Traffic Congestio
* University Campus
* Consideration of Unconventional Remedies
to Nontraditional Transportation Patterns
Universities are in a special position to take information related to the patterns and
causes of congestion and apply it to theirplanning goals. In particular,they can work
effectively to reduce demand.
by David H. Kaplan and Thomas Clapper
David H. [Caplan is a professor in the
Department of Geography at Kent State
University.
Thomas Clapper is the senior assistant to
the vice president for administration at Kent
State University.
28 October-December 2007 1 Copyright © Society for College and University Planning (SCUP). All rights reserved.
on
available infrastructure and gets worse when the
ongestioncannot
capacity resultskeep
fromupthe
with the demand.
overload of trafficNational
on
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.

The problems experienced at Kent State reflect
conditions on other campuses, since many of the largest
college and university campuses are found in towns with
fewer than 50,000 residents. The mix of trip purposes
varies considerably in these contexts, with the majority of
trips related to student movement to and from classes.
The university itself becomes a major traffic generator in a
way that is significantly different from standard peak hour
commuting traffic. Campuses are large and they contain
places to work, learn, socialize, and live-each with its
own trip purpose. Universities seek to ensure that any
transportation improvements are made within their overall
planning objectives, and most seek to be more than a facility
with a parking lot attached.There is also a great deal of
opportunity for developing innovative approaches within a
university setting, given the range of professional talent, the
willingness of university stakeholders to try new ideas, and
the ability of a university to impose policies in a unified manner.
Most universities seek to be more than
a facility with a parking lot attached.
The questions addressed by this article involve examining
the special characteristics of congestion in a university
setting, the components driving this congestion, the best
way to reduce traffic congestion while adhering to overall
university planning objectives, and the areas of opportunity
that accord with both university and community goals.
Congestion in University Campus
Settings
The term "congestion" refers to a situation where bottlenecks
occur at intersections or where some form of merging takes
place (Dunphy et al. 1997).This can result in situations such
as gridlock (where vehicles are backed up into the previous
intersection), stop-and-go traffic, or full-scale traffic jams.
Incidents such as an accident or stopped car create
inadvertent bottlenecks that can cause congestion. Even
at its worst, congestion does not occur everywhere
throughout a transportation network nor does it occur evenly
throughout the day. Instead it is focused on particular places
at particular times during the day when traffic peaks. This
means that, if congestion gets too bad, people can avoid it
by traveling at different times, using different roads, or even
by switching from automobile driving to another mode,
Planning for Higher Education
Traffic Congestion on a University Campus:
A Consideration of Unconventional Remedies to
Nontraditional Transportation Patterns
such as mass transit (Downs 2004). Conversely, if congestion
improves-say through an additional lane-travelers who
had previously been using alternative times, roads, or
modes may switch back to traveling during peak hours.
The available data suggest that these trends also play
a significant role in traffic congestion on college campuses,
where automobile usage has risen considerably (Tolley
1996; Toor and Havlick 2004). Even on residential campuses,
where the majority of students live on campus, students
are more likely to have cars available to them. They are
also likely to pursue activities-employment, recreational,
shopping, and social-that require them to use their cars
on a daily basis. Moreover, we would speculate that more
off-campus students are choosing to live in apartments that
are farther away and so necessitate a longer car trip, a
notion verified by a survey of students enrolled at Kent State.
Other universities share these concerns. For instance,
Bowling Green State University in Ohio has a similar
mission, enrollment, and community size as Kent State.
Officials there report excessive congestion along with
gridlock conditions at various times of the day, with some
days worse than others. Moreover, new private student
housing is being developed outside the traditional city
area. There is concern that traffic patterns have shifted
such that automobiles are now used for very short trips
(e.g., from one class to another) that would have been
previously undertaken on foot or bicycle. This has
consequences for congestion, parking pressures, and
the vitality of traditional retail.
At the same time, campus-related congestion differs
from congestion experienced in other venues. Much of this
results from the addition of certain elements not ordinarily
found in conventional traffic patterns. The traffic that flows
around a large university contains four distinct elements:
the traffic that would be there regardless of the presence of
a university, the traffic composed of faculty and staff as they
travel to and from work, the traffic from commuting students
as they arrive and depart for classes and then leave for home,
and the traffic from students as they travel between different
places within the university itself. Each of these traffic
elements behaves in a different way and has separate travel
peaks. Employees can be expected to use the roads primarily
during the morning and late afternoon, with some travel
during the lunch hour. Students traveling between buildings,
on the other hand, collect in the periods between scheduled
classes and might also be joined by students who are
entering or departing the university during these periods.
29
 David H. Kaplan and Thomas Clapper

Figure 1 The Relationship between Kent State University and the City of Kent

The relative size of each of these traffic elements varies
by season and by day. In the university, most employees
work year-round, although faculty may be less present
during the summer. Student traffic will be considerably less
in the summer than in either the fall or spring semesters.
Since staff employees (but not faculty) are expected to be
on campus throughout the year, we might assume that the
bulk of "new" traffic generated during semesters is student
derived. During the day, the traffic peaks will correspond to
the rhythms of class activity, as students travel to their first
class, leave the campus after their last class, and perhaps
also travel between classes.
Data and Methods
Our analysis attempted to gain a detailed understanding of
where and when congestion occurred on the street network
that surrounds Kent State University. Kent State is located

October-December 2007
30
30 October-December 2007
 Traffic Congestion on a University Campus:
A Consideration of Unconventional Remedies to
Nontraditional Transportation Patterns

just to the east of the city of Kent's central business district
and stretches all the way to the eastern boundary of the city
(see figure 1). While Kent State includes many properties
throughout northeast Ohio, the area of the main campus is
909 acres. The city of Kent encompasses approximately
5,570 acres, so the campus takes up about one-sixth of
the city's area.This does not include the large area of
predominantly student rentals to the south, east, and
west of campus property.
Kent State was developed as a pedestrian campus and
so automobile access between buildings is discouraged.
Within the entire core campus-the area bounded by
Summit Street on the south, Lincoln Street on the west,
East Main Street on the north, and Loop Road on the
east-there is only one through street. At the same time,
the campus has grown so that several buildings are found
outside this core, often on the other side of the four
perimeter streets.
The four perimeter streets differ in their capacity. East
Main Street is a five-lane road that is also a state route.
Summit Street is primarily two lanes with a few left-turn
lanes, as is Lincoln Street. Loop Road is also a two-lane
road for most of its stretch, but includes a right-turn bay
and is generally more open than Summit and Lincoln. Most
of the other streets that feed into the perimeter streets are
two-lane roads.
Upon designation of the study site, we counted the
traffic patterns in two principal ways. First, overall volumes
were counted through the use of tube counters-tubes
that are placed along sections of roadway and left for about
a week.Traffic volumes could then be measured at 15-minute
intervals to provide a sense of temporal variability. These
were analyzed primarily through the development of tables
and charts that enabled us to spot trends and cycles.
Second, the pattern of traffic activity, generally the number
of turns made at intersections, was measured through the
use of intersection counters. This required the input of an
individual who would measure traffic motions for periods of
between one and two hours. The intersection counts were
analyzed through the use of Synchro, a software package
that models traffic patterns and calculates congestion levels.
Synchro also allows for changes to be made in both demand
and capacity, which enabled us to understand how these
changes may affect congestion. A sister package, SimTraffic,
is an animation program that makes it possible to visualize
the traffic as it exists and how it might change with the
incorporation of various alternatives. Both of these tools
are familiar to traffic engineers. Indeed, the results of
adjusted tube counts for key streets in various metropolitan
areas can now be found online.
In our study site, most of the congestion is experienced
at intersections. The use of Synchro allows for the calculation
of a summary indicator known as Level of Service (LOS).
LOS describes the amount of traffic experienced on a road
section relative to the capacity of the road and is expressed as
a letter, A through F (figure 2). LOS analysis is intended to
provide transportation planners and funding agencies with a
relatively consistent means of evaluating road sufficiency. It
is perhaps the primary mechanism whereby suggestions
for transportation capacity improvements are made. A C-
level rating is considered acceptable. Beyond this, a D, E,
or F rating is progressively worse (Transportation Research
Board 2000). However, there are two important modifiers to
any reporting of intersection LOS ratings. First, intersection
ratings, as discussed here, average the congestion of all
streets arriving at the intersection. In a standard intersection,
the LOS reported would average the ratings from each of
the four approaches, so even an intersection with an LOS

Figure 2 Levels of Service

Capacity Ratio Levels of Service Traffic Conditions

< 0.5 A Minimal delays, traffic free-flowing
0.5 to .749 B Some minor delays, speed about 70 percent of free-flow capacity
0.750 to 0.999 C Lane changes might be impeded, speed about 50 percent of
free-flow capacity
1.0 to 1.249 D At level where slight additional traffic causes substantial delay
1.25 to 1.599 E Significant delay, speed one-third that of free-flow
> 1.600 F Extremely slow, long delays, extensive queuing

Planning for Higher Education 31


Figure 3 Study Site
Tube Counters
Intersection Counters
of B can contain an approach where undesirable congestion
occurs. Second, traffic impacts vary by time of year and
time of day.This is particularly true for a large university
within a small community, in which the academic calendar
causes huge swings in traffic congestion and reported
LOS. As a result, both raw numbers and LOS ratings are
used in this study to gauge different traffic conditions.
Figure 3 displays the streets and intersections under
study. Each intersection was measured for between 60
and 90 minutes during the morning, noontime, and late
afternoon. We endeavored to measure on Tuesdays,
Wednesdays, andThursdays and to conduct our measurements
during the course of each session, avoiding beginnings or
ends of semesters and odd weeks in which traffic would
be abnormal (e.g., homecoming, bad weather periods).
We base most of the subsequent discussion on our
noon counts. Using information from our tube counts, we
October-December 2007
32
3;2 October-December 2007
David H. Kaplan and Thomas Clapper
adjusted the noon traffic counts upward to best resemble
conditions at one of the local peaks: 1:30 p.m. (We relied
on students to count the traffic and found that it was
inconvenient to have them make consistent counts at the
1:30 p.m. peak. For that reason we chose to adjust traffic
counts based on patterns tabulated at noon.) We also used
information on hourly variability to calculate a peak factor
that captures the time during which intersection traffic is at
its highest. These peak conditions constitute only a small
percentage of the day, but are quite irritating for those
caught in them.
Description of Traffic Flows
Seasonal variations are clearly significant in traffic congestion.
Figure 4 compares enrollment and traffic during four
periods under study. We picked a "base" period during
 Traffic Congestion on a University Campus:
A Consideration of Unconventional Remedies to
Nontraditional Transportation Patterns

Figure 4 Enrollment and Traffic Increase there are several intersections where the traffic congestion
on Summit Street is undesirable.
While these gross figures confirm the importance
Enrollment Traffic Percentage of students to overall traffic, they do not show exactly
(24-hour) Increase when peaks in traffic volume occur or when congestion
from Base is experienced. Traffic along the perimeter streets varies a
Base 0 9,428 0 great deal by day of the week. Mondays and Fridays tend to
carry less traffic-in fact, many classes are not scheduled
Summer 2001 3,738 11,015 17
on Fridays. Tuesdays, Wednesdays, and Thursdays tend to
Spring 2001 20,449 16,499 75 have more traffic. What is more interesting is the temporal
Fall 2001 22,828 19,747 109 variation during the day. Figure 6 displays the traffic volumes
on Summit Street just east of Lincoln at 15-minute intervals
which there were no scheduled classes, a period during the for a Wednesday during the fall semester, the summer
summer session, a period during the spring semester, and session, and the base period.The data are displayed for
a period during the fall semester. The 24-hour traffic counts the period between 7:30 a.m. and 6:00 p.m.The peaks
are all from Thursday, the busiest day of the academic week. indicate traffic that occurs in the 15-minute interval before
Quite clearly, traffic increases markedly during the academic the listed time, so that 12:00 p.m. refers to traffic between
year. Outside of the 32 weeks in the fall and spring semesters, 11:45 a.m. and 12:00 p.m.
there are much lower overall traffic volumes. The figure The figure indicates that traffic along this major artery
suggests something of a linear relationship, whereby each is anything but standard, especially during the fall semester.
additional enrollment results in between .35 and .45 units First, it reaffirms the differences in traffic between sessions,
of additional traffic on Summit Street. with fall semester recording much higher traffic volumes
Figure 5 compares the LOS ratings for fall and summer overall than either summer or the base period. Second, it
2001, which indicate that traffic congestion during the suggests the emergence of clear peaks, especially during
summer period is not an issue. During the fall, however, the fall semester. During the base week in which there is
no scheduled class activity, traffic volumes steadily climb
Figure 5 Intersection LOS Ratings for throughout the day, peaking at about 5:00 p.m. This is
Summer and Fall 2001 the period during which many Kent State staff members
generally leave work. Summer session shows some
Intersection Summer Fall distinct peaks, especially at 9:30 a.m. and 11:45 a.m.,
East Main/Haymaker/Willow B C along with a smaller peak at 5 p.m. that echoes the peak
during the base week. These correspond with the period
East Main/Lincoln B C
before the first class and the interval between the first and
East Main/Terrace B C second class of the summer session day. During the fall
East Main/Midway A B semester, the peaks become more numerous and more
pronounced.There are distinct peaks at 9:00 a.m., 10:30 a.m.,
East Main/Horning B C
12:00 p.m., 1:30 p.m., 3:00 p.m., and 5:00 p.m.These peaks
Summit/Loop A E seem to bear a loose relationship to class changes, since
Summit/Boyd A C the population involved is a mixture of students coming
Summit/West Campus Center A D to school at a particular time and leaving at a later time
(after classes and studying are complete) and students and
Summit/Risman No data D others who are traveling between different parking spaces
Summit/Morris B C at the university.
Summit/Lincoln B F The third interesting aspect of this figure is the degree
to which these peaks exceed base traffic levels. At 5:00 p.m.,
Summit/South Willow A C
traffic is 60 percent greater than the base; at 1:30 p.m.,
Summit/SR 261 A B traffic is 96 percent greater than the base; and at 10:30 a.m.,

Planning for Higher Education 33


Figure 6 Wednesday Comparisons of Summit just East of Lincoln
Time
traffic is almost three times greater (over 180 percent) than
the base.
What this suggests most strongly is that the experience
of congestion occurs during a small portion of the day.
Indeed, if we consider that the peaks occur whenever there
are more than 350 cars per lane per 15-minute period, the
period of peak traffic constitutes only four percent of the
entire year, six percent of a week during the fall semester,
and 17 percent of a fallThursday, which, along with
Wednesday, is one of the busiest days of the week. Of
course, since more people are in vehicles during peak
congestion times, a greater proportion of people actually
experience congestion.
Methods of Reducing Congestion
Since LOS relates the amount of traffic (or the demand for
transportation infrastructure) to the amount of road capacity
(or the supply of transportation infrastructure), congestion
improvements require either an increase in capacity or a
reduction in demand.
Increasing roadway capacity. Increases in capacity
are accomplished in several ways. The most common
approach has been to build new roads and widen others
to increase lane miles (Cervero 1998). This has been the
approach in the United States, for example, where the bulk
of surface transportation spending has been devoted to
October-December 2007
34
34 October-December 2007
David H. Kaplan and Thomas Clapper
pouring concrete (Surface Transportation Policy Project
1997). But road building is very expensive, and in many
areas it is politically contentious (Wachs 1995). People are
leery of the additional traffic resulting from a new or
expanded road. There is further consideration of the effects
that new road development may have on overall planning
objectives (Giuliano 1995). Moreover, there is an increased
awareness that the building of new capacity may not
necessarily solve congestion. Traffic analysts speak about
"induced traffic" resulting from additional capacity, meaning
that the additional capacity spurs additional demand, through
either "triple convergence:' whereby travelers who had
previously been using alternative times, roads, or modes may
switch back to traveling during peak hours (Downs 2004) or
through the increased construction that is encouraged by
new road development (Cervero 2001; Hansen 1995). There
are other, less expensive, ways to increase capacity, such
as building turning bays that allow traffic to flush out..
IntelligentTransportation Systems (ITS) represent an
additional approach that encompasses a set of measures
to improve capacity and traffic flow without increasing
lane mileage. These systems include better traffic signal
monitoring at intersections, advanced traffic management
systems on highways, on-board guidance systems, electronic
payment systems for tolls, and better approaches to clearing
out accidents (U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal
Highway Administration 2003). Together, ITS are able to
 Traffic Congestion on a University Campus:
A Consideration of Unconventional Remedies to
Nontraditional Transportation Patterns

Figure 7 Capacity Improvements and LOS Ratings

All Of These Options are Optimized with Intelligent TransportationSystems (ITS)

Intersection Fall ITS Summit Summit Summit Terrace Continuous Blocking

Four One-Way One-Way One-Way Right on Off
Lanes Eastbound Westbound Lincoln Northbound Lincoln

East Main/Haymaker/
Willow C C C B C B C D
East Main/Lincoln C C C D C C C B
East Main/Terrace C B C F C C C D
East Main/Midway B B B C B A B C
East Main/Horning C C C D E C C E
Summit/Loop E E C D F E E E
Summit/Boyd C B A B B B B B
Summit/
West Campus Center D C A C C B B A
Summit/Risman D D A B B C C C
Summit/Morris C B A B B B B B
Summit/Lincoln F F B C A F C B
Summit/South Willow C B A A D A A F
Summit/SR 261 B B A B A A A A

Note: Improved intersections are bold and italicized.

significantly increase the amount of traffic handled by each
lane mile, although asTaylor (2002) points out, any capacity
improvements, including ITS, can induce additional traffic
and so minimize many of the realized gains. We tested the
incorporation of ITS, which primarily involved the installation
of loop detectors and smart traffic signals and the optimization
of signal synchronization. In this study, we also tested the
effects of many other remedies, alone or in combination
with ITS.
Figure 7 displays the results of some of our alterations.
In examining this figure, it should be remembered that it
requires a great deal of improvement to alter an LOS rating.
Often improvements may occur at a particular approach
without changing the overall LOS of an intersection. The
first set of alterations involves the implementation of ITS,
which appears to hold significant promise for many of the
studied intersections. One intersection along the northern
perimeter street of East Main is markedly improved, and
three intersections along the southern perimeter street of
Summit Avenue are also improved. This strategy has been
endorsed by the local metropolitan planning organization as
a relatively low-cost method of improving congestion on
Summit Street (Akron Metropolitan Area Transportation
Study 2001).
The other capacity improvements are presented in
combination with ITS. Clearly the greatest improvement
registered is in the widening of Summit Street to four lanes.
It is a tremendously expensive option, estimated at over
$10 million in 2001 (Akron Metropolitan Area Transportation
Study 2001), and it is difficult to know what role induced
traffic may play in further increasing volumes on Summit
Street. Short of this option are five other potential capacity
improvements. Two of these involve converting Summit
Street to a one-way street.The ramifications of this change,
in regard to traffic flow, can only be surmised. However, in
both instances we would expect increased traffic on East

35
Planning for Higher Education
for Higher Education 35

Main as either east- or westbound directional traffic on
Summit was blocked. Both options would significantly
improve the campus area's worst intersection: the
intersection between Lincoln and Summit. A scenario
that proposes to convertTerrace Drive, the single street
intersecting the main campus, from a two-way to a
one-way road, improves some intersections but worsens
the intersection between Terrace and East Main.
Two other options involve specific changes at the
intersection of Lincoln and Summit. One option involves
the construction of a right-turn lane from Summit
Street westbound onto Lincoln and then allowing for a
continuous flow of right-turn traffic. This addresses a
major bottleneck as vehicles at peak periods are divided
between those going straight and those turning right,
both preferred means of leaving the campus area. This
one change would improve this intersection's LOS from
an F to a C. Other intersections along Summit would also
be improved. The final change involves blocking off right
turns on Lincoln Street altogether, where traffic would
be diverted further west on Summit. For obvious reasons,
this improves the Lincoln and Summit intersection
(since traffic can only go straight on Summit) but greatly
deteriorates the situation at Summit and Willow (an
intersection farther east), where the diverted traffic
would then flow.
These options were presented to campus and city
officials. The eventual decision, based partly on these
scenarios, was to first adopt a "no widening" policy
for Summit Street, since it was felt that this would too
heavily compromise the environment of the campus as
a whole. Likewise, the transformation of Summit Street
to a one-way street was considered too drastic with little
expected benefit. Instead, the city of Kent decided to
go ahead with a variety of smaller ITS improvements,
including coordinating signals, shifting some parking
access points, and altering certain intersection access
points. Other options, including a continuous right onto
Lincoln, blocking off Lincoln, and turningTerrace into a
one-way street, are still possibilities in the future.
Reducing demand. The ability to reduce demand is
the other side of managing congestion. Traffic engineers
often build increased demand forecasts into their decisions
when determining what road improvements are warranted.
Indeed, overall demand in the United States has increased
in the last several decades, far outstripping population
growth (Dunphy et al. 1997).
October-December 2007
36
36 October-December 2007
David H. Kaplan and Thomas Clapper
Several demand-reduction strategies include getting
people out of their cars. More targeted approaches to
reducing demand may involve getting people to drive less
during peak periods or on peak highways. The United
States has the highest rate of auto dependence in the
world, with high rates of car ownership, distances traveled
by car, and person-trips by car (Giuliano 1995). Much of
this can be attributed to governmental policies that dictate
land use, the cost of owning a car, the price of gas, and
the relative share of funds spent on various modes of
transportation (Cervero 1998; Giuliano 1998). Some studies
have shown that land use affects mode choice. Mixed-use
neighborhoods, where shops are available within a mile, tend
to encourage more travel by foot or bicycle; higher densities
promote more travel by mass transit (Cervero 1998).
The reduction of demand is one potential means of
reducing congestion that can be more easily attained in
a college campus setting (Gaskins 1989). According to
Millard-Ball, Siegman, andTumlin (2004, p. 31), "most
university planning staff are in a position that their
counterparts in cities and counties can only dream about,
in terms of their ability to influence travel behavior." In
fact, the effects of congestion itself will affect demand by
causing individuals to alter their behavior. If driving and
parking are less convenient, then students, staff, and faculty
may decide to use other transportation modes or travel at
different times of day. In a university, most of the excessive
demand is student derived, so that policies that either
affect student parking choices, class locations, or even
student driving choices are at least theoretically possible.
Urban transportation planners in busy cities or towns must
contend with many diverse sources of traffic.
A college or university can restrict parking and most
charge a yearly or semester fee for parking, a fee that can
be increased if warranted (Millard-Ball, Siegman, and Tumlin
2004;Toor and Havlick 2004; Whitlock 1982). For instance,
Miami University in Oxford, Ohio maintains a strong "no
parking" policy on its campus. A result is that most students
either reside on campus or in private housing within walking
distance. Miami University reports no traffic congestion
concerns and a very strong downtown economic and
social center, the type of environment most universities
and communities envision as ideal. Land-use decisions can
also be more unified in a university setting by promoting
walking or bicycling, locating parking facilities at the campus
edge, and developing a university bus system (Ellis 2003;
Millard-Ball, Siegman, andTumlin 2004;Tolley 1996;
 Traffic Congestion on a University Campus:
A Consideration of Unconventional Remedies to
Nontraditional Transportation Patterns

Figure 8 Changes in Demand and LOS Ratings countywide bicycle network that
should facilitate commuting from
Intersection Actual Fall Percentage Decrease in Demand off campus. A smaller initiative
-10 -20 -30 -40 -50 included the construction of a series
E Main/Willow C C B B B B of pedestrian islands on East Main
Street, easing the ability to cross
E Main/Lincoln C C C B B B
this wide and busy street.
E Main/Terrace C C C B B B Kent State has considered
E Main/Midway B B B A A A but not yet fully implemented two
further actions. One action would
E Main/Horning C C B B B B
involve the placement of classes so
Summit/Loop E E D B B A that they are more evenly distributed
Summit/Boyd C B B A A A around campus at particular peak
Summit/West times during the day. A database
Campus Center D C C B B B developed by the university tracks
each academic activity of each stu-
Summit/Risman D D C C C C
dent, where and when, throughout
Summit/Morris C B B B B A the academic day. There is a direct
Summit/Lincoln F E D C B B relationship between class activities
and traffic volume and location. At
Summit/Willow C B B B A A
particular points in the day traffic is
Summit/SR 261 B B B B A A concentrated at just a few buildings
on campus, so rescheduling these
classes to other buildings might
Transportation Cooperative Research Program 2001). Finally, reduce peak demand.
the university planner can focus on reducing congestion An additional option, only partially undertaken by Kent
that occurs at peak periods through class scheduling to even State, involves affecting the demand and placement of
out enrollments throughout the day or class staggering to parking. Like many other universities, Kent State is reluctant
reduce vehicles at particular points in time and space. to discourage parking and continues to build new facilities
Kent State has initiated a few measures to decrease while keeping rates relatively low. A few simple tools have
motor vehicle demand at some key intersections and has been initiated to affect parking, including the requirement
discussed the possibility of others. One action taken while that resident underclassmen park in peripheral parking lots.
this study was in progress was the development of an However, commuter students are allowed to park in any of
improved way-finding system. Traffic was directed to six parking lots distributed throughout campus. Since
less-traveled arteries and away from some of the more our traffic data suggest and survey data confirm that a
heavily congested intersections. Michigan State University substantial proportion of students (at least 10 percent)
and the city of East Lansing have embarked on an even drive from class to class during the day, these parking lots
more aggressive approach, blocking much of the through might instead be assigned.
traffic going into the campus and requiring traffic to move The effects of demand reduction are shown in figure 8.
either to the left or the right. Clearly, the most congested intersection in the system,
A second action, undertaken just after this study, Summit and Lincoln, exhibits the largest benefit from the
enhanced pedestrian and bicycle access by developing an decline in demand. Another busy intersection, Summit and
esplanade with bicycle lanes and a wide pedestrian lane Loop, also shows a great degree of improvement. For an
that stretches across the entire Kent State campus. This intersection like Summit and Lincoln, a 10 percent reduction
has had a great deal of success in shifting behavior from would entail 52 fewer cars over a peak 15-minute period.
driving between classes to walking and bicycling. In the So the goal is not so much a reduction in demand overall,
near future, this esplanade will be incorporated into a but a reduction in peak demand.

37
for Higher
Planning for Education
Higher Education 37

Planning Implications
The data gathered show clearly where and when congestion
occurs and suggest some reasons why.Traditional traffic
management seeks to improve congestion through
expanding vehicular capacity, even to the point of projecting
what capacity may be 20 years in the future. Priority may
be given to improving the level of service, often through
such measures as increasing the number of lanes. Yet
dramatic capacity improvements can be expensive and
they may conflict with the larger planning objectives set
forth by the campus community. In this case, Kent State
articulates a clear desire to maintain a pedestrian-oriented
campus and to retain as much green space as possible.
The city of Kent's recent Bicentennial Plan (based in part
on the results of this traffic study) identified goals such as
retaining a pedestrian orientation, preserving residential
neighborhoods, and focusing economic activities on the
historic downtown.
Capacity improvements can be tackled in a more
refined way through the systematic collection of traffic
data and the use of traffic modeling software to assess
the impact of separate scenarios. Here, the employment
of intersection counts, tube counts, and Synchro software
enabled us to offer a set of options that could accomplish
many improvements in vehicular capacity without sacrificing
the look and feel of the campus environment. Kent city
planners are adopting some of these scenarios.
Universities are in a special position to apply information
related to the patterns and causes of congestion to their
planning goals. In particular, they can work effectively
to reduce demand. Internal solutions-such as parking
management; class scheduling; the placement and
scheduling of special activities on campus; and the
promotion of walking, bicycling, and bus service-can
lead to large reductions in demand.
Universities are in a special position
to apply information related to the
patterns and causes of congestion to
their planning goals.
More specifically, the steps introduced by Kent
State University and the city of Kent can be divided into
organizational changes and physical improvements. The
October-December 2007
38
38 October-December 2007
David H. Kaplan and Thomas Clapper
following organizational changes have been made in the
wake of this study:
"* A "context sensitive design" process regarding
transportation topics such as parking, traffic flow,
and pedestrian movement was introduced. This
ensures that the needs of all stakeholders are taken
into account when new roadway, transit, or parking
facilities are proposed.
"oA KentTraffic Planning Citizen Advisory Committee
was formed that includes representatives of the
university and city. The goal of this committee is to
coordinate transportation planning between the
two entities. Kent State is also seeking to inaugurate a
permanent transportation committee that will convene
to consider the implications of parking, transit service,
facilities planning, and class scheduling on the overall
campus environment.
"* A way-finding system was developed that improves
how people get to different places on campus.
This system can also reduce vehicular traffic at
already-congested intersections.
Physical changes include:
"* The development of new parking facilities focused
on peripheral areas. Since so much of the congestion
occurred along Summit Street, parking has been
developed in areas away from that artery. This will
hopefully reduce demand in a few key congested
places. In addition, the university has made efforts to
integrate sidewalk systems with all new parking areas.
"* An extensive walking/biking esplanade that runs
throughout the campus and connects to a system
of bicycle trails. The esplanade also connects to the
larger PORTAGE Hike and BikeTrail. This is intended
to encourage students, staff, and faculty to walk or
bicycle between buildings when they might have
otherwise taken an automobile.
" Securing funds to begin the development of a
multimodal facility located between the university and
downtown Kent. Among its potential benefits, the
facility could have the effect of redirecting traffic flow
away from some of the more congested intersections.
"* Seeking transportation funds for pedestrian islands,
signal coordination, and intelligent traffic systems
by the city of Kent. These are all part of the
recommendations that came out of the study
discussed in this article.

When it comes to traffic, most university
problems are also problems of the
surrounding community, and any
solutions require community cooperation.
While such changes are useful beginnings, they are
notable in that they help bring together efforts by the
university with those of the surrounding community.
Unfortunately, most transportation initiatives up to this point
have been conducted in isolation, without the necessary
collaboration between all stakeholders. When it comes to
traffic, most university problems are also problems of
the surrounding community, and any solutions require
community cooperation. In designing for future transportation
requirements, it is essential to consider the needs of the
community and how they may be affected by transportation
changes. A well-kept community directly contributes to the
well-being of the university, and a vibrant university directly
contributes to the well-being of its host community. Both the
community and the university seek long-term comprehensive
planning, thoughtful traffic management strategies, and
economic development opportunities. In the best case,
transportation and community goals can be achieved
together. P,
References
Akron Metropolitan Area Transportation Study. 2001. Congestion
Management System: Performanceand Strategy Evaluation
Report. Akron, OH: Akron Metropolitan AreaTransportation
Study.
Cervero, R. 1998. The Transit Metropolis:A Global Inquiry.
Washington, DC: Island Press.
. 2001. Road Expansion, Urban Growth, and InducedTravel:
A Path Analysis. University of CaliforniaTransportationCenter
Working PaperNumber 520.
Downs, A. 2004. Still Stuck in Traffic: Coping With Peak-HourTraffic
Congestion. Rev. ed. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.
Dunphy, R., D. L. Brett, S. Rosenbloom, and A. Bald. 1997. Moving
Beyond Gridlock:Traffic and Development. Washington, DC:
ULI-Urban Land Institute.
for Higher
Planning for
Higher Education
Traffic Congestion on a University Campus:
A Consideration of Unconventional Remedies to
Nontraditional Transportation Patterns
Ellis, E. 2003. Getting Around Campus. American School and
University 75 (9): 40-44.
Gaskins, W. 1989. CampusTraffic and Parking. ITE Journal59 (7):
33-36.
Giuliano, G. 1995. Land Use Impacts of Transportation Investments:
Highways and Transit. In The Geography of Urban Transportation,
2nd ed., ed. S. Hanson, 305-41. NewYork: Guilford Press.
• 1998. Urban Travel Patterns. In Modem Transport
Geography,2nd ed., eds. B. Hoyle and R. Knowles, 115-34.
New York: Wiley.
Hansen, M. 1995. Do New Highways Generate Traffic? Access,
no. 7: 16-22.
Millard-Ball, A., P Siegman, and J.Tumlin. 2004. Solving Campus
Parking Shortages: New Solutions for an Old Problem.
Planningfor Higher Education 33 (1): 30-43.
SurfaceTransportation Policy Project. 1997. Potholes and Politics:
How Congress Can Fix Your Roads.Washington, DC:
Environmental Working Group.
Taylor, B. D. 2002. Rethinking Traffic Congestion. Access, no. 21:
8-16.
Tolley, R. 1996. Green Campuses: Cutting the Environmental Cost of
Commuting. Journalof Transportation Geography4 (3): 213-17
Toor, W., and S. Havlick. 2004. Transportation and Sustainable
Campus Communities: Issues, Examples, Solutions.
Washington, DC: Island Press.
Transportation Cooperative Research Program. 2001. Transportation
on College and University Campuses:A Synthesis of Transit
Practices.TCRPSynthesis 39. Washington, DC: Transportation
Research Board-National Research Council.
Transportation Research Board. 2000. Highway Capacity Manual.
Washington, DC: Transportation Research Board-National
Research Council.
U.S. Department of Transportation, Bureau of Transportation
Statistics. 2002. Transportation StatisticsAnnual Report, 2001.
Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Transportation.
U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway
Administration. 2003. Intelligent TransportationSystems
Benefits and Costs.Washington, DC: U.S. Department of
Transportation.
Wachs, M. 1995. The Political Context of Transportation Policy.
In The Geography of Urban Transportation,2nd ed., ed.
S. Hanson, 269-86. NewYork: Guilford Press.
Whitlock, E. 1982. Parking for Institutions and Special Events.
Westport, CT: Eno Foundation forTransportation.
39
Education
39
COPYRIGHT INFORMATION

TITLE: Traffic Congestion on a University Campus: A

Consideration of Unconventional Remedies to
Nontraditional Transportation Patterns
SOURCE: Plann Higher Educ 36 no1 O/D 2007

The magazine publisher is the copyright holder of this article and it

is reproduced with permission. Further reproduction of this article in
violation of the copyright is prohibited.