Viable Transportation Options for WWU

1
Viable Transportation Options for WWU
March 10th, 2004

• Presented By
• Nick Bond
• Seth Christian
• Mark Hamilton
• Ted Olsen
• Tyler Schroeder
• Bryan Sehmel

2
Executive Summary

• History of Campus Planning Studio
• WWUs present and future
• transportation needs
• Past transportation solutions
• Proposed transportation plan
• Economic feasibility
• Increased efficiency
• Wider more frequent service

3
WWU Transportation Plan

• Expanded campus shuttle service
• Overall goal of reducing automotive dependency
• Provide economically viable and efficient
  transportation service
• Formulated by mapping student/faculty residential
  addresses

4
Demographics

• Student population
• Staff and Faculty population
• Areas of residence

5
Population Distribution/Density
6

7
Neighborhood Necessities

• Transit Oriented Development integrations
• Consider Happy Valley Neighborhood ideas
• Transit sub-section in neighborhood plans

8
Campus Population

• When students are most likely to be on campus
  throughout the day
• Times and classrooms across campus
• Future transit options Frequency
• Graph

9
Campus Population Graph
10
Current Transportation Situation

• Transportation Planning at WWU
• In 2001, WWU adopted its IMP
• IMP describes and recommends future campus
  improvements encompassing campus growth
• Plan addresses transportation recommendations
  made in the IMP, specifically 3 and 8
• 3- reduce SOV trips to campus, increase transit
  use
• 8- work with WTA to reduce SOV trips, complete
  specific pedestrian and bicycle facilities

11
Current Transportation Situation

• Washington Trip Reduction Act
• Requires all employers with over 100 employees to
  adopt TMP
• Transportation Management Program
• TMP original goals
• Enhance campus pedestrian orientation
• Minimize new parking construction
• Reduce reliance on SOV
• Provide program flexibility

12
WWU/WTA transportation

• WWU and WTA
• history of cooperation on transportation issues
• 2000
• Vikings Express bus pass system
• This year
• 8 routes service WWU
• Approximately 8 times per hour

13
Transit Opportunity

• Growth has increased parking/transportation
  pressure
• Alternative transportation is more cost efficient
  than building parking garages
• Higher frequency
• Especially in outlining neighborhoods
• Greater service to south side of campus

14
Current Transportation Situation

• WWU Origin-Destination Survey Findings
• Travel Characteristics Trip Distribution Travel
  Demand Management Options
• What would help increase transit use?
• Increase bus frequency
• Earlier and later bus service during the day
• Route arrival times which coincide with WWU class

15
WWU Pilot Project

• Cost effective transportation solution
• 2.50 per mile including
• Vehicle maintenance and replacement
• Insurance
• Driver Wages
• Fuel
• High frequency
• High ridership
• Has successfully changed transportation habits of
  WWU students and staff
• Limited service area

16
Recommendations

• Campus Shuttle Expansion
• 5 new routes proposed
• Sehome Route
• Happy Valley/York Route
• Lettered Streets Route
• Roosevelt/Puget Route
• Park and Ride Route
• 1 Evening Route

17

18

19

20

21

22
Evening Shuttle

• Evening service until 300am
• Flexible schedule and route
• Safe evening transportation for students without
  cars
• Reduces the occurrence of drunk driving
• Follows Happy Valley - York route with detour
  into downtown

23
Benefits of Campus Shuttle Expansion

• 68 of students will directly benefit from
  service.
• Within ¼ mile of shuttle stop
• All routes have maximum 15 minute ride to campus
• Reduced demand for on campus parking
• More available space for campus facilities
• Reduction in student costs of living
• Reduced environmental impacts

24
Cost-Benefit Methodology

• Total Cost per Day Route Length (mi) X
• Cost per mi (2.50) X Frequency multiplier
• Shuttle Operational Cost
• 24-30 seat shuttle (wwu pilot)
• 30 per hour, or 2.50 per mile
• Frequency multiplier
• Number of shuttle runs per hour

25

1 Frequency multiplier is determined by the
desired frequency per hour in number of shuttles
required. Example 10-minute service 6 Shuttle
Passes 20-minute service 3 Passes 30-minute
service 2 Passes. 2 Total Cost Per Day
Route Length (mi) X Cost per mi (2.50) X
Frequency Multiplier.
26
Campus Population Graph
27

1 Frequency multiplier is determined by the
desired frequency per hour in number of shuttles
required. Example 10-minute service 6 Shuttle
Passes 20-minute service 3 Passes 30-minute
service 2 Passes. 2 Total Cost Per Day
Route Length (mi) X Cost per mi (2.50) X
Frequency Multiplier.
28
Our Proposal

• 68 of the total student population would receive
  service.
• 8282 Students ¼ mile from shuttle stop
• 12,223 Student Population, Winter qtr 2004
• Cost 187,725 per quarter
• Option 1 Cost per direct user
• 22.66 per quarter
• students within ¼ mile of shuttle stop (8282).
• Including WWU residence halls.
• Option 2 Cost per all campus users
• (faculty, staff and students)
• 13.58 per quarter

29

30
Financing Options

• Option 1
• Funded by a fee imposed by WWU
• Authority under
• Washington Trip Reduction Act
• Option 2
• Combination
• WWU and campus user fee
• Parking fund

31
Benefits of Service

• Small shuttles (24-30 person)
• Less Impact
• More maneuverable
• Cheaper
• Transit pass
• Shuttle and WTA
• Incentive to ride transit
• Cheaper
• Fair and Equitable
• Encourage considerable A.S. involvement in
  decision-making

32
Secondary Recommendations

• Shuttles from Lynden and Ferndale
• In City Express Routes
• More Bike Lanes
• Diversity of Housing Types on Campus
• Improve Sidewalks/Lighting

33

34

35
Secondary Recommendations

• Buses Control Traffic Lights
• Increase frequency of wta routes
• Coordinate bus routes w/class times
• Cover bus stops
• Free transfers

36
Thank youWe will now entertain any questions.
Online Version Available at www.wwu.edu/sustwwu