Volpe National Transportation Systems Center:2010-2012 Traveler Behavior Study

2

Refresher of UPA/CRD Programs

Overview of the 2010-2012 Traveler Behavior Study

Seattle

Preliminary Study Results

Next Steps

Conclusions

3

Refresher: Urban Partnership Agreement (UPA)

Mid 2006: U.S. DOT Congestion Initiative announced

U.S DOT is forming Urban Partnership Agreements (UPA) to fund select cities and regions to implement:

“A comprehensive, integrated approach to reducing congestion through the use of tolling, transit, technology, and telecommuting”

In short, a new nationally funded road pricing program:

Funding: Requires an urban partnership

Goal: Have a “meaningful” impact on traffic congestion

August 2007: 4 Urban Partners announced

Miami, Minneapolis/St. Paul, San Francisco, & Seattle

Initial total of $853 million in Federal discretionary grants from 10 U.S. DOT sources. Mostly authorized for FY ‘07-09

4

Refresher: Congestion Reduction Demonstration (CRD)

CRD is a separate and distinct follow-on program

In 2008, 2 new CRD urban areas announced:

Los Angeles ($213 million)

Atlanta ($110 million)

TTI’s annual Urban Mobility Report says in 2009:

Seattle AtlantaCongested Travel (As Percent of Peak VMT)

64% 74%

Annual Hours of Delay (Per Auto Commuter)

44 hours 44 hours

Annual Congestion Cost (Per Auto Commuter)

$1,056 $1,046

Annual Excess Fuel Consumed(Per Auto Commuter)

35 Gallons 35 Gallons

55

Seattle: SR 520 Floating Bridge

Opened 1963, tolled until 1979

World’s longest floating bridge: 1.4 miles

Design capacity: 65,000 vehicles per day, current AADT: 115,000

Heavily congested, no shoulders

Vulnerable to windstorms/earthquakes, closed several times per year

2014 is targetdate for opening of newreplacement bridge

6

Seattle: Variable Pricing on SR-520 Floating Bridge

Active Traffic Management (ATM) - New dynamic message signs being installed

Real-time Traveler Information signs – display info about travel times and which route to travel

Late June 2011 – Variable tolling expected to begin on SR-520

Tolling in both directions

Toll range – up to $3.50 with Good To Go! and up to $5.00 paying by mail

Adding 130 new bus trips to the existing 600 daily bus trips across SR-520

45 new hybrid-electric diesel buses for trips across the Lake

Improving stops/stations – 2 park/ride lots, real-time info displays

Implementation and support of employer and community trip reduction programs

Vanpools, ride-share programs

Marketing and outreach incentive programs

7

The National Evaluation (Battelle Memorial Institute)

Is it working? How do we know?

UPA/CRD programs must evaluate their own effectiveness

Measure benefits, impacts, and value of each UPA/CRD site’s approach to congestion reduction

Battelle is collecting “before” and “after” data for each urban area (2009-2012 or longer). Data collection is quarterly

Standard engineering measures of network performance – traffic volumes, vehicle occupancy, travel times, delay, travel speeds, etc.

8

Refresher of UPA/CRD Programs

Overview of the 2010-2012 Traveler Behavior Study

Seattle

Preliminary Study Results

Next Steps

Conclusions

9

Volpe Traveler Behavior Study: Goals

Volpe seeking to understand

The changes in travel behavior that occur as a result of road pricing strategies

Behavioral responses which likely vary based on type and location of pricing – hence 2 cities (Seattle & Atlanta)

Behavioral responses that vary across groups within the population (particular focus on low-income households)

Summary

Battelle trying to answer the What?

What are the changes? (Travel times, volumes, etc)

We’re trying to answer the How and Why?

How are individual travelers and households making more “economic” choices? Why are they making these travel choices?

10

No Change: Pay toll

Change Time:

Earlier or Later

Change Mode:

Carpool

Change Route: Drive I-

90

Change Mode: Take bus

What are the potential behavioral responses to tolling SR 520?

Potential Traveler Responses to Pricing

Change Destinatio

n

Don’t Make Trip

Reduce Trip

Frequency

Considerable variation in response to pricing among individuals• Affected by: household incomes, locations,

trip patterns, travel purposes• Regional differences can also be

pronounced• Observationally random differences in

behavior

11

Volpe Traveler Behavior Study: Scope of Research

Household Panel Study

Survey same households before and after road pricing

2-day travel diary (log all trips) completed by all adult (18+) household members

Includes additional survey questions on typical commute behavior, tele-work behavior, attitudes/values, ITS, etc.

Methodology (by City)

Population Recruit MethodHouseholds Who

Complete Before & After Surveys

Auto Travelers

License Plate Capture during peak w/match to registered home

address1300

Transit Users

Direct Intercept (bus stops, Park/Rides, on-board buses)

200Vanpoolers

Email Recruit to vanpool members

12

Refresher of UPA/CRD Programs

Overview of the 2010-2012 Traveler Behavior Study

Seattle

Preliminary Study Results

Next Steps

Conclusions

13

“Before” Seattle Data Collection is Complete

November 2010 - 4 sets of travel dates (Piloted in Sept 2010)

Basic Results

- 3,328 total households*- 2,883 auto households- 393 transit households - 52 vanpool households

- 6,309 individuals- 3,029 men- 3,280 women

- 45,819 trips- 11,920 trips across/around Lake Washington - 5,522 auto trips across SR-520

*A participating household is defined as one where all adult members (18+) completed every question in the two diary day questionnaires

14

Basic Trip Statistics

Reported Time of Day that the Trip Began

15

Traveler Information Sources

Information was consulted for 45% of all trips across/around Lake Washington

*Percentages do not add to 45% because multiple responses were allowed

16

General Attitudes and Attitudes Toward Tolling

Asked of all 6309 adults

Strongly Disagree

Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree

17

Satisfaction with Auto Trips Crossing Lake WA

Respondents reported their level of satisfaction for auto trips across Lake Washington (n=9261 trips)

Very Dissatisfied

Dissatisfied Neutral Satisfied Very Satisfied

18

Satisfaction with Transit Trips Crossing Lake WA

Respondents reported their level of satisfaction for their transit trips across Lake Washington (n=1763 trips)

Very Dissatisfied

Dissatisfied Neutral Satisfied Very Satisfied

19

Sample Composition

Evaluate – Household Characteristics of Sample

Compare to previous studies (2009 SR-520 OD Study, 2006 PSRC Household Study)

Compare to census data and ancillary data sources

Within sample – non-responding households to sample, etc.

Initial Conclusions – Meeting project object to obtain sample that matches the composition of households that cross Lake WA during the peak

Annual Household Income

Auto sample: Completes

N=2883

Ancillary Data(All invited auto HHs)

N=26,114

King County (Census)

SR-520 OD Survey (Dec. 2009)

N=1749

Under 50K 14% 12% 36% 14%

50-99.9K 33% 40% 32% 29%

100-200K 40% 31% 25% 41%

More than 200K 13% 13% 8% 16%

20

Next Steps in Seattle

Panel Maintenance – Ongoing communications to share data and maintain household engagement

Monitoring Tolling Implementation

Possible Focus Groups - Explore pricing responses; motivations; differences from expectations

Conduct “After” Data Collection

Refield same survey to same households in November 2011

Add new questions about behavior changes (and reasons why) since pricing implementation

21

Conclusions

General Project Learnings:

When using existing survey methods for new purposes take the extra time to educate all stakeholders

Stay flexible! Nothing you can do about (significant) tolling delays in both cities (Seattle and Atlanta)

Our methodology and panel approach affords labor efficiencies and allows for the needed flexibility

Most importantly – maintain focus on key project objectives (and your analysis plan) at all times!

Everyone on the project team must maintain this focus

Many stakeholders (in both cities) want prompt access to results and a say in what questions to ask (“before” and “after”)

Travel behavior WILL be significantly impacted due to tolling - but our job is to capture the behavior responses – and the variation within it

Stay tuned for 2013 TRB Planning Applications Conference for results…..

22

Questions? Chicago Vermont

Utah

Elizabeth GreeneThomas AdlerResource Systems Group, Inc.egreene@rsginc.com(802) 295-4999

Jane LappinMargaret PetrellaSean PeirceVolpe National Transportation Systems CenterJane.lappin@dot.gov(617) 494-3692

22

Thanks also to staff at: PSRC, King County, WSDOT, FHWA, WSDOL, Community Transit