unbenaincreasing carpooling in vermont: opportunities and obstaclesnnt

7/26/2019 UnbenaIncreasing Carpooling in Vermont: Opportunities and Obstaclesnnt

1/25

A report by the University of Vermont Transportation Research Center

Increasing Carpooling

in Vermont: Opportunitiesand Obstacles

Report # 10-010 | June 2010


2/25


3/25

Increasing

Carpooling

in

Vermont:

Opportunities

and

Obstacles

UVM

Transportation

Research

Center

June2010

Preparedby:

RichardWatts

Contributionsfrom:

NathanBelz

JosephFraker

LaurenGandrud

JenniferKenyon

MelissaMeece

TransportationResearchCenter

FarrellHall

210ColchesterAvenue

Burlington,VT05405

Phone:(802)6561312

Website:www.uvm.edu/trc


4/25

UVMTRCReport#10010

Table

of

Contents

1. ......................................................................................................................................... 3INTRODUCTION

2.CARPOOL OVERVIEWUS&Vermont.................................................................................................... 3

2.1Challenges/HistoricalTrends.............................................................................................................. 4

2.2Opportunities/ReasonstoCarpool..................................................................................................... 7

2.3IncentivestoIncreaseCarpooling....................................................................................................... 8

3.ANALYSISOFVERMONTCARPOOLDATA................................................................................................. 9

3.1GoVermont........................................................................................................................................ 10

3.2Challenges/HistoricalTrends............................................................................................................ 11

3.3Opportunities/ReasonstoCarpool................................................................................................... 16

3.4IncentivestoIncreaseCarpooling.................................................................................................... 18

4.CONCLUSION/FURTHERRESEARCH........................................................................................................ 21

REFERENCES................................................................................................................................................

22

List

of

Tables

Table1.VermontandUScarpool/drivingaloneforthecommutetoworktrip19702008........................ 4

Table2.CarownershipintheUS(19602008)............................................................................................. 5

Table3.CarownershipinVermont(19602008).......................................................................................... 5

Table4.HouseholdSizeOverTime.............................................................................................................. 5

Table5.Distributionoftripsbytrippurpose............................................................................................... 6

Table6.ChoiceofmodetotraveltoworkintheUSandVermont.............................................................. 7

Table7.

Survey

respondents

by

county

......................................................................................................

10

Table8.Surveyrespondentsbyfrequencyofcarpool............................................................................... 10

Table9.ReasonsnottocarpoolchosenbyrespondentstosurveyofGoVermontparticipants............... 13

Table10.ReasonstocarpoolchosenbyrespondentstosurveyofGoVermontparticipants................... 15

Table11.Reasonstocarpoolchosenbyfocusgroupparticipantsinopenendedconversations............15

Table12.Respondentsperceptionoftheimpactofincentives(1=lowest;5=highest)............................ 18

List

of

Figures

Figure1.

Carpool

frequency

vs.

number

of

cars

owned

(%)

.......................................................................

11

Figure2.Milestraveledtoworkvs.carpoolfrequency............................................................................. 12

Figure3.Numberofkidsinhouseholdvs.carpoolfrequency................................................................... 13

2


5/25

UVMTRCReport#10010

1.

INTRODUCTION

Growthin

car

ownership,

dispersed

land

settlement

patterns,

highway

investments,

travel

behavior

and

socioeconomicchangeshaveallcontributedtoadramaticincreaseinautomobileuseintheU.S.over

thelast80years.1Theresultinghealth,environmentalandenergyimpactsrelatedtoautomobile

dependenceareofconcerntopolicymakersintheUSandVermont.2Proposedsolutionsrangefrom

increasingtheuseofpublictransportation,walkingandbiking,shiftingvehiclefuelsfrompetroleumto

othersourcesorevenencouragingchangesinthebuiltenvironmenttoreducecartrips.3

Oneproposedsolutionistoincreasethenumberofpeopleineachvehiclewhichdoesnotrequire

extensiveinvestmentofpubliccapital,relyinginsteadontheexistinginfrastructureandalreadyowned

privateautomobiles.4Carpoolingcanincreasepersonalmobility,accesstoservices,reduce

environmentalandinfrastructureimpacts,reduceindividualtransportationcostsandsaveenergy.For

example,averagevehicleoccupancyratesintheUSforworktripsareabout1.1pervehicle,downfrom

1.3in

1977.

Slight

increases

in

the

number

of

people

per

vehicle

could

provide

the

same

energy

savings

asswitchingtoanalternativefuel,withoutbuildingnewfuelingstationsormakinganynewadditional

investments.5

However,thepercentageofcommuterscarpoolinghassignificantlydecreasedsince1980both

nationallyandinVermont.Factorsinthatdeclineincludeincreasingcarownership,decreasesin

householdsize,changesintravelbehavior,therelativelylowcostofenergyandothersocio

demographicchanges.Thepurposeofthisresearchistoexaminepotentialobstaclesandopportunities

toincreasingcarpoolingforthejourneytoworkcommuteinVermontandprovideresearchbased

informationforstatepolicymakersregardingprogramsandpoliciesdesignedtoincreasecarpoolingin

Vermont.6

ThisresearchisjointlyfundedthroughtheVTransEfficientTransportationSystemsprojectandtheUVM

TransportationResearchCenter(TRC)SignatureFocusAreaTransportationEnergyandSystem

Efficiency.Inthisreport,wefocusontheGoVermontprogramastatemanagedridesharematching

programasawindowintotheobstaclesandopportunitiestoincreasingcarpoolinginVermont.We

conductedaninitialsurveyof370GoVermontparticipantsandthenconductedfourindepth

conversationswith25ofthoserespondents.ResearchersalsoreviewedGoVermontmaterials,previous

researchoncarpoolingandexamineddatafromtheUSCensusandNHTSdataontravelbehavioratthe

individualandhouseholdlevel.

2.

CARPOOL

OVERVIEW

US

&

VERMONT

ResearchershavestudiedcarpoolingasamodechoicesinceWorldWarII,whenoilandrubber

shortagesnecessitatedfrugalpersonaltransportationhabits.7Asaresultoftheoilcrisisinthe1970s,

19.7percentofcommutersreportedcarpoolingastheirmodetoworkinthe1980Census.8By2000,

however,thispercentagedroppedto11.2percent. Duringthissameperioddrivingalonetowork

increasedfrom64.4percentin1980to75.8percentin2000.9ThenumbersaresimilarforVermont,

3


6/25

UVMTRCReport#10010

carpoolingpeaked25percentofworktripsin1980andhasdecreasedtofewerthan11percent2006

08.

PrivateautomobileuseisthedominantformoftransportationinVermontandtheUS,accountingfor

84.7%ofalltripstoworkinVermont.10Anyexaminationofworktripshastostartwiththebasic

understandingthatthesingleoccupancyvehicle(SOV)isthedominantmodeoftransportationand

alternativessuch

as

carpooling

have

to

be

as,

or

more

attractive

than

driving

alone.

Table1 VermontandUScarpool/drivingaloneforthecommutetoworktrip19702008

1970 1980 1990 2000 200608

CarpoolUS 11.7% 19.7% 13.4% 10.6% 10.9%

CarpoolVT 15.2% 25% 13.7 11.9% 10.9%

DrovealoneUS 66% 64.4% 73.2% 75.8% 74.3%

DroveAloneVT 61.8% 55.9% 76.8% 75.2% 74.30%

Source:USCensus.20062008datafromtheAmericanCommunitySurvey.

2.1Challenges/HistoricalTrends

Anumberoffactorshavebeenassociatedwiththedeclineincarpoolingandtheincreaseindriving

alonesincethe1980s.Inthisstudywefocusonsixfactorsthatresearchershavefoundtohaveastrong

correlationbetweenincreasedprivateautomobileuseandthedeclineinsharedtrips;1)increaseincar

ownership,2)decreaseinhouseholdsize,3)urbanform/landuseandsettlementpatterns,4)costof

fuel,5)travelbehaviorand,6)incentivesanddisincentivessuchasthecostsofparking.Wepresent

nationalandVermontdataexaminingeachofthese.

Increasein

car

ownership:

Researchers

believe

there

is

astrong

correlation

between

the

number

of

vehiclesahouseholdownsandvehiclesmilestraveledbyeachhousehold.Asvehicleownershiprates

haveincreased,carpoolingandtheuseofpublictransportationhasdecreased.Incomeandcar

ownershipisstronglyrelatedashigherincomepeoplearemorelikelytoownmorecars.Becausethe

majorityofthefixedcostsofowningacarareallocatedtothepurchaseandmaintenanceofthecar,

gasolinecostsarearelativelysmallportionofthecostofcarownership,typicallyunder10percent.11

Carownerstendtoseethethecostoftravelasrelativelyminornotaccountingthefixedcostofcar

ownershipaspartoftheirdailytravelcosts.Since1960,thenumberofhouseholdsintheUSwithouta

vehiclehasdroppedfrom21.5percenttolessthan9percent(chartbelow).

Atthesametime,householdswithtwocarshaveincreasedfrom19percenttoalmost38percentand

threecarhouseholdshavegrown8fold.VermontscarownershipratesarehigherthantheUSaverage

andhave

seen

similar

increases.

For

example,

census

data

indicates

that

5.7

percent

of

Vermont

householdsarewithoutvehiclescomparedto8.8percentnationally.Overall,in2009,thenumberof

vehiclesregistered(568,468)wasslightlymorethanthenumberofregistereddrivers(509,317).12

4


7/25

UVMTRCReport#10010

Table2.CarownershipintheUS(19602008)

20062008 2000 1990 1980 1970 1960

NoCar 8.8% 10.3% 11.5% 12.9% 17.5% 21.5%

1Car 33.2% 34.2% 33.7% 35.5% 47.7% 56.9%

2Cars 37.9% 38.4% 37.4% 34.0% 29.3% 19.0%

3or

more

cars

20.0%

17.1%

17.3%

17.5%

5.5%

2.5%

SOURCE:USCensusBureau;www.census.gov

Table3.CarownershipinVermont(19602008)

20062008 2000 1990 1980

NoCar 5.7% 6.8% 8.0% 10.3%

1Car 32.9% 33.6% 34.1% 42.2%

2Cars 41.8% 43.1% 42.3% 33.5%

3ormorecars 19.6.0% 16.4% 15.6% 14.0%

Householdsizeanddemographics:Atthesametimeascarownershiphasincreased,householdsizehas

decreasedleadingtoreducedopportunitiesforhouseholdbasedcarpools.Researchsuggeststhat

householdbasedcarpools(sometimescalledfampools)areonethirdtothreequartersofall

carpooling.13Onestudyfoundthecorrelationbetweenanincreaseinautoavailabilityandadecreasein

householdsizeaccountedfor38percentofthedeclineincarpoolingfrom1970to1990.14Othersocio

demographicsfactorsthatresearchhasfoundtoberelatedtothedecreaseincarpoolinginclude

increasesinfemalesinthelaborforce,increasesinsinglepersonhouseholdandincreasesinaverage

householdincome.

Ashouseholdsizedecreases,carpoolingratesdecreasebecausetherearelessinhouseholdoptionsfor

carpooling.Vermontsdeclininghouseholdsizeandhighcarownershipratespresentamajorbarrierto

policymakers

seeking

to

increase

carpooling

in

the

state.

Table4.HouseholdSizeOverTime

20062008 2000 1990 1980 1970 1960

Vermont 2.37 2.42 2.44 2.57

US 2.61 2.6 2.59 2.63 2.75 3.11SOURCE:USCensusBureau;www.census.gov

Costoffuel:Ascarownershiprateshaveincreasedandhouseholdsizedecreased,energycostshave

decreasedinrealdollarsandvehicleefficiencyhasincreased.Thedeclineintherealmarginalcostof

motorfuel

and

an

increase

in

vehicle

fuel

economy

contributed

to

34

percent

of

the

decline

in

carpoolingbetween1980and1990.Inconstantdollars,energycostspergallonoffuelaresimilartothe

costoffuelin1980.Andasthecostoffuelhasstayedlevel,vehicleefficiencyhasimprovedsothat

Vermonterscantravelthesamemilesusinglessfuel.

Urbanform/settlementpatterns(densityofwork,densityofhome):Increasedsuburbanizationand

dispersedlandusesettlementpatternshavealsocontributedtothedecreaseincarpooling.Because

worktripcarpoolsaredestinationorientedtheyaremostsuccessfulinemploymentareaswithahigh

5


8/25

UVMTRCReport#10010

numberofemployeesand/orahighdensityemployeesettlementatthepointoforigin.15Researchers

havefoundthatcarpoolformationanduseisparticularlysensitivetoindividualcompositional

characteristics(e.g.gender,ageandincome),residentialspatialcontext(theaccessibilityofanindividual

tobematchedtoothercarpoolusers),mobilitystatus(numberofhouseholdautomobiles)andthe

attitudestowardcost,theenvironment,andthevalueoftime.

Inapreviousstudy,TRCresearchersuseddatafromtheE911databasetoidentifyplacesinVermontwithemploymentandresidentialdensityabovethe57housesperacreconsideredtheminimum

necessaryforpublictransportation.Researchersfoundonly15geographicallocations(communities

suchasBurlington,Montpelier,St.Johnsbury,Rutlandetc.)witheithertheemploymentorresidential

densitythatcouldsupporttransit,andpotentiallybyinference,carpooling.16(SeeTRCreport)

Travelbehavior:Thechangeinurbanformhasbeenaccompaniedwithafundamentalchangeintravel.

Wheretheworkcommutetripwasoncetheprimaryvehicletrip,todaylessthan18percentoftotal

tripsaretowork.Instead,manytripsarenowmadefromworktootherplaces,ortripsaremadeina

sequencethatisdifficultforcarpoolingparticularlywhenthedestinationsandemploymentcenters

arebroadlydispersed.

TheNationalHouseholdTravelSurvey(NHTS)measurestravelbehavioratthehouseholdlevelforall

purposes,notjustcommuting.In2001,thesurveydataindicatedtheprominenceoffamilyandpersonal

tripsandthecontinueddeclineoftheworktripasapercentoftotaltrips.

Table5.Distributionoftripsbytrippurpose

Family/personalbusiness 44.6%

Social/recreational 27.1%

Workandworkrelated 17.7%

School/church/other 10.6%

Total 100%Source:

The

2001

National

Household

Travel

Survey,

daily

trip

file,

US

Department

of

Transportation.

Attitudes:Studieshaveidentifiedindividualattitudesasanexplanatoryvariableforwhypeoplechoose

tocarpoolornottocarpool.Carpoolingrequiresmoretraveltimeinordertopickuptheothercarpool

members(forexternalcarpooling)andaconveniencereductionstemmingfromconflictingschedules.

Theperceptionsofcarpooling(e.g.constraintsonindependence,socialrequirementsandinterpersonal

rapport)havealsobeenfoundtoplayalargerrolethancostorconvenience.17

Forsome,theanonymityofusingtransitisfarmoreappealingthantheinducedsocialclimateof

carpooling.Althoughcarpoolsaremorespatiallyflexibleandlesstimeconsumingthanpublictransit

options,theyareoftenperceivedtobemoretimeconsumingbecauseoftheneedtopickupanddeliver

memberswhich

can

lead

to

concerns

about

becoming

involved

with

and

dependent

on

strangers.

18

.Solodriversfindcarpoolinglessconvenientduetoschedulerigidityorbecauseofirregularshifthour

worklocation.Commutersmayalsobelesslikelytoshifttheirmodechoicewhentheyhaveestablished

habitsandassociatecarpoolingwithalossofprivacyandindependence,particularlyiftheyneeda

vehicleduringtheworkday.

sor

19

Inaseparatestudy,TRCresearcherslookedattheroleofsocialcapitalinenablingsocialnetworksthat

wouldincreasecarpooling.Inthatstudyresearchersexaminedhowsocialnetworkscanbeusedby

6


9/25

UVMTRCReport#10010

policymakerstomakeridesharingmoreappealingtoagreaternumberofpeopleforawidervarietyof

trippurposes.Specifically,researchersexaminedthreesocialnetworkbasedridesharingservices;

HinesburgRides(Hinesburg,Vermont);FrontPorchForum(Burlington,Vermont);GoLoco(Universityof

NewHampshire,Durham,NewHampshire);andtheHourExchange(Portland,Maine).

Socialcapitalis,atitscoreaseriesofconnectionsandrelationshipsbetweenindividualmembersofthe

society.Dependinguponthestrength,quality,andextentoftheseconnectionsandrelationships,social

capitalenablespeopletobuildtrust,establishnorms,andformsocialnetworks,whichcanthen

promotesharedcommunityobjectives,forexampleridesharing.

Socialnetworksarethemanyindividualgroupsthatourconnectionsandrelationshipsareorganized

intoincludingourfamily,ourfriends,ourcoworkers,ourneighbors,ourcarpoolgroup,aswellasthe

civic,political,religious,andprofessionalassociationsthatwebelongto. Whilesomenetworksoverlap

e.g.afewofourfriendsmayalsobecoworkersmanyarediscretee.g.noneofourneighborsare

coworkers. Yet,manyofthemareavailabletousintimesofneed. Inaddition,socialnetworks

formalizetheconnectionsandrelationshipsamongandbetweenindividualswithinthenetwork,

regardlessof

how

informal

or

unstructured

the

network

is.

Norms

within

networks

give

people

guidelinesonhowtoact,puttingpressureonpeoplewithinthenetworktocomplywiththenorms.

Twoofthemostimportantnormsfromasocialcapitalperspectivearetrustworthinessandreciprocity.

Thisisbecauseifpeoplegenerallytrusteachotherandsharenormsofreciprocity,thentheriskofthe

otherpartyactingfraudulentlyordefaultingontheirobligationsislowered.

Researchersinthatstudypositedthatahighlevelofsocialcapitalcouldbehelpfulinovercomingthe

obstaclestoridesharing. Forexample,highlevelsoftrustcouldhelpdecreasethefearofgettingintoa

strangerscar. Bybuildingbridgingsocialcapitaltiesi.e.reachingouttoindividualswhobelongto

differentgroupsridesharingpoolscouldbecomesufficientlylargeenoughinordertoovercomethe

difficultiesinfindingsuitablematches. Concernoverrestrictionsinflexibilitycouldbeassuagedif

cooperationandreciprocitybetweencommunitymemberswereconsideredunalterablenorms.

Thesocialnetworkspresentedinthatstudyofferedalternativemodelstothetraditional,standalone

ridesharingplatforms. Inordertoattractmoreridesharers,traditionalplatformscanbeembeddedinto

asocialnetworkorridesharingcanbeaddedtoanexistingcommunitybasedsocialnetwork.Inthat

study,theTRCresearcherssuggestedthatgovernmentsupportneighborhoodbasedsocialnetworks,

whichinturnwouldfacilitateridesharing.However,inthisstudyweareexaminingatraditional

platform theStateofVermontsGoVermontRideshareprogramwhichisfocusedonincreasing

ridesharinginVermont.TheresultsfromtheTRCsearlierstudyinthisareaareavailablethrough

contactingtheTRC.Weturnnowtoananalysisofthatprogramandtheobstaclesandopportunitiesfor

increasingridesharing

in

Vermont.

2.2Opportunities/ReasonstoCarpool

Despitemanyformidableobstacles,bothsocialandphysical,manyAmericansstillchoosetocarpool.

Carpoolingissecondafterdrivingaloneasthemodeofchoicefortravelingtowork,abovewalkingand

publictransportationinboththeUSandVermont.

7


10/25

UVMTRCReport#10010

Table6.ChoiceofmodetotraveltoworkintheUSandVermont

US Vermont

Drivealone 75.8% 75.2%

Carpool 10.6% 11.9%

Transit

4.9%

.7%

Workathome 4.0% 5.7%

Walk 2.8% 5.6%

Other 1.7% .9%Source:USCensus2000

Ingeneral,tripmodechoiceisbasedontravelcost,traveltime,convenience,andotherintangibleor

nontravelrelatedfactors(EPA1978),andfewsociodemographicvariableshavebeenfoundtobe

reliablepredictorsofwhowillcarpoolforjourneytoworktrips. Householdswithlowerincome,lower

automobileavailability,andmultipleworkershavebeenshowntobemorelikelytochoosecarpooling.

Carpoolersareusuallytravelingsignificantlyfartherdistancesthanthosewhodrivealone20although

trip

time

might

be

the

same.

21

In

terms

of

spatial

factors,

it

is

suggested

that

carpool

users

tend

to

trafurtherthanSOVdriversindicatingthatthechoicetocarpoolisdrivenbylocationanddestination

andthatatraveldistanceof10milesisthepointatwhichcarpoolingbecomesappealing.

vel

22Saving

money,eitherthroughreducedgascostsorreducedwearandtearonvehiclesisoftencitedasthefirst

reasontocarpool.InonestudyinTexas,carpoolersweremotivatedprimarilybytheabilitytosave

moneybecausetheycouldusetheHOVlanes.Othermotivationsfoundintheresearchliteraturefor

carpoolingincludelackofautoavailabilityandemployerbasedincentivesordisincentives(e.g.costof

parking).

Still,mostresearchershavefoundthatevenwithapparentlinksbetweenthesevariablesand

carpooling,attitudinalrelationshipsareastrongexplanatoryvariableforcarpoolingpropensity.For

example,researchershavefoundthatsocialmotivationisoneattitudethatfosterscarpooling.

Carpoolersenjoy

each

others

company

and

see

the

carpool

conversation

as

away

to

relax

and

unwind

afteradayatwork.Researchershavealsofoundthatconcernsabouttheenvironmentareasecond

factorthatcausespeopletobemotivatedtocarpool.

2.3IncentivestoIncreaseCarpooling

Anumberofstrategieshavebeenintroducedtoinducecommuterstocarpool.Thesestrategiesinclude,

butarenotlimitedto,ridesharematchingservices,carpoolparkinglots,inadvertentorartificial

reductionofparkingandotheremployeepromotedactivitiessuchasacarpoolcoordinatorandthe

creationof

aworkplace

environment

that

supports

carpooling.

23

Manycarpoolprogramsnowoperatethroughemployers,suchastheBestWorkplacesforCommuters

(BWC)program,avoluntarygovernmentindustrypartnershipwhosegoalistoreducevehicleemissions

andtrafficcongestionbyencouragingemployerstoofferacomprehensivepackageofemployer

commuterbenefitsaspartofemployeebenefitpackages.24WhileprogramssuchasBWCofferasuiteof

incentivesforemployeeswhochooseacommutemode(i.e.transit,walking,bicycling)otherthan

drivingalone,somearespecificallygearedtowardcarpooling,includingbutnotlimitedtoparking

8


11/25

UVMTRCReport#10010

incentives,employeerewardprograms,flexibleworkinghours,guaranteedridehomeservicesanduse

ofacompanycarduringworkinghours.

Researchismixedontheabilityofincentivestomotivateemployeestojoincarpools.Onestudyfound

thatcarpoolerswhocitedsavingmoneybehindotherreasonsforoptingtocarpoolwerestillmorelikely

tostopcarpoolingwithoutemployerincentives,manyofwhichwerefinancial.25Beforeimplementinga

carpoolprogram,coordinatorsoremployersmustrememberthattheincentivesforemployeestoutilizeacommutemodebesidedrivingalonemustofferbenefitsaboveandbeyondthoseinherentlyinvolved

intheirchoice,beitcycling,walking,transit,orcarpool.26

Chargingforparking,i.e.creatingadisincentivetodrivealonetoworkmaybeaseffectiveasany

incentivesthatemployerscurrentlyoffer.Onestudyfoundthat20percentofautomobiledriverswho

nowparkattheiremployersexpensewouldbeinducedtojoincarpoolsorbeginusingtransitforthe

triptoworkiftheywerechargedfortheparkingtheynowreceive.27However,employersmaybe

reluctanttochangeparkingpoliciesifitposesarisktotheirabilitytohireorretainqualityemployees.28

Switchingtocarpoolingislessappealingthandrivingalonewhencommutersliveorworkinareaswith

minimalcongestionandwhereparkingisinexpensiveOntheotherhand,combiningincentiveswith

employerbased

education

and

matching

programs

was

found

to

reduce

driving

alone

by

715

percent

in

anothercasestudy.29

However,incentiveprogramsmayonlyawardexistingbehaviororswitchtransitcommuterstocarpools.

30Onestudyfoundthat50percentofsurveyedindividualsparticipatinginadiscountedcarpoolparking

programwerealreadycarpoolingfortheircommutebeforeobtainingthecarpoolparkingpermit.31

Employeeswhoparticipateincarpoolingprogramsonaparttimebasisposeanadditionalchallengeto

measuringtheeffectivenessofacarpoolingprogramanditsincentives.

Asummaryofincentiveprogramsfoundthatacarpoolprogramsgreatestchanceforsuccessoccurs

whenthetravelneedsofboththeemployerandemployeesareassessedonanindividualbasis;

employers

can

motivate

employees

to

change

their

commuting

behavior

but

have

to

address

individual

travelneeds.32

3.ANALYSISOFVERMONTCARPOOLDATA

Weturnnowtoananalysisoftwosetsofdatagatheredforthisproject,aninitialsurveyofGoVermont

participantsandindepthconversationswith25surveyrespondents.Asnotedearlier,carpoolingin

Vermontdeclinedinthe1980sand1990s,levelingoffatabout11percentoftheworkcommute.

ObstaclestocarpoolingidentifiedinotherstudiesareasstrongorstrongerinVermontthaninmost

otherstates.

Car

ownership

rates

are

above

national

averages,

household

size

is

below

the

national

average,thestateisruralwithfewpocketsofemploymentandresidentialdensityrequiringaspatial

arrangementoftravelthatmakescarpoolingdifficult.Despitetheseknownobstacles,Vermontersare

carpoolingandsomesubsetofthepopulation,basedonthecontinuedgrowthoftheGoVermontride

sharedatabasewantstodomore.

9


12/25

UVMTRCReport#10010

3.1GoVermont

GovernorJamesDouglasestablishedGoVermontin2008,meldingdisparatestateandlocalrideshare

andastatevanpoolsubsidyprogramintotheGoVermontnetwork,explainingitthiswayinhis2008

addresstotheLegislature;Themilestraveledarenttheproblem;thewaywetraversethemis.Asgas

pricesclimb,manyaretakingasecondlookatfuelefficientcarsandtrucksandalternativestosingle

occupancytrips.

Thats

why

Ipropose

GoVermont,

athree

pronged

approach

that

provides

cost

effectivetransportationalternatives,promotesthedevelopmentandavailabilityofcleanerburning

biofuelsandpushesforincreasedvehicleemissionsstandards.33

GoVermontisthestatesprimarymechanismtopromotealternativestosingleoccupancyvehicle

trips.34Theupgradedwebsite(http://www.connectingcommuters.org/)featuresinformationonstate

sponsoredvanpools,ridematchingservicesandacalculatorformeasuringeconomicandenvironmental

impactsofdrivingalone.VTranscontractedwithSpikeAdvertisingtopromotethewebsiteandintends

toallocateabout$350,000totheprograminthecomingyear.35Thewebsiteispresentlyexperiencing

3400hitsamonthwithabouthalfofthoseclickingthroughtothecarpoolingmatchingservice.Overth

lastfewyears,morethan2800Vermontershaveregistered.Thosesubmittingtheirnamesarematche

withpotentialcarpoolingpartnerswithidenticalstarttownsandendtowndestinations.Theservic

registeringamatch

rate

of

23

percent

since

October

2009.

Registered

carpools

in

the

GoVermont

programareallowedtouseaguaranteedridehomeservicewhereataxiisprovidedtogivethema

ridehomeifcarpooldifficultiesarise.

e

d

eis

Inthisreport,wefocusontheGoVermontprogramasawindowintotheobstaclesandopportunitiesto

increasingcarpoolinginVermont. CarpoolersmatchedthroughtheGoVermontprogrammayrepresent

onlyasmallpercentofongoingcarpoolsinVermont,howeversomeexistingcarpoolersmatched

throughtheirworkplace,familyorfriendsarealsosubmittingtheirnamestotakeadvantageofthe

guaranteedridehomeprogram.36Inanearlierstudy,TRCresearchersgeocodedthestatedoriginsand

destinationsof2,813ridersintheGoVermontdatabaseusingtheArcGISprogram.Thisinformationwas

usefultoidentifycommonrideshareandtravelroutes(SeeVTransEfficiencyreportPhase1). Following

onthat

work,

in

this

study,

we

submitted

an

electronic

survey

to

1809

GoVermont

registrants

of

which

370responded.Ofthose370,25voluntarilyparticipatedinanindepthconversationatoneoffour

discussionsessions.Respondentswerepaid$20.00forparticipating.

SurveyData:Apluralityofthe370respondentswasfemale(55%)and45%commuteonaveragemore

than30milestowork.Almosthalfoftherespondents(45%)werefromChittendenandWashington,

withalmosttwothirds(65%)fromthosetwocountiesplusLamoilleandFranklin.Employmentlocations

wereconcentratedinBurlington,Essex,andMontpelierandalongtheI89corridor.Themajor

employerscitedwereIBMandVermontstategovernment.ApluralityofGoVermontregistrantsare

fromtheSt.Albans,BurlingtonandMontpeliercommuteshedandChittenden,FranklinandWashington

countiesThiswastrueofthesurveyrespondentsaswellasthelistthesurveywasdrawnfrom.

10
http://www.connectingcommuters.org/http://www.connectingcommuters.org/


13/25

UVMTRCReport#10010

Table7.Surveyrespondentsbycounty

County

GoVermont

(1809)

Survey

respondents

(370)

Focusgroup

participants

(25)Chittenden 27% 26% 45%

Washington 17% 20% 21%

Franklin 10% 13% 4%

Lamoille 6% 6% 4%

Total(offulllist) 65% 65% 74%

Wegroupedhalfoftherespondentsintoaregularcarpoolcategorytocontrasttheirbehaviorwith

thosewhodontcarpool.However,alloftheserespondentsshareaninterestincarpooling,presumably,

becausetheysubmittedtheirnamestotheGoVermontridematchingservice.

Table8.Surveyrespondentsbyfrequencyofcarpool

Frequencyofcarpool Numberofrespondents Rarely/NeverCarpool Regularcarpoolers

Never 115

183


14/25

UVMTRCReport#10010

spatiallandusepatterns,travelbehavior,costoffuel,attitudesandemployerbasedincentivesand

disincentivessuchasthecostofparking.

CarOwnership:Carownershiphasastrongcausalrelationshipwithsingleoccupancyvehicleuseand

autodependence.Themorecarsahouseholdowns,thelesslikelyhouseholdmembersaretowalk,use

transitorcarpool.Vermontersowncarsatahighrateandthispresentsastrongobstacletoincreasing

carpooling.Surveyrespondentswithfewercarsweremorelikelytocarpoolthanthosewithmorecars.

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

0 Cars 1 Car 2 Cars 3 or more

Cars

%O

fSurveyParticipants

Rarely/Never Carpool

Carpool

Figure1.CarpoolFrequencyvs.NumberofCarsOwned(%)

Asonerespondentwhosharedonecarwithherhusbandsaidoftheircarpoolhabits.

Myhusband

and

Iare

naturally

frugal.

We're

cheap!

Its

just

part

of

our

nature.

We

minimizeourtripsintotown. Wedoubleuptripsintotown.andsothisisjustan

extensionofthat. Thisisjustanextensionofournaturalfrugality.

Urbanform/settlementpatterns(densityofwork,densityofhome):Residentialsettlementpatterns

andemploymentcentersinVermontaredispersed,althoughthereareemploymentconcentrationsin

Burlington,Montpelier,RutlandandatlargeemployerslikethestatecomplexinWaterburyandtheIBM

manufacturingplantinEssex.Thenumberofpeopleintheworkplace(orthedensityofthearea

surroundingtheworkplace)anddensityofthetownoforiginisakeyfactorinenablingcarpooling.

Carpoolmatchesareoftenmadeattheworkplace.Inourfocusgroups,carpoolerswerefarmorelikely

to

have

met

their

fellow

carpoolers

through

the

workplace

or

through

friends.

Only

two

of

the

25

found

carpoolmatchesthroughthestatematchingprogram.(Oneotherfoundavanpoolprogramthroughthe

website).Oneresearchstudy(Ingetal)foundthatonly28percentofcarpoolmatchescomethrough

publicmatchingservices.Mostcarpoolmatchesarefamily,friendorworkplaceoriginated.

Vermontslackofdensitymakesitdifficulttofindsuitablematches.Notedonestateworkerwhofound

amatchthroughherworkplace:

12


15/25

UVMTRCReport#10010

ThisismyfirsttimeactuallycarpoolinginallmylifeIfeelveryluckyLivinginarural

areathough adirtroad,abackroad,andconnectingwithsomebodytomakethat

workisvery,veryhardinVermont. It'snotlikeeverybodylivesaroundthemaindrag

andeverybodycanmatchup. It'sachallenge.

Or,saidanotherwhohadrecentlymovedtoVermont:

ThebiggestissueIvehadwithmovingtoVermontisitssucharuralareathatImnot

surehowbigthecompanyyouworkinis,butwithmebeinginatinycompanyyou

knowmypoolofpeopleyouaskistinyandthenevensmallerthanthatisfinding

somebodythatsmakingthattripandtherearesomanypeoplecomingfromsomany

differentplacesthatitshardfindingsomebodythatsonyourschedule.

Thechallengeoffindingamatchwasidentifiedbysurveyrespondentsasthesecondlargestobstacleto

carpooling.Morethanhalf(51%)oftotalrespondentscheckedaboxthatsaiditwashardtofindother

tocarpoolwithfrommylocationtomydestination.Perhapsthechallengeisbestrepresentedbyone

participantwhohasbeenunabletofindamatchdespiteworkingatthestateslargestprivateemployer

andastated

willingness

to

be

extremely

flexible:

IvebeenontheStatedatabaseforlikefiveyearsandhavenohitsandtalkedtothem

personallyacoupleoftimesSomyexperienceisthatI'vebeentryingtogetsomeoneto

carpoolandmyschedulecanbekindofflexible. Icangoplusorminustwohourson

eachend. AndsomedaysIcanworkathome,too,soIcanbeflexiblethatway. ButI

haveahardtimehookingupwithanyonetocarpoolwith.

Atthesametime,thedistancesVermonterstraveltoworkmayalsobeanincentivetocarpool.

Researchershavefoundthattravelingabovetenmilesmakescarpoolingmorelikely.Resultsfromthe

surveysuggestthatdistanceisafactor,butataboveacertaindistancetheinabilitytofindmatchesmay

inhibit

the

formation

of

carpools.

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

1-5 miles 6-15

miles

16-30

miles

31-45

miles

More than

45 miles

%o

fSurveyParticipants

Never/Rarely Carpool

Carpool

Figure2.MilesTraveledtoWorkvs.CarpoolFrequency

13


16/25

UVMTRCReport#10010

Sociodemographics/householdsize/income/education:Researchershavefoundthenumberof

childrenandthenumberofadultsinahouseholdeffectspeopleswillingnessandabilitytocarpool.

Childrenunder16addtotheobstaclestocarpoolingbecauseofschoolandotherchildrenrelatedtrips.

Whereas,additionaladultsaddtocarpoolingoptions.Surveyrespondentswithchildrenunder18were

lesslikelytocarpool.

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

0 kids 1 kid 2 kids

%o

fSurveyParticipants

Never/Rarely Carpool

Carpool

Figure3.NumberofKidsinHouseholdvs.CarpoolFrequency

Almost12percentofrespondents(11.7%)identifiedtheneedtodropofforpickupkidsasanobstacle

tocarpooling.

TravelBehavior: Changesintravelovertime,primarilythereductioninthecentralnatureofthework

tripandtheincreaseinothertrips,suchasrecreationalandsocialtripshaveimpactedcarpooling.

Surveyrespondentsidentifiedthetripstheyhadtomakeduringandfollowingtheworkdayasthemajor

obstacletocarpooling.Asmentionedabove,thisshowsupintheresponsesinneedingacartorun

errandsaftertheworkday,topickupanddropoffchildrenandtheneedforacarduringtheworkday.

Table9.ReasonsnottocarpoolchosenbyrespondentstosurveyofGoVermontparticipants

Needtorunerrandsduring/attheendoftheday 53.5%

Hardtofindotherstocarpoolfrommylocationtomydestination 50.9%

Easiertodrivemyownvehicle 31.3%

Myjob

requires

driving

during

the

day

17.6%

Needtodrop off(orpickup)kidsonthewaytowork 11.7%

Parkingisavailableatwork 6.2%

Ratherdrivealone 5.5%

Dontlikesharingmycarwithstrangers 2.2%Source:GoVermontTravelsurvey

Focusgroupparticipantsechoedthosecomments:

14


17/25

UVMTRCReport#10010

Ifyoudriveintowork,youfeellikewhenyou'rereadyevenifyoudohavesethours,

youhavethefreedomtogetinalittlebitearlieroralittlebitlater. Youcanrunoutfor

lunchorwhatever. Soit'sbeenalittlebitchallengingformenothavingavehicledown

here.

Tofindpeoplethathavethesamescheduleisjustsometimes weallleadsuchcrazy,

busylives,youknow. Wehavetostopatthegrocerystore,atthepharmacyor

whateverandsometimesitstinks. Its(carpooling)notfeasible.

Costoffuel,costsavings:Thedecreaseinenergycostshasbeenidentifiedasoneofthereasonsforthe

declineofcarpoolinginthe1980s.InVermont,gaspriceshit$4.09agalloninJuly2009,declinedinthe

winterof20092010andremainwellbelowthe2009peak.Callstorideshareprogramsincreaseasfuel

costsincrease.37Increasedfuelcostswerenamedbyfocusgroupparticipantsasthetopreasonthat

wouldmotivatethemtocarpoolmore.

Asonerespondentsaid:

Ifgaswasfivedollarspergallon,youbetIwouldcrawlacrosscutglasstofindacarpool

partner.Iwouldrefusetopayfivedollarspergallonforgastodriveoutthere.

Anothersaid:

I'mthinkingyouhavetogonegativesotospeak. Youhavetomakethecostsof

everybodydrivingbyhimorherselfhigherthanitisnow. Ifyouwanttodrivethe

economics,soyouneedtostartchargingparkingfees.Andthengivetheincentivesto

thosewhocarpool.

Attitudes:

Studies

have

identified

individual

attitudes

as

an

explanatory

variable

for

why

people

choose

nottocarpool.However,alltheparticipantsinthisstudyarethosewhohaveindicatedadesireto

carpoolbysubmittingtheirnametothestatematchingservice.Still,attitudinalissuesidentifiedinother

studiesdidappear.Forexample,participantstalkedaboutneedingtheprivacyoftheirowncar.

IamreallyanintrovertandIenjoycoffeeandpoptartandmymusicinthemorningon

thewayinandthethoughtofgettingtoknowsomebodyforanhourrideinandoutwas

justalittleoverwhelmingpersonallyformyself.

Anotherwomannotpresentlycarpoolingsaid:

IfeelweirdedoutbymeetingandgettinginacarwithsomeoneIdon'tknowand

driving45

miles

outside

of

town.

You

know

what

Imean?

Like

Idon't

know

how

much

peoplearescreenedandsomepeoplemayhavethoseinhibitionswherethat'smaybe

whytheydon'tsignupforthecarpool. Itsjustbecauseyoureallyjustdon'tknowwho

you'regoingtogetinthecarwith.

15


18/25

UVMTRCReport#10010

3.3Opportunities/ReasonstoCarpool

Previousresearchsuggestsindividualscarpooltosavemoney,becauseoflimitedaccesstoacar,forthe

convenienceoverothermodes,becauseofsocialandenvironmentalattitudesandbecauseofincentives

anddisincentivesofferedbyemployers.Allofthosereasonsareapparentinthesurveyandfocusgroup

responses.InananalysisconductedfortheGoVermontprogram,amarketingfirmfoundthreeprimary

reasonsVermonters

carpool;

they

lack

access

to

acar

either

in

the

short

run

or

by

choice,

to

save

moneyandforthesocialaspects.Trailingthosethreereasonsistoprotecttheenvironment.38

Inthisstudy,surveyrespondentscitedsavingmoneyfirstandtheenvironmentsecond.However,focus

groupparticipantsinconversationidentifiedsavingmoneyfirst,socialreasonssecond,theenvironment

thirdandnotwantingtodrive/ownacarlast.Note,surveyrespondentswerenotgivenasocialrationale

tochoose,otherthanmakesmefeelgoodwhichmayexplainthelowerprominenceofthisreason

amongtheirchoices.

Table10.ReasonstocarpoolchosenbyrespondentstosurveyofGoVermontparticipants

Savesmoney 84.3%

Saveswear

and

tear

on

the

vehicle

65.3%

Goodfortheenvironment 65.3%

Convenience 21.9%

Makesmefeelgood 21.9%

Idontliketodrive/Idonthaveacar 9.2%

Limitedparkingatwork 7.3%

EmployerbasedincentivesSource:Carpoolsurvey.N=181.

Table11.Reasonstocarpoolchosenbyfocusgroupparticipantsinopenendedconversations

Savesmoney 35.3%

Socialreasons

25%

Goodfortheenvironment 20%

Notdrive/usecar 15%

SavesMoney:GoVermontestimatesthataconsumerdrivingacargetting25mpgwouldsaveabout

$2,000ayeariftheycarpooledonaregularbasis.Savingmoneyeitherthroughreducedgasolinecosts,

orwearandtearonthevehicleisthefirstreasonpeoplecarpool,GoVermontmanagersbelieve.That

perceptionissupportedbytheanalysis.Savingmoneywasnamedasthetopreasontocarpoolbothin

thelargersurveyandinthefocusgroupsdiscussions.39

Saidone

participant:

GasisnotcheapandIhaveagasguzzler,whichIloveandI'mnotreadytogetridofit. And

thewearandtearonyourcar that'sanotherthing.

Addedanother:Ilikecarpooling.It'shelpedthewearandtearonmycaraswellsavinggas.

Thelackofaccesstoacarwasadiscussedafewtimesinthefocusgroups.

16


19/25

UVMTRCReport#10010

AcoupleoftimesIhavecarpooled.Andpartofitiswhensomebodycontactedmeand

theysaidtheydidn'thaveacar. ItriedtoRideShare,youknow. Iwrotethem. Nobody

gotbacktome. Ikepttryingtocontactthem.Andthentheysaidyes,wewillgetback

toyou,butnobodygotbacktomesoactuallyIendeduptakingthepersonbecausethey

livedaroundmyhouse

Attitudes:Researchershaveidentifiedsocialandenvironmentalattitudesaskeyfactorsincarpool

formation.

Forexample,onthesocialside,thisfemaleparticipantsaid:

Itssomuchnicerthattravelgoesfasterwhentheresanotherpersontochatwith.

Especiallywithme,likesinceImtravelingwithfriends,likeitsmeandabunchofother

30somethingfemaleswhoIsugarwith. Youknow,likewehavealottotalkabout.

Oraddedanothercarpooler:

Sowedohavealotofconversationsthatareworkrelatedthatreallyhelpussort

throughsomeoftheproblemsthatwehavewithinourowndepartments. So,thatwas

thesurprisetothecarpoolingformeandIreallymisstheirfriendshipandImisstheir

conversationswhenI'monmyown.

Anotheradded:

It'sreallynicetojustcatchupinthemorningwithpeoplethatyoudon'tworkallday

withandit'sreallygreatwhenyoucarpoolwithdifferentpeoplebecauseyougettosee

whattheyareupto,howtheirlifeisgoingandit'snotalwaysaboutwork.

Itsnotjustsocialaspectsitsawaytorelaxafteralongday.

WhenImdoingit,I'mdoingitforpuresenseofself.AfterI'veputinareallylongday

atworkandI'vegottenupatfiveo'clocktogetreadyforworktomeetthecarpoolby20

aftersixtobehereby6:30andIgetafter...I'mtiredanddayinanddayoutitjustwears

onmepersonally. SowhenIcarpooltheinteractionwithotherpeople,thejokingwe

arelikeLasVegas whatwesayinthecarpoolstaysinthecarpool.

Environment:Participantsalsoaddedenvironmentalreasonsasareasonforcarpool,buttheywere

neitherasprominentorasfrequent.

Asone

participant

said:

ItsniceyouknowIfeelguiltdrivingthisbodyandyouknowtwoandahalftonsof

steelandglasstowork. Theamountthatsandsittingalotofitjustidling,whichis

zeromilespergallonintraffic. Thatjustseemsobscenetome. SomaybeI'ma

littlemaybeImalittlebitshamedintowantingtocarpool,too. Itjustseemssuchan

efficientwaytodothings.

17


20/25

UVMTRCReport#10010

Advocatesforcarpooling:Participantsinthestudyareclearlyinterestedinandmotivatedtocarpool.

Theorganizationaleffortsthatindividualsgothroughtocarpoolonaregularbasisareremarkable.At

oneendofthespectrumisagroupofteacherswhohavebeencarpoolingfor15yearstotheschool

systeminWashingtonCounty.TwodriversmeetattheRichmondparkandrideloteveryday,following

adetailedmonthlyschedule,wheretheother78individualsjointhem.Carsleavetheworkplaceattwo

differenttimesallowingearlyandlatedepartures.Carpoolrulesdictatemembersareontimeorareleft

behind.Partofthesuccessofthecarpoolistheorganizingskillsoftheleaders.However,thiscarpoolalsobenefitsfromotheroptionsavailablethroughtheworkplace.Forthosewhocantmeetthecarpool

thereareseveraloptionsforridesbacktotheRichmondparkandride,eitherwiththeLinkExpressor

withotherstaffintheschoolsystem.Asoneoftheparticipantssaid:

Wehaveournormsbasically. Thecarpoolleavesatseveno'clockwhetheryou'rethere

ornot. Ifyouneedsomebodytowaityoudbettercallthem. Mostpeoplearriveat6:50

between6:50and6:55. Thefirstcarthatsfullleaves.Andyouknowyoudbetterbe

waitingifthecarpoolthatyouwanttogoinhomeinisleavingat3:15youneedtobe

thereat3:15. Ithastobe.Thereusedtobe...whentherewerefewerofus whenthere

werethreeorfourorfiveofus wecouldbemuchmoreflexible,butwhenwegot

beyondone

car

it

just

you

have

to

it's

the

driver's

rules

as

far

as

the

driver

says

youre

leavingthatswhenyoureleaving. Ifyoucantleaveatthattimeorifsomething

comesout,there'sthebus.

Anotherthreadrunningthroughtheseconversationswastheeffortthatcarpoolersgotofindfellow

carpoolers.Forexample,oneparticipantsaidthisisherresponsewheneversheisintroducedtoanew

employeeatherworkplace.

Iwouldntsayyouknow,I'mlikeopenlyadvocatingforit,butifIhearsomeonewho

livesinMontpelierorBarreorWaterburylikemyfirstquestiontothemistoyouwantto

carpool?Areyouinterestedincarpooling? Sowhentheopportunitypresentsitself,I

definitely

inquired

to

see

if

there

is

a

way

that

they

can

join

us.

Saidanother:

Thepoolisjustsoshallow. ImeanatonepointIactuallygotamagneticsign apiece

ofmagneticmaterialtoputonthebackofmytruckandwroteonitthatsaid,carpool

everyday,figuringwhenI'mdrivingdownRoute12,everybodythat'sdrivingatthe

sametimearemy that'smymarket. Youknow,thepeoplethatIseebothways soI

hadasignthatsaidlookingtocarpoolandanemailaddress. Ididn'tgetasinglehit,

butandthenusingthewebsite,there'sonlyonepersonandit'sreallynotagoodfitat

all.

Oneparticipant

considered

following

someone

home

and

asking

them

to

carpool.

I'veseenlikethesamevehiclegoingdowntheroadandI'msureyouseeit,too,onyour

commutes.AndI'vealmostlikethoughtaboutfollowingthemhome. ButIdon'twanttobe

arrestedforbeingastalker. Itmightbealittlebittoomuch.

3.4IncentivestoIncreaseCarpooling

18


21/25

UVMTRCReport#10010

Theimpactofcompanyincentivesonindividualcarpoolingbehaviorisunclearbasedonthesurveyand

focusgroupconversations.Participantsmentionedincentivesgenerallyasonefactorbutnotthe

decidingfactorintheirdecisiontocarpool.Atthetopofthelistforfactorsthatwouldincrease

carpoolingisasharpincreaseinfuelpricesandmoreavailablecarpoolmatches.Examiningemployer

basedincentives,theemergencyridehomeprogram,aparkingcashoutprogramanduseofacompany

carduringthedayplacedinthetoptierofincentives.Thereducedparkingfeesdidnotrankhighlyat

3.45,possiblybecausemostbusinessesdontchargeforparking.Recognitionmayinfactbeadisincentivejudgingbythestronglowresponsebyallrespondents.

Table12.Respondentsperceptionoftheimpactofincentives(1=lowest;5=highest)

GasPrices Gaspricesincreaseto$5.00agallon 4.95

GasPrices Gaspricesincreaseto$4.00agallon 4.5

Carpoolpartners Individualswholivenearyouandworknearoratyouroffice 4.45

GuaranteedRideHome Employerorserviceprovidesaguaranteedridehomeif

neededduringdayorafterworkdayorreimbursesfortaxiride

4.35

Carpoolmatchingservice servicefindsoutwhoisgoingwhereandfindsasuitable

matchfor

carpooling

4.3

ParkingCashOut Workplaceprovidedcashtoindividualswhocarpoolacertain

numberofdaysaweek

4.25

Useofcompanyvehicleduringday Employeescanuseavehiclethatisownedby

thecompanyforerrandsduringtheday

4.25

Flexibleworkhours Carpoolersareallowedflexibleworkinghoursiftheycarpool 4.15

Vouchertoretailoutlet Carpoolersreceiveavoucherworth$10toretailoutlets,

localrestaurants,everyweek

4.15

Useofcompanyvehicleforcarpool Employeescanuseavehiclethatisownedby

thecompanytocarpooltoworkin

4.15

ParkandRideLots Statefundedlotstomeetfellowcarpoolers 4

Gas

Prices

Gas

prices

increase

to

$3.00

a

gallon

3.95

CarpoolCoordinator Thisindividualorganizeslogisticsofcarpoolandriderswithin

youroffice

3.95

NoParking Unlessyoucarpool,youareunabletoparkyourcaratwork 3.85

PrizeDrawing Peoplewhocarpoolareenteredinweeklydrawingtoreceiveprize 3.85

PreferredParking Carpoolersreceiveparkingspotsclosertoworkentrance 3.6

ReducedParkingFees Carsbroughttoworkbycarpoolersarechargedlessfor

parking

3.45

Recognition Peoplewhocarpoolarerecognizedincompanymaterialssuchas

newsletters,etc.

2.6

VermontEmployerbasedincentives:AnumberofVermontemployersofferincentivestotheir

employeestocarpool.Weconductedaninformalsurveyofcarpoolincentivesatseveralofthe

employerswheresurveyparticipantswork.Forexample,whilerespondentsrepeatedlymentionedthe

difficultyoffindingcarpoolpartnersseveralemployersprovideconfidentialcarpoolmatchingservices

throughtheworkplace,e.g.UVM,ChamplainCollege,FletcherAllenHealthCareandARC.Other

employersprovidegiftcardincentivesforregularcarpoolers.Severalemployersofferguaranteedride

homeprogramsandsubsidizedbusservice,suchasUVMandChamplainCollege.Inasurveyof

19


22/25

UVMTRCReport#10010

employeesatUVM,16.8percentreportedcarpoolingin2008,althoughthesurveyisbasedonthose

choosingtorespond.40NationalLife,whichhasanumberofsuccessfulcarpools,offerspreferential

parkingandfundstowardsgasolineforthosewhocarpoolatleastonceaweek.Notablealsoarepolicies

offeredbytwoVermontcompanies,NRGSystemsandResourceSystemsGroup(RSG)toencourage

carpooling,walking/bikingtoworkandtheuseofmoreefficient/highmileagevehicles.

Parking:Parkingcameupanumberoftimes,andtheresearchsuggestssubstantiallyraisingthepriceofparkingormakingitunavailablewillincreasecarpoolingandtheuseofothermodes.

Inonecasetherelationshipbetweenparkingandcarpoolingwasclear.

Beforewebuiltournewbuildingwehadonly53parkingspacesandwehad90

employeessotherewasnochoice. Ifyoudidn'tgettherebeforeeighto'clockinthe

morning,youdidn'tgetaparkingspot. Andsothatreally...wedidgreatoncarpooling!

Nowwehaveenoughparkingspacesforeveryemployee. Weputinanotherbuilding

andthetownrequiresthatyouaddacertainamountofparkingspaces. Andnowwe

haveenoughparkingspacesandourparticipationisdown.

Themostfrequentcarpoolerinthegroup,whocarpools5daysaweek,eventhoughshelivesonlythree

milesfromtown,citesthehighcostofparkingindowntownBurlingtonandthesubsidizedbuspasses

offeredbyheremployerasthereason.Sheeitherridesthebusorhercarpoolgoestotheinterceptor

lotonPineStreetandtheemployerpaysforthetriptotheworkplaceontheCCTAshuttleeveryday.

Icarpoolfivedaysaweek. AndeventhoughIonlylive3milesfromtown,it'sactually

beengoodinacoupleofways. Wedotaketheparkshuttle,buttherearefouror

sometimesfivepeopleinmyneighborhoodandwegettogetherbecauseweallhaveto

comeintownatthesametime.Andweparkattheparkshuttlelotandourcompany

actuallysubsidizesit,soit'sfreeforustopark.

Flexiblescheduleisanincentivethathasbeenidentifiedasimportant.Mostoftherespondentstothis

surveyhaveaflexiblescheduleorcouldrequestone.Respondentssaidthatworkplacesaregenerally

supportiveofcarpoolingexceptinonecasewheretheemployerhasstressedworkingextrahourstoget

thejobdone.

Thatattitudejustchangedeverybody'sfocusandnowit'slikesomethingyoudon'ttalk

aboutyourcarpool. Youknow,much,it'sanundergroundsortofthing.

ParkandRidelots: Parkandridelotsareseenashighlyconvenientgatheringplacesforcarpoolsto

meetbecausetheyprovidecentrallylocatedmeetingplaces,andtransitandotherpickupanddropoff

options.Concernaboutthecapacityandsafetyoftheseplaceswasraisedrepeatedly.Ofconcernto

policymakers

should

be

several

comments

about

commuters

who

stopped

carpooling

because

of

issues

relatedtoparkandridelots.

Whentheytookthataway(theWillistonparkandridelot)theRichmondparkand

ridebecamecompletelycongested. Itwasalittletriangleofmudunderthebridgeandit

startedoff,youknow,withmaybe10ofusandthen20andthenwewereparkingonthe

streetsandthenwhentheybuilttheparkandride stillnoWillistonparkandride. Now

peopleareparkinganywheretheycanpossiblyfit onthegrassinRichmond.

20


23/25

UVMTRCReport#10010

Addedanotherparticipant:

Iactuallyknowafewpeoplethatstoppedcarpoolingbecauseofthatexitbecausethe

parkandrideisjust thereisnowheretoparkyourcar.Anotherrespondenttalked

aboutthelackofsafetyataparkandrideinFranklinCounty.Thechallengeswere

leavingmycarattheparkandridewhereIliveandonecargot thefrontsidewindow

gotsmashedandthenanothervehicle,somebodytookoutthefrontbumper...Sothat's

partofwhyIdon'tlikecarpoolingtoomuch.

Althoughcovertlotsandmeetingplacesexistaroundthestate,thosealsopresentuserswiththeir

ownchallenges:

IntheBurlingtonarea Icouldn'ttellyouoneparkandrideupthere.AndsotheStaplesPlaza

endsupbeingaparkandride.Andthewholetime,youknow,Ididthatforayearandevery

morningI'dlikecreepoutofmycarandhopenobodynotices.

4.

CONCLUSION/FURTHER

RESEARCH

StrongobstaclesexisttocarpoolingintheUSandinVermont,includingratesofcarownership,

householdsize,dispersedlandsettlementpatterns,changesintravelbehaviorandattitudinalvariables.

Despitethis,carpoolingremainsthesecondmostusedmodefortravelingtoworkafterdrivingalone.

Carpoolingreliesontheexistingvehiclefleetandtheexistingroadsystemandinfrastructure.Increasing

vehicleoccupancyratesthroughincreasingcarpoolingonthejourneytoworkcouldmakeasubstantial

contributiontoreducingenergyusedintransportationandreducecoststoVermonters.

ThisanalysisofasubsetofVermonterscarpooling,orwhowanttocarpooldrawnfromtheGoVermont

databaseisexploratoryandbasedonselfselectedrespondents.Alogicalnextstepwouldbetoconduct

acomprehensiveevaluationoftheGoVermontprogram,drawingastatisticallyrepresentativesampleto

understandmorefullytheeffectivenessoftheprograminpromotingcarpooling.

Similarly,manyofthecarpoolsinVermontarenotrepresentedintheGoVermontdatabase,asmany

areeitherfamilycarpoolsorinitiatedattheworkplace.ThejointpurchaseofanNHTSaddonby

VTrans,CCMPOandtheTRCrepresentanopportunitytoconductfurtheranalysisofcarpoolpatternsin

Vermont.Additionalinformationaboutthespatial,demographicandattitudinalfactorsthatcontribute

tocarpoolinginVermontwouldprovideessentialinformationtopolicymakers.

Oneobstacletocarpoolingraisedinthisstudyisthecapacityandamenitiesatseveralparkandridelots

alongtheI89corridor.

TheGoVermontprogramshouldfocuspromotionalactivitiesinFranklin,Chittenden,Lamoilleand

Washingtoncounties.GoVermontregistrantsinthosecountiesandalongtheI89commuteshedmay

havethegreatestopportunitytofindcarpoolmatchesatoriginanddestinationpoints.

21


24/25

UVMTRCReport#10010

22

Supportingandcoordinatingwithemployerbasedcarpoolprogramsshouldbeonestrategyofthe

GoVermontprogram.

REFERENCES

1 DavidJones.2008.MassMotorization&MassTransit.IndianaUniversityPress.

2IPCCCreport,VTransClimateChangereport.

3Ewing,etallMovingCooler.

4Buliung,R.N.,Soltys,K.,Habel,C.,Lanyon,R.(2008).The"Driving"FactorsBehindSuccessfulCarpoolFormation

andUse.TransportationResearchBoardAnnualMeeting2009.Washington,D.C.5DavidJones.2008.MassMotorization&MassTransit.IndianaUniversityPress.

6Thetermsridesharingandcarpoolingareinterchangeablebutthisreportusesthetermcarpooling.TheU.S.

EnvironmentalProtectionAgencydefinescarpoolingastwoormorepeopledrivingorcommutingtogetherina

privatelyownedvehicle,typicallytothesamedestinationorlocationsincloseproximitytoeachother(EPA2005).7 Ferguson,E.(1997)."TheriseandfalloftheAmericancarpool:19701990."Transportation24:349376.

8Davis,S.C.,Diegel,S.W.,Boundy,R.G.(2009).TransportationEnergyDataBook:Edition28.Centerfor

TransportationAnalysis,EngineeringScience&TechnologyDivision.OakRidgeNationalLaboratory,2009.9

US

Census,

Davis,

S.C.,

Diegel,

S.W.,

Boundy,

R.G.

(2009).

Transportation

Energy

Data

Book:

Edition

28.

Center

for

TransportationAnalysis,EngineeringScience&TechnologyDivision.OakRidgeNationalLaboratory,2009.10

NationalHouseholdTravelSurvey,2009.AnalysisbyTransportationResearchCenteratUVM.11

AmericanAutomobileAssociation12

VermontEnergyReport.TransportationResearchCenter.2010.13

Teal,R.F.(1987)."Carpooling:Who,How,andWhy."TransportationResearchA21A(3):203214.Li,J.,Embry,

P.,Mattingly,S.P.,Sadabadi,K.F.,Rasmidatta,I.,Burris,M.W.(2007)."WhoChoosestoCarpoolandWhy?:

ExaminationofTexasCarpoolers."TransportationResearchRecord:JournaloftheTransportationResearch

Board(2021):110117.14

Ferguson1997,opcit.15

Teal1987,opcit; E.P.A.(November2005).CarpoolIncentivePrograms:ImplementingCommuterBenefitsas

OneoftheNationsBestWorkplacesforCommuters.Washington,D.C.16

TRCReport:TransportationEfficiencyinVermont.2008.17

Hwang,K.,Giuliano,G.(1990).TheDeterminantsofRidesharing:LiteratureReview.Berkley,Universityof

CaliforniaTransportationCenter18

Teal1987,opcit;Margolin,J.M.,MR;Stahr,M(1978)."IncentivesandDisincentivesofRideSharing."

TransportationResearchRecord(673):715.19

E.P.A.(March1978).AnOverviewofRidesharingandMassTransitEmployerIncentives.Denver,CORegionVIII;

Teal1987,opcit.20

Teal1987,opcit.21

Margolin1978.22

Teal,1987;Tsao&Lin,1999.23

E.P.A.(February1994).ASurveyandAnalysisofEmployeeResponsestoEmployerSponsoredTripReduction

IncentivePrograms.California;E.P.A.(September2001).CarpoolIncentivePrograms:ImplementingCommuter

BenefitsUndertheCommuterChoiceLeadershipInitiative.Washington,D.C.;EPA2005,opcit;EPA1978opcit.24

Herzog,

E.,

Bricka,

S.,

Audette,

L.,

Rockwell,

J.

(2006).

Do

Employee

Commuter

Benefits

Reduce

Vehicle

Emissions

andFuelConsumption? ResultsoftheFall2004BestWorkplacesforCommutersSurvey.TransportationResearch

BoardAnnualMeetingWashington,D.C.25

Gilman,C.(2008)."UPASSattheUniversityofWashington."TDMReview(2);DepartmentofTransportation,W.

S.(December2007).HOVUserSurvey:WashingtonStateFreewaySystem.26

EPA1978,opcit.27

Pickrell,D.H.,Shoup,D.C.(1980)."EmployerSubsidizedParkingandWorkTripModeChoice."Transportation

ResearchRecord(786) .


25/25

UVMTRCReport#10010

28Tsao,H.S.J.,Lin,D.(1999).SpatialandTemporalFactorsinEstimatingthePotentialofRidesharingforDemand

Reduction,CAPartnersforAdvancedTransitandHighways.29

EPA1978opcit;Herzog,2006opcit.30

Altshuler,A.(1981)."KeynoteAddress:TheRideshareChallenge."TRBSpecialReport(193).31

Anderson,K.(2006)."RethinkingCarpoolParkingDiscounts."TDMReview(1):1516.32

Hoyt

McBeth,

S.,

Kulyk,

C.

Cohen,

S.

(2008

).

"Applying

Individualized

Marketing

to

the

Workplace."

TDM

Review

(4).33

Gov.DouglasStateoftheState,Jan10200834

Personalcommunication, RossMcDonald,GoVermontprogrammanager.35

DitchtheRideandCatchaRide,TimJohnson.June20,2010.BurlingtonFreePress.36



Ibid,Spikememo39

Personalcommunication, RossMcDonald,GoVermontprogrammanager.Spikememo.40

CATMA2008FallTransportationSurvey.

unbenaincreasing carpooling in vermont: opportunities and obstaclesnnt

Documents