metropolitan washington region 2002 vanpool survey tpb technical committee meeting april 4, 2002...

13
Metropolitan Washington Region 2002 Vanpool Survey TPB Technical Committee Meeting April 4, 2002 Technical Committee Item # 8

Upload: scott-higgins

Post on 04-Jan-2016

212 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Metropolitan Washington Region 2002 Vanpool Survey TPB Technical Committee Meeting April 4, 2002 Technical Committee Item # 8

Metropolitan Washington Region 2002 Vanpool Survey

TPB Technical Committee Meeting

April 4, 2002

Technical CommitteeItem # 8

Page 2: Metropolitan Washington Region 2002 Vanpool Survey TPB Technical Committee Meeting April 4, 2002 Technical Committee Item # 8

2

What is a Vanpool?

– A vanpool is generally defined as a group of 7 to 15 people who commute together on a regular basis in a van

– Vanpools can be owned by an individuals or leased from private agencies

– Vanpool riders are eligible for a US Federal tax code “transportation benefit” if: the vanpool has a 6+ adult seating capacity, not including the driver at least 80% of the vanpool’s mileage is for commuting purposes the number commuters in the vanpool is at least ½ the seating capacity

Page 3: Metropolitan Washington Region 2002 Vanpool Survey TPB Technical Committee Meeting April 4, 2002 Technical Committee Item # 8

3

Why Vanpooling is Important

• Vanpooling is an extremely efficient mode for long distance commuting. One vanpool takes as many as 14 cars off the road. Fewer cars on the

road means less traffic congestion and pollution.

– Vanpooling cuts driving stress and saves commuters money. If HOV lanes are used, vanpools can also reduce commuting times.

– Vanpooling assists employers in recruiting employees, improving morale and reducing tardiness.

– Vanpools are generally long-lived commuting arrangements. Experience shows that once a vanpool is up and running, it is likely to

continue to operate for many years.

– Vanpooling requires little public subsidy.

Page 4: Metropolitan Washington Region 2002 Vanpool Survey TPB Technical Committee Meeting April 4, 2002 Technical Committee Item # 8

4

2002 Vanpool Survey

• Purpose: Analyze vanpooling practices and trends

• Methodology: Mail-out/Mail-back with telephone follow-up

survey of 736 vanpool operators/drivers

• Response: 440 Completed surveys, 60% response rate

Page 5: Metropolitan Washington Region 2002 Vanpool Survey TPB Technical Committee Meeting April 4, 2002 Technical Committee Item # 8

5

Survey Results – Vanpool Seating Capacity

• 79% of the vanpools were 13-15 passenger vans.

• 8% had a seat capacity of 8-12 passengers

• 13% were 7 passenger mini-vans

Vanpool Seating Capacity

9937 22

68

509

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

7 8-10 11-12 13-14 15

Number of Seats

Van

poo

ls

Page 6: Metropolitan Washington Region 2002 Vanpool Survey TPB Technical Committee Meeting April 4, 2002 Technical Committee Item # 8

6

Survey Results – Number of Regular Members

• About half the vanpools surveyed had 12 or more regular members.

• 13% of the vanpools currently had fewer than 7 regular members

• Mean number of regular vanpool members was 10.7

Vanpool Members

94

5036 41

7283

115101

110

34

020406080

100120140

<7 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

Number of Regular Members

Van

pool

s

Page 7: Metropolitan Washington Region 2002 Vanpool Survey TPB Technical Committee Meeting April 4, 2002 Technical Committee Item # 8

7

Survey Results – Typical Weekday Occupancy

• 29% of the vanpools carried 12 or more commuters on a a typical weekday

• 20% of the vanpools carried fewer than 7 commuters

• Mean number of commuters carried on a typical weekday was 9.5

Typical Weekday Occupancy

144

39

70 7198 91

107

69

298

0

50

100

150

200

<7 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

Number of Vanpool Occupants

Van

pool

s

Page 8: Metropolitan Washington Region 2002 Vanpool Survey TPB Technical Committee Meeting April 4, 2002 Technical Committee Item # 8

8

Survey Results – Trip Length (Distance)

• The average one-way distance from the vanpool driver’s home to work location was 48 miles.

• The line-haul portion of the vanpool trip, from the last pick-up point to the first drop off point, was 39 miles.

Vanpool Driver Trip Length

621

63

151 161

116 122

84

0

50

100

150

200

0 -9 10-19

20-29

30-39

40-49

50-59

60-69

70+

Miles

Van

poo

ls

Page 9: Metropolitan Washington Region 2002 Vanpool Survey TPB Technical Committee Meeting April 4, 2002 Technical Committee Item # 8

9

Survey Results – Use of HOV

• More than 3 out 4 vanpool drivers reported use of an HOV lane during their trip to work.

Use HOV?

576

160

0

200

400

600

800

Yes No

Van

poo

ls

Page 10: Metropolitan Washington Region 2002 Vanpool Survey TPB Technical Committee Meeting April 4, 2002 Technical Committee Item # 8

10

Survey Results – Vanpool Origins

• 80% of the vanpools originated in Virginia

• Greatest number of vanpools began in Stafford (237) followed by Prince William (135), Spotsylvania (65), Fairfax (42), Howard (31), Frederick (26), Anne Arundel (21), Prince George’s (21), Fauquier (21), Loudoun (18), Montgomery (16), and Baltimore (13).

Vanpool Origins

140

591

50

200

400

600

800

MD VA Other

Van

poo

ls

Page 11: Metropolitan Washington Region 2002 Vanpool Survey TPB Technical Committee Meeting April 4, 2002 Technical Committee Item # 8

11

Survey Results – Vanpool Destinations

• 57% of the vanpools were destined to DC, 34% to Northern VA and 9% Suburban MD

• Major vanpool destinations were: NW Washington (194), SW Washington (127), SE Washington (55), Alexandria (38), Pentagon (36), Crystal City (30), Rosslyn (25), McLean (23), Lexington Park (15), Carderock (14), Springfield (14), Fort Belvoir (13), Baileys Crossroads (13), Fairfax (10), and Reston (10).

Vanpool Destinations

416

67

253

0

100

200

300

400

500

DC MD VA

Van

poo

ls

Page 12: Metropolitan Washington Region 2002 Vanpool Survey TPB Technical Committee Meeting April 4, 2002 Technical Committee Item # 8

12

Survey Results – Vanpooling Trends

• Vanpooling declined in the 1990s both locally and nationally

• Growth in commuter rail and commuter bus service, expansion of Metrorail to Springfield-Franconia and flexible alternative work schedules have had an impact on the number commuters who vanpool

Trend in Vanpooling

1058

736

0200400600800

10001200

1989 2002

Van

poo

ls

Page 13: Metropolitan Washington Region 2002 Vanpool Survey TPB Technical Committee Meeting April 4, 2002 Technical Committee Item # 8

13

Survey Results – Vanpool Issues of Concern

• Finding new riders (3.0)

• Congestion in HOV lanes (2.9)

• Insurance costs (2.7)

• Finding back-up drivers (2.6)

• HOV hours too short (2.4)

• Risk of rollover accidents (2.3)