Click for next page ( 21


The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement



Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.

OCR for page 20
21 current tolls. Most said that their use of the managed lanes traveled when traffic was not heavy and when they were not in would change at the $3 and $5 levels--their uses being a hurry. Trips to the airport were frequently cited as examples restricted to much more occasional situations and emergen- of when they would most likely use the express lanes. None cies. Participants were asked to rate the amount that they per- said that requiring SunPass or other electronic tolling would be sonally would benefit from the managed lane project on a an obstacle to their use of the facility. Most understood and scale of 1 to 5, with 1 representing no real benefit and 5 rep- supported the concept of variable pricing, especially when it resenting a significant benefit. Almost half the participants was associated with providing reliable service during peak saw the project as providing moderate (a "3") benefits to them periods. Most believed that dynamic pricing would present dif- personally. They were also asked to rate the project overall in ficult real-time decisions on whether to use the facility that terms of how good it was for the area as a whole. Nearly three- could present safety issues. Most believed that it would be best fourths rated the project a "4" or a "5." to prohibit trucks from the express lanes. 40. Denver, Colorado (2006) 42. Collier County, Florida (2007) Method: Survey. Universe: Residents living within 2 miles of Method: Survey. Universe: Collier County residents 18 years existing toll roads or planned toll express lanes. Sample size: of age or older. Sample size: N = 710. Margin of error: 4.0%. N = 384. Margin of error: Not reported. Sample type: Not Sample type: Random telephone. reported. In April, a citizen survey was conducted for the Collier County In April, a survey conducted for the Colorado DOT found that government to give residents the opportunity to inform county 78% of respondents believed toll express lanes were a "good officials about their policy preferences and to grade the effec- way to reduce congestion on Denver area highways," and 66% tiveness and efficiency of county services and programs (56). approved of them as a means of facilitating traffic flow (54). One question on tolling was included in the survey: "Would Sixty-eight percent believed tolling was a good way to finance you support or oppose adding tolls to the new lanes that will extra capacity. Tolls were preferred as the "best funding for be constructed on Interstate 75 in Collier and Lee County road building and maintenance"--(45%), followed by the this year in order to speed up construction of additional traf- issue of bonds (23%), higher gasoline taxes (16%), increased fic lanes on the interstate in the future." In response 39% license fees and vehicle registration (11%), and higher income supported adding tolls, 49% opposed them, and 12% were tax (4%). not sure. 41. Lee and Collier Counties, Florida (2006) HIGH-OCCUPANCY TOLL LANES Method: Focus groups. Number: Eight groups, each with nine This section presents data on HOT lanes. HOT lanes exact a or 10 individuals. Participants: Individuals making three or toll on vehicles not meeting occupancy requirements that more round trips per week on I-75, individuals making one or wish to use lanes or entire roads that are designated for the use two round trips per week on I-75, and individuals residing in of higher-occupancy vehicles. Tolls are collected exclusively Florida six or fewer months per year. by electronic toll collection systems. The concept is a better use of the capacity formerly designated as HOV lanes because In November, focus groups were conducted for Florida's drivers can be eligible to use the facility either by meeting the Turnpike Enterprise to explore the public's reactions to cur- minimum passenger requirement or by choosing to pay a toll rent I-75 conditions and possible implementation of I-75 to gain access to the facility. Express Lanes (55). Most participants understood that exist- ing funding would not support increasing capacity on I-75 and 43. San Diego, California (1996) that tolls would therefore be necessary. The express lane concept was very appealing to most participants because it Method: Focus groups. Number: Three focus groups. Partici- offered a choice of lanes. Having an option with increased pants: Residents of the primary market area. reliability was cited as one of the most important benefits of the express lane. Initial concerns with the express lane con- In September, market research activities were conducted for cept were: safety entering and exiting the lanes, especially the San Diego Association of Governments as pre-project during peak periods and having enough traffic use the lanes to baseline tasks for the I-15 Congestion Pricing Project (57). It justify the added expense. 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 Virtually all participants said they would use the express (to be known as ExpressPass customers). Revenues generated lanes for at least some of their trips. Most would be selective from the project are used to fund transportation alternatives about when to use the express lanes. Seasonal residents were such as transit and rideshare strategies in the I-15 corridor. The generally less concerned about toll amounts because most lanes are located between State Routes 56 and 163 in northern

OCR for page 20
22 San Diego County. The pilot program research tested attitudes populated the original sample and would be present in con- and opinions of commuters traveling in the corridor during tinuing panel waves, carpoolers were over-sampled using peak periods. Among focus group participants, there was gen- quotas for I-15, the study area, and I-8, the control area. The eral dissatisfaction with the rush hour commute on I-15. Fre- same questions with only minor revisions were asked during quent commuters were enthusiastic about being able to access each panel wave, with the intent to measure characteristics the HOV lanes during peak travel times for a cost. of travel behavior, attitudes, and perceptions during each wave. Respondents were asked whether they "considered Method: Survey. Universe: Residents of the primary market the ExpressPass program to be a success." Eighty-nine per- area. Sample size: N = 400. Margin of error: Not reported. cent of current users said "yes," compared with 40% of former Sample type: RDD. subscribers. There also are differences in opinion between I-15 solo drivers and I-15 carpoolers. Twenty-four percent of solo A telephone survey was also conducted (57). About two-thirds drivers versus 33% of carpoolers believed the project was a of respondents expressed a "very" or "somewhat" favorable success. Nearly 40% of I-15 solo drivers and carpoolers were impression of the I-15 congestion pricing program. Forty-three percent of respondents believed that the program would make unaware or had no opinion about the program. Similar per- a difference in their commute. Most (82%) liked the idea of centages of I-8 solo drivers (22%) and I-8 carpoolers (26%) using program revenues to pay for better transit service. Rea- believed that the project was a success, and 60% of the I-8 solo sons given for a favorable impression of the program included drivers were unaware or had no opinion about the program. "saves time" and "eases congestion." More than two-thirds When asked whether "solo drivers should be allowed to use (67%) believe the time they would save would encourage them to sign up for the program. Reasons given for an unfavorable the Express Lanes for a fee," 95% of current users agreed, of impressions were "keep lanes for carpooling" and "too many which 84% strongly agreed. Agreement was also high among will sign up." 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 44. San Diego, California (1997) favorable attitudes than carpoolers. Method: Focus groups. Number: Four groups. Participants: When asked about the perceived "fairness" of the pro- Current ExpressPass users, prior ExpressPass users, HOV gram to regular lane drivers, all segments were positive-- users, and SOV users. 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 In July, focus groups were conducted for the San Diego Asso- I-15 carpoolers. 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, 46. San Diego, California (1998) saves time, improves the safety of their commutes, is good for emergencies, facilitates getting to work on time, eases conges- Method: Survey. Universe: ExpressPass users, I-15 corridor tion, maximizes utilization of the lanes, and increases options users, and I-8 corridor users. Wave 2 sample size: N = 1,501, available to SOV users. Participants in all groups supported of which 985 were panel and 516 were replacement sample. a switch from the monthly pass to a per-use fee, but most Wave 3 sample size: N = 1,576, of which 660 were panel (all 3 strongly opposed the dynamic variable price concept and asso- waves), 301 were waves 2 and 3, and 593 were new. Margin ciated it with price gouging. of error: Not reported. Sample type: Customer list for ExpressPass users, RDD for I-15 and I-8 corridor users. 45. San Diego, California (1997) In spring and fall 1998, the second and third waves of the Atti- Method: Survey. Universe: Current and former ExpressPass tudinal Panel Survey were conducted on behalf of the San users, I-15 corridor users, and I-8 corridor users. Sample size: Diego Association of Governments by the San Diego State N = 1,513. Margin of error: Not reported. Sample type: Cus- University Foundation (60). Respondents were asked whether tomer list for ExpressPass users, RDD for I-15 and I-8 corri- they "considered the ExpressPass program to be a success." Of dor users. the Wave 2 respondents, 79% of current users said "yes," com- pared with 28% of solo drivers and 45% of carpoolers. Among In the fall, the first wave of an Attitudinal Panel Survey was the I-8 control groups, 30% of solo drivers and 24% of car- conducted to examine how the project affected carpoolers and poolers believed the program had been a success. Of Wave 2 other HOV user groups over the 3-year period (59). The study current users, when asked whether "solo drivers should be was sponsored by the San Diego Association of Governments allowed to use the express lanes for a fee," 94% agreed. Agree- and was conducted by the San Diego State University Foun- ment was also high among I-15 solo drivers (69%) and I-15 dation (59). To ensure that sufficient numbers of carpoolers carpoolers (64%).

OCR for page 20
23 For Wave 3 respondents, 95% of current users said "yes," allowed to use the I-15 express lanes for a fee. The intent of along with 73% of I-15 solo drivers and 69% of carpoolers. this question was to determine support for the FasTrak pro- Within the I-8 control group, perceptions about the success of gram concept. The majority of current FasTrak users (88% in the project increased among solo drivers (32%) and carpool- both Waves 4 and 5) continued to "strongly agree" that solo ers (35%). When asked about the perceived "fairness" of the drivers should be allowed to use the express lanes for a fee. program for regular lane drivers, Wave 2 respondents were FasTrak non-users held similar views, but with slightly lower positive--84% of current users said the program was "fair," percentages (78% in Wave 4 and 82% in Wave 5). Smaller as well as 68% of I-15 solo drivers and 67% of I-15 carpool- percentages, but majorities of other I-15 users and I-8 users ers. For Wave 3 respondents, 88% of current users said the strongly agreed or somewhat agreed with the concept (58% to program was "fair" compared with 68% of I-15 solo drivers 77% in Wave 4 and 66% to 70% in Wave 5). and 74% of carpoolers. Wave 4 respondents were asked whether they believed the I-15 FasTrak program was fair to I-15 regular lanes users. 47. San Diego, California (1998) 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 Method: Focus groups. Number: Four groups. Participants: I-15 carpoolers. Perceptions of fairness increased for Wave 5 FasTrak users, HOV users, SOV users. 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- In August, focus groups were conducted to assist the agency ers. Wave 4 and 5 respondents were also asked whether they in evaluating the I-15 FasTrak program (61). Focus groups believed the I-15 FasTrak program was fair to I-15 carpool were undertaken with FasTrak users, HOV users, and SOV lanes users. Perceptions of fairness were high among all seg- users. Most users were satisfied with the program; however, ments (71% to 94% for Wave 4 respondents and 69% to 96% they were concerned about the cost. Cost was also mentioned for Wave 5). 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 49. Puget Sound Region, Washington (2001) variable pricing was not working. Most did not know how the revenue generated by FasTrak was being used. Method: Survey. Universe: Residents in the Puget Sound area. Sample size: N = 1,161. Margin of error: Not reported. Sam- ple type: Not reported. 48. San Diego, California (1999) In May, a telephone survey conducted as part of a Washington Method: Survey. Universe: FasTrak users, I-15 corridor State DOT Managed Lanes Study found that 66% of those users, and I-8 corridor users. Wave 4 sample size: N = 1,515, polled did not want to convert existing HOV lanes to HOT of which 674 were panel (4 waves), 757 were panel (2 or lanes (63). More than 40% were willing to pay tolls for a faster 3 waves), and 84 were refreshment. Wave 5 sample size: N = trip, and 58% would not support a toll. About 50% supported 1,502, of which 342 were panel (all 5 waves), 978 were panel varying the toll rate in the express lanes to manage traffic flow (2, 3, or 4 waves), and 182 were new. Margin of error: Not to improve congestion and transit services. reported. Sample type: Customer list for ExpressPass users, RDD for I-15 and I-8 corridor users. 50. San Diego, California (2001) In spring and fall 1999, the fourth and fifth waves of the Atti- Method: Focus groups. Number: Three groups. Participants: tudinal Panel Survey were conducted on behalf of the San I-15 main lane users, express lane users, and transit riders. Diego Association of Governments by the San Diego State University Foundation (62). Respondents were asked whether In July, focus groups were conducted for the San Diego Asso- the I-15 FasTrak program was a success. The trend toward ciation of Governments as part of community outreach activ- increasingly positive views of the project's success over the ities before an expansion of the existing HOT lanes on I-15 course of the first three waves was generally maintained in (64). The existing HOT lanes had been in operation for more Waves 4 and 5 for FasTrak users, FasTrak non-users, I-15 solo than 5 years. The new project would add four managed lanes drivers, and I-8 solo drivers. Both I-15 carpoolers and I-8 car- with a movable barrier in the median of I-15 to accommodate poolers displayed greater apparent volatility. three lanes in the peak direction. The lanes would give high priority to HOVs and Bus Rapid Transit (BRT). Support for At Wave 4, 62% of I-15 carpooler and 41% of I-8 car- the project was found among participants in all three groups. pooler respondents viewed the project as a success. However, Each group mentioned the length of time until project com- at Wave 5, 55% of I-15 carpooler and 29% of I-8 carpooler pletion as a disadvantage of the project. Equity concerns respondents viewed the project as a success. Respondents within the groups (i.e., fairness of tolls for lower-income were asked whether they believed solo drivers should be drivers) dissolved and support for the project strengthened

OCR for page 20
24 when participants received clarifying information on features the Regional Transportation District). In voicing approval, of the project, including the BRT component (85% of each many participants cited the reduction of congestion in the group supporting). That the lanes would ease congestion for general purpose lanes. Several participants in each group everyone on the main lanes was viewed as a balancing force voiced a concern that lower-income drivers would not be able in the "equity equation." The issue of fairness was raised in to afford the cost of using the HOT lanes. There was general the groups--"I've paid once for the lanes and now I have to agreement that HOV lanes are valued, but underutilized. pay again. That's unfair." The double taxation argument was Most believed HOT lanes were an acceptable means of using most often raised by higher-income Caucasian participants excess capacity. However, many believed that HOT lanes among the main lane and FasTrak user groups. were a "band-aid" solution to the congestion problem and that longer-term solutions must be found (i.e., more carpools Method: Survey. Universe: Residents of target zip codes, and transit use). 18 years of age or older and who were corridor users, English and Spanish speaking. Sample size: N = 800. Margin of error: Method: Survey. Universe: Residents who commute along the 3.4 percentage points. Sample type: RDD and FasTrak I-25 corridor north of Denver. Sample size: N = 350. Margin customer lists. of error: 3%. Sample type: Not reported. In September, a telephone survey was conducted as part of the In terms of HOT lane survey results, it was found that nearly community outreach for the I-15 managed lanes program (64). twice as many residents and commuters on I-25 were in favor Most respondents (83%) were aware of the managed lanes. than were opposed (65). A large portion of respondents were Virtually all (92%) agreed that it was a "good idea" to have undecided as well. Support or opposition was measured ini- some sort of time-saving option on I-15. Sixty-six percent tially and then again after more information and clarification (66%) approved of the FasTrak program. (The program was on how the HOT lanes could be used without paying a toll. presented as one that allowed motorists who drove alone to Respondents were initially inclined to state opposition and travel in the express lanes for a fee that would be charged elec- tended to change their opinion favorably with the additional tronically each time they used the lanes, with the price varying information. Nearly half of low-income respondents (45%) with the amount of traffic in the express lanes.) Twenty-eight supported the concept, 22% disapproved, and 33% were unde- percent disapproved of the program. Among FasTrak cus- cided. Additionally, younger respondents were more favorable tomers, approval was 88% compared with 66% for other I-15 than older respondents. 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 52. Alameda County, California (2003) age, and increased with an increase in household income. More respondents (77%) agreed with the statement: People Method: Survey. Universe: Residents and voters in Alameda, who drive alone should be allowed to use the I-15 express Contra Costa, and San Joaquin counties from cities that con- lanes for a fee (compared with 66% for the FasTrak program tribute significantly to the commute of the Sunol Grade. Sam- itself). Seventy-one percent of respondents agreed with the ple size: N = 800. Margin of error: Not reported. Sample type: statement "the toll is a good way to keep the express lane mov- Not reported. ing quickly," and 26% disagreed. 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 51. Denver, Colorado (2003) the Congestion Management Agency on their transportation plan (66). After giving basic factual information about what Method: Focus groups. Number: Five groups. Participants: the lane was, how it would work, and without giving any rea- Different commuter groups and business owners. sons or arguments for why it was a good or bad idea, respon- dents were asked what they thought of the Smart Car Pool In spring, public outreach activities were conducted in the Lane. Overall, 58% supported the project ranging from 57% in Denver area to gauge public perceptions and opinions on the Alameda County to 60% in Contra Costa and San Joaquin concept of HOT lanes as applied on I-25 north of downtown counties. More information was then provided regarding how Denver (65). Sponsored by the Colorado DOT, the outreach the project would work and the different elements of the proj- activities included focus groups and a stated preference ect so that respondents had time to think about the project. telephone survey. The participants in the focus groups were After hearing more information and having additional time, generally supportive of the HOT lanes concept; however, support grew significantly to 67% overall. The important issues somewhat negative predispositions toward the DOT or the in support of the project were: (1) carpools travel without cost, Regional Transportation District prevented enthusiastic sup- (2) there is no physical toll booth since it uses FasTrak tech- port. They believed that discussions of revenues from HOT nology, and (3) it would generate money both for the com- lanes should focus on uses, like "bus services" or "roadway pletion of a northbound lane and for expanding transit alter- improvements," not on revenue-receiving agencies (e.g., natives in the corridor.

OCR for page 20
25 53. Oak Brook, Illinois (2003) There was a fairly strong consensus on the use of toll rev- enue for building, operating, and maintaining toll facilities. Method: Focus groups. Number: Two groups of 11 individu- Some suggested that toll revenues be used to reduce taxes. als each. Participants: Randomly selected, frequent, and There was an obvious difference between HOV/transit users infrequent I-PASS and cash users of the Illinois Tollway. and other users in views on the effectiveness of HOV lanes. The users in the former group were very positive about HOV In November, focus groups were conducted as part of the larger lanes as a solution to traffic congestion and strongly advocated Illinois Tollway Value Pricing Study (67). The groups were the goal of moving individuals rather than cars, although designed to obtain a solid qualitative understanding of the most other users considered HOV lanes to be an underutilized issues for the study and to use this understanding to inform resource. the design of the quantitative stated preference survey. Over- all, respondents expressed satisfactory opinions of the tollway in comparison with other alternatives. Respondents over- 55. Minneapolis, Minnesota (2004) whelmingly disliked the idea of differential rate increases based on time of travel. Commuters have limited flexibility and Method: Survey. Universe: Individuals within the I-394 travel most would not shift travel times and higher peak prices would shed and I-35W travel shed. Sample size: N = 750 I-394 unfairly penalize commuters. There was no perceived link in respondents and N = 250 I-35W respondents. Margin of error: terms of higher costs and more reliable or faster peak travel. Not reported. Sample type: RDD. Respondents unanimously accepted the addition of lanes as a necessary means of reducing tollway congestion. About half In November and December, the first wave of an Attitudinal indicated that they would pay at least twice as much for a free- Panel Survey to evaluate the I-394 MnPASS lanes was spon- flowing commute (roughly 80 cents per plaza versus the cur- sored by the Hubert H. Humphrey Institute of the University rent average of 40 cents). Infrequent and non-peak travelers of Minnesota and the Minnesota DOT (69). Sixty percent of tended to feel that they were paying enough already and would respondents in the I-394 travel shed and I-35W (i.e., control rather see the addition of lanes without differential tolling. group corridor) had heard of the MnPass Project on I-394 and Nearly all believed carpooling was a good idea and that car- knew that it would allow SOVs to use the carpool lanes for a pools should get preferential pricing; however, almost every- fee and/or that it would charge tolls. Newspaper and TV/radio one indicated they would not carpool themselves. Although were their main sources of information. Sixty-three percent respondents generally liked the idea of BRT, every one indi- believed allowing single drivers to use carpool lanes by pay- cated that they would not use it. 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 54. Dallas/Fort Worth, Texas (2004) good idea relative to those residing in the I-35W travel shed (64% and 58%, respectively). At the same time, respondents Method: Focus groups. Number: Two groups of 8 to 10 indi- in the I-35W travel shed were more likely to have "no opin- viduals each, and two triad interviews. Participants: Recruited ion" on this question than those in the I-394 travel shed (15% from respondents to a mail survey who had attended the Texas and 8%, respectively). DOT public informational meetings in the Dallas/Fort Worth area. Most individuals who approved of the idea believed it was a "better use of carpool lanes" (38%) or it "added capacity to In spring, focus groups were held to understand potential the roadway" (30%). Among those who did not like the idea, users' perceptions toward managed lanes (68). Most partici- they believed either that it would "only benefit the rich" (36%) pants did not have a solid monetary idea about the costs of or that "carpool lanes should be free to all" (24%). Fewer indi- delay, although some were able to relate the costs to a specific viduals (55%) were supportive of the 24-hour-a-day, 7-day-a- trip. Similarly, no one seemed to be able to quantify how much week (24/7) operation of a toll lane program on I-394. Overall, they were willing to pay for a specific time savings. Instead, 46% believed both the MnPass concept and operating it 24/7 they stated that willingness to pay depended on the level of were "good ideas," and 19% believed both were "bad ideas." 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- 56. Atlanta, Georgia (2004) quently used during the focus group discussions. Before the concept of managed lanes was explained, those who were Method: Focus groups. Number: Eight groups, with a total unfamiliar with the concept viewed it as a new tax and reacted of 113 individuals. Participants: Commuters and express bus negatively. A significant number of participants questioned riders on major Atlanta area highways. how electronic toll collection would work and whether the technology would be able to distinguish SOVs from HOVs. In August, the Georgia State Road and Tollway Authority Privacy issues resulting from the use of toll tags did not seem sponsored focus groups with commuters as part of a feasibil- to be a major concern. ity study for HOT lanes and Truck only Toll facilities (70).

OCR for page 20
26 Participants did not believe that it would be possible to guaran- acknowledged that they would use the managed lanes, at least tee travel time in a HOT lane, even through the use of dynamic occasionally, with nearly 20% saying that they would use them tolls. They are skeptical regarding the travel-time guarantee, all of the time if they could afford it. Only 11% of SOV and but most would use the lane in a time of need. A number of 20% of HOV participants said they would never use these individuals believed that HOT lanes did nothing to address lanes because "they don't want to pay any tolls." When the the real problem of congestion on the region's highways. To topic of specific toll levels was introduced beginning with a relieve the problem, it was necessary to take cars off the road $6 one-way toll, more HOV than SOV participants found it through transit improvements. They also believed HOT lane objectionable. SOV participants showed some interest in conversions would discourage carpooling. Conversion from adding passengers to travel free. It also prompted increased HOV-2 to HOV-3 was not supported--individuals believed it interest in considering express bus service or a vanpool as an was simply too difficult to find an additional person to carpool alternative to paying tolls, although 54% of SOV and 25% of and therefore HOT lanes penalized HOV users. Individuals HOV participants still said they would "most likely continue believed that HOT lanes should only be considered if they pay to commute by myself in my car." for themselves. Most participants cited transit expansion and/ or operation as a potential use for HOT lane-generated tolls. 59. Salt Lake City, Utah (2005) 57. Minneapolis, Minnesota (2005) Method: Survey. Universe: Utah residents, heads of household who own and drive a vehicle. Sample size: N = 617. Margin of Method: Survey. Universe: Individuals within the I-394 travel error: 4%. Sample type: RDD. shed and I-35W travel shed. Sample size: N = 549 panel mem- bers, N = 250 transit users, N-151 MnPass subscribers. Mar- In July, UDOT commissioned a telephone survey that investi- gated attitudes toward traffic management options, including gin of error: Not reported. Sample type: Panel and listed HOT lanes, among other attitude and opinion items (73). Fifty- sample (transit users and subscribers). six percent of the respondents favored HOT lanes (32% some- In the fall, the second wave of an Attitudinal Panel Survey to what and 24% strongly) compared with 41% who favored "toll evaluate the I-394 MnPASS lanes was sponsored by the Hubert roads to increase revenue" and 37% who favored "toll roads to H. Humphrey Institute of the University of Minnesota and the reduce commute time." Fifty-seven percent favored reversible Minnesota DOT (71). Fifty-nine percent of panel members in lanes, and 94% favored HOV lanes. About one-third (34%) the I-394 travel shed and I-35W (i.e., control group corridor) 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 believed allowing single drivers to use carpool lanes by paying 48% would use HOV lanes once a week or more often. Respon- a toll was a good idea, 29% believed it was a "bad idea," and dents might use toll roads, HOT lanes, HOV lanes, or reversible 12% had no opinion. Although a majority of respondents in all lanes for emergencies (94%), convenience (82%), to save time income groups believed it was a "good idea," higher-income (76%), if late for work or an appointment (74%), or just to have respondents (71%) were more likely to believe it was a "good the option (63%). Fifty-two percent agreed that "toll road idea" than were mid-income (60%) or lower-income (62%) charges that drivers pay are generally reasonable," and 59% respondents. MnPASS acceptance was higher among SOV agreed that it is reasonable for users of roads to pay for them drivers (70%) and lowest among transit users (45%). Accep- through toll roads. If UDOT were building a new major high- tance among carpoolers was high as well (64%). 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 58. MiamiDade County, Florida (20042005) time of the survey, UDOT was considering a HOT lane project Method: Focus groups. Number: 15 groups with 12 to 14 par- for congestion mitigation purposes on I-15. The project would ticipants in each group. Participants: Stratified random sam- be a conversion of existing capacity, with a flat rate of $50 per ple of MiamiDade County residents in each of the county's month collected by means of stickers in the vehicle window. Opinions of the public had an impact on implementation of the commission districts; SOV, HOV, and transit users; English, project by changing access points, signing, and striping. Spanish, Creole. Between October 2004 and February 2005, focus groups were 60. San Diego, California (2005) held as part of the Florida DOT analysis of I-95 managed lane expansion potential between Golden Glades and SR 395 (72). Method: Survey. Universe: Adults in the San Diego region. Forty-eight percent of SOV and 36% of HOV participants Sample size: N = 900. Margin of error: 3.25%. Sample type: drove cars equipped with SunPass. When the concept of "man- RDD. aged lanes based on open road tolling" was introduced in the groups, the majority of SOV and transit participants approved In July, a region-wide survey conducted for the San Diego of the idea, whereas HOV users were more polarized and far Association of Governments found that 58% of those polled less positive, because it would disrupt their use of the HOV held a favorable opinion of the I-15 managed lanes (22% very lanes. However, 76% of both SOV and HOV participants favorable, 36% favorable) (74); 14% held an unfavorable opin-

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