RESULTS OF THE ONBOARD TRANSIT PASSENGER SURVEY FOR THE SAN DIEGO REGION
|
|
- Christian Crawford
- 5 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 RESULTS OF THE ONBOARD TRANSIT PASSENGER SURVEY FOR THE SAN DIEGO REGION MARCH B Street, Suite 800 San Diego, CA (619)
2 BOARD OF DIRECTORS The 18 cities and county government are SANDAG serving as the forum for regional decision-making. The Association builds consensus, makes strategic plans, obtains and allocates resources, and provides information on a broad range of topics pertinent to the region s quality of life. CHAIR: Hon. Ron Morrison VICE CHAIR: Hon. Mickey Cafagna EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR: Gary L. Gallegos CITY OF CARLSBAD Hon. Ramona Finnila, Mayor Pro Tem (A) Hon. Bud Lewis, Mayor (A) Hon. Matt Hall, Councilmember CITY OF CHULA VISTA Hon. Steve Padilla, Mayor (A) Hon. Patty Davis, Councilmember (A) Hon. Jerry Rindone, Deputy Mayor CITY OF CORONADO Hon. Phil Monroe, Mayor Pro Tem (A) Hon. Frank Tierney, Councilmember CITY OF DEL MAR Hon. Crystal Crawford, Councilmember (A) Hon. Richard Earnest, Deputy Mayor (A) Hon. David Druker, Mayor CITY OF EL CAJON Hon. Mark Lewis, Mayor (A) Hon. Gary Kendrick, Mayor Pro Tem CITY OF ENCINITAS Hon. Christy Guerin, Councilmember (A) Hon. Maggie Houlihan, Deputy Mayor CITY OF ESCONDIDO Hon. Lori Holt Pfeiler, Mayor (A) Hon. Ed Gallo, Councilmember CITY OF IMPERIAL BEACH Hon. Patricia McCoy, Councilmember (A) Hon. Diane Rose, Mayor (A) Hon. Mayda Winter, Councilmember CITY OF LA MESA Hon. Art Madrid, Mayor (A) Hon. Barry Jantz, Councilmember (A) Hon. David Allan, Councilmember CITY OF LEMON GROVE Hon. Mary Sessom, Mayor (A) Hon. Jill Greer, Councilmember (A) Hon. Jerry Jones, Councilmember CITY OF NATIONAL CITY Hon. Ron Morrison, Councilmember (A) Hon. Frank Parra, Deputy Mayor CITY OF OCEANSIDE Hon. Jack Feller, Councilmember (A) Hon. Terry Johnson, Mayor (A) Hon. Rocky Chavez, Councilmember CITY OF POWAY Hon. Mickey Cafagna, Mayor (A) Hon. Don Higginson, Councilmember (A) Hon. Robert Emery, Councilmember CITY OF SAN DIEGO Hon. Dick Murphy, Mayor Hon. Jim Madaffer, Councilmember (A) Hon. Scott Peters, Councilmember CITY OF SAN MARCOS Hon. Corky Smith, Mayor (A) Hon. Pia Harris-Ebert, Councilmember CITY OF SANTEE Hon. Hal Ryan, Vice Mayor (A) Hon. Randy Voepel, Mayor (A) Hon. Jack Dale, Councilmember CITY OF SOLANA BEACH Hon Joe Kellejian, Deputy Mayor (A) Hon. David Powell, Councilmember CITY OF VISTA Hon. Morris Vance, Mayor (A) Hon. Judy Ritter, Councilmember (A) Hon. Bob Campbell, Councilmember COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO Hon. Greg Cox, Chairman (A) Hon. Ron Roberts, Supervisor CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION (Advisory Member) Jeff Morales, Director (A) Pedro Orso-Delgado, District 11 Director METROPOLITAN TRANSIT DEVELOPMENT BOARD (Advisory Member) Leon Williams, Chairman (A) Hon. Jerry Rindone, Vice Chairman (A) Hon. Bob Emery, Board Member NORTH SAN DIEGO COUNTY TRANSIT DEVELOPMENT BOARD (Advisory Member) Hon. Judy Ritter, Chair (A) Vacant (A) Hon. Jack Feller, Board Member IMPERIAL COUNTY (Advisory Member) Hon. Victor Carrillo, Supervisor (A) Hon. Larry Grogan, Councilmember, City of El Centro U.S. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE (Advisory Member) CAPT Christopher Schanze, USN, CEC Commander, Southwest Division Naval Facilities Engineering Command (A) CAPT Richard Gamble, USN, CEC SAN DIEGO UNIFIED PORT DISTRICT (Advisory Member) Jess Van Deventer, Commissioner (A) Michael Bixler, Commissioner (A) Peter Q. Davis, Commissioner SAN DIEGO COUNTY WATER AUTHORITY (Advisory Member) Hon. Bud Lewis, Director (A) Bernie Rhinerson, Director BAJA CALIFORNIA/MEXICO (Advisory Member) Hon. Rodulfo Figueroa Aramoni Consul General of Mexico ii
3 ABSTRACT TITLE: AUTHOR: Results of the Onboard Transit Passenger Survey for the San Diego Region San Diego Association of Governments DATE: March 2004 SOURCE OF COPIES: San Diego Association of Governments 401 B Street, Suite 800 San Diego, CA (619) NUMBER OF PAGES: 245 ABSTRACT: This report summarizes the findings from a survey of transit passengers onboard all fixed transit routes in the San Diego region. Analysis includes rider demographics, trip behaviors, comparison to survey results from 1995 and 1990, and comparisons to population demographics. Survey forms, methodology, and detailed tables are included. iii
4 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The San Diego Association of Governments would like to recognize the onboard surveyors and data processors that assisted in collecting and preparing this data, and all personnel at the agencies who supported the process of data collection. iv
5 TABLE OF CONTENTS Section 1: Overview...3 Introduction...3 Organization of the Report...3 Key Findings...3 Summary of Methodology...4 Companion Reports...4 Section 2: Demographic and Economic Comparisons...5 Economic Indicators...7 Transit - Regional Comparisons...9 Ethnicity Comparisons...11 Visitors on Transit...12 Section 3: System-Level Results...15 Section 4: Results by Demographics...39 By Gender...42 By Ethnicity...47 By Age...53 By Income...59 Section 5: Individual Route Results...65 San Diego Transit Corporation...69 North y Transit District...94 San Diego Trolley, Inc National City Transit Chula Vista Transit MTDB Contract Services Section 6: Comparisons to Past Results - By Operator Section 7: Origin and Destination Maps 213 APPENDICES Appendix A: Questionnaire... A-1 Appendix B: Weighting...B-1 Appendix C: Detailed Methodology...C-1 Appendix D: Boardings/Capita... D-1 v
6 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1 San Diego Region Economic Indicators... 7 Figure 2 San Diego Region Boardings Per Capita, Figure 3 Percent of Ridership who Transferred, 1990, 1995, Figure 4 San Diego Region Changes in Population, Boardings, and Revenue Miles, Figure 5 San Diego Region Percent Change in Passenger Miles Traveled Automobile and Transit, Figure 6 San Diego Region Ridership (2000/3) and Population (2000) Ethnicities...11 Figure 7 San Diego Region Ridership and Population Ethnicities (1990)...11 Figure 8 Visitors Riding Transit in the San Diego Region...12 Figure 9 Where are you Coming From/Going To? (Q1 and Q4) by Year...16 Figure 10 Where are you Coming From/Going To? (Q1 and Q4) by Operator...16 Figure 11 Figure 12 Where are you Coming From/Going To? (Q1 and Q4) by Operator (Table)...17 How did you get to this bus/trolley/coaster -After you get off this bus/trolley/coaster, will you? (Q7 and Q9) By Year...18 Figure 13 How did you get to this bus/trolley/coaster -After you get off this bus/trolley/coaster, will you? (Q7 and Q9) by Operator...18 Figure 14 How did you get to this bus/trolley/coaster -After you get off this bus/trolley/coaster, will you? (Q7 and Q9) by Operator (Table)...19 Figure 15 Did you have a car that you could have used today instead of the bus/trolley/ Coaster? (Q10) By Year...20 Figure 16 Did you have a car that you could have used today instead of the bus/trolley/ Coaster?(Q10) By Operator...20 Figure 17 How many vehicles are available for use by all the people in your home? (Q18) By Year...22 Figure 18 How many vehicles are available for use by all the people in your home? (Q18) By Operator...22 Figure 19 How many vehicles are available for use by all the people in your home? (Q18) by Operator (Table)...23 vi
7 Figure 20 How did you pay to use this bus/trolley/coaster? (Q11) By Year...24 Figure 21 How did you pay to use this bus/trolley/coaster? (Q11) By Operator...24 Figure 22 How did you pay to use this bus/trolley/coaster? (Q11) By Operator (Table)...25 Figure 23 How often do you ride the bus/trolley/coaster? (Q12) By Year...26 Figure 24 How often do you ride the bus/trolley/coaster? (Q12) By Operator...26 Figure 25 How often do you ride the bus/trolley/coaster? (Q12) By Operator (Table)...27 Figure 26 What gender are you? (Q13) By Year...28 Figure 27 What gender are you? (Q13) By Operator...28 Figure 28 What gender are you? (Q13) By Operator (Table)...29 Figure 29 What ethnicity do you consider yourself? (Q14) by Year...30 Figure 30 What ethnicity do you consider yourself? (Q14) By Operator...30 Figure 31 What ethnicity do you consider yourself? (Q14) By Operator (Table)...31 Figure 32 What is your age? (Q15) By Year...32 Figure 33 What is your age? (Q15) By Operator...32 Figure 34 What is your age? (Q15) By Operator (Table)...33 Figure 35 What is the total yearly income of all the people in your home? (Q16) By Year...34 Figure 36 What is the total yearly income of all the people in your home? (Q16) By Operator...34 Figure 37 How do you rate transit service in your area? (Q17) By Year...36 Figure 38 How do you rate transit service in your area? (Q17) By Operator...36 Figure 39 How do you rate transit service in your area? (Q17) By Operator (Table)...37 vii
8
9 SECTION 1 OVERVIEW
10
11 SECTION 1 OVERVIEW INTRODUCTION This report presents a profile of ridership on all fixed bus and rail routes in the San Diego region. The profile is generated from the results an Onboard Passenger Survey completed in Regional information from other sources is used for comparison purposes, and previous onboard survey results are also shown. In all, the following sources were used in the preparation of this report: 1. Current Onboard Passenger Survey results (2003); 2. Previous Onboard Passenger Survey results (1990, 1995) 3. SANDAG Passenger ing Program (2003); 4. U.S. Census Population Data (1990, 2000); and 5. San Diego Convention and Visitors Bureau (2002). For the onboard survey, 164 routes were surveyed in all, representing every fixed route in the region at the time of the survey. Information was collected regarding trip origins and destinations, trip behaviors and passenger demographics. The system has grown significantly since the last region-wide onboard survey was conducted in The number of routes has increased by 56 percent, the number of revenue miles has increased by 18 percent, and weekday ridership has grown by 38 percent. Average weekday ridership (in FY 03) was 318,331. ORGANIZATION OF THE REPORT This report is organized as follows: Section 1 presents an overview, key findings, and a summary of the methodology. Section 2 presents survey findings in comparison to the general population. Section 3 presents system -level findings, along with 1995 and 1990 results. Section 4 presents the results for key demographic categories. Section 5 presents the results for each route. Section 6 presents comparisons to past surveys, by operator. The appendices contain the questionnaire, a detailed methodology, and details of the data weighting. SANDAG Onboard Transit Passenger Survey, March
12 KEY FINDINGS Key findings from the onboard survey are highlighted below: Demographic and trip behavior differences between all three transit modes (bus, commuter rail, and light rail) are pronounced, particularly between commuter rail (Coaster) and the other modes. The Coaster carries wealthier riders, who are more likely to own a car and drive alone to the transit station. They are also more likely to be commuting between home and work, and carry a higher percentage of male and Caucasian riders than other modes. System-wide, Hispanic and African-American ethnicities are over-represented in transit ridership, while Caucasian and Asian ridership are underrepresented. Discretionary riders (those who could have used their car) make up approximately 26 percent of the ridership. Monthly Pass usage has grown by 67 percent since 1990, while cash fares have decreased by 42 percent. Trips between home and work are the most common for all operations except Chula Vista Transit, where home school trips are more common. The professed satisfaction of transit is decreasing, with good satisfaction ratings falling from 60 percent in 1990 to 53 percent in SUMMARY OF METHODOLOGY To collect the information for the Onboard Passenger Survey, surveyors rode onboard buses, trolleys, and the Coaster, offering survey forms to passengers as they boarded the vehicle. Surveys were self-administered; however, the surveyors were available for questions. When passengers completed the questionnaires, they were collected and tracked by route, date, trip time, and direction. The data was then coded, entered, and analyzed. Metropolitan Transit System (MTS) routes and North y Transit District (NCTD) routes had a slightly different survey form (see Appendix A). While different, the questions were worded so that the forms could be combined in analysis. An average of 314 completed questionnaires per route was collected. Efforts were made to survey in both directions and during all time-periods (AM Peak, Midday, PM Peak, and Other). Section 5 and Appendix B of this report show the number of surveys per route. Data was weighted by Passenger ing Program data, so that each route is represented proportionately in the totals. Details of the weighting are shown in Appendix B. COMPANION REPORTS Individual companion reports were written for each operator. The companion reports contain origin/destination maps for each route, operator demographic crosstabs, and rider comments by each route. Copies of these reports may be requested from SANDAG 4 SANDAG Onboard Transit Passenger Survey, March 2004
13 SECTION 2 DEMOGRAPHIC AND ECONOMIC COMPARISONS
14
15 SECTION 2 DEMOGRAPHIC AND ECONOMIC COMPARISONS When evaluating transit ridership, it is useful to take into consideration the economic profile of the region during the survey period and the demographics of the regional population. Against this backdrop we can see more clearly who our riders are and are not, see the effects of regional economic health on transit ridership, and, in general, have a more broad-based view of transit s place in our region. This section presents some of those comparisons, comparing regional economic data to survey results and showing ethnicity comparisons. Not all demographic data is available for all of the survey years, and years that are reasonably close are used when necessary. As year-to-year population and transit ridership changes are rarely severe, using close years does not hinder a clear picture of the changes that occurred between survey periods. ECONOMIC INDICATORS Throughout this report comparisons are made between current and previous (1990, 1995) survey results. The current survey began in fall 2000, and finished in spring The value of these comparisons is enriched by viewing the economics of region during the survey periods. Figure 1, below, displays those statistics. 1 Population Figure 1 San Diego Region Economic Indicators Number Unemployed Unemployment Rate Inflation Rate Median HH Income (inflationadjusted to 1990 Census levels Percent HH with No Vehicle ,498,016 56, % 6.0% $35,028* 8% ,613,100 78, % 1.5% $35,449 N/A ,918,254 63, % 3.5% $35,236 8% (2000) Change % 12.1% -6.5% -41.7% 0.6% 0% Change % -19.8% -32.8% 133.3% -0.6% N/A *1990 census data (reflects 1989 Income) 1 When regional numbers are compared to survey data (such as in Figure 1), the year 2002 has been chosen as the best year to represent the current survey period. SANDAG Onboard Transit Passenger Survey, March
16 As Figure 1 shows, the inflation rate fluctuated from one survey period to the next, and population showed a steady growth. However, median household income (adjusted for inflation) and vehicle ownership did not changed much from one survey period to the next. Household income and vehicle ownership are widely held to be strong predictors of transit ridership, therefore their stability would suggest that, barring large system changes related to transit availability, transit ridership should be stable as well. Stable ridership would not mean that ridership remained the same over the years, but rather that transit boardings would have risen by the same percentage as the population. If transit boardings had risen by the same percent of the population, then the ratio of boardings per population would not change. Figure 2, below, shows the ratio of boardings to population in the three survey years (all years are shown in Appendix D) Figure 2 San Diego Region Boardings Per Capita In 1990 there were approximately 26 boarding for every person in the San Diego region. In 2002 that number had risen to over 30 boardings. 2 The boardings/capita ratio increased, rather than stayed even, as we expected from just looking at the median income and car ownership numbers in Figure 1. For the boardings per capita to have increased, one or both of the following situations has occurred: 1. The number of riders has increased by a larger percent than population, and/or 2. The number of boardings per rider has increased. We can use the survey results to shed light on each of these possibilities. 2 Appendix D shows the boardings per ratio for all years between 1990 and The ratio declined between 2000 and 2002; however, analysis of the decline is not part of this report. 8 SANDAG Onboard Transit Passenger Survey, March 2004
17 1. The Number of Riders Has Increased By a Larger Percent Than Population This could occur for a variety of reasons, with a decrease in median income or car availability usually considered strong influences. Figure 1, on a previous page, shows that, for the entire population, the median household income and the number of households with no car did not change much between our survey years. Our survey results tell us that for transit ridership, car availability remained the same (Section 3, Figure 15), but median income fell (Section 3, Figure 34). The decrease in median household income of ridership, but not of the population, indicates that the number of riders may be increasing by a larger percent than population. 2. The Number of Boardings Per Rider Is Increasing Boardings could increase if more trips are occurring, or if more transfers are being made on each trip. We do not have survey data relating to entire trips; however, we do have survey information on the likelihood of making a transfer, shown in Figure 3, below. Figure 3 Percent of Ridership who Transferred 1990, 1995, 2002 Year % Transfer % % % As shown in Figure 3, survey results show a strong upward trend in transferring between the three survey years. 3 More transferring results in more boardings for each transit trip, and would contribute to a higher boardings/capita ratio. In conclusion; while more research is needed to determine all of the reasons the boardings/capita ratio is increasing, the decline in median income among riders and the increase in the number of transfers likely play a role. The remainder of this section offers more information on transit ridership and regional indicators. TRANSIT REGIONAL COMPARISONS Figure 4, on the following page, shows the comparisons between ridership and population in a slightly different way than did Figure 2. The graph shows the percent changes in regional population, revenue miles, number of routes, and boardings. 3 The method of analyzing transfers changed between 1995 and 2002; however, the change would not have accounted for more than 1-2 percent points, and thus would not have affected the trend. SANDAG Onboard Transit Passenger Survey, March
18 Figure 4 San Diego Region Changes in Population, Boardings, Revenue Miles % 38% 17% Increase in Regional Population Increase in Annual Boardings Increase in Revenue Miles Year Population No. Boardings No. Revenue Miles ,498,016 64,329,258 18,960, ,613,100 69,990,019 21,256, ,918,254 88,598,867 27,802,039 From Figure 4, the transit-related indicators increased by a greater percentage than did the regional population. Another useful comparison, shown in Figure 5, is between transit passenger miles and automobile passenger miles (note that change is between 1996 and 2001). Figure 5 San Diego Region Percent Change in Passenger Miles Traveled Automobile and Transit 1996 and 2001 Change in Daily Passenger Miles - Automobile Change in Daily Passenger Miles - Transit 15% Daily Pass. Miles - Automobile 27% Daily Passenger Miles - Transit Year ,513,350 1,358, ,099,840 1,725,217 As with the other regional comparisons, the percentage increase of passenger miles for transit is greater than for automobile passengers. 10 SANDAG Onboard Transit Passenger Survey, March 2004
19 ETHNICITY COMPARISONS The following two figures compare ridership and population ethnicities in 1990 and in the current survey period. In both figures Hispanics and African-Americans are over-represented on transit compared to the overall population, while Asians and Whites are under-represented. Figure 6 San Diego Region Ridership (2000/3) and Population (2000) Ethnicities 55% 37% 37% 27% 7% 9% 15% 5% 4% 4% Hispanic White Asian/Pacific Islander African American Other 2000/3 Onboard Survey 2000 Population Figure 7 San Diego Region Ridership and Population Ethnicities (1990) 65% 35% 42% 20% 16% 5% 7% 6% 2% 1% Hispanic White Asian/Pacific Islander African American Other 1990 Onboard Survey 1990 Population SANDAG Onboard Transit Passenger Survey, March
20 VISITORS ON TRANSIT Finally, we take a look at how many riders are visitors to the area. According to survey results, 6 percent of boardings were made by those with residence zip codes outside of the San Diego region. Visitors accounted for over five million boardings in Figure 8 Visitors Riding Transit in the San Diego Region Reside outside of the SD region, 6% An estimated 26.3 million people visited the San Diego region during 2002*, and took approximately 5.3 million transit trips. *San Diego Convention and Visitors Bureau Reside in the SD region, 94% The following section presents the results of the survey in graphical form, showing comparisons between operators and with earlier surveys. 12 SANDAG Onboard Transit Passenger Survey, March 2004
21 SECTION 3 SYSTEM-LEVEL RESULTS
22
23 SECTION 3 SYSTEM-LEVEL RESULTS This section contains graphical representations of the survey results. The results of each question are shown in two ways. First is a bar chart comparing the results of this survey to 1995 and 1990 results of the same question, where possible. Second is a bar chart and companion table showing comparisons of results between operators. SANDAG Onboard Transit Passenger Survey, March
24 Figure 9 Where are you Coming From/Going To? (Q1 and Q4) By Year 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Home-Work Home-School Home-Shop % 16% 11% % 22% 12% % 17% 10% Figure 10 Where are you Coming From/Going To? (Q1 and Q4) By Operator 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Home-Work Home-School Home-Shop SDTC NCTD CVT NCT MTDB SDTI Coaster All Results showing all trip categories are shown on the table on the next page. 16 SANDAG Onboard Transit Passenger Survey, March 2004
25 From the graphics on the previous page, and the table below, note that: The Coaster shows a unique trip-end pattern compared to other operators, with the percent of home/work trips almost double those of other operators. Chula Vista Transit is the only operator showing more home/school trips than home/work trips. Figure 11 Where are you Coming From/Going To? (Q1 and Q4) By Operator SDTC NCTD CVT NCT MTDB SDTI Coaster All Home-Work 43% 41% 28% 36% 42% 50% 81% 45% Home-School 18% 25% 37% 20% 20% 10% 4% 17% Home-Shop 10% 8% 9% 12% 12% 9% 2% 10% Home- Friends/Family 9% 7% 8% 12% 10% 12% 7% 10% Home-Medical 6% 6% 4% 5% 3% 3% 1% 4% Home-Other 5% 3% 4% 6% 4% 4% 2% 5% Work-Other 5% 4% 5% 4% 5% 6% 1% 5% Other-Other 4% 6% 5% 5% 4% 5% 1% 5% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% SANDAG Onboard Transit Passenger Survey, March
26 Figure 12 How did you get to this bus/trolley/coaster? After you get off this bus/trolley/coaster, will you? (Q7 and Q9) By year 80% 60% 40% 20% 0% Walk Transfer Drive Alone Drop Off/Carpool Other % 26% 3% 4% 2% % 34% 2% 4% 3% % 38% 3% 4% 1% Figure 13 How did you get to this bus/trolley/coaster? After you get off this bus/trolley/coaster, will you? (Q7 and Q9) By Operator 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Walk Transfer Drive Alone Drop Off/Carpool SDTC NCTD CVT NCT MTDB SDTI Coaster 18 SANDAG Onboard Transit Passenger Survey, March 2004
27 Region-wide, walkers will walk an average of 2.34 blocks. The Coaster again shows a very different profile than other operators, with almost one-third of Coaster users driving alone to the station and the percentage of those being dropped off or carpooling more than double that of any other operator. Figure 14 How did you get to this bus/trolley/coaster? After you get off this bus/trolley/coaster, will you? (Q7 and Q9) By Operator SDTC NCTD CVT NCT MTDB SDTI Coaster Walk 63% 58% 54% 49% 55% 43% 23% 54% Transfer 34% 35% 43% 47% 39% 44% 21% 38% Drive Alone 1% 1% 0% 0% 1% 6% 30% 3% Drop Off/Carpool 2% 4% 3% 2% 3% 6% 13% 4% Other 1% 2% 0% 1% 1% 1% 13% 1% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% SANDAG Onboard Transit Passenger Survey, March
28 Figure 15 Did you have a car that you could have used today instead of the bus/trolley/coaster? (Q10) By Year Percent answering Yes 26% 25% 26% Figure 16 Did you have a car that you could have used today instead of the bus/trolley/coaster? (Q10) By Operator Percent answering Yes All 26% Coaster 83% SDTI 35% MTDB NCT CVT NCTD SDTC 22% 17% 20% 16% 20% 20 SANDAG Onboard Transit Passenger Survey, March 2004
29 Car availability has not changed over the years, remaining at about one-quarter of ridership. Trolley and Coaster riders are more likely than bus riders to have a car available. SANDAG Onboard Transit Passenger Survey, March
30 Figure 17 How many vehicles are available for use by all the people in your home? (Q18) By Year 35% 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% None One Two Three or more % 33% 22% 11% % 32% 22% 13% Figure 18 How many vehicles are available for use by all the people in your home? (Q18) By Operator 50% 45% 40% 35% 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% None One Two Three or more SDTC NCTD CVT NCT MTDB SDTI Coaster All 22 SANDAG Onboard Transit Passenger Survey, March 2004
31 Region-wide, households had an average of 1.2 vehicles available for use. Households of Coaster ridership had an average of 2.0 vehicles. Households of trolley ridership had an average of 1.5 vehicles per household. Figure 19 How many vehicles are available for use by all the people in your home? (Q18) By Operator SDTC NCTD CVT NCT MTDB SDTI Coaster All None 41% 33% 18% 21% 30% 26% 5% 33% One 32% 32% 34% 37% 33% 31% 21% 32% Two 17% 22% 29% 25% 24% 25% 49% 22% Three or more 9% 13% 19% 17% 14% 18% 25% 13% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% SANDAG Onboard Transit Passenger Survey, March
32 Figure 20 How did you pay to use this bus/trolley/coaster? (Q11) By Year 80% 60% 40% 20% 0% Monthly Pass Cash Transfer Other % 54% 8% 4% % 40% 11% 2% % 31% 8% 4% Figure 21 How did you pay to use this bus/trolley/coaster? (Q11) By Operator 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Monthly Pass Cash Transfer SDTC NCTD CVT NCT MTDB SDTI Coaster All 24 SANDAG Onboard Transit Passenger Survey, March 2004
33 Monthly pass usage has been increasing since 1990, accompanied by a comparable decrease in cash fares. Fare structuring since 1990 has favored pass usage, with their prices increasing more slowly than cash prices, and with Senior/Disabled pass prices actually being reduced. We do not see the expected decrease in transfer slip use with the increase in passes (pass users do not need a transfer slip). Figure 22 How did you pay to use this bus/trolley/coaster? (Q11) By Operator SDTC NCTD CVT NCT MTDB SDTI Coaster All Monthly Pass 58% 39% 51% 53% 55% 57% 62% 59% Cash 29% 47% 35% 35% 35% 32% 36% 31% Transfer 7% 10% 11% 11% 8% 9% 2% 8% Other 6% 4% 2% 1% 1% 2% 1% 2% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% SANDAG Onboard Transit Passenger Survey, March
34 Figure 23 How often do you ride the bus/trolley/coaster? (Q12) By Year 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% <1 Day 1-3 Days 4-6 Days 7 Days % 15% 58% 19% % 16% 53% 22% % 14% 54% 25% Figure 24 How often do you ride the bus/trolley/coaster? (Q12) By Operator 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% <1 Day 1-3 Days 4-6 Days 7 Days SDTC NCTD CVT NCT MTDB SDTI Coaster All 26 SANDAG Onboard Transit Passenger Survey, March 2004
35 Frequency of transit ridership has changed little since The average number of days per week riding the bus/trolley/coaster (by those who ride more than one day a week) is 5.2. Figure 25 How often do you ride the bus/trolley/coaster? (Q12) By Operator SDTC NCTD CVT NCT MTDB SDTI Coaster All <1 Day 5% 9% 6% 8% 7% 10% 12% 7% 1-3 Days 13% 14% 16% 15% 14% 14% 12% 14% 4-6 Days 53% 59% 57% 51% 55% 53% 76% 54% 7 Days 30% 18% 21% 26% 23% 23% 0% 25% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% SANDAG Onboard Transit Passenger Survey, March
36 Figure 26 What gender are you? (Q13) By Year 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Female 50% 50% 52% Male 50% 50% 48% Figure 27 What gender are you? (Q13) By Operator 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Female Male SDTC NCTD CVT NCT MTDB SDTI Coaster All 28 SANDAG Onboard Transit Passenger Survey, March 2004
37 Current survey results show all fixed bus routes having slightly more females than males, while both the light- and commuter-rail line ridership favor males. Figure 28 What gender are you? (Q13) By Operator SDTC NCTD CVT NCT MTDB SDTI Coaster All Female 56% 51% 56% 63% 54% 45% 44% 52% Male 44% 49% 44% 37% 46% 55% 56% 48% SANDAG Onboard Transit Passenger Survey, March
38 Figure 29 Do you consider yourself? (Q14) By Year 45% 40% 35% 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% Hispanic White (non-hisp) African American Asian (non-hisp) Other % 42% 16% 5% 2% % 37% 16% 5% 5% % 37% 15% 7% 4% Figure 30 Do you consider yourself? (Q14) By Operator 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Hispanic White (non-hisp) African American (non-hisp) Asian/Pacific Is (non-hisp) SDTC NCTD CVT NCT MTDB SDTI Coaster All 30 SANDAG Onboard Transit Passenger Survey, March 2004
39 Ethnicity profiles have been relatively stable since the 1990 onboard survey. Regionally, Hispanic and White ridership shares are the same (37 percent). The Coaster is more heavily populated with White riders than the other modes. Figure 31 What ethnicity do you consider yourself? (Q14) By Operator SDTC NCTD CVT NCT MTDB SDTI Coaster ALL Hispanic 27% 46% 62% 53% 41% 43% 11% 37% White (non-hispanic) 41% 36% 18% 13% 34% 34% 74% 37% African American (non- Hisp) 19% 10% 9% 13% 13% 14% 5% 15% Asian/Pacific Is (non-hisp) 8% 5% 7% 16% 8% 5% 7% 7% Other 5% 4% 5% 5% 4% 4% 3% 4% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% SANDAG Onboard Transit Passenger Survey, March
40 Figure 32 What is your age? (Q15) By Year 35% 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% % 23% 28% 22% 6% 9% % 20% 24% 26% 7% 7% % 18% 20% 29% 11% 9% Figure 33 What is your age? (Q15) By Operator 45% 40% 35% 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% SDTC NCTD CVT NCT MTDB SDTI Coaster All 32 SANDAG Onboard Transit Passenger Survey, March 2004
41 Median age of ridership is increasing, from 30 years in both 1990 and 1995 to 34 years in the current survey. Age calculations exclude those under twelve. The increase in median age parallels a trend of the regional population, although it is more pronounced among transit riders. Regionally, median age increased from 31 to 34 between 1990 and 2003 (including ALL ages). Figure 34 What is your age? (Q15) By Operator SDTC NCTD CVT NCT MTDB SDTI Coaster All % 23% 30% 22% 19% 10% 4% 13% % 21% 22% 21% 17% 18% 5% 18% % 17% 16% 16% 18% 22% 19% 20% % 24% 19% 21% 26% 31% 41% 29% % 9% 7% 9% 11% 11% 22% 11% 60+ 9% 6% 8% 11% 9% 9% 10% 9% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% SANDAG Onboard Transit Passenger Survey, March
42 Figure 35 What is the total yearly income of all the people in your home? (Q16) By Year 40% 35% 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% Under $10,000 $10,000 - $19,999 $20,000 - $29,999 $30,000 - $39,999 $40,000 - $49,999 $50,000 - $59,999 $60,000 or more % 25% 17% 11% 7% 4% 7% % 25% 15% 10% 5% 3% 7% % 24% 16% 11% 7% 5% 10% Figure 36 What is the total yearly income of all the people in your home? (Q16) By Operator SDTC NCTD CVT NCT MTDB SDTI Coaster All Under $10,000 30% 29% 27% 36% 28% 25% 4% 27% $10,000 - $19,999 25% 21% 23% 25% 24% 26% 4% 24% $20,000 - $29,999 17% 14% 16% 16% 18% 15% 5% 16% $30,000 - $39,999 11% 12% 12% 10% 12% 11% 8% 11% $40,000 - $49,999 7% 8% 8% 5% 7% 7% 9% 7% $50,000 - $59,999 4% 5% 5% 3% 4% 5% 10% 5% $60,000 or more 7% 11% 9% 5% 8% 11% 61% 10% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 34 SANDAG Onboard Transit Passenger Survey, March 2004
43 The median household income (not adjusted for inflation) of transit ridership is $19,400. Adjusted to 1990 levels, the median income of transit ridership is $13,600. Region-wide, 27 percent of transit ridership has household incomes under $10,000, while 51 percent have household incomes under $20,000. Among all households in the San Diego region, only 7 percent have incomes of less than $10,000 annually, and 18 percent less than $20,000. SANDAG Onboard Transit Passenger Survey, March
44 Figure 37 How Do You Rate Transit Service in Your Area? (Q17) By Year 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Good Average Poor % 32% 8% % 39% 7% % 38% 9% Figure 38 How Do You Rate Transit Service in Your Area? (Q17) By Operator 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Good Average Poor SDTC NCTD CVT NCT MTDB SDTI Coaster All 36 SANDAG Onboard Transit Passenger Survey, March 2004
45 The percent share of ridership rating transit service as good has fallen by 7 percentage points since Trolley riders have the highest percentage of good responses, while SDTC has the lowest. In a companion question for Coaster riders only (not shown on table), 81 percent rated the Coaster service as good, 17 percent rated it as average, and only 2 percent rated it poor. Figure 39 How Do You Rate Transit Service in Your Area? (Q17) By Operator SDTC NCTD CVT NCT MTDB SDTI Coaster All Good 47% 49% 49% 50% 52% 62% 55% 53% Average 42% 41% 41% 42% 39% 32% 33% 38% Poor 11% 9% 10% 8% 9% 7% 12% 9% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% The following sections show results by selected demographic profiles, by individual route number, and operator-level comparisons to previous surveys SANDAG Onboard Transit Passenger Survey, March
46
47 SECTION 4 RESULTS BY DEMOGRAPHICS
48
49 SECTION 4 RESULTS BY DEMOGRAPHICS This section provides the results of the survey by the following demographic variables: 1. Gender; 2. Ethnicity; 3. Age; and 4. Income. As described in the introductory section, the data has been weighted by the number of passengers riding each route. The rows at the bottom of each table show unweighted sample sizes so that the viewer can tell how many responses were made to each question. The percentages in the columns reflect the weighted data. SANDAG Onboard Transit Passenger Survey, March
50 REGIONAL ONBOARD PASSENGER SURVEY RESULTS - BY GENDER Q13 - What gender are you? Male 48.3% Female 51.7% 100.0% Unweighted Q1 and Q4- Where are you coming from/going to? By Gender Male Female Home-Work 48.1% 43.8% 45.8% Home-School 15.5% 18.4% 17.0% Home-Shop 8.4% 10.2% 9.3% Home-Friends/Family/Rec 11.4% 8.2% 9.7% Home-Medical 3.3% 4.8% 4.1% Home-Other 4.3% 4.9% 4.6% Work-School/Rec/Shop/Med/Oth 5.1% 4.6% 4.8% School/Rec/Shop/Med/Oth - School/Rec/Shop/Med/Oth 4.1% 5.1% 4.6% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% Unweighted Q7 and Q9 - How did you get to this bus/after you get off this bus will you... By Gender Male Female Walk(ed) 53.8% 54.4% 54.1% Transfer(red) From/To Another Bus 25.5% 26.7% 26.2% Transfer(red) From/To Trolley 10.7% 10.6% 10.7% Drove/Drive alone 3.3% 3.2% 3.3% Dropped off/picked up 3.2% 3.1% 3.2% Other 2.0%.7% 1.4% Transfer(red) From/To Coaster.7%.6%.7% Carpool(ed).7%.6%.6% Pct % 100.0% 100.0% Unweighted SANDAG Onboard Transit Passenger Survey, March 2004
51 Q7 and Q9 - How many blocks did you/will you walk? By Gender Male Female 1 Block 41.5% 48.2% 45.0% 2-3 Blocks 38.4% 35.9% 37.1% 4-5 Blocks 12.4% 11.0% 11.6% 6-9 Blocks 5.7% 3.3% 4.4% 10+ Blocks 2.1% 1.6% 1.8% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% Average Blocks Unweighted Q10 - Did you have a car you could have used today instead of the bus? By Gender Male Female Yes 30.2% 22.7% 26.3% No 69.8% 77.3% 73.7% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% Unweighted Q11 - How did you pay to use this bus? By Gender Male Female Monthly Pass 56.2% 55.0% 55.6% Cash 32.7% 33.3% 33.0% Transfer 8.0% 8.1% 8.1% College Pass 2.7% 2.8% 2.8% Other.2%.5%.4% Jury Ticket.2%.2%.2% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% Unweighted SANDAG Onboard Transit Passenger Survey, March
52 Q12 - How many days/week do you ride the bus? By Gender Male Female 1 2.0% 2.1% 2.0% 2 4.2% 4.6% 4.4% 3 7.2% 7.2% 7.2% 4 7.7% 8.1% 7.9% % 36.3% 35.1% % 11.1% 11.6% % 23.1% 24.5% Less Than One Day per Week 7.1% 7.6% 7.3% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% Average (those riding 1+ days) Unweighted Q14 - Do you consider yourself...? By Gender Male Female White (non-hisp) 41.1% 34.4% 37.7% Hispanic 34.4% 37.7% 36.1% African American (non-hisp) 14.0% 15.7% 14.9% Asian (non-hisp) 5.9% 6.6% 6.3% Other 4.5% 5.5% 5.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% Unweighted SANDAG Onboard Transit Passenger Survey, March 2004
53 Q15 - What is your age? By Gender (Under 12 years of age not surveyed) Male Female % 17.7% 16.4% % 26.1% 24.7% % 18.9% 20.3% % 18.1% 19.2% % 10.6% 10.9% % 5.2% 5.5% % 2.6% 2.3% 80+.7%.7%.7% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% Average Age Unweighted Q16 - What is the total yearly income of your household? By Gender Male Female Under $10, % 31.6% 27.1% $10,000 - $19, % 24.0% 24.0% $20,000 - $29, % 15.3% 15.7% $30,000 - $39, % 10.5% 11.3% $40,000 - $49, % 6.6% 7.1% $50,000 - $59, % 4.2% 4.5% $60,000 or more 13.0% 7.8% 10.3% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% Unweighted SANDAG Onboard Transit Passenger Survey, March
54 Q17 - How do you rate transit service in your area? By Gender Male Female Good 53.9% 50.7% 52.3% Average 36.5% 40.3% 38.5% Poor 9.6% 8.9% 9.2% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% Unweighted Q18 - How many vehicles do you have available for use by all the people in your home? By Gender Male Female % 33.4% 32.3% % 33.6% 31.9% % 21.2% 22.4% 3 9.6% 7.6% 8.6% 4 3.4% 3.0% 3.2% 5 1.2%.6%.9% 6.5%.3%.4% 7.3%.2%.2% 8.1%.0%.1% 9.1%.1%.1% 10.1%.0%.1% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% Average Number of Vehicles Unweighted SANDAG Onboard Transit Passenger Survey, March 2004
55 REGIONAL ONBOARD PASSENGER SURVEY RESULTS - BY ETHNICITY Q13 -Do you consider yourself...? Hispanic 36.6% White (non-hisp) 37.2% Asian (non-hisp) 6.2% African American (non-hisp) 15.0% Other 5.0% Unweighted 100.0% Q1 and Q4- Where are you coming from/going to? By Ethnicity Hispanic White (non- Hisp) ETHNICITY Asian (non- Hisp) African American (non-hisp) Other Home-Work 47.7% 46.0% 42.0% 45.2% 38.8% 45.9% Home-School 19.6% 11.9% 29.6% 15.6% 22.5% 16.8% Home-Shop 9.6% 9.8% 7.6% 9.4% 8.3% 9.5% Home-Friends/Family/ Rec 8.3% 12.0% 6.7% 9.1% 9.1% 9.8% Home-Medical 3.9% 4.9% 1.8% 3.8% 4.7% 4.2% Home-Other 3.0% 5.4% 3.4% 6.6% 5.5% 4.6% Work-School/Rec/Shop/Med/Oth 4.8% 4.7% 3.1% 5.2% 4.7% 4.7% School/Rec/Shop/Med/Oth - School/Rec/Shop/Med/Oth 3.2% 5.3% 5.8% 5.1% 6.4% 4.6% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% Unweighted SANDAG Onboard Transit Passenger Survey, March
56 Q7 and Q9 - How did you get to this bus/after you get off this bus will you...? By Ethnicity Hispanic White (non-hisp) ETHNICITY Asian (non-hisp) African American (non-hisp) Other Walk(ed) 51.0% 56.8% 56.6% 52.8% 54.0% 54.0% Transfer(red) From/To Another Bus Transfer(red) From/To Trolley 28.9% 22.5% 23.8% 30.7% 28.7% 26.4% 12.8% 8.5% 9.5% 11.7% 10.2% 10.7% Drove/Drive alone 1.6% 5.5% 4.1% 1.2% 2.1% 3.2% Dropped off/picked up 3.8% 2.7% 3.8% 2.2% 2.6% 3.1% Other.8% 2.3%.9%.8% 1.0% 1.4% Carpool(ed).7%.8%.5%.2%.7%.6% Transfer(red) From/To Coaster.3%.9% 1.0%.5%.7%.6% Pct % 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% Unweighted Q7 and Q9 - How many blocks did you/will you walk? By Ethnicity Hispanic White (non-hisp) Asian (non-hisp) ETHNICITY African American (non-hisp) Other 1 Block 47.5% 41.8% 54.3% 46.1% 42.7% 45.1% 2-3 Blocks 35.6% 38.4% 33.4% 37.9% 38.4% 37.1% 4-5 Blocks 11.4% 12.4% 7.1% 11.6% 11.8% 11.6% 6-9 Blocks 4.0% 5.1% 3.7% 3.0% 4.5% 4.3% 10+ Blocks 1.4% 2.2% 1.6% 1.4% 2.6% 1.8% Average Blocks Unweighted 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% SANDAG Onboard Transit Passenger Survey, March 2004
57 Q10 - Did you have a car you could have used today instead of the bus? By Ethnicity Hispanic White (non-hisp) ETHNICITY Asian (non-hisp) African American (non-hisp) Other Yes 21.6% 30.2% 32.8% 22.6% 25.6% 25.9% No 78.4% 69.8% 67.2% 77.4% 74.4% 74.1% Unweighted 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% Q11 - How did you pay to use this bus? By Ethnicity Hispanic White (non-hisp) ETHNICITY Asian (non-hisp) African American (non-hisp) Other Monthly Pass 47.6% 61.1% 54.4% 60.7% 56.3% 55.5% Cash 41.3% 28.7% 25.7% 28.9% 28.6% 33.1% Transfer 9.6% 6.5% 4.6% 9.1% 9.9% 8.1% College Pass 1.2% 2.9% 14.4%.7% 4.0% 2.8% Other.4%.3%.8%.5%.9%.4% Jury Ticket.0%.4%.1%.0%.2%.2% Unweighted 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% SANDAG Onboard Transit Passenger Survey, March
58 Q12 - How many days/week do you ride the bus? By Ethnicity Hispanic White (non- Hisp) ETHNICITY Asian (non- Hisp) African American (non-hisp) Other 1 2.2% 1.9% 2.0% 1.5% 2.1% 2.0% 2 5.3% 4.2% 3.9% 3.4% 2.8% 4.4% 3 7.1% 7.5% 7.4% 6.5% 6.6% 7.1% 4 7.7% 9.1% 9.2% 6.1% 5.6% 8.0% % 34.3% 41.8% 34.4% 32.1% 35.1% % 10.2% 8.6% 11.2% 12.5% 11.6% % 24.4% 19.0% 31.0% 31.2% 24.6% Less Than One Day per Week Average (those riding 1+ days 6.5% 8.3% 8.2% 5.9% 7.1% 7.3% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% Unweighted Hispanic Q13 - What gender are you? By Ethnicity White (non-hisp) ETHNICITY Asian (non-hisp) African American (non-hisp) Other Male 45.7% 52.4% 45.1% 45.1% 42.9% 48.0% Female 54.3% 47.6% 54.9% 54.9% 57.1% 52.0% Unweighted 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% SANDAG Onboard Transit Passenger Survey, March 2004
59 Hispanic Q15 - What is your age? By Ethnicity (Under 12 years of age not surveyed) White (non-hisp) ETHNICITY Asian (non-hisp) African American (non-hisp) Other % 8.9% 12.9% 17.3% 25.2% 16.3% % 19.2% 34.2% 23.1% 25.8% 24.7% % 18.8% 20.1% 22.3% 18.7% 20.4% % 22.8% 13.8% 24.4% 16.7% 19.2% % 16.6% 8.0% 9.0% 8.8% 10.9% % 8.5% 6.5% 2.6% 3.7% 5.5% % 3.8% 3.6% 1.2% 1.0% 2.3% 80+.2% 1.4%.9%.1%.1%.6% Average Age Unweighted 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% Q16 - What is the total yearly income of your household? By Ethnicity Hispanic White (non-hisp) ETHNICITY Asian (non-hisp) African American (non-hisp) Other Under $10, % 22.7% 25.7% 24.1% 26.2% 27.3% $10,000 - $19, % 20.8% 20.2% 26.3% 20.3% 24.2% $20,000 - $29, % 15.6% 13.4% 19.0% 14.6% 15.7% $30,000 - $39, % 11.0% 13.4% 13.4% 13.5% 11.3% $40,000 - $49, % 7.4% 8.2% 6.8% 9.7% 6.8% $50,000 - $59, % 5.6% 5.8% 4.8% 6.9% 4.6% $60,000 or more 3.8% 16.9% 13.4% 5.6% 8.8% 10.1% Unweighted 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% SANDAG Onboard Transit Passenger Survey, March
60 Q17 - How do you rate transit service in your area? By Ethnicity Hispanic White (non-hisp) ETHNICITY Asian (non-hisp) African American (non-hisp) Other Good 57.3% 55.1% 47.3% 42.5% 40.0% 52.7% Average 36.3% 34.9% 44.0% 46.5% 47.2% 38.3% Poor 6.4% 10.0% 8.7% 11.1% 12.8% 9.0% Unweighted 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% Q18 - How many vehicles do you have available for use by all the people in your home? By Ethnicity Hispanic White (non-hisp) ETHNICITY Asian (non-hisp) African American (non-hisp) Other % 39.3% 19.9% 38.9% 29.1% 32.4% % 28.6% 33.9% 31.0% 31.6% 31.8% % 20.7% 26.2% 20.0% 23.8% 22.4% % 7.4% 12.2% 5.9% 9.0% 8.5% 4 3.3% 2.9% 5.1% 3.0% 4.1% 3.3% 5 1.4%.7% 1.2%.4%.8%.9% 6.4%.2%.3%.4% 1.3%.4% 7.4%.1%.4%.3%.1%.2% 8.0%.0%.5%.0%.1%.1% 9.1%.0%.1%.0%.1%.1% 10.0%.1%.2%.1%.1%.1% Average Number of Vehicles 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% Unweighted SANDAG Onboard Transit Passenger Survey, March 2004
61 REGIONAL ONBOARD PASSENGER SURVEY RESULTS - BY AGE Q15 - What is your age? (Under 12 years of age not surveyed) % % % % % % % 80+.7% 100.0% Average Age 35.9 Unweighted Q1 and Q4- Where are you coming from/going to? By Age (Under 12 years of age not surveyed) AGE Home-Work 17.7% 46.9% 57.1% 57.9% 54.3% 42.1% 16.6% 14.2% 45.8% Home-School 52.2% 20.5% 8.2% 5.5% 3.4% 2.9% 3.5% 2.8% 17.1% Home-Shop 6.7% 7.7% 8.0% 8.2% 9.4% 20.9% 24.8% 37.0% 9.2% Home-Friends/Family/Rec 9.6% 8.9% 9.3% 8.4% 11.4% 12.4% 24.5% 10.1% 9.8% Home-Medical 1.5% 2.3% 4.0% 5.5% 6.6% 8.0% 11.9% 9.6% 4.2% Home-Other 1.4% 3.2% 5.5% 6.4% 5.7% 5.9% 9.3% 9.5% 4.6% Work- School/Rec/Shop/Med/Oth School/Rec/Shop/Med/Oth - School/Rec/Shop/Med/Oth 4.8% 6.2% 3.8% 4.8% 5.2% 3.3% 1.2% 5.5% 4.8% 6.1% 4.3% 4.0% 3.3% 4.0% 4.4% 8.2% 11.3% 4.5% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% % 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% % Unweighted SANDAG Onboard Transit Passenger Survey, March
62 Q7 and Q9 - How did you get to this bus/after you get off this bus will you...? By Age (Under 12 years of age not surveyed) AGE Walk(ed) 57.9% 55.7% 53.3% 51.6% 53.4% 50.5% 56.2% 57.8% 54.3% Transfer(red) From/To Another Bus Transfer(red) From/To Trolley 25.8% 25.3% 26.6% 26.8% 25.3% 28.7% 27.9% 25.6% 26.2% 9.9% 11.1% 10.9% 10.9% 10.1% 10.1% 9.3% 11.5% 10.6% Drove/Drive alone.7% 1.9% 3.6% 4.7% 5.7% 5.0% 4.0% 1.4% 3.2% Dropped off/picked up 3.9% 3.6% 2.7% 2.8% 2.6% 2.9% 1.0% 3.0% 3.1% Other.7% 1.3% 1.8% 1.7% 1.5% 1.2%.6%.2% 1.4% Carpool(ed).6%.7%.5%.8%.5%.5%.2%.1%.6% Transfer(red) From/To Coaster.5%.3%.6%.8% 1.0%.9%.7%.5%.6% Pct % 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% Unweighted Q7 and Q9 - How many blocks did you/will you walk? By Age (Under 12 years of age not surveyed) AGE Block 49.4% 46.7% 43.2% 41.6% 39.3% 44.2% 37.4% 46.4% 44.4% 2-3 Blocks 35.0% 36.9% 37.8% 39.1% 39.5% 35.3% 41.8% 36.7% 37.5% 4-5 Blocks 9.9% 11.2% 11.5% 12.6% 14.2% 13.9% 15.9% 8.0% 11.9% 6-9 Blocks 3.7% 3.6% 5.2% 5.3% 4.2% 5.0% 4.2% 7.5% 4.4% 10+ Blocks 1.9% 1.7% 2.2% 1.4% 2.7% 1.6%.7% 1.4% 1.9% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% Average Unweighted SANDAG Onboard Transit Passenger Survey, March 2004
63 Q10 - Did you have a car you could have used today instead of the bus? By Age (Under 12 years of age not surveyed) AGE Yes 15.8% 23.0% 26.7% 30.8% 34.5% 33.8% 25.0% 24.9% 26.0% No 84.2% 77.0% 73.3% 69.2% 65.5% 66.2% 75.0% 75.1% 74.0% Unweighted 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% Q11 - How did you pay to use this bus? By Age (Under 12 years of age not surveyed) AGE Monthly Pass 58.9% 40.4% 51.5% 59.9% 65.7% 75.5% 74.5% 76.1% 55.2% Cash 29.6% 42.2% 37.8% 31.1% 25.4% 19.2% 18.3% 20.2% 33.3% Transfer 8.0% 9.8% 8.2% 7.5% 7.5% 4.6% 4.6% 3.5% 8.0% College Pass 2.8% 7.2% 2.0%.9%.4%.1%.1% 2.9% Other.6%.4%.4%.3%.6%.2% 1.2%.2%.4% Jury Ticket.1%.0%.1%.3%.2%.5% 1.5%.2% Unweighted 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% SANDAG Onboard Transit Passenger Survey, March
64 Q12 - How many days/week do you ride the bus? By Age (Under 12 years of age not surveyed) AGE % 1.7% 1.7% 2.3% 2.1% 3.3% 3.8% 4.4% 2.0% 2 3.9% 4.9% 4.3% 3.0% 4.6% 4.8% 8.4% 6.4% 4.3% 3 6.5% 7.7% 7.5% 6.3% 6.4% 8.0% 12.0% 11.7% 7.2% 4 7.5% 8.2% 7.9% 7.2% 7.6% 10.5% 13.2% 13.9% 8.0% % 34.7% 33.6% 36.8% 35.1% 29.2% 18.6% 24.1% 34.9% % 12.0% 12.5% 11.8% 11.8% 10.6% 6.3% 5.8% 11.6% % 22.1% 25.9% 26.9% 26.2% 24.4% 28.4% 28.4% 24.7% Less Than One Day per Week Average (those riding 1+days) Unweighted 7.8% 8.6% 6.6% 5.6% 6.3% 9.2% 9.3% 5.4% 7.3% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% Q13 - What gender are you? By Age (Under 12 years of age not surveyed) AGE Male 44.6% 45.6% 52.0% 51.7% 50.0% 50.7% 43.8% 46.5% 48.6% Female 55.4% 54.4% 48.0% 48.3% 50.0% 49.3% 56.2% 53.5% 51.4% Unweighted 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% SANDAG Onboard Transit Passenger Survey, March 2004
65 Q14 - Do you consider yourself...? By Age (Under 12 years of age not surveyed) AGE White (non-hisp) 20.5% 29.1% 34.6% 44.7% 57.1% 57.7% 60.9% 79.2% 37.5% Hispanic 50.9% 42.9% 38.2% 27.4% 21.9% 24.5% 19.6% 9.7% 36.2% African American (non-hisp) 15.9% 14.1% 16.4% 19.1% 12.5% 7.2% 7.7% 1.8% 15.1% Asian (non-hisp) 5.0% 8.7% 6.2% 4.5% 4.6% 7.4% 9.6% 8.8% 6.3% Other 7.7% 5.2% 4.6% 4.3% 4.0% 3.3% 2.1%.4% 5.0% Unweighted 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 7,577 8,560 6,754 6,655 4,049 1, ,540 Q16 - What is the total yearly income of your household? By Age (Under 12 years of age not surveyed) AGE Under $10, % 30.6% 26.5% 23.6% 25.5% 27.8% 27.8% 24.2% 27.2% $10,000 - $19, % 24.5% 26.1% 23.8% 22.5% 24.0% 27.6% 38.0% 24.0% $20,000 - $29, % 16.3% 16.8% 17.0% 13.2% 14.9% 16.0% 8.0% 15.8% $30,000 - $39, % 10.8% 12.1% 11.5% 9.2% 11.8% 12.2% 6.3% 11.4% $40,000 - $49, % 6.7% 6.2% 8.2% 6.9% 5.3% 8.4% 7.0% 7.1% $50,000 - $59, % 4.3% 3.9% 4.7% 5.3% 3.9% 1.8% 3.0% 4.4% $60,000 or more 11.6% 6.8% 8.4% 11.2% 17.4% 12.4% 6.2% 13.5% 10.2% Unweighted 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% SANDAG Onboard Transit Passenger Survey, March
AUTOMATED REGIONAL JUSTICE INFORMATION SYSTEM JOINT POWERS AGENCY
AUTOMATED REGIONAL JUSTICE INFORMATION SYSTEM JOINT POWERS AGENCY (A Component Unit of the SAN DIEGO ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE) San Diego, California ANNUAL FINANCIAL REPORT For
More informationEmployee contribution as a percent of salary. Multiplier at 55
Agency Name Employee type Employee contribution as a percent of salary Multiplier at 55 Multiplier at 60 Pay-in for $50,000 employee over 20 years Coronado police and fire Public Safety 0.00% 3.00% 3.00%
More informationBudget Monitoring Report Quarter ending September 30, 2014
Budget Monitoring Report Quarter ending September 30, 2014 Economic Outlook National Economy Economic recovery continues to be positive with the economy continuing to grow at a moderate pace Most economic
More information2013 STA Passenger Survey Results. Attachment E Title VI Attachment E
2013 STA Passenger Survey Results Attachment E 1 2014 Title VI Attachment E 2013 STA Passenger Survey Results Overview Spokane Transit Authority (STA) conducted its most recent passenger survey in December
More informationEVALUATION OF GROWTH SLOWING POLICIES FOR THE SAN DIEGO REGION
EVALUATION OF GROWTH SLOWING POLICIES FOR THE SAN DIEGO REGION October 2, 2001 MEMBER AGENCIES: Cities of Carlsbad, Chula Vista, Coronado, Del Mar, El Cajon, Encinitas, Escondido, Imperial Beach, La Mesa
More informationBudget Monitoring Report Quarter ending June 30, 2018
Budget Monitoring Report Quarter ending June 30, 2018 Economic Outlook National Economy The economy continued the same solid growth experienced over the past year through the current quarter Economic indicators
More informationSan Diego Metropolitan Transit System
San Diego Metropolitan Transit System San Diego, California Comprehensive Annual Financial Report and Independent Auditors Report For the years ended June 30, 2013 and 2012 PREPARED BY SAN DIEGO METROPOLITAN
More informationC J. Public Safety Allocations in the San Diego Region: Expenditures and Staffing for Fiscal Year November bulletin
bulletin C J Criminal Justice Research Division, SANDAG Public Safety Allocations in the San Diego Region: Expenditures and Staffing for Fiscal Year 2013 November 2013 Cynthia Burke, Ph.D. Liz Doroski
More informationSan Diego Metropolitan Transit System
San Diego Metropolitan Transit System San Diego, California Comprehensive Annual Financial Report and Independent Auditors Reports For the years ended June 30, 2014 and 2013 PREPARED BY SAN DIEGO METROPOLITAN
More informationONBOARD ORIGIN-DESTINATION STUDY
REPORT ONBOARD ORIGIN-DESTINATION STUDY 12.23.2014 PREPARED FOR: ANCHORAGE METROPOLITAN AREA TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM (AMATS) 55 Railroad Row White River Junction, VT 05001 802.295.4999 www.rsginc.com SUBMITTED
More informationProposition A: San Diego County Regional Fire Protection Ballot Measure
OFFICE OF THE INDEPENDENT BUDGET ANALYST REPORT Date Issued: October 8, 2008 IBA Report Number: 08-103 Ad Hoc Fire Prevention and Recovery Committee: October 13, 2008 Item Number: 2 Proposition A: San
More informationMEETING NOTICE AND AGENDA
MEETING NOTICE AND AGENDA CITIES/COUNTY TRANSPORTATION ADVISORY COMMITTEE (CTAC) SPECIAL MEETING The CTAC may take action on any item appearing on this agenda. Thursday, March 1, 2007 9:30 to 11:30 a.m.
More information2013 Triennial Customer Survey Results
2013 Triennial Customer Survey Results Board of Directors May 1, 2014 Objectives Determine who our customers are Demographics Trip purpose Mode of access Frequency of use Reasons for riding Measure whether
More informationVirginia Railway Express Annual Customer Survey Customer Opinion Survey Results
Virginia Railway Express Annual Customer Survey 2017 Customer Opinion Survey Results 1. What train do you normally take in the evening? Train Responses % of Total Manassas 325 (Departs Union Station at
More informationNORTH COUNTY TRANSIT DISTRICT
NORTH COUNTY TRANSIT DISTRICT MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL MEETING OF THE NORTH COUNTY TRANSIT DISTRICT HELD SEPTEMBER 3, 2015 CALL TO ORDER Rebecca Jones, Board Vice-Chair, called the special meeting to order
More informationMarketwatch Report January 2018
A FREE RESEARCH TOOL FROM THE North San Diego County Association of REALTORS Reporting on Detached Single-Family and Attached Single-Family Residential Activity Only Counties All Counties Overview East
More informationAppendix N. Evaluating the Performance of the Transportation Network
Appendix N Evaluating the Performance of the Transportation Network Appendix Contents Introduction Scorecard for San Diego Forward: The Performance Measures Development Process Public and Working Group
More informationADOPTED FY2018 OPERATING BUDGET FY2018 FY2022 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM AND FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDING JUNE 30, 2018 ADOPTED JUNE 15, 2017
ADOPTED FY2018 OPERATING BUDGET AND FY2018 FY2022 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDING JUNE 30, 2018 ADOPTED JUNE 15, 2017 810 MISSION AVENUE OCEANSIDE, CA 92054 2825 MAIN: (760) 966
More informationNORTH COUNTY TRANSIT DISTRICT
NORTH COUNTY TRANSIT DISTRICT COMPREHENSIVE ANNUAL FINANCIAL REPORT For the Fiscal Years Ended June 30, 2016 and 2015 810 Mission Avenue Oceanside, CA 92054 Office (760)966 6500 Fax (760)967 2001 www.gonctd.com
More informationEXECUTIVE COMMITTEE AGENDA
Board Members Mary Teresa Sessom, Chair Mayor, Lemon Grove (Representing East County) Lori Holt Pfeiler, First Vice Chair Mayor, Escondido (Representing North County Inland) Jerome Stocks, Second Vice
More informationRoundtable on Income Equality, Social Inclusion and Mobility OECD Paris
National Issues in the USA in Economic Development, Mobility and Income Inequality Roundtable on Income Equality, Social Inclusion and Mobility OECD Paris April 4,5 2016 Intent of this Paper This paper
More informationAudit Committee Agenda
BOARD MEMBERS Lorie Zapf, Chair Councilmember, City of San Diego Bill Baber, Vice Chair Councilmember, City of La Mesa Alternate At Large Bill Wells Mayor, City of El Cajon PUBLIC MEMBERS Paul Dostart
More informationCOMPREHENSIVE ANNUAL FINANCIAL REPORT
COMPREHENSIVE ANNUAL FINANCIAL REPORT For the Fiscal Years Ended June 30, 2017 and 2016 Prepared by: Finance Division, North County Transit District 810 Mission Avenue Oceanside, CA 92054 Office (760)966-6500
More informationService and Fare Change Policies. Revised Draft
Revised Draft June 19, 2013 1. INTRODUCTION It is the policy of the Sacramento Regional Transit District (RT) to provide quality service to all customers regardless of race, color, national origin, or
More information2016 Labor Market Profile
2016 Labor Market Profile Prepared by The Tyler Economic Development Council Tyler Area Sponsor June 2016 The ability to demonstrate a regions availability of talented workers has become a vital tool
More informationMetropolitan Council: Regional Parks System Visitor Study Report. November, 2016
Metropolitan Council: s System Visitor Study Report November, 2016 Table of Contents Contents Background, objectives and methodology..... 3 Total respondents by agency and sample demographics summary...
More informationMINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE NORTH COUNTY TRANSIT DISTRICT BOARD OF DIRECTORS HELD NOVEMBER 17, 2016
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE NORTH COUNTY TRANSIT DISTRICT BOARD OF DIRECTORS HELD NOVEMBER 17, 2016 CALL TO ORDER Mark Packard, Board Chair, called the regular meeting to order at 2:00 p.m. ROLL
More informationNORTH COUNTY TRANSIT DISTRICT
NORTH COUNTY TRANSIT DISTRICT COMPREHENSIVE ANNUAL FINANCIAL REPORT For the Fiscal Years Ended June 30, 2012 and 2011 810 Mission Avenue Oceanside, CA 92054 Office (760)966-6500 Fax (760)967-2001 www.gonctd.com
More informationSURVEY OF POTENTIAL OVERNIGHT SERVICE PASSENGERS 1/30/17 OPMI
SURVEY OF POTENTIAL OVERNIGHT SERVICE PASSENGERS 1/30/17 OPMI Survey Background & overview In March 2016, the FMCB ended Late Night service In Fall 2016, the FMCB directed staff to conduct a survey and
More informationDART Fare Structure Programs
DART Fare Structure Programs Budget & Finance Committee November 13, 2018 Joseph G. Costello Senior Vice President, Finance 0 Calendar Date Nov 13 Dec 11 Jan 22 Feb 26 Mar 26 Apr 23 May 28 Jun 18 Jul 18
More informationMarketing to New Residents
TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH RECORD 1402 43 Cost-Effectiveness of Direct Mail Marketing to New Residents CAROL PEDERSEN AMBRUSO In January 1989 the Tri-County Metropolitan Transportation District of Oregon
More informationMinutes NASHVILLE METROPOLITAN TRANSIT AUTHORITY BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING. January 26, 2017
Minutes NASHVILLE METROPOLITAN TRANSIT AUTHORITY BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING January 26, 2017 I. CALL TO ORDER: The regular meeting of the Nashville Metropolitan Transit Authority (MTA) Board of Directors
More informationTitle VI Fare Equity Analysis
Pioneer Valley Transit Authority Title VI Fare Equity Analysis Prepared by the Pioneer Valley Planning Commission April 12, 2012 PVTA TITLE VI FARE EQUITY ANALYSIS APRIL 12, 2012 1. CONFORMANCE WITH REGULATORY
More informationSAN DIEGO METROPOLITAN TRANSIT SYSTEM TABLE OF CONTENTS BUDGET FISCAL YEAR 2014
TABLE OF CONTENTS BUDGET FISCAL YEAR 2014 Table of Contents.... Authorizing Resolution. i iii Section 1, Introduction 1 Chief Executive Officer's Statement. 1 2 Service Area. 6 3 Description of Operator
More informationChapel Hill Transit Strategic and Financial Sustainability Plan Update
Chapel Hill Transit Strategic and Financial Sustainability Plan Update ACT January 21, 2015 Today s Agenda Overview of Chapel Hill Transit Performance Overview Funding Overview Key Challenges Overview
More informationSAN DIEGO METROPOLITAN TRANSIT SYSTEM TABLE OF CONTENTS BUDGET FISCAL YEAR 2012
SAN DIEGO METROPOLITAN TRANSIT SYSTEM TABLE OF CONTENTS BUDGET FISCAL YEAR 2012 Table of Contents.... Authorizing Resolution. i iii Section 1, Introduction 1.01 Chief Executive Officer's Statement. 1 1.02
More informationFor Lease. Free-standing Retail / Office Building 1304 Saratoga Avenue San Jose, CA
For Lease Free-standing Retail / Office Building 1304 Saratoga Avenue San Jose, CA 95117 Description Approximately 4,500 sf plus mezzanine Outstanding identity and visibility In neighborhood shopping center
More informationWake County. People love to be connected. In our cyberspace. transit plan CONNECTING PEOPLE, CONNECTING THE COUNTY
Wake County transit plan CONNECTING PEOPLE, CONNECTING THE COUNTY EXECUTIVE SUMMARY People love to be connected. In our cyberspace driven world, people can stay connected pretty much all of the time. Connecting
More informationNORTH COUNTY TRANSIT DISTRICT
NORTH COUNTY TRANSIT DISTRICT MINUTES OF THE REGULAR BOARD MEETING OF THE NORTH COUNTY TRANSIT DISTRICT HELD MARCH 17, 2016 CALL TO ORDER Mark Packard, Board Chair, called the regular meeting to order
More informationCommission District 4 Census Data Aggregation
Commission District 4 Census Data Aggregation 2011-2015 American Community Survey Data, U.S. Census Bureau Table 1 (page 2) Table 2 (page 2) Table 3 (page 3) Table 4 (page 4) Table 5 (page 4) Table 6 (page
More informationSAN DIEGO METROPOLITAN TRANSIT SYSTEM TABLE OF CONTENTS BUDGET FISCAL YEAR 2013
TABLE OF CONTENTS BUDGET FISCAL YEAR 2013 Table of Contents.... Authorizing Resolution. i iii Section 1, Introduction 1.01 Chief Executive Officer's Statement. 1 1.02 Service Area. 6 1.03 Description of
More informationDEFERRED MAINTENANCE AND THE ROUTINE RESTRICTED MAINTENCE ACCOUNT
DEFERRED MAINTENANCE AND THE ROUTINE RESTRICTED MAINTENCE ACCOUNT Beginning with fiscal year 2013/14, the Deferred Maintenance program was incorporated in to the Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF) base
More informationSan Diego County Juvenile Justice Crime Prevention Act Summary Results FY
San Diego County Juvenile Justice Crime Prevention Act Summary Results FY 2016-17 MARCH 2018 Research findings from the Criminal Justice Clearinghouse 401 B STREET, SUITE 800 SAN DIEGO, CA 92101-4231 T
More informationCOMMUTER CONNECTIONS WASHINGTON DC METROPOLITAN REGION GUARANTEED RIDE HOME (GRH) PROGRAM 2016 GRH APPLICANT SURVEY REPORT
COMMUTER CONNECTIONS WASHINGTON DC METROPOLITAN REGION GUARANTEED RIDE HOME (GRH) PROGRAM 2016 GRH APPLICANT SURVEY REPORT Prepared for: Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments Commuter Connections
More information2008 Cecil County Public Opinion Survey Results Summary
Cecil County Public Opinion Survey Results Summary Survey completed by Public National Research Center Inc. Report created by WILMAPCO September www.wilmapco.org September 29, About the Survey PURPOSE
More informationNorthwest Census Data Aggregation
Northwest Census Data Aggregation 2011-2015 American Community Survey Data, U.S. Census Bureau Table 1 (page 2) Table 2 (page 2) Table 3 (page 3) Table 4 (page 4) Table 5 (page 4) Table 6 (page 5) Table
More informationVotran Transit Development Plan (TDP) River To Sea TPO Committees September 2016
Votran Transit Development Plan (TDP) River To Sea TPO Committees September 2016 Agenda What is a TDP? Baseline Conditions Public Involvement Peer and Trend Review Situation Appraisal Goals Proposed Alternatives
More informationRiverview Census Data Aggregation
Riverview Census Data Aggregation 2011-2015 American Community Survey Data, U.S. Census Bureau Table 1 (page 2) Table 2 (page 2) Table 3 (page 3) Table 4 (page 4) Table 5 (page 4) Table 6 (page 5) Table
More informationZipe Code Census Data Aggregation
Zipe Code 66101 Census Data Aggregation 2011-2015 American Community Survey Data, U.S. Census Bureau Table 1 (page 2) Table 2 (page 2) Table 3 (page 3) Table 4 (page 4) Table 5 (page 4) Table 6 (page 5)
More informationZipe Code Census Data Aggregation
Zipe Code 66103 Census Data Aggregation 2011-2015 American Community Survey Data, U.S. Census Bureau Table 1 (page 2) Table 2 (page 2) Table 3 (page 3) Table 4 (page 4) Table 5 (page 4) Table 6 (page 5)
More information2014 Citizen Survey. Prepared for: Prince William County. Prepared by: ORC International, Inc. September, PRIVATE complies with ISO 20252
2014 Citizen Survey Prepared for: Prince William County Prepared by: ORC International, Inc. September, 2014 PRIVATE complies with ISO 20252 [Blank page inserted for pagination purposes when printing.]
More informationBoard Policy No. 7 Board Member Compensation and Travel Expense Reimbursement
Board Policy No. 7 Board Member Compensation and Travel Expense Summary This policy describes compensation and related requirements for members of the North County Transit District (NCTD) Board (Board)
More informationTechnical Appendix 2 Demographics in Support of Chapter 2
Technical Appendix 2 Demographics in Support of Chapter 2 List of Figures and Tables... 2 Introduction and Structure... 3 Introduction... 3 Structure... 4 Part One: Trends in Transit Use... 5 Younger and
More informationPOLICY PAGE. 900 Lydia Street Austin, Texas PH: / FAX:
POLICY PAGE Center for Public Policy Priorities 9 Lydia Street Austin, Texas 7872 PH: 512.32.222 / FAX: 512.32.227 www.cppp.org September 26 For More Information: Don Baylor, baylor@cppp.org No. 269 THE
More informationMeasuring the Local Economy
Inside this issue: Retail Sales 2-4 Real Estate 5 Employment, spotlight on housing values Construction 8 Spotlight on Jobs Recovery Newsletter Advisory Board Terry Carwile, Mayor, City of Craig Greg Dixson,
More information~ NOTICE OF MEETING ~ CAPITAL METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING
~ NOTICE OF MEETING ~ CAPITAL METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING 2910 East Fifth Street Austin, TX 78702 ~ AGENDA ~ Executive Assistant/Board Liaison Gina Estrada 512-389-7458
More informationBOARD OF DIRECTORS AGENDA
Board Members Jack Dale, Chair Councilmember, Santee Jim Janney, First Vice Chair Mayor, Imperial Beach Don Higginson, Second Vice Chair Mayor, Poway Matt Hall Mayor, Carlsbad Cheryl Cox Mayor, Chula Vista
More informationMonte Vista Population, ,744 4,651 4,564 4,467 4,458 4,432 4,451
1 Monte Vista 4,8 4,7 4,6 4,5 4,4 4,3 4,2 4,1 4,61 4,612 4,61 4,676 Monte Vista, 2-213 4,744 4,651 4,564 4,467 4,458 4,432 4,451 4,418 4,412 4,355 2 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 21 211 212 213 Year Monte
More information2018:IIIQ Nevada Unemployment Rate Demographics Report*
2018:IIIQ Nevada Unemployment Rate Demographics Report* Department of Employment, Training & Rehabilitation Research and Analysis Bureau Dr. Tiffany Tyler-Garner, Director Dennis Perea, Deputy Director
More informationPROPOSED SHOPPING CENTER
PROPOSED SHOPPING CENTER Southeast Corner I-95 & Highway 192 Melbourne, Florida In a 5 Mile Radius 80,862 Population 32,408 Households $61K Avg HH Income SOONER INVESTMENT Commercial & Investment Real
More informationAGENDA. Thursday, April 3, :30 AM 311 South Tremont Street, Oceanside, California
BOARD OF DIRECTORS Chairman Ed Gallo Vice-Chair Dave Roberts Bob Campbell Rocky Chavez David Druker Bill Horn Julianne Nygaard Chris Orlando Jerome Stocks AGENDA Karen King, Executive Director C. Michael
More informationBe the Change! Community impact RepoRt
Be the Change community Impact Report Be the Change Robert M. McGill, Chairman & CEO Mahatma Gandhi said, Be the change you want to see in the world. At the Neighborhood we have taken this commandment
More informationSAN DIEGO METROPOLITAN TRANSIT SYSTEM TABLE OF CONTENTS BUDGET FISCAL YEAR 2018
TABLE OF CONTENTS BUDGET FISCAL YEAR 2018 Table of Contents.... Authorizing Resolution. i iii Section 1, Introduction 1 Chief Executive Officer's Statement. 1 2 Service Area. 8 3 Description of Operator
More informationTell us what you think. Provide feedback to help make American Community Survey data more useful for you.
DP03 SELECTED ECONOMIC CHARACTERISTICS 2016 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates Supporting documentation on code lists, subject definitions, data accuracy, and statistical testing can be found on
More informationCHERRIOTS 2018 SERVICE PLAN APPENDIX A EQUITY ANALYSIS
CHERRIOTS 2018 SERVICE PLAN APPENDIX A EQUITY ANALYSIS 1. Background... 1 2. Title VI requirements... 1 3. SAMTD Title VI compliance... 2 3.1 Major service changes policy... 2 3.2 Definition of adverse
More informationAmerican Community Survey 5-Year Estimates
DP03 SELECTED ECONOMIC CHARACTERISTICS 2012-2016 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates Supporting documentation on code lists, subject definitions, data accuracy, and statistical testing can be found
More informationAmerican Community Survey 5-Year Estimates
DP03 SELECTED ECONOMIC CHARACTERISTICS 2012-2016 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates Supporting documentation on code lists, subject definitions, data accuracy, and statistical testing can be found
More informationAmerican Community Survey 5-Year Estimates
DP03 SELECTED ECONOMIC CHARACTERISTICS 2012-2016 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates Supporting documentation on code lists, subject definitions, data accuracy, and statistical testing can be found
More informationAmerican Community Survey 5-Year Estimates
DP03 SELECTED ECONOMIC CHARACTERISTICS 2012-2016 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates Supporting documentation on code lists, subject definitions, data accuracy, and statistical testing can be found
More informationAmerican Community Survey 5-Year Estimates
DP03 SELECTED ECONOMIC CHARACTERISTICS 2012-2016 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates Supporting documentation on code lists, subject definitions, data accuracy, and statistical testing can be found
More informationAmerican Community Survey 5-Year Estimates
DP03 SELECTED ECONOMIC CHARACTERISTICS 2012-2016 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates Supporting documentation on code lists, subject definitions, data accuracy, and statistical testing can be found
More informationAmerican Community Survey 5-Year Estimates
DP03 SELECTED ECONOMIC CHARACTERISTICS 2012-2016 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates Supporting documentation on code lists, subject definitions, data accuracy, and statistical testing can be found
More informationAmerican Community Survey 5-Year Estimates
DP03 SELECTED ECONOMIC CHARACTERISTICS 2012-2016 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates Supporting documentation on code lists, subject definitions, data accuracy, and statistical testing can be found
More informationAmerican Community Survey 5-Year Estimates
DP03 SELECTED ECONOMIC CHARACTERISTICS 2012-2016 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates Supporting documentation on code lists, subject definitions, data accuracy, and statistical testing can be found
More informationAmerican Community Survey 5-Year Estimates
DP03 SELECTED ECONOMIC CHARACTERISTICS 2012-2016 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates Supporting documentation on code lists, subject definitions, data accuracy, and statistical testing can be found
More informationAmerican Community Survey 5-Year Estimates
DP03 SELECTED ECONOMIC CHARACTERISTICS 2012-2016 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates Supporting documentation on code lists, subject definitions, data accuracy, and statistical testing can be found
More informationAmerican Community Survey 5-Year Estimates
DP03 SELECTED ECONOMIC CHARACTERISTICS 2012-2016 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates Supporting documentation on code lists, subject definitions, data accuracy, and statistical testing can be found
More informationAmerican Community Survey 5-Year Estimates
DP03 SELECTED ECONOMIC CHARACTERISTICS 2012-2016 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates Supporting documentation on code lists, subject definitions, data accuracy, and statistical testing can be found
More informationAmerican Community Survey 5-Year Estimates
DP03 SELECTED ECONOMIC CHARACTERISTICS 2012-2016 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates Supporting documentation on code lists, subject definitions, data accuracy, and statistical testing can be found
More informationAmerican Community Survey 5-Year Estimates
DP03 SELECTED ECONOMIC CHARACTERISTICS 2012-2016 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates Supporting documentation on code lists, subject definitions, data accuracy, and statistical testing can be found
More informationAmerican Community Survey 5-Year Estimates
DP03 SELECTED ECONOMIC CHARACTERISTICS 2012-2016 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates Supporting documentation on code lists, subject definitions, data accuracy, and statistical testing can be found
More informationAmerican Community Survey 5-Year Estimates
DP03 SELECTED ECONOMIC CHARACTERISTICS 2012-2016 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates Supporting documentation on code lists, subject definitions, data accuracy, and statistical testing can be found
More informationAmerican Community Survey 5-Year Estimates
DP03 SELECTED ECONOMIC CHARACTERISTICS 2012-2016 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates Supporting documentation on code lists, subject definitions, data accuracy, and statistical testing can be found
More informationAmerican Community Survey 5-Year Estimates
DP03 SELECTED ECONOMIC CHARACTERISTICS 2012-2016 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates Supporting documentation on code lists, subject definitions, data accuracy, and statistical testing can be found
More informationAmerican Community Survey 5-Year Estimates
DP03 SELECTED ECONOMIC CHARACTERISTICS 2012-2016 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates Supporting documentation on code lists, subject definitions, data accuracy, and statistical testing can be found
More informationAmerican Community Survey 5-Year Estimates
DP03 SELECTED ECONOMIC CHARACTERISTICS 2012-2016 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates Supporting documentation on code lists, subject definitions, data accuracy, and statistical testing can be found
More informationAmerican Community Survey 5-Year Estimates
DP03 SELECTED ECONOMIC CHARACTERISTICS 2012-2016 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates Supporting documentation on code lists, subject definitions, data accuracy, and statistical testing can be found
More informationAmerican Community Survey 5-Year Estimates
DP03 SELECTED ECONOMIC CHARACTERISTICS 2012-2016 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates Supporting documentation on code lists, subject definitions, data accuracy, and statistical testing can be found
More informationAmerican Community Survey 5-Year Estimates
DP03 SELECTED ECONOMIC CHARACTERISTICS 2012-2016 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates Supporting documentation on code lists, subject definitions, data accuracy, and statistical testing can be found
More informationAmerican Community Survey 5-Year Estimates
DP03 SELECTED ECONOMIC CHARACTERISTICS 2012-2016 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates Supporting documentation on code lists, subject definitions, data accuracy, and statistical testing can be found
More informationAmerican Community Survey 5-Year Estimates
DP03 SELECTED ECONOMIC CHARACTERISTICS 2012-2016 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates Supporting documentation on code lists, subject definitions, data accuracy, and statistical testing can be found
More informationItem #4 FEBRUARY 10, 2015 MEETING MINUTES PG. 2 Approve the February 10, 2015 meeting minutes.
AGENDA HERITAGE VALLEY TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE (HVTAC) Thursday, March 19, 2015, 1:30 p.m. Santa Paula City Hall, Council Chambers 970 Ventura Street, Santa Paula, CA 93060 Item #1 Item #2 Item #3
More informationLake Tahoe Basin Census Trends Report
Lake Tahoe Basin Census Trends Report 1990-2000-2010 Prepared August 2013 Contents Page Executive Summary 1 Findings 1 Definitions 3 Section 1. Demographics 4 Population 4 Age 6 Race 6 Housing 10 Tenancy
More informationAgenda MEETING OF THE SAN DIEGO METROPOLITAN TRANSIT SYSTEM BOARD OF DIRECTORS. May 11, :00 a.m.
1255 Imperial Avenue, Suite 1000 San Diego, CA 92101-7490 619.231.1466 FAX 619.234.3407 Agenda MEETING OF THE SAN DIEGO METROPOLITAN TRANSIT SYSTEM BOARD OF DIRECTORS 1. Roll Call May 11, 2017 9:00 a.m.
More informationSAN DIEGO LAFCO MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING JULY 7, 2003
SAN DIEGO LAFCO MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING JULY 7, 2003 There being a quorum present, the meeting was convened at 9:00 a.m. by Chairwoman Dianne Jacob. Also present were: Regular Commissioners Councilmember
More informationBOARD OF SUPERVISORS 2018 TRANSIT SUMMIT INFORMATION ITEM. Countywide
Date of Meeting: June 25, 2018 #I-1 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 2018 TRANSIT SUMMIT INFORMATION ITEM SUBJECT: ELECTION DISTRICT(S): STAFF CONTACTS: Advisory Boards Comments Countywide Scott Gross, Transportation
More informationRifle city Demographic and Economic Profile
Rifle city Demographic and Economic Profile Community Quick Facts Population (2014) 9,289 Population Change 2010 to 2014 156 Place Median HH Income (ACS 10-14) $52,539 State Median HH Income (ACS 10-14)
More information2015 Edmonton and Region Household Travel Survey
2015 Edmonton and Region Household Travel Survey Summary Report April 2018 Prepared by: City of Edmonton R.A. Malatest & Associates Ltd. Acknowledgements The 2015 Edmonton and Region Household Travel Survey
More informationWhite Pine County. Economic and Demographic Profile, 1999
TECHNICAL REPORT UCED 99/2000-18 White Pine County Economic and Demographic Profile, 1999 UNIVERSITY OF NEVADA, RENO White Pine County Economic and Demographic Profile, 1999 Study Conducted by: Shawn W.
More informationWashington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority Metro Budget Overview
Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority Metro Budget Overview February 2011 Metro 10,877 Employees (10,974 budgeted) 1,491 Buses 588 Escalators and 237 Elevators 106 Miles of Track 92 Traction Power
More information