4.6. SR 05-21-2001 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

A sample size of 800 respondents provides for a sampling error of+/- 3.5% at the 95% confidence level. Each area sample of 400 respondents provides for a sampling error of+/- 4.9% at the 95% confidence level. When analyz/ng the information in smaller groups, the error due to sampling is higher. All statistical tests of significance were completed at the 95% +/- 5% confidence level. That is, 95 times out of 100 you can be confident that reported significant differences did not happen by pure chance. Who We Talked To .. Respondents were screened to be at least 18 years of age, reside in either the 8-county Metro area or 79- county Greater Minnesota area, and have traveled in Minnesota using some means of transportation within the past 6 months. If respondent never personally drove or never rode in a car or a bus with someone on state freeways, 2-lane or divided state highways, the survey was scaled back to a series of attitudinal questions on congestion and demographic classification questions. Persons that had participated in a Mn/DOT market research study in the past 6 months were eliminated fi'om the study. A security screen was also administered. Key Findings The detail for each statement in this section can be found in the Detailed Findings section of this report. Overall, survey findings indicate stronger similarities than dissimilarities between segments of Minnesota residents that use the transportation infrastructure~. Residents from both the 8-county Metro area and the 79- county Greater Minnesota area hold, for the most part, very similar attitudes related to the growth in traffic congestion. Collectively users believe traffic congestion has and will cominue to grow. Statewide residems give M_n/DOT credit for reducing current levels of congestion on Minnesota roadways. As a group they are confident Mn/DOT will find .~tegies to help cope with the growth in traffic. _ Most residents lack a clear understanding of the transportation funding mechanism, but at the same time collectively agree the legislature should make dealing with growth in Congestion a legislative priority,. When asked to identify long-term transportation planning priorities, projects such as providing light rail or commuter rail were top priorities but seeking additional funding for these projects was a middle level priority. Additional funding and new projects were not seen as equal needs that go hand-in-hand. Have used a means of Umn.qportation either personally or with someone to travel Minnesota freeways, 2-tane or divided highways m the past 6 months. ; ~ Cc )\'( ~t-~STIOX S'l"l 't)\' 2{)1}t)