National Academies Press: OpenBook

Compilation of Public Opinion Data on Tolls and Road Pricing (2008)

Chapter: Chapter Three - Public Opinion Data on Tolling and Road Pricing

« Previous: Chapter Two - Methods for Compiling and Analyzing Data
Page 10
Suggested Citation:"Chapter Three - Public Opinion Data on Tolling and Road Pricing." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2008. Compilation of Public Opinion Data on Tolls and Road Pricing. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14151.
×
Page 10
Page 11
Suggested Citation:"Chapter Three - Public Opinion Data on Tolling and Road Pricing." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2008. Compilation of Public Opinion Data on Tolls and Road Pricing. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14151.
×
Page 11
Page 12
Suggested Citation:"Chapter Three - Public Opinion Data on Tolling and Road Pricing." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2008. Compilation of Public Opinion Data on Tolls and Road Pricing. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14151.
×
Page 12
Page 13
Suggested Citation:"Chapter Three - Public Opinion Data on Tolling and Road Pricing." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2008. Compilation of Public Opinion Data on Tolls and Road Pricing. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14151.
×
Page 13
Page 14
Suggested Citation:"Chapter Three - Public Opinion Data on Tolling and Road Pricing." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2008. Compilation of Public Opinion Data on Tolls and Road Pricing. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14151.
×
Page 14
Page 15
Suggested Citation:"Chapter Three - Public Opinion Data on Tolling and Road Pricing." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2008. Compilation of Public Opinion Data on Tolls and Road Pricing. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14151.
×
Page 15
Page 16
Suggested Citation:"Chapter Three - Public Opinion Data on Tolling and Road Pricing." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2008. Compilation of Public Opinion Data on Tolls and Road Pricing. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14151.
×
Page 16
Page 17
Suggested Citation:"Chapter Three - Public Opinion Data on Tolling and Road Pricing." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2008. Compilation of Public Opinion Data on Tolls and Road Pricing. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14151.
×
Page 17
Page 18
Suggested Citation:"Chapter Three - Public Opinion Data on Tolling and Road Pricing." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2008. Compilation of Public Opinion Data on Tolls and Road Pricing. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14151.
×
Page 18
Page 19
Suggested Citation:"Chapter Three - Public Opinion Data on Tolling and Road Pricing." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2008. Compilation of Public Opinion Data on Tolls and Road Pricing. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14151.
×
Page 19
Page 20
Suggested Citation:"Chapter Three - Public Opinion Data on Tolling and Road Pricing." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2008. Compilation of Public Opinion Data on Tolls and Road Pricing. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14151.
×
Page 20
Page 21
Suggested Citation:"Chapter Three - Public Opinion Data on Tolling and Road Pricing." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2008. Compilation of Public Opinion Data on Tolls and Road Pricing. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14151.
×
Page 21
Page 22
Suggested Citation:"Chapter Three - Public Opinion Data on Tolling and Road Pricing." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2008. Compilation of Public Opinion Data on Tolls and Road Pricing. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14151.
×
Page 22
Page 23
Suggested Citation:"Chapter Three - Public Opinion Data on Tolling and Road Pricing." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2008. Compilation of Public Opinion Data on Tolls and Road Pricing. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14151.
×
Page 23
Page 24
Suggested Citation:"Chapter Three - Public Opinion Data on Tolling and Road Pricing." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2008. Compilation of Public Opinion Data on Tolls and Road Pricing. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14151.
×
Page 24
Page 25
Suggested Citation:"Chapter Three - Public Opinion Data on Tolling and Road Pricing." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2008. Compilation of Public Opinion Data on Tolls and Road Pricing. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14151.
×
Page 25
Page 26
Suggested Citation:"Chapter Three - Public Opinion Data on Tolling and Road Pricing." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2008. Compilation of Public Opinion Data on Tolls and Road Pricing. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14151.
×
Page 26
Page 27
Suggested Citation:"Chapter Three - Public Opinion Data on Tolling and Road Pricing." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2008. Compilation of Public Opinion Data on Tolls and Road Pricing. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14151.
×
Page 27
Page 28
Suggested Citation:"Chapter Three - Public Opinion Data on Tolling and Road Pricing." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2008. Compilation of Public Opinion Data on Tolls and Road Pricing. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14151.
×
Page 28
Page 29
Suggested Citation:"Chapter Three - Public Opinion Data on Tolling and Road Pricing." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2008. Compilation of Public Opinion Data on Tolls and Road Pricing. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14151.
×
Page 29
Page 30
Suggested Citation:"Chapter Three - Public Opinion Data on Tolling and Road Pricing." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2008. Compilation of Public Opinion Data on Tolls and Road Pricing. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14151.
×
Page 30
Page 31
Suggested Citation:"Chapter Three - Public Opinion Data on Tolling and Road Pricing." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2008. Compilation of Public Opinion Data on Tolls and Road Pricing. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14151.
×
Page 31
Page 32
Suggested Citation:"Chapter Three - Public Opinion Data on Tolling and Road Pricing." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2008. Compilation of Public Opinion Data on Tolls and Road Pricing. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14151.
×
Page 32
Page 33
Suggested Citation:"Chapter Three - Public Opinion Data on Tolling and Road Pricing." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2008. Compilation of Public Opinion Data on Tolls and Road Pricing. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14151.
×
Page 33
Page 34
Suggested Citation:"Chapter Three - Public Opinion Data on Tolling and Road Pricing." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2008. Compilation of Public Opinion Data on Tolls and Road Pricing. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14151.
×
Page 34
Page 35
Suggested Citation:"Chapter Three - Public Opinion Data on Tolling and Road Pricing." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2008. Compilation of Public Opinion Data on Tolls and Road Pricing. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14151.
×
Page 35
Page 36
Suggested Citation:"Chapter Three - Public Opinion Data on Tolling and Road Pricing." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2008. Compilation of Public Opinion Data on Tolls and Road Pricing. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14151.
×
Page 36
Page 37
Suggested Citation:"Chapter Three - Public Opinion Data on Tolling and Road Pricing." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2008. Compilation of Public Opinion Data on Tolls and Road Pricing. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14151.
×
Page 37
Page 38
Suggested Citation:"Chapter Three - Public Opinion Data on Tolling and Road Pricing." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2008. Compilation of Public Opinion Data on Tolls and Road Pricing. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14151.
×
Page 38
Page 39
Suggested Citation:"Chapter Three - Public Opinion Data on Tolling and Road Pricing." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2008. Compilation of Public Opinion Data on Tolls and Road Pricing. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14151.
×
Page 39

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

11 This chapter presents public opinion data on tolling and road pricing. The politics and practice of tolling and road pricing are constantly evolving as new issues hit the public agenda, as experiences with tolling and road pricing projects are com- municated, as new players enter the industry, and as new technologies alter what is possible in terms of toll collection. Because of this, the synthesis focuses primarily on recent data (i.e., since 2000), but also notes older or longitudinal data as appropriate. The public opinion data are presented chronologically in seven categories: (1) traditional tolling, (2) express toll lanes, (3) high-occupancy toll (HOT) lanes, (4) cordon tolling or area charging, (5) public–private partnerships, (6) tax-related ini- tiatives for transportation infrastructure funding, and (7) sur- veys on a range of road pricing and funding issues. Within each category, the individual public opinion polls or surveys are numbered sequentially for cross-referencing purposes. Managed lanes are not listed as a distinct category because the definition varies from agency to agency and may be used to refer to many different applications, including high-occupancy vehicle (HOV) lanes, HOT lanes, or other special use lanes. In this document, research associated with managed lanes is pre- sented in the HOT lane section if single-occupancy vehicles (SOVs) will be charged the toll; otherwise the research is pre- sented under express toll lanes. In each description of the public opinion data, the sponsor of the research and the relevant public opinion measures are presented as well as pertinent information about the situa- tional context. When presenting the public opinion measures, the exact wording of the item is provided where it is known. In addition, each public opinion data source is annotated with meta-information for evaluation and comparison purposes based on the method of collecting the data. For survey data, the meta-information include survey universe (i.e., who was asked the questions), sample size (i.e., number of respon- dents), margin of error (i.e., the results spread as a result of random sampling error), and sample type (i.e., method by which the sample was drawn). For focus groups, we provide the number of groups and number of individuals, and who the participants represent. For each, we have indicated whether the research activity was conducted in languages other than English. When “not reported” is noted in the text, this is because these details were not reported in the information available for this synthesis. This does not necessarily mean that this information was not reported in the survey docu- ments provided by the survey organization to the sponsoring organization. TRADITIONAL TOLLING Data in this section represent public opinion on traditional tolling projects. A traditional toll road (bridge or tunnel) requires toll collections from all drivers (usually with the exception of emergency vehicles). Typically, those tolls are used to support operations and maintenance, as well as to pay debt service on the bonds issued to finance the toll facility. The toll rate does not typically vary by time of day or day of the week. Tolls may be collected at a flat rate at toll plazas or based on distance traveled using tickets, electronic transpon- ders, or video recording of license plates. Many existing tra- ditional toll roads are converting to some form of electronic toll collection, with most new toll projects incorporating the option to pay electronically. 1. Orange County, California (1999) Method: Survey. Universe: Orange County residents. Sample size: N = 600. Margin of error: Not reported. Sample type: Not reported. The Transportation Corridor Agency (TCA) commissioned a poll that found 75% of respondents supported completion of the toll road system (12). 2. Statewide North Carolina (2000) Method: Survey. Universe: North Carolina registered voters. Sample size: N = 898. Margin of error: ±3 percentage points. Sample type: Not reported. In October, the Your Voice, Your Vote partners (a coalition of North Carolina print and broadcast media companies) surveyed North Carolina residents on issues relating to an upcoming election, including transportation issues (13). On the issue of tolling, 52% of respondents supported “tolls on new roads as a way of speeding construction.” Seventy-three percent said the “governor should make improving traffic flow the primary basis of transportation policy decisions.” Of these respondents, 46% reported that “traffic flow should be the only basis for transportation decisions,” and 27% said planners should consider “both traffic flow and the control of CHAPTER THREE PUBLIC OPINION DATA ON TOLLING AND ROAD PRICING

development and sprawl.” In the poll, North Carolinians also noted that they were more concerned about shorter commutes and cleaner cars than controlling urban sprawl or encouraging mass transit. 3. Chicago, Illinois (2001) Method: Survey. Universe: Illinois registered voters. Sample size: N = 1,012. Margin of error: Not reported. Sample type: Not reported. In May, the Chicago Tribune/WGN-TV conducted a poll to assess public reactions to the governor’s plan to merge the Illinois State Toll Authority with the DOT, and eliminate the state’s tollways (14). Most individuals surveyed believed “tollways were convenient to where they live,” and among that group 58% believed the “roads were a good value for the money”; with 33% disagreeing. Among those who said they used I-PASS, an electronic collection system, 71% consid- ered the tollways a good value. Fifty-two percent of regular tollway users reported that they would be willing to pay more to maintain and reconstruct the system at the risk of failing to live up to the system’s bond obligations, whereas 44% would not. Sixty-six percent of regular tollway users said stopping to pay tolls (at toll booths) was a bigger problem than the cost of the tolls. Only 14% found the cost of the tolls more objec- tionable than stopping to pay them. Most respondents (74%) did not want gasoline taxes used to maintain the system if tolls were eliminated (15). 4. Orange County, California (2001) Method: Survey. Universe: Registered voters in Orange County. Sample size: N = 1,201. Margin of error: ±4.3% to 5.7%. Sample type: Not reported. In May, a telephone survey commissioned by TCA found that most people surveyed in Orange County were support- ive of the 241 Toll Road extension (i.e., Foothill-South), a 16-mile tollway from Oso Parkway in Mission Viejo to Inter- state 5 south of San Clemente (16). TCA oversees Orange County’s 51-mile public toll road system. At the time of the survey, TCA was anticipating selling more revenue bonds to finance the extension of the Foothill Eastern toll road after 2004. Several articles were found relating to the sur- vey results, most likely because the extension faced substan- tial opposition from environmental groups because the pro- posed routes crossed open space and a habitat for endangered species. This survey asked respondents for their initial view on completing the toll road and then repeated these ques- tions following a presentation of pro and con arguments (17). Before receiving the pro and con arguments about complet- ing the extension, 58% of respondents supported completing the Foothill South project, and 29% opposed completing it. After hearing the arguments, the survey found that 54% of county voters supported the Foothill South project, whereas 12 39% opposed the tollway. The survey indicated that the most persuasive argument for Foothill South was the “need for an alternative to I-5,” and the most persuasive argument against it was a “need for spending not on highways but on mass transit and getting cars off the road.” The TCA poll also found that 74% believed that “toll roads can be built in an environmentally sensitive way.” About 65% said “toll roads have been helpful in relieving local traffic,” whereas 70% said “the roads have enhanced the quality of life in the county by reducing stress from traffic and shortening com- mute times” (18). 5. San Clemente, California (2001) Method: Survey. Universe: Registered voters in San Clemente. Sample size: N = 500. Margin of error: Not reported. Sample type: Not reported. A telephone survey commissioned by TCA showed that 55% of surveyed San Clemente residents supported the Foothill South project, the 16-mile extension of the Foothill (241) Toll Road (19). San Clemente was the location of the most vocal opposition to the extension during public meetings. Thirty- seven percent said “toll roads should not be built because they encourage urban sprawl”; 56% believed that “developers will build homes with or without the toll road extension, so roads are needed”; 74% said “toll roads can be built in an environ- mentally sensitive way”; and 72% noted that the “existing toll roads have helped relieve traffic in Orange County.” Half of the respondents in San Clemente rated the performance of the existing 241 Tollway as good or excellent, compared with 39% in the county as a whole. More than half of respondents (61%) in San Clemente rated the San Joaquin Hills Toll Road as good or excellent, compared with 46% in the county as a whole. 6. Orange County, California (2001) Method: Survey. Universe: Adult residents of Orange County; English, Spanish. Sample size: N = 2,004. Margin of error: ±3 percentage points. Sample type: Random digit dial (RDD). In September, the Public Policy Institute of California in col- laboration with the University of California, Irvine, conducted its first annual series of surveys in Orange County (20). The majority of residents surveyed (54%) believed the toll roads (including the Foothill, San Joaquin Hills, and Eastern Cor- ridor) have been a good thing for the transportation system. Only 12% stated that they had been bad. Twenty-five percent said toll roads had made no difference. Fifty-nine percent would favor construction of the Foothill Toll Road South, from I-5 south of San Clemente to the existing Foothill Toll Road along Mission Viejo, 26% would oppose construction, and 15% were not sure. Completion of the toll road was favored more by younger individuals (57%) and those with incomes of $80,000 or more (64%).

13 7. Lee County, Florida (2001) Method: Survey. Universe: Drivers in Lee County. Sample size: N = 1,739. Margin of error: N/A. Sample type: Conve- nience; drivers who stopped at intersections. A survey was conducted by researchers from Texas A&M University to gain insight into the potential driver reaction to an intersection queue jump (IQJ) (21). An IQJ is an elevated ramp or side lane that can be used by motorists normally stopped in traffic at an intersection to bypass the intersection and traffic congestion. Drivers were surveyed about their over- all perception of the IQJ concept and their willingness to pay to use one. Sixty-seven percent of respondents approved of the IQJ concept. In addition, approximately 54% of surveyed drivers indicated a willingness to pay at least a small amount to use the IQJ. Likelihood of using the IQJ was associated with being married with children, and having a household income of less than $16,000 or more than $75,000. Decreasing the likelihood of using the IQJ was being on a shopping trip, age 65 or older, or being male. 8. Orange County, California (2002) Method: Survey. Universe: Registered voters in Orange County. Sample size: N = 1,200. Margin of error: Not reported. Sample type: Not reported. In May, the TCA commissioned a second poll about support or opposition to the construction of an extension to the Foothill South (22). This poll was conducted by the same organization that executed the survey in 2001. After being told the argu- ments, the survey found that 58% of county voters surveyed supported the Foothill South project; 36% opposed the toll- way, and about 5% were undecided. 9. San Clemente, California (2002) Method: Survey. Universe: Registered voters in San Clemente. Sample size: N = 500. Margin of error: Not reported. Sample type: Not reported. In May, a telephone survey commissioned by TCA found that after pro and con arguments were presented, 54% of San Clemente residents surveyed supported the Foothill South, the 16-mile extension of the Foothill (241) Toll Road, and 40% opposed it. Six percent were undecided (23). Thirty- eight percent said “toll roads should not be built because they encourage urban sprawl”; 56% believed that “developers will build homes with or without the toll road extension, so roads are needed.” Sixty-one percent said they favored “toll roads to provide another option to Orange County freeways,” whereas 37% opposed toll roads. Sixty-four percent stated that “traffic is going to get worse, and the toll road is a way to handle increasing traffic”; 34% disagreed. Sixty-five percent said the “toll road will worsen sprawl by encouraging more homes in undeveloped areas of the county”; 29% disagreed. Fifty-four percent said the “toll road won’t provide long-term traffic solution in the south county”; 40% disagreed. 10. Central Florida (2002) Method: Survey. Universe: Households in District (parts of Lake, Seminole, and Volusia Counties). Sample size: Not reported, but surveys mailed to 12,500 households. Margin of error: Not reported. Sample type: Not reported. In April, a mail survey of residents in parts of Lake, Seminole, and Volusia counties by the District Representative’s office found that 55% of those surveyed supported an extension of the Western Expressway toll road, 26% opposed it, and 19% said they did not know (24). The article is quoted as saying that the early returns showed strong support for the new toll road connection, and that support waned as more surveys were returned. In addition, there were differences by county. The proposed toll road extension was between state route (SR) 417 in Seminole County and Apopka in Orange County (near Orlando). Seventy-three percent of the respondents in Seminole County checked “yes” when asked if they sup- ported the connection; 58% of Volusia residents checked “yes,” whereas less than 50% of respondents from Lake County checked “yes.” 11. New York, New York (2002) Method: Survey. Universe: New York state residents. Sam- ple size: N = 1,402. Margin of error: ±2.6%. Sample type: Not reported. In February, a survey by the Quinnipiac University Polling Institute showed a strong opposition to placing tolls on the presently toll free East River (Brooklyn, Manhattan, Williams- burg, and Queensboro) bridges (25). Twenty-one percent of those surveyed said “yes” that the state legislature should approve of a New York City toll on the bridges, and 65% said “no.” Fourteen percent were not sure. Opposition was higher in New York City (74%) than upstate (52%). 12. Citrus County, Florida (2002) Method: Survey. Universe: Citrus County residents. Sample size: N = 800. Margin of error: Not reported. Sample type: RDD, probability. In March, the University of South Florida’s Center for Urban Transportation Research conducted a survey as part of a study to determine whether the Suncoast Parkway extension in Cit- rus County should be built and, if so, where (26). Fifty-one percent of those surveyed said “yes” there was a “need for toll roads such as the Suncoast Parkway in Citrus County.” Slightly more than one-third (35%) answered “no” to that sur- vey question, and 14% reported that that they had not heard of

the project. When asked specifically for their opinions on the Suncoast Parkway Project (26), 59% supported construction of the road—34% with strong support, 17% if certain condi- tions were met, and 8% if certain locations were avoided. Only 13% opposed the road outright. The majority of the indi- viduals surveyed (58%) were newcomers who had moved to Citrus County since 1990. 13. Orange County, California (2003) Method: Survey. Universe: Registered voters in Orange County. Sample size: N = 1,200. Margin of error: Not reported. Sample type: Not reported. In June, TCA commissioned its third annual survey about the extension of the Foothill South Tollway (27). The survey was conducted just as the agency was about to release an alterna- tive analysis of three toll road routes and three non-tollway options for improving traffic in south Orange County as part of the environmental impact study for the road. Support declined slightly—from 56% to 53%—when those polled were informed of pro and con arguments regarding the toll road. Support for the project was highest in South County, where 65% of those polled expressed support. Approximately 74% of respondents countywide said that “roads can be built to be environmentally safe.” Of those who have never used one, 60% opposed toll road construction. 14. New York Metro Area (2003) Method: Focus groups. Number: Four groups. Participants: Randomly selected passenger car drivers; three groups com- prised of E-ZPass users; one group that paid cash to travel on Port Authority of New York and New Jersey (PANYNJ) facilities; all used the PANYNJ facility at least once a week since 2001. In December 2003, PANYNJ sponsored focus groups to assess its facilities users’ opinions about various aspects per- taining to a time-of-day initiative (28). Time-of-day pricing went into effect in 2001 as a means for reducing congestion, increasing use of transit and E-ZPass, and facilitating com- mercial traffic control management. Before the focus group discussions, most participants seemed to be unaware or con- fused about the time-of-day pricing program with its sys- tem of tolls and discounts. When it was explained, reactions ranged from neutral to disinterest to irritation that they were being manipulated by the agency that was running the facili- ties on which they traveled. Passenger drivers rejected off- peak toll discounts because the discount was too small to alter travel plans. Participants believed altering plans would not only be inconvenient, but also cost more money and men- tal energy. Very few saw the benefit of traveling off-peak as a way to address traffic congestion. Almost all resented having to pay tolls and did not feel they got much value for their money. 14 Method: Focus groups. Number: Two groups. Participants: Randomly selected truck dispatchers; one group from for- hire carriers; one group from private carriers. In January 2004, focus groups with truck dispatchers were conducted for the same study as previously discussed (28). Use of E-ZPass was more prevalent in the for-hire group than in the private carrier group. Those who recalled anything about time-of-day pricing dismissed it as inconsequential. The discounts were too small and they did not feel that they had the flexibility to travel off-peak. They believed that they would make more money by traveling the fastest route even if the tolls were higher on that route. They were resigned to and not concerned about the price of tolls because increases could be passed on to their customers. Method: Survey. Universe: Adult users of PANYNJ facilities. Sample size: N = 505. Margin of error: Not reported. Sample type: Not reported. A passenger survey was conducted to capture opinions on different toll-related issues: impact of time-of-day pricing on traffic, fairness of the pricing, and willingness to pay more for better services (28). A small percentage (15%) reported that they believed the time-of-day pricing had an effect on traffic. Of those, most believed the traffic was a lot worse. The majority of those surveyed (85%) agreed that it would be fair to give discounts to E-ZPass users. Most (78%) were E-ZPass users themselves. However, 66% of cash users also approved of providing toll dis- counts to E-ZPass users. When asked if it is a good idea to vary toll rates during different times of day to help improve traffic congestion, 59% of respondents agreed. However, when asked if it was fair to charge higher bridge and tunnel tolls during peak travel periods, agreement dropped to 26%. Eighty-three percent agreed that it was fair to provide dis- counts to frequent travelers. Sixty-five percent of the respon- dents also indicated that it was fair to use the toll revenues to support public transit. Forty-two percent were willing to pay more for a faster trip, and 37% would pay more for a more reliable trip. Method: Survey. Universe: Commercial carriers that use PANYNJ facilities. Sample size: N = 200. Margin of error: Not reported. Sample type: Not reported. A survey of private and for-hire carriers who have used the PANYNJ toll facilities for at least three years was con- ducted as part of the larger study (28). The carriers who could remember the 2001 toll increase owing to time- of-day pricing believed that it had little, if any, impact on traffic conditions. Most believed traffic congestion had gotten worse. Most surveyed carriers (92%) believed that it would be fair to give E-ZPass users a discount. Most (88%) were also in favor of charging less in tolls during off-peak hours, and most (80%) were against charging more during peak hours.

15 15. Orange County, California (2003) Method: Survey. Universe: Adult residents of Orange County; English, Spanish. Sample size: N = 1,004. Margin of error: ±3 percentage points. Sample type: RDD. In December, the Public Policy Institute of California, in col- laboration with the University of California, Irvine, conducted another special survey of Orange County (29). The majority of surveyed residents (52%) believed that the toll roads (includ- ing the Foothill, San Joaquin Hills, and Eastern Corridor) had been good for the transportation system. Only 15% said they had been bad, and 22% said that they had made no difference. Toll roads were favored more by younger individuals (57%) and those with incomes of $80,000 or more (64%). 16. Tyler, Texas (2004) Method: Focus groups. Number: Three groups, with 8 indi- viduals each. Participants: Tyler residents. In February, the Texas DOT (TxDOT) sponsored several research activities to gauge the public’s perceptions of tolling Loop 49, a proposed regional outer loop around the city of Tyler (30). At the time of the research, the Texas Transporta- tion Commission had directed TxDOT to examine all projects for toll viability. Tyler, a mid-size urban/rural city in northeast Texas, had no toll roads, and the research was conducted to gain an understanding of the public’s acceptance of tolls. Focus groups were held with residents of varied socioeconomic and demographic characteristics. Participants believed that toll roads were convenient in some situations, primarily in larger cities, but that Tyler was not big enough to warrant a toll road. Method: Survey. Universe: Residents of Tyler. Sample size: N = 199. Margin of error: Not applicable. Sample type: Con- venience, shoppers at a mall. A survey was also conducted with shoppers at a centrally located mall. Most respondents (84%) agreed that Loop 49 was needed (30). Seventy-eight percent agreed that “tolling Loop 49 will keep some people from using it”; 9% disagreed; and 13% were neutral. About half of respondents (49%) agreed that “tolling Loop 49 was a good way to pay for the road”; 32% disagreed and 19% were neutral. Thirty-five per- cent agreed that “using [a] gasoline tax is a better way than charging a toll to pay for new construction”; 37% disagreed and 28% were neutral. 17. Baton Rouge, Louisiana (2004) Method: Survey. Universe: Individuals who voted in three of the past five elections. Sample size: N = 400. Margin of error: ±5%. Sample type: Not reported. In April, a poll funded and drafted by the political action arm of the chamber of commerce found that 57% of voters sup- ported toll roads when asked if they “favor or oppose toll roads as one means of reducing traffic congestion in Baton Rouge” (31). Before asking this question, respondents were told that “federal, state, and local transportation funds are being cut, and many states and communities are building and using toll roads as the best way to address traffic congestion.” At the time of the poll, proposals were being floated that would create a toll road to bypass the northern part of the city and connect Inter- state 10 west of Port Allen with Interstate 12 in the Denham Springs area. 18. Orange County, California (2004) Method: Survey. Universe: Registered voters in Orange County. Sample size: N = 1,100. Margin of error: ±4.3% to 5.7% (for different geographical subgroups). Sample type: Not reported. In June, TCA commissioned its fourth annual telephone sur- vey about the extension of the Foothill South Tollway, which was conducted by the same survey organization that had done the previous three surveys (32). Sixty-one percent of respon- dents supported toll roads in Orange County as a way of pro- viding an alternative option to the freeways, and 33% were opposed (33). Before the reading of the pro and con state- ments, 54% supported the project and 23% opposed it. After hearing the pros and cons associated with completing the Foothill South, 57% supported the project and 37% opposed it. In San Clemente, where the most vocal opposition was based, 56% supported the completion of the Foothill South, whereas 35% opposed it, and 9% were undecided. 19. Statewide Wisconsin (2004) Method: Survey. Universe: Wisconsin residents. Sample size: N = 500. Margin of error: ±3.5 percentage points. Sample type: Not reported. In July, a survey conducted for a two-year civic journalism project called Building the New Wisconsin Economy found that 53% of surveyed Wisconsinites would oppose turning some of the state’s highways into toll roads (34). Eighty per- cent of respondents said they would support investing more money in the highway system and energy infrastructure, but they would not want toll roads or higher energy bills. A large majority (79%) believed that the state was maintaining the highway system well. 20. Statewide California (2004) Method: Survey. Universe: Registered voters. Sample size: N = 608. Margin of error: ±4%. Sample type: Not reported. In August, the Field Poll was commissioned by the Press- Enterprise and other California media subscribers to con- duct a survey of California voters about a 2,500 page report

that had been released by a panel appointed by Governor Schwarzenegger to root out waste in state government (35). The board made approximately 1,000 proposals that they believed could save the state billions of dollars over a five- year period. The following are the results relating to trans- portation savings. Forty-one percent of those surveyed sup- ported “increasing the state’s number of toll roads to provide more revenue for highway building and repair,” and 54% opposed the idea. The commissioners did not recommend specific freeways for new toll lanes, although the report mentioned that San Diego-area freeways had been cited as possible candidates. Respondents also did not support plans to transfer responsibility for some state highways to local government—34% supported the idea, whereas 54% opposed it. 21. Austin, Texas (2005) Method: Focus groups. Number: Three groups of 10 individ- uals each. Participants: Adults residing in Bastrop, Hays, Travis, and Williamson counties. In March, TxDOT sponsored focus groups with a random sample of potential toll road users, defined as currently using roadways parallel to planned toll roads in central Texas and holding positive or neutral attitudes about the toll road plan (36). The focus groups revealed that central Texans have com- plex sets of attitudes about toll roads. For most, toll road issues were not black or white and therefore could not easily be cap- tured with global “yes” or “no” types of questions. Even indi- viduals who believed the system of toll roads was a good idea had questions and doubts about the actual implementation of the toll road plan in central Texas by TxDOT. People’s atti- tudes were still being formed, were not stable, and were sen- sitive to new information as it arose. Central Texans were not novice toll road users. Most individuals had prior positive experience in using toll roads. Negative experiences regard- ing congestion caused by correct change toll booths or safety issues caused by poor signage were mentioned, but did not seem to negatively prejudice them. 22. Orange County, California (2005) Method: Survey. Universe: Orange County voters. Sample size: N = 1,200. Margin of error: ±4.4% to 5.6%. Sample type: Not reported. In June, TCA commissioned the fifth annual public opinion survey related to the extension of the Foothill South Tollway (37). Fifty-four percent of Orange County residents surveyed supported plans to complete the last segment of the Foothill, 23% opposed them, and 23% were undecided (38). After read- ing the arguments for and against, respondents were again asked for their opinions on this plan. With more information, support increased to 57%, but opposition increased as well to 37%. The undecided segment dropped to 6%. 16 23. San Antonio, Texas (2005) Method: Survey. Universe: Registered voters. Sample Size: N = 500. Margin of error: Not reported. Sample type: Not reported. In June, the Alamo Regional Mobility Authority, which builds toll roads, commissioned a survey of local attitudes (39). Forty-nine percent polled said they were against toll roads, whereas 44% were in favor. After being told details and how toll roads would help, the approval rate increased to 58%, whereas opposition dropped to 34%. 24. Austin, Texas (2005) Method: Survey. Universe: Adults residing in Bastrop, Cald- well, Hays, Travis, and Williamson counties who are poten- tial users of the toll roads under construction. Sample size: N = 1,500. Margin of error: ±2% percentage points. Sample type: RDD. In July, TxDOT sponsored a survey to assess baseline attitudes toward toll roads among potential users in central Texas (40). When asked a general question about whether toll roads were needed, 45% of central Texans surveyed believed that toll roads were needed, and 49% believed they were not needed (6% did not know or refused to answer). The most frequent reasons mentioned for toll roads not being necessary were “not wanting to pay another tax” (21%), followed by “don’t want to pay the toll,” “need to look for alternative transportation fund- ing,” and “need to look for transportation alternatives” (10% each). When specifically asked about toll roads under con- struction in the region, the majority (51%) supported such con- struction. When provided with a set of alternatives to building toll roads, 20% did not believe there were better alternatives to toll roads, 19% wanted increased funding for public transit, and 11% wanted to build more roads with current transporta- tion dollars. When provided with a list of potential traffic relief strategies, 68% preferred “converting an existing lane into a carpool lane.” Least preferred was implementing a local gas tax (23% preferred). At the time of the survey, several toll roads were under construction or planned, including U.S. 183A, SH 45 North, Loop 1 North, and SH 130. 25. Austin, Texas (2005) Method: Focus groups. Number: Four groups. Participants: Not reported. In July, the Central Texas Regional Mobility Authority spon- sored focus groups to discuss transportation issues (41). Many had used toll roads in other areas of the country and reported having good experiences. “Tollways are a good idea but only for new construction, not for existing roads.” The general con- sensus for funding new roads was that it should not come from taxes because taxes were already too high. Most participants would not mind paying tolls because the planning that goes

17 into them is much superior to the standard roadways. There appeared to be a high expectation that tolls would be elimi- nated once the roadway is paid for. Perceived benefits of new tolls included less pollution, increased fuel efficiency, short- ening of travel time in emergencies, increased safety—fewer accidents, improved quality of life, and convenience. Method: Survey. Universe: Not reported. Sample size: N = 1,060. Margin of error: ±3 percentage points. Sample type: Not reported. In August, the Central Texas Regional Mobility Authority commissioned a survey of local attitudes about tolls, taxes, and traffic (41,42). Thirty-eight percent of the respondents believed the best way to pay for new roads was to charge tolls and 37% said the best way was to increase taxes. When asked whether there was a need for toll roads, half of central Texans (50%) said “no” and 42% said “yes.” Sixty percent believed adding toll lanes to existing roads was a “bad idea,” compared with 26% who believed it was a “good idea.” Seventy-eight percent believed “converting existing roads into toll roads” was a “bad idea,” compared with 13% who believed it was a “good idea.” Nearly half (47%) said “yes” they “plan to use toll roads in central Texas,” and 44% said “no.” Sixty-eight percent thought it was a “bad idea” to charge “higher tolls during rush hour to discourage unnecessary trips,” and 25% thought it was a “good idea.” Fifty-three percent thought is a “good idea” to charge “lower tolls during off-peak hours to encourage drivers to avoid peak-hour travel,” and 37% thought it was a “bad idea.” One-half (50%) supported the “efforts of groups who oppose the toll road plan for various philosophical reasons,” and 31% opposed the efforts of these groups. 26. Statewide Utah (2006) Method: Survey. Universe: Utah residents. Sample size: N = 415. Margin of error: ±5%. Sample type: Not reported. In February, a poll sponsored by the Utah DOT (UDOT) showed that 55% of Utah residents surveyed would support construction of toll roads in the state if it meant a needed road could be built within the next 3 years versus the next 20 years (43). Almost 40% opposed toll roads, regardless of when a new road was to be built. The poll was taken when SB80, a bill that would allow UDOT to enter into public–private partner- ships (PPPs) to build toll roads, was being sponsored. The bill eventually passed. 27. El Paso, Texas (2006) Method: Survey. Universe: Not reported. Sample size: Not reported. Margin of error: Not reported. Sample type: Not reported. In February, an El Paso Times/KVIA ABC 7 poll showed that 59% of those residents of El Paso polled opposed toll roads as a way to pay for expensive transportation projects, whereas 38% favored them (44). These were the same percentages found in 2004. The article stated that two weeks before the poll, the El Paso City Council voted 5 to 3 to petition the Texas Transportation Commission for the power to establish a Regional Mobility Authority that would use road toll rev- enues to provide the supplemental funding needed to get expensive and much needed highway projects started decades ahead of schedule. The article also mentioned that tolls would not be paid at traditional toll booths, but electronically. 28. San Clemente, California (2006) Method: Survey. Universe: San Clemente residents. Sample size: N = 400. Margin of error: Not reported. Sample type: Not reported. In July, the city of San Clemente, California, commissioned a survey (the second in two years) to gauge local residents’ views of and their satisfaction with city services (45). Survey results indicated that managing traffic congestion and manag- ing growth were the most important issues (both at 68%) to residents compared with preventing ocean pollution (63%), fire/paramedic service (62%), policy service (61%), and beach maintenance (59%). Fifty-five percent of respondents sup- ported the extension of the Foothill South tollway, whereas 37% opposed it. Also related to transportation, 66% supported an expansion of the Metrolink train service, whereas 22% opposed it. 29. Statewide Maine (2006) Method: Survey. Universe: Maine residents, 18 years of age or older, head of household. Sample Size: N = 400. Margin of error: ±4 percentage points. Sample type: RDD. In December, the Maine Turnpike Authority (MTA) commis- sioned a telephone survey to benchmark a variety of citizen perceptions and attitudes (46). Surveys had been conducted since 1999. Fifty-six percent of respondents said they sup- ported the idea of funding the fixing of a highway or bridge for safety reasons through establishing tolls on the project as com- pared with 19% who would support an increase in the state gas tax, and 9% who would support canceling the project. The same percentage (56%) would support the idea of fund- ing a new highway, bridge, or bypass through establishing tolls, 16% would support increasing the state gas tax, and 10% would support canceling the project. Sixty-nine percent opposed using toll revenues from MTA to fund other state budget needs, whereas 24% favored the idea. Nine of 10 (88%) rated the Maine Turnpike as being either “good” or “excel- lent.” Eight of 10 (81%) believe that the MTA is doing either a “good” or an “excellent” job of managing the Turnpike. Nearly half (47%) found a statement pertaining to inadequate funding for transportation projects to be either “somewhat believable” (37%) or “very believable” (9%).

EXPRESS TOLL LANES This section presents public opinion data associated with express toll lanes—a type of road pricing system where motorists must pay a toll to gain access to lanes that are sepa- rated from the mainstream traffic. The lanes are “express”; there are no toll booths. The express toll lanes use a system of cameras and/or transponders to toll vehicles automatically. Typically, these tolls will increase as traffic density within the tolled lanes also increases. This pricing scheme limits the traf- fic demand within the lanes, ultimately resulting in lanes that can travel freely despite the congestion in the mainstream travel lanes. 30. Orange and Los Angeles Counties, California (1995) Method: Survey. Universe: SR 91 corridor users. Sample size: N = 645. Margin of error: Not reported. Sample type: Recruited from license plate capture. In the fall, an opinion survey of peak period travelers in the SR 91 corridor was sponsored by California Polytechnic State University as part of the evaluation of the variable-toll express lane facility (47). This survey was done prior to the lanes being opened. SR 91 was the first site of congestion pricing in the United States. It is located between the junction of SR 91 and 55 at the Anaheim and Orange/Riverside County Line. The facility provided two extra lanes in each direction and incor- porated a number of innovative features including tolls that vary by time of day based on expected congestion in the corri- dor, the requirement that all users be registered customers and carry identifying transponders, the use of discount pricing as an incentive to HOVs, photo enforcement of toll violations, and that the facility was developed and operated by a private company for profit. The express lanes were built within what had been one of the most heavily congested freeway corridors of California, with typical peak period delays of between 30 and 40 min. The opinion survey was administered to sub-samples of travelers who participated in an origin–destination travel survey. The idea of providing extra toll-financed lanes to bypass conges- tion received approval ratings of from 62% to 68% among the different occupancy groups reported (i.e., SOV, HOV-2, and HOV-3). Reported approval rates were obtained by dividing the number of respondents stating that they believe the con- cept is a good idea by the total number of individuals who responded. Approval ratings for the idea of varying tolls based on congestion were lower—ranging from 40% to 45% among occupancy groups. Approval ratings for using toll financing for new highways ranged from 61% to 69%. Between 28% and 33% of the occupancy groups rated toll financing as the best method of paying for new highways (higher than for gas taxes, vehicle registration fees, and sales tax). Most respondents (75% to 80%) approved of replacing toll booths with electronic toll and traffic management technology. The idea of operating the 18 express lanes as a private, for-profit enterprise was not popular, receiving approval ratings of from 37% to 45%. 31. Orange and Los Angeles Counties, California (1996) Method: Survey. Universe: SR 91 corridor users. Sample size: N = 505 (457 from 1995 survey and 48 new). Margin of error: Not reported, specified that this varies by subgroup. Sample type: Panel and recruited from license plate capture. In April–May, a supplemental opinion-only survey was con- ducted to capture commuters’ viewpoints a few months after the SR 91 express lanes opened, during the settling-in period. The survey was sponsored by California Polytechnic State University as part of the evaluation of the variable-toll express lane facility (47). Approval for providing extra toll-financed lanes to bypass congestion ranged from 60% to 82% among the different occupancy groups and lane types reported (i.e., free/toll SOV, free/toll HOV-2, and free/toll HOV-3). Approval ratings among toll lane users, which were in the 70% to 80% range, were consistently higher than among non- users of toll lanes. The highest ratings were among toll HOV-2 users. Approval ratings for the idea of varying tolls based on congestion ranged from 51% to 69% among occupancy groups. Approval ratings for using toll financing for new highways ranged from 55% to 68%. Between 18% and 43% of the occupancy groups rated toll financing the best method of pay for new highways (higher than for gas taxes, vehicle registration fees, and sales tax). The toll SOV group was least likely to rank toll financing as the best method. Most respon- dents greatly approved of replacing toll booths with electronic toll and traffic management technology, with 70% to 98% approval. The idea of operating the express lanes as a private, for-profit enterprise received mixed approval ratings of 37% to 65%. The toll SOV group expressed the lowest approval for this concept. 32. Orange and Los Angeles Counties, California (1996–1997) Method: Survey. Universe: SR 91 corridor users. Sample size: N = 489 (332 from 1995/1996 surveys and 157 new). Margin of error: Not reported; specified that this varies by subgroup. Sample type: Panel and recruited from license plate capture. In the fall/winter, a third opinion survey of peak and off-peak period travelers in the SR 91 corridor was again sponsored by California Polytechnic State University as part of the evalua- tion of the variable-toll express lane facility (48). This survey was done about one year after the lanes opened. Approval for providing extra toll-financed lanes to bypass congestion ranged from 60% to 81% among the different occupancy groups and lane type reported (i.e., free/toll SOV, free/toll HOV-2, free/toll HOV-3, and off-peak). Approval ratings were higher among toll lane users and off-peak users than among free lane

19 users. Approval ratings for the idea of varying tolls based on congestion ranged from 59% to 72% among occupancy groups. Approval rating for using toll financing for new high- ways ranged from 61% to 78%. Between 26% and 41% of the occupancy groups rated toll financing as the best method of pay for new highways (compared with gas taxes, vehicle registra- tion fees, and sales tax). Most respondents greatly approved of replacing toll booths with electronic toll and traffic man- agement technology, at 76% to 92% approval. The idea of operating the express lanes as a private, for-profit enterprise received approval ratings of 41% to 75%. Approval of SOV and HOV-2 toll paying users was in the 70% to 75% range. 33. Orange and Los Angeles Counties, California (1999) Method: Survey. Universe: SR 91 corridor users. Sample size: N = 1,788 (1,375 new, 348 respondents from 1996 survey, 65 from 1997/1998 surveys by University of California, Irvine researchers). Margin of error: Not reported; specified that this varies by subgroup. Sample type: Panel, recruited from license plate capture, RDD. In the fall of 1999, an opinion survey was sponsored by Cali- fornia Polytechnic State University as part of the evaluation of the SR 91 variable-toll express lane facility (48). The principal objective of the survey was to update earlier investigations of public opinion. Of particular interest was the possible influ- ence on travel and opinion of the new Eastern Toll Road, which opened in October 1998, about a year before this survey was conducted. Approval for providing extra toll-financed lanes to bypass congestion ranged from 50% to 75% among the dif- ferent occupancy groups and lane type reported (i.e., free/toll SOV, free/toll HOV, free/toll HOV-2, and free/toll HOV-3+). Toll lane users were more supportive than non-users. Approval ratings for the idea of varying tolls based on con- gestion ranged from 30% to 50% among occupancy groups. Among SOV commuters, a very large difference in approval was observed between toll lane users (53%) and non-users (28%). Higher-income commuters ($100,000+) were found to show higher approval of variable tolls, as well as of toll financing in general, compared with other groups. The idea of operating the express lanes as a private, for-profit enter- prise received approval ratings in the 30% to 45% range. The approval levels for toll lane users generally exceeded non- users. The researchers noted that there were recent highly public controversies occurring in connection with this project. When asked whether it was a good idea to let SOVs use underutilized carpool lanes for a fee, provided the lanes do not become congested, approval ratings ranged from a low of 42% for free HOV users to a high of 74% for toll SOV users. About 45% to 50% of recent HOV commuters approved of the idea, compared with 59% to 74% of SOV commuters. Approval was highest among commuters with household incomes of $100,000+. 34. Orlando, Florida (2000) Method: Focus groups. Number: Ten groups, with approxi- mately 10 individuals in each. Participants: Individuals who use I-4 during peak period 3+ days per week; Individuals who use I-4 at least once per week, and Orlando visitors who used I-4 during current stay. From May to June, focus groups were conducted for Florida’s Turnpike to determine how Orlando-area I-4 travelers feel about current travel conditions in the I-4 corridor and trans- portation improvement alternatives (49). Participants raised negative sentiments concerning adding tolls to new lanes on I-4. However, most said they would use the express lanes for at least some trips if they were built as conceived, with tolls. Participants’ level of use would depend on the toll rates and the amount of time savings that the lanes provided. Positive reac- tion to the plan came as a result of conveying the full rationale for why the tolled lanes would be necessary and carefully pre- senting key details of the concept. 35. Miami, Florida (2001–2002) Method: Focus groups. Number: Six groups, with 8 to 14 indi- viduals in each. Participants: Commuters who use freeways during peak period 3+ days per week; other individuals who use freeways at least once per week; English and Spanish. In July 2001, focus groups were conducted for the Miami Value Pricing Project to explore reactions to value pricing and express lane alternatives and to pretest a survey instru- ment (50). Most participants reported that they would likely use express lanes at least occasionally if they were available and if they provided acceptable levels of service while not deteriorating conditions on existing lanes. They appreciated the opportunity to have a “real choice” as opposed to current conditions where the available choices involved congested routes during the peak periods. Several said that the oppor- tunity to use these lanes would influence them to acquire SunPass, the Florida DOT’s prepaid toll program. Some were concerned that those with lower incomes would have to use the regular lanes, with wealthier travelers using the express lanes. Most did not react favorably to peak pricing. Higher peak prices were believed to unfairly penalize commuters. Virtually all disliked dynamic pricing. They liked the idea of open road tolling and especially the removal of toll plaza bottlenecks. Method: Focus groups. Number: Six groups, with 8 to 14 indi- viduals in each. Participants: Commuters who use free- ways during peak period 3+ days per week; other individ- uals who use freeways at least once per week; English and Spanish. In March 2002, a second set of focus groups were conducted after some of the value pricing options had been refined (50). In this set of groups, participants were shown a value pricing

video and two sets of concept plans before discussing value pricing alternatives. Four groups were with cash customers and two were with SunPass customers. Most cash customers liked the express lanes and indicated that they would use them at least on occasion. At the same time, all indicated that they would prefer to have the ten-lane roadway open to general use, which was viewed as being fairer to everyone. They did not like the idea of increasing tolls during peak periods and lowering tolls during the off-peak hours. SunPass customers were more opinionated; participants were skeptical as to whether express lanes would work safely without delays. However, most said they personally would use the express lanes if a beneficial time savings was realized. Method: Survey. Universe: Focus group participants and other Miami area residents and visitors. Sample size: N = 1,161. Margin of error: N/A. Sample type: Intercept. In September 2001, a stated preference survey was adminis- tered to provide estimates of the population’s values of time and the overall response to the value pricing concepts (50). In response to the statement, “tolls should be charged on the new I-4 express lanes to ensure that they are not congested,” respondents were almost evenly divided between agreeing (40%) and disagreeing (43%). More than half (54%) agreed that “cars with two or more occupants should pay reduced tolls on the new I-4 express lanes.” Almost one-third (31%) dis- agreed. Only 13% agreed and 72% percent disagreed with the statement, “tolls should be higher whenever there is conges- tion on toll roads and the new I-4 lanes.” Respondents also tended to disagree with the statement, “tolls should be higher during peak periods and reduced during off-peak periods.” Sixty-two percent disagreed with the statement and 25% agreed. Less than half (44%) agreed that “tolls should be charged to help pay for highway construction.” Thirty-eight percent disagreed. 36. Twin Cities, Minnesota (2002) Method: Survey. Universe: Twin Cities’ citizens. Sample size: N = 800. Margin of error: Not reported. Sample type: Not reported. In January, a survey of residents found that 57% supported “having the option of paying a fee to use an uncongested free- way when in a hurry,” compared with 51% in the same survey that supported a gas tax increase (51). 37. Twin Cities, Minnesota (2003) Method: Survey. Universe: Adults. Sample size: N = 1,000. Margin of error: Not reported. Sample type: Not reported. In January, a survey of adults by the Star Tribune revealed that 59% of those surveyed suggested increasing user fees as a means to manage the budget shortfall (51). 20 38. Statewide Minnesota (2004) Method: Survey. Universe: Minnesota adults. Sample size: N = 821. Margin of error: ±3.4%. Sample type: Random telephone. In January, the results of a Star Tribune Minnesota Poll found that 69% of Minnesota adults polled would support paying for new highway lanes with tolls collected from drivers who choose to use them (52). Only 23% preferred to increase the gas tax to build new lanes and open them to everyone. Support for tolls was the same in the metro area as it was statewide. The poll was taken the month that the Minnesota DOT was prepar- ing to invite private companies to present plans to finance and build new lanes in the metro area and recoup their investment by charging tolls. Poll respondents indicated that they would support tolls because users would pay. The article quoted res- idents as saying, “you don’t have to use the toll road; but if you want to get out of congestion and use the toll roads, that’s entirely up to you.” “We’ve got enough taxes.” “I like tolls because I wouldn’t use them and I wouldn’t pay for it.” Those who favored a gas tax increase saw it as a fairer way to pay for roads. “I think transportation is for everyone. To be fair about it, it’s going to cost everybody. A toll road is very selec- tive [and] for the affluent.” The poll indicated that those who supported toll lanes included individuals of all ages and incomes, and nearly equal numbers of men and women. But support was more widespread among individuals from 18 to 24 years old (78%) and those making less than $30,000 a year (76%). A larger percentage of registered Republicans than the Democratic–Farmer–Labor party supported the tolled lanes. 39. Miami–Dade County, Florida (2005) Method: Focus groups. Number: Nine groups, each with approximately 10 individuals. Participants: Residents from a broad area surrounding the proposed project and users of the Homestead Extension of Florida’s Turnpike or SR 836; En- glish, Spanish, Creole. In February, focus groups were conducted by Florida’s Turn- pike Enterprise to determine how area travelers felt about the current travel conditions in the Homestead Extension of Florida’s Turnpike and SR 836 corridors and about potential traffic-improvement alternatives, such as managed lanes (53). A short version of a managed lanes video was shown to respon- dents. Most participants seemed to understand that the project would involve construction of new lanes in the center of exist- ing facilities. However, few fully understood the managed lane concept. They did not recognize that the lanes would be managed to ensure close to free flow conditions and most did not understand how prices might vary to achieve that objec- tive. Once participants came to understand the concept, most believed it addressed both some of their personal needs as well as traffic issues in the study corridors. Respondents were asked how their use of the managed lanes would change at four different price points: $1, $2, $3, and $5 per trip above

21 current tolls. Most said that their use of the managed lanes would change at the $3 and $5 levels—their uses being restricted to much more occasional situations and emergen- cies. Participants were asked to rate the amount that they per- sonally would benefit from the managed lane project on a scale of 1 to 5, with 1 representing no real benefit and 5 rep- resenting a significant benefit. Almost half the participants saw the project as providing moderate (a “3”) benefits to them personally. They were also asked to rate the project overall in terms of how good it was for the area as a whole. Nearly three- fourths rated the project a “4” or a “5.” 40. Denver, Colorado (2006) Method: Survey. Universe: Residents living within 2 miles of existing toll roads or planned toll express lanes. Sample size: N = 384. Margin of error: Not reported. Sample type: Not reported. In April, a survey conducted for the Colorado DOT found that 78% of respondents believed toll express lanes were a “good way to reduce congestion on Denver area highways,” and 66% approved of them as a means of facilitating traffic flow (54). Sixty-eight percent believed tolling was a good way to finance extra capacity. Tolls were preferred as the “best funding for road building and maintenance”—(45%), followed by the issue of bonds (23%), higher gasoline taxes (16%), increased license fees and vehicle registration (11%), and higher income tax (4%). 41. Lee and Collier Counties, Florida (2006) Method: Focus groups. Number: Eight groups, each with nine or 10 individuals. Participants: Individuals making three or more round trips per week on I-75, individuals making one or two round trips per week on I-75, and individuals residing in Florida six or fewer months per year. In November, focus groups were conducted for Florida’s Turnpike Enterprise to explore the public’s reactions to cur- rent I-75 conditions and possible implementation of I-75 Express Lanes (55). Most participants understood that exist- ing funding would not support increasing capacity on I-75 and that tolls would therefore be necessary. The express lane concept was very appealing to most participants because it offered a choice of lanes. Having an option with increased reliability was cited as one of the most important benefits of the express lane. Initial concerns with the express lane con- cept were: safety entering and exiting the lanes, especially during peak periods and having enough traffic use the lanes to justify the added expense. Virtually all participants said they would use the express lanes for at least some of their trips. Most would be selective about when to use the express lanes. Seasonal residents were generally less concerned about toll amounts because most traveled when traffic was not heavy and when they were not in a hurry. Trips to the airport were frequently cited as examples of when they would most likely use the express lanes. None said that requiring SunPass or other electronic tolling would be an obstacle to their use of the facility. Most understood and supported the concept of variable pricing, especially when it was associated with providing reliable service during peak periods. Most believed that dynamic pricing would present dif- ficult real-time decisions on whether to use the facility that could present safety issues. Most believed that it would be best to prohibit trucks from the express lanes. 42. Collier County, Florida (2007) Method: Survey. Universe: Collier County residents 18 years of age or older. Sample size: N = 710. Margin of error: ±4.0%. Sample type: Random telephone. In April, a citizen survey was conducted for the Collier County government to give residents the opportunity to inform county officials about their policy preferences and to grade the effec- tiveness and efficiency of county services and programs (56). One question on tolling was included in the survey: “Would you support or oppose adding tolls to the new lanes that will be constructed on Interstate 75 in Collier and Lee County this year in order to speed up construction of additional traf- fic lanes on the interstate in the future.” In response 39% supported adding tolls, 49% opposed them, and 12% were not sure. HIGH-OCCUPANCY TOLL LANES This section presents data on HOT lanes. HOT lanes exact a toll on vehicles not meeting occupancy requirements that wish to use lanes or entire roads that are designated for the use of higher-occupancy vehicles. Tolls are collected exclusively by electronic toll collection systems. The concept is a better use of the capacity formerly designated as HOV lanes because drivers can be eligible to use the facility either by meeting the minimum passenger requirement or by choosing to pay a toll to gain access to the facility. 43. San Diego, California (1996) Method: Focus groups. Number: Three focus groups. Partici- pants: Residents of the primary market area. In September, market research activities were conducted for the San Diego Association of Governments as pre-project baseline tasks for the I-15 Congestion Pricing Project (57). It was a pilot program that for a monthly fee allowed a limited number of solo drivers to use an 8-mile stretch of carpool lanes (to be known as ExpressPass customers). Revenues generated from the project are used to fund transportation alternatives such as transit and rideshare strategies in the I-15 corridor. The lanes are located between State Routes 56 and 163 in northern

San Diego County. The pilot program research tested attitudes and opinions of commuters traveling in the corridor during peak periods. Among focus group participants, there was gen- eral dissatisfaction with the rush hour commute on I-15. Fre- quent commuters were enthusiastic about being able to access the HOV lanes during peak travel times for a cost. Method: Survey. Universe: Residents of the primary market area. Sample size: N = 400. Margin of error: Not reported. Sample type: RDD. A telephone survey was also conducted (57). About two-thirds of respondents expressed a “very” or “somewhat” favorable impression of the I-15 congestion pricing program. Forty-three percent of respondents believed that the program would make a difference in their commute. Most (82%) liked the idea of using program revenues to pay for better transit service. Rea- sons given for a favorable impression of the program included “saves time” and “eases congestion.” More than two-thirds (67%) believe the time they would save would encourage them to sign up for the program. Reasons given for an unfavorable impressions were “keep lanes for carpooling” and “too many will sign up.” 44. San Diego, California (1997) Method: Focus groups. Number: Four groups. Participants: Current ExpressPass users, prior ExpressPass users, HOV users, and SOV users. In July, focus groups were conducted for the San Diego Asso- ciation of Governments to assist the agency in evaluating the I-15 ExpressPass program (58). All participants cited the same benefits to using the express lanes—reduces stress, saves time, improves the safety of their commutes, is good for emergencies, facilitates getting to work on time, eases conges- tion, maximizes utilization of the lanes, and increases options available to SOV users. Participants in all groups supported a switch from the monthly pass to a per-use fee, but most strongly opposed the dynamic variable price concept and asso- ciated it with price gouging. 45. San Diego, California (1997) Method: Survey. Universe: Current and former ExpressPass users, I-15 corridor users, and I-8 corridor users. Sample size: N = 1,513. Margin of error: Not reported. Sample type: Cus- tomer list for ExpressPass users, RDD for I-15 and I-8 corri- dor users. In the fall, the first wave of an Attitudinal Panel Survey was conducted to examine how the project affected carpoolers and other HOV user groups over the 3-year period (59). The study was sponsored by the San Diego Association of Governments and was conducted by the San Diego State University Foun- dation (59). To ensure that sufficient numbers of carpoolers 22 populated the original sample and would be present in con- tinuing panel waves, carpoolers were over-sampled using quotas for I-15, the study area, and I-8, the control area. The same questions with only minor revisions were asked during each panel wave, with the intent to measure characteristics of travel behavior, attitudes, and perceptions during each wave. Respondents were asked whether they “considered the ExpressPass program to be a success.” Eighty-nine per- cent of current users said “yes,” compared with 40% of former subscribers. There also are differences in opinion between I-15 solo drivers and I-15 carpoolers. Twenty-four percent of solo drivers versus 33% of carpoolers believed the project was a success. Nearly 40% of I-15 solo drivers and carpoolers were unaware or had no opinion about the program. Similar per- centages of I-8 solo drivers (22%) and I-8 carpoolers (26%) believed that the project was a success, and 60% of the I-8 solo drivers were unaware or had no opinion about the program. When asked whether “solo drivers should be allowed to use the Express Lanes for a fee,” 95% of current users agreed, of which 84% strongly agreed. Agreement was also high among former users (86%), I-15 solo drivers (65%), and I-15 car- poolers (56%). In general, I-15 users had more favorable atti- tudes than I-8 users and, on each route, solo drivers had more favorable attitudes than carpoolers. When asked about the perceived “fairness” of the pro- gram to regular lane drivers, all segments were positive— 90% of current users said the program was “fair” as well as 73% of former users, 72% of I-15 solo drivers, and 68% of I-15 carpoolers. 46. San Diego, California (1998) Method: Survey. Universe: ExpressPass users, I-15 corridor users, and I-8 corridor users. Wave 2 sample size: N = 1,501, of which 985 were panel and 516 were replacement sample. Wave 3 sample size: N = 1,576, of which 660 were panel (all 3 waves), 301 were waves 2 and 3, and 593 were new. Margin of error: Not reported. Sample type: Customer list for ExpressPass users, RDD for I-15 and I-8 corridor users. In spring and fall 1998, the second and third waves of the Atti- tudinal Panel Survey were conducted on behalf of the San Diego Association of Governments by the San Diego State University Foundation (60). Respondents were asked whether they “considered the ExpressPass program to be a success.” Of the Wave 2 respondents, 79% of current users said “yes,” com- pared with 28% of solo drivers and 45% of carpoolers. Among the I-8 control groups, 30% of solo drivers and 24% of car- poolers believed the program had been a success. Of Wave 2 current users, when asked whether “solo drivers should be allowed to use the express lanes for a fee,” 94% agreed. Agree- ment was also high among I-15 solo drivers (69%) and I-15 carpoolers (64%).

23 For Wave 3 respondents, 95% of current users said “yes,” along with 73% of I-15 solo drivers and 69% of carpoolers. Within the I-8 control group, perceptions about the success of the project increased among solo drivers (32%) and carpool- ers (35%). When asked about the perceived “fairness” of the program for regular lane drivers, Wave 2 respondents were positive—84% of current users said the program was “fair,” as well as 68% of I-15 solo drivers and 67% of I-15 carpool- ers. For Wave 3 respondents, 88% of current users said the program was “fair” compared with 68% of I-15 solo drivers and 74% of carpoolers. 47. San Diego, California (1998) Method: Focus groups. Number: Four groups. Participants: FasTrak users, HOV users, SOV users. In August, focus groups were conducted to assist the agency in evaluating the I-15 FasTrak program (61). Focus groups were undertaken with FasTrak users, HOV users, and SOV users. Most users were satisfied with the program; however, they were concerned about the cost. Cost was also mentioned by the SOV group as the reason they did not use FasTrak. Most respondents did not understand how the variable pric- ing worked, and part-time users expressed concern that the variable pricing was not working. Most did not know how the revenue generated by FasTrak was being used. 48. San Diego, California (1999) Method: Survey. Universe: FasTrak users, I-15 corridor users, and I-8 corridor users. Wave 4 sample size: N = 1,515, of which 674 were panel (4 waves), 757 were panel (2 or 3 waves), and 84 were refreshment. Wave 5 sample size: N = 1,502, of which 342 were panel (all 5 waves), 978 were panel (2, 3, or 4 waves), and 182 were new. Margin of error: Not reported. Sample type: Customer list for ExpressPass users, RDD for I-15 and I-8 corridor users. In spring and fall 1999, the fourth and fifth waves of the Atti- tudinal Panel Survey were conducted on behalf of the San Diego Association of Governments by the San Diego State University Foundation (62). Respondents were asked whether the I-15 FasTrak program was a success. The trend toward increasingly positive views of the project’s success over the course of the first three waves was generally maintained in Waves 4 and 5 for FasTrak users, FasTrak non-users, I-15 solo drivers, and I-8 solo drivers. Both I-15 carpoolers and I-8 car- poolers displayed greater apparent volatility. At Wave 4, 62% of I-15 carpooler and 41% of I-8 car- pooler respondents viewed the project as a success. However, at Wave 5, 55% of I-15 carpooler and 29% of I-8 carpooler respondents viewed the project as a success. Respondents were asked whether they believed solo drivers should be allowed to use the I-15 express lanes for a fee. The intent of this question was to determine support for the FasTrak pro- gram concept. The majority of current FasTrak users (88% in both Waves 4 and 5) continued to “strongly agree” that solo drivers should be allowed to use the express lanes for a fee. FasTrak non-users held similar views, but with slightly lower percentages (78% in Wave 4 and 82% in Wave 5). Smaller percentages, but majorities of other I-15 users and I-8 users strongly agreed or somewhat agreed with the concept (58% to 77% in Wave 4 and 66% to 70% in Wave 5). Wave 4 respondents were asked whether they believed the I-15 FasTrak program was fair to I-15 regular lanes users. Ninety percent of FasTrak users said the program was “fair” as did 85% of non-users, 67% of I-15 solo drivers, and 84% of I-15 carpoolers. Perceptions of fairness increased for Wave 5 with the exception of I-15 carpoolers—96% of users, 90% of non-users, 74% of I-15 solo drivers, and 70% of I-15 carpool- ers. Wave 4 and 5 respondents were also asked whether they believed the I-15 FasTrak program was fair to I-15 carpool lanes users. Perceptions of fairness were high among all seg- ments (71% to 94% for Wave 4 respondents and 69% to 96% for Wave 5). 49. Puget Sound Region, Washington (2001) Method: Survey. Universe: Residents in the Puget Sound area. Sample size: N = 1,161. Margin of error: Not reported. Sam- ple type: Not reported. In May, a telephone survey conducted as part of a Washington State DOT Managed Lanes Study found that 66% of those polled did not want to convert existing HOV lanes to HOT lanes (63). More than 40% were willing to pay tolls for a faster trip, and 58% would not support a toll. About 50% supported varying the toll rate in the express lanes to manage traffic flow to improve congestion and transit services. 50. San Diego, California (2001) Method: Focus groups. Number: Three groups. Participants: I-15 main lane users, express lane users, and transit riders. In July, focus groups were conducted for the San Diego Asso- ciation of Governments as part of community outreach activ- ities before an expansion of the existing HOT lanes on I-15 (64). The existing HOT lanes had been in operation for more than 5 years. The new project would add four managed lanes with a movable barrier in the median of I-15 to accommodate three lanes in the peak direction. The lanes would give high priority to HOVs and Bus Rapid Transit (BRT). Support for the project was found among participants in all three groups. Each group mentioned the length of time until project com- pletion as a disadvantage of the project. Equity concerns within the groups (i.e., fairness of tolls for lower-income drivers) dissolved and support for the project strengthened

when participants received clarifying information on features of the project, including the BRT component (85% of each group supporting). That the lanes would ease congestion for everyone on the main lanes was viewed as a balancing force in the “equity equation.” The issue of fairness was raised in the groups—“I’ve paid once for the lanes and now I have to pay again. That’s unfair.” The double taxation argument was most often raised by higher-income Caucasian participants among the main lane and FasTrak user groups. Method: Survey. Universe: Residents of target zip codes, 18 years of age or older and who were corridor users, English and Spanish speaking. Sample size: N = 800. Margin of error: ± 3.4 percentage points. Sample type: RDD and FasTrak customer lists. In September, a telephone survey was conducted as part of the community outreach for the I-15 managed lanes program (64). Most respondents (83%) were aware of the managed lanes. Virtually all (92%) agreed that it was a “good idea” to have some sort of time-saving option on I-15. Sixty-six percent (66%) approved of the FasTrak program. (The program was presented as one that allowed motorists who drove alone to travel in the express lanes for a fee that would be charged elec- tronically each time they used the lanes, with the price varying with the amount of traffic in the express lanes.) Twenty-eight percent disapproved of the program. Among FasTrak cus- tomers, approval was 88% compared with 66% for other I-15 users. Extending the toll lanes was the preferred method to alleviate congestion on other parts of I-15, even if there were additional free lanes. Approval decreased with an increase in age, and increased with an increase in household income. More respondents (77%) agreed with the statement: People who drive alone should be allowed to use the I-15 express lanes for a fee (compared with 66% for the FasTrak program itself). Seventy-one percent of respondents agreed with the statement “the toll is a good way to keep the express lane mov- ing quickly,” and 26% disagreed. 51. Denver, Colorado (2003) Method: Focus groups. Number: Five groups. Participants: Different commuter groups and business owners. In spring, public outreach activities were conducted in the Denver area to gauge public perceptions and opinions on the concept of HOT lanes as applied on I-25 north of downtown Denver (65). Sponsored by the Colorado DOT, the outreach activities included focus groups and a stated preference telephone survey. The participants in the focus groups were generally supportive of the HOT lanes concept; however, somewhat negative predispositions toward the DOT or the Regional Transportation District prevented enthusiastic sup- port. They believed that discussions of revenues from HOT lanes should focus on uses, like “bus services” or “roadway improvements,” not on revenue-receiving agencies (e.g., 24 the Regional Transportation District). In voicing approval, many participants cited the reduction of congestion in the general purpose lanes. Several participants in each group voiced a concern that lower-income drivers would not be able to afford the cost of using the HOT lanes. There was general agreement that HOV lanes are valued, but underutilized. Most believed HOT lanes were an acceptable means of using excess capacity. However, many believed that HOT lanes were a “band-aid” solution to the congestion problem and that longer-term solutions must be found (i.e., more carpools and transit use). Method: Survey. Universe: Residents who commute along the I-25 corridor north of Denver. Sample size: N = 350. Margin of error: ±3%. Sample type: Not reported. In terms of HOT lane survey results, it was found that nearly twice as many residents and commuters on I-25 were in favor than were opposed (65). A large portion of respondents were undecided as well. Support or opposition was measured ini- tially and then again after more information and clarification on how the HOT lanes could be used without paying a toll. Respondents were initially inclined to state opposition and tended to change their opinion favorably with the additional information. Nearly half of low-income respondents (45%) supported the concept, 22% disapproved, and 33% were unde- cided. Additionally, younger respondents were more favorable than older respondents. 52. Alameda County, California (2003) Method: Survey. Universe: Residents and voters in Alameda, Contra Costa, and San Joaquin counties from cities that con- tribute significantly to the commute of the Sunol Grade. Sam- ple size: N = 800. Margin of error: Not reported. Sample type: Not reported. In August, a poll was conducted with questions on the Smart Car Pool Lane over the Sunol Grade as part of a larger poll for the Congestion Management Agency on their transportation plan (66). After giving basic factual information about what the lane was, how it would work, and without giving any rea- sons or arguments for why it was a good or bad idea, respon- dents were asked what they thought of the Smart Car Pool Lane. Overall, 58% supported the project ranging from 57% in Alameda County to 60% in Contra Costa and San Joaquin counties. More information was then provided regarding how the project would work and the different elements of the proj- ect so that respondents had time to think about the project. After hearing more information and having additional time, support grew significantly to 67% overall. The important issues in support of the project were: (1) carpools travel without cost, (2) there is no physical toll booth since it uses FasTrak tech- nology, and (3) it would generate money both for the com- pletion of a northbound lane and for expanding transit alter- natives in the corridor.

25 53. Oak Brook, Illinois (2003) Method: Focus groups. Number: Two groups of 11 individu- als each. Participants: Randomly selected, frequent, and infrequent I-PASS and cash users of the Illinois Tollway. In November, focus groups were conducted as part of the larger Illinois Tollway Value Pricing Study (67). The groups were designed to obtain a solid qualitative understanding of the issues for the study and to use this understanding to inform the design of the quantitative stated preference survey. Over- all, respondents expressed satisfactory opinions of the tollway in comparison with other alternatives. Respondents over- whelmingly disliked the idea of differential rate increases based on time of travel. Commuters have limited flexibility and most would not shift travel times and higher peak prices would unfairly penalize commuters. There was no perceived link in terms of higher costs and more reliable or faster peak travel. Respondents unanimously accepted the addition of lanes as a necessary means of reducing tollway congestion. About half indicated that they would pay at least twice as much for a free- flowing commute (roughly 80 cents per plaza versus the cur- rent average of 40 cents). Infrequent and non-peak travelers tended to feel that they were paying enough already and would rather see the addition of lanes without differential tolling. Nearly all believed carpooling was a good idea and that car- pools should get preferential pricing; however, almost every- one indicated they would not carpool themselves. Although respondents generally liked the idea of BRT, every one indi- cated that they would not use it. 54. Dallas/Fort Worth, Texas (2004) Method: Focus groups. Number: Two groups of 8 to 10 indi- viduals each, and two triad interviews. Participants: Recruited from respondents to a mail survey who had attended the Texas DOT public informational meetings in the Dallas/Fort Worth area. In spring, focus groups were held to understand potential users’ perceptions toward managed lanes (68). Most partici- pants did not have a solid monetary idea about the costs of delay, although some were able to relate the costs to a specific trip. Similarly, no one seemed to be able to quantify how much they were willing to pay for a specific time savings. Instead, they stated that willingness to pay depended on the level of necessity for saving time. Participants indicated that they would use managed lanes at least occasionally. Such words as “choice,” “preference,” “option,” and “convenience” were fre- quently used during the focus group discussions. Before the concept of managed lanes was explained, those who were unfamiliar with the concept viewed it as a new tax and reacted negatively. A significant number of participants questioned how electronic toll collection would work and whether the technology would be able to distinguish SOVs from HOVs. Privacy issues resulting from the use of toll tags did not seem to be a major concern. There was a fairly strong consensus on the use of toll rev- enue for building, operating, and maintaining toll facilities. Some suggested that toll revenues be used to reduce taxes. There was an obvious difference between HOV/transit users and other users in views on the effectiveness of HOV lanes. The users in the former group were very positive about HOV lanes as a solution to traffic congestion and strongly advocated the goal of moving individuals rather than cars, although most other users considered HOV lanes to be an underutilized resource. 55. Minneapolis, Minnesota (2004) Method: Survey. Universe: Individuals within the I-394 travel shed and I-35W travel shed. Sample size: N = 750 I-394 respondents and N = 250 I-35W respondents. Margin of error: Not reported. Sample type: RDD. In November and December, the first wave of an Attitudinal Panel Survey to evaluate the I-394 MnPASS lanes was spon- sored by the Hubert H. Humphrey Institute of the University of Minnesota and the Minnesota DOT (69). Sixty percent of respondents in the I-394 travel shed and I-35W (i.e., control group corridor) had heard of the MnPass Project on I-394 and knew that it would allow SOVs to use the carpool lanes for a fee and/or that it would charge tolls. Newspaper and TV/radio were their main sources of information. Sixty-three percent believed allowing single drivers to use carpool lanes by pay- ing a toll was a good idea, 27% believed it was a “bad idea,” and 10% had no opinion. Individuals residing in the I-394 travel shed were slightly more likely to believe MnPass was a good idea relative to those residing in the I-35W travel shed (64% and 58%, respectively). At the same time, respondents in the I-35W travel shed were more likely to have “no opin- ion” on this question than those in the I-394 travel shed (15% and 8%, respectively). Most individuals who approved of the idea believed it was a “better use of carpool lanes” (38%) or it “added capacity to the roadway” (30%). Among those who did not like the idea, they believed either that it would “only benefit the rich” (36%) or that “carpool lanes should be free to all” (24%). Fewer indi- viduals (55%) were supportive of the 24-hour-a-day, 7-day-a- week (24/7) operation of a toll lane program on I-394. Overall, 46% believed both the MnPass concept and operating it 24/7 were “good ideas,” and 19% believed both were “bad ideas.” 56. Atlanta, Georgia (2004) Method: Focus groups. Number: Eight groups, with a total of 113 individuals. Participants: Commuters and express bus riders on major Atlanta area highways. In August, the Georgia State Road and Tollway Authority sponsored focus groups with commuters as part of a feasibil- ity study for HOT lanes and Truck only Toll facilities (70).

Participants did not believe that it would be possible to guaran- tee travel time in a HOT lane, even through the use of dynamic tolls. They are skeptical regarding the travel-time guarantee, but most would use the lane in a time of need. A number of individuals believed that HOT lanes did nothing to address the real problem of congestion on the region’s highways. To relieve the problem, it was necessary to take cars off the road through transit improvements. They also believed HOT lane conversions would discourage carpooling. Conversion from HOV-2 to HOV-3 was not supported—individuals believed it was simply too difficult to find an additional person to carpool and therefore HOT lanes penalized HOV users. Individuals believed that HOT lanes should only be considered if they pay for themselves. Most participants cited transit expansion and/ or operation as a potential use for HOT lane-generated tolls. 57. Minneapolis, Minnesota (2005) Method: Survey. Universe: Individuals within the I-394 travel shed and I-35W travel shed. Sample size: N = 549 panel mem- bers, N = 250 transit users, N-151 MnPass subscribers. Mar- gin of error: Not reported. Sample type: Panel and listed sample (transit users and subscribers). In the fall, the second wave of an Attitudinal Panel Survey to evaluate the I-394 MnPASS lanes was sponsored by the Hubert H. Humphrey Institute of the University of Minnesota and the Minnesota DOT (71). Fifty-nine percent of panel members in the I-394 travel shed and I-35W (i.e., control group corridor) believed allowing single drivers to use carpool lanes by paying a toll was a good idea, 29% believed it was a “bad idea,” and 12% had no opinion. Although a majority of respondents in all income groups believed it was a “good idea,” higher-income respondents (71%) were more likely to believe it was a “good idea” than were mid-income (60%) or lower-income (62%) respondents. MnPASS acceptance was higher among SOV drivers (70%) and lowest among transit users (45%). Accep- tance among carpoolers was high as well (64%). 58. Miami–Dade County, Florida (2004–2005) Method: Focus groups. Number: 15 groups with 12 to 14 par- ticipants in each group. Participants: Stratified random sam- ple of Miami–Dade County residents in each of the county’s commission districts; SOV, HOV, and transit users; English, Spanish, Creole. Between October 2004 and February 2005, focus groups were held as part of the Florida DOT analysis of I-95 managed lane expansion potential between Golden Glades and SR 395 (72). Forty-eight percent of SOV and 36% of HOV participants drove cars equipped with SunPass. When the concept of “man- aged lanes based on open road tolling” was introduced in the groups, the majority of SOV and transit participants approved of the idea, whereas HOV users were more polarized and far less positive, because it would disrupt their use of the HOV lanes. However, 76% of both SOV and HOV participants 26 acknowledged that they would use the managed lanes, at least occasionally, with nearly 20% saying that they would use them all of the time if they could afford it. Only 11% of SOV and 20% of HOV participants said they would never use these lanes because “they don’t want to pay any tolls.” When the topic of specific toll levels was introduced beginning with a $6 one-way toll, more HOV than SOV participants found it objectionable. SOV participants showed some interest in adding passengers to travel free. It also prompted increased interest in considering express bus service or a vanpool as an alternative to paying tolls, although 54% of SOV and 25% of HOV participants still said they would “most likely continue to commute by myself in my car.” 59. Salt Lake City, Utah (2005) Method: Survey. Universe: Utah residents, heads of household who own and drive a vehicle. Sample size: N = 617. Margin of error: ±4%. Sample type: RDD. In July, UDOT commissioned a telephone survey that investi- gated attitudes toward traffic management options, including HOT lanes, among other attitude and opinion items (73). Fifty- six percent of the respondents favored HOT lanes (32% some- what and 24% strongly) compared with 41% who favored “toll roads to increase revenue” and 37% who favored “toll roads to reduce commute time.” Fifty-seven percent favored reversible lanes, and 94% favored HOV lanes. About one-third (34%) reported that they would use HOT lanes once a week or more often, 22% would use toll roads once a week or more often, and 48% would use HOV lanes once a week or more often. Respon- dents might use toll roads, HOT lanes, HOV lanes, or reversible lanes for emergencies (94%), convenience (82%), to save time (76%), if late for work or an appointment (74%), or just to have the option (63%). Fifty-two percent agreed that “toll road charges that drivers pay are generally reasonable,” and 59% agreed that it is reasonable for users of roads to pay for them through toll roads. If UDOT were building a new major high- way, most (56%) would prefer building the road in five years using toll roads, compared with 31% who preferred building the road in 20 to 30 years using the traditional method. At the time of the survey, UDOT was considering a HOT lane project for congestion mitigation purposes on I-15. The project would be a conversion of existing capacity, with a flat rate of $50 per month collected by means of stickers in the vehicle window. Opinions of the public had an impact on implementation of the project by changing access points, signing, and striping. 60. San Diego, California (2005) Method: Survey. Universe: Adults in the San Diego region. Sample size: N = 900. Margin of error: ±3.25%. Sample type: RDD. In July, a region-wide survey conducted for the San Diego Association of Governments found that 58% of those polled held a favorable opinion of the I-15 managed lanes (22% very favorable, 36% favorable) (74); 14% held an unfavorable opin-

27 ion (7% very unfavorable). Respondents were asked if “driving by yourself, would you occasionally pay a fee to use the man- aged lanes during rush hour?” Almost half (48%) said “yes,” 41% said “no,” and 9% said “depends.” The greater a resident’s household income, the more likely that individual was to indi- cate willingness to pay to use the managed lane (73% of those with incomes of $150,000 or greater versus 40% of those with incomes of less than $40,000). 61. Minneapolis, Minnesota (2006) Method: Survey. Universe: Individuals within the I-394 travel shed and I-35W travel shed. Sample size: N = 1,228; 343 panel members, 178 transit users, 106 MnPass subscribers, 601 new. Margin of error: Not reported. Sample type: Panel, listed sample (transit users and subscribers), and RDD. In the spring, the third wave of an Attitudinal Panel Survey to evaluate the I-394 MnPASS lanes was sponsored by the Hubert H. Humphrey Institute of the University of Minnesota and the Minnesota DOT (75). Sixty-five percent of panel members in the I-394 travel shed and I-35W (i.e., control group corridor) believed allowing single drivers to use car- pool lanes by paying a toll was a good idea, 22% believed it was a “bad idea,” and 13% had no opinion (76). A majority of respondents in all income groups reacted positively to the idea of allowing SOV drivers to use carpool lanes by paying a toll (76). At the same time, acceptance was greater among the higher-income respondents (71%) than among lower-income (64%) or mid-income (61%) respondents. There were no sig- nificant differences across the income groups in terms of negative response to the concept. About one-fourth of each income group believed this concept was a bad idea (26% of mid-income, 24% of lower-income, and 21% of higher- income respondents). MnPASS acceptance is highest among SOV drivers (66%) and lowest among transit users (49%). Yet, acceptance among carpoolers was also high (60%). 62. Salt Lake County, Utah (2006) Method: Survey. Universe: County residents. Sample Size: N = 571. Margin of error: ±4.5 percentage points. Sample type: Not reported. In May, a poll showed that 61% of Salt Lake County residents opposed letting individual drivers use the car pool lanes on I-15 for a fee, and 91% said they would not pay the fee to use the lanes (77). Qualitative citations in the article quoted one resident as saying, “tolls are just a way for the rich to pay for privileges.” A DOT spokesman noted that “people in general don’t like to pay for something they perceive that they have gotten for free in the past.” 63. Atlanta, Georgia (2006) Method: Survey. Universe: Individuals 18 years of age or older, residing in Cherokee and Cobb Counties, with tele- phone service in home, and travel target road segment at least once per week. Sample size: N = 1,500. Margin of error: ±3 percentage points. Sample type: RDD. In May, a survey conducted for the Georgia DOT to assess the opinions of individuals in Cherokee and Cobb counties who drove the I-75 corridor between I-285 and I-575 found that respondents were equally divided on whether the HOT concept (i.e., charging vehicles with only one occupant to use the new lanes) was a “good idea” or a “bad idea” (49% each) (78). Reasons mentioned for believing it was a good idea were: “people in carpools should be rewarded” (41%) and “it will reduce the flow of traffic” (34%). Individuals tended to believe it was a bad idea because “it was not fair” (43%) and “they were just opposed to tolls” (31%). When asked about HOT-3; that is, charging vehicles with one or two individu- als, support decreased and opposition increased significantly (37% and 61%, respectively). When asked about HOT-4 (i.e., charging vehicles with one, two, or three individuals), support decreased again to 29% and opposition increased to 69%. Finally, respondents were asked their opinions about express toll lanes (i.e., regardless of how many occupants, all vehicles tolled). Support for express toll lanes was higher than for HOT-3 and HOT-4 and opposition was less (38% and 59%, respectively). Respondents were asked “if you decided to pay the toll, what is the one reason that would most often influence you.” The top reason selected among a provided list was “to reduce overall travel time” (49%), fol- lowed by “to reduce the amount of time in heavy traffic” (19%). Thirteen percent said they would never decide to use the lanes. 64. Atlanta, Georgia (2006) Method: Survey. Universe: Adults in Cherokee, Cobb, Dekalb, Forsyth, Fulton, and Gwinnett counties with telephone in home and using target road segment at least once per week. Sample size: N = 1,810. Margin of error: ±2.5 percentage points. Sample type: RDD. In July, a survey was commissioned by the Georgia DOT to assess the opinions of individuals who drive the SR 400 corridor between SR 20 and downtown Atlanta regarding proposed managed lane scenarios (79). Respondents were divided on their opinions of the HOT lane concept (i.e., sin- gle drivers using the HOV lane for a fee), with 48% saying it was a “good idea” and 49% saying it was a “bad idea.” Rea- sons individuals supported the concept were “it will help reduce traffic” (42%) and “encourages carpooling” (31%). Reasons individuals were opposed were “it is not fair” (39%) and “in general opposed tolling” (26%). When respondents were subsequently asked their opinions of HOT-3, support decreased and opposition rose (36% and 60%, respec- tively). When respondents were queried about HOT-4, sup- port decreased and opposition increased even more (24% and 72%, respectively). Finally, respondents were asked for their opinions about express toll lanes (i.e., regardless of how many occupants, all vehicles tolled). Support for express toll

lanes was higher than for HOT-3 and HOT-4 and opposition was less (37% and 57%, respectively). 65. Houston and Dallas, Texas (2006) Method: Survey. Universe: Adults in Houston and Dallas; English and Spanish. Sample size: N = 4,634. Margin of error: N/A. Sample type: Opt-in, Internet. From May to July, an Internet survey was sponsored by TxDOT to investigate the benefits and drawbacks of providing preferential treatment to HOVs in managed lanes (80). After an explanation of managed lanes, survey respondents were asked to respond to the question, “Would you be interested in using managed lanes?” There was considerable interest in the managed lane concept in both Houston and Dallas. Eighty-one percent of current toll road users polled in Dallas and 75% in Houston expressed interest in using managed lanes. Seventy- three percent of non-toll users in Dallas and 69% in Houston also expressed interest. Private vehicle owners were much more likely to express interest than transit users. The percent- age of interest was highest among individuals with a house- hold income greater than $100,000 and lowest among those with a household income less than $25,000. The top reasons for interest were: travel time saving, increased travel time reli- ability, less stress, and that there were no large trucks on the managed lanes. The primary reason travelers were not interested in using managed lanes was opposition to the tolls required for their use. CORDON TOLLING OR AREA CHARGING Data on public opinion associated with cordon tolling and area charging are presented in this section. These strategies are employed to ease urban congestion. In cities that have used this method of pricing, there have been different methods of applying or implementing the schemes. Cordon tolling is gen- erally implemented as a set of tolled links surrounding a des- ignated area so that all travelers entering or passing through the area are tolled. A variant of cordon charging is area charging (or area licensing) in which a charge is levied to use a vehicle within a defined area, rather than just to enter it. Although this synthesis focuses primarily on public opinion data starting in 2000, the history of cordon tolling, which started in Singapore in 1975, suggested that “older” data be reported. Altogether, 16 data points are presented, most of which reflect research activities outside of the United States. 66. Oslo, Norway (1989) Method: Survey. Universe: Not reported. Sample size: Not reported. Margin of error: Not reported. Sample type: Not reported. Oslo instituted a full-scale toll ring system in 1990, with 19 toll stations charging at all times. The imposition of the tolls was 28 timed to coincide with the opening of the Oslo Tunnel, an express bypass for congested downtown arterials that is one of the road projects to be financed by toll revenues. The Oslo model does not represent congestion pricing. It was designed primarily to generate revenue to finance desired transportation infrastructure improvements (6). The toll rates were low owing to 50% financial support from the national government and do not vary much with congestion. An electronic charging option, available by subscription at reduced daily or monthly rates, uses a microwave technology; subscribers are billed monthly, and enforcement is by video camera. A survey before the pro- gram was implemented found that 29% of respondents were positive, 65% negative, and 6% unsure of the project. 67. Trondheim, Norway (1991) Method: Survey. Universe: Not reported. Sample size: Not reported. Margin of error: Not reported. Sample type: Not reported. In April and May, a survey was conducted before the imple- mentation of a toll ring system in Trondheim (Norway) (6). The toll ring system operates 11 h per day on weekdays. Elec- tronic subscribers benefit from a discount for trips entering after 10:00 and from ceilings on their charge liabilities in any given hour or month. Seven percent of respondents were pos- itive toward the toll ring system, 72% were negative, and 21% were unsure. After implementation later that year, 20% were positive, 48% were negative, and 32% were unsure. The arti- cle noted that attitudes toward the entire package of tolls and road improvements were more evenly balanced. Before imple- mentation, 28% were positive toward the entire package, 28% were negative, and 44 were unsure. After implementation, 32% were positive, 23% were negative, and 45% were unsure. 68. Cambridge, England (1994) Method: Survey. Universe: Not reported. Sample size: Not reported. Margin of error: Not reported. Sample type: Not reported. Cambridge introduced the concept of congestion-specific charging, making the charge vary in real time based on the severity of the congestion. Although different real-time pric- ing schemes were proposed and tested, as in Hong Kong, the cordon tolling scheme was not enacted. Surveys in the summer of 1994 found that the road pricing concept was viewed as “acceptable” by only one-third of respondents. This was a larger proportion than favored car bans or parking controls, but far less than public transit improvements (6). 69. Oslo, Norway (1999) Method: Survey. Universe: Residents of the urban region. Sample size: N = 500. Margin of error: Not reported. Sample type: Not reported.

29 In the fall, a public opinion survey was conducted to probe attitudes to transport policy measures and in particular to var- ious forms of collecting and utilizing road-user charges. The survey was carried out under the auspices of the “Pricing Measures Acceptance” PRIMA project (81). Thirty-nine per- cent of those surveyed supported cordon tolls on all access roads, 47% supported cordon charges only on urban high- ways, and 60% supported cordon charges only on new roads. 70. Stockholm, Sweden (1999) Method: Survey. Universe: Residents of Stockholm County. Sample size: N = 500. Margin of error: Not reported. Sample type: Not reported. In fall, a PRIMA survey was also carried out in Stockholm. The survey was taken after a 1992 political agreement for cordon pricing fell apart in spring 1997 (81). The toll system was cancelled. Fifteen percent of those surveyed supported cordon tolls on all access roads, 42% supported charges only on urban highways, and 25% supported charges only on new roads. 71. London, England (1999) Method: Survey. Universe: Residents across Greater London. Sample size: N = 2,100. Margin of error: Not reported. Sam- ple type: Not reported. In March through August, a program was conducted of market research surveys that examined the public’s current attitudes to charging options in London (82). The first stage was 100 qual- itative interviews among residents, car drivers, visitors, and commercial vehicle operators, among other market segments. The car-using public voiced strong opposition to the idea of charging, particularly residents who might be affected. They resisted the idea of paying for driving in their own home area, and charging residents was seen as particularly unfair. When the concept of using the revenues to pay for transport improve- ments was introduced, individuals’s attitudes softened slightly. However, they expressed skepticism that improvements would be made and concerns about whether charging schemes could actually be enforced. Visitors were also skeptical about charg- ing and its enforcement. Although they could see some bene- fits, they believed charging would be unfair, because travel to London was already expensive. Interest group representa- tives were supportive of road charging in principle, when they knew that the monies would be used to pay for transport improvements. The second stage was a set of quantitative surveys. Respon- dents were introduced to the road-user charging schemes. Because of increasing levels of congestion the Government intends to provide local authorities with new powers to charge road users. Making driving more expensive can reduce traffic levels and pro- vide a source of money to improve traffic and public transport . . . There are two road user charging schemes that might be consid- ered: an area road user license scheme for Central London, an area road user license scheme for Central and Inner London . . . the forthcoming Mayor would have the power to spend the money raised from such a road user charging scheme and this has to be spent on additional transport and/or traffic and environmental improvements in London. (82, p. 6). Respondents were then asked whether they believed that a road-user charging scheme as described with a daily charge of £5 would be a “good thing” for London. Fifty-three percent said it was a “good thing,” 36% said it was a “bad thing,” and 11% were neutral. Only 30% of car drivers in Inner and Cen- tral London believed a daily license for Central London would be a “good thing”; whereas 58% believed it was a “bad thing,” and 12% were neutral. Sixty-seven percent of the general pub- lic believed road-user charges would be a “good thing” if rev- enues were spent on a mix of transport improvements. This percentage increased to 73% when the respondents’ preferred transportation spending package was introduced into the ques- tion. Respondents were asked their preferences in a prior question. Women more than men were supportive of the road charging scheme as were younger residents, those with- out access to a vehicle, and individuals who frequently used public transport. The level of positive response decreased with an increase in the level of the charge. The majority of the surveyed general public (57%) said road-user charging was necessary and 35% said it was not. There was little difference in response by demographics. Forty-eight percent believed road-user charging would be unfair compared with 44% who believed it would be fair. Concerns for fairness were primarily among drivers on lower incomes, followed by residents of the charging area and car commuters. 72. Helsinki, Finland (2002) Method: Survey. Universe: Not reported. Sample size: Not reported. Margin of error: Not reported. Sample type: Not reported. A survey of residents of the metropolitan area was conducted in relation to a road pricing proposal to reduce congestion and raise revenue to improve the transit network (83). To implement road pricing in the region, new legislation would have to be passed allowing for such initiatives. There was no formal structure to the proposed road scheme: therefore, it was developed through feasibility studies and through learn- ing from other cities’ experiences, such as those of London and Stockholm. When residents were surveyed about trans- port issues, 60% believed that road pricing should never be implemented in the Helsinki area, with 69% arguing that public transport improvements should be funded through taxes. Seventy percent believed that public transport should be the first priority for improvement compared with only 18% who believed that improving conditions for car users should be the priority.

73. Ft. Myers Beach, Florida (2003) Method: Survey. Universe: Drivers stopped at one particular intersection. Sample size: N = 1,398. Margin of error: N/A. Sample type: Convenience. Researchers from Texas A&M University re-analyzed data from a Ft. Myers Beach Congestion Mitigation Survey that was conducted in March to estimate the potential effective- ness of a cordon toll around Ft. Myers Beach (84). Self-mailer questionnaires were handed to drivers at an intersection and at a grocery store in Ft. Myers. The survey population repre- sented non-residents, seasonal residents, and long-term resi- dents. Overall, 64% of respondents agreed that “tolls are a fair way to pay for transportation improvements.” Agree- ment was highest among non-residents (80%) and lowest among long-term residents (53%). Approval increased to 57% among long-term residents in response to the question, “if there were a way to reimburse residents, how do you feel about the tolls?” 74. Edinburgh, Scotland (2003) Method: Survey. Universe: Residents of Edinburgh and sur- rounding communities. Sample size: N = 2,406. Margin of error: Not reported. Sample type: Not reported. In the fall, the city of Edinburgh Council assessed the public acceptance of cordon tolling (85). The pricing proposal fea- tured two charging cordons; one operating from 7:00 a.m. to 6:30 p.m. around the outskirts of the central heritage area, and one generally following the route of the city bypass, operating from 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 a.m. A total of 19,500 questionnaires were mailed, with 684 returned by Edinburgh residents and 1,722 by residents of the surrounding areas. Respondents were asked to indicate how they would vote in the proposed 2005 referendum, and there was aggregate majority opposi- tion to the proposal. Non-car users gave the proposal clear majority support, whereas among car users there was clear majority opposition. Another question on the survey asked for agreement or disagreement with the statement, “Traffic con- gestion on Edinburgh’s road network will get worse and it needs to be reduced.” There was clear majority support for congestion reduction among both groups. Respondents were then given a range of alternatives for reducing congestion and asked to select their preferred options. The rank order of pref- erences were • Better quality public transport, • More park and ride facilities, • Cheaper public transport, • Provision of school buses, • Increased road capacity on key routes, • Improved cycling and walking facilities, • More car sharing schemes, • Congestion charging, • Re-opening closed road sections to traffic, 30 • Banning cars in central Edinburgh, • Fewer bus lanes, • Stricter enforcement of parking regulations, • More bus lanes, • Higher parking charges, • Increased fuel tax. Respondents were then asked how transport improvements should be funded. The options provided ranged from conges- tion charging and higher parking charges to increased income tax and fuel taxes; most car users and non-users preferred con- gestion charging. 75. Stockholm, Sweden (2005/2006) Method: Survey. Universe: Not reported. Sample size: Not reported. Margin of error: Not reported. Sample type: Not reported. A congestion tax trial was implemented in central Stockholm from January to July 2006. The trial consisted of a cordon- based variable pricing scheme to enter the city center (86). Before the trial in fall 2005, approximately 55% of all Stock- holm county residents believed that it was a “rather” or “very” bad decision to conduct a congestion tax trial. In May 2006, only 41% believed that it was a “rather” or “very” bad decision. After the seven-month trial was complete, a referendum was held to ascertain whether the people of Stockholm and the sur- rounding municipalities were in favor of a permanent system of road-user charging. In the city of Stockholm, 53% voted “yes” to the introduction of a permanent scheme, and 47% voted, “no.” Outside the city in the commuter belt, 15 of 26 sur- rounding municipalities held their own referendums; 48% were in support and 52% were against. 76. Shanghai, China (2005) Method: Survey. Universe: Not reported. Sample size: Not reported. Margin of error: Not reported. Sample type: Not reported. Public opinion was measured related to a feasibility study for road pricing in Shanghai to reduce congestion and improve air quality (83). Car drivers did not support the scheme. An inter- est survey indicated that 91% did not agree with the scheme, compared with only 7% who did. The cordon scheme would operate only during weekday morning and evening peak peri- ods and would charge every time a vehicle entered the zone. The priced areas covered the core of the commercial heart of the city, where traffic concentration and congestion delays were greatest, with limited scope for new highway construction to resolve the problems. The technology would be a tag-and- beacon-style approach. The scheme would be implemented as part of a package that included public transport improvements, metro construction, bus priority schemes, traffic management improvements, and road network improvement.

31 77. London, England (2006) Method: Survey. Universe: Not reported. Sample size: Not reported. Margin of error: Not reported. Sample type: Not reported. The current Central London Congestion Charge run by Trans- port for London (TfL) has been operational since February 2003 (83,86). In this time, it has undergone several variations altering arrangements for payments and arrangements for operations such as fleet schemes. Perhaps most significantly, the charge was increased form £5 to £8 in July 2005. The orig- inal scheme was implemented with the aim of reducing con- gestion, making radical improvement to bus services, improv- ing journey time reliability for car users, and making the distribution of goods and services more efficient. The scheme has been proven to improve air quality and reduce levels of harmful emissions and particulates contributing to poor health and climate change. Public support has been tracked since before the implementation of the scheme. This had demon- strated how support improves with awareness of the scheme and when the positive impacts of the schedule are visible and reported. Surveys reported support to be around 40% in the run up to the scheme and between 50% and 60% in the following year. Sixty percent supported the congestion charge in 2006 and more than 80% reported that they would accept charging if public transport improved. 78. New York, New York (2006) Method: Survey. Universe: New York City residents 18 years of age and older; English and Spanish. Sample size: N = 800. Margin of error: ±3.5 percentage points. Not reported. Sam- ple type: RDD. In June, the Tri-State Transportation Campaign commissioned a survey to explore and benchmark New York City residents’ awareness of congestion pricing, factors that would contribute to support or opposition to congestion pricing in the Central Business District of Manhattan, and concepts to inform the development of a communications program, including identi- fication of relevant message and consumer-end benefits (87). One in five city residents (18%) stated that they have never heard or read anything about congestion pricing. Respondents were almost equally divided on whether traffic congestion pricing or charging a toll to cars and trucks entering Manhat- tan below 60th Street would be a “good idea” (44%) or “bad idea” (45%). Twelve percent could not say. After hearing a description of the congestion pricing pro- gram implemented in London, 73% of respondents (40% very likely and 33% somewhat likely) believe congestion pricing would be likely to reduce traffic congestion in Manhattan below 60th Street if put into operation in that area. Among those who believe congestion pricing is very likely to reduce traffic, 62% believe the program is a “good idea” and 31% view it as a “bad idea.” Most (65%) of those with little confi- dence that congestion pricing would ease traffic see it as a “bad idea.” Congestion pricing is seen as a “good idea” by Manhat- tan (49%) and Staten Island (58%) residents more often than other boroughs and by those working in Manhattan (50%) more often than by residents working elsewhere (40%). Rea- sons why respondents found congestion pricing a good idea included because they believe it would reduce traffic, traffic jams, and congestion in the area; increase use of public trans- portation; decrease unnecessary cars, trucks, and people in the area; bring increased revenue to the city; and reduce pollution. Congestion pricing is seen as a “bad idea” by those who travel to work in their cars (55%) more than public transit users (40%), by those in households with cars (49%) more often than those without cars (38%), and by residents under the age of 30 (53%) more than by those in their 40s and 50s (38%). Reasons for believing it is a “bad idea” included: • There are already too many tolls or taxes; • It will be too expensive for individuals who are already paying too much; • It will increase traffic and congestion rather than decrease it; • It won’t solve the problem; • It is unfair or not right to charge to enter Manhattan; and • It will hurt businesses and increase prices. 79. New York, New York (2007) Method: Survey. Universe: New York City registered voters. Sample size: N = 1,013. Margin of error: Not reported. Sample type: Not reported. In January, a Quinnipiac University Poll found that New York City voters oppose congestion pricing by a 62% to 31% mar- gin (88). This was measured by the question: “Do you support or oppose charging vehicle owners a fee to drive below 60th Street in Manhattan during rush hours?” There was greater support among Manhattan residents (rather than other bor- oughs), Caucasians (as opposed to Blacks and Hispanics), and public transit users. There were several issues related to the congestion pricing proposal that were tested with survey respondents: (1) Congestion pricing would unfairly tax indi- viduals who live outside of Manhattan—57% agreed and 37% disagreed, with higher agreement among Blacks and Hispan- ics; women; and residents of the Boroughs of Bronx and Queens, and Kings County; (2) It would be bad for the econ- omy because fewer individuals will come into Manhattan; therefore, restaurants and other businesses will lose revenue— 47% agreed and 47% disagreed, with higher agreement among Blacks and Hispanics, women, and residents of Bronx and Queens; (3) It would improve mass transit because increased demand would lead to increased service—48% agreed and 45% disagreed, with higher agreement among men and resi- dents of Manhattan and Staten Island; (4) It would be good for the economy because traffic congestion costs New Yorkers billions of wasted dollars every year—42% agreed and 49% disagreed, with higher agreement among Manhattan residents.

80. New York, New York (2007) Method: Survey. Universe: Not reported. Sample size: N = 1,150. Margin of error: Not applicable. Sample type: Opt-in. In April, New York City’s mayor put forth several proposals to improve the environment of the city including congestion pricing (89). An online poll conducted by Crain’s New York Business a few days after the Mayor’s announcement found that more than half of respondents supported the Mayor’s pro- posal (53%), with 45% saying that congestion pricing was needed to reduce gridlock and 8% saying that the surcharge would help generate needed funds for the city. Of the 47% who opposed the plan, 38% said congestion pricing was unfair to small business owners and residents who have no choice but to drive into Manhattan; 9% said the plan would increase congestion elsewhere in the city. Under the Mayor’s proposal, the city would impose a surcharge on cars and trucks entering Manhattan during peak hours on weekdays. The charge would be $8 for car drivers and $21 for truck oper- ators to drive into Manhattan south of 86th Street. The fee would only be imposed during the week, between 6 a.m. and 6 p.m. Also, motorists driving major highways along Manhat- tan’s east and west sides would not be charged, so it would be possible to go from Brooklyn to Harlem along Franklin D. Roosevelt Drive without entering the zone. The fee would be reduced by the toll commuters who already pay to enter Man- hattan by bridges and tunnels and who do not use E-ZPass transponders. A network of cameras would capture the license plate numbers of vehicles crossing the cordon and either charge a driver’s existing commuter account or generate a bill to be paid each time. Revenues from fees would be used to make improvements in the transit system. 81. United States National Poll (2007) Method: Survey. Universe: Individuals who opted-in to web- site poll. Sample size: N = 1,150. Margin of error: Not appli- cable. Sample type: Opt-in. A Harris Poll found that 37% of U.S. adults say that traffic congestion is a serious problem in their community (90). Two- thirds of that 37% say it is not being addressed. The poll asked questions about London-type congestion pricing, calling it a congestion tax. Sixty-six percent were opposed, most of them strongly. Only 22% said they would support it. 82. New York, New York (2007) Method: Survey. Universe: New York City registered voters. Sample size: N = 1,369. Margin of error: ±2.7%. Sample type: Not reported. In June, a Quinnipiac University Poll found that New York City voters statewide oppose 52% to 31% Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s proposal to charge a fee for drivers entering 32 Manhattan (91). This was measured by the question: “Do you support or oppose the Bloomberg administration’s congestion pricing plan?” Upstate voters opposed the idea 42% to 27%, whereas New York City voters opposed it 57% to 35% and suburban voters opposed it 54% to 34%. Those who usually traveled into and out of Manhattan by car opposed it 62% to 11%, compared with 50% to 11% for those whose usual means of travel was public transit. When asked whether they would “support congestion pric- ing if the money were used to prevent an increase in mass tran- sit fares and bridge and tunnel tolls,” support among statewide voters increased to 52% and opposition decreased to 36%. New York City voters would back the idea 50% to 33%. When asked “how much have you heard or read about con- gestion pricing, a plan adopted by some major cities to reduce traffic by charging a fee to drive into congested areas,” most persons had heard “a lot” (31%) or some (30%). Very few knew “nothing at all” (22%) or “not much” (13%). Indeed, 52% of respondents in New York City had heard or read “a lot.” PUBLIC–PRIVATE PARTNERSHIPS To meet the gap in funding highway infrastructure with public capital, policy makers are considering PPPs for selected toll road projects. Typically, these agreements are complex, long- term arrangements that involve the private sector agreeing to construct or rehabilitate a public access toll facility in exchange for rights to the future toll revenues. Although PPPs (or concessions) are not new, the entry of this issue into the public opinion realm is just beginning. 83. Dallas, Texas (2005) Method: Survey. Universe: Individuals 18 years of age or older, residing within targeted census tracts in the Dallas/Fort Worth area, who have at least one household vehicle avail- able for use and travel State Highway 121 at least once per week. Sample size: N = 1,011. Margin of error: ±3%. Sample type: RDD. In August, a stated preference survey was executed as part of an Investment Grade Traffic and Revenue Study in connection with State Highway 121 (92). The stated preference survey measured public opinions, acceptance, travel behaviors, and preferences relating to tolling and the private development of the State Highway 121 toll road located in Denton and Collin counties, north of Dallas, Texas. A majority of respondents (56%) believed that it was a good idea to complete necessary construction on State Highway 121 through the use of tolls, 38% believed it was a bad idea, and 6% did not know. Much fewer (42%) believed it was a good idea for TxDOT to allow a private firm to build State Highway 121 in exchange for the right to collect tolls. About the same percentage (41%) believed it was a bad idea, and 18% did not know.

33 84. San Antonio, Texas (2006) Method: Survey. Universe: Not reported. Sample size: Not reported. Margin of error: N/A. Sample type: Opt-in. In February, a San Antonio Business Journal online Business Pulse survey indicated that 74% of participants voting in the poll opposed hiring private contractors to build and manage toll roads in San Antonio (93). Twenty-two percent supported such a move, whereas 3% were undecided. Toll roads are cur- rently planned in San Antonio along stretches of U.S. High- way 281 and Loop 1604 and possibly a portion of Interstate Highway 35. 85. Statewide Indiana (2006) Method: Survey. Universe: Indiana residents age 18 and older. Sample size: N = 501. Margin of error: ±4.4%. Sample type: RDD, probability. In March, 30% of respondents to a statewide telephone poll believed that the deal to lease the Indiana Toll Road (i.e., take over operations, maintenance, and revenues) to an Australian– Spanish consortium for 75 years to raise money for highway projects was a good idea, whereas 60% said it was a bad idea (94). Nearly half of those polled who were against the lease (47%) said they opposed it primarily because of foreign control, 13% of those opposed believed tolls would likely increase, 12% were against private control of a public asset, 27% cited a variety of other reasons, and 1% were not sure of the reason for their opposition. When asked if money raised by leasing the toll road should used be only for highway and transportation projects, 50% said it should be used for other programs as well as transportation, whereas 41% said it should be restricted to highway/transportation uses and 9% were unsure. Also indicated in the poll was that governor’s approval rating (in 2006) decreased to 37% from the 55% rating of 2004, a few months after taking office. Several residents quoted in the article (94) mentioned that the governor was “trying to do too many things too fast.” The article noted that in trying to build support for the toll road lease, the governor has courted busi- nesses and labor groups, held town meetings, and lobbied law- makers, always underscoring the state’s road construction needs in a 10-year timetable of projects, called Major Moves. The governor had cast the toll road lease as “the jobs vote of a generation.” 86. Statewide Indiana (2006) Method: Survey. Universe: Likely voters. Sample size: N = 800. Margin of error: ±3.5 percentage points. Sample type: Not reported. In September, 39% of respondents to a statewide telephone poll believed the deal to lease the Indiana Toll Road to an Australian–Spanish consortium for 75 years to raise money for highway projects was a good idea, whereas 55% said it was a bad idea (95); 6% were not sure. The governor’s administra- tion reported that most of the money would be used to help finance hundreds of highway and other transportation projects, many of which otherwise would never happen or would have been decades away. Democrats made their opposition to the lease a top campaign issue going into November’s election. Republicans were more likely than Democrats to support the lease (46% and 30%, respectively). Those respondents in the northern part of the state were more likely to be opposed than those in the south (the toll road bisects the northern Indiana county of St. Joseph). In a list of important issues facing the state, toll roads were far down on the list (6%), compared with health care costs (18%), taxes and state spending (17%), education funding (14%), illegal immigra- tion (10%), and gas prices (5%). 87. Statewide New Jersey (2007) Method: Survey. Universe: New Jersey residents. Sample size: N = 1,000. Margin of error: Not reported. Sample type: Not reported. In February, a statewide poll commissioned by AAA’s Mid- Atlantic chapter indicated that 56% of residents opposed sell- ing or leasing the New Jersey Turnpike and Garden State Parkway to private interests to pay down the state’s debt (41% strongly opposed and 15% somewhat opposed) (96). Twenty percent supported the concept (4% strongly supported and 16% somewhat supported). Twenty-four percent were unde- cided. Respondents who opposed selling or leasing the New Jersey Turnpike and Garden State Parkway to private inter- ests were more supportive (65%) of using the money from the sale or lease for transportation investment. Sixty-eight percent were aware of the issue. The poll found that 65% of the respondents said money from a sale or lease should go toward transportation investment. The article indicated that the poll results show that many residents are concerned about losing control of well-maintained toll roads that have had few toll increases. A spokesperson for the state’s Treasury Depart- ment was quoted as saying, “the public is not well-served when public opinion is tested before the Corzine administra- tion has made any proposal.” 88. Dallas, Texas (2007) Method: Survey. Universe: Individuals 18 years of age or older, residing within targeted census tracts in the Dallas/Fort Worth area, who have at least one household vehicle available for use and travel State Highway 121 at least once per week. Sample size: N = 1,011. Margin of error: ±3 percentage points. Sample type: RDD. In May, a stated preference survey was executed as part of an Investment Grade Traffic and Revenue Study in connection with L.B.J. Highway (97). The stated preference survey measured public opinions, acceptance, travel behaviors, and

preferences relating to value pricing and private development of the L.B.J. Highway toll road located near the cities of Dallas, Garland, Farmers Branch, and Mesquite in Dallas County. About half of respondents (48%) believed that it was a good idea to complete necessary construction of Interstate 635 (the L.B.J. Highway) through the use of tolls. About half (49%) believed it was a bad idea, and 3% did not know. About one- third (34%) believed it was a good idea for TxDOT to allow a private firm to construct and manage the lanes on Interstate 635 in exchange for the right to collect tolls. Almost two-thirds (61%) believed it was a bad idea, and 5% did not know. At the time of the survey, the Texas legislature was debating bill HB 1892, which included a two-year ban on private toll road con- tracts, with certain exceptions, among other toll-related items. 89. Statewide Pennsylvania (2007) Method: Survey. Universe: Pennsylvania voters. Sample size: N = 1,318. Margin of error: ±2.7 percentage points. Sample type: Not reported. In May, the Quinnipiac University Poll Study conducted a statewide survey in Pennsylvania that asked voters for their opinions on several topical issues (98). Several questions addressed leasing the Pennsylvania Turnpike to a private com- pany. “Governor Rendell has proposed leasing the Pennsylva- nia Turnpike to a private company, but keeping state control over toll increases and maintenance schedules. The money would be used to pay for highway and bridge construction. Do you support or oppose this proposal?” (98). Forty-four percent of those polled supported the proposal, 42% opposed it, and 14% had no opinion. Support decreased from 49% reported in March 2007. The provision of additional information, “leas- ing the turnpike would result in an upfront payment of about $12 to $18 billion by the company leasing the turnpike . . . the state could invest that money and earn nearly one billion dol- lars a year in interest to be spent on roads and bridges” (98) made no difference to 40% of respondents; 38% said it would make them “more likely” to support and 15% said it would make them “less likely” to support leasing the Pennsylvania Turnpike. The majority of respondents (54%) believed that “leasing the turnpike to a private company would result in sig- nificant toll increases,” whereas 30% did not agree with that statement and 16% did not know. Half (50%) believed a pri- vate company would do “about the same job” maintaining the turnpike as the state government. Thirty percent believed that a private company would do a “better job” and 13% a “worse job.” 90. Statewide New Jersey (2007) Method: Survey. Universe: New Jersey voters. Sample size: N = 891. Margin of error: ±3.3 percentage points. Sample type: Not reported. In August, the Rutgers–Eagleton Poll found that 61% of vot- ers opposed leasing the New Jersey Turnpike and the Garden 34 State Parkways to a non-profit corporation (99). Among those who had heard or read “a lot” about leasing the toll roads, 85% said they opposed the idea. Sixty-four percent of voters polled said they opposed raising tolls on the Turnpike and the Garden State Parkway to pay off state debt. Toll hikes are viewed in a different light when voters are asked to choose between rais- ing tolls, raising taxes, or cutting services to help get the state out of debt. Given those choices, 44% of voters opt for toll increases, 28% for service cuts, and 9% support increasing taxes. 91. Statewide Pennsylvania (2007) Method: Survey. Universe: Pennsylvania voters. Sample size: N = 1,160. Margin of error: ±3.3 percentage points. Sample type: Not reported. In August, a Quinnipiac University poll found state residents oppose the plan of leasing the Pennsylvania Turnpike to a pri- vate operator by a margin of 47% to 40%, with the rest un- decided (100). Support has shifted downward from March 2007 (49%) and May 2007 (44%). TAX-RELATED INITIATIVES Public opinion regarding tax-related initiatives is relevant to the topic of tolling and road pricing because pricing decision making is often done within the context of alternatives to increased taxes. With the passage of the Federal-Aid Highway Act and Highway Revenue Act of 1956, federal motor fuel tax revenues have been earmarked only for roadway spending. The fuel taxes are the primary source of roadway and transit infrastructure funding at the state and local levels. The federal Highway Trust Fund was established by the Highway Rev- enue Act of 1956 for the direct purpose of funding the con- struction of an Interstate System and aiding in the financing of primary, secondary, and urban routes. After many years of steady growth, federal and state gas tax receipts reached a plateau in the late 1990s. According to the National Surface Transportation Policy and Revenue Study Commission, as a result of recent federal revenue and expenditure trends, the Highway Trust Fund is projected to reach a negative balance in 2009 and the Mass Transit Account balance begins to decline in 2008. 92. Atlanta, Georgia (2002) Method: Survey. Universe: Residents of the 13-county metro area. Sample size: N = 502. Margin of error: Not reported. Sample type: RDD, probability. In the fall, an Applied Research Center Regional Issues Poll found that only one-third (32%) of metro Atlantans would support an increase in Georgia’s motor fuel tax to fund road- way projects (101). Sixty-three percent would not support an increase and 5% did not know. The poll is conducted quarterly

35 by the Applied Research Center at Georgia State Univer- sity. The article noted that even though the state’s gas tax was the lowest in the nation (at 7.5 cents per gallon vs. the national average of 20 cents), there was little support for an increase. Of those who supported an increase, most (65%) said that it should be increased by 10 cents—rather than 15 cents, 20 cents, or something else. Few respondents (17%) believed the fuel tax should be decreased; most (80%) believed it should be kept the same. Georgia’s constitution limits the gas tax to roads and roadway improvements; however, 59% of respondents said they would support a constitutional change to allow the money to be used for mass transit. 93. Pierce County, Washington (2002) Method: Survey. Universe: Registered voters in Pierce County. Sample size: N = 400. Margin of error: Not reported. Sample type: Not reported. In March, a survey found an even split over the concept of a state plan that included an increase in the gas tax, with 24% of those surveyed strongly in favor and 33% strongly opposed (102). Reasons given for voting “yes” included “costs more later,” “freight mobility,” and “safety needs.” Reasons for vot- ing “no” were “over-taxation” and “government wastes too much money.” Fifty-seven percent responded that roads and highways need attention over mass transit, and 59% believed Pierce County gets “less than its fair share of funds.” 94. Statewide Washington (2002) Method: Survey. Universe: Not reported. Sample size: Not reported. Margin of error: Not reported. Sample type: Not reported. In August, a statewide poll conducted for the 1000 Friends of Washington found that of those polled 63% would vote for a tax increase if there were higher priority given to transit and other transportation choices (103). Seven-four percent placed a higher priority on safety and maintenance over new road projects. Eighty-three percent wanted the Washington State DOT to reform how it budgets projects to have all the funds needed to complete projects before they got started. 95. King, Pierce, Snohomish Counties, Washington (2002) Method: Survey. Universe: Residents in King, Pierce, and Snohomish counties. Sample size: N = 500. Margin of error: Not reported. Sample type: Not reported. In September, a telephone poll conducted for the Seattle Times found majority support for R-51 (103). This was a statewide transportation funding package that would be financed through bonds and user taxes: a one-time 1% surcharge on vehicle pur- chases, weight fee increases for trucks over 10,000 lb (exclud- ing pickups and recreational vehicles), and a 9 cent/gallon gas tax increase over two years. Across the counties, 64% of those polled supported R-51 in King County, 43% in Snohomish, and 40% in Pierce. More than 50% supported transit needs over roads, with 70% supporting the building of a BRT sys- tem. The measure was scheduled to be on the November ballot. 96. Statewide Oklahoma (2005) Method: Survey. Universe: Registered voters. Sample size: N = 750. Margin of error: ±3.8%. Sample type: Not reported. In June, a statewide poll co-sponsored by the Tulsa World and KOTV Channel 6 found that 64% of Oklahoma residents plan- ning to vote would vote against a fuel tax increase, whereas 25% said they would vote for it and 11% did not respond (104). Most opposition (68%) came from the area of the state outside Tulsa and Oklahoma City where the economy is based to a large degree on agriculture, where gasoline and diesel are major costs. In Tulsa, 58% said they would oppose a fuel tax increase, compared with 62% in Oklahoma City. At the time, gasoline prices had topped $2 a gallon and State Question 723 was being considered, which would gradually increase the gasoline tax by 5 cents and the diesel tax by 8 cents, bringing both to 22 cents per gallon within four years to get extra funds for roads and bridges. The measure was not passed. 97. Statewide Oklahoma (2005) Method: Survey. Universe: Registered voters. Sample size: N = 503. Margin of error: ±4.4%. Sample type: Not reported. In August, another statewide poll co-sponsored by the Tulsa World and KOTV Channel 6 found that 75% of Oklahoma res- idents planning to vote would vote against a fuel tax increase, whereas 16% said they would vote for it and 9% did not respond (105). The proposal to raise the fuel tax was on the ballot on September 13, 2005. At the time of the poll, gasoline prices were headed to $3 per gallon. Eighty-three percent said the condition of state roads and bridges was fair to poor. Seventy percent said the state should spend more on bridges and roads. 98. Statewide Wyoming (2007) Method: Survey. Universe: Wyoming residents. Sample size: N = 600. Margin of error: ±4 percentage points. Sample type: Not reported. In January, a statewide poll found that Wyoming residents wanted better roads, but they did not want to pay higher fuel taxes to get them (106). Nearly nine of 10 residents (89%) of those polled supported spending more money on maintaining the state’s highways and widening some busy two-lane roads. Just over 7% oppose spending more and 4% said they did not know. However, when asked if they would support an increase

in the state gasoline tax to maintain and improve the state’s roadways, 55% said they would oppose an increase and 8% did not know. SURVEYS ON A RANGE OF ROAD PRICING AND FUNDING ISSUES The final section presents polls and surveys that elicited pub- lic opinion on a variety of road pricing and funding schemes. Because these research studies were more diverse in their questions and results, it was found to be more appropriate to present them in this general section rather than under the pre- vious specific topics. 99. Statewide Oregon (2000) Method: Survey. Universe: Oregon voters. Sample size: Not reported. Margin of error: Not reported. Sample type: Not reported. In the spring, AAA Oregon/Idaho surveyed Oregon voters on a variety of ideas for funding highways (107). The results did not show strong support for either a large gas tax increase or electronic tolling. Of the ideas tested, the highest level of opposition (91%) was toward a per-household highway access fee, 81% opposed a mileage fee, 75% opposed an automatic increase system in the fuel tax, and 68% opposed tolls to reduce congestion on highways. In terms of fuel taxes, 54% were willing to pay an extra 2 cents a gallon; however, support declined as the tax increase went to 3 cents and 4 cents. A $10 vehicle fee was supported by 55%. 100. Texas (2003) Method: Survey. Universe: Texas householders, English and Spanish speaking. Sample Size: N = 2,111. Margin of error: ±1% for statewide responses. Sample Type: RDD. The Center for Transportation Research at the University of Texas conducted a statewide public opinion assessment of new toll roads in various areas of the state of Texas on behalf of TxDOT (108). About half (51%) agreed that drivers should not have to pay tolls for new roads; 37% disagreed and 12% were neutral. Older individuals and those who were rela- tively new to the area were more likely to support tolls for both new and existing roads; however, retired individuals were less likely. Seventy-one percent of respondents agreed with the statement that drivers should not have to pay tolls for existing roads, 22% disagreed, and 7% were neutral. This question was asked in two different ways. Survey version one mentioned the costs for construction and maintenance that TxDOT incurs yearly, and version two gave the average yearly costs for an American to own and operate a vehicle. There was greater agreement with the statement that drivers should not have to pay tolls with version two. 36 Asked to choose between gas tax increases and conversion to toll roads, 23% selected gas tax increases, whereas 61% selected toll roads and 16% had no preference. Given the choice for project management between PPPs and the public alone, respondents were almost equally divided (46% to 45%, with 9% indicating no preference). More educated persons and those aware of toll projects in their areas were more likely to support PPPs. Support increased slightly in the survey version that mentioned that PPPs generally resulted in quicker project completion. Support for HOT lanes (i.e., SOVs in HOV lanes for a toll) was mixed, with 52% agreeing that it was a good feature and 48% saying it was not. Older individuals, males, those who travel to work on toll roads and those who live 50+ miles from their workplace had a greater tendency to support HOT lanes. Minimal support was evidenced for congestion pricing (i.e., increase in toll rates during rush hours), with 26% agreeing it was a good feature and 74% disagreeing. Significant public support was evidenced for charging higher tolls for trucks, with 79% of respondents saying “yes” this should occur. Seventy-five percent agreed with the statement that tolls should be reduced after construction was paid; 22% disagreed and 7% were neutral. Seventy-eight percent agreed with the statement that revenues from tolls should stay in the region. 101. San Diego, California (2003) Method: Survey. Universe: San Diego voters. Sample size: N = 1,200. Margin of error: ±2.9%. Sample type: Voter reg- istration list. In 1987, San Diego County voters approved a 20-year half- cent sales tax to pay for county transportation improvements (109). This sales tax was set to expire in 2009. A survey was conducted in 2003 to gauge support for extending the tax. Respondents were asked if they would “support or oppose extending the half-cent tax for 30 years to pay for additional county transportation improvements and operations.” Sixty- two percent supported extending the tax, whereas 29% opposed it. When read the language of the ballot measure that men- tioned specific highways to be improved, expansion of transit for seniors and disabled persons, expansion of other public transit services, and expedites and finances improvements, 72% said they would vote “yes” on this ballot measure. The item went to ballot in November 2004 and passed with a slim margin over the mandatory two-thirds requirement. Respondents were also asked about support or opposition to construction of managed lane facilities in freeway corridors throughout San Diego County for use by BRT and carpools as well as SOVs if they paid a toll. Seventy-six percent sup- ported construction, whereas 20% opposed and 4% had no opinion. Most individuals (73%) believed this system of man- aged lanes would have a positive effect in reducing traffic congestion (19% a “great deal” and 54% said “some”).

37 When asked about priorities for some specific transporta- tion-related issues, 54% gave a high priority to building new roads and freeways, 42% gave a high priority to building new lanes on existing freeways where buses and carpools would ride free and SOV could pay a toll, and 24% gave a high priority to building new toll roads. 102. Greater Washington, D.C. Area (2005) Method: Survey. Universe: Adults living in Washington, D.C.; Maryland; and Virginia. Sample size: N = 1,003. Margin of error: Not reported. Sample type: Not reported. In January, The Washington Post in association with ABC News sponsored a poll of Washington metropolitan region’s residents on attitudes toward transportation infrastructure funding (110). In response to the survey question, “Which of the following do you think is a better way to pay for highway expansion or new highways in your area?”, respondents said charging tolls, 60%; raising taxes, 30%; neither, 9%; and no opinion, 1%. Across the three jurisdictions, support for tolls was 75% in the District of Columbia, 61% in Maryland sub- urbs, and 53% in Virginia. In addition, 58% of the regions’ residents supported the concept of HOT lanes, whereas 48% supported adjustable (or time-variable) tolls. At the time of the poll, there were proposals in Virginia to build HOT lanes on the Beltway and on Interstates 95 and 395. In Maryland, officials were considering adding express toll lanes to the Beltway, I-270, the Baltimore Beltway, and I-95 north of Baltimore. 103. United States—National (2005) Method: Survey. Universe: Adults nationwide. Sample size: N = 1,204. Margin of error: Not reported. Sample type: Not reported. In January, The Washington Post and ABC News also spon- sored a survey to assess support for various congestion miti- gation policies among a national sample of respondents (110). Levels of support ranged from 51% for HOV lanes (if none now), 36% for single-driver tolls in HOV lanes, 32% for a higher gas tax, 29% for adjustable tolls, and 11% for city cen- ter tolls. At the time of the poll gas was at $1.91 for a gallon of regular unleaded. Sixty-five percent of respondents opposed a higher gas tax, with 43% opposed to implementing HOV lanes. 104. San Antonio, Texas (2005) Method: Focus groups. Number: Four groups, with a total 19 individuals. Participants: San Antonio residents who traveled the I-35 study corridor. In February and March, TxDOT sponsored focus groups as part of the San Antonio I-35 Northeast Corridor Value Pricing Study (111). The groups were used to test the individuals’s understanding and opinions of value priced lanes—both HOT lanes (free HOV travel) and express toll lanes (all travelers pay a toll). None of the participants were familiar with the concept of value pricing. After being given examples, most believed that offering an incentive for carpooling and transit use was a good idea, although most did not feel they were in a position to take advantage of those options owing to time commitments and family constraints. About half of the participants stated that San Antonio was not at the point of needing value priced lanes. Others believed it would be good idea as an option to avoid congestion. The idea of dynamic pricing was strongly opposed in each group. Most participants also believed that the price of tolls paid, up to $8, on the example project in Califor- nia were “outrageous” and did not believe anyone in San Anto- nio would be willing to pay that much. All participants were in favor of HOT lanes rather than express toll lanes, because HOT lanes reward or encourage carpooling and public trans- portation. It was important to most participants that the toll revenue be reinvested in local transportation projects. The question of equity was brought up during the focus groups. In one group, there was a concern about the impact of limited access points along the study corridor for businesses. In another group, the effect of tolling on lower-income drivers was raised. There was general agreement across groups that wealthy drivers would use the facility more often, but that it would be beneficial for everyone to have a choice of using or not using the value priced facility. Method: Survey. Universe: San Antonio residents who trav- eled on I-35. Sample size: N = 632. Margin of error: Not reported. Sample type: RDD In June, a survey was administered by the Public Policy Research Institute of Texas A&M University (112). Thirty- eight percent of those surveyed agreed that “express toll lanes should be constructed on I-35.” Forty-three percent disagreed with the statement, and 18% had no opinion. Half of respon- dents agreed that “charging tolls on the new lanes is accept- able if they are not congested.” Thirty eight percent disagreed, and 12% had no opinion. When asked what should be done with the generated toll revenue once the express toll lanes were paid for, most users believed that maintenance of exist- ing highways, local roads (I-35 or in the region), or new lanes should be the priority. 105. Switzerland National (2005) Method: Survey. Universe: Respondents 18+ years to a Swiss Federal Railroads survey. Sample size: N = 1,005. Margin of error: Not reported. Sample type: Not reported. The Institute for Transport Planning and Systems, ETH Zurich, in collaboration with the Transport and Mobility Laboratory, EPF Lausanne, and the Institute for Economic Research, Uni- versity of Lugano, conducted a survey about preferences for different transport pricing schemes (113). At the time of the survey, a simple type of road pricing already existed in the country. Each car driver who wanted to use Swiss motorways

had to buy a one-year window sticker for 40 CHF. The rev- enues raised by fuel taxes and the stickers are spent on the expansion and maintenance of the road infrastructure. In- creased congestion was a primary factor in a possible referen- dum requiring the government to act on road pricing. Overall, the new road pricing option was selected in 50% of the responses. There was high approval of the motorway toll (53%) and kilometer-dependent toll (58%), and less support for area licensing (41%) and a time-dependent toll (40%). Accept- ability of motorway tolls and area licensing was stronger if the sponsor was a coalition of environmentalists. It was stronger for kilometer-dependent tolls and time-dependent tolls if the sponsor was an automobile club. Respondents in middle- and small-size towns and their suburbs showed high approval rates for area licensing. Large-city residents did not like area licens- ing; they preferred all other types of pricing by more than 50%. In terms of uses of the revenue, highest preference was given to investments in public transport, followed by a reduction in income tax and the bonus-malus system (i.e., the toll paid would be reduced by individual usage history). The level of pricing was the most important factor, with acceptability decreasing with increasing cost levels. In terms of demo- graphics, higher age and full-time employment increased the probability of choosing the road pricing scheme, whereas owning a car or high car mileage per year reduced it. 106. Statewide Minnesota (2005) Method: Survey. Universe: Adults in Minnesota. Sample size: N = 800. Margin of error: ±3.5%. Sample type: RDD. Annually since 1987, the Minnesota DOT has sought public opinion about transportation through an omnibus survey (114). In December and January, the omnibus survey included ques- tions on toll lanes and on a dedicated motor vehicle sales tax. The Minnesota DOT looked at toll lanes as a new option. “Unlike toll roads where all drivers pay to travel on a highway, a toll-lane would be built alongside existing highway lanes, which would continue to be free. Toll lanes could be a new lane added or the conversion of an existing carpool lane, and you pay a fee only when you choose to travel on it. Would you want to have the option to use a toll lane, for a fee, on con- gested roads?” Forty-eight percent answered, “yes.” This was a decrease from the 55% who answered “yes” in 2004. Respondents were presented with four reasons for building toll lanes and asked to rank the importance of each reason on a scale of 1 to 10, with 10 being “extremely important” and 1 being “not at all important.” The percentages rating each as a 7, 8, 9, or 10 were • Help manage roadway congestion, 54%. • Provide a reliable BRT route, 51%. • Generate some additional revenue for roadways, 48%. • Offer motorists an option for faster and more reliable trip times, 47%. 38 Respondents were also asked about a dedicated tax. “Cur- rently, roughly half of the motor vehicle sales tax that is paid when you buy a car goes to transportation needs. There is a proposal to dedicate all of this particular tax in the state to transportation needs. How do you feel about this proposal?” Seventy-four percent supported the proposal, of which 26% supported it strongly. Greater support was associated with increased age and income. Males were more likely to support the proposal than females. Overall, 16% opposed the proposal. 107. Statewide Washington (2006) Method: Focus groups. Number: Three groups in Puget Sound, Yakima, and Vancouver. Participants: Washington State voters. In February, focus groups were held as one part of public atti- tudes of Washington State voters toward transportation issues for the Washington State Transportation Commission (115). It was found that most participants were aware of how trans- portation projects are funded. They believed that the gas tax was generally fair. Attitudes toward tolling were split. Tolls were seen as fair because users pay or tolls were seen as unfair because the participants believed that if the government were more efficient with the gas tax, tolls would not be necessary. An outdated mental picture of tolling systems is hobbling people’s acceptance of it in spite of having heard about elec- tronic toll collection. Conditions for acceptance of tolling included: (1) a general apprehension of a statewide tolling system because of its complexity, fears of abuse and fraud, and writing a blank check; (2) toll revenue should be spent on the tolled facility; (3) tolled routes must have alternative free routes; (4) anything already built should not be tolled; (5) revenue-generating tolling is preferred over congestion- management tolling; (6) cynicism about government spend- ing blocks acceptance of creating funding approaches; and (7) cordon tolling and an annual mileage fee are considered unac- ceptable and unfair. 108. Seattle, Washington (2006) Method: Focus groups. Number: Two groups of eight individ- uals each. Participants: Respondents in the Travel Choices Study, a federally funded pilot that tested mileage-based charging using Global Positioning System (GPS) and cell phone technology. In April, focus groups were held with participants at the con- clusions of the Travel Choices Study to develop a better under- standing of their experience with and reactions to it (116,117). After eight months of using the pay-as-you-go tolling system, not all participants seemed to appreciate its congestion-reduc- ing benefits. Respondents were divided on whether or not the Traffic Choices system makes more or less sense than gas or excise taxes. Those who preferred the GPS-based system liked the idea of being taxed on the particular roads used and the time

39 of travel (as opposed to a gas tax), and scaled to actual use (as opposed to an excise tax). Those who expressed a preference for gas taxes did so because that collection infrastructure is already in place and does not require that individuals adapt to an additional complex system. The gas tax also penalizes those who drive vehicles with poor gas mileage. Above all, partici- pants were skeptical that this GPS-based system would replace an existing form of taxation, but rather would simply be added on top of current taxes. Participants were concerned that such a mileage-based tolling system would impose a financial burden on households with limited or fixed incomes. Participants were very clear that revenue collected should fund transportation, as opposed to general government expenditures, and transporta- tion in the region. Concerns about privacy were less focused on the collection of the information per se and more on how that information could be used if it got into the wrong hands. Method: Survey. Universe: Registered voters. Sample size: N = 1,118. Sample margin of error: Not reported. Sample type: Not reported. A statewide telephone survey was conducted as one part of public attitudes of Washington State voters toward transporta- tion issues for the Washington State Transportation Commis- sion (116,117). Generally, the public was amenable to using tolls to fund specific projects and in specific situations. People want assurances from government leaders that if tolls are used, they will be used efficiently and implemented fairly. Thirty-eight percent of respondents were aware of “tolling roads or bridges as a way to shift traffic patterns and spread out road usage by charging higher tolls when there is a lot of traf- fic and lower tolls when there is less traffic.” Of those individ- uals who responded that they were aware, 52% believed this was a “good idea” and 42% a “not-so-good idea.” Sixty-three percent preferred that “tolls be considered only in special project-by-project situations,” 18% said “tolls should be con- sidered as a general source of transportation revenue,” and 17% said “tolls should never be considered.” Respondents were read three statements about the goals of tolling and were asked if they agreed or disagreed. Fifty-eight percent favored the use of tolls as a way to “provide funds to improve our highway system,” compared with 36% who favored the use to “shift traffic patterns and spread out road usage by charging higher tolls to discourage use when there is a lot of traffic and lower tolls when there is less traffic.” Forty- four percent favored use of tolls to “both raise funds and to shift traffic patterns and spread out road usage.” Respondents were asked about their awareness of and sup- port for HOT lanes. Support was measured with two different wording formats. Version one described HOT lanes as “high- occupancy toll lanes, where carpools use the lanes for free and solo drivers can choose to use the lanes for a toll. The toll would vary based on the number of cars in the toll lanes to keep the lanes free flowing.” Awareness was 30% and, of those, 61% approved of HOT lanes (21% strongly and 40% somewhat). Version two added the following phase to the end of version one “and gives everyone an opportunity for a faster, reliable trip when they really need it.” Awareness was 36% and, of those, 65% approved of HOT lanes (32% strongly and 33% somewhat). Half of the sample was asked whether it was fairer to increase the gasoline tax or increase the number of tolls on highways and roads. Forty-seven percent said more tolls; 35% said increase the gas tax. The other half of the sample was asked the same question with the added phrase “be more fair to lower-income groups and those on fixed incomes.” Fifty- two percent said more tolls, and 27% said increase the gas tax. The vast majority of respondents (84%) had driven a toll road, 89% had used a toll bridge, and 88% had used HOV lanes. 109. Statewide California (2006) Method: Survey. Universe: California adults 18+ years, En- glish and Spanish speaking. Sample size: N = 2,705 and 815. Sample margin of error: Not reported. Type: RDD. Researchers supported by the Mineta Transportation Institute at San Jose State University conducted two surveys in 2006 to measure public opinion regarding a range of revenue options to fund transportation, including tolls and road pricing (118). Support for various options in rank order was • Truck-only-toll lanes, 64%. • HOT lanes, 55%. • Toll roads, 47%. • Variable registration fees, 44%. • Express toll lanes, 44%. • Gas tax, 40%. • Sales tax, 40%. • Vehicle license fee, 40%. • Tolls on new highway lanes, 40%. • Registration fees, 32%. • General obligation bonds, 30%. • Indexed gas tax, 27%. • Mileage fee, 22%. Generally, highest support for toll roads was evidenced among those respondents from 18 to 34 years old (54%) com- pared with respondents older than 55 years (43%). Support was also higher among women (50%) than among men (43%). For tolls on new highway lanes—highest support was noted among respondents with annual incomes above $100,000 (46%) compared with 36% for those under $50,000. 110. Nationwide (2006) Method: Survey. Universe: Adults (18 years of age and older) living in private households in the continental United States. Sample size: N = 2,394. Margin of error: ±2 percentage points. Sample type: Telephone probability.

In November, an AAA survey indicated that 71% of those Americans polled believed “more money is needed for trans- portation because we are not keeping pace with demands on the system” (119). Respondents were presented with five tolling options for managing congestion. “Some states are looking at various types of toll options to help manage con- gestion. In choosing among the following options, which would you likely favor? I will read the entire list to you and then repeat each option to you, at which time you can answer yes or no.” Support for each option in rank order was • Add tolls only on new roadways, 34%. • Allow solo drivers to pay a toll and ride in HOV lanes, 34%. • Add tolls only on new roads and increase tolls during times of high traffic volume, 31%. • Add tolls on new and existing roadways, 28%. • Add tolls on new and existing roadways and increase tolls during times of high traffic volume, 27%. 40 Respondents were then provided with five options to help pay for the transportation system. Respondents generally favored raising transportation funding through the addition of tolls over non-toll initiatives. “I am going to read 5 options to help pay for our transportation system. Assuming each of the options would raise equal amounts of money, please tell me if you support using each option as a means to increase funding for transportation.” Overall, 52% of respondents selected one of the toll options, whereas 40% chose one of the non-toll options. Support for each option in rank order was • Add tolls only on new roads and highway lanes, 39%. • Add tolls on new and existing roads and highway lanes, 33%. • Increase motor fuel taxes, 21%. • Impose a vehicle-mile tax based on the number of miles driven, 19%. • Increase non-fuel taxes such as sales, income, and prop- erty taxes, 15%.

Next: Chapter Four - Factors and Circumstances Affecting Public Opinion »
Compilation of Public Opinion Data on Tolls and Road Pricing Get This Book
×
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF

TRB’s National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP) Synthesis 377: Compilation of Public Opinion Data on Tolls and Road Pricing explores how the public feels about tolls and road pricing, examines public opinion concerning charging for the use of roads, and highlights factors associated with the acceptance or rejection of road pricing.

  1. ×

    Welcome to OpenBook!

    You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

    Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

    No Thanks Take a Tour »
  2. ×

    Show this book's table of contents, where you can jump to any chapter by name.

    « Back Next »
  3. ×

    ...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

    « Back Next »
  4. ×

    Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

    « Back Next »
  5. ×

    To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter.

    « Back Next »
  6. ×

    Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

    « Back Next »
  7. ×

    View our suggested citation for this chapter.

    « Back Next »
  8. ×

    Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

    « Back Next »
Stay Connected!