The National Academies Press

Currently Skimming:

Pages 373-403

The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.

From page 373... ... Appendix D ‐ 1 Appendix D Content Review of Toll‐Related Travel Surveys: Brief Findings and Summary Table Read the entire page →
From page 374... ... Appendix D ‐ 2 Inventory and Content Review Assessment of Toll‐Related Travel Surveys A content review analysis of toll‐related travel surveys was undertaken as part of the research and development of the tool, "Designing and Implementing Surveys to Assess Attitudes and Travel Behavior for EJ Analyses and to Monitor Implementation." Table 1 presents a summary of key findings from the individual toll‐ related travel surveys and explores the topics of transponder usage, opinions or attitudes toward tolling, and actual or predicted use of toll facilities. The findings describe how toll plans and pricing initiatives affect the attitudes of respondents about the fairness of toll projects and/or the presumed or actual travel behavior of respondents. In particular, Table 1 is intended as a resource for comparing the reported similarities and differences by income and race factors. Toward the objective of carrying out an environmental justice assessment, the table reveals troubling gaps in the current practice in the reporting of race and income patterns in comparison to the general populations on non‐EJ populations. For such assessments to occur, toll survey sampling plans must be sufficiently robust to capture the views of low‐income and minority segments. The toll survey, the analysis plan and report findings must be designed to comprehensively assess how the benefits and burdens of these initiatives may be perceived and borne by low‐income and minority populations in comparison to the broader general population (i.e., the non‐EJ populations) . In compiling the reports for the content review analysis, the Research Team also examined a technical memorandum published for the San Francisco region's Metropolitan Transportation Commission (HDR Engineering, 2013) Read the entire page →
From page 375... ... Appendix D ‐ 3 Table 1. Summary of Findings from Toll‐Related Travel Surveys Reviewed Region Type of Study Findings California – Los Angeles Region I‐110 and I‐10 Corridor License Plate and Mailback Survey (2009) 1 • Whites were the least likely to agree that express bus services should be expanded on the I‐10/I‐110. Read the entire page →
From page 376... ... Appendix D ‐ 4 Region Type of Study Findings California – Los Angeles Region I‐10 and I‐110 Pre‐ Implementation License Plate Study (2012) 2 • This pre‐high‐occupancy toll (HOT) Read the entire page →
From page 377... ... Appendix D ‐ 5 Region Type of Study Findings California – Los Angeles Region Equity Plan Survey (2013) 3 Survey targeted "Equity Plan Account" holders (now known as Low‐Income Assistance Plan) Read the entire page →
From page 378... ... Appendix D ‐ 6 Region Type of Study Findings California – Los Angeles Region I‐10 and I‐110 Post‐ Implementation License Plate Study (2014) 4 • Focus of study is to compare responses of pre‐ and post‐implementation surveys and differences in HOV to non‐HOV lane users. Read the entire page →
From page 379... ... Appendix D ‐ 7 Region Type of Study Findings California – Los Angeles Region Low‐Income Field Surveys (2015) 5 Survey targeted low‐income travelers, mostly non‐users of Metro ExpressLanes and FasTrak, but no users of these programs were excluded. Close focus on race/ethnicity of low‐income travelers. • Of those that drive alone, 19.7% are African American, 10.9% are White, 21.2% are Asian, and 48.2% are Hispanic. • Of the 16.4% of respondents that carpool, 24.7% are African American, 16.4% are White, 26.0% are Asian, and 32.9% are Hispanic. • Of the 7.9% of respondents that ride the bus, 42.9% are African Americans making them the largest group to commute via transit, 2.86% are White making them the smallest group to commute via transit, 14.3% are Asian, and 40.0% are Hispanic. • Low‐income commuters prefer using their own vehicle. When asked "what is preventing you from using a commute alternative such as ridesharing or transit," Asians (33. 3%) Read the entire page →
From page 380... ... Appendix D ‐ 8 Region Type of Study Findings • When asked about reasons why they do not own a transponder, 12.8% of African Americans, 15.8% of Whites, 8.1% of Asians, and 9.9% of Hispanics reported the statement "There are no toll lanes on my commute to and from work." California – Los Angeles Region I‐110 Corridor (2008) 6 • More people in the environmental justice (EJ) Read the entire page →
From page 381... ... Appendix D ‐ 9 Region Type of Study Findings California – Los Angeles Region San Gabriel Valley – LA County (2008) 8 • EJ population (46%) Read the entire page →
From page 382... ... Appendix D ‐ 10 Region Type of Study Findings Colorado – Denver Region I‐25 Stated Preference Survey (2004) 10 • When asked about their attitude to HOT lanes: 56% of Hispanics, 44% of Whites, 25% of African Americans, and 13% of Asian Americans were in favor. Read the entire page →
From page 383... ... Appendix D ‐ 11 Region Type of Study Findings Georgia – Atlanta Region I‐85 Express Lanes Before/ After Implementation Survey (2011– 2012) 11 • Blacks, Asians, and other minorities decreased the number of one or more weekly trips made in the HOV lanes (wave 1) Read the entire page →
From page 384... ... Appendix D ‐ 12 Region Type of Study Findings Georgia – Atlanta Region I‐20, I‐75, I‐95, and I‐285 Stated Preference Survey (2007) 13 • Survey did not report results broken out by race and/or ethnicity. Read the entire page →
From page 385... ... Appendix D ‐ 13 Region Type of Study Findings Kentucky (Louisville) and Southern Indiana Region Ohio River Bridges Crossing Facility, Intercept Community Survey (2014) Read the entire page →
From page 386... ... Appendix D ‐ 14 Region Type of Study Findings Minnesota – St. Paul and Minnea‐ polis Region I‐394 Minneapolis‐ St. Paul, Minnesota Attitudinal Panel Survey (2004‐ 2006) 17 • The survey sample included few people representing racial or ethnic minorities. Transponder owners were more likely to be White than a racial minority; 16% of White respondents compared to 11% of minority respondents owned transponders. Read the entire page →
From page 387... ... Appendix D ‐ 15 Region Type of Study Findings Texas – Houston, Dallas and Fort Worth Region Katy Freeway Stated Preference Survey (2008) 19 • Survey did not report results broken out by race and/or ethnicity. • Low‐ and high‐income groups have higher mean value of travel time savings compared to medium‐income group. The survey reports that the low‐income group having a higher mean value of travel time savings may be attributed to schedule inflexibility of persons with lower‐paying jobs. Texas – Houston, Dallas and Fort Worth Region Houston and Dallas, Texas Regions Stated Preference Survey (2006) Read the entire page →
From page 388... ... Appendix D ‐ 16 Region Type of Study Findings Washing‐ ton – Seattle Region SR 520 Bridge Before & After Implementation Survey (2010 & 2012) 24 • Survey did not report results broken out by race and/or ethnicity. Read the entire page →
From page 389... ... Appendix D ‐ 17 10 Ungemah, D., Swisher, M., Tighe, C. 2005. Discussing High‐Occupancy Toll Lanes with the Denver, Colorado, Public. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. 1932, 129‐136. UrbanTrans. 2004. I‐25 HOT Lanes Public Outreach: Summary Report: Stated Preference Telephone Survey. Prepared for Colorado Department of Transportation. 11 Peirce, S., Petrella, M., Puckett, S., Minnice, P., Lappin, J., Volpe National Transportation Systems Center. 2014. Urban Partnership Agreement and Congestion Reduction Demonstration Programs: Lessons Learned on Congestion Pricing from the Seattle and Atlanta Household Travel Behavior Surveys. Prepared for U.S. Federal Highway Administration. Retrieved from http://ntl.bts.gov/lib/54000/54000/54065/UPA‐ CRD_Panel_Survey_Lessons_Learned_Final_Report_Volpe.pdf Peirce, S., Petrella, M., and Green, E. 2014. 2010–2012 Longitudinal Household Travel Diary Study: Seattle & Atlanta. Poster. Retrieved from http://static.tti.tamu.edu/conferences/tss12/posters/14.pdf Petrella, M., Puckett, S., Peirce, S., Minnice, P., Lappin, J., Volpe National Transportation Systems Center. 2014. Effects of an HOV‐2 to HOT‐3 Conversion on Traveler Behavior: Evidence from a Panel Study of I‐85 Corridor in Atlanta (Final Report) . Prepared for the U.S. Federal Highway Administration. Retrieved from http://ntl.bts.gov/lib/54000/54000/54062/CRD_Panel_Survey_Atlanta_Final_Report_Volpe.pdf Ray, R., Petrella, M., Peirce, S., Minnice, P., Puckett, S., Lappin, J., Volpe National Transportation Systems Center. 2014. Exploring the Equity Impacts of Two Road Pricing Implementations Using a Traveler Behavior Panel Survey: Full Facility Pricing on SR 520 in Seattle and the I‐85 HOT‐2 to HOT‐3 Conversion in Atlanta (Final Report) Read the entire page →
From page 390... ... Appendix D ‐ 18 19 Burris, M., Patil, S., Texas A&M Transportation Institute. 2009. Estimating the Benefits of Managed Lanes. 20 Burris, M., Sadabadi, K.F., Mattingly, S.P., Mahlawat, M., Li, J., Rasmidatta, I., and Saroosh, A. 2007. Reaction to the Managed Lane Concept by Various Groups of Travelers. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. 1996, 74–82. 21 Burris, M., Han, N., Geiselbrecht, T., Wood, N., Texas A&M Transportation Institute. 2015. I‐30 Express Lanes Survey Report. Prepared for North Central Texas Council of Governments and the Federal Highway Administration. 22 Burris, M., Appiah, J., Texas A&M Transportation Institute. 2003. An Examination of Houston's QuickRide Participants by Frequency of QuickRide Usage. Prepared for the Texas Department of Transportation. Burris, M., Figueroa, C. 2006. Analysis of Traveler Characteristics by Mode Choice in HOT Corridors. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 45 (2) Read the entire page →
From page 391... ... Appendix D ‐ 19 Appendix Below are four tables from the MTC Regional Express Lanes Interstate 680 Corridor Environmental Justice Technical Memorandum Appendix C: Summary of Express Lane Surveys Before and After Implementation. Exhibit A‐1. Express Lane General Public Perceptions Prior to Implementation Region Type of Study Findings Denver, CO 2005 survey conducted before implementation on I‐25 1  Stakeholder interviews of 21 persons indicated strong support for I‐25 high‐occupancy toll (HOT) lanes, only 1 person opposed with different opinions for use of revenue. Read the entire page →
From page 392... ... Appendix D ‐ 20 Exhibit A‐1. Express Lane General Public Perceptions Prior to Implementation Region Type of Study Findings Alameda County, CA 2007 survey of public attitudes for I‐580 and I‐680 Express Lanes 5  General survey of 466 persons with 95% confidence level, little breakdown in respondent income groups.  Total of 95% of respondents had heard of carpool or commuter lanes, but only 71% had heard of toll or HOT lanes. Read the entire page →
From page 393... ... Appendix D ‐ 21 Exhibit A‐1. Express Lane General Public Perceptions Prior to Implementation Region Type of Study Findings San Francisco, CA 2007 survey about congestion pricing for downtown San Francisco 4  Survey with 600 respondents with 95% overall confidence level; respondents were: 54.5% White, 6.3% Black, 15.5% Asian, 11.7% Hispanic, 7.8% other, and some persons refusing to answer.  Respondents' income information: 9.3% of respondents with income less than $25,000, 18.8% with income $25,000‐$49,999, 13.5% with income $50,000‐74,999, 42.7% with income greater than $75,000, and 14.0% refused to provide household income information.  Awareness of congestion pricing: 32.3% San Francisco County residents, 18.3% nearby county residents (Alameda, Contra Costa, Marin, San Mateo, and Santa Clara Counties) , and 25.3% overall.  Awareness of congestion pricing when definition read: 65.3% San Francisco County residents, 54.0% other county residents, and 59.7% overall.  Very little concern about implementing congestion pricing resulting in low‐income motorists having less access to downtown San Francisco: 2.9% San Francisco County residents, 3.19% other county residents, and 3.4% overall; no breakout of question by income or minority groups.  Little difference in responses from San Francisco County and surrounding counties. Sources: 1. Ungemah et al., 2005. 2. Buckeye and Munich, 2006. 3. FDOT, 2000. 4. J.D. Franz Research, 2007. 5. SA Opinion Research, 2007. 6. SA Opinion Research, 2008. Notes: HOV = high‐occupancy vehicle; SOV = single‐occupancy vehicle; HOT = high‐occupancy toll Read the entire page →
From page 394... ... Appendix D ‐ 22 Exhibit A‐2. Express Lane Perceptions by Income Group Prior to Implementation Region Type of Study Findings Denver, CO 2005 survey conducted before implementation on I‐25 1  Telephone interviews of 350 persons in I‐25 corridor; results indicated general support for the high‐occupancy toll (HOT) lane project.  40% of respondents making <$35,000 approved of HOT lane project, with 22% disapproving and 33% undecided. Read the entire page →
From page 395... ... Appendix D ‐ 23 Sources: 1. Ungemah et al., 2005. 2. Buckeye and Munich, 2006. 3. FDOT, 2000. 4. J.D. Franz Research, 2007. 5. SA Opinion Research, 2007. 6. SA Opinion Research, 2008. Notes: HOV = high‐occupancy vehicle; SOV = single‐occupancy vehicle; HOT = high‐occupancy toll Exhibit A‐3. Express Lane Perceptions By Minority Group Prior to Implementation Region Type of Study Findings Denver, CO 2005 survey conducted before implementation on I‐25 1  Surveys did not report results by minority groups, either race or ethnicity. Minneapolis, MN Focus groups prior to project implementation on I‐394 (2007) Read the entire page →
From page 396... ... Appendix D ‐ 24 Exhibit A‐4. Studies on Express Lane Use After Implementation Region Type of Study Findings Denver, CO PowerPoint presentation of I‐25 Express Lane users based on 2008 survey 1  Survey did not report results broken out by minority groups, either race or ethnicity. Survey did not ask about fairness.  No income breakout for why use of express lanes and satisfaction. Read the entire page →
From page 397... ... Appendix D ‐ 25 Exhibit A‐4. Studies on Express Lane Use After Implementation Region Type of Study Findings Houston, TX I‐10 QuickRide survey of users in March and November 2003 3  Survey did not ask questions about minority, either race or ethnicity, or fairness/equity.  Slow and steady increased usage of QuickRide since implementation in 1998. Read the entire page →
From page 398... ... Appendix D ‐ 26 Exhibit A‐4. Studies on Express Lane Use After Implementation Region Type of Study Findings Houston, TX I‐10 Katy Freeway HOT Lane 2010 survey to assess value of travel time savings (VTTS) 5  No questions or analysis of minorities, either race or ethnicity, or fairness/equity.  Survey to estimate value of travel time savings depending on different types of trips – normal vs. unusual trips.  Survey included six categories of unexpected urgent trips to compare with an ordinary trip purpose.  In general, the VTTS is 3.8 to 5.5 times greater than an ordinary trip purpose.  Mean VTTS was significantly different for income groups; the low‐income group (<$50,000) Read the entire page →
From page 399... ... Appendix D ‐ 27 Exhibit A‐4. Studies on Express Lane Use After Implementation Region Type of Study Findings Minneapolis, MN 2004‐2006 longitudinal study of users 6  Survey did not look at minorities, either race or ethnicity, or fairness/equity.  Survey results showed little difference between responses based on income, gender, and education for support for single‐occupancy vehicles (SOVs) Read the entire page →
From page 400... ... Appendix D ‐ 28 Exhibit A‐4. Studies on Express Lane Use After Implementation Region Type of Study Findings Minneapolis, MN 2006 survey of MnPass users one year after implementation 7  Survey did not look in detail at minority, either race or ethnicity; low response rate for non‐Whites.  Willingness to pay not statistically different for lower‐income group (<$50,000) Read the entire page →
From page 401... ... Appendix D ‐ 29 Exhibit A‐4. Studies on Express Lane Use After Implementation Region Type of Study Findings Orange County, CA Observational data for SR 91 Express Lanes (5‐year study, published in 2001) 9  Survey does not discuss minority, either race or ethnicity, fairness/equity. Read the entire page →
From page 402... ... Appendix D ‐ 30 Exhibit A‐4. Studies on Express Lane Use After Implementation Region Type of Study Findings San Diego, CA I‐15 Express Lanes demonstration project 3‐year survey of users (2002) 11  Survey did not look at minorities, either race or ethnicity.  Attitudinal survey of 3‐year demonstration express lane project.  FasTrak users came from neighborhoods with the highest income groups.  Respondents believed pricing policies were fair and did not raise equity issues as a concern.  General concerns about the fairness of pricing policies may not arise when revenue use is not perceived as favoring privileged groups and when a general purpose lane is not taken away to create express lanes. Seattle, WA Pilot study with variable charges for highway use (2008) Read the entire page →
From page 403... ... Appendix D ‐ 31 Exhibit A‐4. Studies on Express Lane Use After Implementation Region Type of Study Findings Seattle, WA Estimating toll impacts based on car ownership and transportation patterns by income (2011) 14  Survey did not look at minority, either race or ethnicity, nor perceived fairness. Read the entire page →

From page 373...

... Appendix D ‐ 1 Appendix D Content Review of Toll‐Related Travel Surveys: Brief Findings and Summary Table

Read the entire page →

From page 374...

... Appendix D ‐ 2 Inventory and Content Review Assessment of Toll‐Related Travel Surveys A content review analysis of toll‐related travel surveys was undertaken as part of the research and development of the tool, "Designing and Implementing Surveys to Assess Attitudes and Travel Behavior for EJ Analyses and to Monitor Implementation." Table 1 presents a summary of key findings from the individual toll‐ related travel surveys and explores the topics of transponder usage, opinions or attitudes toward tolling, and actual or predicted use of toll facilities. The findings describe how toll plans and pricing initiatives affect the attitudes of respondents about the fairness of toll projects and/or the presumed or actual travel behavior of respondents. In particular, Table 1 is intended as a resource for comparing the reported similarities and differences by income and race factors. Toward the objective of carrying out an environmental justice assessment, the table reveals troubling gaps in the current practice in the reporting of race and income patterns in comparison to the general populations on non‐EJ populations. For such assessments to occur, toll survey sampling plans must be sufficiently robust to capture the views of low‐income and minority segments. The toll survey, the analysis plan and report findings must be designed to comprehensively assess how the benefits and burdens of these initiatives may be perceived and borne by low‐income and minority populations in comparison to the broader general population (i.e., the non‐EJ populations) . In compiling the reports for the content review analysis, the Research Team also examined a technical memorandum published for the San Francisco region's Metropolitan Transportation Commission (HDR Engineering, 2013)

Read the entire page →

From page 375...

... Appendix D ‐ 3 Table 1. Summary of Findings from Toll‐Related Travel Surveys Reviewed Region Type of Study Findings California – Los Angeles Region I‐110 and I‐10 Corridor License Plate and Mailback Survey (2009) 1 • Whites were the least likely to agree that express bus services should be expanded on the I‐10/I‐110.

Read the entire page →

From page 376...

... Appendix D ‐ 4 Region Type of Study Findings California – Los Angeles Region I‐10 and I‐110 Pre‐ Implementation License Plate Study (2012) 2 • This pre‐high‐occupancy toll (HOT)

Read the entire page →

From page 377...

... Appendix D ‐ 5 Region Type of Study Findings California – Los Angeles Region Equity Plan Survey (2013) 3 Survey targeted "Equity Plan Account" holders (now known as Low‐Income Assistance Plan)

Read the entire page →

From page 378...

... Appendix D ‐ 6 Region Type of Study Findings California – Los Angeles Region I‐10 and I‐110 Post‐ Implementation License Plate Study (2014) 4 • Focus of study is to compare responses of pre‐ and post‐implementation surveys and differences in HOV to non‐HOV lane users.

Read the entire page →

From page 379...

... Appendix D ‐ 7 Region Type of Study Findings California – Los Angeles Region Low‐Income Field Surveys (2015) 5 Survey targeted low‐income travelers, mostly non‐users of Metro ExpressLanes and FasTrak, but no users of these programs were excluded. Close focus on race/ethnicity of low‐income travelers. • Of those that drive alone, 19.7% are African American, 10.9% are White, 21.2% are Asian, and 48.2% are Hispanic. • Of the 16.4% of respondents that carpool, 24.7% are African American, 16.4% are White, 26.0% are Asian, and 32.9% are Hispanic. • Of the 7.9% of respondents that ride the bus, 42.9% are African Americans making them the largest group to commute via transit, 2.86% are White making them the smallest group to commute via transit, 14.3% are Asian, and 40.0% are Hispanic. • Low‐income commuters prefer using their own vehicle. When asked "what is preventing you from using a commute alternative such as ridesharing or transit," Asians (33. 3%)

Read the entire page →

From page 380...

... Appendix D ‐ 8 Region Type of Study Findings • When asked about reasons why they do not own a transponder, 12.8% of African Americans, 15.8% of Whites, 8.1% of Asians, and 9.9% of Hispanics reported the statement "There are no toll lanes on my commute to and from work." California – Los Angeles Region I‐110 Corridor (2008) 6 • More people in the environmental justice (EJ)

Read the entire page →

From page 381...

... Appendix D ‐ 9 Region Type of Study Findings California – Los Angeles Region San Gabriel Valley – LA County (2008) 8 • EJ population (46%)

Read the entire page →

From page 382...

... Appendix D ‐ 10 Region Type of Study Findings Colorado – Denver Region I‐25 Stated Preference Survey (2004) 10 • When asked about their attitude to HOT lanes: 56% of Hispanics, 44% of Whites, 25% of African Americans, and 13% of Asian Americans were in favor.

Read the entire page →

From page 383...

... Appendix D ‐ 11 Region Type of Study Findings Georgia – Atlanta Region I‐85 Express Lanes Before/ After Implementation Survey (2011– 2012) 11 • Blacks, Asians, and other minorities decreased the number of one or more weekly trips made in the HOV lanes (wave 1)

Read the entire page →

From page 384...

... Appendix D ‐ 12 Region Type of Study Findings Georgia – Atlanta Region I‐20, I‐75, I‐95, and I‐285 Stated Preference Survey (2007) 13 • Survey did not report results broken out by race and/or ethnicity.

Read the entire page →

From page 385...

... Appendix D ‐ 13 Region Type of Study Findings Kentucky (Louisville) and Southern Indiana Region Ohio River Bridges Crossing Facility, Intercept Community Survey (2014)

Read the entire page →

From page 386...

... Appendix D ‐ 14 Region Type of Study Findings Minnesota – St. Paul and Minnea‐ polis Region I‐394 Minneapolis‐ St. Paul, Minnesota Attitudinal Panel Survey (2004‐ 2006) 17 • The survey sample included few people representing racial or ethnic minorities. Transponder owners were more likely to be White than a racial minority; 16% of White respondents compared to 11% of minority respondents owned transponders.

Read the entire page →

From page 387...

... Appendix D ‐ 15 Region Type of Study Findings Texas – Houston, Dallas and Fort Worth Region Katy Freeway Stated Preference Survey (2008) 19 • Survey did not report results broken out by race and/or ethnicity. • Low‐ and high‐income groups have higher mean value of travel time savings compared to medium‐income group. The survey reports that the low‐income group having a higher mean value of travel time savings may be attributed to schedule inflexibility of persons with lower‐paying jobs. Texas – Houston, Dallas and Fort Worth Region Houston and Dallas, Texas Regions Stated Preference Survey (2006)

Read the entire page →

From page 388...

... Appendix D ‐ 16 Region Type of Study Findings Washing‐ ton – Seattle Region SR 520 Bridge Before & After Implementation Survey (2010 & 2012) 24 • Survey did not report results broken out by race and/or ethnicity.

Read the entire page →

From page 389...

... Appendix D ‐ 17 10 Ungemah, D., Swisher, M., Tighe, C. 2005. Discussing High‐Occupancy Toll Lanes with the Denver, Colorado, Public. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. 1932, 129‐136. UrbanTrans. 2004. I‐25 HOT Lanes Public Outreach: Summary Report: Stated Preference Telephone Survey. Prepared for Colorado Department of Transportation. 11 Peirce, S., Petrella, M., Puckett, S., Minnice, P., Lappin, J., Volpe National Transportation Systems Center. 2014. Urban Partnership Agreement and Congestion Reduction Demonstration Programs: Lessons Learned on Congestion Pricing from the Seattle and Atlanta Household Travel Behavior Surveys. Prepared for U.S. Federal Highway Administration. Retrieved from http://ntl.bts.gov/lib/54000/54000/54065/UPA‐ CRD_Panel_Survey_Lessons_Learned_Final_Report_Volpe.pdf Peirce, S., Petrella, M., and Green, E. 2014. 2010–2012 Longitudinal Household Travel Diary Study: Seattle & Atlanta. Poster. Retrieved from http://static.tti.tamu.edu/conferences/tss12/posters/14.pdf Petrella, M., Puckett, S., Peirce, S., Minnice, P., Lappin, J., Volpe National Transportation Systems Center. 2014. Effects of an HOV‐2 to HOT‐3 Conversion on Traveler Behavior: Evidence from a Panel Study of I‐85 Corridor in Atlanta (Final Report) . Prepared for the U.S. Federal Highway Administration. Retrieved from http://ntl.bts.gov/lib/54000/54000/54062/CRD_Panel_Survey_Atlanta_Final_Report_Volpe.pdf Ray, R., Petrella, M., Peirce, S., Minnice, P., Puckett, S., Lappin, J., Volpe National Transportation Systems Center. 2014. Exploring the Equity Impacts of Two Road Pricing Implementations Using a Traveler Behavior Panel Survey: Full Facility Pricing on SR 520 in Seattle and the I‐85 HOT‐2 to HOT‐3 Conversion in Atlanta (Final Report)

Read the entire page →

From page 390...

... Appendix D ‐ 18 19 Burris, M., Patil, S., Texas A&M Transportation Institute. 2009. Estimating the Benefits of Managed Lanes. 20 Burris, M., Sadabadi, K.F., Mattingly, S.P., Mahlawat, M., Li, J., Rasmidatta, I., and Saroosh, A. 2007. Reaction to the Managed Lane Concept by Various Groups of Travelers. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. 1996, 74–82. 21 Burris, M., Han, N., Geiselbrecht, T., Wood, N., Texas A&M Transportation Institute. 2015. I‐30 Express Lanes Survey Report. Prepared for North Central Texas Council of Governments and the Federal Highway Administration. 22 Burris, M., Appiah, J., Texas A&M Transportation Institute. 2003. An Examination of Houston's QuickRide Participants by Frequency of QuickRide Usage. Prepared for the Texas Department of Transportation. Burris, M., Figueroa, C. 2006. Analysis of Traveler Characteristics by Mode Choice in HOT Corridors. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 45 (2)

Read the entire page →

From page 391...

... Appendix D ‐ 19 Appendix Below are four tables from the MTC Regional Express Lanes Interstate 680 Corridor Environmental Justice Technical Memorandum Appendix C: Summary of Express Lane Surveys Before and After Implementation. Exhibit A‐1. Express Lane General Public Perceptions Prior to Implementation Region Type of Study Findings Denver, CO 2005 survey conducted before implementation on I‐25 1  Stakeholder interviews of 21 persons indicated strong support for I‐25 high‐occupancy toll (HOT) lanes, only 1 person opposed with different opinions for use of revenue.

Read the entire page →

From page 392...

... Appendix D ‐ 20 Exhibit A‐1. Express Lane General Public Perceptions Prior to Implementation Region Type of Study Findings Alameda County, CA 2007 survey of public attitudes for I‐580 and I‐680 Express Lanes 5  General survey of 466 persons with 95% confidence level, little breakdown in respondent income groups.  Total of 95% of respondents had heard of carpool or commuter lanes, but only 71% had heard of toll or HOT lanes.

Read the entire page →

From page 393...

... Appendix D ‐ 21 Exhibit A‐1. Express Lane General Public Perceptions Prior to Implementation Region Type of Study Findings San Francisco, CA 2007 survey about congestion pricing for downtown San Francisco 4  Survey with 600 respondents with 95% overall confidence level; respondents were: 54.5% White, 6.3% Black, 15.5% Asian, 11.7% Hispanic, 7.8% other, and some persons refusing to answer.  Respondents' income information: 9.3% of respondents with income less than $25,000, 18.8% with income $25,000‐$49,999, 13.5% with income $50,000‐74,999, 42.7% with income greater than $75,000, and 14.0% refused to provide household income information.  Awareness of congestion pricing: 32.3% San Francisco County residents, 18.3% nearby county residents (Alameda, Contra Costa, Marin, San Mateo, and Santa Clara Counties) , and 25.3% overall.  Awareness of congestion pricing when definition read: 65.3% San Francisco County residents, 54.0% other county residents, and 59.7% overall.  Very little concern about implementing congestion pricing resulting in low‐income motorists having less access to downtown San Francisco: 2.9% San Francisco County residents, 3.19% other county residents, and 3.4% overall; no breakout of question by income or minority groups.  Little difference in responses from San Francisco County and surrounding counties. Sources: 1. Ungemah et al., 2005. 2. Buckeye and Munich, 2006. 3. FDOT, 2000. 4. J.D. Franz Research, 2007. 5. SA Opinion Research, 2007. 6. SA Opinion Research, 2008. Notes: HOV = high‐occupancy vehicle; SOV = single‐occupancy vehicle; HOT = high‐occupancy toll

Read the entire page →

From page 394...

... Appendix D ‐ 22 Exhibit A‐2. Express Lane Perceptions by Income Group Prior to Implementation Region Type of Study Findings Denver, CO 2005 survey conducted before implementation on I‐25 1  Telephone interviews of 350 persons in I‐25 corridor; results indicated general support for the high‐occupancy toll (HOT) lane project.  40% of respondents making <$35,000 approved of HOT lane project, with 22% disapproving and 33% undecided.

Read the entire page →

From page 395...

... Appendix D ‐ 23 Sources: 1. Ungemah et al., 2005. 2. Buckeye and Munich, 2006. 3. FDOT, 2000. 4. J.D. Franz Research, 2007. 5. SA Opinion Research, 2007. 6. SA Opinion Research, 2008. Notes: HOV = high‐occupancy vehicle; SOV = single‐occupancy vehicle; HOT = high‐occupancy toll Exhibit A‐3. Express Lane Perceptions By Minority Group Prior to Implementation Region Type of Study Findings Denver, CO 2005 survey conducted before implementation on I‐25 1  Surveys did not report results by minority groups, either race or ethnicity. Minneapolis, MN Focus groups prior to project implementation on I‐394 (2007)

Read the entire page →

From page 396...

... Appendix D ‐ 24 Exhibit A‐4. Studies on Express Lane Use After Implementation Region Type of Study Findings Denver, CO PowerPoint presentation of I‐25 Express Lane users based on 2008 survey 1  Survey did not report results broken out by minority groups, either race or ethnicity. Survey did not ask about fairness.  No income breakout for why use of express lanes and satisfaction.

Read the entire page →

From page 397...

... Appendix D ‐ 25 Exhibit A‐4. Studies on Express Lane Use After Implementation Region Type of Study Findings Houston, TX I‐10 QuickRide survey of users in March and November 2003 3  Survey did not ask questions about minority, either race or ethnicity, or fairness/equity.  Slow and steady increased usage of QuickRide since implementation in 1998.

Read the entire page →

From page 398...

... Appendix D ‐ 26 Exhibit A‐4. Studies on Express Lane Use After Implementation Region Type of Study Findings Houston, TX I‐10 Katy Freeway HOT Lane 2010 survey to assess value of travel time savings (VTTS) 5  No questions or analysis of minorities, either race or ethnicity, or fairness/equity.  Survey to estimate value of travel time savings depending on different types of trips – normal vs. unusual trips.  Survey included six categories of unexpected urgent trips to compare with an ordinary trip purpose.  In general, the VTTS is 3.8 to 5.5 times greater than an ordinary trip purpose.  Mean VTTS was significantly different for income groups; the low‐income group (<$50,000)

Read the entire page →

From page 399...

... Appendix D ‐ 27 Exhibit A‐4. Studies on Express Lane Use After Implementation Region Type of Study Findings Minneapolis, MN 2004‐2006 longitudinal study of users 6  Survey did not look at minorities, either race or ethnicity, or fairness/equity.  Survey results showed little difference between responses based on income, gender, and education for support for single‐occupancy vehicles (SOVs)

Read the entire page →

From page 400...

... Appendix D ‐ 28 Exhibit A‐4. Studies on Express Lane Use After Implementation Region Type of Study Findings Minneapolis, MN 2006 survey of MnPass users one year after implementation 7  Survey did not look in detail at minority, either race or ethnicity; low response rate for non‐Whites.  Willingness to pay not statistically different for lower‐income group (<$50,000)

Read the entire page →

From page 401...

... Appendix D ‐ 29 Exhibit A‐4. Studies on Express Lane Use After Implementation Region Type of Study Findings Orange County, CA Observational data for SR 91 Express Lanes (5‐year study, published in 2001) 9  Survey does not discuss minority, either race or ethnicity, fairness/equity.

Read the entire page →

From page 402...

... Appendix D ‐ 30 Exhibit A‐4. Studies on Express Lane Use After Implementation Region Type of Study Findings San Diego, CA I‐15 Express Lanes demonstration project 3‐year survey of users (2002) 11  Survey did not look at minorities, either race or ethnicity.  Attitudinal survey of 3‐year demonstration express lane project.  FasTrak users came from neighborhoods with the highest income groups.  Respondents believed pricing policies were fair and did not raise equity issues as a concern.  General concerns about the fairness of pricing policies may not arise when revenue use is not perceived as favoring privileged groups and when a general purpose lane is not taken away to create express lanes. Seattle, WA Pilot study with variable charges for highway use (2008)

Read the entire page →

From page 403...

... Appendix D ‐ 31 Exhibit A‐4. Studies on Express Lane Use After Implementation Region Type of Study Findings Seattle, WA Estimating toll impacts based on car ownership and transportation patterns by income (2011) 14  Survey did not look at minority, either race or ethnicity, nor perceived fairness.

Read the entire page →

Key Terms

← Previous Chapter Skim

Next Chapter Skim →

This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More information on Chapter Skim is available.