Long Range Transportation Plan
Marketing Research Study
Phase 2 – Additional Analysis of Data Set
October 15, 2009
Prepared By
Southeastern Institute of Research
Assignment
• FAMPO recently contracted with Kimley-Horn and The
Southeastern Institute of Research (SIR) for a random
telephone survey assessing the attitudes and opinions of
1,500 residents regarding their satisfaction with the region’s
existing transportation system, the Long Range
Transportation Plan (LRTP), and possible long term
transportation-related improvements.
• While not the focus of the study, a few questions were
included that probed respondents’ opinions regarding the
formation of a Transportation Authority and funding of
transportation projects.
• This document reports data mining (in terms of
demographics and psychographics) related to attitudes
regarding the establishment of a Transportation Authority,
increased transportation funding, and sources of
transportation funding.
Southeastern Institute of Research
Table of Contents
• Increase In Transportation Funding –
Continuum of Support
• Sources of Funding – Who Wants To Pay More
Personally?
• Regional Transportation Authority –
Supporters and Non-Supporters
• Impact of LRTP on Funding and
Transportation Authority
3
Southeastern Institute of Research
Transportation
Funding
Who supports increases in funding?
Who doesn’t?
4
Southeastern Institute of Research
FAMPO’s Continuum of Support for
Increased Transportation Funding
Do Not
Support
Increase
16%
of FAMPO Area
Residents
Support
Up to 10%
Support
10% to 50%
34%
21%
of FAMPO Area
Residents
of FAMPO Area
Residents
Support
Over 50%
28%
of FAMPO Area
Residents
Q14. Which of the following statements best describes your support in regard to
transportation funding for the Greater Fredericksburg Region?
5
Southeastern Institute of Research
Those Who Support Increase In Transportation Funding . . .
Do Not Support Support
Increase
Up to 10%
Note: 5% of
those who do
not support an
increase refused
to answer the
“age” question
compared with
2% in each of
the other
categories.
Age
Mean age
48
44
Support
10% to 50%
Support
Over 50%
41
44
Tend to be slightly younger
Gender
48
53
44
50
Ethnicity
80
80
77
73
Trans Needs
9
7
15
11
% Male
% White
% HHs Needing
Transportation
Accommodations
Residency
Tend to be more in need of transportation accommodations
% Medium ( 2 -10)
6
35
4
46
7
45
8
49
% Long Term (10+)
59
50
48
43
% New (<2 yrs)
Southeastern Institute of Research
Tend to be relatively new to the area
Those Who Support Increase In Transportation Funding . . .
Employment
% Employed
Do Not Support
Increase
Support
Up to 10%
Support
10% to 50%
Support
Over 50%
60
64
69
70
Tend to be more employed
Education
% College Grad
56
59
58
59
Tend to be just slightly more educated
Income
Mean ($000)
88
100
96
91
Tend to earn more
Commute
% Drive Alone
(includes Hybrids)
Commute
% Commute Out
77 (80)
80 (88)
82 (86)
72 (75)
36
42
37
47
Tend to commute out of Southeastern
region Institute of Research
Those Who Support Increase In Transportation Funding . . .
Do Not Support
Increase
Transportation
System
Opinion
Leaders:
Defined as
those who
participated
in at least 2
activities in
the past year
Active
Opinion
Leaders:
Defined as
those who
participated
in at least 3
selected
activities in
the past year
(= about 1/3
of Opinion
Leaders)
Support
Up to 10%
Support
10% to 50%
Support
Over 50%
% Very Satisfied (5)
23
15
10
12
% Not Satisfied (1)
19
10
14
26
Tend to be more extreme in satisfaction
Transportation
System
Avg. Mean Imp.
3.78
3.86
4.01
4.08
Avg. Mean Perf.
3.13
3.24
3.14
2.98
Tend to find transportation system attributes more important
but less likely to give the area higher ratings
Panel
% Participating
23
27
33
48
Tend to be more likely to volunteer for the panel
Opinion
Leader
% Opinion Leader
23
31
32
31
% Active Leader
20
12
18
15
Southeastern Institute of Research
Tend to be Opinion Leaders
Those Who Support Increase In Transportation Funding . . .
Should Have Do Not Support
Increase
Funding
Responsibility
% State
44
18
% Local
7
% Regional
5
% Federal
Govt
Spending on
Trans.
% Too Little (1, 2)
% Too Much (4, 5)
LRTP
Spending
$ (out of $100)
to be spent
on non road – Avg
Support
Up to 10%
Support
10% to 50%
Support
Over 50%
46
16
11
7
46
14
10
6
50
11
7
10
Are less likely to think local government should
have transportation funding responsibility and
more likely to think that the federal government
should have responsibility. But the majority still
think it’s the state’s responsibility.
28
27
34
14
50
10
64
5
Tend to think the government
spends too little on transportation
59.30
64.40
70.50
66.90
Would allocate more LRTP funding
Southeastern Institute of Research
to non-road related activities
Increase In Transportation Funding Recap Demographics
Compared to Non-supporters, Supporters for an Increase in
Transportation Funding Tend To Be Slightly Older, Slightly More
Upscale, Opinion Leaders Who Are Relatively Newer To The Area
Non-Supporters
(Tend To Be)
Supporters
(Tend To Be)
•
•
•
•
•
•
Older
Relatively newer to the area
More likely to be employed
Just slightly higher education
Higher Income
More likely to be an opinion
leader
•
•
•
•
•
•
10
Younger
Longer-term residents
Less likely to be employed
Just slightly lower education
Lower Income
Less likely to be an opinion
leader
Increase In Transportation Funding Support Recap –
Transportation Issues
Compared to Non-supporters, Supporters for an Increase in Transportation
Funding Also Tend To Be Commuters Who Commute Out of The
Area and People Who Have A Greater Need for Transportation
Accommodations & Overall Transportation System.
Supporters
(Tend To Be)
• More likely to commute out of
the area
• More extreme in satisfaction
• More in need of transportation
accommodations
• Transportation attributes are
more important but they rate
area performance lower
11
•
•
•
•
Non-Supporters
(Tend To Be)
Less likely to commute out of
the area
Less extreme in satisfaction
Less in need of transportation
accommodations
Transportation attributes are
less important but they rate
area performance higher
Southeastern Institute of Research
Increase In Transportation Funding Support Recap –
Funding Attitudes
Compared to Non-supporters, Supporters for an Increase in
Transportation Funding Tend To Believe The State & Feds Should
Have More Responsibility & LRTP Funds Should Go
Towards A Balanced Transportation System
Supporters
(Tend To Think)
Non-Supporters
(Tend To Think)
• The state should have primary
transportation funding
responsibility, but are more likely
than non-supporters to think the
federal government should have
responsibility
• The government spends too little
on transportation
• LRTP funding should be allocated
to non-road related activities
• The state should have primary
transportation funding
responsibility, but are more likely
than supporters to think the local
government should have
responsibility
• The government spends too much
on transportation
• LRTP funding should be allocated
to non-road related activities, but
less so than supporters
12
Fredericksburg and Stafford County Are The
Least Likely to Not Support an Increase
Q14. Which of the following statements best describes your support in regard to
transportation funding for the Greater Fredericksburg Region?
13
Southeastern Institute of Research
Sources of
Transportation
Funding
Who wants to pay more personally?
14
Southeastern Institute of Research
This
question
was only
Asked of
supporters
of any
increase in
funding…
Question #
14… before
this one14A.
Two Thirds Think that New Transportation
Funds Should Come From Tolls, Fares, & Taxes
Tolls and fares
35%
New taxes
26%
Cut funding in other
programs
40% of these said
something similar
to new taxes
and/or tolls and
fares.
23%
Other
15%
No new funds should be
added
8% of these said
something similar
to cut funding.
7%
Don't know
5%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
Q14A. If new funds are needed for the regional transportation system, in your
opinion, where should those funds come from? ONLY ASKED OF THOSE WHO SUPPORT
AN INCREASE
15
100%
Southeastern Institute of Research
Important Analysis Interpretation
Q14A. If new funds are needed for the regional transportation system, in your
opinion, where should those funds come from? ONLY ASKED OF THOSE WHO SUPPORT
AN INCREASE
One way to view the responses to this question is to assuming
that when most people say the source of funds should be “tolls,
fares, and taxes” that they are suggesting they would
personally be the source of funds.
Using this interpretation, we can speculate that two-thirds (61%
said tolls/taxes/fares plus 6% who wrote in something similar to
new taxes and/or tolls and fares in the “other” category) would
be in favor of personally funding the transportation
system through tolls, fares, and taxes.
28% would prefer that the money come from funds
already allocated to other programs.
16
Southeastern Institute of Research
This
question
was only
Asked of
supporters
of any
increase in
funding…
Question #
14… before
this one14A.
2/3rds of Residents Who Support Increasing
Funding Would Personally Fund the
Transportation System
Group 2 (see next page)
Would Personally Fund – 67%
(includes all open ended comments that
suggested tolls, taxes, fares)
Group 1 (see subsequent pages)
Would Not Personally Fund – 28%
(includes 50% of these “other” comments in this
group that related to fund increase other ways –
not tolls, fares, taxes, etc.)
Q14A. If new funds are needed for the regional transportation system, in your
opinion, where should those funds come from? ONLY ASKED OF THOSE WHO SUPPORT
AN INCREASE
17
Southeastern Institute of Research
(As a subset of all of the supporters for increased
funding should go to transportation….)
Group 1 (see subsequent pages)
Would Not Personally Fund – 28%
(includes 50% of “other” comments that
related to fund increase other ways – not tolls,
fares, taxes, etc.)
Who Supports Increases In
Transportation Funding Without Using
Tolls, Fares, and New Taxes?
Who Supports Increases In
Transportation Funding Using Tolls,
Fares, and New Taxes ?
Group 2 (see subsequent pages)
Would Personally Fund – 67%
(includes all open ended comments that
suggested tolls, taxes, fares)
18
Southeastern Institute of Research
Would Pay for Funding Increases
Through Tolls, Fares, and Taxes . . .
Group 1: Would Not
Personally Fund
Age
Mean age
Gender
% Male
41
Group 2: Would
Personally Fund
43
53
48
77
74
16
10
Ethnicity
% White
Trans Needs
% HHs Needing
Transportation
Accommodations
Residency
% New (<2 yrs)
% Medium ( 2 -10)
% Long Term (10+)
Tend to be less in need of
transportation accommodations
9
53
6
45
38
49
Southeastern
Institute of Research
Tend to be longer term residents
Would Pay for Funding Increases
Through Tolls, Fares, and Taxes . . .
Employment
Group 1:Would Not
Personally Fund
Group 2: Would
Personally Fund
70
68
% College Grad
58
62
Income
96
96
80 (84)
76 (79)
51
40
% Employed
Education
Mean ($000)
Commute
% Drive Alone
(includes Hybrids)
Commute
% Commute Out
Southeastern Institute of Research
Tend to commute within
the region
Would Pay for Funding Increases
Through Tolls, Fares, and Taxes
Opinion
Leaders:
Defined as
those who
participated
in at least 2
activities in
the past year
Active
Opinion
Leaders:
Defined as
those who
participated
in at least 3
selected
activities in
the past year
(= about 1/3
of Opinion
Leaders)
Group 1: Would Not
Personally Fund
Transportation
System
Group 2: Would
Personally Fund
% Satisfied (4, 5)
32
33
% Not Satisfied (1)
15
19
Avg. Mean Imp.
3.99
4.01
Avg. Mean Perf.
3.03
3.11
38
38
% Opinion Leader
34
32
% Active Leader
14
Transportation
System
Panel
% Participating
Opinion
Leader
Southeastern Institute of Research
16
Would Pay for Funding Increases
Through Tolls, Fares, and Taxes
Should Have
Funding
Responsibility
% State
% Local
% Regional
% Federal
Govt
Spending on
Trans.
% Too Little (1, 2)
% Too Much (4, 5)
LRTP
Spending
$ (out of $100)
to be spent
on non road – Avg
Group 1: Would Not
Personally Fund
Group 2: Would
Personally Fund
50
14
7
9
47
12
10
7
54
9
52
9
67.30
68.40
Southeastern Institute of Research
Recap of Source of Increased Funding
This Data Set Does Not Reveal Many Discernable Differences Between
Those Who Would Pay for Funding Increases - Through Tolls,
Fares, and Taxes - And Those Who Would Prefer Other Funding Alternatives.
The Biggest Difference Centers on Commuting In Or Out of The Region. The
Commuters Who Commute Within The Region Are More Likely
To Say They Would Fund Increases Personally (Taxes, Tolls, Fares).
Supporters Who Would
Not Personally Fund
(Tend To Be)
Supporters Who Would
Personally Fund
(Tend To Be)
• More in need of transportation
accommodations
• Relatively newer to the area
• More likely to commute out of
the area
• Less in need of transportation
accommodations
• Longer term residents
• More likely to commute within
the area
23
Regional
Transportation
Authority
24
Southeastern Institute of Research
As a
comparison,
67% of
Charlottesville
Residents were
in favor of a
Regional
Transit
Authority
(rated 4 or 5)
in a 2009
study.
More than Half Support a Regional
Transportation Authority
56%
Q12B. To what extent do you support the establishment of a Regional Transportation
Authority?
25
Southeastern Institute of Research
Those Who Support a Regional Transportation Authority . . .
Age
Mean age
Super
Detractors (1)
Detractors
(1, 2, 3)
Supporters
(4, 5)
Super
Supporters (5)
48
44
43
43
Tend to be slightly younger
Gender
% Male
67
53
45
48
Are more likely to be female
Ethnicity
83
% White
Trans Needs
% HHs Needing
Transportation
Accommodations
Residency
73
73
Tend to be more diverse
8
9
12
15
Tend to be more in need of transportation accommodations
% Medium ( 2 -10)
11
37
% Long Term (10+)
51
% New (<2 yrs)
82
7
41
5
47
6
46
52
47
48
Southeastern Institute of Research
Tend to have been in area
for a while
Those Who Support a Regional Transportation Authority . . .
Super
Detractors (1)
Detractors
(1, 2, 3)
Employment
67
66
66
68
Education
65
59
56
53
% Employed
% College Grad
Supporters
Super
(4, 5)
Supporters (5)
Tend to be less educated
Income
Mean ($000)
Commute
% Drive Alone
(includes Hybrids)
Commute
% Commute Out
96
96
90
91
72 (76)
78 (82)
77 (80)
77 (80)
45
42
42
46
Southeastern Institute of Research
Those Who Support a Regional Transportation Authority . . .
Super
Detractors
Detractors (1) (1, 2, 3)
Opinion
Leaders:
Defined as
those who
participated
in at least 2
activities in
the past year
Transportation
System
% Satisfied (4,5)
40
35
35
36
% Not Satisfied (1)
24
17
19
24
3.79
3.81
4.06
4.10
Transportation
System
Avg. Mean Imp.
Active
Opinion
Leaders:
Defined as
those who
participated
in at least 3
selected
activities in
the past year
(= about 1/3
of Opinion
Leaders)
Supporters
Super
(4, 5)
Supporters (5)
Avg. Mean Perf.
Panel
% Participating
3.04
3.09
3.13
3.13
Tend to find transportation system attributes more
important and give the area higher ratings
26
26
40
44
Tend to be more likely to volunteer for the panel
Opinion
Leader
% Opinion Leader
31
30
29
33
% Active Leader
15
16
Southeastern Institute of Research
16
18
Those Who Support a Regional Transportation Authority . . .
Should Have
Funding
Responsibility
% State
% Local
% Regional
% Federal
Govt
Spending on
Trans.
% Too Little (1, 2)
% Too Much (4, 5)
LRTP
Spending
$ (out of $100)
to be spent
on non road – Avg
Super
Detractors (1)
Detractors
(1, 2, 3)
Supporters
(4, 5)
Super
Supporters (5)
43
54
52
42
14
12
14
13
13
2
2
15
8
9
7
8
Are less likely to think state government should
have transportation funding responsibility and
more likely to think that regional government
should have responsibility. But the majority still
think it’s the state’s responsibility.
45
20
43
15
50
10
56
11
Tend to think the government
spends too little on transportation
54.40
61.50
69.60
70.90
Would allocate more LRTP funding
Southeastern Institute of Research
to non-road related activities
Regional Transportation Authority (RTA) Recap
Compared to Non-RTA Supporters, Supporters of the RTA
Tend To Be Younger, More Diverse, Longer Term Residents
In Need Of Transportation Accommodations
Non-Supporters
(Tend To Be)
Supporters
(Tend To Be)
•
•
•
•
•
•
Younger
Slightly More Female
Diverse
Longer-term residents
Less educated
More in need of transportation
accommodations
• More likely to be a panel member
30
•
•
•
•
•
•
Older
Slightly More Male
Less diverse
Relatively newer to the area
More educated
Less in need of transportation
accommodations
• Less likely to be a panel member
Regional Transportation Authority (RTA) Recap
Compared to Non-RTA Supporters, Supporters of the RTA Tend To Believe
Transportation Is More Important, Support An Increase In Transportation
Funding, And Believe Funding Should Be Allocated To Non-road Related Activities
Supporters
(Tend To Think)
•
•
•
•
•
Transportation attributes are more
important and they rate area
performance higher
The state should have primary
transportation funding responsibility,
but are more likely than nonsupporters to think regional
government should have responsibility
The government spends too little on
transportation
Transportation funding should be
increased
LRTP funding should be allocated to
non-road related activities
Non-Supporters
(Tend To Think)
•
•
•
•
•
31
Transportation attributes are less
important and they rate area
performance lower
The state should have primary
transportation funding responsibility,
but are less likely than supporters to
think regional government should
have responsibility
The government spends too much on
transportation
Transportation funding should not be
increased
LRTP funding should be allocated to
non-road related activities, but less
so than supporters
RTA Support Directly Correlates
with Pro Funding Support
Top Two Box Scores:
50%+ - 70%
10% to 50% - 65%
<10% - 50%
None – 29%
Q14. Which of the following statements best describes your support in regard to
transportation funding for the Greater Fredericksburg Region?
Q12B. To what extent do you support the establishment of a Regional Transportation
Authority?
Southeastern Institute of Research
32
All Areas Have Similar Support for an RTA
Top-two Box Score (4,5)
Fredericksburg – 58%
Caroline – 55%
King George - 54%
Spotsylvania – 57%
Stafford – 56%
Q12B. To what extent do you support the establishment of a Regional Transportation
Authority?
33
Southeastern Institute of Research
LRTP Impact
34
Southeastern Institute of Research
Those Who Support Increase
In Transportation Funding . . .
LRTP Goals
Avg. Mean
Confidence
Do Not Support
Increase
Support
Up to 10%
Support
10% to 50%
Support
Over 50%
2.38
2.88
3.16
3.04
Tend to be more confident that the
LRTP goals will be accomplished
35
Southeastern Institute of Research
Those Who Support a
Regional Transportation Authority . . .
LRTP Goals
Avg. Mean
Confidence
Super
Detractors (1)
Detractors
(1, 2, 3)
2.06
2.58
Supporters
Super
(4, 5)
Supporters (5)
3.18
3.26
Tend to be more confident that the
LRTP goals will be accomplished
36
Southeastern Institute of Research
Take-A-Ways
(To date)
37
Southeastern Institute of Research
Take-A-Ways To Date
• Compared to non-supporters, supporters for an increase in
transportation funding tend to be slightly older, slightly more
upscale, opinion leaders who are relatively newer to the
area. They also tend to be commuters who commute out of
the area and people who have a greater need for
transportation accommodations & the overall transportation
system.
• While there’s a greater level of support for increased funding
among commuters who leave the area every day than
commuters who remain within the FAMPO region, there
tends to be lesser personal commitment with long distance
commuters than with local commuters to pay for
transportation funding increases with taxes, toll, fares.
• Compared to Non-RTA Supporters, Supporters of the RTA
Tend To Be Younger, More Diverse, Longer Term Residents
In Need Of Transportation Accommodations.
38
Southeastern Institute of Research
Take-A-Ways To Date
• There is a direct correlation between support for increase in
transportation funding and support for the RTA
• Supporters of increased transportation funding and the RTA
tend to be more confident that the LRTP goals will be
accomplished.
• RTA supporters tend to think the government spends too
little on transportation and would direct funding to nonroads.
• “Transportation attributes” - the topic itself - seems more
important among supporters than non-supporters for all
three issues -1) increase in funding, 2) supporting needed
funds with personal funding (taxes, tolls, fares), and 3)
support for the RTA. Educating residents on transportation
issues makes sense to build support.
• Panel members skew towards RTA supporters. Use them
future understand RTA issues.
39
Southeastern Institute of Research
APPENDIX:
Opinion Leaders
40
Southeastern Institute of Research
45% Are Considered “Opinion Leaders”
or Have Participated in At Least
Two of These Events in the Past Year
Q34. Which of the following activities, if any, have you done or participated in over
the past 12 months?
41
Southeastern Institute of Research
16% Are Considered “Active Opinion Leaders”
or Have Participated in At Least Three
of These Selected Events in the Past Year
Q34. Which of the following activities, if any, have you done or participated in over
the past 12 months?
42
Southeastern Institute of Research
For Additional Information
on this Study Contact:
Christy Evanko
Southeastern Institute of Research
804-358-8981
43
Southeastern Institute of Research