UCI Commuting Behavior

Presented By:

Irene Tangon May 15, 2004

at the University of California, Irvine

Why Study Commuting Behavior?

Why Study Commuting Behavior?

So that we can:• Increase efficiency

• Fulfill Needs• Encourage

alternative transportation

To understand:• Commuting

Patterns• Commuting Needs

• Commuting Attitudes

• Current research studies the question

of mode choice.

Commuting Mode Choice

•What factors influence their decision?

•How do people choose which

transportation mode to take?

Factors Affecting Mode Choice

•Individual Factors: The influence of personal needs and desires.

•Urban Design Factors:The influence of the built environment.

The University: A Unique Community

• Unique & viable alternative transportation available

• Unique student schedules• Unique student lifestyles

This makes for a fascinating research opportunity.

Methods•Student InterviewsResults were developed into

•SurveysDesigned to evaluate students’ current

•Travel Patterns

and students’

•Attitudes concerning current UCI transportation issues, including

•Parking & Alternative Transportation.

MethodsSurveys were distributed

in:

• Classrooms• Residence HallsRespondents were:

Home Location

0%20%40%60%

MainCampus

EastCampus

Tow nCenterApts

Parkw estApts

Apts >1Miles

Location

The UCI Campus

Results (Commuting Patterns)

While most East Campus students indeed take the shuttle as their primary mode to campus, over 30% of students consider driving to be their secondary mode to campus.

East Campus Mode Choice

0%20%40%60%80%

100%

Walk Bik

e

Shuttle

Publi

c Trans

itDriv

e

Carpo

ol

Dropp

ed O

ff

None/N

A

Primary

Secondary

Results (Commuting Patterns)

Percent of East Campus Residents that Use Given Mode Regularly

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Walk/Bike Drive Shuttle

% Respondents TO

% Respondents From

Over 50% of East Campus residents walk to campus at least once per week, but they also drive to campus at least once per week. Driving is not environmentally conscious behavior, nor is it good for student health.

Results (Commuting Needs)

Frequency East Campus Students Travel to Campus Each Day

27%

73%

Once

Twice orMore

•Over 80% of East Campus Students and 74% of all students are on campus beyond the hours of 8am – 5pm

regularly.

•73% of East Campus Students and 56% of all students travel to campus more than once per day.

Results (Commuting Attitudes)

Regression Analysis showed:

•Distance, Schedule, and Energy are not a significant factors in the decision to walk or bike.

•Safety: Only significant attitudinal factor found for walking/biking is whether respondent feels it is safe.

•Car: Those who own a car are more likely to believe that walking/biking is inconvenient.

East Campus Residents’ Walking/Biking attitudes.

Results (Commuting Attitudes)

Interviews showed:

•The shuttle “requires the least planning ahead.”

•It is “simple…you get on, you sit, and then you get off…it’s easy.”

Regression Analysis showed:

•Convenience: Those who do not often think about how they travel to campus are more likely to believe that the shuttle is convenient.

•& those who believe that the shuttle is convenient are more likely to take the shuttle.

East Campus Residents’ Shuttling attitudes.

DiscussionMode Choice: Urban Design or

Individual?Urban Design Factors:

Individual Factors:•Distance

•Safety

•Schedule

•Convenience

•Energy

•Car

•Car

•Convenience

•Distance

•Energy

•Safety

•Schedule

(-)

(+)(-)

(+)

(-)

(+)

SummaryWe gathered information about East Campus

Students’:

•Commuting Patterns

•Commuting Needs

•Commuting Attitudes•We found that their patterns do not have positive environmental behavior nor are they beneficial to student health.

•Their needs are very demanding. They must travel to campus several times per day and are on campus at odd hours.

•Both individual and urban design factors affect mode choice attitudes of students.

Conclusion

Future Research:• Experimental Study• Larger Sample Size

• More diverse population

AcknowledgementsMany thanks to:

My advisor and mentor:

Professor Marlon Boarnet&

Professor Kristen DayProfessor Craig AndersonProfessor Valerie Jenness

Tracy McMillanMariela Alfonzo

Layal Nawfal&

My Family and FriendsFor their guidance and encouragement

This project was funded by

The UCI Undergraduate Research Opportunities Program

Please send inquiries to:

tangi@uci.eduIrene Tang

Department of Planning, Policy and Design

University of California, Irvine