ATTACHMENT 1

Chapel Hill Transportation Management Plan

2005 Employee Travel Survey Results

Introduction and Description

The Town of Chapel Hill Transportation Management Plan (TMP) is intended to reduce the use of single-occupancy vehicles and encourage travel by alternative modes of transportation.  The TMP requires the presence of transportation coordinators at each site, annual transportation reports, and a biennial travel survey.  The TMP began in 1991, and now applies to 74 developments containing almost 300 tenants.  It applies to employers in Chapel Hill who are located in developments which have been approved for Special Use Permits.  In addition, the TMP applies to all departments of the Town of Chapel Hill government. 

A travel behavior survey is required of each business and all employees at TMP sites.  It asks questions about place of residence, commuting time and distance, transit use, and reasons which may motivate people to change their commuting behavior.  The results of this survey are used to profile the commuters in Chapel Hill and to determine how best to serve their needs.  In 2005, survey packets were sent to 74 sites containing approximately 292 employers and 7,962 employees.  Of the surveys distributed, 153 employer surveys and 3,966 employee surveys were returned.  The employee response rate was 49.8%, slightly below the goal of 50% (See Table 1).

Table 1. TMP employee response rate 2001 - 2005

TMP Profile	2001	2003	2005
# Sites Surveyed	36	61	74
# Employers	115	266	292
# Employees	4000	5500	7962
# Surveys returned	2385	2581	3966
Response Rate	59.6%	46.9%	49.8%

This document is a basic overview of TMP employee commuting behavior reported in the 2005 employee survey.  It also discusses changes in the characteristics of TMP employees and their commuting patterns over time from 1999 to 2005.  Though some data is available from the years 1994, 1995, and 1996, data is available for more than 1000 respondents only for the years from 1999 to present, thus only these years were used for historical comparison.  The growth of the TMP survey as more sites are included means that results from year to year are not directly comparable.  It is also important to note that every question was not answered by all employees therefore the number of respondents may vary between tables.  

Place of Residence

In 2005, employees at TMP sites commuted to work from 72 different towns in 20 counties.  Ninety-seven percent of these employees commuted to Chapel Hill from Orange County and the neighboring counties of Alamance, Chatham, Durham, and Wake.  Of those employees, 48% commuted from within Orange County, and 33% commuted from within Chapel Hill.  Table 2 shows the most popular residential locations of TMP employees.

Table 2. Municipalities with more than 30 TMP Employees

Town	County	Number of Employees	Percent of Employees
Chapel Hill	Orange	924	34.2%
Durham	Durham	601	22.3%
Carrboro	Orange	206	7.6%
Hillsborough	Orange	172	6.4%
Raleigh	Wake	135	5.0%
Pittsboro	Chatham	116	4.3%
Mebane	Alamance	84	3.1%
Cary	Wake	74	2.7%
Graham	Alamance	46	1.7%
Efland	Orange	43	1.6%
Apex	Wake	42	1.6%
Burlington	Alamance	35	1.3%

The majority of TMP employees commute from locations outside Chapel Hill.  Since 1999, the percentage of employees living within Chapel Hill has decreased by 6%.  The percentage of employees has grown by 2.6% for Durham, 1.9% for Wake County, and 1.1% for areas classified as other.  The percentage of employees living in Carrboro, Hillsborough, Alamance County, and Chatham County have all changed by less than 1%.

Table 3. TMP employee locations of residence by percent 1999-2005

	Employees by Percent (%)
Residence	1999	2001	2003	2005*	% Change
Chapel Hill	40.2	62.8	36.6	34.2	-6.0
Carrboro	6.7	4.3	7.1	7.6	0.9
Durham	19.7	13.6	25.0	22.3	2.6
Hillsborough	7.3	4.0	5.3	6.4	-0.9
Alamance County	7.3	4.6	6.2	7.5	0.2
Chatham County	5.0	5.0	3.9	5.3	0.3
Wake County	8.9	3.2	10.3	10.8	1.9
Other	4.8	2.5	5.7	5.9	1.1
# of Respondents	1,058	2,318	2,581	2,611

* Blue Cross/Blue Shield did not report residence data for its 1,137 employees

Travel Mode

Survey results indicate that almost 90% of TMP employees travel to work in a single occupancy vehicle.  This percentage has decreased slightly since 1999, corresponding with an increase in all of the listed alternative modes.  The largest increase is in transit use, which may be due to the fact that the Chapel Hill Transit bus system went fare-free during this time period.

Table 4. TMP Employee commute modes by percent, 1999 to 2005

	Employees by Percent (%)
Mode	1999	2001	2003	2005	% Change
Drive Alone	90.6	93.5	90	88.4	-2.2
Carpool	5.6	3.7	3.5	6.3	0.7
Transit	1.9	0.7	2.1	2.5	0.6
Walk	1.4	1.4	1.2	1.9	0.5
Bicycle	0.1	0.6	0.2	0.5	0.4
# of Respondents	1,056	2,329	2,581	3,748

Figure 1. TMP Employee commute modes by percent, 1999 to 2005

Commute Distance & Time

In 2005, almost 40% of TMP employees commuted more than 20 miles one-way to Chapel Hill.  Since 1999, the largest decrease is evident in those employees commuting less than 5 miles.  The largest increase is evident in those employees commuting more than 20 miles.  This shows a general trend towards employees living further from work, which is supported by residential location data.  TMP employees in 2005 were more likely to travel less than 10 minutes or more than 30 minutes to work than previously.  The percentage of employees commuting between 15 and 30 minutes has decreased a great deal.  This seems to show that employees in 2005 were more likely to live either very close to or very far from work than in the past.

Table 5. TMP Employee commute distances, 1999-2005

	Employees by Percent (%)
Distance	1999	2001	2003	2005	% Change
Less than 5 miles	27.0	17.8	21.3	22.3	-4.7
5 to 10 miles	25.1	20.3	27.0	25.9	0.8
10 to 20 miles	26.7	23.7	27.0	26.0	-0.7
More than 20 miles	21.2	38.1	21.6	25.8	4.6
# of respondents	1,041	2,381	2,581	3,748

Figure 2. TMP employee commute distances, 1999-2005

Table 6. TMP Employee commute times, 1999-2005

	Employees by Percent (%)
Time	1999	2001	2003	2005	% Change
Less than 10 minutes	6.8	7.1	17.5	17.3	10.5
10-15 minutes	24.5	20.7	24.3	23.6	-0.9
15-30 minutes	56.4	42.6	37.0	36.3	-20.1
More than 30 minutes	12.2	30.0	21.1	22.7	10.5
# of respondents	1,041	2,381	2,581	3,748

Figure 3. TMP employee commute times, 1999-2005

Commute Time of Day

Survey results show that most TMP employees continue to maintain traditional work days, resulting in clear morning and evening peak travel periods.  However, results also indicate that a majority of TMP employees in 2005 traveled to work outside the hour of 7:30 to 8:30 in the morning.  Other evidence of increased alternative work schedules includes a 10.6% increase in the percentage of employees arriving at work after 8:30 since 1999.

Figure 4.  2005 TMP Employee Arrive at Work and Leave from Work Times

Table 7. TMP Employee work arrival times, 1999 – 2005

	Employees by Percent
Time	1999	2001	2003	2005	% Change
Before 7:30 AM	28.6	33.9	20.4	11.4	-17.2
7:30 - 8:30 AM	53.6	44.8	46.4	71.0	17.4
After 8:30 AM	17.8	21.3	33.3	17.6	-0.2
# respondents	1017	2326	2183	2402

Figure 5. TMP employee work arrival times, 1999 – 2005

Commuter Behavior Changes

In the 2005 survey, 1697 people (61.1%) had never used transit.  Possible reasons for the lack of transit use among TMP employees include the reported data that 839 people did not work and 1694 did not live near a transit stop.  However at the majority of businesses, employee reports regarding transit service contradicted each other.  In these cases, some employees reported that there was not transit service within a 5 minute walk of their work while others reported that there was.  The level of detail provided in the survey is not sufficient to make a determination about the extent to which people’s perception differed from the actual transit presence. However, this shows the need for better information provision in encouraging transit use.  People who do not perceive that they work or live close to transit are unlikely to use those services even if they exist.

Determining what incentives could change people’s commuting behavior is important for future efforts to reduce SOV commuting.  Of the TMP employees, 1222 (44.1%) said they would not consider changing their commuting habits at this time.  However, many employees reported that they would be willing to consider changing their behavior for a number of reasons (See Table 8 for full list of reasons).  The largest portion, 945 (34.1%) employees, said that they would consider change their commuting habits if they could save money.  Others said they would consider a change if they could vanpool, had help setting up a vanpool, or had a carpool partner.  More than 200 employees reported that they would be willing to changing if they had more information about transit and ridesharing.  These answers indicate a general willingness by many people to use alternative modes if those modes are made more attractive through information, experience, and monetary savings.

Table 8. Reasons reported for considering commuting change

Reason employee would change commuting habits	Number of Employees	Percent of Employees *
Could Save Money	945	34.1%
Transit was more convenient	619	22.3%
Had an Emergency Ride Home	505	18.2%
Could find a Carpool Partner	475	17.1%
Didn't have to rideshare every day	262	9.5%
Could Vanpool	219	7.9%
Had Information about Transit/Ridesharing	172	6.2%
Had Reserved/Preferred Parking	140	5.1%
Had help setting up a vanpool	63	2.3%
Would not consider changing now	1222	44.1%
Total	4622

* Employees could select multiple options; percentages are out of total employees, not total responses

The TMP survey also gathered information about employee activity levels during the workday (See Table 9). More than 16% of employees reported walking or biking on short errands or to nearby meetings.  However, only 6% of employees reported that they walk, bike, or take the bus to lunch during the week.  Though it is uncertain how many employees bring lunch or eat at on-site locations, it is likely that some percentage of employees travel by auto to lunch, adding to mid-day traffic.  Though 11.6% of employees reported using their lunch break for exercise, it is not known what type of exercise that is (i.e. traveling to a gym, exercising on site) Overall, the majority of TMP employees do not walk or bike during the day.

Table 9. Activities reported during the workday

While at work employees…	Number of Employees	Percent of Employees*
Walk or bike on short errands or to nearby meetings	947	16.4%
Use your lunch break to exercise 1-2 times/week	672	11.6%
Use your lunch break to exercise 3-5 times/week	389	6.7%
Use your lunch break for at least 30 minutes of other, moderate physical activity 1-2 times/week	314	5.4%
Walk, bike, or take the bus to lunch 1-2 times/week	185	3.2%
Walk, bike, or take the bus to lunch 3-5 times/week	159	2.8%
Use your lunch break for at least 30 minutes of other, moderate physical activity 3-5 times/week	118	2.0%
Total	6448

* Employees could select multiple options; percentages are out of total employees, not total responses

Comparison to UNC and Regional Data

Data from recent travel behavior surveys for the Triangle region and for UNC employees can be compared to TMP data to further explore commuting patterns.  The top residential locations for UNC employees are very similar to TMP employees, though a slightly higher percentage of TMP employees reside in Chapel Hill.  Data for the region was not compared due to the large difference in work location destinations for that sample.

Table 10. Residential Locations for TMP and UNC Employees

		Percent of Employees (%)
Town	County	TMP	UNC	Difference
Chapel Hill	Orange	34.2	31.2	3.0
Durham	Durham	22.3	23.3	-1.0
Carrboro	Orange	7.6	7.7	-0.1
Hillsborough	Orange	6.4	4.4	2.0
Raleigh	Wake	5.0	4.2	0.8
Pittsboro	Chatham	4.3	4.8	-0.5
Mebane	Alamance	3.1	3.2	-0.1
Cary	Wake	2.7	3.1	-0.4
Graham	Alamance	1.7	3.1	-1.4
Efland	Orange	1.6	<1.0	<0.5
Apex	Wake	1.5	2.0	-0.5
Burlington	Alamance	1.3	2.2	-0.9

TMP employees are less likely to live within 5 miles of their work than UNC employees.  TMP employees are also less likely to live more than 20 miles from their work.  Though travel time data is not directly comparable due to different categories for time, it is notable that UNC employees are less likely to commute less than 10 minutes.  This reflects the fact that UNC employees are more likely to use alternative modes, since modes such as transit have higher travel time than autos.  Detailed data about distance to work was not available from the regional survey, but the average trip distance for Home-based work trips in the region was 9.61 miles.

Table 11. Distance to Work for TMP and UNC Employees

Mode choice for TMP employees and UNC employees is very different.  Only 69.9% of UNC employees drive alone, compared to 88.3% of TMP employees.  UNC employees are much more likely to use Park and Ride or transit than TMP employees.  A higher percentage of UNC employees uses all alternative modes except carpooling.  The mode choice for TMP employees is quite similar, however, to data for the entire region.  TMP employees were more likely to use transit or walk than regional employees, but percentages for drive alone and carpool were very close to the same values.

Table 12. Mode Choice for TMP, UNC, and Regional Employees

	Employees by Percent (%)
Mode	TMP	UNC	Region
Drive Alone	88.4	69.9	88.6
Carpool	6.3	4.7	7.1
Transit	2.5	10.1	0.7
Walk	1.9	2.7	1.7*
Bicycle	0.5	2.9	1.7*
Park and Ride	0.4	17.4	-
Vanpool	0.1	3.4	-
Motorcycle	-	1.0	-
Dropped off	-	6.1	-
Other	-	3.4	-

* The Triangle survey aggregated walk and bike as “Non-motorized Transit.” The percentage

reflected in this chart for both walk and bike is half the value for Non-motorized Transit.

TMP Comparison – Town of Chapel Hill Employees versus Other Employees

Table 13, Top Residential Locations by County

	Employees by Percent
County	Town	Other TMP	Difference
Orange	46.6	48.4	-1.8
Durham	17.4	24.1	-6.7
Alamance	12.1	5.6	6.5
Chatham	11.8	8.1	3.7
Wake	7.2	10.4	-3.2
Guilford	2.0	0.4	1.6

Table 14, Top Residential Locations by Town

		Employees by Percent
Town	County	Town	Other TMP	Difference
Chapel Hill	Orange	21.1	35.8	-14.7
Durham	Durham	19.6	22.6	-3.0
Hillsborough	Orange	10.4	5.9	4.5
Carrboro	Orange	6.1	7.8	-1.7
Pittsboro	Chatham	6.1	4.1	2.0
Efland	Orange	5.0	1.2	3.8
Mebane	Alamance	4.6	2.9	1.7
Graham	Alamance	4.3	1.4	2.9
Burlington	Alamance	3.6	1.0	2.6
Raleigh	Wake	3.2	5.2	-2.0
Apex	Wake	2.5	1.4	1.1
Cary	Wake	2.1	2.8	-0.7
Haw River	Alamance	1.8	0.3	1.5
Snow Camp	Alamance	1.4	0.5	0.9
Greensboro	Guilford	1.0	0.3	0.7

Table 15, Mode Choice

	Percent of Employees (%)
Mode	Town	Other TMP	Difference
Drive Alone	91.6	88.0	3.6
Carpool	4.5	6.5	-2.0
Bus	1.9	2.6	-0.7
Walk	1.0	2.0	-1.0
Bicycle	1.0	0.4	0.6
Park & Ride	0.0	0.4	-0.4
Vanpool	0.0	0.1	-0.1

Table 16, Transit Information

	Percent of Employees (%) who have used transit before			Percent of Employees (%) who WORK within a 5-minute walk of a transit stop			Percent of Employees (%) who LIVE within a 5-minute walk of a transit stop
	Town	Other TMP	Difference	Town	Other TMP	Difference	Town	Other TMP	Difference
Yes	72.8	34.2	38.6	58.4	62.0	-3.6	20.0	33.8	-13.8
No	27.2	65.8	-38.6	40.3	29.3	11.0	75.4	58.8	16.6
Unknown	-	-	-	1.3	8.8	-7.5	4.6	7.4	-2.8

Table 17, Willingness to Change

	Percent of Employees (%)
Reason employee would change commuting habits	Town	Other TMP	Difference
Could Save Money	41.0	29.6	11.4
Had an Emergency Ride Home	23.6	15.6	8.0
Transit was more convenient	13.8	20.8	-7.0
Could find a Carpool Partner	11.5	15.9	-4.4
Didn't have to rideshare every day	11.5	8.2	3.3
Could Vanpool	8.5	7.0	1.5
Had Reserved/Preferred Parking	4.3	4.6	-0.3
Had help setting up a vanpool	3.3	1.9	1.4
Had Information about Transit/Ridesharing	2.3	6.0	-3.7
Would not consider changing now	37.7	40.0	-2.3

Table 18, Continuous Basis

	Percent of Employees (%)
Employee would be willing to do on a continuous basis	Town	Other TMP	Difference
Work a reduced week (4-10's or 9-8's)	43.3	31.8	11.5
Use the bus for free	21.6	25.0	-3.4
Arrive at work before 7:30 AM or after 9:00 AM	17.4	18.1	-0.7
Carpool if free/preferred parking was provided	10.2	12.1	-1.9
Commute by bicycle if storage/showers/lockers were available	6.2	6.6	-0.4
Commute by walking	4.9	6.0	-1.1
None of the above	32.1	26.4	5.7