Citation
How to encourage the use of transportation alternatives at the Auraria Higher Education Center

Material Information

Title:
How to encourage the use of transportation alternatives at the Auraria Higher Education Center an examination of transportation system management strategies and an analysis of Auraria's automobile commuters
Creator:
Sakofs, Paula Lippin
Publication Date:
Language:
English
Physical Description:
vii, 162 leaves : ; 28 cm

Thesis/Dissertation Information

Degree:
Master's ( Master of Arts)
Degree Grantor:
University of Colorado Denver
Degree Divisions:
College of Architecture and Planning, CU Denver
Degree Disciplines:
Planning and community development

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords:
Transportation -- Planning -- Colorado -- Denver Metropolitan Area ( lcsh )
Transportation -- Planning ( fast )
Colorado -- Denver Metropolitan Area ( fast )
Genre:
bibliography ( marcgt )
theses ( marcgt )
non-fiction ( marcgt )

Notes

Bibliography:
Includes bibliographical references (leaves 153-156).
General Note:
Cover title.
General Note:
Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree, Master of Planning and Community Development, College of Architecture and Planning.
Statement of Responsibility:
by Paula Lippin Sakofs.

Record Information

Source Institution:
University of Colorado Denver
Holding Location:
Auraria Library
Rights Management:
All applicable rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier:
15580982 ( OCLC )
ocm15580982
Classification:
LD1190.A78 1986 .S363 ( lcc )

Full Text
HOW TO ENCOURAGE THE USE OF TRANSPORTATION
ALTERNATIVES AT THE AURARIA HIGHER EDUCATION CENTER
An examination of Transportation System Management
strategies and an analysis of Auraria's
automobile commuters.
"by
Paula Lippin Sakofs
B.S.E., S.U.N.Y. at Cortland, 1976
A Thesis submitted in partial fulfillment
of the requirements for the degree of
Masters in Planning and Community Development
School of Architecture and Planning
1 986
AURARIA LIBRARY
U1A7D1 T73SS31


This thesis for the Master's Degree "by
Paula Lippin Sakofs
has been approved for the
School of Architecture and Planning


ABSTRACT
The Auraria Higher Education Center is a commuter
oriented campus and the automobile is the most popular mode of
transportation employed to commute to the campus The demand
for parking, however, is much greater than the supply of
parking spaces. Therefore, a problem exists for which a
solution or solutions need to be devised. Planners and policy
makers at Auraria have been working on developing solutions to
this problem that are geared towards meeting the demand for
parking. Yet, there exists another side of the coin, that
being to develop solutions which are geared towards reducing
the demand for parking. Therefore, the purpose of this study
was to recommend Transportation System Management (TSM)
strategies which could help ameliorate the parking problem at
Auraria by discouraging the use of the single passenger
vehicle and encouraging the use of transportation alternatives
for commuting to the campus.
This study was divided into five chapters. In Chapter I,
the Introduction, the problem, the purpose and the outline for
this study were presented. In Chapter II, a literature review
was undertaken which involved an examination of the
philosophy/concept of TSM and TSM strategies. Furthermore,
the demographic, geographic and attitudinal characteristics of
those who use and don't use transportation alternatives were
researched, particularly ridesharing, bus transit and
bicycling. A survey of automobile commuters at the Auraria
campus was undertaken in order to gather data concerning their


geographic and demographic characteristics, as well as
information regarding thei-r use of carpooling and hus transit
and their attitudes towards these and other alternative modes
of transportation. The methodology employed to design and
implement this survey was described in Chapter III and in
Chapter IV, the data were analyzed. In Chapter V,
implications of the survey data were discussed, along with
recommendations to encourage the use of transportation
alternatives at the Auraria campus.
In essence, the author concluded that the population of
automobile commuters at Auraria needs to be segmented and
different audiences need to be targeted for specific
strategies to encourage the use of transportation
alternatives. Furthermore, strategies for encouraging the use
of alternative modes of transportation must be designed so
that incentives for using transportation alternatives are
coupled with disincentives for driving alone. Data from the
survey indicated that full-time students and faculty/staff
would be much better audiences to target for such strategies
than part-time students..
The author concluded that parking utilization at Auraria
could increase if those more willing and able to utilize
transportation alternatives (full-time students and
faculty/staff) were encouraged to do so through a coordinated
package of disincentives for driving alone coupled with
incentives for using transportation alternatives. Thus, it
was concluded, parking spaces would be freed up for the
part-time students, who comprise the majority of student
commuters at the Auraria campus.


TABLE OP CONTENTS
Chapter
I. INTRODUCTION....................................... 1
Purpose of the Thesis.............................. 4
Scope and Method of the Study...................... 5
II. REVIEW OP THE LITERATURE........................... 7
An Overview of TSM................................. 7
TSM in the Denver Region.......................... 14
Ridesharing as a TSM Technique.................... 18
Introduction...................................... 18
Demographic and Geographic Characteristics........ 22
Attitudinal Characteristics....................... 27
Ridesharing Strategies and Responses.............. 32
Effects of Ridesharing Strategies................. 36
on other modes
Parking Management as a TSM Technique............. 38
Introduction...................................... 38
Parking Management Strategies and Responses...... 41
Effects of Parking Management Strategies.......... 45
on other modes
Bicycling as a TSM Technique...................... 46
Introduction...................................... 46
Demographic and Geographic Characteristics....... 49
Attitudinal Characteristics and Concerns.......... 51
Bicycling Strategies and Responses................ 52
Transit Changes as a TSM Technique................ 56
Introduction..................................... 56
Demographic and Geographic Characteristics........ 57
Attitudinal Characteristics....................... 60
Transit Strategies and Responses.................. 62
Chapter II Summary................................ 66
III. RESEARCH METHODS AND PROCEDURES................... 68
Introduction.................................... 68
Research Design................................... 68
Determination and Selection of the................ 71
Study Sample


Page vi
Processing the Data............................... 73
IV. ANALYSIS OP AURARIA'S AUTOMOBILE COMMUTERS....... 74
Introduction.................................... 74
Overall Geographic and Demographic................ 75
Characteristics of Auraria's Automobile Commuters
Demographic Characteristics....................... 75
Geographic Characteristics........................ 80
Crosstabulations Between the...................... 84
Demographic and Geographic Variables
Frequency of Bus and Carpool Usage................ 88
Significant Geographic and Demographic............ 89
Factors of Bus and Carpool Usage
Reasons for Not Riding the Bus.................... 96
Reasons for Not Carpooling....................... 102
Response to Incentives to Increase............... 108
Frequency of Bus Ridership and Carpooling
Responses to Scenario of Restricted Parking...... 110
and Transportation Alternatives Preferred
Solutions to Auraria's Parking Problem........... 112
Chapter IV Summary............................... 121
V. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS...................... 122
Introduction..................................... 122
Implications of Survey Findings................. 123
Recommendations to Encourage the Use of.......... 125
Transportation Alternatives at Auraria
Introduction................................... 125
Strategies to Encourage Ridesharing............. 128
Strategies to Encourage Bicycling............... 142
Strategies to Encourage Bus Ridership........... 147
Suggestions for Further Research................. 151
REFERENCES...................................... 153


Page vii
Appendix A....................................... 157
Appendix B....................................... 161


INTRODUCTION
The Auraria Higher Education Center, created in 1977,
is an urban campus located adjacent to downtown Denver. The
Auraria campus is unique, in that it embodies a structure
wherein three distinct and independent institutions share
common facilities and centralized services on a campus that
is owned and managed by a fourth agency, the Auraria Higher
Education Center (AHEC) (Wartgow, 1986). The three
institutions of higher learning housed on the Auraria campus
are the University of Colorado at Denver (UCD), Metropolitan
State College (MSC) and Denver Auraria Community College
(DACC). The Auraria campus services more than 27,000
students, the largest number served on any campus in the
State. Since there are no dormitories at Auraria, everyone
must commute to the campus. According to information
available from AHEC's Parking and Transportation Services,
during the Pall Semester 1986, more than 15,000 vehicles
were registered with the Parking Office. The automobile,
then, is the most popular mode of transportation employed to
commute to Auraria.
Vith Auraria's fast growth over the last ten years,
certain problems have emerged regarding the physical space
on campus. Necessary classroom and office space expansion
and other physical developments, such as the future closure
of Lawrence and Larimer streets through the campus, have had
a particularly significant impact on the number of available


Page 2
parking spaces at Auraria. Currently, there are 3*572 off
street parking spaces at Auraria, provided "by twenty one
lots located throughout the campus. During the Pall and
Spring semesters, these lots accommodate an average of 9*000
vehicles per day during the week and thus, the demand for
parking is much greater than the supply.
Parking facility studies conducted hy outside
consultants for AHEC Parking and Transportation Services in
the early 1980's concluded that "as existing parking lots
give way to campus development over the next ten years,
parking on campus will become non-existent for most of the
school day" (Peat, Marwick and Mitchell, 1983: p. III 1).
In a recent interview with the Assistant Director of Parking
and Transportation Services, Mr. Mark Gallagher, this
prediction seems to be coming to pass (Gallagher, 1986). In
response to the author's question regarding the current
availability of parking spaces on campus, Mr. Gallagher
explained that parking could be found in the lots on the
West side of campus, but was essentially unavailable in the
East side lots as early as 9:30 each morning, due to their
more desirable locations. He also stated that during the
first three weeks of the Pall 1986 Semester, parking was
extremely difficult to find anywhere on campus.
Given the extraordinary demand on parking, which is
rooted in the fact that the Auraria campus is commuter
oriented, with the automobile being the main mode of
transportation, it is imperative that steps be taken to
ameliorate the parking shortage on campus. Planners and


Page 3
policy makers at the Auraria Higher Education Center have
certainly recognized the gravity of this situation and have
been actively working to find ways to increase the number of
parking spaces through various actions, such as: 1)
building temporary lots to take the place of parking space
lost to campus growth and development, 2) instituting a
trolley shuttle system, from nearby Mile High Stadium to the
Auraria campus, to utilize available parking space at the
sports complex during the day, 3) leasing parking space from
the city of Denver adjacent to the campus, e.g. the lot at
the old District Attorneys building on Colfax and 4)
restriping lots to accommodate more cars.
Although these solutions seem reasonable and workable,
they also represent a limited view of a comprehensive
solution to the parking problem at the Auraria campus. More
specifically, most of the actions currently being taken to
solve the parking problem have as their main thrust meeting
the demand for parking. In so doing, these actions
encourage the use of the automobile. Yet, there exists
another side of the coin, that being, designing solutions or
actions which are aimed at decreasing the use of the
automobile and therefore, decreasing the demand for parking.
This perspective cannot be ignored, especially in the city
of Denver, due to the serious air pollution problems in this
area.
According to information compiled by the Colorado
Health Department's Air Pollution and Control Division, "the
Denver metro area has one of the worst air pollution


Page 4
problems of any major U.S. city. Its high altitude, basin
like setting, winter temperature inversions, growing
population and high per capita auto ownership produce carbon
monoxide (CO) levels that frequently violate nation ambient
air quality standards. Ninety-four percent of the region's
CO comes from motor vehicles, mostly automobiles" (Episodic
Share-A-Ride Program Public Hearing Briefing Sheet, 11/83).
By 1987, Colorado must meet federally mandated requirements
for national ambient air quality standards, or risk losing
millions of dollars in federal highway subsidies. Denver's
poor air quality is a serious matter, and the Auraria Higher
Education Center, being a major trip generator in the
Denver-metro area, ought to play a role in helping improve
Denver's poor air quality by more actively promoting the use
of alternative modes of transportation to the single
passenger automobile.
PURPOSE OF THESIS
As stated previously, planners and policy makers at the
Auraria Higher Education Center have, by and large, pursued
solutions to Auraria's parking shortage that are geared
towards meeting the demand for parking. Very little energy
has been devoted to developing solutions geared towards
reducing the demand for parking. No research studies have
been conducted which address this point of view. Therefore,
the purpose of this thesis is to explore creative ways to
deal with Auraria's parking shortage through measures or


actions which discourage the use of the single passenger
automobile on campus while at the same time, encourage the
use of transportation alternatives for commuting to Auraria.
Moreover, this study will assess if these measures/actions
are viable for implementation at the Auraria campus.
SCOPE AND METHOD OF STUDY
This thesis involves an exploration of transportation
based solutions to ameliorate the parking problem at the
Auraria campus. Although other types of solutions exist,
such as decentralizing the campus, restructuring class times
and constructing campus residential facilities, these
options were not examined due to the time and resource
limitations of the author.
This study is divided into five chapters. In Chapter
I, the Introduction, an overview of the problem is
presented, as well as the purpose and procedure for this
study. A literature review is presented in Chapter II. The
concept of Transportation System Management (TSM), a
comprehensive transportation planning concept/philosophy,
and transportation alternatives to the single passenger
vehicle are examined and explored. Furthermore, the
demographic, geographic and attitudinal characteristics of
people who utilize transportation alternatives are also
presented in Chapter II.
In order to better understand Auraria's automobile
commuters a survey was undertaken. Data regarding their


Page 6
demographic and geographic characteristics, as well as their
attitudes towards transportation alternatives, particularly
carpooling and hus transit, and their use of these
alternative transportation modes, were gathered and
analyzed. In Chapter III, the methodology employed to
develop and implement this survey is described. In Chapter
IV, the survey data are analyzed and in Chapter V,
suggestions for developing transportation alternatives to
decrease the demand for parking on campus are explored along
with recommendations to help ameliorate Auraria's parking
problems.


CHAPTER II
AH OVERVIEW OF TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM MANAGEMENT
Issues and policies in planning reflect the changing
values and conditions of the current times. Transportation
planning is no exception. According to Edward Weiner (1982,
P- 10),
"There will be a number of major changes in
transportation policy in the decade of the '80's.
Concentration is no longer on building and expanding
transportation facilites. The focus is shifting to
maintaining and rehabilitating existing facilities and
to improving the use of these facilities for moving
goods and people more efficiently and effectively."
Prom what set of values and conditions did this policy
emerge?
During the 1970s conservation-of fiscal and natural
resources-became a household word and emerged as a central
theme of urban policy (Gakenheimer and Meyer, 1979) The
Department of Transportation's response to this policy was a
concept called Transportation System Management or TSM. In
1975, the Urban Mass Transportation Administration and
Pederal Highway Administration issued a series of joint
regulations embodying this concept. In keeping with the
national urban policy, the key objectives of TSM would be,
"conservation of fiscal resources, of energy, of
environmental quality and of quality of urban life"
(Rosenbloom, 1977: p. 1). The regulations stated that:
"Automobiles, public transportation, taxis, pedestrians, and
bicycles should be considered as elements of one single
urban transportation system..." TSM is a, "process for


Page 8
planning and operating a unitary system of urban
transportation" (Patricelli, 1977: p. 14).
Essentially the regulations recognized that, there was
a conflict between the decline of fiscal and non-renewable
natural resources and the increasing travel demands of the
American people. Furthermore, many urban areas had
significant investments in existing transportation networks
and resources that were perhaps not being fully utilized.
Therefore, "before seeking federal assistance for the
development of additional facilities, the TSM regulations
would require urban areas to make better use of their
existing infrastructure and capacity" (Lee and Meyer, 1980:
p. 14). In essence, TSM was deemed necessary to meet
increasing demands for services in an era of declining
resources by better managing the system presently in place.
TSM, therefore, "represents a radical departure from the
historic preoccupation with capital-intensive system
additions designed to accommodate increasing demand for
transportation services" (Lockwood and Wagner, 1977: p.
100).
Transportation system management can be comprehensively
defined as,
"a short range element of a regional planning process
that addresses ways to improve overall transportation
system performance through various low capital or no
capital management actions. Such actions can be
intramodal (e.g. improved transit scheduling
techniques, bikeway or pedestrian facilities),
intermodal (e.g., bus priorities on streets, parking
restrictions), or extramodal (e.g., pricing strategies
to discourage long term parking, employer incentives
for ridesharing.) The heart of TSM is a concept in
which the urban transportation system is a single


Page 9
entity and federal funds are transportation resources.
The goal of TSM is to increase systemwide efficiency of
people and goods movement without significant new
infrastructure investment, rather than to simply
accommodate increasing vehicle travel (Lee and Meyer,
1980: p. 14).
"TSM actions are directed at solving present problems
(e.g. air pollution and congestion), rather than
anticipating future ones, and are thus considered
short-term" (DRCOG, 1979: p- 1). However, some see that TSM
does have a long range aspect, "that of continuing to
multiply effective actions, modify less effective actions,
and extend actions in space over time" (Lockwood and Wagner,
1977: p. 108).
As stated in the definition of TSM, various low capital
or no capital management actions can be implemented to meet
the goal of creating a more "unitary" transportation system.
The Department of Transportation and the Federal Highway
Administration have categorized these actions under five
major headings. The headings and sub-headings include the
following actions: (Pratt, 1981).
1. Actions To Add Transportation System Elements
a) New Highway Facilities
b) . New Transit Facilities/Equipment
2.. Actions To Ensure The Efficient Use Of Existing
Road Space
a) Traffic Operations Improvements
b) Pool/Bus Priority Facilities
c) Pedestrian/Bikeway Facilities
d) Variable Work Hours
3. Actions To Reduce Vehicle Use In Congested Areas
a) Pool/Transit Fringe Parking
b) Carpooling Encouragement Activities
c) Vanpools/Buspools
d) Area Auto Restraints
e) Auto Facility Pricing
f) Auto Facility Supply


Page 10
4. Actions To Improve Transit Service
a) Collection/Distribution Transit
t>) Transit Scheduling/Frequency
c) Bus Routing/Coverage
d) Express Transit
e) Flexible Paratransit
f) Transit Pare Changes
g) Transit Marketing/Brokerage
5- Traveler Response Research
a) Research Techniques
b) Travel Demand Modeling
c) Consumer Preference Analysis
d) Time/Cost Modeling
e) Convenience/Comfort/Reliability Analysis
f) Safety Analysis
Two extremely important concepts need mentioning when
reviewing the transportation actions outline defined above.
First, these actions can be implemented separately or
together in packages. For example, in category number
three, Actions To Reduce Vehicle Use In Congested Areas, in
item B, a carpooling encouragement activity that could be
implemented may be a computerized or manual matching system
to help people find others interested in ridesharing. This
matching system, however, could also be instituted
simultaneously with item E, in which a discounted parking
fee could be provided for those who carpool. Thus, there
would exist a monetary incentive to carpool along with a
process to help facilitate the matching of potential
carpoolers.
The packaging of various TSM strategies that complement
or support one another is cited extensively in the
literature as the ideal way to develop TSM strategies
(DRCOCr, 1979; Remak, 1977; Lockwood and Wagner, 1977; Ellis,
1977). However, a word of caution is necessary. TSM


Page 11
actions can "be mutually supportive, as in the case described
above, or in some instances, they may be counter-productive.
For instance, DRCOG (1979) cites an example involving the
implementation of a TSM technique such as high occupancy
vehicle lanes. In areas that don't have adequate
transportation alternatives, greater traffic congestion may
be caused on the remaining lanes and traffic can be diverted
to other routes, thereby causing an increase in vehicle
miles traveled (VMT), or an increase in vehicle emissions."
Therefore, "combining TSM strategies from individual actions
requires knowledge of their interactions. Combinations can
have synergistic or counterproductive joint effects"
(Lockwood and Wagner, 1977: p. 102).
In terms of packaging various strategies, research in
this area stresses that,
"Packages of TSM activities that work toward reducing
demand for transportation resources, either at peak
commuting times or generally, appear to have longer
lasting and broader benefits than those that work
toward increasing the capacity of the transportation
system. Reducing the number of vehicles by increasing
occupancy, lessening trip length, changing travel times
and routes and eliminating some needs to travel serve
the combined objectives of reducing air pollution,
automotive fuel consumption and traffic congestion and
may also provide for greater mobility for those without
access to cars" (Remak, 1977: p. 96).
The second important concept that needs to be discussed
is a crucial and new concept in transportation planning.
This is that TSM "reflects an emerging recognition of the
potential for complimentary transit and highway management"
(Lee and Meyer, 1980: p. 14). The goal of a unitary system
of transportation has history working against it, though.


Page 12
As noted in the literature,
"One thing that did not occur in the 200 years of
growth in transportation was the development of a
transportation system. Each mode of transport
developed independently, and to a large extent,
competitively. Each was treated separately in the
policy sense...As a consequence of the lack of a
concerted transportation policy and programs there is
considerable duplication and overlap in the U.S.
transportation picture; at the same time, it is often
difficult to make an intermodal trip" (Ross, Maull and
Smerk, 1977: p. 81-82).
The lack of coordination and cooperation amongst those
in the transportation industry appears to present serious
problems for the implementation of TSM actions. Lee and
Meyer (1980, p. 13)' capture the essence of this issue,
"The TSM process confronts deeply rooted problems of
compatibility among agency missions, skills and
consituencies. Among the current problems in TSM, the
most important are still those that pertain to the
planning and implementation of intermodal TSM actions
and require the cooperation and active support of
several agencies or political jurisdictions. The most
successful TSM examples reflect either unique
institutional arrangements that have facilitated
intermodal programming or intramodal actions requiring
only minimal cooperative support."
Therefore, the broader the TSM program, the greater are the
numbers of institutions involved which increases the
difficulties of coordinating activities and increases the
potential for conflicts of interest (Remak, 1977)*
Despite the institutional and political conflicts that
may exist amongst various groups, it is clear from an
examination of the literature that there needs to be a
cooperative spirit among transit operators, transportation
professionals and public officials at all levels of
government, if there is to be success with transportation
system management. At one of the first conferences on TSM


Page 13
held in 1977, various transportation officials echoed this
need. Representing a private consultant's perspective,
Roberta Remak (1977, p. 94) remarked: "Increasing
responsibilty has been placed on those who provide local
transportation facilities and services to consider not only
the internal efficiency of their particular operation but
its impact on the rest of the transportation system and the
community at large." Representing a state transportation
department's perspective at this conference, Robert Hunter
(1977, p. 34) stated,
"The need now is to have a balanced transportation
system in which each mode does the job that it is best
suited to do and for which there is an expressed need
or desire... achieving a balanced transportation system
requires the cooperative efforts of all agencies
involved... efficient transportation system management
will result from the cumulative efforts of all agencies
and systems involved."
Although certain people in the transportation
profession leave a somewhat bleak picture of the problems
caused by institutional and goal conflicts amongst those in
the industry, there is a tremendous need, perhaps now more
than ever, to see to the continuance of transportation
system management actions. For, as it is written in the
literature, "the forces that originally led to the TSM
concept- the needs for intermodal coordination, for low
capital solutions and for increased system efficiency in an
era of scarce resources- will not abate" (Lee and Meyer,
1980: p. 13).


Page 14
TSM IN THE DENVER REGION
The Denver Regional Council of Governments (DRCOG), is
the metropolitan planning organization responsible for
designing TSM strategies for the Denver region. The four
objectives of TSM in this area are: (DRCOG, 1982: p. 35)
1) Reduction of vehicle demand on the transportation
system.
2) Improvement of system operations to achieve the
greatest system efficiency possible with minimum
investment in capital facilities.
3) Maintenance of the system to reduce the need for costly
new construction.
4) Reduction of transportation related adverse
environmental and social impacts.
In order to develop packages of TSM strategies for the
diversity of situations and circumstances in the Denver
region, DRCOG has divided the region into five subareas and
has identified transportation related problems of these
areas and packages of strategies to address these problems.
The subareas include: areawide, CBD, activity centers,
corridors, and residential areas. Since the Auraria Higher
Education Center best shares the transportation problems and
solutions of the first three subareas, these will be
examined briefly.
Problems that are areawide include: air quality (due
mainly to automotive emissions), and overall limitations on
system capacity. These problems are addressed by
"ridesharing, transit system improvements, bicycle
facilities, traffic operations and maintenance, parking
management and exclusive high occupancy vehicle (hov) lanes.


Page 15
Objectives of this package are to reduce motor vehicle
travel in the region and to improve the efficiency of the
roadway system" (DRCOG, 1982: p. 48).
The CBDs problems also include air quality, high
levels of vehicle congestion and capacity limitations.
According to DRCOG*s (1982, p. 48) studies on TSM
strategies,
"CBD problems are addressed by a package consisting of
transit system improvements, ridesharing, parking
management, auto restricted zones, variable work hours,
pedestrian facilities, bicycle facilities, traffic
operations and maintenance strategies. Objectives of
this strategy package are to reduce vehicle travel,
ameliorate congestion "trouble spots," reduce auto
emissions, and reduce conflicts between private
vehicles and pedestrians, bicycles and buses."
Activity centers share some of the same problems as the
CBD. According to DRCOG (1982, p. 47), "Because of their
role in the region as centers for employment and retail
activity, activity centers tend to experience relatively
high levels of congestion." This strategy package includes:
ridesharing, transit system improvements, bus priority
treatments, parking management, variable work hours and
pedestrian/bicycle facilities. The objectives of this
package are to "reduce vehicle travel, and related
congestion and auto pollution" (DRCOG, 1982: p. 50).
As stated previously, the Auraria campus shares many of
the transportation related problems of the three subareas
discussed, including: air quality, vehicle congestion and
capacity limitations. In the next section, the author will
specifically review certain strategies recommended for these
subareas. These include:
ridesharing (carpooling and


Page 16
vanpooling), parking management, transit improvements and
"bicycle facilities. These were chosen for a number of
reasons. First, it is believed that these strategies have
the most applicability to the Auraria campus and can be
dealt with largely from within the political and
jurisdictional boundaries of the campus. As research
suggests, those TSM actions which have the greatest success
of being implemented are instituted where there exist few
inter-jurisdictional conflicts and/or where there are few
agencies which take part in their implementation.
It is this author's belief that Auraria can achieve
tremendous success with many of the suggested strategies due
to the nature and purpose of the Auraria Higher Education
Center (AHEC) as an institution. Many AHEC operations, e.g.
Parking Operations and Public Safety, which are necessary
for the success of ridesharing and other TSM strategies, are
under the auspices of the Auraria Higher Education Center.
Thus, unlike, for example, a CBD which has private and
public agencies running certain operations (e.g. parking)
for different ends (profit vs. the "public good"), AHEC is a
public agency designed to serve the Auraria campus
community. As such, the profit motive can be more easily
usurped for actions which have as their ultimate goal the
welfare and protection of the public good. The Auraria
campus, then, has tremendous opportunities for developing
and implementing TSM strategies which elsewhere, often run
up against great political and institutional odds. It is
obviously important to note, though, that the Auraria Higher


Page 17
Education Center exists within a larger environment it
cannot control. However, more can he done at Auraria to
encourage and promote the use of transportation
alternatives, particularly in the areas AHEC can control.
Finally, these particular strategies were chosen to meet the
scope of this thesis, which is limited to transportation
related solutions to the parking problem at Auraria.


Page 18
RIDESHARING AS A TSM TECHNIQUE
INTRODUCTION
"Ridesharing, including carpooling and vanpooling, is a
social and economic activity in which two or more people
share a vehicle" (Margolin, Misch and Dobson, 1976: p. 41)-
Vanpooling can he more specifically defined as a "form of
paratransit that can serve those areas not suited to fixed
route transit service and that has proven to he economically
sufficient" (Cambridge Systematics, Inc., 1978: p. IV-7)
Vanpooling is increasing in popularity every year hut is a
relatively new form of commuter transportation and the
future popularity of vanpooling remains unknown. However,
data have shown that the acceptance of vanpooling is growing
quickly. This is "demonstrated by the doubling in numbers
each year of employer sponsored, third party and other
organized program vanpools in the 1974-1980 period" (Pratt,
1981: p. 125). Although there are some differences in
carpooling and vanpooling regarding certain demographic and
geographic variables of those who utilize these
alternatives, as well as certain factors neccessary for
their success, they will be discussed together, due to the
greater commonalities between them.
The major objectives of ridesharing are to: 1) reduce
the number of vehicle trips and vehicle miles of travel
(VMT) to lessen energy consumption, air pollution, and
congestion and 2) reduce the pressure to take on high cost


Page 19
capital improvements, such as new roads, parking structures,
etc. (Pratt, 1977). In assessing the potential of
ridesharing in the Denver-Metro area, DRCOG (1979, p. 29)
has concluded that "This type of activity can significantly
reduce VMT and that it is a particularly attractive option
in low density urban settings and areas not well served by
transit." Ridesharing affords many benefits to the
commuter, employer, and community, state, and country. Some
of these benefits include: (Margolin, Misch, et al., 1981:
P- 5).
Commuter Benefits:
1) Reduced hassle and fatigue from driving.
2) Reduced commuting cost.
3) Reduced vehicle maintenance difficulties and
responsibilities.
4) Socializing and relaxation opportunities.
5) Enjoyment of ridesharing incentives, e.g., preferential
parking.
Employer Benefits:
1) Reduced parking demand and lower capital expenditures on
parking areas.
2) Alleviation of local traffic congestion.
3) Reduced employee tardiness and absenteeism and greater
employee morale.
4) Fringe benefits for employees, e.g., preferential
parking.
5) Good public relations for employer.
Community, State, Rational Benefits:
1) Reduced peak period traffic congestion.
2) Reduced energy use and dependence on foreign oil
markets.
3) Reduced air pollution.
4) Reduced parking and street/highway capacity demand.
Despite the many and varied benefits of ridesharing,
limited data from AHEC Parking Operations indicates that
only approximately 12-14 percent of the people at the
Auraria Higher Education Center carpool. There are limits


Page 20
to the potential for ridesharing and certain community
conditions associated with its success. Limits to
ridesharing potential include: 1) commonality of origin,
destination and work or school schedules, 2) the need for a
car at work or school and 3) a pool of people from which to
acquire good matches. (Pratt, 1977; Weishrod and Eder,
1980).
Specific limits or conditions important for the success
of vanpooling include: 1) one way trip lengths in excess of
15 miles, 2) a fixed and regular set of working schedules,
3) a large enough "business to allow matching of 10-12 people
from the same residential area. It has "been found that a
lower hound of 250 employees has been used as a size
criterion for determining the availability of vanpooling.
Furthermore, the density of employees has been found to be
an important factor, as the ratio of maximum pickup and
delivery time to line-haul travel time is a measure of
vanpool attractiveness. This ratio is most favorable when
the line haul travel distance is long and when the density
of eligible employees is high. It has been found that the
ratio of line-haul to collection time should be greater than
one, 4) inadequate public transit and 5) traffic congestion
or parking problems at the site of employment (Pratt, 1981;
Cambridge Systematics, Inc., 1978; Pratt, 1977).
In general, community conditions associated with
ridesharing success include: 1) fuel shortages and
increasing costs of fuel, 2) shortage or high cost of
parking, 3) highway congestion and limited transit service,


Page 21
4) long commute distances, 5) regular or variable working
hours, 6) social approval of ridesharing and 7)favorable
political and regulatory settings (Margolin, Misch, et al.,
1 981 ).
Although it is not included in the above list, the
importance of employer commitment to ridesharing is another
crucial determinant in the success of ridesharing programs
(DRCCKx, 1979; Pratt, 1977). It has been documented that
"individual companies that have initiated aggressive
employee matching carpool programs have increased carpooling
75 percent" (Pratt, 1977: p. 82). This also holds true for
vanpooling. Strong employer commitment in the case of
employer sponsored vanpooling programs can overshadow
factors such as trip length. Analysis of the most
successful and least successful vanpool applications
revealed that "employer characteristics (type, size,
location) and trip length have little influence on project
outcome, but that employee residential densities and
management commitment are significant influencing factors in
the success or failure of vanpooling programs" (Pratt, 1981:
p. 138).
Another condition associated with the success of
ridesharing programs is the packaging of actions with
incentives, such as preferential parking for ridesharers.
More discussion about this will be forthcoming in the
section on TSM strategies for ridesharing. The next
section, however, will examine the demographic, geographic,
and behavioral or attitudinal factors which are


Page 22
characteristic of those who carpool or vanpool and those who
prefer to drive solo.
DEMOGRAPHIC AND GEOGRAPHIC CHARACTERISTICS
There is disagreement amongst various researchers who
have studied the demographic and geographic characteristics
of people who rideshare. Some contend that "these types of
characteristics are poor indicators and predictors of the
choice between driving alone and ridesharing" (Horowitz and
Sheth, 1977: p. 7). Others point to fairly significant
differences between carpoolers, vanpoolers, and drive alone
commuters. (Margolin, Misch, et al., 1981; Pratt, 1977;
Weisbrod and Eder, 1980). The following section will
describe those differences in age, gender, income, auto
ownership, occupation or worker characteristics and
geographic characteristics between those who rideshare and
those who don't.
The research in this area points to some significance
in age and choice of mode. Some contend that "vanpoolers
tend to be older than users of other modes and there are no
other significant differences in age among other modes, such
as carpooling and bus transit" (Weisbrod and Eder, 1980: p.
9-25). Others suggest that carpoolers tend to be somewhat
younger on the average than solo drivers and vanpoolers
(Pratt, 1977). With regards to gender, this is believed to
be an insignificant factor in the decision to rideshare,
although there is some research that supports the finding


Page 23
that females tend to he carpool passengers more often than
males (Weishrod and Eder, 1980).
There is disagreement concerning income characteristics
of carpoolers, vanpoolers and those who drive solo. Some
suggest that this, too, is not an important factor in
distinguishing ridesharers from non-ridesharers (Pratt,
1977; Weishrod and Eder, 1980). However, others have
reached very different conclusions about differences among
these various groups. Prom a 1978 Commuter Computer survey
of vanpoolers in Los Angeles, researchers showed that
vanpoolers have a higher household income than the rest of
the population. (Margolin, Misch, et al., 1981). These
researchers also found differences in income between
carpoolers and non-carpoolers. In a 1976 study on
incentives and disincentives for carpooling, the following
conclusion was reached regarding important differences
between these two groups: "Middle income groups, from
$10,000-$30,000 annual income carpooled more frequently and
lower income groups carpooled less than half as much.
Higher income groups carpooled about 9 percent less than the
average for the middle income groups" (Margolin, Misch, et
al., 1 981 : p 14).
Occupation or worker characteristics is another area in
which researchers have arrived at different conclusions.
Carpoolers have been reported "to have less flexibility in
working hours than drive alone commuters, to arrive and
depart earlier, and more within the peak traffic flow
period" (Pratt, 1977: p. 92). Perhaps this could explain


Page 24
the finding that "Carpoolers and vanpoolers are more likely
than solo drivers to have production jobs and less likely to
be in sales and service occupations" (Weisbrod and Eder,
1980: p. 1-16). An Iowa City survey showed that the type of
employee was not an important factor for carpool formation
and a conversation with the Assitant Director of Van Pool
Services, Inc. in Colorado, revealed no problems with people
of different job levels vanpooling together (Pratt, 1977;
Weisbrod L., 1984). However, other researchers have found
that vanpoolers tended to occupy somewhat more responsible
or higher status positions than carpoolers (Margolin, Misch,
et al., 1981).. In a 1976 study on incentives and
disincentives for ridesharing, it was found that "most
people really prefer not to cross major job barriers when
they commute particularly, but not only, in carpools"
(Margolin, Misch, et al., 1981: p. 17). In this survey
(1981, p. 18) it was also found that "Solo drivers want to
preserve their present status in the sense of associating
with people like themselves and feel like they will draw the
lines where they want them or else they won't rideshare."
With regards to auto ownership, it has been
hypothesized that auto ownership levels for ridesharing
workers are lower than for drive alone commuters. Some
data, however, show very little difference in auto ownership
for drive alone commuters, vanpoolers, and carpoolers
(Weisbrod and Eder, 1980; Pratt, 1977). It has also been
hypothesized that the vehicle left at home by the person
ridesharing is used by others in the household, and thus,


Page 25
the net effect is not a decrease in VMT for the region, due
to the fact that the vehicle is used for other trips
(Ben-Akiva and Atherton, 1977). However, others have found
that "in an analysis of persons who switched from driving
alone to ridesharing, the car which was formerly used for
driving to work was currently not heing used by anyone else
for 74 percent of the surveyed group, was being used for
fewer miles for 24 percent of the group, and was being used
for the same or greater mileage for only 2 percent of the
group" (Weisbrod and Eder, 1980: p. 9-23)-
Although there exist differences amongst research
findings for demographic characteristics of carpoolers,
vanpoolers, and solo drivers, research on geographic
characteristics is quite consistent. It appears that the
major factor differentiating modal groups regarding this
characteristic is home-to-work commuting distance (Weisbrod
and Eder, 1980; Pratt, 1977; Margolin, Misch, et al., 1981).
This finding is best stated by Margolin and Misch (1981 p.
23):
"It is well established that commuters who travel only
a few miles to work are not likely to carpool. This is
because the benefits of expense reduction, hassle
reduction, and social opportunities are small; and the
costs are high in added travel time, inconvenience,,
loss of mastery over the commute, and possible social
problems. As trip length increases, the balance among
these factors begins to tip more in favor of
ridesharing."
It is interesting to note that, "The absolute distance
between carpooler residences is not as important a
determinant of carpool formation as the amount of extra time
spent in picking up passengers. In a majority of carpools,


Page 26
the extra time is less than five minutes and for over 85
percent, less than ten minutes" (Pratt, 1977: p. 92).
Information from surveys of people ridesharing in Los
Angeles and Minneapolis, show that the average solo driver
commutes approximately ten miles one way, and the average
carpooler commutes approximately fifteen to twenty miles one
way. Vanpoolers distances vary quite a hit, hut are at
least twenty-seven miles one way (Margolin, Misch, et al.,
1981; Weishrod and Eder, 1980). Information about
vanpoolers from Van Pool Services, Inc., in Colorado shows
two findings. A majority of the people who use this service
travel at least 125 miles round trip/day to Denver from
areas such as Ft. Collins, Loveland, Greeley, and Colorado
Springs. However, there are vans coming from much shorter
distances, thirty miles round trip, as well. Many of these
people work for companies that have more than 150 employees,
live in areas well served hy the hus, and tend to view the
vanpool as a special hus service (Weishrod L., 1984).
As can he seen from the discussion on demographic and
geographic characteristics of ridesharers and drive alone
commuters, the most salient factor in the decision to
rideshare seems to he geographic characteristics. There is
strong evidence supporting the distance factor in relation
to choice of mode. However, some researchers disagree that
demographic and geographic characteristics are crucial
determinants or significant predictors of mode choice;
instead they have found that "Attitudes toward ridesharing
and driving alone are crucial to this study and can provide


Page 27
keys to the development of strategies to increase these
types of modes" (Horowitz and Sheth, 1977: p. 7)- Even some
who have found significant demographic and geographic
differences in ridesharers and solo drivers agree on the
importance of attitudes and state, "Potential ridesharers to
date tend to he commuters who may choose to pool because of
favorable attitudes, rather than compelling situational or
economic circumstances" (Margolin, Misch, et al., 1981: p.
14). The next section, then, will examine attitudinal
characteristics of solo drivers and ridesharers.
ATTITUDINAL CHARACTERISTICS
Solo drivers and those who carpool or vanpool differ
somewhat and to varying degrees in the attributes of
commuting that are the most important to them. Yet, there
do exist commonalities amongst these groups. Investigations
of commuter attitudes indicate that travel time and
convenience are the most important aspects of the work trip
to those who carpool and those who don't (Pratt, 1977). As
stated in the literature, "The speed and efficiency with
which the carpool can operate is the critical concern in the
decision to rideshare" (Pratt, 1977: p. 82). This also
holds true for vanpooling, although with some modifications,
for people are willing to tolerate longer travel times in
exchange for the door-to-door convenience which vanpooling
affords them. This meshes with research findings that the


Page 28
actual time spent in the vehicle is less important than the
cumulative time spent in commuting. For example, if one
takes the hus for commuting, other than the time spent in
the actual commute, time is probably spent waiting for the
bus, walking to and from the bus stop, and possibly
transferring along the route. It appears that the degree to
which convenience and time attributes are important will
predispose someone to ridesharing or to driving solo.
According to some research, "Solo drivers generally
have a neutral attitude toward ridesharing and a change in
attitude might be achieved by proper promotional techniques"
(Horowitz and Sheth, 1977: p* 7)* Others, however, have
found that there are hard core solo drivers, who would not
rideshare even given promotional techniques that might
influence the more neutral solo drivers. Hard core solo
drivers appear to put a great deal of importance on having
the autonomy which their cars afford them, and "exhibit a
lower tolerance for delays, frustrations, uncertainty and
rigid working schedules" (Margolin, Misch, et al., 1981: p.
14). Furthermore, "They are more entrenched in the
convenience aspect of driving solo and believe they don't
have any alternatives other than driving to work alone"
(Margolin, Misch, et al., 1981: p. 16).
The role of travel cost has not been found to be as
consistently important in the decision to rideshare as
convenience; some surveys show this to be very important and
others don't find it to be as significant. Although
Margolin and Misch (1981) found that the major reason people


Page 29
joined a carpool was convenience (such as similarity of
location and work hours to other carpool members), the
second most important reason was a savings in money. Saving
money is also a crucial factor in the decision to vanpool
(Weisbrod, L., 1984). Some researchers believe that travel
cost will become a more significant determinant in the
future as the cost of gas increases (Weisbrod and Eder,
1980) . Even though cost savings is recognized as the major
advantage of ridesharing, this factor is outweighed by the
dependability, speed and flexibility advantages of driving
alone (Weisbrod and Eder, 1980; Margolin, Misch, et al.,
1981) .
Another important issue in the mode choice decision
appears to be the travelers need for independence (not
wanting to rely on others or have others rely on you). In
the Minneapolis Rideshare Demonstration Study, all mode
groups (bus, carpool and vanpool) acknowledged driving
alone to be the most dependable, fastest, and most flexible
mode of travel (Weisbrod and Eder, 1980: p. 1-17).
Research also suggets that safety is an important
consideration and concern in the decision to rideshare
(Weisbrod and Eder, 1980). In fact, in some surveys, safety
is rated more important than travel cost in the mode choice
decisions of commuters (Weisbrod and Eder, 1980).
It is interesting to note that some research findings
suggest travelers' perceptions of attributes such as
convenience, reliability, comfort and safety are not
considered separately in the selection of travel mode to


Page 30
work. Significant overlapping of these variables occurs in
the publics perceptions of these notions. These same
findings, though, imply that travel cost and time are
considered as separate issues and variables than the ones
representing convenience, reliability, comfort and safety
(Neveu, Koppelman and Stopher, 1977)*
Another interesting finding in the research on
attitudes indicates that ridesharing is perceived and viewed
as a very social activity. "Neither carpooling nor
vanpooling is considered an impersonal commute mode by solo
drivers... Social concerns about ridesharing remain as prime
today as they were in a study of carpooling five years ago"
(Margolin, Misch, et al., 1981: p. 17)* In an Iowa City
survey, one third of the respondents felt "the ability to
carpool with friends was important" (Pratt, 1977: p* 93)*
Vanpooling is also seen as a very personal activity. Most
of the people referred to vanpooling programs in Los Angeles
and Denver are notified through personal contacts first,
company presentations second, and lastly through advertising
(Margolin, Misch, et al., 1981; Weisbrod, L.,1984)*
It is also interesting to note from a review of the
literature on attitudes and travel behavior that people who
have tried and are now using a particular ridesharing mode,
such as carpooling or vanpooling, always rate their mode as
highest regarding attributes such as most relaxing,
convenient, dependable, etc. (Weisbrod and Eder, 1980).
These findings make a lot of sense, for in order to have
made the switch from driving alone to ridesharing, the


Page 51
concerns about convenience, reliability, etc. would have had
to have been resolved. Once the new mode was tried and
fears of it were alleviated, the new mode could then take on
those attributes once reserved for solo driving.
Research on traveler attitude behavior shows that
behavioral feedback influences perceptions of system
features and that "Experience with a system improves users'
perceptions of its features, which in turn is related to
usage" (Horowitz and Sheth, 1977: p. 7) Since convenience
perceptions are extremely important in the decision to
rideshare, experience with ridesharing will improve the
users perception of ridesharing as being an acceptable and
convenient way to commute. In essence, then, the crux of
the decision to rideshare is that, "The perception of
drivers toward time loss and the characteristics of
convenience and reliability about ridesharing will have to
change before their travel behavior will change" (Horowitz
and Sheth, 1977: p. 7). This view is also shared by others
doing research on traveler attitude and behavior (Margolin,
Misch, et al., 1981).
In the next section, the author will explore and
examine various TSM strategies and actions to increase
ridesharing, traveler response to these actions and the
effect of these actions on other transportation
alternatives.


Page 32
RIDESHARIHG- STRATEGIES AND RESPONSES
The strategies or actions to increase ridesharing
include the following: 1) enacting incentives for use of
high occupancy vehicles (HOV's), 2) enacting disincentives
for driving alone, 3) personalizing the matching process, 4)
obtaining strong employer commitment for ridesharing and 5)
educating people through effective publicity and promotion.
It has been reported that "automobile disincentives are much
more effective than incentives to increase ridesharing, but
these policies are less acceptable to the public and
therefore less likely to be implemented" (Ben-Akiva and
Atherton, 1977: p. 17). Other researchers contend that "The
use of incentives to encourage ridesharing is more powerful
than the use of disincentives" (Margolin, Misch, et al.,
1981: p. 15). However, many researchers stress the
importance of designing a coordinated program of incentives
and disincentives because, in general, traveler response to
incentives is small and the most significant changes in
travel behavior are predicted for those parking-related
policies that combine both incentives and disincentives
(Ben-Akiva and Atherton, 1977; Margolin, Misch, et al.,
1981 ; DRCOGr, 1 979) -
An example of an incentive for ridesharing is
preferential treatment for high occupancy vehicles (HOV's).
Research indicates that preferential treatment for buses,
carpools and vanpools is one of the TSM actions that can be
applied in many areas to promote shifts by commuters from


Page 33
low occupancy automobiles to HOVs. Furthermore,
"preferential treatment for HOVs is one of those rare
solutions that offers relief from intricate problems of
energy consumption, urban congestion, and air and noise
pollution at maximum benefit with minimum harm" (Goodman and
Morin, 1977: p. 48).
For the purposes of this thesis, the author will be
concentrating on those preferential treatment techniques
that involve parking facilities. These can be directly
implemented at the Aurar.ia Higher Education Center, for AHEC
operates and is responsible for the campus parking
facilities. A type of preferential treatment involving
parking facilities includes allowing HOVs to park in more
conveniently located lots. Some research describes that
"preferential parking appears to be the least effective
strategy when applied as an independent action at firms
larger than 250 employees" (DRCOG, 1979: p. 30). Like many
TSM actions, however, the importance of this measure is not
found so much in its effectiveness as a lone measure, but
rather in its complimentary role with other actions as part
of a coordinated package. However, others have reached
different conclusions and contend that programs that give
carpool priority parking are effective in increasing the
number of carpools and the average auto occupancy, most
notably in areas where parking supply is limited (Pratt,
1977).
Another preferential treatment technique for HOV's
involves reducing parking fees for those who rideshare.


Page 34
According to some research, differential parking rates for
carpools and single occupant autos may also induce
significant shifts to carpooling (Pratt, 1977). More
research findings on preferential parking locations and
reduced fees for ridesharers will he examined in the next
section on parking management actions, as these types of
preferential treatments for HOV's overlap with some parking
management actions.
Another important strategy to encourage the use of
ridesharing is to personalize the matching process. Some
research has found that purely impersonal methods, such as
computer matching programs, provide very little incentive
and often strong disincentive to prospective carpoolers"
(Margolin, Misch, et al., 1981: p. 15). It appears that
solo drivers want the match method personalized, for
according to one survey, only 25 percent would consider
forming a pool by themselves and 78 percent would like the
help of a worksite coordinator. It has been found that a
major component in the perceived inconvenience of
carpooling is the difficulty of establishing contact with
potential pool mates. These difficulties could be overcome
by assistance in forming carpools at the workplace"
(Horowitz and Sheth, 1977: p. 7)*
Another important action to take in order to encourage
ridesharing is to obtain employer commitment for the
program. Some define this as one of the most important
factors for an effective and successful ridesharing program
(DRC0G-, 1979)* Employer-based, rather than area wide


Page 35
matching services and promotion, and employer commitment are
crucial to effective ridesharing programs. This is well
documented in the literature.
"The most individually effective carpool matching
programs appear to he those which are initiated and
carried out hy employers for the benefit of their own
employees... The rate of participation in employer based
matching programs and the number of carpools which are
formed as a result depend to a large extent upon the
degree of employer commitment" (Pratt, 1977; p. 85).
In analyses of attitudes of solo drivers toward
ridesharing, researchers have found that a significant
deterrent to ridesharing is the reluctance of people to rely
on others. Certain researchers contend that this can be
dealt with by educating people about the positive aspects of
sharing rides, to turn this reluctance around and make
people aware of the relaxation benefits, for example, of
ridesharing. Educating the public about ridesharing
introduces yet another strategy to increase use of these
modes, that being advertising and publicity. Research in
this area notes a couple of important factors. It appears
that traveler response to rideshare publicity and
advertising, taken alone without incentives and pooling
assistance, is not very promising (Pratt, 1977). It has
also been found that the results of publicity and
advertising campaigns are mixed. It seems, however, that
rideshare promotion may serve an important role in the
longer term attitude development and assistance in
increasing ridesharing, even though the short term impact of
advertising and publicity campaigns is difficult to measure
(DRCOG, 1979). With regards to promoting ridesharing,


Page 36
research suggests that it should he promoted as a
convenience, over being promoted as a cost issue (Horowitz
and Sheth, 1977). This will have the best chance for
success, particularly if the use of the private automobile
is made less convenient (Brand, 1977).
EFFECTS OP RIDESHARING- STRATEGIES OH OTHER MODES
Some researchers contend that non-competition with
transit service increases the effectiveness of ridesharing
programs. Aggressively promoting ridesharing and offering
incentives for carpooling and vanpooling can have an impact
on the transit market by diverting choice ridership away
from transit to carpools or vanpools (DRCOG, 1979; Ben-Akiva
and Atherton, 1977; Cambridge Systematics, Inc., 1978).
However, many researchers have found this to be quite
minimal and recommend strategies to counteract these
effects. Most experience to date shows that carpooling will
not detract significantly from transit use; "The
attractiveness of carpooling as an alternative mode appears
to be no greater on the average for transit riders than for
solo drivers Some mode shift will occur but the net result
is less congestion" (Pratt, 1977; p. 97).
As some research suggests, the diversion of people from
transit to vanpools has also not proven excessive (Pratt,
1977). "Most vanpool operations tap a predominantly new
travel market as compared to more traditional mass transit"
(Pratt, 1981; p. 140). If anything, vanpooling and


Page 37
carpooling share similar markets, as can he seen from
research data from the Minneapolis Rideshare Demonstration
Study: "95 percent of carpoolers were former drive alone
commuters; 65 percent of vanpoolers were former carpoolers
and 6-8 percent of carpoolers and vanpoolers were formerly
hus riders (Weisbrod and Eder, 1980; p. 1-16). Some
researchers contend that "conflict between ridesharing and
transit services will he minimal with a brokerage approach,
which entails providing transit information along with other
ridesharing services in the best interests of the commuter"
(Margolin, Misch, et al., 1981; p. 20). Thus, by promoting
all types of transportation alternatives together, it
appears that mode shifts from transit to ridesharing will be
minimal.
The next TSM strategy that will be examined is parking
management techniques.


Page 38
PARKING MANAGEMENT AS A TSM TECHNIQUE
INTRODUCTION
Parking management, pursued in the context of achieving
the objectives of TSM, is a fairly recent concept. Raymond
Ellis (1977, p. 54), a private transportation consultant,
describes this concept very clearly:
"Increasing recognition is being given to the important
role that the availability and quality of parking can
play in shaping the overall service provided by the
urban transportation system and in achieving other
community objectives. The usefulness of the automobile
can be impeded if the driver is unable to find
convenient and reasonably priced parking in the
vicinity of his or her final destination. Similarly,
the ease of access to a transit station and the
difficulty of driving and parking near the final
destination are important factors influencing a
travelers choice of mode. Consequently, there has
been an increased recognition- particularly at the
federal level- that public policies influencing the
availability and pricing of parking can be used to
achieve air quality, energy conservation and congestion
reduction
Basically, parking management strategies have two
principal objectives within the overall context of TSM: 1 )
to improve transportation service and 2) to increase the
generalized cost of using a single occupant automobile so as
to divert these travelers to high occupancy vehicles (HOV's)
(Ellis, 1977). Ellis (1977, p. 56) contends that "These two
objectives are actually contradictory,, and it is therefore
necessary to determine which one is most desirable,
depending on local planning objectives and circumstances."
In the case of decreasing the demand for parking spaces at
the Auraria campus and decreasing areawide VMT, the second


Page 39
objective is the more appropriate to pursue. Therefore,
parking management actions which have as their primary
objectives the reduction of VMT and decreasing the demand
for parking will be examined in this section.
To some, those parking management actions directed at
diverting solo drivers to transportation alternatives by
increasing the generalized cost of driving seem pecuniary
and politically controversial. However the argument for
such an approach states that "The automobile driver,
particularly the peak hour, home to work driver, is not
paying the cost of providing him or her with highway
facilities" (Ellis, 1977: p. 56). Thus, this person is not
charged the full cost of his or her contribution to certain
externalities, such as noise, air pollution, energy
consumption, and traffic congestion. Therefore, a number of
economists and planners have suggested that "The experienced
costs of single person automobile travel should more closely
approach the social costs" (Ellis, 1977: p- 56). Regardless
of whether or not this argument is sound, it is highly
controversial, for research shows that the only barrier to
implementing a program which aggressively promotes the use
of HOVs is political (Cambridge Systematics, Inc., 1978).
As with ridesharing, it is possible to design and
implement an effective program of parking measures; however,
certain conditions are necessary to achieve a programs
potential. These include: 1) the development of strategies
which balance incentives and disincentives, 2) the
development of local institutional relationships which will


Page 40
facilitate planning, implementation and enforcement of
parking management strategies and 3) the availability of
alternative modes of travel that offer service levels
comparable to that offered by the private automobile (DRCOG,
1979; Cambridge Systematics, Inc., 1978).
The importance of the last condition cannot be over
emphasized, as it appears consistently in the literature
(DRCOG, 1982; DRCOG, 1979; Cambridge Systematics, Inc.,
1978). As stated by DRCOG (1979, p- 23), "It is extremely
difficult to shift travelers from the auto in areas without
high levels of service from alternative modes
.."Restrictive parking management actions would only be
appropriate where there is a high level of service offered
by transit and excess capacity on that service, and at large
firms where the potential for ridesharing is high" (DRCOG,
1982: p. 62). It has been reported that Denver has opposed
parking management proposals, due to the great dependancy on
the auto in this area. Because of the urban sprawl in the
Denver-Metro region, this has made transportation
alternatives, particularly mass transit, seem unviable to
many people. However, these strategies still need to be
addressed. Parking management actions can be taken at the
the Auraria campus which are not unnecessarily punitive and
could have very positive effects on campus parking shortages
and areawide VMT. In the next section, the author will
examine those parking management strategies which could be
implemented at the Auraria Higher Education Center and
traveler responses to these actions.


Page 41
PARKING MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES AND RESPONSES
The various parking management strategies that will he
examined include: 1)preferential parking locations for
ridesharers, 2) preferential parking fees for ridesharer's
and auto facility pricing strategies to induce shifts to
HOV's and transit, 3) parking supply restrictions and 4) a
combination of the above.
As stated in the section on strategies to encourage
ridesharing, preferential parking for those who rideshare
has received mixed response. Some researchers state that
this can induce people to switch from single occupancy
vehicles to HOV's, particularly where parking supply is
limited (Pratt, 1977), whereas other researchers don't find
this to be an effective strategy, particularly when applied
as an independent action without other incentives or
disincentives (DRCOG, 1979)* Research on traveler response
to this measure indicates that "At large employers, there
will be an increase in ridesharing; however, this strategy
will draw from transit commuters, as well as drive alone
commuters" (Cambridge Systematics, Inc., 1978: p. IV-18).
This, however, can be ameliorated by a brokerage approach in
which all modes of transportation alternatives are promoted
together, so as to reduce the amount of shifting from
transit to ridesharing (Margolin, Misch, et al., 1981).
Instituting differential parking fees for HOV's is
another parking management strategy that generally has been


Page 42
shown to have a positive effect on reducing VMT and shifting
people from the drive alone mode to ridesharing or transit.
Research on auto facility pricing has shown that "an
increase in parking fees will lead to a moderate decline in
the number of automobiles using a facility, most commonly in
the range of a .15 percent to .4 percent volume reduction
for each 1 percent price increase" (Pratt, 1977: p. 143).
This is dependent, however, on the availability of
transportation alternatives and travel choices. It has been
reported that those measures which can be characterized as
pricing disincentives are inequitable in the distribution of
their effects. "An increase in parking charges at
facilities provided by large employers results in greater
percentage changes in VMT for lower and middle income
households than for upper income households" (Cambridge
Systematics, Inc., 1978: p. IV-9).
Another application of auto facility pricing involves
changing the structure of parking fees to encourage short
term users and/or to induce shifts from low occupancy
vehicles to HOV's. According to some researchers,
"The parking pricing structure is frequently such that
the total cost of parking/hour decreases as the
duration of parking increases. Although pricing
strategies for encouraging short term parking (or
inducing shifts to transportation alternatives) have
not frequently been employed, they appear to offer
potential for application to facilities where the fees
are collected by an attendent" (Ellis, 1977: p. 58).
A parking rate experiment involving a shift in rate
structure to favor the short term parker was instituted in
Philadelphia. The preliminary analysis showed that "Rate


Page 43
changes do affect the demand for parking and that favoring
the short term parker increases facility utilization"
(DRCOG, 1979: p. 27)- Furthermore, the experiment showed
that ,"Changing the rate structure to favor short term
parkers did not have a financially detrimental effect on the
parking operators" (DRCOG, 1979: p. 27)- In order for short
term parking policies to he effective, research has shown
that enforcement of parking regulations is crucial.
"Potential violators must realize that they have a
relatively high probability of receiving a traffic citation
and of having to pay the fines for their citations" (Ellis,
1972: p. 59).
A parking management strategy which has been shown to
be more effective than those which offer preferential
treatments to HOV's deals with limiting the supply of
parking spaces. The purpose of limiting the supply of
parking is to encourage the use of transportation
alternatives, and therefore reduce areawide VMT (Margolin,
Misch, et al., 1981). According to some researchers,
"Choice of mode for work travel (and therefore work
VMT) appears to be relatively insensitive to most of
the strategies that are designed to discourage auto use
by making parking more expensive and/or less
conveniently located. On the other hand, those
strategies which regulate the number of spaces
available, because they actually impose a constraint on
the supply of parking, can be quite effective"
(Cambridge Systematics, Inc., 1978: p. IV-13).
This is supported by DRCOG (1979, p- 48): "Supply
restrictions are significantly more effective than pricing
measures in reducing VMT." Traveler response to this
measure does indicate that limited parking does


Page 44
significantly increase ridesharing and transit use
(Margolin, Misch, et al., 1981). It has been documented
that "restricting the number of drive alone spaces per
employee to -5 at large employers, results in increases for
shared ride and transit of 26.6 percent and 9-2 percent
respectively. Drive alone decreases by 7*1 percent and auto
occupancy increases from 1.14 to 1.18" (Cambridge
Systematics, Inc., 1978: p. IV-18).
The most effective approach to viewing parking
management as a TSM technique involves combining various
strategies into program packages. This has been shown to be
more effective in terms of reducing VMT than the sum of
individual measures. For example, "If employer based
carpool and vanpool programs are combined with measures
restricting employer provided spaces to only HOVs, the
resulting percentage change in VMT is about 14 percent
greater than the summed VMT reduction of the measures taken
individually" (Cambridge Systematics, Inc., 1978: p. IV-19)*
These same researchers have shown a similar scenario for
combining strategies involving parking charges and
preferential parking locations for HOV's. They state, "When
implemented alone, a $3*00 parking charge results in a .8
percent reduction in VMT, and the preferential parking
measure results in a .9 percent VMT reduction. However,
when implemented in combination, the result is a 2.4 percent
decrease in VMT" (Cambridge Systematics, Inc., 1978: p.
IV-39).


Page 45
EFFECTS OP PARKING MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES ON OTHER MODES
It seems as if parking management strategies can effect
changes of mode from driving alone to transit and
ridesharing. When examining the potential impacts of
parking measures, three types of shifts occur in work trip
modal shares: 1) auto disincentives shift commuters from
auto to transit, 2) disincentives aimed at single occupant
autos result in increased carpooling as well as increased
transit ridership and 3) carpool and vanpool incentives draw
commuters not only from single occupant vehicles, hut also
from transit (Cambridge Systematics, Inc., 1978).
In the next section, the author will examine bicycling
as a TSM technique. As in the section on ridesharing, the
demographic, geographic, and attitudinal characteristics of
regular bicycle users will be described. An examination of
possible strategies to increase bicycling and travelers'
responses to these strategies will be included as well.


Page 46
BICYCLING- AS A TSM TECHNIQUE
INTRODUCTION
It is clear from an examination of the literature that
"bicycling has "been slighted and has not received the
recognition it deserves as a viable transportation mode. As
stated by DRCOG (1982, p. 72), "The bicycle _is a viable
transportation mode. This fact has been widely accepted for
decades throughout much of the world, but only in recent
years have Americans begun to recognize the bicycle as a
significant part of the transportation mix." As a result of
this orientation toward the bicycle in the U.S., provisions
for bicyclists are minimal or non-existent (DRCOG, 1982).
Basically, there are two types of bicyclists, the
utilitarian bicyclist who uses his/her vehicle for work or
school types of trips and the recreational cyclist, who uses
his/her vehicle for recreational purposes. Although these
two types of cyclists use the same or similar vehicle, their
transportation needs appear to be very different. Some
researchers explain this dilemma,
"In planning for bicycle facilities in U.S. cities,
transportation planners must recognize that viewing the
bicycle primarily as a recreational vehicle will not
meet the needs of most cyclists. The bicycle must be
integrated into the urban transportation planning
process like any other urban transportation
mode... scenic bikeways along abandoned railroad
rights-of-way will not suffice" (Hanson and Hanson,
1976: p. 24-28).
This view is also shared by DRCOG (1979, p34):
"The existing transportation system is the principal
resource currently available to transportation


Page 47
bicyclists. However, this system was initially
designed for the automobile, and thus, does not always
meet the specific transportation needs of utilitarian
bicyclists" (DRCOG, 1979: p. IV.)..."utilitarian
bicyclists want to get to places in the most efficient
manner possible...as such, they frequently must travel
on the more congested and hazardous portions of the
street system... therefore, the street system much be
reworked, so that it better accommodates bicycles."
Tremendous psychological barriers need to be overcome
in order for the utilitarian bicyclist to be taken
seriously. According to one researcher, "Despite traffic
laws that give bicycles equal rights, the
automobile-commuting traffic planner is tempted to view the
bicycle as an obstacle rather than as a vehicle with which
to share the roadway" (Shaw, 1976: p. 32). In a study on
bicycling in downtown Denver, similar sentiments were
expressed: "The community at large does not consider cycling
a serious means of traveling downtown, despite numerous
advantages, including Denver's excellent climate, favorable
topography and its first class bikeway system" (The Denver
Partnership, Inc., 1983: p. 1). Despite the psychological
and subsequent political barriers to bicycling, there is no
question regarding the benefits of this mode. These
include: 1) health to the cyclist, 2) reduced levels of air
and noise pollution, 3) lower levels of fuel consumption, 4)
less urban space taken up by parking and automobile related
facilities and 5) lower levels of traffic congestion (The
Denver Partnership, Inc., 1983; Kraft, 1977; Hanson and
Hanson, 1976).
It appears that the potential for increasing
utilitarian bicycling in urban areas is quite large.


Page 48
According to data compiled by one researcher, the potential
for this is 15 percent of all urban work trips (Kraft,
1977)- In Denver, the potential seems even greater.
Studies prepared by DRCOG.have shown that most utilitarian
bicycle trips are under five miles in length (one way) with
the average being about two miles (one way). DRCOG (1979,
p. 9) has found that "Since 14 percent of all home based
work (HBW) trips in the Denver area are two miles or less
and 49 percent of HBW trips are six miles or less, there is
a large percentage of HBW trips in the Denver-Metro area
which could be accommodated by the bicycle." Translated
into actual time spent commuting, DRCOG (1979, p. 22)
states, "Assuming bicycling speeds of about 12 mph for
commuting purposes, a two mile trip will take 10 minutes.
Based upon the same commuting speed, a trip of 30 minutes
would offer a practical maximum of five to six miles one way
commuting distance." Thus, it appears as if there exists a
large percentage of people who could use the bicycle as a
mode of transportation for commuting purposes. However,
there are certain factors that effect this mode choice
decision.
Factors which effect mode choice decision regarding
bicycling include: 1) flexibility of schedule, 2) trip
distance, 3) travel time, 4) trip cost, 5) route quality, 6)
quality of bicycle facilities at the destination, 7) age, 8)
gender, 9) income, 10) education, 11) residence location,
12) weather and climate and 13) environmental pollution
(DRCOG, 1979; Lott, Lott and Tardiff, 1977). Furthermore,


Page 49
some research has found that the type of land use
arrangement (compact vs. sprawling) has the potential to
effect bicycle mode choice decisions (Robinson, Edwards and
Ohrn, 1980). In the next section, then, some of these
factors will be addressed. As in the chapter on
ridesharing, the demographic, geographic, and attitudinal
characteristics of regular bicycle users will be examined.
DEMOGRAPHIC AND GEOGRAPHIC CHARACTERISTICS
There seems to be fairly consistent information in the
literature on demographic characteristics of bicyclists.
There is agreement that age is a factor which influences
participation in bicycling. Essentially, bicycling use
decreases as age increases (The Denver Partnership, Inc.,
1983; DRCOG, 1979; Lott, et al., 1977; Shaw, 1976).
Statistics compiled by DRCOG (1979, p. 8) show that
"Approximately 45 percent of the people in the age category
20-29 years bicycle yearly and 37 percent of the people in
the age category 30-44 years bicycle yearly. This
percentage drops drammatically for those 44 years and
older." These findings coincide with a survey of Denver's
Mountain Bicyclists Association's (MBA) members. Fifty
percent of MBA's membership is in the age category 25-44
years old (The Denver Partnership, Inc., 1983).
Research has shown that gender appears to be a
relatively insignificant factor in the mode choice decision
(Lott, et al., 1977). However, some researchers have found


Page 50
that this has an influence on the number of miles traveled,
that being, males travel further than females (Kaplan,
1975)* Income findings seem to be consistent. The
incidence of bicycling increases with family income. "The
percentage of bicycling for those in the income bracket of
15,000/year or more, is at least two times greater than
those whose incomes are $10,000/year or less" (DRCOG, 1979:
p. 18). However, one researcher cautions the significance
of income findings in the H.S., "bicycling in Europe is
broadly based and may change in the U.S. as bicycling
becomes more broadly based as well" (Shaw, 1976: p. 52).
As with ridesharing, geographic characteristics are
very significant indicators and predictors of bicycle mode
choice. According to a survey of downtown workers in Davis,
California (an area similar to Boulder, CO. with regard to
bicycle use and awareness), it was found that "Work trip
length is a predictor of bicycle use as a transportation
mode and motor vehicle users tend to have longer trips"
(Lott, et al., 1977: p. 32). Lott (1977, p. 35) also
concluded that "There is a strong correlation between
measured and perceived distance." DRCOG (1979, p- III) has
reported that "Most utilitarian, trips are under five miles
(one way) in length, with the average being about two miles
(one way.)" Other research supports this finding (Kaplan,
1975)* With regards to where bicycling occurs, DRCOG (1979)
has found that suburban areas tend to have higher rates of
bicycling than central cities and rural areas, although
there are somewhat higher levels of utilitarian bicycle use


Page 51
in urban areas. According to the Mountain Bicyclists
Association's survey in Denver, 45 percent of the members
live in the central area surrounding downtown and 35 percent
live in the Metro area. Furthermore, 56 percent of the
members use bike paths to commute and 44 percent commute on
city streets (The Denver Partnership, Inc., 1983).
From an examination of the literature regarding
demographic and geographic factors influencing bicycle mode
choice, it seems as if age and trip distance are the most
salient variables effecting this decision. People within
the age range of 20-44 years and living within a one way
distance of five miles or less from their destination are
most likely to make utilitarian trips by bicycle than any
other adult group. In the next section, the author will
examine the attitudinal characteristics and concerns of
bicyclists.
ATTITUDINAL CHARACTERISTICS AND CONCERNS
Without a doubt, the most frequently cited concerns of
bicyclists are the fear of bicycle theft and the lack of
adequate bicycle storage facilities (DRCOG, 1982; DRCOG,
1979; Kraft, 1977; Shaw, 1976). As stated by DRCOG (1979,
p. 54), "Unless bicycle parking facilities are provided
which will offer protection from theft, commuter bicycling
will always remain an insignificant part of regional trip
making." In a later study of bicycling in Denver, DRCOG
stated (1982, p. 46), "The bicycle is particularly well


Page 52
suited to transportation in the CBD, but the lack of secure
storage facilities places a constraint on the use of
bicycles. Although bicycle storage facilities are
available at most major bicycling destinations in the Denver
region, most dont provide adequate bicycle security.
Furthermore, in terms of security, the common bicycle rack
is not perceived as beneficial by bicyclists (DRCOG, 1979)-
Other problem areas identified by bicyclists include: 1)
traffic conflicts, 2) inconsiderate automobile drivers and
3) necessity of separate bike lanes or paths (Shaw, 1976).
Essentially, then, the most pressing concerns for bicyclists
deal with bicycle theft and inadequate storage facilities
and safety concerns regarding commuting in heavy traffic.
In the next section, strategies will be examined that may
ameliorate these concerns.
BICYCLING STRATEGIES AND RESPONSES
As stated above, bicyclists are extremely concerned
about safe and secure storage facilities. According to
DRCOG (1982, p. 73), Bicycle facilities should be pursued
as an areawide strategy in order to address the problems of
air quality and limited roadway system capacity.
Sufficiently secure and visible bicycle storage facilities
should be provided at locations characterized by high
concentrations of purposeful trip destinations (work,
school, shopping) and at high volume bus stops." This is
supported by other researchers (The Denver Partnership,


Page 53
Inc.-, 1983; Hanson and Hanson, 1976).
Other attributes of a parking facility important to the
commuter cyclist include: "weather protection, hardware that
will lock both the wheels and frame, tamper resistant racks
and racks that are near an entrance or within viewing
distance of a parking attendent. Hardware used in future
installations should also be compatible with horseshoe
shaped locks, as these are becoming more and more popular"
(The Denver Partnership, Inc., 1983: p. 13)- Furthermore,
"Bicycle lockers (either key or coin operated) should be
provided instead of, or in addition to, existing racks at
all major activity centers in the Denver region" (DRCOG-,
1979: p* 65). In addition to providing safe and secure
facilities for bicyclists, other secondary support
facilities that have been found to encourage bicycling
include: showers in places of employment and the
availability of clothes lockers at the workplace (The Denver
Partnership, Inc., 1983; Hanson and Hanson, 1976).
Bicyclists are also very concerned about on-route
commuting facilities. In the introduction to this section,
the point was made that bicyclists in the past have not only
been perceived as a nuisance, but also as an afterthought.
Researchers recommend that this thinking must change; "If
the bicycle is to become a viable, safe, and frequently used
means of transportation, proper facilities must be provided.
This means primarily constructing separate paths or
delimiting bicycle lanes on existing streets to separate
bicycles from motor traffic" (Hanson and Hanson, 1976: p.


Page 54
25). Other researchers agree on the importance of separate
facilities to promote bicycling (Robinson, Edwards and Ohrn,
1980).
According to a study of bicycle use in downtown Denver,
bicycle route facility changes have been recommended for
Denver's growing bicycle population. As stated in the
report, "The growing number of pedestrians and bicyclists
traveling Cherry Creek and the Platte River warrants the
installation of security lighting. Bridge underpasses can
be especially dark, creating a danger for commuters and
students who may be riding after sunset" (The Denver
Partnership, Inc., 1983: p. 8). Furthermore, the bicycle
study calls for an awareness of bicyclists' needs for future
transportation planning efforts in downtown Denver, as it is
stated, "Alterations associated with the proposed Auraria
Roadway should strengthen the bicycle linkages between
downtown Denver, the Auraria campus and the Cherry Creek
Bikeway" (The Denver Partnership, Inc., 1983: p. 9).
Another major concern for bicyclists deals with safety
needs during the commute. It is widely accepted that "many
people are reluctant to become bicycle commuters because
they perceive it as being too dangerous. Although there
are, in fact, many external hazards to bicycling, most of
the dangerous aspects can be reduced to a minimum by riding
in a responsible and defensive manner" (The Denver
Partnership, Inc., 1983: p. 19). Therefore, physical system
improvements need to be coupled with programmatic elements
to encourage greater bicycle utilization for utilitarian


Page 55
trips. These include: 1 ) public education to stimulate
bicycle utilization and to teach safe operation of the
bicycle and 2) bicycle registration to improve bicycle
security (DRCOG, 1979: p* 55) Public education about
bicycling is seen as essential by other researchers as well;
Information is an essential element that can reinforce
hardware improvements. Media coverage, brochures, and
special bicycle events help promote bicycling (The Denver
Partnership, Inc., 1983: p. 18). Beth Wren-Estes, the
Executive Director of Mountain Bicyclists Association in
Denver, states this point clearly (The Denver Partnership,
Inc., 1983: p- 18):
1 believe that one crucial hey to the attainment of
better parking and access is the dissemination of
educational materials in tandem with the implementation
of physical system improvements. It is important to
educate the cyclist and the general public on the laws
regarding cycling, where to park downtown, how to
secure bicycles and how to ride in and out of downtown
in the quickest and most efficient way."
It is clear, then, that strategies to increase bicycling
must include educational as well as physical system
improvement aspects.
In the next section, TSM strategies to increase transit
use will be examined. As in this section and the section on
ridesharing, characteristics of bus riders and non-bus
riders will be examined, along with strategies to promote
transit use and travelers' responses to these actions.


Page 56
TRANSIT CHANGES AS A TSM TECHNIQUE
INTRODUCTION
Although transit changes are an important area to
examine, more effort was spent in researching the three TSM
techniques previously discussed- ridesharing, parking
management and bicycling. This is due to the fact that the
Auraria Higher Education Center has greater control over
on-campus facilities for moving and parking cars and
bicycles. Therefore, more time was spent in reviewing areas
for which AHEC has responsibility and for which policy
decisions concerning transportation changes could more
easily be implemented. Since the responsibility for running
and operating the bus system rests with the Regional
Transportation District (RTD), possible recommendations for
changes to improve transit service, although important and
beneficial to Auraria commuters, may possibly not be acted
upon as easily and/or quickly as recommendations to
encourage ridesharing and/or bicycling. It is essential,
however, to review transit changes when looking at ways to
decrease the demand for parking on campus and to decrease
areawide VMT.
Many people in the transportation profession contend it
is quite difficult to change peoples' commuting behavior and
don't look towards transit as having a tremendous ability to
change this in the near future. Nonetheless, transit does
have an important role to play in the overall urban


Page 57
transportation system. According to DRCOG (1979, p. 47),
"Transit service improvements alone have a limited
ability to reduce VMT; yet transit has an important
role to play in providing: 1) an alternative means of
travel to the private automobile and 2) a possible
solution to subarea specific problems such as CO air
pollution in the Denver CBD. Transit service
improvements are an essential element of a
comprehensive program to encourage the use of high
occupancy vehicles by providing an alternative means of
mobility."
Research points to many factors that will increase
transit ridership. Before discussing these, though, the
author will examine the demographic, geographic and
attitudinal characteristics of transit users and non-users
in the next section. First, however, clarification is
needed regarding the classifications of transit users that
are addressed in the next section. Those transit users that
choose to use transit, even though they could travel instead
by car, are called "choice" transit riders. Those transit
users that use transit because they do not have access to
cars are called "captive" transit riders.
DEMOGRAPHIC AND GEOGRAPHIC CHARACTERISTICS
Demographic information from various research studies
on transit ridership reveals interesting findings.
Statistics on age of choice transit riders appear to vary,
depending upon the particular area surveyed. For example, a
survey of choice and captive ridership in the Pittsburgh
Metropolitan area stated that the proportion of choice trips
increases from ages 15-35 years, then decreases again.
Those in the age group 30-54 years make more choice trips


Page 58
than any other group. Furthermore, the study found that
"among choice tripmakers, there is a much smaller proportion
of younger and older riders" (Keefer, 1962: p. 26). Survey
findings from a study conducted in Santa Ana, California
differ. It is reported that people in the age group 35-65
years have the highest ridership potential and those in the
age group 18-24 years are unlikely to use the bus (Fielding,
et al., 1976: p. 25). In Denver, a survey of RTD ridership
revealed the highest bus use for the age group 18-24 years
and high use, in rank order, for those in the following age
categories: 1) 65 years and older, 2) 25-34 years and 3)
45-54 years. Those in the age groups 35-44 years and 55-64
years used the bus less than the other groups. (The Denver
Consulting Group, 1982).
Research findings regarding gender and race seem more
consistent than those concerning age. Regarding gender, it
is widely accepted that choice tripmakers are predominantly
male and captive tripmakers are mostly female (Keefer, 1962;
Weisbrod and Eder, 1980). Statistics concerning race show
that it is more likely that choice trips will be made by
anglos and more captive trips will be made by minorities
(Keefer, 1962; Byrd, 1976). In fact, the Denver study
showed that anglos make up a disproportionate percentage of
RTDs transit non-users (The Denver Consulting Group, 1982).
Information on income and auto ownership can be grouped
together. This connection is stated in the literature; "the
average auto ownership level for bus riders is only about
half of the level for commuters using other modes, although


Page 59
this difference is related to income" (Weishrod and Eder,
1980: p. 9-21). Surveys in Minneapolis, Atlanta, California
and Pittsburgh show that there are significant differences
in household income for transit users and nonusers, although
the survey findings vary from one location to another
(Weishrod and Eder, 1980; Byrd, 1976; Fielding,
Blankenship, Tardiff, 1976; Keefer, 1962). In California,
it was found that "the group with the highest ridership
potential would he those without cars and who earn less than
$7,900. Those households with two or more cars and with
incomes greater than $25,000 would he unlikely to use the
bus" (Fielding, et al., 1976: p. 25). However, a survey
conducted in Atlanta showed different results. It revealed
that "the greatest relative increase in ridership was from
upper income households, those with $20,000 per year or more
(providing service improvements were implemented)" (Byrd,
1976: p. 31). In Denver, it does not appear as if bus
ridership is negatively affected by high household incomes.
In fact, quite the opposite seems to be the case. A large
percentage of people with high incomes in the Denver-Metro
region ride the bus (The Denver Consulting Group, 1982).
Information regarding geographic characteristics of
transit users and non-users is fairly consistent. It has
been reported that transit use is directly related to the
proximity of the trip origin to a bus route (Fielding, et
al., 1976). Furthermore, more bus users live within city
limits and non-users live in the suburbs (Byrd, 1976).
RTD's ridership survey also bears out this finding (The


Page 60
Denver Consulting Group, 1982). Prom an examination of this
information, it appears that there is more consensus in the
literature regarding the relationship "between geographic
characteristics and transit use than demographic
characteristics and transit use. In the next section,
attitudinal characteristics of transit users and non-users
will "be examined.
ATTITUDINAL CHARACTERISTICS
Prom an examination of the literature, it appears that
the most important attributes of transit service to
commuters include: 1) schedule reliability, 2) greater
frequency of service, 5) driver attitude (this has been
shown to be more important to the public than many of the
costly amenities of bus design) and 4) closeness to the bus
line (Fielding, et al., 1976; Byrd, 1976). Transit cost is
important, but studies have shown that other attributes,
such as driver attitude and distance to the bus route are
more significant in the mode choice decision to use the bus
(Fielding, et al., 1976).
As with ridesharing, differences exist between transit
users' and non-users' perceptions of bus service. Overall,
transit is perceived as less convenient by non-users than by
users. In a survey of Atlanta's transit system, "More than
half of the users felt transit was either very convenient or
somewhat convenient for work trips compared to less than one
third of the non-users." Furthermore, transit non-users


Page 61
perceived lower overall quality of "bus service than did
users. Transit non-users also placed more importance on
schedule reliability than users and placed more emphasis on
better schedule information than did users (Byrd, 1976:
p-31 ) These findings mesh with research that contends the
more one uses a system, the more one perceives it as being
convenient. Thus, the alternative mode, in this case the
bus, takes on the attributes once reserved solely for the
automobile.
According to some research, the perception of transit
convenience must change in order to attract more riders. As
stated by Byrd (1976, p. 36):
"It is possible that additional riders could be
attracted to transit if there was an improvement in the
perception of convenience by non-users. The general
perception of transit convenience of users is
significantly higher than that of non-users, regardless
of geographical location. These findings point to the
importance of the perception of transit convenience and
the need to communicate this concept to the general
public."
Other researchers contend, however, that merely improving
peoples perceptions of a system's attributes doesn't go far
enough towards changing travel behavior.
"Analyses have shown that, at least for buses, the
relation between perceptions of system features and
behavior is mediated by their relations to modal
affect. Modal affect was found to be not only the
strongest predictor of behavior, but also to add
predictive power over and above the influence of
perceived.convenience and comfort. This suggests that
favorable evaluations of transit attributes are
necessary but not sufficient to attain transit
ridership. Perceptions of attributes do influence
affect, but there appears to be a component of it that
is independent of the perceived attributes of a system.
It may be necessary, therefore, to change a potential
user's image or overall evaluation of a mode before
favorable perceptions of features can lead to increased
usage" (Dumas and Dobson, 1979: p- 70).


Page 62
The above statement is also supported by findings in
the Atlanta survey. According to the survey findings, a
large segment of non-users already perceived transit service
quality as good when the survey was conduted. However, from
this survey the point was made that non-users would be
willing to use the bus if service were improved even more
(Byrd, 1976). Prom an examination of attitudinal
characteristics, it can be concluded that convenience and
service attributes are particularly important to choice
transit riders in order to induce shifts to this mode.
Furthermore, travelers perceptions of transit and modal
affect play an important role in the decision process as
well. In the next section, then, various strategies will be
examined that address these concerns as well as traveler
response to these actions.
TRANSIT STRATEGIES AND RESPONSES
The various strategies to increase transit ridership
include: 1) fare reductions, 2) service improvements, 3)
public education, 4) employer commitment and 5) a
combination of the above with auto disincentives.
A prime strategy to increase the use of transit is to
reduce fares. Generally, experiments with fare reductions
have shown an increase in ridership during the fare
reduction period, with a certain percentage continuing to
use transit following the end of the experiment. In
Atlanta, "Total ridership for the six month period following


Page 63
the fare reduction experiment was 15 percent greater than
the equivalent period the year hefore" (Byrd, 1976: p. 30).
Pare reductions have been shown to have varying effects,
depending on the time of day, e.g. during the peak or
off-peak periods of transit service. Regarding free fare
experiments, it has been reported that "Free fare during the
peak period is less effective than free fare during the off
peak period" (DRCOG, 1979: p. 12). Other findings
concerning free fare experiments have shown that "There has
been no significant evidence to support the notion that
traveler response to free fares is dramatically different
from the response to fare reductions" (Pratt, 1981: p. 241).
There is inconsistent information in the literature
regarding the exact effects of fare decreases on transit
ridership. According to DRCOG (1979, p. 14),
"Although the Simpson-Curtin rule, which states that an
overall fare increase of 1 percent will reduce
ridership by one third of 1 percent, continues to be
supported by actual experience, evidence is
inconclusive as to whether the relationship observed
for fare increases holds in reverse for fare
decreases."
Other researchers, however, have found that "The effect
of a bus fare increase or decrease averages roughly a .4
percent ridership loss or gain per 1 percent fare change"
(Pratt, 1981: p. 237). Pratt (1981) has found that
ridership responds least to fare changes in large cities and
where transit service is exceptionally good or the cost of
transportation alternatives is high. It has also been
reported that younger age groups respond more to fare
changes, or at least to fare reductions (Pratt, 1981).


Page 64
Service improvements are another strategy to increase
transit ridership. These have been found to be more
effective than fare reductions in increasing transit use.
Furthermore, "Non-work or off-peak trips are more sensitive
to such improvements than work purpose or peak period trips"
(DRCOG, 1979: p- 15). In the Atlanta survey, it was found
that higher income respondents had a more definite idea of
their response to transit service improvements than lower
income respondents.
"More than one third of the higher income respondents
stated they were either very likely or not at all
likely to ride transit given service improvements. On
the other hand, only 15 percent of the lower income
respondents (household incomes less than $5,000) stated
definitely they would or wouldn't ride transit if
service was sufficiently improved. Overall, more than
25 percent of non-users interviewed stated they would
be likely to ride transit if service were sufficiently
improved" (Byrd, 1976: p. 51)-
As with ridesharing and bicycling, the public needs to
be educated regarding transit in order to take greater
advantage of this mode. According to some research,
consumers overestimate their proposed use of transit and
this may be related to lack of information or experience.
Therefore, the public must be educated in the use of the bus
service (Fielding, et al., 1976). Actions to take may
include better marketing and promotion of transit services.
This leads to employers taking an active part in helping
promote transit. It has been reported that generally,
"Employer oriented programs are more successful than area
wide efforts to promote transit and the degree of employer
support is a primary determinant of the level of success for


Page 65
the program" (Pratt, 1981: p. 267). The availability of
transit passes offered at a discount by employers has
affected mode choice. "Pass use and mode shifts to transit
are more prevalent among those employees receiving direct
transit subsidies from their employers. Therefore, offering
prepayment options at a discount by the employer or transit
operator has had a substantial effect on their use in
several cases" (Pratt, 1981: p. 274-275).
As with all of the various TSM techniques examined, the
most effective strategy to influence a change of mode from
the automobile to a transportation alternative involves
combining auto disincentives with alternative mode
incentives. This is true with transit as well. According
to DRCOG- (1982, p. 61), "In CBD areas and activity centers
that can be well served by transit, transit improvement
actions should be accompanied by measures to reduce reliance
on the private automobile." Research conducted over twenty
years ago recognized this relationship; "It appears that the
most persuasive argument for choosing transit is the
difficulty and expense of driving and parking in downtown
areas" (Keefer, 1962: p. 53).


Page 66
CHAPTER II SUMMARY
The purposes of this literature review were: 1) to
provide the reader with historical and general "background
information on Transportation System Management (TSM) and 2)
to examine TSM strategies that could "be employed at the
Auraria Higher Education Center which discourage the use of
the single passenger automobile and encourage the use of
alternative modes of transportation. Along with an
examination of these TSM techniques, the author also
explored the demographic, geographic and attitudinal
characteristics of users and non-users of these various
alternative transportation modes.
In general, it appears that the most salient point
regarding the implementation of TSM strategies is that their
effects can be either synergistic or counterproductive. It
is therefore essential that TSM actions be applied in a
rational and well-conceived manner. With regards to the
characteristics of those who use and those who don't use a
particular transportation alternative, it appears that there
is more consensus in the literature regarding the
significance of geographic characteristics on user behavior
from one location to another. There seems to be less
consensus regarding research findings on demographic
characteristics and attitudinal characteristics of people
who use transportation alternatives.


Page 67
In the next chapter, Chapter III, the author will
describe the methodology employed to survey the demographic,
geographic, and attitudinal characteristics of automobile
commuters at the Auraria Higher Education Center.


Page 68
CHAPTER III
RESEARCH METHODS AND PROCEDURES
INTRODUCTION
Research in the area of transportation alternatives
points to some consistencies and inconsistencies regarding the
demographic, geographic and attitudinal characteristics of
those who use transportation alternatives and those who dont.
Therefore, in order to develop recommendations for employing
transportation alternatives to the single passenger vehicle at
the Auraria campus, it was necessary to survey Auraria's
automobile commuters. Data regarding their demographic and
geographic characteristics as well as their use of
transportation alternatives and attitudes towards these,
particularly ridesharing and bus transit, were gathered and
analyzed. Unfortunately, not a great deal of data concerning
bicycling as a transportation alternative was gathered. This
was due, in part, to wanting to keep the length of the survey
down. The author must apologize for this error in judgement.
RESEARCH DESIGN
The intent of this study was primarily descriptive, to
define the demographic and geographic characteristics of
automobile commuters at the Auraria campus, as well as gather
base line data on the frequency of bus ridership and
carpooling for this population. Furthermore, the respondents'
attitudes towards transportation alternatives were examined,


Page 69
in order to determine how "best to encourage greater use of
these alternatives for commuting to the campus. Specifically,
the author hoped to gain insight into the reasons people chose
not to carpool and/or ride the bus. Lastly, an examination of
transportation alternatives which would be the most desirable
and the least preferable to Auraria's automobile commuters was
also undertaken, in order to recommend solutions to the
problem of parking at the Auraria campus. This study was
conducted under the auspices of AHEC's Parking Operations. At
the time of the study, the author was the Carpool/Vanpool
Coordinator at the Auraria Higher Education Center. It was
hoped that information gathered from the survey would better
enable the author to develop transportation alternatives for
the Auraria campus.
At the time of this study, Spring Semester 1983, there
were approximately 17,000-18,000 people (students, faculty and
staff), who registered their vehicles with the Auraria Higher
Education Center's Parking Operations. This registration
process was necessary in order to allow on-campus parking
privileges to Auraria students, faculty and staff. Due to the
size of this population, the amount of information desired and
the research constraints (just the author available to conduct
the study), it was determined that the most constructive way
to survey the population would be to design and develop a
mail-out questionnaire. The actual design of the survey
(format and selection of the questions) was developed after
discussions with various professors at the University of
Colorado at Denver's Graduate School of Design and Planning,


Page 70
including Dr. Daniel Schler, Dr. Bernie Jones and Dr. Andre
Kimboko. Furthermore, questionnaires each of these professors
had developed or been involved with in the past were reviewed
to gain insight into the design of such instruments. For a
copy of the questionnaire see Appendix A, p.157.
One of the problems associated with a mail-out
questionnaire is a low response rate. It was decided that
perhaps one way to elicit a greater response would be to offer
an incentive to those returning the survey. Following
discussions with the Director of AHEC's Parking Operations,
Raul Gomez, it was decided to offer a $25.00 gift certificate
to the Auraria Book Center to one of the respondents who
returned the questionnaire. This information was included in
a cover letter accompanying the questionnaire (see Appendix B,
p. 161 ) Each respondent's questionnaire was numbered in the
upper right hand corner on the top page. The respondent's
name, address and questionnaire number were recorded on a pad.
In such a manner, it was possible to place all of the
respondents' numbers in a bag when the surveys were returned,
randomly select a winner and notify the individual that had
won. A further step was taken to ensure a greater rate of
return for the survey. A business reply envelope was inserted
in each letter so that postage for the survey would be the
responsibility of AHEC Parking Operations and not the people
surveyed.


Page 71
DETERMINATION AND SELECTION OP THE STUDY SAMPLE
As stated previously, the population of the study
included all people (students, faculty and staff), who
registered their vehicles with the Auraria Parking Operations
during the Spring Semester, 1983* This was approximately
17,000-18,000 people. Due to the large population size, it
was decided to send the questionnaire to a random sample of
the population. It was decided that a 5$ sampling of the
population would he representative of the total population.
Out of this 5$ sample, it was determined that 384
questionnaires would need to he returned in order to obtain
statistically acceptable data.
The sampling frame used was available from the Auraria
Parking Operations. People who register their vehicles with
the Parking Operations are required to fill out a form which
is filed by number in the Parking Office. Permission was
granted by the Director of Parking Operations to select the
sample utilizing these forms. Information pertinent to the
study listed on the forms was the individuals name, address
and status (faculty, staff or student). A systematic random
sampling technique was employed, whereby every 20th person's
form was pulled from the files, starting from a randomly
selected point, and the individual's name, address and status
(if faculty or staff) were recorded. This was done manually,
since such information was not computerized at the time this
study was undertaken. In total, 940 names were drawn from the
files containing the vehicle registration forms.


Page 72
Prom the time people received the questionnaires, they
were given approximately two weeks in which to complete the
survey and mail it hack. Questionnaires were mailed (hy bulk
rate) at the end of March and requested hy the end of April
(the questionnaires were mailed this early due to the slower
service given with hulk rate items). Since there would still
he a few more weeks left in the semester hy the time the
surveys were received hy the respondents and requested hack,
it was hoped that the respondents, particularly the students,
would not he under such great pressure to complete work for
the end of the semester and might therefore he more willing to
take the time to complete the questionnaire. The timing,
then, of mailing and receiving the questionnaires was
considered crucial to improving the chances of ensuring a
better rate of return. It appears that factors taken into
consideration in distributing the questionnaires, such as the
Auraria Book Center gift certificate incentive and the timing
of the surveys distribution, did have a positive effect on a
good response rate. Out of the 906 questionnaires mailed, 406
were returned, representing a 43# rate of return, which is
considered quite acceptable for this type of survey.


Page 7^
PROCESSING THE DATA
The questionnaire was designed in such a manner that
editing and coding the data could he accomplished in the most
efficient way possible. People were asked to circle numbers
that corresponded to a particular answer on the questionnaire.
As such, this information could be easily key punched into the
computer. The University of Colorado at Boulders Control
Data Cyber computer was used to house the data and the data
was analyzed using quantitative analysis from the Statistical
Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS). The analysis of the
data included the following tabulations: 1) frequency
tabulations of each question and 2) crosstabulations between
the following: the various demographic and geographic
characteristics of the respondents, the frequency of bus
ridership and carpooling by the demographic and geographic
characteristics and the various multiple response questions by
the geographic and demographic characteristics of the
respondents, as well.
The next chapter, Chapter IV, involves an analysis and
discussion of the survey data. Particular attention will be
paid to the demographic and geographic characteristics of
Aurarias automobile commuters, as well as their behavior and
attitudes towards the use of transportation alternatives,
particularly carpooling and bus transit.


Page 74
CHAPTER IV
ANALYSIS OF AURARIA1S AUTOMOBILE COMMUTERS
INTRODUCTION
In the last chapter, the methodology employed to study
Auraria's automobile commuters was described. A
questionnaire was developed in order to provide information
regarding their geographic and demographic characteristics,
as well as their current use of various transportation
alternatives and attitudes towards them, particularly
carpooling and bus transit. The ultimate purpose for
developing this survey was to recommend solutions to
Auraria's parking problems based on decreasing the demand
for the single passenger automobile on campus.
This chapter is divided into three parts. Part I
describes the geographic and demographic characteristics of
Auraria's automobile commuters. In Part II, the frequency
of carpooling and bus ridership is described, along with an
analysis of the significant demographic and geographic
characteristics of those who use these alternatives and
those who don't. Reasons as to why people don't use these
alternatives are discussed, as well as responses to
particular incentives offered to increase usage of
carpooling and bus transit. Finally, Part III addresses
what actions people would take if they could not find
parking at Auraria and what solutions they would favor to
solve the problem of very restricted parking on campus. Once


Page 75
again, the significant demographic and geographic factors
that separate people with varying attitudes towards the
transportation alternatives offered are analyzed in Part
III.
PART I
OVERALL GEOGRAPHIC AID DEMOGRAPHIC CHARACTERISTICS OF
AURARIA'S AUTOMOBILE COMMUTERS
The following geographic and demographic
characteristics of Auraria's automobile commuters are
examined in this section: 1) one-way travel distance to
Auraria, 2) home direction from Auraria, 3) age of
respondents, 4) institutional status and affiliation of
respondents, 5) gender of respondents and 6) income of
respondents. The demographic characteristics are discussed
first.
Gender Of Respondents
More females responded to the questionnaire than males,
58$ vs. 42$ respectively. Since the breakdown of gender in
the sampling frame was not known, it is not known why more
females responded to the questionnaire than males.
Age Of Respondents
The following table presents the breakdown of ages
among the respondents.


Page 76
Table 1- Age Of Respondents
Age Number Of Respondents Percent
< 18 0 0#
18-24 121 50#
25-54 178 44#
55-44 74 18#
45-54 25 6#
55-64 8 2#
65 and over 1 .2#
Prom an examination of the data, it is clear that the
mode for age range of the respondents was from 25-54 years
and the majority of the population, or 74# were between the
ages of 18-34 years. There was little representation in the
population of those over 44 years old. Further analysis of
these data showed that in this and many of the questions in
which there were more than three categories from which the
respondents could choose an answer, there were too many
categories and they therefore needed to be combined in some
manner. The combined age categories became the following:
1) 18-24 years- 30#, 2) 25-54 years- 44#, 5) 55-44 years-
18# and 4) 45 years or more- 8#. Justification for
combining the age categories as they were was mostly
generated from the literature review research regarding age
characteristics of people who participate in bicycling and
bus ridership in RTD's system.


Page 77
Income Of Respondents
The income categories used in this survey were derived
from two sources, 1) U.S. Census studies and 2) other
surveys reviewed. In this question, the respondents were
asked to circle the range that "best matched their income;
however, in retrospect, the author believes that this
question should have "been worded differently. Rather than
asking the respondents for their own income, they should
have been asked to circle the range that best reflected
their household income. The following table presents the
responses to this question.
Table 2- Income Of Respondents
Income Number Of Respondents Percent
Less than $5,000 95 23#
$5,000-$7,499 44 11#
$7,500-$9,999 20 5#
$10,000-$14,999 49 12#
$15,000-$19,999 50 12#
$20,000-$24,999 59 15#
$25,000-$34,999 56 9#
$35,000-$49,999 27 7#
$50,000 or more 16 4#
As can be seen from Table 2, the mode for income was
less than $5,000 and a large percentage of the respondents
(39#) had incomes less than $10,000. After performing a few
crosstabulations, it was decided to combine the many income
categories. The combined income categories became the
following: 1) Less than $10,000- 39#, 2) $10,000-$19,999-
24#, 3) $20,000-$34,999- 24# and 4) $35,000 or more- 11#.
It is clear that the mode regarding the income range was


Page 78
less than $10,000 per year. However, the next two combined
categories, $10,000-$19,999 and $20,000-334,999, represented
a significant portion of the population (48$). Eleven
percent of the respondents were in the highest income range,
greater than or equal to $35,000.
Institutional Status and Affiliation
The largest proportion of students at Auraria who
responded to the survey were either affiliated with the
University of Colorado at Denver (44$) or Metropolitan State
College (48$). The following table presents a comparison
between institutional affiliation of the respondents and
enrollment proportions campus-wide.
Table 3- Institutional Affiliation Of Respondents Compared
To Institutional Affiliation Campus-Wide
Institution Respondent's Affiliation Campus-Wide
UCD 44$ 35$
MSC 48$ 51$
DACC 6$ 12$
AHEC 1 $ 1 $
Table 3 shows that UCD was overrepresented and DACC was
underrepresented, compared to the campus-wide enrollment
proportions of any other group.
Regarding status of the respondents, although the
majority of students attending school at the Auraria Higher
Education Center attend on a part-time basis, there were
slightly more full-time students than part-time students who


Page 79
responded to the questionnaire (46# vs. 43# respectively).
The following table presents a comparison of the
respondent's status with the status of students campus-wide.
Table 4- Status Of Respondents Compared
To Status Campus-Wide
Status Survey Frequency Campus Frequency
Full-time students: 46# 33#
Undergraduates 87# 95#
Graduates 13# 5#
Part-time students: 43# 67#
Undergraduates 70# 81#
Graduates 30# 19#
Faculty/Staff 11#
As can be seen from Table 4* full-time and graduate
students responded to the survey in greater proportions than
exist campus-wide. Information regarding part-time
faculty/staff was not readily available; therefore, the
campus-wide percentage is missing. The status categories
needed to be combined when performing the crosstabulations
and therefore became the following categories: 1) full-time
students- 46#, 2) part-time students- 43# and 3)
faculty/staff- 11#.


Page 80
GEOGRAPHIC CHARACTERISTICS
One Way Travel Distance To Auraria
In the questionnaire, people were asked how far they
traveled (one way) to get to Auraria. The following table
presents the responses to this question.
Table 5- One Way Travel Distance To Auraria
Distance (miles) Number Of Respondents Percent
0-2 25 6$
3-5 66 16$
6-10 108 27$
11-15 118 29$
16-20 40 10$
Over 20 45 11$
From the information in Table 5> it is obvious that the
mode for distance traveled to Auraria was between 11-15
miles one-way and the majority (56$) of automobile commuters
traveled between 6-1 5 miles one-way. It also is apparent
that almost the same percentage of commuters (21$ and 22$)
traveled over 15 miles one-way and under 6 miles one-way to
Auraria, respectively.
For combining the one-way distance categories the first
two categories, 0-2 miles and 3-5 miles, were collapsed
since this seemed to be a cut-off point for people to
bicycle and possibly ride the bus. The literature review
research strongly supports a maximum distance of 5 miles
one-way for most people to make utilitarian bicycle trips
and some research regarding bus transit suggests that people


Page 81
within the city limits use th^fe "bus more often. As can he
seen from Table 5, 22$ of Auraria's automobile commuters
lived within 0-5 miles one-way from the campus. The only
other categories that were combined were 16-20 miles and
over 20 miles (21$) since it seemed logical that people
living these distances from Auraria would be most likely to
rideshare (carpool or vanpool).
Home Direction From Auraria
Another geographic issue considered in the survey was
the direction in which people lived from Auraria. In
retrospect, it appears that perhaps a better way to have
worded this question would have been to have asked for the
direction from which one usually traveled to get to Auraria,
since 22$ of the respondents indicated they were usually
coming to Auraria from work and 78$ indicated they were
usually coming from home. However, since those who usually
made a three prong trip to Auraria, i.e. work-Auraria-home
or back to work, would probably have been the least likely
to utilize transportation alternatives, it was not felt the
data from this question would be invalidated. Table 6
presents the responses to the question on home direction
from Auraria.


Page 82
Table 6- Home Direction Prom Auraria
Direction
Number of Respondents
Percent
North 27 7#
Northwest 69 17#
Northeast 18 4#
East 41 10#
Southeast 115 28#
South 25 6#
Southwest 65 16#
Vest 44 11#
Prom Table 6, it is clear that the majority of people
commuting to Auraria commuted from southeast of the campus
(28$). Furthermore, 50# of the population traveled from a
southerly direction, 28# from a northerly direction and
almost the same percentage, 10# and 11# from the East and
Vest respectively. A few different ways of combining
directional categories were tried and it was decided in the
end to combine categories along major directional lines
(North, South, East and Vest).
The table on the next page summarizes the demographic
and geographic characteristics of Auraria's automobile
commuters discussed in this part of the chapter.


Page 83
Table 7- Summary Of Demographic and Geographic
Characteristics
Variable Frequency
Gender:
Females 234 (58*)
Males 171 (42*)
Age:
< 25 121 (30*)
25-34 178 (44*)
35-44 74 (18*)
45 or more 32 (8*)
Income:
< $10,000 159 (39*)
$10,000-$19,999 ' 99 (24*)
$20,000-$34,999 95 (24*)
$35,000 or more 43 (11*)
Status:
Full-time student 187 (46*)
Part-time student 176 (43*)
Faculty/Staff 43 (11*)
Institutional Affiliation:
UCD 178 (44*)
MSC 195 (48*)
DACC 26 (6*)
AHEC 4 (1*)
One-Way Distance:
0-5 miles 91 (22*)
6-10 miles 108 (27*)
11-15 miles 118 (29*)
16 or more miles 85 (22*)
Home Direction:
Worth 11 4 (28*)
East 41 (10*)
South 205 (50*)
West 44 (11*)


Page 84
Table 7 shows that the most typical respondent was female
(58$), was between the ages of 25-54 (44$), had an income of
less than $10,000 (59$), was a full-time student (46$), was
affiliated with MSC (48$), commuted between 11-15 miles
one-way from the campus (29$) and traveled to Auraria from
the South (50$).
Crosstabulations Between The Demographic
And Geographic Variables
Crosstabulations were performed between the geographic
variables to note if there were any statistically signficant
relationships among them; none were found. The following
crosstabulations were performed among the demographic
variables to see if there were any statistically significant
relationships among them: 1) age by gender, 2) age by
income, 5) age by institution attended, 4) age by status and
5) income by status. The crosstabulations that were not
significant at or beyond .05 were age by institution
attended and age by gender. The other crosstabulations are
discussed below.
Age By Income
The following table presents the results of this
crosstabulation.


Page. 85
Table 8- Age By Income
Income
Age <$10,000 $10,000-$1 9,999 $20,000-$34,999 _>$35,000
<25 71$ 19$ 8$ 2$
25-34 30$ 30$ 32$ 8$
35-44 27$ 27$ 23$ 23$
>45 28$ 6$ 35$ 31$
Chi-square value= 99*12
Level of Statistical Significance=.0000
It is clear from Table 8, that those persons in the
younger age categories were more highly represented in the
lower income groups than were those persons in the older age
categories. Seventy-one percent of those respondents less
than 25 had incomes of less than $10,000 compared to 50$ for
those respondents 25-34 years, 27$ for those respondents
35-44 years and 28$ for those 45 years or more. The
opposite situation was true for those in the older age
groups. Thirty-one percent of those respondents 45 years or
more were represented in the highest income category,
compared to 2$ of those respondents less than 25* Pearson's
R ( r=.39, p=.0000) indicated a positive correlation between
age and income; as age increased, so did income and vice
versa.


Age By Status
The following table presents the results of this
crosstabulation.
Page 86
Table 9- Age By Status
Status
Full-time student Part-time student Faculty/Staff
<25 68$ 29$ 3$
25-34 42$ 50$ 8$
35-44 30$ 57$ 14$
>45 25$ 31$ 44$
Chi-square value= 73 71
level of Statistical Significance= .0000
From Table 9, it is clear that the majority of those
respondents less than 25 were full-time students (68$). The
majority of those respondents in the next two age
categories, 25-34 and 35-44, were part-time students (50$
and 57$ respectively). The largest proportion of
respondents in the oldest age category, 45 years or more,
were faculty/staff (44$)
Status By Income
The following table presents the results of this
crosstabulation.


Page 87
Table 10- Status By Income
Income
<$1 0 Status i, 000 $10,000-$1 9,999 $20,000-$34,999 >$35,000
Full-time students 67# 18# 10# 5#
Part-time students 21# 31# 34# 15#
Faculty/ Staff 19# 26# 40# 16#
Chi-square value= 95-48
Level of Statistical Significance= .0000
As can be seen from Table 10, full-time students were
represented much more at the lowest end of the income scale
(less than $10,000) than either part-time students or
faculty/staff. Sixty-seven percent of full-time students'
incomes were less than $10,000 compared to 19# for
faculty/staff. On the other hand, faculty/staff were
represented more in the highest income level (greater than
or equal to $35,000) than any other group; 16# of the
faculty/staff were in this income level compared to 5# of
the full-time students.
In the next section of the data analysis, the frequency
of bus ridership and carpooling will be examined.
Particular emphasis will be paid to the significant
demographic and geographic characteristics of those who
utilized and those who didn't utilize these transportation
alternatives. A discussion of reasons why commuters chose
not to rideshare or ride the bus will be included, as well
as an examination of responses to incentives to increase the


Page 88
use of these transportation alternatives.
PART II
FREQUENCY OF BUS AND CARP001 USAGE
In the questionnaire, the respondents were asked how
often they rode the hus and carpooled to Auraria. They were
given six categories from which to choose their responses.
The following table presents the categories and frequencies
of response for hus ridership and harpooling.
Table 11- Frequency Of Bus Ridership and Carpooling
Bus Ridership Carpooling
Daily 7 (2*) 16 (4*)
Few times/wk. 26 (6*) 19 (5*)
Once/wk. 9 (2*) 16 (4*)
Few times/month 7 (2*) 12 (3*)
Few times/semester 47 (12*) 35 (8*)
Never 310 (76*) 310 (76*)
For both bus ridership and carpooling, the six
categories were combined into three larger categories for
the purposes of crosstabulating the frequency of usage with
the various demographic and geographic characteristics of
Auraria's automobile commuters, already described in Part I
of this chapter. This was done to see if the use of
transportation alternatives was related in any significant
way with such characteristics. Those who responded that
they either rode the bus or carpooled either daily, a few
times per week or once per week were labeled as "regular


Page. 89
users" of that transportation alternative. As can he seen
from Table 11, 11 # of the respondents were regular bus users
and 13# of the respondents were regular carpoolers. Those
who responded that they either rode the bus or carpooled
either a few times per month or a few times per semester
were labeled as "infrequent users." As can be seen from
Table 11, 14# of the respondents were infrequent bus users
and 11# were infrequent carpoolers. lastly, Table 11 shows
that the same percentages of respondents never rode the bus
or carpooled (76#).
In the next section of the chapter, the significant
geographic and demographic factors of bus ridership and
carpool usage are examined.
Significant Geographic and Demographic Factors
of Bus and Carpool Usage
The frequencies of bus and carpool usage were
crosstabulated with the demographic and geographic
characteristics of the survey respondents to see if any of
these variables were significantly related to the use of
these transportation alternatives. The following table
presents the results of this analysis.


Page 90
Table 12- Significant Variables In Relation To
Bus Ridership and Carpooling
Transportation Alternative
Bus Carpooling
Variable
Direction NS NS
Distance NS S ( .1
Income NS S ( J
Gender S (.02) NS
Age NS ( .03) NS
Status S s (
Travel frequency to Auraria s (.01) NS
NS= Not Significant
The significant crosstabulations shown in Table 12 are
discussed below.
Bus Ridership By Frequency Of Travel To Auraria
The following table presents the results of this
crosstabulation.


Page 91
Table 13- Bus Ridership By Weekly Travel To Auraria
Bus Ridership
Regular Infrequent Non-Rider
Weekly Travel
_>4 times/week 14$ 14$ 72$
3 times/week 10$ 17$ 74$
<2 times/week 4$ 9$ 87$
Chi-square value= 12.72
Level of statistical significance= .01
Table 13 shows clearly that frequent travelers to
Auraria are more likely to ride the bus. Fourteen percent
of those who traveled to Auraria four or more times per week
were regular bus riders and 14$ were infrequent bus riders.
Those who commuted to the campus three times per week rode
the bus more on an infrequent basis (17$). Those who
commuted to the campus the least, two times per week or
less, used the bus the least; only 4$ rode the bus on a
regular basis and 9$ rode the bus infrequently.
Bus Ridership By Status of Respondent
The following table presents the results of this
analysis.


Table 14- Bus Ridership By Status
Bus Ridership
Regular Infrequent Non-Rider
Status Full-time Student 13$ 17$ 70$
Part-time Student 8$ 9$ 84$
Faculty/Staff 12$ 16$ 72$
Chi-square value= 10 Level of statistical 48 significance n o
Table 14 shows clearly that full-time students and
faculty/staff rode the bus more often than part-time
students. Almost the same percentages of full-time students
and faculty/staff rode the bus regularly and infrequently.
Thirteen percent of the full-time students and 12$ of the
faculty/staff rode the bus regularly. Seventeen percent of
the full-time students and 16$ of the faculty/staff rode the
bus on an infrequent basis. Almost the same percentages of
part-time students rode the bus regularly and infrequently
(8$ and 9$ respectively).
Bus Ridership By Gender
This crosstabulation was statistically significant at
.02 and the chi-square value was 11.53* Females rode the
bus more frequently than males. Twelve percent of the
females rode the bus on a regular basis compared to 8$ of
the males. Fifteen percent of the females rode the bus
infrequently compared to 11$ of the males. Both females and
males rode the bus more on an infrequent basis.


Page 93
Carpooling By Status Of Respondent
The following table presents the results of this
crosstabulation.
Table 15- Frequency of Carpooling By Status
Carpooling Regular Frequency Infrequent Never Carpool
Status Full-time student 19$ 16$ 66$
Part-time student 7$ 7$ 86$
Faculty/Staff 12$ 9$ 79$
Chi-square value= 20.49
Level of statistical significances .0004
Table 15 shows that full-time students carpooled more
frequently than either part-time students or faculty/staff
and part-time students carpooled the least often. Nineteen
percent of the full-time students carpooled regularly and
16$ carpooled infrequently, compared to 12$ of the
faculty/staff who carpooled regularly and only 7$ who
carpooled infrequently. The same percentages of part-time
students carpooled regularly and infrequently, 7$ each.
More part-time than full-time students never carpooled (86$
vs. 66$ respectively).
Carpooling by Distance Traveled to Auraria