CTR Employer Survey Report

Similar documents
CTR Employer Survey Report

CTR Employer Survey Report

CTR Employer Survey Report

2015/16 CTR Survey Data Overview


Denver Car Share Program 2017 Program Summary

Puget Sound Transportation Panel Factors in Daily Travel Choices September 1991

Emergency Ride Home Program Survey

Vanpool in Atlanta: Accommodating a 10% Mode Shift for Coca-Cola. Prepared for CEE 6625 by Calvin Clark Daejin Kim Yu Chen

FINAL REPORT FORM 1 (Formerly titled Project Monitoring Form 1 - Ridesharing ) Total Project Cost: $

Welcome! Think carpool, then think bigger! Questions? Contact our Vanpool team!

Transportation Demand Management. Overview of Tools and Strategies

Policy Note. Vanpools in the Puget Sound Region The case for expanding vanpool programs to move the most people for the least cost.

Frequently Asked Questions Rideshare Program

Utah Transit Authority Rideshare. CTAA Conference June 12, 2014

Facts and Figures. October 2006 List Release Special Edition BWC National Benefits and Related Facts October, 2006 (Previous Versions Obsolete)

Kauai Resident Travel Survey: Summary of Results

Parking Management Element

Evaluation of an Electric Bike Pilot Project at Three Employment Campuses in Portland, Oregon

CSU Fullerton Commuter Choice Programs: Supporting Sustainable Commutes by Campus Employees

Transportation Demand Management Element

Transportation 2040: Plan Performance. Transportation Policy Board September 14, 2017

MONTEREY BAY UNIFIED AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DETAILED SUMMARY OF FINAL APPLICATIONS

TRANSPORTATION DEMAND MANAGEMENT

Draft Transportation Demand Management Program for the Oak Knoll Project

List of Figures. List of Tables Membership. Parking ations

2 VALUE PROPOSITION VALUE PROPOSITION DEVELOPMENT

More persons in the cars? Status and potential for change in car occupancy rates in Norway

1.963 Report: A Sustainable Transportation Plan for MIT Campus May 2007

Trip Generation and Parking Study New Californian Apartments, Berkeley

Treasure Island Mobility Management Program

Transportation Demand Management Program

University of Washington. Stadium Expansion Parking Plan and Transportation Management Program Report

Janice Fortunato Senior Director Business Partnerships

The Georgia CMAQ Program. Practice Makes Perfect

TRAVEL DEMAND MANAGEMENT PROGRAM PERFORMANCE MEASURES REPORT 2017

Commuter Vanpool Program Scope of Work

Attachment A. BATA Resolution No. 128 BAY AREA TOLL AUTHORITY TOLL SCHEDULE FOR TOLL BRIDGES (EFFECTIVE JANUARY 1, 2019)

Metro Strategic Plan: Changing our relationship with the customer May 17, 2018

Rideshare and TDM Part of the Transportation System

Address Land Use Approximate GSF

Trip Generation and Parking Utilization Data Collection at Mini-Mart with Gas Station

Incentives for Green Fleets

List of Figures. List of Tables Membership Parking ations...

Shared Mobility in Seattle:

CONSUMER ATTITUDES TOWARD E- BIKES: A REVIEW OF THREE STUDIES IN NORTH AMERICA

CHAPTER 9. PARKING SUPPLY

EXPERIENCE IN A COMPANY-WIDE LONG DISTANCE CARPOOL PROGRAM IN SOUTH KOREA

CLRP. Performance Analysis of The Draft 2014 CLRP. Long-Range Transportation Plan For the National Capital Region

Trip Generation & Parking Occupancy Data Collection: Grocery Stores Student Chapter of Institute of Transportation Engineers at UCLA Spring 2014

IH 45 (GULF FWY) IH 10 (Katy Fwy) to IH 610 S (South Loop) 2010 Rank: Rank: 12

TULANE UNIVERSITY. Transportation Working Group: CAP Scenarios

University of Washington. Stadium Expansion Parking Plan and Transportation Management Program

Commuter Behavior and Greenhouse Gas Emissions at the University of Rhode Island

UC Santa Cruz TAPS 3-Year Fee & Fare Proposal, through

Vanpool Incentive Program

Performance Measures 4 th Quarter/Year End 2010

Vanpool Regional Administration

M E M O R A N D U M INTRODUCTION. POTENTIAL TDM STRATEGIES Marketing & Management. Residents & Employees. Exhibit 6

Vanpooling and Transit Agencies. Module 3: Benefits to Incorporating Vanpools. into a Transit Agency s Services

Travel Decisions Survey Summary Report. San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency (SFMTA)

EVALUATION OF MTC S CLIMATE PROGRAM. May 7, 2015 TRB Sustainability for Transportation

Comments_Negative_A. Neg_ScenA

Alternative 3 Air Quality and Climate Change Calculations

Treasure Island Mobility Management Program

May 23, 2011 APTA Bus & Paratransit Conference. Metro ExpressLanes

2008 Air Emissions Inventory SECTION 3 HARBOR CRAFT

2014 Bay Area Council Survey Report of Selected Results: Energy and Communications

Mid-Atlantic GREEN OPERATOR GO Program: Replacement Funding Assistance Program Application

San Francisco State University Transportation Survey Results Final Report

School Transportation Assessment

Earth Day Report April 22, 2013

3.0 MULTI-MODAL PROGRAM AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Parking Pricing As a TDM Strategy

Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority. Paid Parking Pilot Program Parking Management

Performance Measures Second Quarter 2012

Mercer Island Town Center Parking Study Joint Commission Presentation March 16, 2016

Ports of Delaware and Virginia (DE-VA)* Dray Truck Replacement Program Application

Organization. SDOT Date and Commute Seattle. Dave Sowers, Deputy Program Administrator

The TDM Plan for Fort Washington Office Park NOVEMBER 1 6, 2017 FORT WASHINGTON OFFICE PARK STAKEHOLDERS

Best Route. Best Care. The Milwaukee Regional Medical Center s Alternative Transportation Program

CO 2 Emissions: A Campus Comparison

Keeping Seattle Moving Seattle City Council February 2013

The City of Toronto s Transportation Strategy July 2007

RESIDENTIAL WASTE HAULING ASSESSMENT SERVICES. January 10, 2011 Presentation to Arvada City Council

Call for Projects Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) Emissions Formulas Technical Advisory Committee

Parking & Transportation Services Virtual Parking Permits at Stanford Stanford Staffers Brown Bag Forum Kingscote Gardens, Room 140 November 8, 2018

Thinking Outside the Bus: New Approaches to Commuter Transportation

It s easy to understand why ridesharing is increasing in

Travel to Work Survey 2018

Aren t You Really a Mobility Agency? Why The Vanpool Works for Transit

Sales and Use Transportation Tax Implementation Plan

2016 Greenhouse Gas Inventory

University of Washington. Stadium Expansion Parking Plan and Transportation Management Program Report

Autumn Salamack. King County Metro Transit Sustainability Program Coordinator Seattle, WA

SANDAG Vanpool Program Guidelines as of February 2018

The Environmental Benefits and Opportunity of Shared Mobility

San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District Indirect Source Review (ISR) - Air Impact Assessment (AIA) Non-Residential Project Application Form

VANPOOL PROGRAM October 2012

3.17 Energy Resources

Transcription:

CTR Employer Survey Report Employer Id : E11056 City of Lacey Employer : Worksite : City of Lacey Street : 420 College St Se Jurisdiction : City of Lacey Thank you for completing your Commute Trip Reduction survey. This report contains the survey results. Survey Date : 5/11/2015 Response Rate : 52% Drive Alone & One-Way VMT Rates at this Worksite Drive Alone : One-Way VMT per employee : 91.7% 10.9 Survey Type : Paper Employees and Survey Response Information Reported Total Employees at Worksite: 334 Surveys Distributed : 334 Surveys Returned : 175 Surveys Returned by CTR Affected Employees : 165 Total Estimated CTR - Affected Employees at Worksite : 315 Drive Alone - All Employees One Way VMT per Employee - All Employees Site History and Goal Cycle Drive Alone - All Drive Alone - CTR Affected VMT / Employee - All VMT / Employee - CTR Affected 2007-2008 89.0% 88.9% 12.5 12.7 2009-2010 88.3% 87.7% 11.6 11.4 2011-2012 84.8% 84.4% 10.5 10.6 2013-2014 88.2% 87.2% 12.7 12.6 2015-2016 91.7% 91.4% 10.9 11.1 2017-2018 N/A N/A N/A N/A 2019-2020 N/A N/A N/A N/A Goal TBD TBD TBD TBD Percent Change 3.0% 2.8% -12.8% -12.6% Page 1 of 12 Report generated on 10/6/2015

Comparison Between Rates With and Without Fill-In The survey response rate is indicated on Page 1. To encourage a response rate of at least 70%, additional drive alone trips are added to survey results for worksites with a response rate of less than 70%. For these worksites it is assumed that non-responding employees between the actual response rate and 70% drive alone 5 days a. These additional trips represent the "Fill-In" applied. Note that fill-in is not applied to a worksite s first survey in the 2007 to 2012 cycle (their baseline survey). 2007-2008 2013-2014 2015-2016 2015-2016 Without Fill In Drive Alone - All Employees* 89.0% 88.2% 91.7% 88.8% Drive Alone - CTR Affected Employees* 88.9% 87.2% 91.4% 88.3% VMT/Employee - All Employees 12.5 12.7 10.9 10.6 VMT/Employees - CTR Affected Employees 12.7 12.6 11.1 10.8 * Drive alone rate includes one person motorcycles. GHG Emissions: Total for Drive Alone, Carpools, Vanpools Annual Greenhouse Gas Emissions (Metric Tons CO2e) for Roundtrip Commute* Value 2007-2008 2013-2014 2015-2016 Emissions for Surveyed Employees 465 492 375 Estimated Emissions for Total Employment 669 685 715 * Estimated based on VMT from commuters driving alone, carpooling, vanpooling, or motorcycling, without fill-in applied. Bus Passenger Miles and Rail Passenger Miles* Annual Passenger Miles (includes Roundtrip Commute) 2007-2008 2013-2014 2015-2016 Bus Annual Passenger Miles - Estimated for Total Employment 863 418 5,726 Bus Annual Passenger Miles - Surveyed Employees 600 300 3,000 Ferry Annual Passenger Miles - Estimated for Total Employment 0 0 0 Ferry Annual Passenger Miles - Surveyed Employees 0 0 0 Train/Light Rail/Streetcar Annual Passenger Miles - Estimated for Total Employment Train/Light Rail/Streetcar Annual Passenger Miles - Surveyed Employees 0 0 0 0 0 0 * passenger miles can be used to gauge changes in transit usage, and also to calculate greenhouse gas emissions from transit commute trips. However, emissions attributable to transit vary widely, depending on the efficiency/energy source of transit vehicles and transit vehicle passenger load (typically ranging from 0.1 to 0.9 pounds CO2e emissions/passenger mile). Employers are strongly encouraged to contact their local transit agencies for more precise information on GHG emissions for their transit trips. If nothing else is available, the value of 0.47 pounds (0.00021 metric tons) per passenger mile can be used to estimate CO2e emissions for bus transit, and 0.39 pounds (0.00018 metric tons) CO2e emissions per passenger mile for train/light rail/streetcar. Q3. One way, how many miles do you commute from home to your usual work location? Average one-way distance home to work: 11.7 miles Page 2 of 12 Report generated on 10/6/2015

Commute Trips By Mode - All Employees Q.4a: Last, what type of transportation did you use each day to commute TO your usual work location? (Mode used for the longest distance.) Mode Trips During This Survey Week % of Trips During This Survey Week % of Trips During Previous Employees Who Used This Mode at Least Once During This % of Employees Who Used This Mode at Least Once During This % of Employees Who Used This Mode at Least Once During Previous Survey Week Drive Alone * 1,029 91.2% 88.0% 165 94.3% 91.4% Carpool 25 2.2% 6.0% 8 4.6% 7.4% Vanpool 14 1.2% 1.1% 3 1.7% 1.1% Motorcycle - 1 5 0.4% 0.0% 3 1.7% 0.0% Motorcycle - 2 0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% Bus 5 0.4% 0.1% 1 0.6% 0.6% Rail 0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% Bike 45 4.0% 2.0% 20 11.4% 4.6% Walk 4 0.4% 2.2% 1 0.6% 2.3% Telework 0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% CWW 0 0.0% 0.1% 0 0.0% 0.6% Boarded Ferry with Car/Van/Bus Used Ferry As Walk On 0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% Other 1 0.1% 0.6% 1 0.6% 1.1% * Drive alone mode includes fill-in, where applicable. Page 3 of 12 Report generated on 10/6/2015

Commute Trips By Mode - Affected Employees Q.4a: Last, what type of transportation did you use each day to commute TO your usual work location? (Mode used for the longest distance.) Mode Trips During This Survey Week % of Trips During This % of Trips During Previous Employees Who Used This Mode at Least Once During This % of Employees Who Used This Mode at Least Once During This % of Employees Who Used This Mode at Least Once During Previous Drive Alone * 994 91.1% 86.9% 156 94.5% 90.7% Carpool 25 2.3% 6.5% 8 4.8% 8.0% Vanpool 14 1.3% 1.1% 3 1.8% 1.2% Motorcycle - 1 3 0.3% 0.0% 2 1.2% 0.0% Motorcycle - 2 0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% Bus 5 0.5% 0.1% 1 0.6% 0.6% Rail 0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% Bike 45 4.1% 2.2% 20 12.1% 4.9% Walk 4 0.4% 2.4% 1 0.6% 2.5% Telework 0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% CWW 0 0.0% 0.1% 0 0.0% 0.6% Boarded Ferry with Car/Van/Bus Used Ferry As Walk On 0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% Other 1 0.1% 0.6% 1 0.6% 1.2% * Drive alone mode includes fill-in, where applicable. Page 4 of 12 Report generated on 10/6/2015

Alternative Modes - Number of Employees Who Used a Non-Drive Alone Mode: Non-Drive Alone Number Of Days Exactly this # of Employees Exactly this % of Employees At least # of Employees At least % of employees 0 Day 142 81% 175 100% 1 Days 11 6% 33 19% 2 Days 3 2% 22 13% 3 Days 4 2% 19 11% 4 Days 10 6% 15 9% 5 Days 5 3% 5 3% 6 or More Days 0 0% 0 0% Work Schedules By Group - All Employees (This table shows the relationship between work schedule and commute mode) Employees who worked: Drive Alone 5 days / Drive Alone 3 or 4 days / Used Bus At Least 3 days / Carpooled At Least 3 days / Used Rail At Least 3 days / Vanpooled At Least 3 times / Biked or Walked At Least 3 Days / Used 'Other' Modes At Least 3 Days / Used Non- Drive Alone At Least 3 Days / 5 days a 116 74.8% 20 12.9% 1 0.6% 3 1.9% 0 0% 3 1.9% 9 5.8% 0 0% 16 10.3% 4 days a (4/10s) 3 days a 9 days in 2 s (9/80) 7 days in 2 s 1 25% 3 75% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 1 100% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 1 20% 1 20% 0 0% 2 40% 0 0% 0 0% 1 20% 0 0% 3 60% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% Other 3 60% 1 20% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% Page 5 of 12 Report generated on 10/6/2015

Count by Occupancy of Carpools, Vanpools, and Motorcycles Q.4b If you used a carpool or vanpool as part of your commute, or if you ride a motorcycle, how many people (age 16 or older) are usually in the vehicle? Ridesharing Occupancy Mode Response Count 1 Motorcycle 11 2 Motorcycle 0 2 Carpool 20 3 Carpool 5 4 Carpool 0 5 Carpool 0 >5 Carpool 0 <5 Vanpool 0 5 Vanpool 5 6 Vanpool 0 7 Vanpool 0 8 Vanpool 9 9 Vanpool 0 10 Vanpool 0 11 Vanpool 0 12 Vanpool 0 13 Vanpool 0 14 Vanpool 0 15 Vanpool 0 Page 6 of 12 Report generated on 10/6/2015

Reported Work Schedule - All Employees Q.5 Which of the following best describes your work schedule? Reported Work Schedule Reported Work Schedule # Of Responses % Of Employees 5 days a 155 91.2% 4 days a (4/10s) 4 2.4% 3 days a 1 0.6% 9 days in 2 s (9/80) 5 2.9% 7 days in 2 s 0 0% Other 5 2.9% Page 7 of 12 Report generated on 10/6/2015

Parking and Telework Q.9: On the most recent day that you drove alone to work, did you pay to park? (Mark "yes" if you paid that day, if you prepaid, if you are billed later, or if the cost of parking is deducted from your paycheck.) Q.10: How many days do you typically telework? Telework Frequency # of Responses % of Responses No Answer/Blank 2 1.1% I don't telework 171 97.7% Occasionally, on an as-needed basis 2 1.1% 1-2 days/month 0 0.0% 1 day/ 0 0.0% 2 days/ 0 0.0% 3 days/ 0 0.0% Page 8 of 12 Report generated on 10/6/2015

Reasons for driving alone to work/not driving alone to work Q11. When you do not drive alone to work, what are the three most important reasons? Question Text # of Responses % of Responses Personal health or well-being 35 20.7% To save money 33 19.5% Other 31 18.3% Environmental and community benefits 25 14.8% Financial incentives for carpooling, bicycling or walking. 16 9.5% Driving myself is not an option 7 4.1% Emergency ride home is provided 5 3.0% Cost of parking or lack of parking 4 2.4% Free or subsidized bus, train, vanpool pass or fare benefit 3 1.8% To save time using the HOV lane 3 1.8% I have the option of teleworking 3 1.8% Preferred/reserved carpool/vanpool parking is provided 3 1.8% I receive a financial incentive for giving up my parking space 1 0.6% Q12. When you drive alone to work, what are the three most important reasons? Question Text # of Responses % of Responses I like the convenience of having my car 125 30.1% Riding the bus or train is inconvenient or takes too long 80 19.3% Family care or similar obligations 69 16.6% My commute distance is too short 44 10.6% Bicycling or walking isn't safe 41 9.9% Other 40 9.6% My job requires me to use my car for work 10 2.4% I need more information on alternative modes 5 1.2% There isn't any secure or covered bicycle parking 1 0.2% Page 9 of 12 Report generated on 10/6/2015

Employee Use - All Employees Q 13. Please indicate the number of one-way transit or walk-on ferry trips you took last on each system listed below (for any purpose, not just getting to and from work). Please select "Other" if your transit isn't listed. Employees Making This Many Trips in a Week Trips/Week Community Everett Intercity King County Metro Kitsap Pierce Sound Whatcom Transportation Authority Ferry as Walk-On Other 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 or more 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 # Of Employees using Total One-Way Trips Per Week 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 16 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Page 10 of 12 Report generated on 10/6/2015

Employee Use - Affected Employees Q 13. Please indicate the number of one-way transit or walk-on ferry trips you took last on each system listed below (for any purpose, not just getting to and from work). Please select "Other" if your transit isn't listed. Employees Making This Many Trips in a Week Trips/Week Community Everett Intercity King County Metro Kitsap Pierce Sound Whatcom Transportation Authority Ferry as Walk-On Other 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 or more 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 # Of Employees using Total One-Way Trips Per Week 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 16 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Page 11 of 12 Report generated on 10/6/2015

Commute Mode By ZipCode for All Employees Q8. What is your home zip code? Weekly Count of Trips By Mode Other Ferry (walk-on) Ferry (Car/Van/Bus) CWW Telework Walk Bike Train Bus Motorcycle Vanpool Carpool Drive Alone Employee Percentage Total Employees Home Zip code 4 2.29% 10 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 98327 1 0.57% 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 98338 1 0.57% 1 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 98360 1 0.57% 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 98405 1 0.57% 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 98407 1 0.57% 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 98408 1 0.57% 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 98498 2 1.14% 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 98501 20 11.43% 87 4 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 98502 14 8.00% 47 9 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 98503 26 14.86% 105 6 0 0 0 0 12 4 0 0 0 0 0 98506 11 6.29% 40 1 0 4 5 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 1 98512 14 8.00% 69 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 98513 26 14.86% 113 0 0 3 0 0 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 98516 20 11.43% 97 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 98531 2 1.14% 5 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 98532 4 2.29% 11 0 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 98541 1 0.57% 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 98557 1 0.57% 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 98568 2 1.14% 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 98576 2 1.14% 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 98579 7 4.00% 35 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 98584 3 1.71% 12 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 98589 6 3.43% 27 1 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 98597 3 1.71% 12 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 98957 1 0.57% 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Page 12 of 12 Report generated on 10/6/2015