|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Traffic Congestion on a University Campus: A Consideration of Unconventional Remedies to Nontraditional Transportation Patterns by Dave Kaplan and Thomas Clapper Universities are in a special position to take information related to the patterns and causes of congestion and apply it to their planning goals. In particular, they can work effectively to reduce demand. Congestion results from the overload of traffic on available infrastructure and gets worse when the capacity cannot keep up with the demand. National transportation statistics indicate that 42 percent more vehicles used each urban lane mile in 2000 than in 1980, tripling the number of hours people spent in traffic delays (U.S. Department of Transportation, Bureau of Transportation Statistics 2002). This alone is generally used to justify claims that we are in a congestion crisis (see Downs 2004; Dunphy et al. 1997). Yet the overall data obscure a tremendous amount of temporal and spatial variation. While many reports within the academic and popular literature have analyzed the causes of traffic congestion, few have addressed the unique characteristics of congestion as it occurs within university campus communities. This article reports on traffic congestion around Kent State University, a large, midwestern, state university of 25,000 students located in Kent, Ohio, a city with a permanent population of 27,000 residents. Compared to some campuses, the congestion levels at Kent State would not be considered severe. Students, faculty, and staff have not yet altered their transportation and parking behavior in any appreciable way. At the same time, people at Kent State are clearly concerned about transportation issues. Students regularly complain about limited parking and traffic congestion, and the university has sought solutions to these issues before they become untenable.
{click on a page number above to go to that page}
Dave Kaplan and Thomas Clapper . 2007. Traffic Congestion on a University Campus: A Consideration of Unconventional Remedies to Nontraditional Transportation Patterns. Planning for Higher Education. 36(1): 28–39.
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||