fhwa top survey virginia november 2005

WWW.NWRG.COM

FHWA TOP SurveyVirginia

November 2005

WWW.NWRG.COM

Project Overview

TOP Survey Objectives

Understand the needs and expectations of travelers of nation’s / state’s / local region’s transportation system

Measure the extent to which the existing transportation system meets those needs

Update previous measures and provide new baseline measures for emerging issues

Establish national and other benchmark data for participating states

Identify travelers’ priorities for system improvement

Virginia Objectives

Establish key benchmarks for system performance

Provide specific measures for travelers’ perceptions of:

– Safety and changes in safety while driving

– Management of transportation improvement projects

– Interest in public participation and traveler information

Research Approach – TOP Survey

Interviews completed with more than 1,250 users of the state’s transportation system– 18 years of age and older– Had at least some recent experience traveling on the

system defined to include . . . Roads Public transportation Pedestrian walkways / sidewalks Bikeways

Telephone survey methodology– Projectable to the general population– Includes listed & unlisted numbers

No cell phones

Sampling

Stratified by four transportation regions

– Margin of error associated with a survey of this size is plus or minus about 2.8 percentage points

– Within each region (n = 300), error is plus or minus 5.6 percentage points

Survey length – 23 minutes

– High response rates – 27 percent

– High cooperation rates – nearly 60 percent of those contacted agreed to complete the survey

Benchmarking

The TOP Survey provides the unique opportunity to reliably benchmark Virginia’s data against a national sample

Four levels of benchmarking data available

– National

– Census Region – South

– Census Division – South Atlantic

– Peer States Florida, Georgia, Maryland, North Carolina, Pennsylvania,

Texas, Washington

WWW.NWRG.COM

Key Findings: Travel

Modes of Transportation Used

Virginia is a state on the move, using the entire public transportation system

– Virtually everyone in Virginia has access to a car that they use daily– Use of public transportation is somewhat limited, except in Northern

Virginia where nearly half (46%) use public transportation

% Using Mode

(last year)

# of Users(millions)

Days / Week Use

Personal Vehicle 96% 5.1 6.3

Walk 48 2.6 2.8

Bicycle 30 1.6 1.2

Public Transportation 23 1.2 1.3

Miles Driven Annually

On average, Virginia travelers drive 13,558 miles annually (excluding “none”) – slightly more than the national average

– This equates to more than 67.1 billion miles traveled annually

4%

11%

17%

28%

18%

13%

8%

0%

10%

20%

30%

None Less than5,000 miles

5,000 to9,999 miles

10,000 to14,999miles

15,000 to19,999miles

20,000 to29,999miles

More than30,000miles

Miles Driven Annually

Median (excluding "none") = 13,558

Types / Frequency of Regional Travel

People use their local transportation system for many purposes

– While the most frequent trips are commute trips, the number of non-commute trips is more than twice that of commute trips

% Take Tripin Past Week

# of Days / Week

Estimated # of Trips (millions)

Commute to Work 65% 5.1 35.1

Commute to School 10 3.6 3.8

Take Children to School 24 3.7 9.4

Business Errands 42 3.2 14.2

Shopping / Personal Errands 96 3.0 30.6

Recreation / Entertainment 81 2.0 17.2

Visiting Friends / Family 75 2.1 16.8

Medical Appointments 23 1.0 2.4

Total Commute Trips 38.9

Total Non-Commute Trips 90.7

Total Trips 129.6

Long Distance / Extended Travel

More than four out of five (82%) travelers took at least one trip outside their local region in the past year

– On average, those traveling outside their region take three to four trips per year – equating to an additional 33.3 million trips

Have Not Taken Trip Outside

Region18%

Taken Trip Outside Region of

More Than 50 Miles82%

Average Number of Extended Trips = 4

WWW.NWRG.COM

Characteristics of a High-Quality Transportation System

Important System Characteristics

All aspects of the system are important – that is, all have a mean above the mid-point on the scale

By far the most important system characteristic is highway and roadway safety

Also important:– Being able to travel easily– Efforts to reduce delays from traffic congestion and

improve traffic flow– Bridge conditions– Pavement conditions– Planning

Important System Characteristics (con’t)

% Extremely Important Mean *

Highway / roadway safety 73% 9.32

General mobility 56 8.89

Efforts to reduce delays from congestion 55 8.71

Bridge conditions 55 8.66

Efforts to improve traffic flow 53 8.59

Pavement conditions 51 8.55

Planning for future transportation needs 52 8.51

Setup of work zones for safety and traffic flow

42 8.25

Management of work zones to reduce delays / congestion

43 8.20

* Mean based on 11-point scale where “10” means “extremely important” and “0” means “not at all important.”

Important System Characteristics (con’t)

% Extremely Important Mean *

Pedestrian safety and mobility 48 8.14

Maintenance response times 38 8.04

Consideration of the environment 36 7.88

Amenities such as rest areas, etc. 30 7.49

Traveler information 29 7.16

Visual appeal / appearance 22 6.98

Bicycle safety and mobility 24 6.01

* Mean based on 11-point scale where “10” means “extremely important” and “0” means “not at all important.”

What’s Important – Benchmark

Virginia South Atlantic

Peer States

Overall Importance 8.09 8.43 8.33

Highway / roadway safety 9.32 9.23 9.25

General mobility 8.89 9.00 8.83

Efforts to reduce delays from congestion 8.71 8.65 8.56

Bridge conditions 8.66 8.89 8.83

Efforts to improve traffic flow 8.59 8.80 8.68

Pavement conditions 8.55 8.48 8.66

Planning for future transportation needs 8.51 8.77 8.71

Setup of work zones 8.25 8.47 8.46

What’s Important – Benchmark


Peer States

Management of work zones to reduce delays / congestion

8.20 8.46 8.21

Pedestrian safety and mobility 8.14 8.63 8.61

Maintenance response times 8.04 8.19 8.25

Consideration of the environment 7.88 8.23 8.18

Amenities such as rest areas, etc. 7.49 8.04 7.87

Traveler information 7.16 7.87 7.73

Visual appeal / appearance 6.98 7.73 7.45

Bicycle safety and mobility 6.01 7.36 7.07

WWW.NWRG.COM

Key Findings: System Quality

Overall Quality

Less than half (49%) of Virginia travelers are satisfied with the state’s transportation system – Satisfaction is only moderate and a significant number are

neutral and dissatisfiedExtremely Satisfied

(10)6%

Satisfied (7-9)43%

Dissatisfied (0 - 3)13%

In the Middle (4-6)38%

Mean = 6.03 (based on 11-point scale where "10" means

"extremely satisfied" and "0" means "extremely dissatisfied")

Overall Quality – Benchmarked

Virginia is similar to other states in the South but travelers in Virginia are less satisfied than travelers in their peer states

13% 11% 10% 7%

38%35% 39%

35%

43% 48% 47%52%

6% 5% 4% 5%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Virginia South South Atlantic Peer States

HighlySatisfied

Satisfied

Neutral

Dissatisfied

Grading the System Infrastructure

Overall, Virginia’s system gets a C plus (C+) grade – overall mean of 2.32

– Like satisfaction this is somewhat below the national average overall as well as for states in the South

The system gets the highest grade for the conditions of its bridges and visual appeal

And its lowest grades for:

– Bicyclist and pedestrian safety and mobility

– Transportation planning

– Efforts to improve traffic flow / reduce traffic congestion

Infrastructure Grades – Above Average

% A % A / B Net Mean

Overall Grade 2.32

Bridge conditions 16% 63% 2.68

Visual appeal 16 62 2.68

Amenities 16 57 2.56

Programs to improve safety 11 53 2.48

Setup of work zones for safety / traffic flow 13 54 2.48

Traveler information 12 50 2.45

Consideration of the environment 13 36 2.38

Infrastructure Grades – Below Average

% A % A / B (Net)

Mean

Overall Grade 2.32

Maintenance response times 9 45% 2.29

Pavement conditions 10 44 2.26

Efforts to reduce delays from road work 6 38 2.13

Efforts to reduce congestion / improve traffic flow

6 38 2.11

Transportation planning 8 26 2.10

Pedestrian safety and mobility 10 38 2.07

Bicycle safety and mobility 8 25 1.71

Infrastructure Grades by Region

Two regions receive below-average ratings.

Region Mean Grade

Statewide 2.32 C plus

Southwest 2.42 C plus

Northern Virginia 2.36 C plus

Central 2.28 C plus

Hampton Roads 2.21 C plus

Grade scale from 0 = “F / Fail” to 4 = “A / Excellent”. Midpoint = 2.0

Potential Issues by Region

Hampton Roads– Efforts to reduce congestion & improve traffic flow

– Efforts to reduce delays from road work


– Pavement conditions

– Maintenance response times

– Setup of work zones to maximize safety and traffic flow

– Consideration of the environment

– Amenities

– Visual appeal

Potential Issues by Region

Central

– Bicycle and pedestrian safety and mobility


– Pavement conditions

– Maintenance response times

Northern Virginia


– Efforts to reduce congestion and improve traffic flow

Infrastructure Grades – Benchmark


Peer States

Overall Grade 2.32 2.36 2.49

Bridge conditions 2.68 2.79 2.81

Visual appeal 2.68 2.67 2.77

Amenities 2.56 2.71 2.77

Programs to improve safety 2.48 2.36 2.56

Setup of work zones 2.48 2.33 2.49

Roadway safety (general) 2.45 2.34 2.53

Traveler information 2.45 2.63 2.76

Consideration of the environment 2.38 2.28 2.46

Infrastructure Grades – Benchmark


Peer States

Overall Grade 2.32 2.36 2.49

Maintenance response times 2.29 2.43 2.52

Pavement conditions 2.26 2.35 2.41

Efforts to reduce delays from road work 2.13 2.34 2.47

Efforts to reduce congestion / improve traffic flow

2.11 2.28 2.41

Transportation planning 2.10 2.20 2.25

Pedestrian safety and mobility 2.07 2.05 2.28

Bicycle safety and mobility 1.71 1.68 2.49

Safety

Virginians feel that roads are becoming less safe

Strongly Agree Roads are More Dangerous

46%

Somewhat Agree Roads are More

Dangerous25%

Neutral / Disagree Roads are More

Dangerous29%

Reasons for Concerns About Safety

Congestion and concerns about other drivers are the primary reasons Virginia travelers feel less safe

7%

8%

9%

12%

16%

25%

40%

56%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%

Narrow Lanes

Drunk Drivers

Number of Trucks

Construction Zones

Hazardous Road Conditions

Others Driving Too Fast

Others Driving Too Recklessly

Road Congestion

% of Respondents

WWW.NWRG.COM

Target Improvement Opportunities

Explanation of Quadrants

Combined importance and quality– Maintain / leverage strengths– Address / place resources toward weaknesses /

potential weaknesses

Importance

Low High

Performance

High Priority 4:Secondary Strengths:Maintain Current Level

of Service

Priority 1:Primary Strengths:Maintain / Improve

Current Level of Service

Low Priority 3:Potential Weaknesses:Improve if Resources

are Available

Priority 2:Critical Weaknesses:Target Improvement

Efforts Here

Target Improvement Areas

Improving traffic flowReducing delays from congestion

Delays from road work Planning for transportation needs

Pavement conditions

Bicycle safety & mobility

Maintenance response times

Visual appeal

Traveler information

Pedestrian safety & mobility

Setup of work zones for safety and traffic flow

Programs to improve safety

Overall safety

Bridge conditions

Consideration of the environment

Highway amenities

-1

0

1

-1 0 1

CRITICAL WEAKNESSES

PRIMARY STRENGTHSSECONDARY STRENGTHS

POTENTIAL WEAKNESSES

HighestImportanc

LowerImportance

Highest Performance

Lowest Performance


Statewide– Pedestrian safety and mobility

North– Reducing congestion and improving traffic flow– Planning for future transportation needs– Reducing delays from road work

Hampton Roads– Planning for future transportation needs– Pavement conditions– Maintenance response times– Reducing congestion and improving traffic flow– Reducing delays from road work


Central– Pavement conditions– Reducing congestion and improving traffic flow– Reducing delays from road work

Southwest– Pavement conditions– Planning for future transportation needs– Consideration of the environment

Potential Improvements

Virginians would like to see more construction completed at night or during other off-peak hours

Strategies Strongly Agree Mean

Construction at night 63% 4.33

Improve / expand existing public transportation

48 4.13

Expand existing highways 49 4.04

Offer new public transportation 48 4.01

Build / expand pedestrian walkways 45 4.00

Provide better quality traffic information 39 3.98

Build / expand park-and-ride system 33 3.84Mean based on 5-point scale where “5” means “strongly agree” and “1” means “strongly disagree.”

Options to Reduce Congestion

Virginians are most likely to support programs that reduce the number of vehicles on the roads

Strategies Use Mean

Encourage telecommuting 34% 7.54

Increase availability of public transportation 33 7.39

Provide incentives for carpooling 31 7.33

Increase availability of HOV lanes 22 6.43

Implement toll road alternatives 13 4.97

Increase parking rates 12 4.28Mean based on 1-point scale where “10” means “use to great extent” and “0” means “do not use at all.”

Transportation / Traveler Information

Travelers feel they have adequate access to transportation news

But they are interested in getting more – 63% say they are interested in getting information on

transportation and travel They feel they have greatest access to

– Road advisories– Traffic congestion updates

They feel they have the least information transportation plans and updates

Mainstream media continues to be the primary source for information on transportation

WWW.NWRG.COM

Planning for the Future

Value for Tax Dollars

Virginians have mixed opinion as to whether they are getting their money’s worth on what is spent to build and maintain the state’s transportation system

9%

24%

36%

33%

7%

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40%

Strongly Disagree (0)

Disagee (1 - 3)

In the Middle (4-6)

Agree (7 - 9)

Strongly Agree (10)

Agree / Disagree Getting Money's Worth for Tax Dollars

Mean = 5.34(based on 11-point scale where "10" = "strongly

agree" and "0" = "strongly disagree")

Value for Tax Dollars by Overall Quality

Those satisfied with the quality of the system are more likely to feel they are getting good value for their tax dollars.

37%

6%3% 3%

38%

55%

18%

4%

14%

30%

51%

27%

11% 9%

28%

66%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

Extremely Satisfied(10)

Satisfied (7-9) Neutral (4-6) Dissatisfied (0-3)

Strongly Agree -- Receive Value (10) Agree -- Receive Value (7-9)

Neutral (4-6) Disagree -- Receive Value (0-3)

Support for Projects

Virginians generally support additional transportation projects – notably those to build or expand public transportation services.

Build / Expand

Public Transportation

PedestrianWalkways

More Roads

Bike Lanes

% Extremely Likely 27% 25% 21% 20%

% Likely 36 34 38 29

% In the Middle 25 27 26 31

% Not Likely 11 14 15 20

Mean * 7.07(BCD)

6.77(AD)

6.59(AD)

6.06(ABC)

Mean based on 11-point scale where “10” = “extremely likely to support” and “0” = “not at all likely to support.”

Support for Projects by Region

In general, travelers in Northern Virginia are more likely to support all projects – but notably those that promote the use of alternative modes

North Hampton Roads

Southwest Central

Mean *

Overall Support 7.15 6.66 6.19 6.11

Public Transportation 7.98 6.90 6.61 6.11

Pedestrian Walkways 7.21 6.65 6.53 6.40

Roadways 7.03 6.67 6.19 6.14

Bike Lanes 6.39 6.41 5.41 5.77

Mean based on 11-point scale where “10” = “extremely likely to support” and “0” = “not at all likely to support.”

Support for Projects by System Quality

Those who are extremely satisfied with the current system are more likely to support future transportation projects

33%

8% 6%11%

31%

56%

46%

54%

23%

31%

40%

33%

13%

5%8%

12%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

Extremely Satisfied Satisfied (7-9) Neutral (4-6) Dissatisfied (0-3)

Strongly Support Projects (10) Somewhat Support Projects (7-9)

Neutral (4-6) Do Not Support Projects (0-3)

Support for Projects by Current Value

Those who feel they are getting good value for their tax dollars are more likely to support future transportation projects

30%

8% 6%11%

38%

65%

44% 45%

24% 25%

43%

29%

8%3%

6%

16%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

Strongly Agree --Receive Value (10)

Agree -- ReceiveValue (7-9)

Neutral (4-6) Disagree -- ReceiveValue (0-3)

Strongly Support Projects (10) Somewhat Support Projects (7-9)

Neutral (4-6) Do Not Support Projects (0-3)

Interest in Being Involved in Planning

Virginians feel it is somewhat important for citizens to be involved in prioritizing transportation projects

Extremely Important (10)16%

Important (7-9)29%

Not Important (0 - 3)17%

In the Middle (4-6)38%

Mean = 6.06 (based on 11-point scale where "10" means

"extremely important and "0" means "not at all important")

Preferred Means to Provide Input

While most Virginians prefer providing input through surveys and/or elections, one out of three express interest in public meetings

22%

33%

37%

47%

52%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%

Telephone surveys

Public meetings

Web surveys

Mail surveys

Voting / Elections

% of Respondents

WWW.NWRG.COM

Project Management

Attitudes Toward System Management

Two out of three Virginians feel projects are not completed on time

– Even more feel that projects are not completed within the budget

67%79%

31%21%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Completed On Time Completed On Budget

Yes

No

Project Completion Rates by Region

Hampton Roads travelers are the most likely to feel that projects are not completed on time

67%82%

66% 61% 61%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Statewide HamptonRoads

Central North Southwest

% Feel Projects Not Completed on Time

Project Completion Rates by Region

Hampton Roads travelers also feel the state has gotten worse in terms of completing projects on time

14%

23%

8%

14%

9%

0%

10%

20%

30%



% Feel State has Gotten Worse in Schedule Management

Budget Management by Region

There are no differences by regions in terms of Virginians’ attitudes toward budget management

79% 81% 81% 78% 77%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%



% Feel Projects Not Completed within Budget

Improvements in System Management

Virginians see some improvement in the management of project schedules

– They feel that the management of project budgets has gotten worse

37%52%

46%36%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Schedule Management Budget Management

GottenBetter

GottenWorse

Improvements in Project Completion Rates by Region

Hampton Roads travelers feel the state has gotten much worse in terms of completing projects on time

14%

23%

8%

14%

9%

0%

10%

20%

30%



% Feel State has Gotten Much Worse in Schedule Management

Improvements in Budget Management by Region

Hampton Roads travelers also feel the state has gotten much worse in terms of completing projects within budget

17%

26%

14%18%

10%

0%

10%

20%

30%



% Feel State has Gotten Much Worse in Budget Management

Satisfaction with Opportunity to Express Concerns

Virginians feel that they have the opportunity to express concerns regarding problems with transportation projects

Neutral5%

Very Dissatisfied15%

Somewhat Satisfied

42%

Somewhat Dissatisfied

24%

Very Satisfied14%

WWW.NWRG.COM

Key Take-Aways

Key Take-Aways

Virginians are moderately satisfied with the state’s transportation system

But– Virginia’s systems ranks below key benchmark statistics

nationwide and in the south– And there are clear areas for improvement

System strengths include– Bridge conditions– Setup of work zones for safety and traffic flow

Setup of work zones for safety and traffic flow is a critical weakness in Southwest Virginia

– Highway safety Safety is a potential problem in both Southwest Virginia and in

Hampton Roads

Key Take-Aways

Critical weaknesses include– Pavement conditions– Planning for future transportation needs– Pedestrian safety and mobility (Central)– Improving traffic flow (Central, North, Hampton

Roads)– Reducing congestion (North, Hampton Roads)– It is clear that travelers distinguish between

efforts to improve traffic flow – i.e., general movement of traffic – versus efforts to reduce congestion

Key Take-Aways

Potential Weaknesses– Bicycle safety and mobility

A greater issue for those who are attempting to bicycle

Has interrelated consequences for other system characteristics

– Maintenance response times A greater problem in the North where maintenance

response times directly impact congestion and traffic flow

Key Take-Aways

There is relatively strong support for additional transportation projects– Notably for expanded / improved public

transportation services– But support is highly related to

Current satisfaction with the system The extent to which travelers feel they are getting

value for the tax dollars that are currently being expended

Virginia needs to do a better job of communicating its successes

Key Take-Aways

Despite Virginia’s efforts, travelers still feel that transportation improvement projects are not completed on time and they cost more than budget– Moreover, the majority do not feel there has

been much in the way of improvementsVirginia needs to

– Continue is focus on better project management systems

Notably in Hampton Roads region– More widely communicate its successes

WWW.NWRG.COM

Q&A / Discussion

fhwa top survey virginia november 2005

Documents