Table Of Content388.041 2001
T6tss
2002
fRANSPORTATION STAKEHOLDER
SURYEY
MONTANA STATE LIBRARY
t 3 E. 6th AVE.
TranPlan A 55<9520
21
I 2001 I
MONTANASTATELIBRARY
3 0864 1001 5333
DATE DUE
V;
7
JHI :
DEMCO 38-301
—
TranPlan 21
—
2001
2001
TRANSPORTATION
STAKEHOLDER
SURVEY
TranPlan Public Involvement
21
Prepared by:
Montana Department ofTransportation
&
Rail, Transit, Planning Division
Multimodal Planning Bureau
MARCH
2002
2001 StakeholderSurvey
Digitized by the Internet Archive
in 2012 with funding from
Montana State Library
http://archive.org/details/2001transport10130mont
1
List ofTables and Figures
ii
Executive Summary
1
Introduction 2
Survey Format 3
Stakeholders Satisfaction with the 3
Prioritizing Actions to Improve the -
Transportation System
New Questions 7
MDT's Role in Economic Development 7
MDT's Customer Service and Performance Grades 8
Bicycle and Pedestrian Stakeholder Group 9
Economic Development Stakeholder Group 15
Environmental Group 20
Intermodal Freight Stakeholder Group 27
Local Government Stakeholder Groups 32
City Stakeholder Group
County Stakeholder Group
Passenger Transportation Stakeholder Group 4
State, Federal, and Local Government
7
Stakeholder Group
Native American Tribes Stakeholder Group 53
Appendix A-
. i
Stakeholder Surveys
2001 StakeholderSurvey
i
Table 1: Stakeholder Groups 3
Table 2: Possible MDT Economic Development Actions 7
Table 3: MDT Customer Service Grades 8
Table 4: Possible MDT Economic Development Actions-
12
Bicycle/Pedestrian Group
Table 5: Customer Service Grades-Bicycle/Pedestrian Group 13
Table 6: Possible MDT Economic Development Actions-
17
Economic Development Group
Table 7: Customer Service Grades-Economic Development
18
Group
Table 8: Possible MDT Economic Development Actions-
23
Environmental Group
Table 9: Customer Service Grades-Environmental Group 24
Table 10: Possible MDT Economic Development Actions-
30
Intermodal Freight
Table 11: Customer Service GradesTntermodal Freight Group 30
Table 12: Possible MDT Economic Development Actions-Cities 35
Table 13: Possible MDT Economic Development Actions-
36
Counties
Table 14: Customer Service Grades-Cities 37
Table 15: Customer Service Grades-Counties 38
Table 16: Possible MDT Economic Development Actions-
44
Passenger Transportation Group
Table 17: Customer Service Grades-Passenger Transportation
45
Group
Table 18: Possible MDT Economic Development Actions-
50
Government Groups
Table 19: Customer Service Grades-Government Group 51
Table 20: Possible MDT Economic Development Actions-Native
56
American Tribes
Table 21: Customer Service Grades-Native American Tribes 57
2001 StakeholderSurvey
ii
11
Figure 1: Stakeholder Group Comparison - System Satisfaction 4
Figure la: Stakeholder History - System Satisfaction 4
Figure 2: Overall Satisfaction with the Transportation System 5
Figure 3: Stakeholder Group Comparison - System Priorities 6
Figure 3a: Stakeholder History - System Priorities 6
Figure 4: Bicycle/Pedestrian Group - System Satisfaction 9
Figure 4a: Bicycle/Pedestrian Group History - System Satisfaction 10
Figure 5: Bicycle/Pedestrian Group - System Priorities 10
Figure 5a: Bicycle/Pedestrian Group History - System Priorities 1
Figure 6: Economic Development Group - System Satisfactions 15
Figure 7: Economic Development Group-System Priorities 16
Figure 8: Environmental Group - System Satisfaction 20
Figure 8a: Environmental Group History - System Satisfaction 2
Figure 9: Environmental Group - System Priorities 22
Figure 9a: Environmental Group History - System Priorities 22
Figure 10: Intermodal Freight Group - System Satisfaction 27
Figure 10a: Intermodal Freight Group History - System Satisfaction 28
Figure 1 1: Intermodal Freight Group - System Priorities 28
Figure 11a: Intermodal Freight Group History - System Priorities 29
Figure 12: Local Government-Cities - System Satisfaction 32
Figure 13: Local Government-Counties - System Satisfaction 33
Figure 14: Local Government-Cities - System Priorities 34
Figure 15: Local Government-Counties - System Priorities 34
200 StakeholderSurvey
1
hi
Figure 16: Passenger Transportation Group - System Satisfac-
41
tion
Figure 16a: Passenger Transportation Group History - System 42
Satisfaction
Figure 17: Passenger Transportation Group - System Priorities 42
Figure 17a: Passenger Transportation Group History - System Pri-
43
orities
Figure 18: Government Group - System Satisfaction 47
Figure 18a: Government Group History - System Satisfaction 48
Figure 19: Government Group - System Priorities 49
Figure 19a: Government Group History - System Priorities 49
Figure 20: Native American Tribes - System Satisfaction 53
Figure 21: Native American Tribes - Overall Satisfaction with the 54
Transportation System
Figure 22: Native American Tribes - System Priorities 55
2001 StakeholderSurvey
iv
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
In 2001, MDT's stakeholder groups are:
Generally satisfied with Montana's transportation system
Most satisfied with the interstate system
Least satisfied with passenger rail service
Out of a list of twenty-one possible actions to improve Montana's transporta-
tion system, the highest priority actions for the stakeholders are:
Improve other roads/streets
Provide year round access to rest areas
The lowest priority action for the stakeholders is reduce single occupancy ve-
hicle use.
When compared to the previous stakeholder surveys done since 1997:
Satisfaction with the transportation system components has changed little.
Overall satisfaction with Montana's transportation system has improved or
stayed the same with the stakeholder groups, except for the bicycle/
pedestrian and environmental groups, whose satisfaction decreased.
Possible system improvement priorities remain the same as mostly medium
priorities, except for 'minimize impacts on environment from construction'
and 'ensure adequate bicycle facilities' which have dropped to a low priority
rating.
The stakeholder groups' top priorities for possible actions for MDT involve-
ment with economic development are:
Maintain and modernize Montana's existing transportation system based
on forecast needs
Work to improve commercial air service to Montana
The stakeholder groups' bottom priority for MDT's role in economic develop-
ment
is:
Redirect funds from statewide improvement efforts to expansion projects on
specific corridors to attract economic development
MDT's overall customer service and performance grades are in the C to B-
range, slightly lower than the public's customer service grades in the 2001
Telephone Survey.
200 StakeholderSurvey
1
1
INTRODUCTION and combining the urban area plan-
ners into the state and federal govern-
ment group. An economic development
The primary purpose of this report
interest group and local government
is to document the data collected
group consisting of city and county of-
through the 200 Montana Department
1 ficials were added. Each group has di-
ofTransportation Stakeholder Survey.
verse transportation interests and
It also references the 2001 Public In-
gives a statewide representation. The
volvement Telephone Survey for a com-
groups included:
parison between the general public
Bicycle and pedestrian interests
and transportation stakeholders. In
Economic development associa-
addition, the report provides a com-
tions, business organizations, local
parison to the 1997 and 1999 Trans-
development corporations and as-
portation Stakeholder Surveys.
sociations
Environmental organizations and
Stakeholder surveys are an impor-
associations
tant part of MDT's public involvement
Commercial trucking, rail freight,
process. They examine transportation
air freight, and intermodal interests
stakeholders' perception of the current
Passenger transportation interests
condition Montana's transportation
including local transit, intercity
system and consider possible actions
bus, rail, and air
and priorities that could be taken by
Metropolitan Planning Organiza-
MDT
to improve the transportation
tions, urban areas, and state and
system. The public involvement proc-
federal agencies
ess affords citizens, constituency
County Commissions
groups, transportation providers, local
Mayors and Chief Executives of cit-
governments, Montana's Native Ameri-
ies and towns
can tribes, and state and federal agen-
cies the opportunity to participate in
planning and project development. Stakeholders were selected from
MDT's Newsline database, which con-
Public involvement at the planning
level reduces the potential for future sists of individuals, organizations, as-
sociations, businesses, government
controversy, results in a better state-
wide transportation system, and al- agencies, and local government offi-
lows for open communication between cials with an interest in transportation
the Department and citizens of Mon- related issues. In addition to the
tana. The surveys also help MDT staff stakeholder groups listed above, sur-
determine changes in public opinion veys were also sent to Montana's Na-
that indicate a need to update Mon- tive American tribes. Unlike respon-
tana's statewide multimodal transpor- dents of the other groups, the tribes
were not considered a homogeneous
tation plan, TranPlan 21.
stakeholder group. The analysis of the
In 2001, the stakeholder groups data for each responding tribe was
were changed from the 1997 and 1999 done separately to ensure that each
surveys by adding three more groups was represented as a sovereign nation.
2001 StakeholderSurvey
2
