Laserfiche WebLink
Executive Summary <br /> <br />Background <br /> <br />The Minnesota Department of Transportation (Mn/DOT) recognizes the value of clearly understanding the <br />public's attitudes toward congestion. Programs and system changes require strategies tbat'~are both <br />understood and supported by the public. Similarly, Mn/DOT's communications,need to reflect the-public's <br />expectations, and ideally engage the public in the transportation challenges facing our state. <br /> <br />Last f~all~ Mn/DOT conducted a series of focus groups throughout the state, designed as a first step in <br />listening to the public about the/r experiences and attitudes toward traffic congestion and mamagement. <br />Groups were held in both the Metro area and in greater Minnesota locations. The information gleaned fi:om <br />the focus groups was valuable, but not statistically valid, and therefore a quantitative telephone study was <br />planned. The focus group learning was the basis for question development in thl.q follow-up, telephone <br />study. <br /> <br />Study Objectives <br /> <br />Specifically, this quantitative research study was designed to teach us the following: <br /> <br />Quantified dH'ting behaviors assodated with our roadway system (frequency of use, types of <br />roadways used, mode, and purpose of trip). <br /> <br />Reactions toward statements that descn'be projected increases in traffic volume <br /> <br />General attitudes toward current and furore COngestion levels. <br /> <br />Identified behaviors associated wi.~'th congestion experienced (leave earlier, increased bus use, <br />etc.) <br /> <br />Identification of whom they feel is most responsible for addressing congestion related funding <br /> <br />Allocation of priorities for a variety of transportation planning options. This was done in the <br />current tense as well for 'the next twenty years'. <br /> <br />Lastly, how well Mn/DOT is communicating with the public and the methods they'd prefer be <br />used, to communicate with them. <br /> <br />Methodology <br />A total of 800 telephone interviews (400 Metro area and 400 Greater Minnesota area) were completed with a <br />random sample of Minnesota households during the time period October 25 through December 21, 2000. A <br />random digk dial sample was used so that results are representative across the State of Minnesota. Two <br />samples were managed. One sample included numbers within the 8-county Metro area. The other sample <br />included numbers within the 79-county Greater Minnesota area. This sampling technique was used to also <br />include unlisted telephone numbers. <br /> <br /> 2 <br />COX(.';E.s'I'I( )N ~'~'I T)\' 20()() <br /> <br /> <br />