university of north carolina at greensboro transportation plan update - sustainability ·...

UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA AT GREENSBORO

TRANSPORTATIONPLAN UPDATE

UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA AT GREENSBORO

TRANSPORTATIONPLAN UPDATE

f i n a l r e p o r tn o v e m b e r 2 0 1 2

Advisory Committee

David Reeves – Design Project ManagerHoward Doyle – University ArchitectFred Patrick – Director of Facilities Design and ConstructionMike Byers – Associate Vice Chancellor for Campus EnterprisesScott Milman – Director of Auxiliary ServicesSuzanne Williams – Associate Director of Campus Access & Travel Demand ManagementTrey McDonald – Sustainability CoordinatorJorge Quintal – Associate Vice Chancellor for FacilitiesVicki McNeil – Associate Vice Chancellor for Student AffairsJill Beville – Director of Campus Recreation

This plan is the direct result of the contributions from numerous people. We extend our sincere appreciation to the countless faculty, staff, and students who participated in the planning process and guided the development of this plan. We also wish to think the City of Greensboro and our partners in the community for their involvement. Everyone’s time, input, and energy are greatly appreciated.

Consulting Team

Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.Fred BurchettJon WilsonJonathan WhitehurstChris IserAaron HeustessAllison FluittTrung VoJulie Young

Alta/Greenways, Inc.Chuck FlinkMatt HayesLindsay Smart

November 2012

TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF FIGURES

Transportation Master Plan Update

Table of ContentsChapter 1 – Background & OverviewPlanning Process ......................................................................................... 1-1

Community Outreach ................................................................................... 1-1

Data Collection and Analysis ........................................................................ 1-2

Planning Context......................................................................................... 1-3

Planning Themes ......................................................................................... 1-4

Purpose and Goals ...................................................................................... 1-4

Premises of Plan Documentation ................................................................. 1-5

Report Components .................................................................................... 1-5

Chapter 2 – Campus ContextLocal Dynamics ........................................................................................... 2-1

Campus Access ............................................................................................. 2-2

Transit Service .............................................................................................. 2-2

Community Statistics .................................................................................. 2-4

Population Trends ........................................................................................ 2-4

Implications .................................................................................................. 2-4

Community Feedback .................................................................................. 2-5

Web-Based Survey ....................................................................................... 2-5

Campus Open House .................................................................................... 2-7

Conclusion .................................................................................................. 2-7

Chapter 3 – Bicycle and Pedestrian ElementBicycle and Pedestrian Framework .............................................................. 3-1

Five E’s of Bicycle & Pedestrian Planning..................................................... 3-2

Types of Users .............................................................................................. 3-2

Types of Facilities ......................................................................................... 3-2


Previous Planning Efforts ............................................................................. 3-3

Existing Facilities .......................................................................................... 3-7

Campus Community Perception ................................................................ 3-11

ii

Table of Contents Table of FiguresTransportation Master Plan Update

Final Report

Recommendations .................................................................................... 3-12

Bicycle and Pedestrian Circulation ............................................................. 3-12

Facility Recommendations ......................................................................... 3-15

Program Recommendations ...................................................................... 3-21

Conclusion ................................................................................................ 3-22

Chapter 4 – Transit ElementTransit Framework ...................................................................................... 4-1

Transit and Campus Development ............................................................... 4-1

Transit and Travel Demand Management ................................................... 4-1


Previous Planning Efforts ............................................................................. 4-2

Existing Services ........................................................................................... 4-4

Proximity of Transit Services ........................................................................ 4-9

Campus Community Perception ................................................................ 4-17

Recommendations .................................................................................... 4-17

Spartan Chariot Express/Spartan Village ................................................... 4-17

Other Recommendations ........................................................................... 4-18

Conclusion ................................................................................................ 4-20

Chapter 5 – Parking & Travel Demand ManagementVehicular Access & Parking .......................................................................... 5-1

Vehicular Access & Parking Framework ....................................................... 5-1

Recommendations ....................................................................................... 5-8

Travel Demand Management .................................................................... 5-11

Overview .................................................................................................... 5-11

Planning Context ........................................................................................ 5-14

Recommendations ..................................................................................... 5-16

Impact of TDM on Parking ......................................................................... 5-18

Parking Demand and Revenue ................................................................... 5-18

Impact of TDM on Air Quality .................................................................... 5-20

Conclusion ........................................................................................................ 5-20

iii


Final Report

Chapter 6 – Action PlanImplementation Framework ........................................................................ 6-2

Controlling Factors ....................................................................................... 6-2

University Partners ...................................................................................... 6-2

Campus Community Perception .................................................................. 6-2

Action Plan ................................................................................................. 6-3

Conclusion ................................................................................................ 6-11

AppendixParking Demand Model .............................................................................. A-1

Future Scenarios .......................................................................................... A-9

Recommendations ..................................................................................... A-16

iv


Final Report

List of FiguresChapter 1 – Background & OverviewNo figures

Chapter 2 – Campus ContextFigure 2.1 – Campus Context .............................................................................. 2-3

Chapter 3 – Bicycle and Pedestrian ElementFigure 3.1 – Bicycle and Pedestrian Context ...................................................... 3-9

Figure 3.2 – Need for Bicycle and Pedestrian Intersection Improvements ...... 3-10

Figure 3.3 – Pedestrian Connectivity ................................................................ 3-13

Figure 3.4 – Bicycle Circulation ......................................................................... 3-14

Figure 3.5 – Pedestrian Recommendations...................................................... 3-19

Figure 3.6 – Bicycle Recommendations ............................................................ 3-20

Chapter 4 – Transit ElementFigure 4.1 – Transit Context- University ............................................................. 4-7

Figure 4.2 – Transit Context- City/Region .......................................................... 4-8

Figure 4.3 – GTA Transit Buffer Map w/UNCG Commuter Students ............... 4-11

Figure 4.4 – GTA Transit Buffer Map w/UNCG Staff and Faculty ..................... 4-12

Figure 4.5 – HEAT Transit Buffer Map w/UNCG Commuter Students.............. 4-13

Figure 4.6 – HEAT Transit Buffer Map w/UNCG Staff and Faculty ................... 4-14

Figure 4.7 – PART Transit Buffer Map w/UNCG Commuter Students .............. 4-15

Figure 4.8 – PART Transit Buffer Map w/UNCG Staff and Faculty ................... 4-16

Figure 4.9 – Transit Concept ............................................................................. 4-19

Chapter 5 – Vehicular Access & ParkingFigure 5.1 – Vehicular Access ............................................................................. 5-2

Figure 5.2 – Spartan Village Parking Enforcement Zones................................. 5-10

Figure 5.3 – Travel Demand Management ....................................................... 5-17

Chapter 6 – Action PlanNo figures

November 2012

CHAPTER 1BACKGROUND & OVERVIEW


In 2009, the University of NorthCarolina at Greensboro (UNCG)developed a strategic plan toguide decision-making from2009 to 2014. A committee ofmore than 70 faculty, staff,students, alumni, andcommunity memberscollaborated to develop a “strategic,transformative, dynamic, value-driven, andoutcome-based plan.” Among the core valuesexpressed in the 2009-2014 Strategic Plan is acommitment to sustainability. The Universitydefines sustainability as “Academics, operations,and outreach…conducted with careful attention tothe enduring interconnectedness of social equity,the environment, the economy, and aesthetics.”The University has acknowledged that fulfillment ofthis commitment will require considerations fortransportation and campus access.

Over the past several years, the University hasmade progress toward increasing transportationchoice to, from, and within the campus. Today,students can bicycle through campus in dedicatedlanes on Spring Garden Street, walk through theheart of campus along the College Avenuepedestrian mall, connect to Greensboro and theregion by bus, or rent a Zipcar for a quick trip acrosstown. These tangible examples of sustainability inaction are reinforced through numerous previousand ongoing planning efforts that direct policies anddecision-making. The University of North Carolina atGreensboro Transportation Master Plan Updateblends these ideas into a consolidated frameworkthat guides campus access and internal circulationthrough the 2018 school year and beyond.

Planning ProcessAt its best, university-basedtransportation planning evolvesfrom a collaborative process ledby campus officials and involvingfaculty, staff, students, and thesurrounding community. Theproject team engages these

stakeholders through multiple channels ofcommunication and numerous feedback loops. Theplanning process for such plans should be rooted inan outreach platform that gathers, processes, andapplies a diversity of opinions from the campuscommunity and its neighbors. The data collectionand analysis process builds on the communityoutreach efforts and culminates in the logicalpresentation of recommendations and a step-by-step approach to implementation.

Community OutreachThe campus population and the general publicinteract with the University and its transportationsystem in different ways; however, they encountersimilar issues. Given these experiences, both groupsunderstand the strengths and weaknesses of thetransportation system (particularly access to andfrom campus) and feel the impact of transportationdecisions on a daily basis. Community outreachenables campus and local officials and the projectteam to tap into this special knowledge. Outreachfor the UNCG Transportation Master Plan Updateincluded online and face-to-face interaction. Twoprinciples of public outreach were adhered to:

1. Faculty, staff, students, and the surroundingcommunity have a personal understandingof the transportation network, and planningdecisions have a direct impact on their dailylives.

2. Groups can share in the collective vision forthe overall plan or specificrecommendations even as they holddiffering opinions on how its vision shouldbe achieved.

Respecting these principles, community outreachfor the Update facilitated open dialogue about the

1-2

Background & OverviewTransportation Master Plan Update

Final Report

issues affecting the campus population as well asthe general public. The following sections providean overview of the community outreach methodsand structure. More detail on the collectiveoutcome of these efforts is provided in the chaptersthat follow.

Advisory CommitteeAt the outset ofthe project, agroup of campusofficials was selected to act as a sounding boardthroughout the planning process. The AdvisoryCommittee ensured the plan respected agreed-upon goals, recognized previous planning efforts,and incorporated the assorted perspectives foundthroughout campus and the surroundingcommunity. The Advisory Committee wasinstrumental in providing initial direction for theplan and ensuring the final product respected thepurpose and goals described later in this chapter.Members of the Advisory Committee representedthe following University departments:

Facilities Design & Construction

Campus Enterprises

Business Affairs

Parking Operations and Campus AccessManagement (POCAM)

Sustainability

The Advisory Committee met monthly during theplanning process, concluding its project role with areview of the final plan. However, the AdvisoryCommittee also is charged with championing theplan’s recommendations through implementation.

Web-Based SurveyWhile the Advisory Committee and a review ofprevious and ongoing plans revealed a variety ofissues and potential solutions related totransportation, it was necessary to gather inputfrom a larger swath of the campus population. Thiswas accomplished via a web-based questionnaire.The online questionnaire was distributed to faculty,staff, and students through a campus-wide email

message. The link to the questionnaire also wasmade available on various University websites. Thequestionnaire assessed existing campus access,multimodal provisions, and investment priorities,focusing on the range of travel options availableand desired travel behaviors. Results from thissurvey have been tabulated for consideration in theneeds assessment and formulation ofrecommendations. A general overview of the surveyis provided in Chapter 2, with mode-specificoutcomes described in the chapters that follow.

Campus Open HouseA Campus Open House—held October 27, 2011 atthe Elliott University Center—was designed toreview project goals, verify issues and concerns, andsolicit comments on recommended solutions. Witha float-in format,interestedpersons couldstop by anytimebetween 12:30p.m. and 7:30p.m. for one-on-one discussionswith the projectteam. Brief presentations at 2:00 p.m. and 6:00p.m. outlined the purpose of the Update and theplanning process, introduced backgroundinformation, and set the stage for the interactiveconversations at one of four stations – 1) What WeHeard, 2) Bicycle and Pedestrian, 3) Transit, and 4)Vehicular Access and Parking. A summary of theresults is provided in Chapter 2. Comments fromthe Open House were used to finalizerecommendations.

Data Collection and AnalysisThe UNCG Transportation Master Plan Updateaddresses the various ways students, faculty, staff,and visitors travel to,from, and withincampus. While thesetravel modes arepresented in differentchapters, the

1-3


Final Report

collective review of existing conditions anddevelopment of recommendations included specialconsideration of how modes interact. The AdvisoryCommittee assisted with the general data assembly(e.g., historical trends and projections for faculty,staff, and student counts) and data assembly foreach mode (e.g., previous plans, facilities, transitroutes, ridership trends, and parking occupancy).The project team used this data and subsequentanalysis to develop a series of recommendations forconsideration by the Advisory Committee, campuspopulation, and general community.

Planning ContextTo maximize its effectiveness, the UNCGTransportation Master Plan Update should becoordinated with other campus, municipal, andregional plans and/or policies that impact planningefforts on campus. This section provides a generalreview of key plans. Although this list does notconstitute all of the previous or ongoing planningefforts, it does review important documents thathave informed the development of the Update.

UNCG Campus Transportation PlanFebruary 2006The 2006 UNCG CampusTransportation Plan serves asthe starting point for theTransportation Master PlanUpdate. The CampusTransportation Plan outlinesa transportation strategy toaddress University growth.The plan is organized aroundtransportation modes withseparate sections for transit, bicycles, pedestrians,travel demand management, and parking. The planfocuses on addressing future parking shortagesthrough a series of initiatives that target parkingdemand.

UNCG Campus Master Plan UpdateOctober 2007The 2007 Campus MasterPlan Update takes acomprehensive look atcampus development trendsand future needs. The Planguides the University througha period of expected growththrough 2025 and expressesthe need for collaborationwith local partners. Building upon previous planningefforts, the Campus Master Plan Update addressesthe structure and form of the built environment,prioritizes the use of existing campus spaces,identifies sites for preservation and futuredevelopment, and suggests ways to improve theUniversity’s approach to landscape, circulationpatterns, and access.

UNCG Campus Bicycle Master PlanMay 2008The UNCG Campus BicycleMaster Plan was completedin 2008 as the University’sfirst comprehensive bicyclestudy. The plan promotesbicycling as a sustainablemode of travel on campusthrough a series of facilityenhancements, ancillaryimprovements, and program recommendations.Directed by a Steering Committee comprisingstudents, faculty, and staff, the plan focuses oncreating a safe bicycling environment and providingconvenient routes for commuters and recreationalriders.

UNCG Strategic Plan 2009-2014September 2010The UNCG Strategic Plan 2009-2014 was developedduring 2008-2009 by a committee of more than 70faculty, staff, students, alumni, and communitymembers. The plan, which is revisited every year,guides the strategic procurement and allocation ofresources, responds to prevailing circumstances,

1-4


Final Report

ensures the University’s values are upheld, andexerts an impact on the lives of students and thecommunity. The plan includes a vision and missionstatement as well as a series of five values—inclusiveness, collaboration, sustainability,responsibility, and transparency. The plan alsoincludes five strategic areas, each of which hasestablished objectives.

UNCG Strategic Housing Plan 2020August 2009The Strategic Housing Plan, completed in August2009, takes a long range view of campus housingwithin the larger institutional context. The planreferences the confluence of factors such asincreasing complexity of UNCG’s mission, traditionalnotions of the campus and undergraduateexperience, growth in enrollment, and risingdemand for student housing. The plan also accountsfor institutional partnerships for community andeconomic development.

Spartan VillageStatistics show students living on campus duringtheir first semester at UNCG are more likely toenjoy success as a student and graduate. The 2009Strategic Housing Plan recognized this trend andcalled for a 10% increase in the percentage ofundergraduate students living in University housing.After years of planning and coordinating withstakeholders on campus and in the surroundingcommunity, the University received approval in thefall of 2011 to begin construction on SpartanVillage. The Village will extend the campus to thesouth across Lee Street. At full build-out, the Villagewill include 1,400 student beds, a recreation center,350,000 square feet of institutional space, and51,000 square feet of mixed-use space. The initialphase will include 800 beds and 15,000 square feetof mixed-use space (in a collection of four buildings)and a police station.

Planning ThemesSeveral themes emerged during the outreachefforts for this project and were documented inother plans and studies. The following initiativesencapsulate the general themes of efficiency andsustainability. Though not formalized, these ideasalso guided recommendations of the Update.

Sustainability—Sustainability was establishedas one of five core values as part of the 2009Strategic Plan. The campus transportationsystem is an important contributor to projectsand services that “enhance the environmental,human, and financial capital of the University.”

Livability—Livability is a critical component ofthe campus atmosphere and likely a decidingfactor for many applicants. Factors thatcontribute to the livability of a universitycampus and the surrounding communityinclude the design and functionality of the builtenvironment, the way uses are coordinated,and the choices provided in the transportationnetwork.

Coordination—Coordination will occur onmultiple levels—with previous and ongoingplanning efforts, among different departmentson campus, with surrounding neighborhoods,and between the University and the City.

Purpose and GoalsThe UNCG Transportation Plan Update refreshesstrategies outlined in previous plans to reflect newgrowth trends and campus development. Theoverall purpose of the plan is to devise a 5-yearblueprint to enhance the sustainability of campusthrough a coordinated, multimodal approach tocampus access and mobility. During initialdiscussions with the Advisory Committee, a series ofconversations were synthesized into a set of goalsto direct the plan. These goals were intended toprovide a framework for developing ideas, options,and recommendations. The goals also provide ameasure with which to evaluate the effectiveness ofthe overall plan. In short, results of the planningprocess are intended to support the following:

1-5


Final Report

The UNCG Transportation Master Plan Updatewill integrate campus expansion plans southof Lee Street with a coherent, multimodalconnectivity plan and an integrated approachto parking allocation.

The UNCG Transportation Master Plan Updatewill provide a revised understanding ofexisting campus transportation dynamics,including modes of access, parking, and traveldemand management.

The UNCG Transportation Master Plan Updatewill evaluate parking demand and allocationwith an emphasis on the potential to reducethe demand for parking in the future.

The UNCG Transportation Master Plan Updatewill include a forward-looking approach tomoving people to, from, and within campusthrough a coordinated set of multimodalsolutions.

The UNCG Transportation Master Plan Updatewill consider the distribution and analysis ofhandicap-accessible spaces.

Premises of Plan DocumentationThe UNCG Transportation Plan Update tackles issuesand concerns identified during previous planningefforts as well as issues that surfaced during thecourse of the planning process for the Update. Thereport catalogs these efforts, outlines the issues, andpresents recommendations to achieve the purposeand goals of the plan. The report evolved based onthe following premises.

The report is not intended to educate thereader on standard planning practice. Instead,it focuses on the processes and results specificto the UNCG Transportation Plan Update.

The report documents issues and concerns forcampus transportation and presents a series ofrecommendations based on planning, analysis,and community involvement.

The report has been organized to provideconcise representation of issues and

recommendations, and, to the extent possible,utilizes visual cues to effectively convey ideas.

The report and its supporting deliverables areintended to be living documents that providestructured recommendations with flexibility tophase improvements appropriately.

Report ComponentsThe UNCG Transportation Master Plan Updatereport summarizes the plan’s focus on multimodaltransportation strategies, as reflected in thecomponents of the plan. The report includes thefollowing chapters.

Campus Context (Chapter 2)—Reviews local,regional, and statewide dynamics andexamines growth trends related to faculty,staff, and students. Describes access tocampus and summarizes community feedback.

Bicycle and Pedestrian Element (Chapter 3)—Describes the bicycle and pedestrianframework and planning context. Documentspreferred circulation patterns and detailsfacility and policy recommendations.Emphasizes connections to and from campus.

Transit Element (Chapter 4)—Describes thetransit framework and planning context.Documents circulation patterns for transit withspecial consideration for access to and fromthe Mixed-Use Village south of Lee Street.

Vehicular Access and Parking (Chapter 5)—Discusses dynamics associated with parkingsupply, demand, and allocation on campus.Provides an overview of UNCG’s traveldemand management programs and policies.Summarizes anticipated parking reductionbased on the multimodal recommendations.

Action Plan (Chapter 6)—Outlines a strategy tofully implement recommendations, includingphasing and policy considerations.


Final Report

CHAPTER 2CAMPUS CONTEXT


November 2012

It’s essential that University leaders, campusadvocates, and the community plan and provideappropriate transportation infrastructure in a waythat promotes sustainability and livability. Simplystated, good transportation is the key to buildingupon the growth and success of the University.Conventional transportation planning that caters topersonal vehicles and focuses on improvements toroads and parking infrastructure can help only somuch. Strategic investment in roads and parkingmust be balanced with improvements to thebicycle, pedestrian, and transit network andconsideration of travel demand managementstrategies.

The University of North Carolina at GreensboroTransportation Master Plan Update promotesbetter access and mobility for students, faculty,staff, and visitors with a focus on the continueddevelopment of a truly multimodal transportationsystem. The plan picks up where previous efforts leftoff, incorporating new factors such as campusexpansion and established initiatives such assustainability. The Update features tools thatsuccessfully merge access and mobility betweenmodes and across geographies.

Local DynamicsThe University of North Carolina at Greensboro islocated one mile west of downtown Greensboro,the state’s third-largest city with a population of270,000. In addition to UNCG, the city ofGreensboro boasts six other colleges: NorthCarolina Agricultural and Technical State University(NC A&T), Greensboro College, Guilford College,Elon Law School, Bennett College, and GuilfordTechnical Community College. Together, theseinstitutions provide significant resources to the Cityin terms of education facilities and economicdevelopment. These colleges are connected toUNCG through physical infrastructure as well ascollaborative endeavors. The Gateway UniversityResearch Park is a tangible representation ofUNCG’s connection to its sister institutions. Thepark represents a joint research campus developedby UNCG and NC A&T at two locations inGreensboro—the South Campus off Lee Street nearthe I-40/I-85 interchange, and the North Campusnortheast of Greensboro off US 29 near Reedy Forkand Bryan Park.

Regional Context

2-2

Campus ContextTransportation Master Plan Update

Final Report

Campus AccessThe University benefits from a variety of ways toconveniently access campus. These access modesprovide choices for faculty, staff, students, andvisitors. The level of service varies among themodes.

Bicycle and Pedestrian FacilitiesAs a compact campus with few through streets, theUniversity is very walkable. In fact, nearly any pointon campus can be reached within a 10-minute walkfrom the center of campus. North-south routes oncampus are more readily defined for pedestrians,while east-west routes are less apparent. While thecampus itself is walkable, numerous barriers posechallenges to safe access on bike or foot to campusfrom most directions. These barriers include AycockStreet and the Norfolk Southern Railroad to thesouth. A general lack of facilities to the north alsocreates challenges. See Chapter 3 for moreinformation on bicycle and pedestrian facilities.

Transit ServiceTransit service to and from UNCG has expandedover the last several years and is gaining inpopularity. Service is provided from a transit hubcentrally located at the end of Walker Avenue onthe west side of Jackson Library for the SpartanChariot, HEAT (Higher Education Area Transit), andPART (Piedmont Authority for RegionalTransportation) routes. The campus also can beaccessed via a shuttle from a network of park-and-ride facilities near the University. See Chapter 4 formore information on transit service.

Arterial RoadwaysNestled in the city’s roadway grid network, a seriesof north-south and east-west roadways connectsvehicular traffic to the campus from points inGreensboro and throughout the Piedmont region.The major north-south routes providing access tocampus are Aycock Street (the western boundary ofcampus) and Tate Street (the eastern boundary ofcampus). East-west routes Market Street and LeeStreet provide northern and southern boundaries ofthe existing campus, respectively. Spring GardenStreet is a major east-west route in the Greensboroarea and despite enhanced landscaping and trafficcalming measures continues to serve through trafficas a connection between downtown and points tothe west.

Figure 2.1 shows the campus context.

2-3


Final Report

Figure 2.1 Campus Context

2-4


Final Report

Table 2.1 – Student EnrollmentYear Projections

2006 Plan 2012 Update

2006 16,728 n/a

2011 17,880 17,152

2012 18,267 17,216

2013 18,546 17,258

2014 18,960 17,310

2015 19,626 17,393

Source: UNCG Office of Institutional Research

Table 2.2 – Faculty and Staff (2011)Classification Number

PermanentFaculty 890Staff (exempt) 575Staff (non-exempt) 1,194

TemporaryFaculty 190Staff (exempt) 71Staff (non-exempt) 127

Other StaffDining (Chartwells) 260Bookstore (Barnes & Noble) 7

Total 3,314

Source: UNCG Parking Operations & CampusAccess Management

Community StatisticsOver the past few years, population growth oncampus among faculty, staff, and students hasremained relatively low. However, on a given day,the campus still hosts more than 20,000 people.

Population Trends

StudentsLong-range enrollment projections were lastcompleted by the Office of Institutional Research in2008. Likewise, the overall University of NorthCarolina system has not prepared new officialenrollment estimates. Based on available data andcurrent trends, the size of the student population isexpected toremain relativelyflat for the nextseveral academicyears. Currenttrends impactinggrowth inenrollment includeUNCG scaling backthe size of thefreshman class toimprove academicquality andexpected budgetcuts in the nextseveral years.Table 2.1 shows student enrollment projections forthe next five years from the 2006 CampusTransportation Plan and the Update.

The numbers in this table exclude distanceeducation, such as iSchool. And while these figuresare general estimates and show small enrollmentgrowth each year, the constraints facing theUniversity could result in the first decline incampus-based enrollment in more than a decade.

Faculty and StaffIn August 2011,the Universityemployed morethan 3,300 facultyand staff. Table 2.2shows thebreakdown byemployee type.The 2006 CampusTransportationMaster Planreported 2,525faculty and staff in2005 and 2,580 in2006. Based onthese figures, thesize of the facultyand staff hasgrownapproximately28%.

ImplicationsThe significant growth at UNCG over the last fewdecades has slowed in recent years. The 2006Transportation Master Plan projected growth ofapproximately 17% through 2015. Revised numberssuggest the growth will be closer to 4% between2006 and 2015 and 1.5% between 2011 and 2015.But the impact on the transportation network(parking demand and desire for multimodalfacilities) cannot be determined based solely on therise in on-campus population. The University hastaken a structured approach to encouragingsustainable transportation decisions by the campuspopulation. As the existing population switchesfrom single-occupancy vehicles, the result is a rise inbicycle, pedestrian, and transit use as well as lowerdemand for parking permits (see Chapter 6 formore information).

2-5


Final Report

Community FeedbackSuccessful plansembrace aninclusive processwith involvementfrom individualsand groups thatregularly face theissues at hand andwill be most impacted (positively or negatively) bypotential solutions. Community outreach efforts forthe UNCG Transportation Plan Update introduced inChapter 1 revealed several overarching issues:

The perception of campus transportation andthe openness to certain recommendationsvaries among the different campus populationgroups (faculty, staff, and students).

The campus community is receptive totraveling by means other than single-occupancy vehicles, though bicycle andpedestrian facilities and transit service need tobe convenient to attract new users.

Safety for pedestrians is a concern, especiallyat frequent conflict points betweenpedestrians and vehicles or bicyclists.

Traffic congestion and on-campus parking areidentified as areas in need of improvement.

These issues as well as more specific outcomessurfaced during the community outreach channelsdetailed on the following pages.

Web-Based SurveyWhile a wide variety of needs and interests wereidentified through discussions with the AdvisoryCommittee, additional input was desired. A web-based questionnaire distributed to faculty, staff,and students via email provided information on avariety of topics. The survey evaluated existingconditions and strategies developed to improvesafety and mobility on campus and in the vicinity ofthe University. Though the survey was helpful inidentifying perceptions about parking andtransportation issues, the survey responses differedfrom more reliable data. However, the 2,500responses proved helpful in assessingtransportation issues and potential strategies.

The questionnaire was organized around severalcategories of questions, including Introduction andBackground; Rating Campus Access; Driving andParking; Biking, Walking, and Riding Transit; andPriorities and Implementation. It included questionsabout changes in the transportation system, travelpatterns to campus, and desirability for multimodalprovisions. Other questions challenged respondentsto make choices related to transportationalternatives and priorities.

The text and graphics that follow illustrate a few ofthe general trends as expressed through the survey.Additional results are presented in the chapters thatfollow.

2-6


Final Report

What is your primary role on campus?

Overall, how would you rate the following pieces ofthe campus access system?

Do you feel that living or working on campusnecessitates having a car on campus?Yes (47.1%) No (52.9%)

Demographic questions helped determine whowas completing the survey and allowed theopinions of faculty, staff, and students to beviewed independently. However, respondents tothe survey did not represent actual percentageof faculty, staff, and students on campus.

Faculty: 2011 actual = 5%, survey = 10%Staff: 2011 actual = 11%, survey = 23%Students: 2011 actual = 84%, survey = 67%

Because faculty and staff have not embracedalternative modes at the level of students,answers tend to favor automobile issues andsolutions over other modes as shown in thegraphs on this page.

On average, how often do you use thefollowing transportation options?

2-7


Final Report

Campus Open HouseComments received during theweb-based survey anddiscussions with the AdvisoryCommittee formed the basis ofthe updated plan. Prior tosubmitting a full draft of theUpdate, the project teamreached out to the campuscommunity and surroundingneighborhoods to reviewexisting conditions, discussemerging trends and themes,and evaluate preliminaryrecommendations.

The Campus Open House was conducted October27, 2011 from 12:30 p.m. to 7:30 p.m. at the ElliottUniversity Center. Four stations were set up – 1)What We Heard, 2) Bicycle and Pedestrian, 3)Transit and Ridesharing, and 4) Vehicle Access andParking. Each station was staffed with a member ofthe project team and included a series of maps andexhibits to illustrate existing conditions andrecommendations. Attendees were invited to visitthe stations to learn more about areas of personalinterest. Presentations were given at 2:00 p.m. and6:00 p.m. to describe the planning context, planningprocess, questionnaire results, planning themes, theplan’s purpose and goals, and a brief introduction ofeach element. A large group question and answersession concluded the presentation.

A total of 68 people signed in at the welcome table.The sign-in sheet asked participants to note theirrole on campus, which indicated 25 undergraduatestudents, 17 graduate students, 12 faculty/staff,and 14 community members attended the meeting.Some participants selected more than one category.Overall, some of the plan’s recommendations wereadjusted based on the information provided at theopen house. Results specific to individual elementsare detailed in the appropriate chapters of thisreport.

ConclusionAs mentioned in Chapter 1, the recommendationsthat form the core of this plan represent thecollective vision for a safe, multimodal, andinterconnected transportation system that supportsthe University’s continued focus on sustainabilityand attention to campus expansion to the south.The chapters that follow—beginning with thebicycle and pedestrian element and concluding withan implementation plan—adhere to this vision.


Final Report

November 2012

CHAPTER 3BICYCLE & PEDESTRIAN ELEMENT


Bicycling and walking areessential components ofthe transportation systemin and around theUniversity of North Carolinaat Greensboro. Theproximity of the campus toresidences makes thecampus an ideal setting fornon-motorized travel. University staff andadministrators have made a commitment to createsafe environments for bicyclists and pedestrianstraveling to, from, and within campus. In 2008,UNCG developed a Campus Bicycle Master Plan toguide the development of campus bicycle facilities,programs, and policies to encourage cycling.Pedestrian and bicycle travel has also beenexamined through the Campus TransportationMaster Plan (2006) and the Campus Master Plan(2007).

UNCG’s efforts to create a desirable environmentfor bicycle and pedestrian travel have beenrecognized by two different organizations. In 2010,UNCG was named one of the Best Workplaces forCommuters by the National Center for TransitResearch. This honor signifies the availability ofattractive options for commuter travel, includingbicycling, walking, transit use, carpooling, and carsharing. In 2011, UNCG earned a Bronze-levelBicycle-Friendly University designation. Selected forthis honor in its inaugural class, UNCG wasrecognized for providing an excellent environmentfor bicycle travel.

The Bicycle and Pedestrian Element of theUniversity of North Carolina at GreensboroTransportation Master Plan Update documents theUniversity’s existing facilities and programs andsummarizes feedback regarding non-motorizedtravel. Previous planning efforts are referenced andbuilt upon to create a recommended set of bicycle,pedestrian, and greenway facilities. The Update isnot intended to replace these unique planningefforts. Rather, the intent is to blend therecommendations of those plans with currentfeedback and the other elements of the Update.

This chapter begins with an overview of the bicycleand pedestrian framework and planning contextbefore documenting preferred circulation patternsfor bicyclists and pedestrians. The chapterconcludes by detailing facility and policyrecommendations with an emphasis on connectionsto and from campus.

Bicycle andPedestrian FrameworkThe benefits of cycling and walking are welldocumented. Taking trips by bike or on footimproves the environment, promotes good health,saves money, eases the burden on roadways, andenhances the livability of campus. Many peoplewho travel to UNCG on a daily basis choose to bikeor walk for one or more of these reasons.

As the UNCG campus has grown and faculty, staff,and students have chosen to live farther fromcampus, connecting homes to the University via anetwork of viable bicycle and pedestrian facilitieshas become more difficult. The expansion of thecampus and complementary land uses also hasresulted in the need to cross several facilities thatact as barriers to bicycle and pedestrian travel.These facilities include Aycock Street, MarketStreet, the railroad, and Lee Street.

If the overall purpose of the Update is to create abalanced, multimodal transportation system foraccessing and moving around campus, the planningand delivery of a safe and accessible bicycle andpedestrian network must be provided within thefollowing framework.

3-2

Bicycle and Pedestrian ElementTransportation Master Plan Update

Final Report

Five Es of Bicycle & Pedestrian PlanningThe collective projects and programs recommendedfor UNCG and its surrounding area can be groupedinto one or more of the following interrelatedcomponents.

Engineering—Engineering refers to thenetwork of pathways that must be planned,designed, and constructed.

Education—Once the pathways are in place,cyclists and pedestrians must be made awareof the location and proper use of facilities aswell as the destinations they connect.

Encouragement—People need to beencouraged to bicycle and walk to validate theinvestment and reap the benefits.

Enforcement—To ensure the safety of all usersand the long-term sustainability of the bicycleand pedestrian system, the formal andinformal “rules of the road” must be enforced.

Evaluation—A regular review of the bicycleand pedestrian network should include anassessment of cycling and walking activity,safety analysis, and ways the campuscontinues to work to improve these numbers.

Types of UsersDifferent reasons for traveling by bike or foot,combined with varying skill levels, require a flexibleand responsive bicycle and pedestrian plan.Bicycling and walking often fall into two distinctcategories based on trip purpose. Utilitarian, non-discretionary travel is prevalent in a college setting,where many students lack access to a vehicle andrely on transit, bicycling, and walking. Othermembers of the community may choose non-motorized travel for utilitarian trips to promotephysical fitness, environmental stewardship, and/orcost savings. Recreational, discretionary travelrecognizes the health benefits of walking andbicycling and promotes the livability of the campus.

Both user types require a complete network ofbicycle and pedestrian facilities as well as programsthat educate and encourage current and futureusers. Cyclists can be categorized based on theirlevel of riding skill. Advanced cyclists can safely rideon thoroughfares with higher traffic volumes andspeeds. These cyclists prefer shared roadways inlieu of striped bike lanes and paths. Basic cyclistsare less comfortable riding in traffic without specialaccommodations and often prefer multi-use pathsor bike lanes.

Types of FacilitiesRoadways need to be designed with an eye towardboth the intended use by cyclists and pedestriansand how the facility fits into a system-wide network.Design considerations also should be given toancillary bicycle facilities and amenities such as bikeracks and stations, bikes on buses and bikeamenities at transit stops, and bike-friendlydrainage inlets. For pedestrians, attention must begiven to curb ramps as well as marked crosswalksand enhancements such as raised crosswalks,pedestrian refuge islands, and curb extensions.

3-3


Final Report

Progress on the 2008 Campus Bicycle Master PlanRecommendations included the following.

Lighting improvements at Tate and Aycock Streetrailroad underpasses

o UPDATE: Pedestrian and bicycle improvementshave been completed for both underpasses.

Campus-wide intersection improvementso UPDATE: Improvements such as enhanced

signage and markings have been implemented atselect intersections.

Bicycle parking location and facility improvementso UPDATE: Bicycle parking has been and continues

to be added on campus, not only for newbuildings but also at strategic locations aroundhigh-demand areas.

Program and policy recommendationso UPDATE: Several programs recommended in the

plan have been put in place. These include thecreation of a bicycle safety brochure, targetedenforcement campaigns, bicycle registration,and promotion of alternative transportationevents.

Planning ContextBicycling and walking are important modes oftransportation in and around UNCG today and willremain so in the future. Regardless of the trippurpose, bicycling and walking provide a high levelof independence, flexibility, and freedom of choicerelative to where you want to go and when youwant to get there. Prior to developing a set ofrecommended bicycle and pedestrianimprovements for UNCG, it’s important tounderstand existing conditions. This sectiondocuments previous planning efforts; currentbicycle, pedestrian, and greenway facilities in place;and feedback received from students, faculty, andstaff about the positive and negative elements ofthe non-motorized transportation system.

Previous Planning EffortsUNCG, the City of Greensboro, and the GreensboroUrban Area Metropolitan Planning Organizationhave undertaken planning efforts in recentyears to address the needs of bicyclists andpedestrians. These plans, combined withongoing research at the state and federallevel, help to establish the vision for therecommendations in this chapter.

The University of North Carolina atGreensboro Campus Bicycle MasterPlanMay 2008The UNCG BicycleMaster Plan wasdeveloped in 2008 toidentify necessaryimprovements to thebicycle network in andaround the UNCGcampus. This plan provided an evaluation ofcurrent riding conditions and facilities, astudy of the bicycle circulation and parkingneeds on campus, bicycle facility designguidelines, and a set of policy and programrecommendations.

The Bicycle Circulation Plan recommended on- andoff-road improvements to the bicycle network.Drawing from the Greensboro Urban Area Bicycle,Pedestrian, & Greenway Master Plan, a set ofrecommendations were formulated to serveinternal campus needs as well as the needs ofbicyclists traveling to and from campus.Recommendations were developed further toexamine proposed facility types and cost estimates.Barriers to bicycle travel such as intersections,railroad crossings, and natural features were alsoexamined.

Special focus was given in the UNCG Bicycle MasterPlan to bicycle parking needs. This plan examinedbicycle parking design standards and policies toaddress parking locations and quantities. Locationswhere additional bicycle parking is needed wereidentified, with the top 25 bicycle parking needsprioritized based on user feedback.

3-4


Final Report

The University of North Carolina atGreensboro Campus Transportation PlanFebruary 2006The original UNCG CampusTransportation Plan wasprepared in 2006 to documentthe vision for the campustransportation network andobtain feedback from thecampus population about theirtransportation needs. Basedon this background, a set ofmultimodal recommendations was developed toaddress the existing and future needs of the UNCGcampus. The following general themes are found inthe 2006 plan:

Heavy emphasis on parking needs, includingbicycle parking.Recommended bicycle parking near everybuilding entrance on campus.Recommended covered bicycle parking atstrategic locations around the campus.Emphasis on connections with existing andproposed on- and off-road bicycle facilitiesoutside the campus area (e.g. the Lake DanielGreenway and the future Battleground RailTrail)Identification of locations for aesthetic andsafety improvementsAncillary facilities and education programs

See the insets for specific bicycle and pedestrianrecommendations as well as progress on this plan.

Progress on the 2006 UNCG Campus Transportation Plan PedestrianPedestrian recommendations of the 2006 Campus Transportation Plan (Section 7.4) included the following.

Install brick or stamped concrete crosswalks on all crosswalks (consistent with the existing campusdesign theme) at the intersection of Spring Garden Street and Aycock Street, Walker Avenue and AycockStreet, and Spring Garden Street and Tate Street.

o UPDATE: This recommendation has been implemented.Work with the City of Greensboro to construct sidewalks in keeping with the prioritized list of sidewalkinfill projects.

o UPDATE: Ongoing coordination with the City has resulted in priority sidewalks being reflected insubsequent plans.

Reduce vehicle speeds on Spring Garden Street.o UPDATE: Medians and bike lanes were installed to calm traffic and 20mph speed limit signs are

posted. University police conduct occasional speed wagon checkpoints.Increase driver awareness of pedestrians.

o UPDATE: University police created a pedestrian safety task force in 2010 and conducted a safetyawareness campaign in Spring 2011. University police and POCAM collaborated in 2011 to createa safety brochure for drivers, cyclists, and pedestrians.

Continue to work to improve the rail underpasses on Tate Street and Aycock Street.o UPDATE: Implementation of this recommendation is ongoing with long-term improvements

being coordinated with the City and the rail operator. Work on the Aycock Street overpassappears on the FY2014-2020 Metropolitan Transportation Improvement Program as an unfundedproject. Right-of-way acquisition is slated for FY2022 with construction in FY2023.

Pursue an additional connection between Lee Street and Oakland Avenue if it can be done in a safe,cost-effective manner.

o UPDATE: The pedestrian underpass at Forest Street is anticipated to open in Fall 2013.

3-5


Final Report

Progress on the 2006 UNCG Campus Transportation Plan BicycleBicycle recommendations of the 2006 Campus Transportation Plan (Section 6.4) included the following.

Work with the City of Greensboro to develop and implement the Bikeways and Greenways Program.o UPDATE: The 2008 Campus Bicycle Master Plan Steering Committee included representation

from the City of Greensboro and references existing plans adopted by the City.Ensure that University and City bicycle plans complement one another.

o UPDATE: UNCG has consulted with the Greensboro Bicycle & Pedestrian Coordinator.Identify safe connections to the Lake Daniel Greenway and the future Battleground Rail Trail.

o UPDATE: Connections to the Lake Daniel Greenway are recommended via East Lake Drive and tothe future Battleground Rail Trail via Carr Street and Walker Avenue.

Work with the City to stripe and mark bicycle lanes on Spring Garden Street from Downtown, throughcampus, to Holden Road.

o UPDATE: This recommendation has been implemented.Provide bicycle parking at every building entrance. Locations specifically needing additional bicyclespaces are referenced below with a status update.

o UPDATE: Phase 2 bicycle racks are currently in design with construction scheduled for completionby 6/10/12. This project will result in additional permanent bicycle racks at Sullivan Science,Stone, Petty, Foust, and Gatewood Studio Arts as well as 4 Dero Fixit stations at McIver Deck,Jefferson Suites, Walker Circle, and Gray Drive near Gove Student Health Center. Portable rackswill be located to satisfy demand for bicycle parking in other locations as needed.

Provide covered bicycle parking in strategic locations on campus. Likely candidates include WalkerAvenue Parking Deck, Music Building, Oakland Avenue Parking Deck, Graham Building, Taylor Theatre,and Elliott University Center.

o UPDATE: Covered parking has not yet been provided in these locations.Work with the Bike Me! Collective to educate the campus population and promote bicycling on campus.

o UPDATE: Though the Bike Me! Collective is no longer active, UNCG Spartan Cycles collaborateswith the local non-profit advocacy group Bicycling in Greensboro (BIG).

Continue to work to improve the rail underpasses on Tate Street and Aycock Street.o UPDATE: This recommendation has been implemented.

Pursue an additional connection between Lee Street and Oakland Avenue if it can be done in a safe,cost-effective manner.

o UPDATE: The pedestrian underpass at Forest Street is anticipated to open in Fall 2013.Provide an on-campus bike repair station in a convenient and accessible location.

o UPDATE: Student mechanics with Spartan Cycles provide basic maintenance and minor repairsfor registered bicycles at Oakland Deck approximately 10 hours per week by appointment. Localbike shops host free bike clinics on campus at least twice each semester.

Distribute the map of safe streets for bicycling to students.o UPDATE: GDOT bike maps printed in 2007 have been distributed on campus though the maps are

currently out of print (updated GDOT bike map currently only available online).

3-6


Final Report

The University of North Carolina atGreensboro Campus Master Plan UpdateOctober 2007The UNCG Campus Master PlanUpdate was developed to providea holistic view of the currentneeds and future growth of theUNCG campus. This plan not onlyincluded transportation, but alsofocused on land uses, characterareas, and the vision for thecampus as a whole.

Part of the vision for UNCG is enhancing itsreputation as a bicycle- and pedestrian-friendlycampus. To do this, bicycle and pedestrianrecommendations were developed that interfacewith the existing and proposed transit and roadwaynetwork. Improvements included creating new andimproving existing east-west pedestrian pathways,while also strengthening important north-southpedestrian corridors. A new pedestrian bridge alongLee Street was recommended to connect with afuture multimodal transit hub and as a location forfuture covered bicycle parking.

Bicycle recommendations were based on the 2006Transportation Master Plan and included a mix ofcorridor improvements and spot enhancements.The plan promotes the creation of striped bicyclelanes along major corridors such as Walker Avenueand Tate Street. Railway underpasses at Aycock andTate Streets were recommended for refurbishmentor replacement, creating a safer and moreappealing environment for both bicyclists andpedestrians. Bicycle amenities such as showers andbike pumps were recommended forimplementation at strategic bike stations aroundcampus. Bicycle parking needs identified in the2006 UNCG Campus Transportation Plan werereaffirmed in this plan.

The needs of the bicycle and pedestrian populationalso were addressed through the vision for futureland uses developed in the UNCG Campus MasterPlan. This plan focused on promoting a compact,pedestrian-oriented campus with a healthy mix ofland uses in redeveloping or growing areas.

Greensboro Urban Area Bicycle, Pedestrian,& Greenway Master PlanOctober 2006The Greensboro Urban AreaMetropolitan PlanningOrganization developed theBicycle, Pedestrian, &Greenway Master Plan toreaffirm the area’scommitment to growinginto a bicycle- andpedestrian-friendlycommunity. The planaddressed bicycling and walking needs throughoutthe MPO as well as focused on specific needs withinthe City of Greensboro. UNCG and its surroundingneighborhoods were identified as a special area offocus.

The plan recommended a network of on-roadbicycle, on-road pedestrian, and greenway facilities.One hundred different greenway recommendationswere developed for the metro area, encompassingall levels of paved and natural surface trails. Over418 miles of greenways were recommended in theMPO area, with 252 miles of those within the City ofGreensboro. Almost 900 miles of on-road bicyclefacilities were recommended for the MPO. Thisnumber includes a major commitment to stripedbicycle lanes, with over 131 miles of this facilitytype recommended. More than 532 miles of pavedshoulders were also recommended. On-roadpedestrian facilities were also strongly supported,with 364 new sidewalk miles proposed.

3-7


Final Report

Bicycle and Pedestrian Safety Strategies inNorth Carolina: Statewide Input and PrioritiesSynthesis ReportMay 2011The North Carolina Department of Transportation(NCDOT) led a statewide public involvement effortin late 2010 and early 2011 to identify problems andpotential solutions specific to bicycle and pedestriansafety. This effort included a survey distributed byNCDOT that generated more than 16,000responses. The survey found a clear majority ofrespondents did not feel their communities weresafe for recreational or utilitarian bicycling. The lackof on-road bicycle facilities was stated as the chiefreason for this safety issue. Similarly, less than 43%of respondents reported feeling safe to walk todestinations in their communities, citing a lack ofconnected sidewalk facilities. Notably, over 90% ofsurvey respondents felt a safe bicycle andpedestrian network in their community wouldenhance their well-being and quality of life.

Using this information, NCDOT has been able todetermine a set of priorities for statewide bicycleand pedestrian planning. The highest priority is tomove forward with implementation of the recentlyadopted statewide Complete Streets Policy, whichencourages the consideration of all transportationmodes when making improvements. An allocationof additional funding for multimodal projects wasidentified as a priority to help further theseobjectives. In addition, more robust education andenforcement efforts statewide were identified toincrease public awareness of non-motorized travel.

Existing FacilitiesUNCG has been recognized forits commitment to bicycle andpedestrian travel. UNCGfeatures high quality bicycleand pedestrian environmentswith significant travel by bicycleand foot. Priority pedestrian circulation patternsrely heavily on the Lake, Tate, Stirling, College,Walker, Spring Garden, and Forest corridors.Priority bicycle circulation patterns rely heavily onthe Tate, Gray, West, Carr, Walker, College, Forest,Spring Garden, and Aycock corridors.

The UNCG campusis very walkable,with almost all ofthe campus within a10-minute walkfrom JacksonLibrary. Sidewalksare found on mostroads within and leading away from campus andpedestrian pathways crisscrossing campus. SpringGarden Street features striped bicycle lanes, aplanted median, and sidewalks, making it a highlyfunctional multimodal roadway on campus. The

striped bicyclelanes change to asharrow at theeastern border ofcampus. CollegeAvenue has beenconverted to a

3-8


Final Report

pedestrian and bicycle facility that offers north-south circulation. Many roads within campus haveadequate, high-quality sidewalks. Smallimprovements such as curb ramps and crosswalkrepainting are the most significant needs.

The region contains almost 100 miles of greenways,with 81 of those miles existing within the City ofGreensboro. The MPO also has more than 125 milesof on-road bike facilities, including a mile of bicyclelanes on Spring Garden Street. Additionally, only 29miles of these on-road bike facilities consist ofpaved shoulders.

Currently, 501 loops are in place, providing capacityfor 1,002 bikes. These existing bicycle racks provideadequate parking for a majority of campus,however, some areas still need additional bikeparking facilities.

Figure 3.1 shows the existing bicycle and pedestriancontext, along with current bicycle parkinglocations. This map also documents bicycle andpedestrian crash locations for 2007 to 2010 asprovided by the City of Greensboro.

Bicycle and Pedestrian CrashesTo identify areas where additional attention needsto be devoted to safety issues, bicycle andpedestrian crash locations were obtained for thepast four years (2007-2010) from the City ofGreensboro. These crashes primarily involveconflicts between autos and bicycles or autos andpedestrians. In a dense campus environment suchas UNCG with a heavy demand for non-motorizedtravel, it’s not unexpected to have higher crashrates for these modes. However, improvements tocertain corridors and intersections can beconsidered to improve overall travel safety for thecampus.

The reported crash locations shown in Figure 3.1were compared to results from the web-basedsurvey. One survey question asked respondents ifsome of the largest intersections in or around theUNCG campus needed to be improved forpedestrian safety. Figure 3.2 documents theresponses to this question—intersections indicatedby respondents as most in need of improvementare noted by higher percentages of “Definitely”(blue) and “Somewhat” (red) responses.

When comparing this information, the intersectionsand crossings along Aycock Street were perceivedto have the greatest need of safety improvements.This perception was borne out by crash dataindicating that crashes along Aycock Street weremore prevalent than along Tate Street. Surveyrespondents rated the intersections of AycockStreet with Walker Avenue and Lee Street as thetwo most in need of improvement, with theintersection of Aycock Street and Spring GardenStreet close behind. The bicycle and pedestrianimprovements made to Spring Garden Street wererecognized by survey respondents, resulting inlower percentages of safety improvement needsbeing expressed for that corridor.

3-9


Final Report

Figure 3.1 Bicycle and Pedestrian Context

3-10


Final Report

Figure 3.2 Need for Bicycle and Pedestrian Intersection Improvements

3-11


Final Report

Campus Community PerceptionThe web-based survey provided feedback from asubset of the campus population. As described inChapter 2, the unscientific survey did notcompletely represent the general demographics ofcampus—responses were disproportionatelyweighted toward members of the campuscommunity that choose personal automobiles astheir preferred mode of transportation. In additionto the survey, additional opportunity for publicoutreach was provided through the Campus OpenHouse held in October 2011. Collectively, thisfeedback was vetted through the AdvisoryCommittee for use in the development ofrecommendations. The following issues emerged.

A clear need was communicated forenhanced east-west travel opportunitieswithin the campus, particularly forpedestrians.Room for improvement exists on manycorridors in and around campus to promotebicycle friendliness.Several barriers to pedestrian and bicycletravel were noted, such as the railroadcrossings at Aycock Street and Tate Street.Bicycle parking issues were identified,noting locations such as the Petty ScienceBuilding and Mendenhall Residence Hallwhere the need for racks is immediate.Covered bicycle parking also emerged as adesired amenity on campus.

Web-Based SurveyFeedback from the survey demonstrates somemeasure of desire for bicycle and pedestrianimprovements in and around the UNCG campus.Items of note from the survey include the following.

Sidewalks and crosswalks were generallywell regarded (75% of respondents viewedthem as excellent or good), but the ratingfell to 50% for greenways and multi-usepaths and 44% for on-street bicyclefacilities.Distance from campus was the largest issuefor respondents about why they do not

bike, though this response may be reflectiveto the subset of the campus communitythat completed the survey.Adding greenways and striped bike laneswere favored by respondents.Nearly a quarter of respondents also saidthey might be interested in renting a bicyclefor a fee.

Campus Open HouseNumerous comments at the open house related tobicycle and pedestrian travel. While not allcomments were carried forward asrecommendations, each was evaluated.

Improve the crosswalks at Tate Street/LeeStreet and Aycock Street/Lee Street.Consider left-turn phasing for eastboundand westbound Walker Avenue at AycockStreet to improve pedestrian safety.Need more walk time at WalkerAvenue/Aycock Street crossing.Improve pedestrian crossing safety onSpring Garden Street near Tate Street.Need to address bicycle connections toEUC/Library and connections on campus.Add stop signs on Spring Garden Street tocalm traffic and improve pedestrian safety.Need central locations for bikes (bikelockers, storage) or bike station.Need an on-campus bike sharing program.Create bicycle lanes coming from SouthAycock Street to campus.Need traffic calming/elevated crosswalks onSpring Garden Street. Drivers don’t see orignore poorly marked existing crosswalks.Need more active enforcement of speed,yield to pedestrians, etc.

3-12


Final Report

RecommendationsBased on the existing conditions, travel issues, andpublic feedback analyzed during the data gatheringphase of this plan, a set of recommendations hasbeen developed. The recommendations addressthese needs while also integrating with the transitand auto needs detailed elsewhere in the plan.

Bicycle and Pedestrian CirculationTo promote this holistic system,recommendations developmentbegan with a study of the bicycleand pedestrian circulation issues inand around UNCG. When analyzingthe connectivity of an area forpedestrians, it is first important tounderstand the distance that isbeing covered. Since walkingspeeds are comparatively slow,destination points become lessviable for pedestrian travel whenthey are farther away. Figure 3.3shows the pedestrian connectivityof the UNCG campus and itssurroundings. To gain aperspective on travel times forpedestrians, walking radii were calculated from twomajor campus destination points—the JacksonLibrary and the intersection of Lee Street andGlenwood Avenue. Using an average person’swalking speed, the distance a person could travel infive minutes was calculated from each destinationpoint. These distances are shown by yellow dashedcircles on Figure 3.3. Upon examination, it isevident that a large portion of the campus can betraversed within a five-minute walk.

Currently, pedestrians can make straightforwardand efficient connections via a series of north-southroutes on campus. Sidewalks are provided alongsuch key roadways as Aycock Street, Tate Street,College Avenue, and McIver Street. Many of theseroutes also include connections across SpringGarden Street, while a handful of them continueacross the railroad tracks to Lee Street.

East-west routing for pedestrians is more difficult.Few of the east-west roadways travel all the waythrough the UNCG campus. While this trafficdiversion reduces automobile traffic in the campusinterior, it also means that pedestrians must rely onoff-road sidewalks and greenways for theseconnections. For east-west roadways that connectthrough campus, high vehicular traffic volumesmake them less suitable for pedestrians. Theimprovements that have been made to Spring

Garden Street attempt to offset thisissue at that location.

Figure 3.4 shows the typical bicyclecirculation patterns through thecampus. Due to the lack of dedicatedbicycle facilities in most locations, thenorth-south routes surrounding thecampus are less attractive for bicyclists.As with pedestrians, many bicyclemovements in the campus interior mustoccur on off-road facilities such asgreenways. Despite the lack of quickand efficient facilities for bicycle travelin some locations, the demand to movebetween many recreational, residential,and academic facilities remains high.

The provision of striped bike lanes onSpring Garden Street has created a safer and moredirect option for east-west travel by bicyclists. Userswill typically avoid the high volumes along LeeStreet, and instead use Haywood Street if they aretraveling along the southern portion of campus. Therailroad tracks remain a crossing barrier forbicyclists, with crossings currently limited to TateStreet and Aycock Street with a third to be providedvia the Pedestrian Underpass at Forest Street.

3-13


Final Report

Figure 3.3 Pedestrian Connectivity

3-14


Final Report

Figure 3.4 Bicycle Circulation

3-15


Final Report

Facility RecommendationsDetailed recommendations for pedestrian andbicycle facilities can be found in Figure 3.5 andFigure 3.6, respectively. The following sectionsdiscuss the proposed facility recommendations forsidewalks, on-road bicycle facilities,greenways/sidepaths, and bicycle parking.

On-Road Pedestrian RecommendationsFigure 3.5 shows a series of proposed sidewalks andintersection crossing improvements to enhance theUNCG on-road pedestrian network.

Construct new sidewalks to fill in existinggaps in sidewalk system.

o North Drive (Main Campus)o Oakland Avenue (Main Campus)o Kenilworth St (Main Campus)o Theta St (Main Campus)o Haywood Street (Spartan Village)o Neal Street (Spartan Village)o Union Street (Spartan Village)o Highland Avenue (Spartan Village)o Wright Avenue (Neighborhood)o Mayflower Drive (Neighborhood)o Cobb Street (Neighborhood)

Install high visibility crosswalks.o All signalized crossings of Aycock Sto Tate St and Oakland Aveo Carr St and McIver Sto Gray Dr near Gove Student Healtho Gray Dr and West Sto Kenilworth St and Theta Sto Union St and Gregoryo Union St and Highland Aveo Oakland Ave and Kenilworth Sto Oakland Ave and Highland Aveo Oakland Ave and Stirling St

Install ground-mounted pedestriancrossing signs.

o Gray Dr near Gove Student Health

o Walker Ave and Stirling Sto Theta St

Construct curb extensions.o Aycock St and Walker Aveo Gray Dr near Gove Student Healtho Gray Dr and West Sto Oakland Ave and Forest Sto Oakland Ave and Highland Ave

Construct median refuge islands.o Aycock St between Spring Garden

St and Walker Ave (raised planted)o Tate St north of RR underpass

(raised planted)o Spring Garden St at Stirling St

(extend existing)

Install PedAdvance signals.o Aycock St and Walker Aveo Aycock St and Spring Garden Sto Aycock St and Forest Sto Aycock St and Lee Sto Lee St and Glenwood Aveo Lee St and Tate St/Silver Aveo Tate St and Spring Garden Sto Tate St and Walker Aveo Tate St and Carr Sto Tate St and Market Sto Market St and Lake Rd

Install pedestrian countdown signals.o Market St and Tate Sto Tate St and Carr Sto Aycock St and Lee Sto Lee St and Glenwood Aveo Lee St and Tate/Silver Ave

Construct wide sidewalk.o Forest St between Spring Garden St

and the Elliott University Center

3-16


Final Report

Aycock Street ImprovementsThe UNCG Transportation Master Plan Updateidentifies Aycock Street as a pedestrian focus area.Aycock Street originally was envisioned as a north-south freeway connection through Greensboro asevidenced by the interchange at Market Street anda wide cross section north of Walker Avenue. Thewide cross section encourages speeding andcontributes to safety concerns. Crossing AycockStreet on foot was consistently identified as a majorsafety concern during campus and communityoutreach efforts. Motorists along Aycock Streetconflict with pedestrians, many of which cross atunsignalized mid-block locations. The intersectionof Aycock Street and Walker Avenue is the onlysignalized crossing north of Spring Garden Street,but the addition of a third northbound lane andtraffic turning from westbound Walker Avenue tonorthbound Aycock Street contributes to the safetyconcerns on this segment of Aycock Street.

Improvements to Aycock Street north of WalkerAvenue (shown in the graphic to the right anddescribed below), aim to calm the street andencourage pedestrians to cross at the improvedsignalized intersection. Specific recommendationsinclude:

Construct landscaped medians to directpedestrians to signalized crossings

Install PedAdvance signals at each signalizedcrossing.

Increase the lighting at the intersection ofAycock Street and Walker Avenue

Construct a curb extension (bulbout) at WalkerAvenue.

Remove the third northbound lane betweenWalker Avenue and the Market Street onrampby striping the existing pavement to restrict use.

Move service vehicle access from WalkerAvenue to the rear of the Student RecreationCenter to improve pedestrian safety.

Construct a sidepath from the existing path bythe Softball Stadium to Market Street.

Safety concerns also are evident from WalkerAvenue south to Spring Garden Street, wherestudents consistently cross Aycock Street mid-blockand take unprotected refuge in the center turnlane. Further study of this portion of the corridor isneeded, and improvements could be coordinatedwith ongoing plans to reconstruct the rail underpasson Aycock Street.

3-17


Final Report

On-Road Bicycle RecommendationsFigure 3.6 displays on-road bicycle facilityrecommendations on and around the UNCGcampus.

Create bicycle boulevards with pavementmarkings, signage, traffic calming, andmini-circles.

o Union Sto Aberdeen Terro Lake Dro Haywood Sto Walker Ave (west of Aycock St)o Lexington Aveo McGee Sto Edgar St (northern connection to

Carr St)

Add a striped bicycle lane.o Silver Aveo College Ave from Administration Dr

to Spring Garden St (green paintedcontraflow bicycle lane)

Paint sharrows.o North Dro McIver Sto Walker Aveo Forest St (Oakland

Ave to Spring GardenSt)

o Aycock St (south ofWalker Ave)

o Kenilworth Sto Stirling St

Off-Road RecommendationsFigures 3.5 and 3.6 show proposed off-road campusconnectors and sidepath facilities. These facilitiestypically are designed to serve both bicyclists andpedestrians.

Construct sidepath.o Aycock St from Walker Ave to

Market St

Enhance campus connector paths.o Connection between Lee St and

Forest St (Pedestrian Underpass)o Union St extension between

Lexington Ave and Glenwood Aveo College Aveo Connection between Forest St/Spring

Garden St intersection and CollegeAve

o Connection between Gray Dr andCollege Ave via the Walker Ave Circle

o Connection between Gray Dr andMcIver St

o Connection to North Dr behind theSullivan Science and Eberhartbuildings

3-18


Final Report

Bicycle Parking RecommendationsFigure 3.6 shows existing and proposed bicycleparking locations on campus. The UNCG BicycleMaster Plan recommended “Inverted U” or“Stadium” racks as the campus standard, which bikeshelters and bike lockers at strategic locations.See Section 5 of The UNCG Bicycle Master Plan formore detail, including site requirements

Install bicycle racks near convenient accessto buildings.

o Stone Building near College Avenueentrances (5 U racks – 10 spaces)

o Petty Building (1 stadium rack – 8spaces)

o Spartan Village as developmentoccurs

Replace portable racks with permanentloops.

o Sullivan Science Building near NorthDrive Child Day Care (1 stadiumrack – 8 spaces)

o McIver Building near Foust Building(1 stadium rack – 8 spaces)

o Mary Foust Residence Hall (1stadium rack – 8 spaces)

o Guilford Residence Hall (2 stadiumracks – 16 spaces)

o Near Tower Village and MHRAMoore Humanities (3 stadium racks– 24 spaces)

Install bicycle stations (covered parking,showers, and bike pumps).

o Oakland Avenue Deck (3 lockers – 6spaces)

o McIver Parking Deck (1 shelter withu racks – 8 spaces)

o Walker Circle (1 shelter with u racks– 10 spaces)

o Graham Building (1 shelter with uracks – 8 spaces)

o Proposed Rec Center (3 lockers – 6spaces; 1 shelter with u racks – 8spaces)

o Taylor/Brown/Carmichael Plaza (2shelters with u racks – 16 spaces)

o Elliott University Center – CollegeAvenue on the east side the EUC (2shelters with u racks – 16 spaces)

Changes in demand for bicycle parking over time isbest understood with regular bicycle parkingoccupancy counts. Parking Operations and CampusAccess Management has collected counts for thepast two years, a practice that should continue inthe future. The occupancy counts should becompared with the list of recommended parkingfacilities to determine if changes are warranted.Parking policies described in the UNCG BicycleMaster Plan should dictate the type and capacity ofbicycle parking provided for new development,including Spartan Village. General guidelines fromthe Bicycle Master Plan include:

Residential – 1 space per 4 units

Academic – 1 space per 5 buildingoccupants

Sports/Recreation – 1 space per 40 to 100seats

Operations – 1 space per 5 buildingoccupants

Parking Deck – 1 space per 20 automobilespaces

Park-and-Ride Lots – 1 space per 20automobile spaces

3-19


Final Report

Figure 3.5 Pedestrian Recommendations

3-20


Final Report

Figure 3.6 Bicycle Recommendations

3-21


Final Report

Program RecommendationsThe bicycle and pedestrian network needs asupporting program of encouragement, education,and enforcement initiatives. The followingprograms have been applied successfully inmunicipal and collegiate settings around the UnitedStates and could be considered for implementationat UNCG.

Encouragement ProgramsUniversity ProgramsProviding bicycle-related information to incomingstudents has been an effective way for UNCG toincrease student’s bicycle awareness and safety oncampus. It is recommended that the Universityinclude bicycle materials in the orientation packetfor new employees (faculty and staff). The packetcould include bicycle registration and bicycle safetyinformation, lists of bicycle retailers, the bicyclerules and regulations, and a map of existing bicyclefacilities and recommended routes.

A bicycle map is particularly important forencouraging the active and safe use of bicyclefacilities. It is recommended that the Universitycoordinate with GDOT to ensure the next revision tothe City’s Bicycle Map includes the existing andproposed facilities from the Update. The mapsshould be readily available online and in print. It isrecommended that the University provide a link tothe Greensboro Bicycle Map on POCAM’s bicyclewebpage and print copies for distribution oncampus.

Bicycle Sharing Program

Bicycle sharing programs appear in all shapes andsizes in cities and campuses throughout the world.The central concept is offering free (or nearly free)access to bicycles to reduce the use of automobilesfor short trips. A system of volunteer-run hubs orkiosks would be located throughout the campus,and the campus community registered with theprogram present membership cards to check out abicycle for a specified period of time.

When the Spartan Cycles bike sharing programbegan Fall 2010, free bike loans were offered tostudents. To sustain the program long term, freebike sharing is now limited to departments andstudent groups only. Individual students and staffmay rent a bicycle, helmet, lock, and key for $25 persemester with basic maintenance included. TheSpartan Cycles program currently is managed by astudent intern working approximately 10 hours perweek. Plans to grow the bike program by partneringwith the Spartan Trader campus consignment shopare under consideration.

It is recommended that the University implement abicycle sharing program with kiosks set up near theWalker Avenue Circle, Curry Building, and Phase 1 ofSpartan Village.

Alternative Transportation Events

The University has sponsored events such as theGreen Games and Bike-to-Work Day to promotenon-motorized transportation. These activities willcontinue to be a critical component of UNCGssuccess in shifting the campus community awayfrom single-occupant vehicles. Coordinating days,weeks, and even months that specifically promotealternative transportation options has proven to bea good method of increasing the number ofstudents who try alternative options, but morefocus is needed on faculty and staff. Bikeprogramming and marketing specifically for facultyand staff occurs during the summer months whenfewer students are on campus. UNCG partners withBicycling in Greensboro, the City of Greensboro,and local bike shops to provide refueling stations,summer bike rentals, and other programs in Mayincluding National Bike to Work Day. It isrecommended that the University tailor someprograms (e.g. foster a faculty versus staff green

3-22


Final Report

commute challenge) and continue to partner withthe City of Greensboro to improve the visibility andviability of programs with faculty and staff.

Collaboration with City of Greensboro and theGreensboro Urban Area MPOThe 2006 UNCG Campus Transportation Plan and2008 Campus Bicycle Master Plan emphasizedcoordination between the University and City forbicycle and pedestrian initiatives. The UNCG Officeof Business Affairs maintains a collaborativeworking relationship with the City and theGreensboro Department of Transportation (GDOT).UNCG Campus Enterprises, and specifically ParkingOperations and Campus Access Management(POCAM), are in contact with GDOT and theGreensboro Urban Area Metropolitan PlanningOrganization (MPO). It is recommended that theUniversity continue to work with the City ofGreensboro and the Greensboro Urban Area MPO tohave representation on transportation advisorycommittees that address citywide issues of non-motorized transportation policy and planning.

Education and EnforcementPublic Education and Enforcement ProgramsUNCG has taken a proactive approach to educationand enforcement, efforts which are coordinated bythe UNCG Police Department. University policecreated a pedestrian safety task force in 2010 andconducted a safety awareness campaign during theSpring semester of 2011. Also in 2011, Universitypolice and POCAM collaborated in 2011 to create asafety brochure for drivers, cyclists, andpedestrians. It is recommended that the Universitymake the safety awareness campaign an annualevent. A simple approach such as the “Same Road,Same Rights, Same Rules” campaign may be used.Note: This phrase is trademarked byProbicycle.com, but public and non-profit entitiestypically are granted permission to use the phrasewithout charge. This approach is geared towardboth motorists and bicyclists. Education shouldfocus on the awareness of motorists’ need to yieldto pedestrians in the crosswalks and a pedestrian’s

responsibility of not walking in front of oncomingtraffic.

Enforcement ProgramsBicycle theft can be a deterrent to bicycle use,especially to users with higher-end bicycles. Oneprogram that has been used to track down bicycletheft rings is a sting operation using a homingdevice. An attractive bicycle with a homing device inthe frame is placed in a location where numerousbicycles have been stolen with minimal protection.If stolen, the bicycle can be tracked. It isrecommended that the University implement a theftenforcement program.

Speed EnforcementKeeping traffic speeds low is essential for the safetyof UNCG staff and students. University and City lawenforcement can use a variety of techniques such asticketing and speed trailers to enforce speed limitson roadways adjacent to UNCG. It is recommendedthat the University conduct regular speedcheckpoints.

ConclusionThe success of UNCG’s bicycle and pedestriansystem ultimately depends not only on the facilitiesprovided but also on the encouragement andeducation efforts of the University. Thecommitment of UNCG to provide a robust bicycleand pedestrian network demonstrates the desire topromote non-motorized travel. The thorough andtimely maintenance of these facilities will reassureprospective users that the facilities will be safe andaccessible. Outreach programs to educate students,faculty, staff, and visitors about the amenitiesavailable to them will help maintain high visibilityfor non-motorized travel. When all of thesepractices combine, they will expand upon thesuccessful non-motorized program at UNCG.

3-23


Final Report

Summary of RecommendationsThe UNCG Transportation Master Plan Update includes the following recommendations:

FacilitiesImprove Aycock Street with a landscaped median, crossing enhancements, and removal of the thirdnorthbound lane north of Walker Avenue.Construct new sidewalks to fill in existing gaps in sidewalk system at 11 specified locations.Install high visibility crosswalks at 11 specified locations and all signalized crossings of Aycock Street.Install ground-mounted pedestrian crossing signs at three specified locations.Construct curb extensions at five specified locations.Construct median refuge islands along Tate Street and a portion of Spring Garden Street.Conduct additional study of Aycock Street between Lee Street and Walker Avenue.Install PedAdvance signals at all signalized crossings adjacent to and on campus.Install pedestrian countdown signals at five specified locations.Construct a wide sidewalk on Forest Street.Create bicycle boulevards along eight identified corridors.Add striped bicycle lanes on Silver Avenue and College Avenue.Paint sharrows on seven identified corridors.Construct a sidepath along Aycock Street from Walker Avenue to Market Street.Enhance campus connector paths at seven specified locations.Install bicycle racks near convenient access to buildings.Replace portable racks with permanent loops.Install bicycle stations at nine locations.

Program and PoliciesInclude bicycle materials be included in the orientation packet for new employees (faculty and staff).Coordinate with GDOT to ensure the next revision to the City’s Bicycle Map includes the existing andproposed facilities from the Update.Provide a link to the Greensboro Bicycle Map be provided on POCAM’s bicycle webpage and print copiesfor distribution on campus.Implement a bicycle sharing program with kiosks set up near the Walker Avenue Circle, Curry Building,and Phase 1 of Spartan Village.Tailor some programs and partner with the City of Greensboro to improve the visibility and viability ofprograms with faculty and staff.Work with the City of Greensboro and the Greensboro Urban Area MPO to have representation ontransportation advisory committees.Make the safety awareness campaign an annual event.


Final Report

November 2012

CHAPTER 4TRANSIT ELEMENT


Nationally, many people agree that they would usetransit if service was fast, frequent, dependable,and easy to use. Like a complete system of roads,sidewalks, and bikeways, transit must provideconnections to the places people need or want togo at a time when they need to get there. Given theframework of transit-supportive urban forminherent to a college campus, transit enhancementshave a high probability of success in providingchoice to riders and reducing demand for single-occupancy vehicles.

Likewise, transit can provide a safer, morepedestrian-friendly, and less environmentallyimpactful trip for faculty, staff, and studentstraveling to, from, and within the UNCG campus.The Transit Element of the University of NorthCarolina at Greensboro Transportation Master PlanUpdate describes the current transit networkavailable to the campus community, reveals howreceptive potential users may be to expandedservices, and provides basic recommendations forUniversity-sponsored service.

Transit FrameworkIn the five yearssince the 2006CampusTransportationMaster Plan wascompleted, theUniversity hasexpanded thetransit offeringsfor faculty, staff, and students. The Spartan Chariotand Higher Education Area Transit (HEAT) are twoservices that show University staff continues toacknowledge the importance of publictransportation in providing mobility. The collectiveresult of the Update should be an integrated,balanced intermodal transportation system thatsafely and efficiently moves people between activitynodes. Effective transit planning and servicedelivery operates within the following framework.

Transit and Campus DevelopmentThe urban form of a college campus (building scale,orientation, and use) is a major reason transit oncollege campuses works well. It should be nosurprise that transit often is one of the most utilizedforms of transportation to travel to and fromcollege campuses across the nation.

Connectivity between off- and on-campus transitroutes improves the overall convenience and easeof using transit as a means of traveling to campusand getting around on campus. Improving themobility of faculty, staff, and students between on-campus destinations is an important considerationas Spartan Village takes shape.

Transit and Travel Demand ManagementTransit can reducetravel demand andimprove trafficoperations bydecreasing thenumber of single-occupancy vehicleson the roadway

4-2

Transit ElementTransportation Master Plan Update

Final Report

network. In many urban areas, heavy trafficcongestion results from this increased demand onthe roads. In general, congestion can be reduced byencouraging the use of transit. Perhaps moreimportant on a college campus, the use of transitcan reduce the demand for parking. The strategy ofbetter managing travel demand by encouragingtransit necessitates that road users who currentlytravel alone via personal vehicle choose to utilizetransit instead, not only increasing transit ridershipbut also decreasing the number of single-occupancyvehicles using the roadway.

Planning ContextAs a critical component of a completetransportation system, transit is significantlyimpacted by the decisions made for other modes.Including bus pullouts when retrofitting an arterialstreet or ensuring curb extensions are designed toaccommodate the turning radius of a bus are twoexamples. At its best, transit provides an efficientand inexpensive transportation mode. The planningcontext for the Transit Element begins with anoverview of existing conditions and considers thefeedback of staff, stakeholders, and the generalpublic as well as previous planning efforts.

Previous Planning EffortsWhen planningand designingeffective transitservice, it’sessential tounderstandtravel patterns,activity centersexternal tocampus, and the operating environment of thesystem. Plans and studies that preceded the Updatehave assessed existing services, the growth ofcampus, ridership trends (and projections),technological advancements, and coordinationopportunities. Plans at a regional scale have helpedestablish a long-term vision for transit withoutconcrete funding to fulfill it. Relevant transit plansconsidered in the development of the TransitElement for the Update include the following.

2006 UNCG Transportation Master Plan: Theexisting Transportation Master Plan describesexisting and proposed transit routes. At thetime the plan was completed, the HEAT servicewas in its infancy and the Spartan Chariot hadnot taken shape. Recommendations focus onutilizing the Walker Avenue circle as a transithub and making minor changes to routing andservice delivery.

2007 UNCG Campus Master Plan Update: As along-term vision plan, the 2007 CampusMaster Plan Update stops short of crafting newrecommendations for public transit at UNCG.Instead, the plan reiterates therecommendations from the 2006transportation plan and identifies providingaccess to UNCG’s campus via public transit as akey consideration moving forward.

2010 Regional Transit Development Plan: ThePiedmont Authority for RegionalTransportation (PART) developed the RegionalTransit Development Plan to accommodateregional growth and address challenges in asustainable way. The plan identifies LeeStreet/High Point Road as a transit emphasiscorridor (15 or 30 minute headways, transitsignal priority, enhanced amenities), connectsthe University to downtown via a streetcar,and designates a transit center at UNCG.

These plans formed the baseline for thedevelopment of the Update’s Transit Element.

4-3


Final Report

Progress on the 2006 UNCG Campus Transportation Plan TransitRecommendations of the 2006 Campus Transportation Plan (Section 5.5) included the following.

Utilize the Walker Avenue Circle behind Jackson Library as the primary transit hub on campus.o UPDATE: The Walker Avenue Circle currently serves as a hub for HEAT, PART, and Spartan Chariot

buses.Utilize Elam as western limit of Campus Shuttle service.

o UPDATE: HEAT Route 73 serves Elam.Utilize the following stops for the Campus Loop route: Walker Avenue Hub, Walker and Warren, Walkerand Chapman, Walker and Elam, Elam and Spring Garden, Spring Garden and Chapman, Spring Gardenand Warren, and Spring Garden and Stirling.

o UPDATE: These stops are served by HEAT Route 73.Route Inner Circulator along neighborhood streets.

o UPDATE: HEAT Route 73 circulates through surrounding neighborhoods.Dependent on GTA Feasibility.

o UPDATE: Students and employees may ride all GTA routes fare free with Spartan Card, and GTARoutes 1, 2, and 9 have stops on and/or near campus.

Expand the Campus Loop route west to Holden Avenue as population density warrants.o UPDATE: Extending services from campus west to Holden Avenue is not a priority at this time.

Provide service to the Millennial Campuses.o UPDATE: Service to the Millennial Campuses is not provided at this time but should remain a

long-term recommendation.Provide a new service south of campus as population density warrants.

o UPDATE: The HEAT shopping shuttle connects to Four Seasons Mall. The Spartan Chariot beganservice to Lofts on Lee in Fall 2011. The Spartan Chariot Express service will begin Fall 2013.

Identify funding source: student fees, increased parking permit costs, some combination of the two.o UPDATE: Since the 2006 plan, students have paid a transportation fee and permit costs have

increased.Provide real-time bus information available on-line.

o UPDATE: The University has installed mogo GPS on Spartan Chariot buses and provides real-timeinformation online.

4-4


Final Report

Existing ServicesUNCG encourages transit for traveling to, from, andwithin campus. A centrally located on-campustransit hub at the Walker Avenue circle links theSpartan Chariot, Higher Education Area Transit(HEAT), and Piedmont Authority for RegionalTransportation (PART). Within walking distance arealso other HEAT and Greensboro Transit Authority(GTA) bus stops. The sections below provide a briefoverview of transit service at UNCG. A series of twocontext maps (Figure 4.1 & 4.2) follow the sectionsand show service in relation to the campus.

UNCG Spartan ChariotThe SpartanChariot operateson a loop routecircling UNCG’scampus, stoppingat 11 locationsduring theweekdays and 17locations during the evenings and weekends. Ridersof the Spartan Chariot may connect to HEAT andGTA routes via the UNCG transit hub at the WalkerAvenue circle. Figure 4.1 shows the weekdaydaytime route.

Between the 2009-2010 and 2010-2011 school year,the number of rides on the Spartan Chariotincreased 7.5% while the percentage of milesdecreased 2.0%. The slight drop in mileage was dueto minor schedule adjustments and reduced needto serve the park-and-ride lot late at night.

Park & Ride ShuttlesPark & Rideshuttle service isoffered forcommuters wholive off campusand park in thepark-and-ride lot at 1720 West Lee Street acrossfrom the Greensboro Coliseum Complex. This lot isrestricted to those with an appropriate permit andis open Monday to Thursday 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m.and Friday 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. The shuttledeparts every 10 to 15 minutes and stops at threecampus locations:

Lot 8 near Financial Aid

Forest Street near McNutt and MooreHumanities MHRA

Spring Garden Street in front of the GrahamBuilding

Park-and-ride miles and rides increased 6.7% and18.1%, respectively, from 2009-2010 to 2010-2011.This increase is due to increased E permit sales andnew late night service.

Higher Education Area TransitHEAT waslaunched in 2006by GTA and sevenlocal colleges anduniversities(UNCG, BennettCollege, ElonUniversity School of Law, Greensboro College,Guilford College, Guilford Technical CommunityCollege, and NC A&T). HEAT operates nine routesand provides fare-free service for qualifyingstudents from UNCG, Greensboro College, GuilfordCollege, and NC A&T. Because HEAT covers largedistances and is designed to be an express service,bus stops along its routes are kept to a minimum todecrease travel times. However, HEAT shares manyof its stops with GTA stops, so riders can easilyconnect to the GTA transit network to reach theirdestination.

4-5


Final Report

Table 4.1 - Historical HEAT RidershipCollege/University 2010-11 2009-10 2008-09 2007-08 2006-07

UNCG 294,202 197,061 137,276 96,198 93,337

NC A&T* 263,193 202,169 143,485 69,052 24,030

Bennett College 79,216 65,073 43,175 50,974 28,754

Guilford College 24,993 17,533 11,726 8,307 9,114

GTCC 21,060 16,236 353,796 268,564 204,270

Greensboro College 1,645 0 3,232 2,761 2,684

Elon University School of Law 19 28 101 173 9

Total 684,328 498,100 692,791 496,029 362,198

Same-school Total^ 661,623 481,864 335,763 224,704 155,244

* NC A&T 2007-08 data missing for August through mid-October^ Total excludes GTCC and Greensboro College

Source: The Greensboro Transit Authority HEAT Program, Year 5: 2010-2011

Since the inception ofHEAT, GTA has regularlyreported ridership trendsand participation bymember institutions.Table 4.1 shows ahistorical comparison ofstudent ridership byschool as reported in theHEAT 2010-11 annualreport. Between the2008-09 and 2010-2011school years, UNCGridership increased morethan 200% from 96,198 to294,202. UNCG accountsfor 43% of all HEATridership.

Service from UNCG topopular destinations inthe city includes:

Off-Campus Housing (apartment communitieson Walker Avenue, Chapman Street, andSpring Garden Street) – From the WalkerAvenue circle via HEAT 73

Downtown (as well as NC A&T, BennettCollege, and transfers at the Depot) – From theWalker Avenue circle via HEAT 72 to the Depotdowntown

Friendly Center (dining, movies, and shoppingas well as Guilford College) – From the WalkerAvenue circle via HEAT 71 west to FriendlyCenter

Late Night and Weekends (east to downtownor west to Guilford College) – From the WalkerAvenue circle via HEAT 70/71 with service until3:00 a.m. Thursday through Saturday

HEAT service is free to UNCG students with a validID.

4-6


Final Report

Greensboro Transit AuthorityCreated in 1991, GTAserves the City ofGreensboro by providingbus services on 15 routesMonday through Saturdayand 7 routes on Sundays.The GTA fleet consists of42 fixed-route buses.Service from UNCG topopular locations in thecity includes:

Greensboro Coliseum – From the GTA bus stopat Tate Street and Lee Street via Route 2

Four Seasons Town Centre – From the GTAbus stop at Tate Street and Lee Street viaRoute 2

Wendover Avenue (Walmart) – From the GTAbus stop at Spring Garden Street and AycockStreet via Route 1

GTA service is free to students with a valid ID. GTAalso provides a paratransit service called SpecializedCommunity Area Transportation (SCAT) for personswith disabilities who cannot use the fixed-routevehicles. From 2009-2010 to 2010-2011, thenumber of rides on HEAT/GTA increased 49.9%.

Piedmont Authority for Regional TransportationPART provides 14 weekday routes and 2 weekendroutes connecting several cities in the PiedmontTriad area and beyond, including Winston-Salem,Greensboro, Chapel Hill, and Durham.

Service from UNCG to popular locations beyond thecity includes:

South to Asheboro – From the Walker Avenuecircle via PART Route 10 Randolph CountyExpress to Asheboro ($2.40 round trip forstudents; $4.80 for non-students)

West to the Mountains – From the WalkerAvenue circle via HEAT 72 to the Depotdowntown, transfer to PART Route 7Mountaineer Express to Boone (operated byCoach America – $20 round trip for students;$28 for non-students)

East to Chapel Hill – From the Walker Avenuecircle via HEAT 72 to the Depot downtown,transfer to a PART bus going to the PART Hub,transfer to PART Route 4 Medical Connections($14 round trip for students; $28 for non-students)

PART also offers a variety of commuter servicesincluding an emergency ride home program,vanpools, and direct bus routes from Davidson andRandolph Counties to UNCG. Routes also provideservice to the Piedmont Triad International Airport.PART maintains 27 park-and-ride lots and operatesa bus fleet consisting of 45 vehicles.

In 2010-2011, 184 regional PART bus passes weresold at UNCG, 82 by employees and 102 bystudents.

4-7


Final Report

Figure 4.1 Transit Context – University

4-8


Final Report

Figure 4.2 Transit Context – City/Region

4-9


Final Report

Proximity of Transit ServicesMost transit riders will walk up to a quarter mile toreach a stop. In pedestrian-friendly areas, travelersmay walk up to a half mile. As part of the Update, aproximity analysis was conducted in which theaddresses of UNCG and commuter students, faculty,and staff were mapped to determine their proximityto bus stops and park-and-ride lots.

Commuter StudentsFor the purposes of this analysis, commuterstudents were defined as any student living in off-campus housing. The data provided for this analysiswas dependent upon information provided bystudents as their local address. Some students listedout-of-state addresses as local. Prior to calculatingthe percentages shown below, these out-of-stateaddresses were removed. As shown in Table 4.2,commuter students have relatively good access tocampus by bus from their place of residence.Approximately 28.2% of these students live within ahalf mile of a GTA bus stop, and 12.6% live within ahalf mile of a HEAT stop. Because the SpartanChariot route does not stray from campus, many ofthe students within proximity to a Spartan Chariotstop also are within walking distance of campus.Table 4.3 shows two out of three students arewithin 10 miles of a PART park-and-ride lot.

Table 4.2 - Commuter Student Residenceswithin Distance of Bus Stop

ServiceBus

Stops¼-mile ½-mile

Persons % Persons %

GTA 1,075 2,525 22.5% 3,166 28.2%

HEAT 67 1,058 9.4% 1,419 12.6%

SpartanChariot 16 439 3.9% 845 7.5%

PART 41 108 1.0% 796 7.1%

Total 1,162 2,551 22.7% 3,266 29.1%

Table 4.3 - Commuter Student Residenceswithin Distance of PART Park-and-Ride Lot

5 miles 10 miles

Persons % Persons %

6,236 55.6% 7,738 69.0%

Faculty and StaffAs shown in Table 4.4, approximately one-third ofUNCG’s faculty and staff reside within a quartermile of a GTA bus stop. Approximately 43% offaculty and staff are within a half-mile walk to a busstop. With 1,075 of the bus stops attributed to GTA(a much larger number compared to SpartanChariot, HEAT, or PART), it’s not surprising thatmost faculty and staff who live near a bus stopwould be dependent on GTA. Indeed, many of theHEAT stops are shared with GTA.

While only 1% of the addresses are within a quartermile of a PART bus stop, PART’s network of 27 park-and-ride lots extends the reach of the service. Table4.5 shows 71% of faculty and staff live within 5miles of a PART park-and-ride lot and 88% livewithin 10 miles.

Table 4.4 - Faculty and Staff Residenceswithin Distance of Bus Stop

ServiceBus

Stops¼-mile ½-mile

Persons % Persons %

GTA 1,075 774 31.1% 1,057 42.5%

HEAT 67 166 6.7% 336 13.5%

SpartanChariot 16 68 2.7% 160 6.4%

PART 41 37 1.5% 228 9.2%

Total 1,162 780 31.4% 1,073 43.2%

Table 4.5 - Faculty and Staff Residenceswithin Distance of PART Park-and-Ride Lot

5 miles 10 miles

Persons % Persons %

1,764 71.0% 2,179 87.7%

4-10


Final Report

Figures 4.3 to 4.8 show the transit networks of GTA,HEAT, and PART as well as their respective quarter-mile and half-mile buffer zones for each bus stop.Also displayed are the residences of the University’scommuter students, faculty, and staff.

The GTA network covers much of Greensboro and isaccessible to 42.5% of UNCG staff and faculty and28.2% of UNCG commuter students. However,Figures 4.3 and 4.4 reveal clusters of commuterstudents, staff, and faculty are not within walkingdistance of any GTA bus stops. One such clusterexists in the northwestern portion of Greensboro,while another can be seen on the north side. Asmall cluster of residences in the southwest are notwithin walking distance of a GTA bus stop.

HEAT provides transit service focused on the city’scolleges and universities, and its bus stops are asubset of GTA’s bus stops. Even so, 12.6% of UNCGcommuter students are within walking distance ofHEAT bus stops. UNCG provides local matchingfunds to allow their students to ride the HEAT buseswithout paying a fare. Figures 4.5 and 4.6 show theproximity of commuter students and faculty andstaff to HEAT stops.

PART’s park-and-ride lots are accessible to a largepercentage of both UNCG commuter students andfaculty and staff. Of the 3,793 addresses that do notfall in the 5- or 10-mile buffer zones for park-and-ride lots, 722 are in Durham and Chapel Hill. WhilePART’s routes extend to Durham and Chapel Hill, nopark-and-ride lots currently exist within these cities.These routes provide service for medicalappointments once a day, though the general publiccan ride with a reservation if space is available.Additionally, 403 of the addresses are located inCharlotte. Figures 4.7 and 4.8 show the proximity ofcommuter students and faculty and staff to PART’spark-and-ride lots.

As mentioned, many commuter students, faculty,and staff within walking distance of a bus stop(most likely a GTA, HEAT, or PART bus stop) also arewithin walking distance of the campus. Therefore,the most important aspect of the Spartan Chariotnetwork concerning the use of transit to travel toand from campus is its transit hub, which providesconnections to the HEAT and PART networks.

##

£¤421

£¤29£¤220

£¤70 £¤220

£¤220

§̈¦40

§̈¦85

InterstateUS HighwayState HighwaysOther Roads

GreensboroHigh PointJamestown

## UNCG Campus

UNCG Commuter StudentsGTA StopsGTA Routes

0.25 Mile Bus Stop Buffer0.5 Mile Bus Stop Buffer


Figure 4 .3 - GTA Transi t Buf fer Map wi th UNCG Commuter Students

I0 4Miles

##

£¤421

£¤29£¤220

£¤70 £¤220

£¤220

§̈¦40

§̈¦85



## UNCG Campus

UNCG Staff and FacultyGTA StopsGTA Routes



Figure 4.4 - GTA Transit Buffer Map wit h UNCG Staff and Facu lty

I0 4Miles

##

£¤29

£¤421

£¤220£¤70

£¤220

£¤220

§̈¦40

§̈¦85



## UNCG Campus

UNCG Commuter StudentsHEAT StopsHEAT Routes



Figure 4 .5 - HEAT Transi t Buf fer Map wi th UNCG C ommuter Students

I0 3Miles

##

£¤29

£¤421

£¤220£¤70

£¤220

£¤220

§̈¦40

§̈¦85



## UNCG Campus

UNCG Staff and FacultyHEAT StopsHEAT Routes



Figure 4.6 - HE AT Transit Buffer Map wit h UNCG Staff and Facu lty

I0 3Miles

##

£¤220

£¤158

£¤601

£¤64

£¤421

£¤70

£¤52

£¤501

£¤21

£¤15

£¤29

£¤311

£¤1

£¤74

£¤220

£¤158

£¤15

£¤70

£¤311

£¤21

£¤501

£¤220

£¤601

£¤29

£¤70£¤64

£¤70

£¤52

£¤601

£¤15

£¤29

§̈¦77§̈¦40

§̈¦220

§̈¦40

InterstateUS Highway

## UNCG Campus

UNCG Commuter StudentsPART RoutesPART Park & Ride Lots

5 Mile Park and Ride Lot Buffer10 Mile Park and Ride Lot Buffer


Figure 4 .7 - PART Transi t Buf fer Map wi th UNCG Commuter Students

I0 30Miles

##

£¤220

£¤158

£¤601

£¤64

£¤421

£¤70

£¤52

£¤501

£¤21

£¤15

£¤29

£¤311

£¤1

£¤74

£¤220

£¤158

£¤15

£¤70

£¤311

£¤21

£¤501

£¤220

£¤601

£¤29

£¤70£¤64

£¤70

£¤52

£¤601

£¤15

£¤29

§̈¦77§̈¦40

§̈¦220

§̈¦40

InterstateUS Highway

## UNCG Campus

UNCG Staff and FacultyPART RoutesPART Park & Ride Lots

5 Mile Park and Ride Lot Buffer10 Mile Park and Ride Lot Buffer


Figure 4.8 - PA RT Transit Buffer Map wit h UNCG Staff and Facu lty

I0 30Miles

4-17


Final Report

Campus Community Perception

SurveysThe perceptionof transit haschanged overthe last severalyears. InAugust 2008,the Universityinitiated a campus transit survey and responseswere gathered directly from riders on the bus aswell as online. The survey provided insight intoridership trends, experiences, and desires for newservice. The 2008 survey revealed 80% ofrespondents were very satisfied or somewhatsatisfied with park-and-ride service andapproximately 86% wait 15 minutes or less for ashuttle. More than 88% of respondents stated theywere very satisfied or somewhat satisfied with theSpartan Chariot and approximately 75% wait 15minutes or less for a bus. Comments andsuggestions from the 2008 survey revealed a desirefor longer service hours and more convenient stops.

As mentioned in previous chapters, a non-scientificweb-based survey was distributed via email tofaculty, staff, and students to gather feedbackspecific to the Update. Due to discrepanciesbetween the sample collected through the onlinesurvey and observed behaviors, the frequency ofalternative mode use revealed in the survey is inquestion. However, some responses appear tomirror observed behaviors. When asked to ratetransit service, 60% of the respondents rated transitas “excellent” or “good.” Based on the survey, thecampus community also was very receptive totransit. Faster routes (times similar to driving) andbus stops closer to destinations were identified asimprovements most likely to increase transit use.

Campus Open HouseResults of the survey were confirmed duringdiscussions at the Campus Open House.Convenience is the key to increasing transitridership. In general, the majority of UNCG faculty,

staff, and students would increase their use oftransit with:

More stops near popular destinations

Decreased headways (increased frequency)

Shortened routes (quicker to destination)

Lower cost

The Open House also enabled the project team todiscuss preliminary recommendations with currentand potential riders. Specific comments from thesediscussions were evaluated for incorporation in theplan. General comments included the need forsimplified schedules and the need for continuedcoordination among service providers.

RecommendationsDaily activities on campus require some form ofpersonal mobility. The level of mobility afforded tofaculty, staff, and students at UNCG is improving.Good—not just adequate—public transportationcloses a gap in a sustainable transportation system.The vision continues to be that publictransportation is a travel mode of choice for agreater portion of the campus population and thatthose traveling to campus become less reliant onprivate vehicles. For this to become a reality, theUniversity understands the impact that campusexpansion (particularly Spartan Village) will have onfuture transit service. The recommendations thatfollow focus on expanding service to accommodatethe physical growth of the campus. The Universityalso understands the critical role partnerships withlocal transit agencies and other universitiescontinue to play in the delivery of service. TheUpdate does not make recommendations to thetransit service provided by other agencies.

Spartan Chariot Express/Spartan VillageThe core component of the transit concept is theimplementation of the Spartan Chariot Express routeslated to begin service in Fall 2013. The Expressservice will transport faculty, staff, and studentsbetween main campus and Spartan Village. Figure4.9 illustrates the proposed route. The transit

4-18


Final Report

concept includes the following considerations andrecommendations:

The existing Spartan Chariot route remainsunchanged in terms of route and stops.

The Spartan Chariot should stop at theparking lot scheduled to open in Fall 2012near the corner of Silver Avenue and UnionStreet.The Quad Fountain bus stop currently outof service due to the ongoing renovation ofthe Quad should be restored onceconstruction is complete.

The Spartan Chariot Express shouldsupplement the existing Spartan Chariotroute by providing counter-clockwisecirculation with fewer stops.

Initially, the Spartan Chariot Express shouldinclude stops at Walker Avenue Circle,Spartan Village (Phase 1 housing), TateStreet at Oakland Avenue, Carr Street nearthe Sullivan Science Building, and McIverStreet near the School of Music.

To supplement connectivity betweenSpartan Village and locations served byGTA, HEAT, and PART, a second transit hubis recommended at Lee Street andGlenwood Avenue (a recommendation thatalso appears in the 2007 Campus MasterPlan). This location includes bus pullouts,both eastbound and westbound. It alsoprovides convenient access to a future railstation and the main campus via thePedestrian Underpass. The Transit Hub isrecommended as an enhanced bus stopwith shelters that will serve the SpartanChariot, Spartan Chariot Express, HEAT,GTA, and PART.

An additional stop should be provided inthe Transit Hub at Lee Street and GlenwoodAvenue when Phase 2 of the Spartan Villageopens in 2015.

Bus pullout locations should be provided onLee Street as part of the redesign of thecorridor. Pullouts are recommended justprior to the Glenwood Avenue intersectionfor both eastbound and westbounddirections. These locations are in proximityof the Pedestrian Underpass, and ridersdestined for Spartan Village can disembarkthe Spartan Chariot Express without havingto cross Lee Street.

The University should conduct additionalstudy of bus stops to account for continuedtransit growth over time.

Other RecommendationsThe University should work with the City ofGreensboro and the developmentcommunity to encourage residential infilldevelopment for student housing within theexisting HEAT 73 route. (Note: Privatedevelopers built student apartments westof Holden Road beyond the HEAT 73 route.Student residents have access to GTA 1fare-free in addition to private shuttlesprovided by the property owners.)

Direct PART service should be provided tocampus from the PART Regional Hub on NC68. In the interim, riders should beencouraged to transfer at Four Seasons toavoid having to go downtown to the Depotand backtrack to the University.

Service to the Millennial Campuses isrecommended as a long-term option asdevelopment occurs.

Partner with the Computer Sciencedepartment to conduct a design contest fora smartphone transit vehicle locatorapplication.

Partner with PART to maximize park-and-ride options for out-of-town faculty, staff,and students

4-19


Final Report

Figure 4.9 Transit Concept

4-20


Final Report

Summary of RecommendationsThe UNCG Transportation Master Plan Update includes thefollowing recommendations:

Spartan Chariot Express/Spartan VillageMaintain the existing Spartan Chariot route.Add a Spartan Chariot stop at the Silver Avenue/UnionStreet parking lot in Fall 2012.Restore service at the Quad Fountain bus stop whenrenovations of the Quad are complete.Launch the Spartan Chariot Express in Fall 2013 as acounter-clockwise circulator route with limited stops.Create a transit hub in Spartan Village at theintersection of Lee Street and Glenwood Avenue withbus pullouts and shelters.Add stops for the Spartan Chariot and Spartan ChariotExpress route at the new transit hub.Voice support for the bus pullout locations on LeeStreet and encourage implementation as part of theredesign of the corridor.

Other RecommendationsWork with the City of Greensboro and developmentcommunity to encourage residential infill developmentfor student housing within the existing HEAT 73 route.

Educate/encourage PART riders to transfer at FourSeasons to avoid having to go downtown to the Depotand backtrack to the University.

Support direct service to campus by PART from thePART Regional Hub on NC 68.

Evaluate potential service to the Millennial Campuses asa long-term option as development occurs.

Partner with the Computer Science department toconduct a design contest for a smartphone transitvehicle locator application

Partner with PART to maximize park-and-ride optionsfor out-of-town faculty, staff, and students.

Develop partnership between UNCG Center forGeographic Information Science, GTA, and PART toutilize Google Transit for sharing bus information withriders.

ConclusionTransit is vital to a healthy and sustainablecampus—now and in the future. The focusof the Transit Element is to promote transitas a safe, convenient, and dependable formof transportation with connectionsthroughout Greensboro and the Triad. Thischapter took shape with the understandingthat solutions for transit extend beyondwhat typically is considered transit planning.Strategies presented in other elements ofthe Update will help solidify transit as aviable alternative for faculty, staff, andstudents regardless of their proximity tocampus. These strategies include:

Maintaining a consistent bicycle andpedestrian network that allowsriders to safely move between busstops and their final destination.

Ensuring that campus expansionsupports existing and future transitservice.

Blending transit improvements witha coordinated travel demandmanagement plan.

The addition of Spartan Village requiresexpansion of the transit system. Perhapsmore so than any other element of theUpdate, transit has flourished since the 2006plan. For growth to continue and for serviceto be extended to the village, the Universityand its local partners must maintain acommitment to progressive planning andconstantly assess service delivery even asthey actively seek innovative fundingsources for short- and long-terminvestments.

CHAPTER 5PARKING & TRAVEL DEMAND MANAGEMENT


November 2012

The University of North Carolina at Greensboro islocated within the street grid network ofGreensboro just west of downtown. While the gridnetwork makes it easier to integrate bicycling,walking, and riding transit into the fabric of thetransportation network, it also limits the ability toprovide large-scale improvements to the roadwaynetwork. Within the last decade, improvements toSpring Garden Street on campus have created asignificant amenity for the campus community.However, these improvements have done little tolimit the east-west through traffic on campus.Diverting some through trips to Lee Street is a validobjective for the University.

The previous chapters have shown the University ofNorth Carolina at Greensboro TransportationMaster Plan Update is focusing on multimodalstrategies for campus access. Other elements of theplan have addressed hotspot conflicts betweenpedestrians, cyclists, and vehicles. The Parking andTravel Demand Management chapter describesparking supply, demand, and allocation on campusin the context of future growth and describes aseries of travel demand management strategiesthat will further reduce parking demand.

Vehicular Access & ParkingA discussion of vehicle access requires anunderstanding of the local roadway network. Howvehicles access UNCG is related to the type offacilities that surround and bisect campus. Thefunctional classification of streets near campusprovides the necessary framework to evaluatevehicular access.

Vehicular Access & Parking FrameworkThe classification of streets into “functional”categories aids in communication among policymakers, planners, engineers, and citizens. In acampus environment, it defines the street in termsof roadway design, operations, and character anddesignates the type of traffic the street is intendedto serve. Figure 5.1 shows the classification ofstreets in the UNCG network as well as thesurrounding roadway network. Classificationsinclude major and minor thoroughfares, campusconnectors, and service roads.

Two considerations for distinguishing thoroughfaresfrom campus connectors are access and mobility.Thoroughfares promote mobility by limiting accesspoints (intersections and driveways). Too muchmobility at high speeds limits access by pedestriansand bicyclists, which is an existing problem onAycock Street. The thoroughfare is designed tocarry more traffic than generated within its corridor(i.e., higher speeds, higher volumes, and longerdistances). Campus connectors provide access andserve University patrons, neighborhood residents,and merchants as they reach their destination.These streets should be low speed, low volumefacilities designed for short distances and are notintended for use by through traffic.

Once on campus, motorists need appropriate,reliable, and (to some extent) convenient places topark. Understanding and accommodating this needis accomplished by balancing parking demand(based on land uses) with parking supply (thenumber and location of parking provided).

5-2

Parking & Travel Demand ManagementTransportation Master Plan Update

Final Report

Figure 5.1 Vehicular Access

5-3


Final Report

Existing Conditions – Vehicular AccessThe size and scale of development on campusaffects vehicular access and parking. The UNCGcampus currently contains multiple building usetypes, including instruction, student services,academic support, institutional support,athletics/recreation, housing, and operations andmaintenance. The total gross square footage ofeach of the building use types on campus is shownin Table 5.1.

Table 5.1 – Existing Building Gross Square FootageBuilding Use Type Gross Square Footage

Instruction 2,101,279

Student Services 445,482

Academic Support 237,955

Institutional Support 180,805

Athletics/Recreation 85,988

Housing 2,388,637

Operations & Maintenance 79,873

Total 5,517,019

An in-depth understanding of existing conditionsand previous planning efforts provides a foundationto support recommendations. UNCG is bordered onthe west by Aycock Street, on the south by LeeStreet, on the east by Tate Street, and on the northby West Market Street. These streets are describedbelow in terms of functional classification. Theclassification of streets into “functional” categoriesaids in communication among policy makers,planners, engineers, and citizens. Majorthoroughfares serve medium- to long-distancetravel and connect minor thoroughfares andcampus connectors to other higher-level facilities.Minor thoroughfares primarily serve local travel andconnect to major thoroughfares and other minorthoroughfares.

West Market Street is a four-lane median-divided major thoroughfare that connectsdowntown Greensboro with neighborhoods tothe west. It is a regionally significant corridor.West Market Street can be a barrier tobicyclists.

Aycock Street is a five-lane undivided majorthoroughfare that runs north-south along thewestern edge of campus. Aycock Streetseparates UNCG from the College Parkneighborhood and numerous faculty, staff, andstudent residences. Pedestrian crossings atsignals and mid-block create safety problemsalong Aycock Street, as described in Chapter 3.

Lee Street is a five-lane undivided majorthoroughfare. Lee Street is a regionallysignificant corridor that connects DowntownGreensboro with the University, theentertainment district surrounding theGreensboro Coliseum, and I-40. While LeeStreet currently is the southern border ofcampus, expansion plans will make this streetan east-west connector internal to the campus.

Tate Street is a two-lane minor thoroughfareon the eastern edge of campus that servesnorth-south neighborhood and campus trafficaccessing Lee Street or Market Street.

While these streets primarily provide access tocampus, they also serve the role of accommodatingthrough traffic in the Greensboro area.Modifications to these streets must balance theneeds of UNCG with those of the City of Greensboroand surrounding neighborhoods.

Previous Planning Efforts2006 University of North Carolina at GreensboroCampus Transportation PlanThe 2006 UNCG Campus Transportation Planestablished a vision for the campus transportationnetwork and offered a set of recommendations toaddress the existing and future needs of the UNCGcampus. Heavy emphasis was placed on parkingneeds based on campus growth. See the inset forrecommendations and progress specific to parking.

2007 University of North Carolina at GreensboroCampus Master Plan UpdateThe UNCG Campus Master Plan Update takes along-term approach to campus development. Whilethe focus is on land use and the built environment,the plan addresses vehicular access, service access,

5-4


Final Report

Progress on the 2006 UNCG Campus Transportation Plan ParkingRecommendations of the 2006 Campus Transportation Plan (Section 9.3) included the following.

Construct no further standalone parking structures beyond those currently under construction.

o UPDATE: No new parking structures have been constructed.

Provide 700 additional spaces on top of the parking supply forecast for 2008 to offset parking lost tobuilding construction. These spaces could be provided at the parcels between Lee Street and the railroad(high priority) or one on-campus deck (low priority).

o UPDATE: Additional parking supply has been provided at the following locations: 915 Northridge(150 spaces), 1200 West Lee Street (220 spaces), 1410 West Lee Street (in design), and SpartanVillage (in design). The 2012 Update includes revised projections of parking supply needs.

Maintain the current system for allocating permits and spaces in individual lots.

o UPDATE: This recommendation has been implemented.

If alternatives alone are not attractive enough to keep parking demand below supply by restricting thefollowing groups or combination of groups: People living near campus; Freshmen; and On-campusstudents.

o UPDATE: No restrictions are currently in effect, though supply is sufficient to meet demand.

and parking and seeks to limit conflicts betweenmotorists and bicyclists/pedestrians.

Greensboro Urban Area Metropolitan PlanningOrganization 2035 Long Range Transportation PlanThe Greensboro Urban Area Metropolitan PlanningOrganization (MPO) 2035 Long RangeTransportation Plan (LRTP) outlines plans forhighway improvements through 2035. In this plan,the railroad underpass at Aycock Street is slated forreplacement in 2025. Although this is later than theplanning horizon for this Update, the replacementof this underpass will provide a critical upgrade toAycock Street that not only will improve accessaround UNCG but also improve the connectionbetween the existing UNCG campus and SpartanVillage. The LRTP also mentions the railroad gradeseparation at Tate Street. Improvements at thislocation would provide many of the same benefitsas the proposed improvements at the Aycock Streetrailroad underpass.

As part of the Greensboro Urban Area (MPO)Comprehensive Transportation Plan, Lee Street andAycock Street near UNCG are identified as needingimprovement, but the plan lacks detailedrecommendations. Suggestions from this Updateshould be taken into consideration in the futurewhen improvements are made to these corridors.

Existing Conditions – ParkingParking Supply and OccupancyThe majority of the parking supply on campus isprovided in 68 surface parking lots and fourstructured parking facilities. In addition, parking isavailable in on-street parking areas and remote, off-campus park-and-ride lots. The largest structuredparking facility is the Oakland Avenue Deck (974spaces) and the largest of the surface parkingfacilities is the remote park-and-ride lot located at1720 West Lee Street (1,048 spaces).

From August 22 through August 25, 2011, UNCGcollected occupancy data at several surface parkingand structured parking facilities. Data was collectedeach day on the hour from 8:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m.and was compared to surface and structuredparking capacities. The average results of theoccupancy survey were used to determine theexisting parking conditions on campus. The resultsof this survey are shown in Table 5.2.

A parking system is considered at capacity whenoccupancy is no more than 90% of capacity. The10% excess supply keeps the time required to find aparking space within reason and promotes aperception of adequate parking. When parkingoccupancy exceeds these levels, there may be

5-5


Final Report

Table 5.2 – Existing Parking Occupancy (% of spaces occupied)1

Parking Facility Capacity

Occupancy

8:00am 9:00 am 10:00 am 11:00 am 12:00pm 1:00pm 2:00pm

Lot 1A 64 0% 2% 5% 11% 11% 9% 9%

Lot 1C 42 2% 2% 2% 5% 2% 5% 5%

Lot 1 144 17% 17% 35% 42% 57% 55% 51%

Lot 2 47 30% 47% 98% 98% 96% 98% 94%

Lot 3 North 41 59% 80% 100% 98% 100% 98% 93%

Lot 3 South 61 66% 90% 100% 100% 100% 97% 95%

Lot 4 89 66% 99% 100% 100% 99% 97% 94%

Lot 7 North 142 82% 99% 100% 99% 99% 98% 99%

Lot 7 South 332 12% 59% 100% 100% 97% 95% 93%

Lot 8 North 97 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

Lot 8 South 182 60% 88% 100% 100% 99% 99% 99%

Lot 9 North 253 94% 99% 100% 100% 100% 99% 99%

Lot 9 South 156 38% 45% 63% 75% 76% 75% 72%

Park-and-Ride 1,048 17% 38% 57% 71% 71% 67% 66%

Spring Garden 198 69% 71% 69% 70% 69% 70% 69%

Walker Deck 796 33% 66% 84% 93% 93% 93% 92%

Oakland Deck 974 27% 55% 77% 87% 87% 85% 88%

McIver Deck 651 34% 65% 83% 88% 87% 86% 84%

Total 5,317 36% 60% 77% 84% 84% 83% 82%

delays and frustration in finding a space, andpatrons may be forced to use a space that is too farfrom their destination or does not offer acomfortable walking environment. This margin alsoallows for: 1) the activity of vehicles moving in andout of parking stalls during busy periods; 2) surgesin short-term parking activity; and 3) the temporaryloss of spaces due to improperly parked vehicles,weather conditions, construction activity, etc.

Throughout much of the observation period,parking on campus exceeded 85% occupancy. Thislevel indicates that a patron may not be able to finda parking space within a reasonable amount oftime. The larger parking facilities (parking decks andpark-and-ride lots) did not exceed 85% occupancyuntil closer to mid-day. As an aggregate, parkingoccupancy met or exceeded 85% occupancy at11:00 a.m. and 12:00 p.m. The Appendix includes a

series of figures that represent parking demand oncampus at the times occupancy data was collected.

Since 2005, UNCG’s parking occupancy has droppedfrom 95% to 86% during a time of significantenrollment growth. Despite limited availability ofconvenient parking in the central area of campus,access is well balanced with existing parkingfacilities (lots and decks) and transportationservices. The Oakland Avenue Parking Deck, Park &Ride, Spartan Village (under construction), andother perimeter/remote lots can meet projecteddemand for parking through 2018.

Parking DemandStudent enrollment and university employment arethe main predictors of parking demand in a campusenvironment. To estimate future demand forparking, enrollment projections for the five-year

5-6


Final Report

period for academic years 2011-12 through 2015-16were obtained from the University. Theseprojections, which are shown in Table 5.3, showvery little projected growth in enrollment over thenext five years. (Prior to 2009, the University ofNorth Carolina System provided long-rangeenrollment projections for each memberinstitutions. However, the system no longerprovides these projections.)

The University desires a longer-range projection ofparking needs for planning purposes. (It should benoted that the timeframe to program, design, andconstruct a structured parking facility typically cantake five years.) Enrollment data from the UNCGOffice of Institutional Research was reviewed tocreate a “low” and “high” long-term growthscenario. Five-year enrollment trends werecalculated from 1990 to 2010, and growth rateshave varied significantly during the history of theUniversity.

During the lowest five-year period (from 1995to 2000) campus enrollment increased only0.7%.

During the highest five-year period (from 2000to 2005) enrollment increased approximately26%.

“Low” and “high” growth scenarios were developedfor 2015-16 through 2025-26. Projections providedfor the next five years show a five-year growth rateof 1.4%. Using this information, five-year growthrates of 1% (or approximately .199% annually) forthe “low” scenario and 10% (or approximately1.924% annually) for the “high” scenario werearbitrarily selected.

Past projections of parking demand estimated thenumber of faculty and staff as a percentage ofenrollment. According to 2011 data, staffencompassed approximately 19% of the campuspopulation of 20,500. For the purposes of projectingfuture campus population and demand, thispercentage was used.

Historic information was used to calculate parkingdemand. The 2006 UNCG Transportation MasterPlan estimated parking demand at 33.84 spaces forevery 100 members of the campus population.However, Travel Demand Management (TDM)measures implemented by the University since the2006 plan have significantly reduced the demandfor parking on campus. Demand for parking permitshas dropped approximately 21%. To approximatethe current parking demand, the 2011 observedparking demand (4,343 vehicles as determined byoccupancy counts conducted by UNCG staff) wasdivided by the number of faculty, staff, andstudents on campus. This calculation estimates thecurrent parking demand at 21.18 spaces for every100 members of the campus population. Thisnumber was used to project future parking demand.

The parking demand as a percent of total campuspopulation for “low” and “high” growth scenarios isshown in Table 5.3. Assuming demand for parkingremains consistent (i.e. demand neither increasesnor decreases compared to the observed 2011data), additional parking is not needed until afterthe planninghorizon in the“low” growthscenario. Withthe sameassumptions inthe “high” growthscenario,additional parkingwould be neededin year 2018.

5-7


Final Report

Table 5.3 – Growth Scenarios and Parking Demand2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025

Student Enrollment1

17,152 17,216 17,258 17,310 17,393

Low Scenario2 17,428 17,463 17,498 17,533 17,568 17,603 17,638 17,673 17,708 17,743

High Scenario3 17,728 18,069 18,417 18,771 19,132 19,500 19,875 20,257 20,647 21,044

Faculty/Staff4

3,314 3,326 3,334 3,345 3,361

Low Scenario 3,367 3,374 3,381 3,388 3,394 3,401 3,408 3,415 3,421 3,428

High Scenario 3,425 3,491 3,558 3,627 3,697 3,768 3,840 3,914 3,989 4,066

Total Campus Population

20,466 20,542 20,592 20,655 20,754

Low Scenario 20,795 20,837 20,879 20,921 20,962 21,004 21,046 21,088 21,129 21,171

High Scenario 21,153 21,560 21,975 22,398 22,829 23,268 23,715 24,171 24,636 25,110

Parking Demand

4,343 4,359 4,370 4,383 4,404

Low Scenario 4,413 4,422 4,431 4,440 4,448 4,457 4,466 4,475 4,484 4,493

High Scenario 4,489 4,575 4,663 4,753 4,844 4,938 5,032 5,129 5,228 5,3281 Enrollment projections (headcount) for 2011 through 2015 were provided by UNCG.2 Low growth scenario assumes 1% increase per five-year interval between 2016 and 2025.3 High growth scenario assumes 10% increase per five-year interval between 2016 and 2025.4 Faculty and staff projections are estimated to be equal to 19% of enrollment based on 2011 actual percentage.

Spartan Village ParkingParking scenarios were developed for the UNCG Transportation Master Plan Update based on the phasedbuildout of Spartan Village, which includes several building use types such as institutional support,athletics/recreation, and housing. Additional parking also is included in each phase: Mixed-Use Village –Phase 1 (772 spaces), New Police Station (68 spaces), New Recreation Center (150 spaces), and Mixed-UseVillage – Phase 2 (768 spaces).

The different uses and expected parking supply form the basis for future parking demand calculations. Usingproposed square footages, along with parking demand generation ratios calibrated to the UNCG campus, andtime of day parking distribution, future parking demand was projected for each scenario. A parking modeldeveloped to predict parking demands included the ability to measure shared parking among zones and toaccount for parking reduction as motorists switch to other modes. Based on the model results, the UNCGcampus as a whole is expected to remain below its actual capacity for each scenario. While local zonaldeficits occur for some zones after sharing surplus, the campus as a whole is projected to consistently haveparking occupancies between 82% and 87%. Based on these outcomes, no additional parking capacity isrecommended for the main campus in the planning horizon and the anticipated parking supply currentlydesigned in Spartan Village is sufficient. See the Appendix for more information.

5-8


Final Report

RecommendationsThe recommendations that follow are based on theanalysis of parking supply and demand and campuspopulation projections.

Parking PermitsMarketing—The University’s travel demandmanagement initiatives have been very successfuland significantly increased transit ridership,bicycling, and walking. However, balance isimportant in all systems. According to the surveyconducted for this plan, parking is perceived to bein short supply when in actuality nearly 2,000 fewerpermits were sold compared to five years ago. Mostlikely, the parking “problem” on campus is merely aperception expressed by the sample of surveysreceived. A marketing program that makes staff andstudents aware of the availability of parking andtransit options may improve this perception. It isrecommended that UNCG enhance marketingefforts for parking permits, especially theavailability of permits in the garages.

Parking Rate Study—The existing parking ratestructure and policies do not properly influenceparking behavior. For example, 2-hour free on-street parking is available behind the WalkerAvenue deck on the west side of Kenliworth Street.The hourly rate to park in the deck is $2 for the firsthour and $1 for subsequent hours. User demand forsurface and on-street parking (due to itsconvenience) typically exceeds the demand forgarage parking. Many agencies price surface parkingat a higher rate than garage parking to fosterdemand for garage parking. Another example is themetered parking located near the McIver deck. Therate for this parking is $1 hour, while the rate forparking within the deck is $2 hour.

It is recommended that UNCG initiate a parking ratestudy that evaluates permit rates, hourly rates, andmeter rates. The rate study should review thefeasibility of replacing existing mechanical meterswith pay-on-foot pay stations that accept creditcards. (Agencies that have implemented paystations that accept credit cards have reportedincreases in revenue of up to 30% per meter.) The

study also should review the location of the existingparking meters and recommend potential removaland installation of fee based, short-term parking.

The current permit structure divides permits intofour broad categories: On campus deck ($445/year),on campus surface ($302/year), Park-and-Ride($175/year) and the Northridge employee($30/year). The differential in fee between oncampus parking permits ($302 to $445) whencompared to the park-and-ride permit for the 1200West Lee Street Lot ($175) seems appropriate.However, the fee for the Northridge lot seems lowwhen compared to other parking facilities. Thestudy also could explore pricing central campusparking (Walker Avenue Parking Deck) higher thanperimeter parking (Oakland Avenue Parking Deck).

Online Permit Sales and License Plate Recognition—Universities such as the University of Maryland,Texas Tech, and BYU have implemented online saleof parking permits that use the vehicle licenseplates as the unique vehicle identifier. This systemeliminates student wait times as well as the needfor parking permits. Parking enforcement occursusing mobile license plate recognition systems(LPR). Enforcement personnel use scanners tocompare the license plate with the registereddatabase of paid permit users. Some Universitieshave reported cost savings of up to $100,000 byeliminating the need to print parking permits. It isrecommended that UNCG implement online permitsales with license plate recognition.

(For more information on LPR enforcement and on-line permits, see the link below to frequently askedquestions (FAQ) from the University of MarylandDepartment of Transportation.)

www.transportation.umd.edu/images/parking/PDFs/CLPR%20FAQ%20Fall.pdf

http://www.transportation.umd.edu/images/parking/PDFs

5-9


Final Report

Permit Oversell—Many Universities oversellparking permits (typically by 5 to 10% of thefacility’s capacity) to account for the fact that notevery user is on campus at the same time.Contingency plans are developed for rare instanceswhere the facility is full (such as during an event)and parking patrons are directed to another lot.Based on information provided, it does not appearthat UNCG currently oversells permits. In fact, theUniversity is underselling parking permits in thegarages. It is recommended that the University offerfor sale a number of permits equal to the capacity ofthe Oakland Avenue and McIver Street ParkingDecks on a trial basis. This recommendation shouldoccur through gradual incremental increases. If staffdoes not purchase all permits offered, more permitsshould be available for sale to students.

Parking Permit Fee Increase—An outcome of therecommended parking rate study should be a five-year plan that recommends changes in the parkingfee structure. If refinancing the existing garage debtis feasible, increases in parking permits may beavoidable. However, the continuing drop in demandfor parking permits needs to be monitored toassure adequate revenue is collected to cover theexisting debt obligation. It is recommended that theUniversity monitor permit sales and evaluateparking permit increases. Future changes in parkingfees should be implemented over differentacademic years (e.g. increase permit prices one yearand hourly rates the next year).

Spartan Village ParkingOver the next five years, initial development of theSpartan Village will occur. Prior to the initiation ofSpartan Village, approximately 200 on-streetparking spaces were located in the Village planningarea (roughly the area bounded by Lee Street onthe north, Silver Street on the east, Haywood Streeton the south and Aycock Street on the west). As thisarea transitions from a residential community to acollege campus, issues associated with parking likelywill arise. As an example, the first phase of theSpartan Village will add approximately 800 beds ofhousing near Union Avenue and Highland Street.

In the absence of a plan of action, students who livein this housing would park on street to avoid permitfees, which in turn would affect parking in theexisting neighborhood. In addition, a plan for on-street parking on Lee Street within the SpartanVillage is necessary to guide future development onthat corridor.

Spartan VillageOn-street parking control in the Spartan Village canbe placed into three classifications: 1) No ParkingZones, 2) Residential Parking Permit Zones, and 3)On-Street Time-Limited Parking Zones. Thelocations of these zones are shown in Figure 5.2.

No Parking Zones—On-street parking in SpartanVillage should be prohibited near streetintersections, driveways, or areas where the streetis not wide enough to accommodate travel lanesand on-street parking. It is recommended that on-street parking in Spartan Village be prohibited onthe north side of Lee Street and on portions ofAycock Street.

Residential Parking Permit Zones—The Universityand City of Greensboro previously worked togetherto implement a residential parking permit programin the College Hill area east of UNCG. In thisprogram, residents apply to the City to receive aresidential parking permit that allows them to parkon street without being subject to the posted timelimitations. Vehicles that do not display theseparking permits are limited to the posted timerestriction (typically two hours).

It is recommended that prior to the completion ofthe first phase of Spartan Village, the University andCity work with the Glenwood neighborhood toimplement a similar residential parking permitprogram. Residential parking permits should beimplemented for areas within the Glenwoodneighborhood where students may perceive long-term on-street parking to be convenient. Initially,the residential parking permit program shouldinclude all of the south side of Haywood Street andportions of the side streets (Highland Street,Lexington Avenue, and Glenwood Avenue) thatremain private property.

5-10


Final Report

On-Street Time-Limited Parking Zones—On-streetparking should be encouraged but controlled andmanaged for other portions of Spartan Village,particularly around the proposed housing, retailareas, and recreation center. On the main campus,a combination of time-limited parking zones(typically two hours) and meter-controlled spacesare used where on-street parking exists. It isrecommended the University consider theimplementation of parking pay stations to assist inparking management in Spartan Village. Paystations that accept credit card payment arestrongly suggested.

Varying time limits should be considered for thedifferent parts of Spartan Village. For example, theon-street parking near the proposed retail shouldbe limited to one hour while the limits on NealStreet, Glenwood Avenue, and Union Avenue maybe as long as four hours. To maximize theeffectiveness of the on-street parking program, it isrecommended the parking restrictions be enforcedfrom 8:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. Whether or not to allowovernight on-street parking on Union Avenue isanother issue for consideration.

It is recommended that the University seekauthorization from the City of Greensboro toenforce the time-limited parking zones identified inthis section in the areas near Spartan Village.

Figure 5.2 Spartan Village Parking Enforcement Zones

5-11


Final Report

Travel Demand ManagementThe University of North Carolina at Greensboro hasmade a commitment to providing a range ofattractive transportation options for its students,faculty, staff, and visitors. The Planning Themesdiscussed in Chapter 1 put this commitment into aneven larger context by highlighting the connectionsto sustainability and livability. A range of viabletransportation choices makes a campus morelivable. Transportation options such as bicycling,walking, and transit promote the sustainability ofthe campus by reducing dependence on cars.

Travel demand management (TDM) strategies areanother critical element in the creation of asustainable and livable environment. TDMstrategies offer a set of physical improvements,programs, and policies designed to reducecongestion on and near campus and to providealternatives to driving alone. A combination ofincentives and disincentives can encouragebehavior changes for commuters, such as travelingduring less congested times or taking an alternativemode to work. In addition to reducing congestion,TDM actions reduce costs associated with using andmaintaining personal automobiles, increasemobility and choice, conserve energy, and improveair and water quality.

TDM recommendations are based on feedbackreceived through community outreach, discussionswith the Advisory Committee, and a review of bestpractices. This chapter begins with a discussion ofthese best practices and strategies and concludeswith a set of recommended alternatives for theUNCG area.

OverviewTravel Demand Management (TDM) aims to achieveefficient use of the transportation network throughchanges in travel patterns (e.g. shifting fromautomobile to non-automobile modes, from single-occupant vehicles to higher occupancy vehicles, andfrom peak-hour travel to off-peak travel). In otherwords, TDM measures change travel behavior (how,when, and where people travel). Strategies tied to aTDM plan focus on the demand side (behaviorchanges) rather than the supply side (infrastructureimprovements).

Objectives of typical TDM strategies include:

1) improving multimodal transportationoptions;

2) providing incentives to change travel mode,time, or destination;

3) improving land use accessibility; and

4) reforming transportation policies andprograms to provide funding for TDM.

Congestion and parking demand can be reduced byincreasing campus awareness of travel choices andby changing the travel habits of staff or students. Asthe University has seen in the last few years,changes in when and how the campus populationtravels to campus can significantly reduce demandfor parking and spread traffic more evenlythroughout the day.

5-12


Final Report

Progress on the 2006 UNCG Campus Transportation Plan Travel Demand ManagementRecommendations of the 2006 Campus Transportation Plan (Section 8.4) included the following.

Extend hours of operation of existing park-and-ride lot to 10:00 p.m. with shuttle service provided on 20- to30-minute headways after 7:00 p.m.

o UPDATE: The Park & Ride shuttle operates 7:00 a.m.to 10:00 p.m. Monday-Thursday and 7:00a.m. to 7:00 p.m. on Friday with 10-minute service before 5:00 p.m. and 15-minute service after.

Operate a new park-and-ride service from Four Seasons Mall and Friendly Shopping Center, if feasible.

o UPDATE: Service to Four Seasons Mall and Friendly Shopping Center is provided by HEAT.

Permits for this option should be as inexpensive as possible.

o UPDATE: Park & Ride permits are less expensive than A/B/C surface lot permits and deckpermits. HEAT is fare-free with a SpartanCard campus ID.

Develop a storage lot with a total of 500 spaces.

o UPDATE: The gated lot at 915 Northridge accommodates approximately 150 vehicles. The gatedlot at 1200 West Lee Street accommodates 220 vehicles.

Provide reserved parking for vanpools.

o UPDATE: The Parking Operations & Campus Access Management department collaborates withPART to promote vanpooling. Reserved parking is offered though no vanpools have formed yet.

Promote the Carpool Club ridematching service for carpoolers and vanpoolers.

o UPDATE: The original Carpool Club was upgraded to Zimride Fall 2010.

Provide reserved and preferred parking for carpoolers/vanpoolers.

o UPDATE: Preferential parking for carpoolers/vanpoolers is under consideration.

Identify or hire a transportation demand management coordinator to educate, promote, and adaptalternative modes to changing needs.

o UPDATE: This recommendation has been implemented.

Institute and promote a Commuter Incentive Program with incentives for those who pledge not to buy aparking permit, including parking vouchers, guaranteed ride home program, preferred parking forcarpoolers/vanpoolers, and use of Zipcars.

o UPDATE: The University has implemented a guaranteed ride home program (provided by PART)and Zipcars. Parking vouchers and preferred parking for carpoolers/vanpoolers is underconsideration.

Explore the opportunities for introducing a parking cash-out program and/or a flex-parking system.

o UPDATE: No cash out program or flex parking system has been implemented.

5-13


Final Report

TDM MeasuresRideshareRidesharing typicallyrefers to carpoolingand vanpooling,representing a directeffort to maximize the number of passengers ineach vehicle. Participation in ridesharing ismaximized when it provides flexibility andcommuters can choose to rideshare part-time (e.g.,two or three times per week). Class schedules thatvary throughout the week make it especiallyimportant for students to be able to rideshare part-time. Ridesharing options can be categorized intothe following alternatives:

Carpools typically use vehicles owned bythe users themselves.Vanpools are more suitable options forlonger commutes and typically use vanssupplied by employers, for-profit vanpoolcompanies, non-profit organizations, orgovernment agencies. Vanpools can be self-supporting by having operating expensescovered by the riders. Vanpools could be anattractive option to faculty, staff, orstudents living farther from campus whoare willing to adopt more regular departureand return times.Transit and shuttle services can providedirect transportation to campus or givethose who choose to carpool or vanpool ameans of moving between destinationsonce they arrive at their worksite. At UNCG,this includes a combination of services suchas the Spartan Chariot, HEAT, GTA, andPART. Park-and-ride services also providean option for individuals interested in ridingtransit who lack direct access to servicenear their residence. Existing and proposedtransit services are covered in more detailin Chapter 4.

An interesting dynamic of ridesharing, particularlyregarding carpooling and vanpooling, is how greateruse of the service directly provides greateropportunities for prospective riders to find

someone with similar commuting patterns (origin,destination, time, etc.). This iterative process tiesthe success of ridesharing to the marketing andeducation strategies used in its implementation.Zimride, a matching service used by UNCG, isdescribed in a subsequent section.

Bicycle and PedestrianThe transportation systems of vibrant universitycampuses such as UNCG include infrastructure forbicycles and pedestrians as well as methods fortravelers to conveniently switch modes. Thosecharged with TDM program implementation face avariety of issues related to bicycling and walking asdescribed in Chapter 3. Bicycle and pedestrianrecommendations under the TDM umbrella fallinclude ancillary facilities (e.g. bicycle parking andbicycle racks on buses); education, enforcement,and encouragement programs; and planning forbicycling and walking (especially coordinationbetween UNCG and local agencies).

Alternate Travel SchedulesAs described earlier in this chapter, UNCG seespeaks and valleys of traffic on campus and parkingdemand. However, congestion levels aroundcampus are influenced not only by the school itselfbut also by the traffic traveling into and out ofcentral Greensboro. When applied strategically,alternate work schedules balance the demand onthe transportation system. Alternate work scheduleoptions include compressed work week (e.g. nine-hour work days with one day off every other week),flexible work hours, staggered work hours (e.g.employees report and leave at 15- to 30-minuteinterval), and telecommuting.

Land Use and DevelopmentThe connection between transportation and land usehas been studied through numerous planning effortssuch as the 2007 Campus Master Plan Update. UNCGis actively pursuing a development and growthstrategy favoring compact centers that combinecomplementary land uses. Spartan Village is anexcellent example of this philosophy. Whenconsidered together, decisions and investmentsregarding all elements have a significant bearing on

5-14


Final Report

future development patterns on campus. The quantityand location of travel demand can be influenced byland use decisions, highlighting the factors (i.e., tripgeneration, trip length, and travel mode) thatinfluence transportation efficiency. As mentioned inChapter 4, the University should work with the City ofGreensboro and the development community toencourage infill residential development near campusfor students, faculty, and staff.

Marketing, Education, and ImplementationMarketing, education, and implementation speak tothe larger need for a continuous and inclusiveprocess—from plan development through initiationto evaluation. These strategies further defineconsumer needs and preferences, refine appropriateproducts and services, distribute information aboutproducts and services to existing and potential users,and promote their use. Marketing, education, andimplementation are critical components ofimplementing TDM strategies to reduce SOVs andminimize parking demand.

Planning ContextTravel demand management strategies are arecurring theme in the transportation plans andmaster plans developed recently by UNCG. TheUNCG Campus Master Plan Update promotes aconnected community with symbiotic land use andtransportation. Existing programs and facilities oncampus and in Greensboro establish a solidgroundwork for the continuation of TDM initiatives.

Existing TDM Programs and PoliciesUNCG’s commitment to sustainability has focusedattention on the benefits of travel demandmanagement, and resources and manpower areallocated to a Campus Access Managementprogram. Visitors to the UNCG website can findinformation about transit, bicycling, walking, andridesharing. Real-time updates also are providedthrough social media to alert potential users aboutopportunities or temporary issues. A variety oftravel demand management programs exist on oraround campus. Some of the most notableprograms are described below.

Spartan Chariot—The Spartan Chariotcirculates campus on weekdays andweekends to help the campus populationmove easily without having to use apersonal vehicle. Riders can track theposition of the bus along the route online inreal time. See Chapter 4.Park-and-Ride—A park-and-ride shuttleoperates on weekdays every 10 to 15minutes between the park-and-ride lot atthe Greensboro Coliseum Complex andthree designated campus locations (Lot 8,Forest Street, and Spring Garden Street).PART operates 27 park-and-ride lotsthroughout the Piedmont with express busservice to Downtown Greensboro. SeeChapter 4.Zipcar—Zipcars arrived at UNCG in 2010 toprovide students, staff, and faculty theability to reserve a car on campus for shorttrips. Zipcars are located off Gray Drive nearthe Gove Student Health Center.Zimride—The Zimride network allowsUNCG students, staff, and faculty to finddrivers and riders with similar travelpatterns for daily commute carpooling andoccasional ride sharing. A calendar featurewas added in 2012 enabling participants totrack their sustainable transportationactivities and earn points for prizes.Bicycle Sharing—Spartan Cycles bicyclesharing at UNCG began in 2010 and theprogram expanded to include bicyclerentals in 2011. Through a partnership withHealthy UNCG, participants can log bicycletravel miles to earn rewards. See Chapter 3.Emergency Ride Home—The UNCGEmergency Ride Home program providesparticipants with a reliable way home ondays they have chosen to use an alternativetransportation option. This system isdesigned to encourage use of bicycling,walking, transit, and ridesharing by providinga safety net if an emergency should arise.This is a free service provided to UNCGstudents, faculty, and staff by PART.

5-15


Final Report

Campus Community PerceptionA critical part of a successful TDM program ispromoting awareness of available services. Throughcommunity outreach for the Update, participatingfaculty, staff, and students were asked to providefeedback on the effectiveness of these programsand how they are publicized. Results of the surveysare summarized in the charts on the following page.

Survey respondents were asked if they were awareof available travel demand management options.Respondents indicated they had heard of the TDMoptions (more than 85% of respondents indicatedthey had heard of all the options listed), whichconfirms the success of program education efforts.Respondents who indicated they had tried theavailable services were significantly less. Theoptions with the fewest respondents participatingwere the emergency ride home service (whichrequires participation in other ridesharing options)and the Zipcar service (in which cost was identifiedas a limiting factor).

Respondents indicating they had not tried a servicewere then asked to discuss why they had notparticipated. The majority of these respondentsindicated they had no interest in the services beingoffered. Beyond this response, the need for accessto a car was stated as the primary reason for nottaking advantage of these services. The exception tothis finding was for the Zipcar program, where overa quarter of respondents indicated cost was theirbiggest deterrent from using the system.

Survey respondents also were asked if they wouldbe willing to pay a fee to rent a bicycle. Of the morethan 20% of respondents that said they might beinterested, approximately half indicated they wouldprefer a daily or weekly rental. On average,respondents would be willing to pay around $2.50per hour for a bike rental, $7.50 per day, and $20per week.

While the survey was not statistically valid nor a fullrepresentation of the campus community, theresults helped in evaluating trends.

Are you aware of the following transportation options?Have you tried them?

If you are aware but haven’t tried them, why not?

5-16


Final Report

RecommendationsUNCG’s commitment to providinga balanced transportation systemto students, faculty, and staff ledto its recognition as a BestWorkplace for Commuters by theNational Center for TransitResearch. The University of North Carolina atGreensboro has been proactive in pursuing andimplementing programs that further the objectivesof its travel demand management program. Withthis in mind, the TDM recommendations in theUpdate build upon existing programs and facilities.Figure 5.3 shows many of the existing and proposedamenities relating to travel demand managementon and around the UNCG campus.

Bicycle, Pedestrian, and TransitRecommendations in other chapters of the Updatedirectly relate to TDM principles. Recommendationsdescribed in other chapters relevant to traveldemand management include:

Bicycle sharing programs, including theSpartan Cycles initiative (Chapter 3), providebicycle travel opportunities to interestedparticipants with minimum cost or hassle.

Encouragement and education programs forbicycles and pedestrians facilitate the use ofnon-motorized travel onto and around campus(Chapter 3).

Park-and-ride shuttle service (Chapter 4)provides transit options to people who mightotherwise be limited by their distance fromtransit lines.

Additional recommendations include:

UNCG already has parking available for over1,000 bicycles. It is recommended that theUniversity construct additional bicycle racksadjacent to major destination points.

It is recommended that the University providebike stations at high traffic areas aroundcampus as indicated in Figure 3.6. UNCG hasadopted a progressive approach by includingadvanced bike storage facilities in the

construction of Spartan Village. Bicycle storageadvancement is also being leveraged for LEEDcertification points in new construction efforts.

It is recommended that the University add aZipcar location in Spartan Village (such as nearthe new Rec Center).

It is recommended that a new transit hub (buspullouts, benches, etc.) be located in SpartanVillage near the intersection of Lee Street andGlenwood Avenue. This transit hub wouldprovide a point for area transit services toserve users in the southern portion of thecampus.

To date, students have used TDM options at agreater rate than faculty and staff. Incentivesfor carpooling and vanpooling may encouragemore faculty and staff to participate. In Fall2012, a Carpool Club incentive program waslaunched. It is recommended that Universityprovide parking vouchers and preferredparking in the parking decks forcarpoolers/vanpoolers.

PART has expressed interest in conductingadditional outreach for the campus communityregarding the park-and-ride facilities itoperates. Meanwhile, the campus communityhas requested more direct PART service tocampus, especially from the PART RegionalHub on NC 68. It is recommended that theUniversity encourage PART to implement directservice to campus. Until then, riders should beencouraged to transfer at Four Seasons toavoid having to go downtown to the Depot andbacktrack to the University.

If the proposed commuter rail line throughGreensboro is implemented, the area aroundthe Pedestrian Underpass will be consideredfor a rail station. This location would providean easy connection to such amenities as theproposed transit hub, several bike stations,and the new Zipcar facility.

It is recommended that the University installpaid charging stations for alternative energyvehicles in each parking deck.

5-17


Final Report

Figure 5.3 Travel Demand Management

5-18


Final Report

Table 5.4 Permit Sales by Type by YearPermitType 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 5-year

change

A 743 741 743 691 690 -53

B 2,036 1,711 1,643 1,427 1,091 -945

C 2,015 1,873 1,653 1,699 1,363 -652

DE 140 121 91 88 119 -21

E 2,117 1,870 1,647 1,573 1,708 -409

EB 204 204

GR 57 55 49 45 45 -12

K 1,116 947 897 826 753 -363

KB 47 58 100 100

LB 197 46 46

M 493 432 536 475 463 -30

MB 37 39 77 77

RA 27 97 111 121 121

SGB 178 176 180 183 197 19

W 583 546 516 495 490 -93

WB 6 9 16 16

Total 9,478 8,499 8,142 7,916 7,483

Impact of TDM on ParkingEfforts to provide and encouragealternative ways to travel to campushave reduced parking demand sincethe 2006 plan.

Parking Demand and RevenueAnnual ridership of HEAT has grownsignificantly—more than 200%—since its inception in 2006 (see Table4.1 in Chapter 4). It is informative tocompare changes in transit ridershipto the sale of parking permitsbetween 2006 and 2011. The charton this page shows that while transitridership has increased more than200% since 2006, the number ofparking permits sold annually hasdropped by almost 2,000 permits.

As the chart indicates, the TravelDemand Management (TDM)measures undertaken by theUniversity have successfullyencouraged transit use butdecreased parking demand andrevenue. Assuming an averageannual permit fee of approximately$300, the 21% drop in parkingpermits means the parking systemlost an estimated $600,000 in annualrevenue in 2010-11 compared to2006-07. The parking system is self-funded (i.e. it does not receiveUniversity funding). If the trend ofdecreasing demand for parkingpermits continues, parking officialsmay have to increase parking permitrates to fund the debt obligation forthe parking decks.

5-19


Final Report

Table 5.5 Permit Sales by Type by Year

Parking Facility Capacity2005-06 2010-11

TotalPermits

% ofCapacity

TotalPermits

% ofCapacity

Oakland Avenue 974 1,116 115% 853 88%Walker Avenue 796 583 73% 506 64%McIver Street 651 493 76% 540 83%

Sales by Permit TypeA closer examination of the parkingpermit sales reveals the sales trend ofindividual permit sales. Table 5.4 showsthe annual parking permit sales by typefrom 2006-07 to 2010-11.

The permit types that haveexperienced the most significant dropin demand over the last five years are:

“B” Permit—Student on-campussurface lot permits; annual fee$302, down 46%

“K” Permit—Faculty Oakland Avenue ParkingDeck permits, annual fee $445, down 33%

“C” Permit—Student commuter surface lotpermits; annual fee $302, down 32%

The permit types that have experienced the mostsignificant increase in demand over the last fiveyears are:

“EB” Permit—The residential remote lot at1200 West Lee Street; annual fee of $175, up204 in 2010-2011. This may be a lower costreplacement permit for some students whoused to purchase “B” permits

“RA” Permit—Staff Employee lot at 915Northridge Street; annual fee of $30. This maybe a lower cost replacement permit for somestaff who used to purchase “K” Permits.

The trend in permit sales not only illustrates theUniversity’s success in providing alternative ways tocommute to campus, it also shows that studentshave been quicker to shift their travel patternsaway from personal automobiles. It also isinteresting to note that student demand for permitsto park in the parking decks (KB, MB, and WB) haveincreased over the five-year period, while staffdemand for permits (K, M and W) to park in in thesame facilities has decreased.

As shown in Table 5.5, the number of permits soldin each of the parking decks has decreased over thelast 5 years. In 2005-06, students were not allowedto purchase permits in the parking decks. However,in 2010-11 a limited number of permits wereavailable for student purchase. (According toPOCAM’s web page, no student permits arecurrently available for any of the parking decks. Awaitlist is maintained for those who wish to park inthe decks.)

Parking occupancy data furnished by UNCG wascompared with historic permit sales to calculate a %of capacity. For the Oakland Avenue and McIverStreet decks, the observed peak occupancycorresponded to approximately the number ofpermits sold. The Walker Avenue Deck recorded asignificantly higher occupancy than the permitsales. This is not unexpected due to the number ofvisitors who use the Walker Avenue Deck.

5-20


Final Report

Table 5.6 - Impact of TDM on Greenhouse Gas Emissions2011 2015 2020 2025

LowGrowth

HighGrowth

LowGrowth

HighGrowth

Parking Demand 4,343 4,404 4,448 4,844 4,493 5,328

Reduction in Parking Demand1 N/A 661 667 727 674 799

Parking Demand with TDM Measures N/A 3,743 3,781 4,117 3,819 4,529

CO2 Emissions Reduced (metric tons)2 N/A 3.4 3.4 3.8 3.5 4.21Assumes a 15% reduction in parking due to TDM measures.2Assumes reduction in parking demand correlates to reduction in passenger vehicles.http://www.epa.gov/cleanenergy/energy-resources/calculator.html

Impact of TDM on Air QualityThe Greensboro area and UNCG have taken aproactive approach to air quality issues. Byestablishing an Early Action Compact with theEnvironmental Protection Area, the Triad currentlyis designated as in attainment for the 8-hour ozonestandard. In fact, the Greensboro area is inattainment for all criteria pollutants except the1997 annual PM2.5 standard.

To continue the positive momentum for air quality,it is essential for the University to continue activelyseeking ways to reduce motorized travel miles.Criteria pollutants will continue to serve as abenchmark for air quality performance. However, asthe effects of greenhouse gases are becomingbetter known, it also is important to consider theoverall greenhouse gas footprint for future growthand development.

Travel demand management strategies provide anexcellent way to minimize the use of motorizedvehicles. The TDM Encyclopedia, developed by theVictoria Transport Policy Institute, providesguidance on the reduction in parking demand thatcan be expected with the implementation of certainTDM measures. Considering recommendations inthis plan such as enhanced bicycle facilities,improved walking and cycling environments,ridesharing, and transit improvements, parkingdemand could decrease as much as 15% comparedto levels with no TDM measures in place. Thisreduction in parking demand directly translates to areduction in motorized vehicle traffic on campus.

The EnvironmentalProtection Agencyprovides a mechanism forestimating greenhousegas emissions, includingcarbon dioxide. Table 5.6shows the correlationbetween reduced parkingdemand and reductions inCO2 emissions. This tablereferences the low growthand high growth scenariosestablished in Table 5.3.

ConclusionThe University of North Carolina at Greensboro hastaken a proactive approach to addressing vehicularaccess and parking through travel demandmanagement strategies. By planning for futureneeds of the existing campus with an eye towardSpartan Village, UNCG can improve vehicular accessand parking in a context-sensitive, multimodal way.Reducing the number of faculty, staff, and studentsthat drive alone to campus will reduce parkingdemand and help balance existing and futuresupply. The end result will be critical to achieve thelong-term sustainability goals championed by theUniversity.

http://www.epa.gov/cleanenergy/energy-resources/calculator.html

5-21


Final Report

Summary of RecommendationsThe UNCG Transportation Master Plan Update includes the following recommendations:

ParkingEnhance marketing efforts for parking permits, especially the availability of permits in the garages.

Initiate a parking rate study that evaluates permit rates, hourly rates, and meter rates.

Implement online permit sales with license plate recognition.

Offer for sale a number of permits equal to the capacity of the Oakland Avenue and McIver StreetParking Decks on a trial basis.

Monitor permit sales and evaluate parking permit increases.

Prohibit on-street parking on the north side of Lee Street and on the portions of Aycock Street inSpartan Village.

Work with the City and the Glenwood neighborhood to implement a residential parking permit programin Glenwood prior to the completion of the first phase of Spartan Village.

Consider the implementation of parking pay stations to assist in parking management in Spartan Village.

Seek authorization from the City of Greensboro to enforce the time-limited parking zones in the areasnear Spartan Village.

Express to the City of Greensboro the priority the University places on improving Aycock Street.

Install charging stations for alternative energy vehicles in each parking deck

Travel Demand ManagementConstruct additional bicycle racks adjacent to major destination points.

Provide bike stations at high traffic areas around campus as indicated in Figure 3.6.

Add a third Zipcar location in Spartan Village.

Locate a new transit hub in Spartan Village near the intersection of Lee Street and Glenwood Avenue.

Provide parking vouchers and preferred parking in the parking decks for carpoolers/vanpoolers.

Encourage PART to implement direct service to campus.


Final Report

November 2012

CHAPTER 6ACTION PLAN


Purpose and GoalsThe UNCG Transportation Master Plan Updaterefreshes strategies outlined in previous plans toreflect new growth trends and campusdevelopment. The overall purpose of the plan isto devise a blueprint to enhance thesustainability of campus through a coordinated,multimodal approach to campus access andmobility. Introduced in Chapter 1, the followinggoals were intended to provide a framework fordeveloping ideas, options, andrecommendations.

The UNCG Transportation Master PlanUpdate will integrate campus expansionplans south of Lee Street with a coherent,multimodal connectivity plan and anintegrated approach to parking allocation.

The UNCG Transportation Master PlanUpdate will provide a revisedunderstanding of existing campustransportation dynamics, including modesof access, parking, and travel demandmanagement.

The UNCG Transportation Master PlanUpdate will evaluate parking demand andallocation with an emphasis on thepotential to reduce the demand forparking in the future.

The UNCG Transportation Master PlanUpdate will include a forward-lookingapproach to moving people to, from, andwithin campus through a coordinated setof multimodal solutions.

The UNCG Transportation Master PlanUpdate will consider the distribution andanalysis of handicap-accessible spaces.

The planning process for the University of NorthCarolina at Greensboro Transportation Master PlanUpdate required coordination among administrativeand academic departments on campus, the studentbody, and community stakeholders. Implementingthe plan is no different. Success will depend uponhow well campus leaders from a variety ofdepartments can balance competing interests. Thistask is made easier by describing a series of definedsteps—or action items—to move the processforward. In simple terms, the Action Plan provides ablueprint for implementation. From the outset ofthe plan, the purpose was to enhance thesustainability of campus through a coordinated,multimodal approach to campus access andmobility.

The foundation of the Action Plan is thecommitment of identified partners (University andcommunity), awareness of transportation issues onand near campus, and strategic initiatives thatsupport behavioral-based changes and emphasizealternatives to single-occupancy vehicles. TheAction Plan sets the stage for the successfulorchestration of the facilities, policies, andprograms recommended throughout the Update.The core of this chapter is the Action Plan, whichlists specific policies and projects as well asconsiderations for implementation. Clearly definedaction items serve two purposes: 1) they enable theUniversity to track progress and schedule futureimprovements, and 2) they help the Universityidentify ways to enhance sustainability on campusthrough well-guided transportation decisions.

6-2

Action PlanTransportation Master Plan Update

Final Report

Implementation FrameworkA sustainable transportation system will emergefrom consensus among stakeholders on their roleand responsibility as partners charged withimplementing the plan’s recommendations.

Controlling FactorsSeveral factors will determine the timing andexecution of the Update’s recommendations.

The degree of control or influence theUniversity, the City of Greensboro, and otherpartners have relative to their desire toimplement changes.

The availability of personnel and financialresources to implement specific programs.

Whether an action item is an independentproject or program or a component of aneffort that involves multiple projects,programs, or policies.

The interdependence of various action items,in particular the degree to which implementingone item is dependent upon the successfulcompletion of another item.

University PartnersPartners charged with carrying forward therecommendations of the Update represent animportant collection of stakeholders on campus andin the community committed to successfulprograms that encourage a diversity of options fortraveling to, from, and within campus. Many ofthese partners have actively participated in theAdvisory Committee, web-based survey, CampusOpen House, or individual discussions as the plantook shape. These partners include:

UNCG Administration

o Facilities Design & Construction

o Parking Operations and Campus AccessManagement

o Campus Enterprises

o Sustainability

UNCG Faculty and Support Staff

UNCG Students

City of Greensboro

Greensboro Urban Area MPO

Guilford County

Greensboro Transit Authority

Piedmont Authority for RegionalTransportation

North Carolina Department of Transportation

These partners likely will be active participants inmany of the action items described in previouschapters and prioritized in the following pages.These agencies will guide, coordinate, and advocatefor enhanced travel options.

Campus Community PerceptionIn addition to identifying issues and testingpotential solutions, the web-based survey askedrespondents to spend money on a variety oftransportation improvements. When dividing $10among a series of improvements, they could chooseto spend all the money on one category ordistribute it among several. Given the generaldemographic of the survey sample was weightedtoward those that drive alone to campus, it’s notsurprising that most money was allocated toparking. As discussed in Chapter 5, the parkingproblems identified by the survey are based moreon perception rather than actual data. The result ofthe $10 question further indicates the importanceof parking among the campus community.Pedestrian crossings were the second-highestmoney getter. Responses from faculty, staff, andstudents also were compared against one another.Faculty and staff placed a higher emphasis onpedestrian crossings and greenways/trails whileparking was the big ticket item for residential andcommuter students. When asked if they wouldsupport higher parking fees to fund theseimprovements, approximately 60% said yes withlittle variation among the campus communitygroups.

6-3


Final Report

Action PlanThis section lists appropriate actions to implementthe recommendations of the Update based on threetimeframes—Immediate (Within 2 years), Mid Term(3 to 5 years), and Long Term (More than 5 years).Priorities were determined based on a combinationof perceived need and relative ease ofimplementation. Many of the tasks arerecommended to be initiated in the next five years,coinciding with campus redevelopment ordevelopment activities. The success of this planhinges on the University’s continuing to educate thecampus community about sustainable transportationand parking options. As with any planning effort,community support can encourage implementation,while opposition can significantly delay a project.

The Action Plan Matrix (Table 6.1) lists specificphysical and policy/program recommendations foreach modal elements of the plan: Bicycle andPedestrian, Transit, Parking, and Travel DemandManagement. Many of these recommendations canbe administered concurrently as resources (fundingand staff time) permit. The priorities or phasing areprovided here with the understanding thatUniversity and City of Greensboro initiatives maydictate future changes. While some improvementsrequire coordination or assistance by the City ofGreensboro or NCDOT, most of the responsibilityfor implementing recommendations naturally lieswith the University.

Table 6.1 – Action Plan Matrix

Recommendation Type Benefit Resources Required

Immediate (Within 2 years)

Bicycle and Pedestrian

Construct new sidewalks to fill in existing gaps in sidewalk system.

Kenilworth St (adjacent to the Bryan Building and on theeastside south of Spring Garden Street)

Theta St (adjacent to the Bryan Building)

Physical SafetyConnectivityMobilityAccessibility

$25/linear foot

Construct wide sidewalk.

Forest St between Spring Garden St and the Elliott UniversityCenter


$50/linear foot

Install continental high visibility crosswalks.

All signalized crossings of Aycock StTate St and Oakland AveCarr St and McIver StGray Dr near Gove Student HealthGray Dr and West StKenilworth St and Theta St

Union St and GregoryUnion St and Highland Ave

Physical SafetyMobilityAccessibility

$5,000/each

6-4


Final Report


Bicycle and Pedestrian (continued)

Install ground-mounted pedestrian crossing sign.

Gray Dr near Gove Student HealthWalker Ave and Stirling StTheta St

Physical Safety $200/each

Construct curb extension around on-street parking.

Aycock St and Walker St

Physical SafetyAccessibility

$20,000/intersection

Install PedAdvance signal.

Aycock St and Walker StAycock St and Walker Ave

Aycock St and Spring Garden StAycock St and Forest StLee St and Glenwood AveLee St and Tate St/Silver Ave

Physical Safety $5,000/intersection

Create bicycle boulevards with pavement markings, signage, trafficcalming, and mini-circles.

Union StAberdeen TerrHaywood St

Physical SafetyConnectivityMobility

Varies

Add a green painted contraflow bike lanes.

College Ave from Administration Dr to Spring Garden St


$10,000/mile

Paint sharrows (shared-lane markings) on key roadways.

North DrMcIver StWalker AveForest St (Oakland Ave to Spring Garden St)Aycock StTate St


$2,000/mile or$200/sharrow

Enhance campus connector.Connection between Lee St and Forest St (PedestrianUnderpass)Connection between Lexington Ave and Glenwood Ave


Varies

6-5


Final Report



Install bicycle racks near convenient access to buildings.

Stone Building near College Avenue entrances(5 U racks – 10 spaces)Petty Building(1 stadium rack – 8 spaces)

Spartan Village (as development occurs)(see UNCG Bicycle Master Plan for number of spaces basedon development type and intensity)

Physical ConvenienceSecurity

U rack ($140)Stadium Rack ($465)Bike Lockers ($1,500)Bike Shelter ($3,000)

Install bicycle stations.

Walker Circle (1 shelter with u racks – 10 spaces)Physical Convenience

SecurityU rack ($140)Bike Shelter ($3,000)

Express to the City of Greensboro the priority the University placeson improving Aycock Street.

Policy/Program

SafetyCoordination

Staff Time

Distribute bicycle education and encouragement materials.

Include bicycle materials be included in the orientationpacket for new employees (faculty and staff).

Coordinate with GDOT to ensure the next revision to theCity’s Bicycle Map includes the existing and proposedfacilities from the Update.

Provide a link to the Greensboro Bicycle Map be provided onPOCAM’s bicycle webpage and print copies for distributionon campus.

Policy/Program

SafetyMobilitySOV ReductionCoordination

Staff TimePrinted Materials

Initiate a faculty versus staff green commute challenge during theGreen Games.

Policy/Program

SOV Reduction Staff TimePrinted Materials

Work with the City of Greensboro and the Greensboro Urban AreaMPO to have representation on transportation advisorycommittees that address citywide issues of non-motorizedtransportation policy and planning.

Policy/Program

Coordination Staff Time

Implement a bicycle sharing program with kiosks near the WalkerAvenue Circle and Curry Building.

Policy/Program

MobilitySOV ReductionConvenience

Requires additionalstudy

Make the safety awareness campaign an annual event. Policy/Program

Safety Staff TimePrinted Materials

Transit

Continue to promote partnerships with transit providers in the Cityand region.

Policy/Program

CoordinationMobilitySOV Reduction

Staff Time

Maintain the existing Spartan Chariot route. Policy/Program

MobilitySOV Reduction

N/A

6-6


Final Report


Transit (continued)

Add a Spartan Chariot stop at the Silver Avenue/Union Streetparking lot (Fall 2012).

Policy/Program


$5,000 for shelter,sign, and amenities

Restore service at the Quad Fountain bus stop (when renovationsof the Quad are complete).

Policy/Program


N/A

Launch the Spartan Chariot Express as a counter-clockwisecirculator route with limited stops (Fall 2013).

Policy/Program



Voice support for the bus pullout locations on Lee Street andencourage implementation as part of the redesign of the corridor.

Policy/Program

MobilitySafety

Staff Time

Educate/encourage PART riders to transfer at Four Seasons toavoid having to go downtown to the Depot and backtrack to theUniversity.

Policy/Program


Staff Time

Partner with the Computer Science department to conduct adesign contest for a smartphone transit vehicle locator application.

Policy/Program

CoordinationPromotion


Partner with PART to maximize park-and-ride options for out-of-town faculty, staff, and students.

Policy/Program


Staff Time

Parking

Enhance marketing efforts for parking permits, especially theavailability of permits in the garages.

Policy/Program

FinancialStabilityEfficiency


Initiate a parking rate study that evaluates permit rates, hourlyrates, and meter rates.

Policy/Program

FinancialStabilityEfficiency

$35,000 to $50,000(depending on scope)

Implement online permit sales with license plate recognition. Policy/Program

ConvenienceEfficiency

$40,000/vehicle pluscentral software

Prohibit on-street parking on the north side of Lee Street and onthe portions of Aycock Street in Spartan Village.

Policy/Program

Safety N/A

Encourage on-campus residents to choose remote lots for vehiclestorage.

Policy/Program

Efficiency Staff Time

Offer for sale a number of permits equal to the capacity of theOakland Avenue and McIver Street Parking Decks on a trial basis.

Policy/Program

FinancialStability

N/A

Travel Demand Management

Maintain existing TDM programs. Policy/Program


N/A

6-7


Final Report


Mid Term (3 to 5 years)


Construct curb extension around on-street parking.

Gray Dr near Gove Student HealthGray Dr and West St



Construct median for pedestrian refuge.

Tate St north of RR underpass (raised planted)Spring Garden St at Stirling St (extend existing)

Physical Safety $50/linear foot

Install PedAdvance signal.Aycock St and Lee St

Tate St and Spring Garden StTate St and Walker AveTate St and Carr StTate St and Market StMarket St and Lake Rd

Physical Safety $5,000/intersection


Walker Ave (west of Aycock St)


Varies

Add a standard striped bicycle lane.

Silver Ave (as part of the development of Spartan Village)


$10,000/mile

Paint sharrows (shared-lane markings) on key roadways.Kenilworth St

Stirling St


$2,000/mile or$200/sharrow

Enhance campus connector.

College Ave


Varies

Install bicycle racks near convenient access to buildings.

Spartan Village (as development occurs)



6-8


Final Report



Replace portable racks with permanent loops.

Science Building near North Drive Child Day Care(1 stadium rack – 8 spaces)McIver Building near Foust Building(1 stadium rack – 8 spaces)Mary Foust Residence Hall(1 stadium rack – 8 spaces)Guilford Residence Hall(2 stadium racks – 16 spaces)Near Tower Village and MHRA Moore Humanities(3 stadium racks – 24 spaces)


U rack ($140)Stadium Rack ($465)

Install bicycle stations.

Oakland Avenue Deck(3 lockers – 6 spaces)McIver Parking Deck(1 shelter with u racks – 8 spaces)


U rack ($140)Bike Lockers ($1,500)Bike Shelter ($3,000)

Expand the bicycle sharing program by adding a kiosk near Phase 1of Spartan Village.

Policy/Program

MobilitySOV ReductionConvenience


Implement a theft enforcement program with a bicycle homingdevice.

Policy/Program

Security Varies

Transit

Create a transit hub in Spartan Village at the intersection of LeeStreet and Glenwood Avenue with bus pullouts and shelters.

Physical MobilitySOV Reduction

Included in LeeStreet Improvements

Add stops for the Spartan Chariot and Spartan Chariot Expressroute at the new transit hub.

Policy/Program


Included in LeeStreet Improvements

Work with the City of Greensboro and the developmentcommunity to encourage residential infill development forstudent housing within the existing HEAT 73 route.

Policy/Program


Staff Time

Support direct service to campus by PART from the PART RegionalHub on NC 68.

Policy/Program


Staff Time

Review growth at the Gateway Campus and determine if changesto HEAT are necessary to better serve these locations.

Policy/Program


Staff Time

6-9


Final Report


Parking

Monitor permit sales and evaluate parking permit increases. Policy/Program

FinancialStability

Staff Time

Work with the City and the Glenwood neighborhood to implementa residential parking permit program in Glenwood prior to thecompletion of the first phase of Spartan Village.

Policy/Program

CoordinationTown Relations

Staff Time

Consider the implementation of parking pay stations to assist inparking management in Spartan Village.

Policy/Program

Convenience $25,000 to$40,000/pay station

Seek authorization from the City of Greensboro to enforce thetime-limited parking zones in the areas near Spartan Village.

Policy/Program

FinancialStability

Staff Time

Install charging stations for alternative energy vehicles in eachparking deck.

Physical Sustainability $6,000/unit

Travel Demand Management

Add a third Zipcar location in Spartan Village. Policy/Program


TBD

Provide parking vouchers and preferred parking in the parkingdecks for carpoolers/vanpoolers.

Policy/Program



Long Term (More than 5 years)


Construct new sidewalks to fill in existing gaps in sidewalk system.McGee St


$25/linear foot

Install continental high visibility crosswalks.Oakland Ave and Kenilworth StOakland Ave and Highland AveOakland Ave and Stirling St

Physical SafetyMobilityAccessibility

$5,000/each

Construct curb extension around on-street parking.Oakland Ave and Forest StOakland Ave and Highland Ave




Lexington AveMcGee StEdgar St (northern connection to Carr St)Aycock St (between Hollbrook St and Haywood St)Hollbrook St


Varies

6-10


Final Report



Construct new sidepath.Aycock St from Walker Ave to Market St


$50/linear foot

Enhance campus connector.Connection between Forest St/Spring Garden St intersectionand College AveConnection between Gray Dr and College Ave via the WalkerAve CircleConnection between Gray Dr and McIver StConnection to North Dr behind the Sullivan Science andEberhart buildings


Varies

Install bicycle racks near convenient access to buildings.Spartan Village (as development occurs)(see UNCG Bicycle Master Plan for number of spaces basedon development type and intensity)



Install bicycle stations.Walker Circle(1 shelter with u racks – 10 spaces)Graham Building(1 shelter with u racks – 8 spaces)Proposed Rec Center(3 lockers – 6 spaces; 1 shelter with u racks – 8 spaces)Taylor/Brown/Carmichael Plaza(2 shelters with u racks – 16 spaces)Elliott University Center(2 shelters with u racks – 16 spaces)


U rack ($140)Bike Lockers ($1,500)Bike Shelter ($3,000)

Transit

Evaluate potential service to the Millennial Campuses as a long-term option as development occurs.

Policy/Program


Staff Time

6-11


Final Report

ConclusionThe 2006 Campus Transportation Plan provides thestarting point for a renewed Transportation MasterPlan. And while a new Campus Master Plan wasprepared in 2007, numerous changes have occurredin recent years. The University has rapidly movedfrom planning to design to the verge of constructionon a historic expansion of the campus to the south.

The University of North Carolina at GreensboroTransportation Master Plan Update recognizes theimportance of parking and transportation issuesassociated with existing campus operations as wellas planned expansion. The plan illustrates the needto address safe movements of bicyclists andpedestrians along and across Lee Street and AycockStreet, the need for continued focus on transit andtravel demand management, and the need for aparking approach that efficiently allocates demand.

Numerous individuals collaborated within thecontext of the Update to establish a baseline ofunderstanding upon which to assess needs andidentify recommendations. The umbrella under

which the plan took shape was the set of goals anda general purpose that included devising a blueprintto enhance the sustainability of campus through acoordinated, multimodal approach to campusaccess and mobility. The actionablerecommendations of the plan should meet theimmediate challenges of the University, its people,and the surrounding community.

Beyond simple planning horizons, the Updateshould set the stage for improved choice inpersonal transportation, coordinated publictransportation, seamless rideshare integration, anda bicycle and pedestrian network designed with theuser in mind. The plan recognizes that faculty, staff,and students who arrive on campus without apersonal automobile will need to be able to travelwhere and when they want with minimalconstraints. The University of North Carolina atGreensboro Transportation Master Plan Updateshould serve as a livable document that equipsadministrators to address unforeseen changes andto capitalize on opportunities as they presentthemselves.


Final Report

November 2012

APPENDIX

PARKING SCENARIOS


Table A.1 – Parking Demand Generation Ratios

Building Use Type Demand Ratio

Instruction 1 space / 900 sf

Student Services 1 space / 1,200 sf

Academic Support 1 space / 900 sf

Institutional Support 1 space / 300 sf

Athletics/Recreation 1 space / 750 sf

Housing 1 space / 600 sf

Operations & Maintenance 1 space / 3,000 sf

Parking Demand ModelA parking system is considered at capacity whenoccupancy is at 85% to 90% of capacity. The 10% to15% excess supply keeps the time required to find aparking space within reason and promotes aperception of adequate parking. When parkingoccupancy exceeds these levels, there may bedelays and frustration in finding a space, andpatrons may be forced to use a space that is too farfrom their destination or does not offer acomfortable walking environment. This margin alsoallows for: 1) the activity of vehicles moving in andout of parking stalls during busy periods; 2) surgesin short-term parking activity; and 3) the temporaryloss of spaces due to improperly parked vehicles,weather conditions, construction activity, etc.

Throughout much of the observation period,parking on campus exceeded 85% occupancy. Thislevel indicates that a patron may not be able to finda parking space within a reasonable amount oftime. The larger parking facilities (parking decks andpark-and-ride lots) did not exceed 85% occupancyuntil closer to mid-day. As an aggregate, parkingoccupancy met or exceeded 85% occupancy at11:00 a.m. and 12:00 p.m.

Figures A.1 through A.7 aregraphical representations ofparking demand parking demandon campus at the times occupancydata was collected. Different colorsin these figures represent varyingdegrees of occupancy in each ofthe surface parking and structuredparking facilities. Within thesefigures, red signifies a facility withgreater than 85% occupancy,orange represents 70 to 85%occupancy, light green represents50 to 70% occupancy, and darkgreen represents less than 50%occupancy.

These parking occupancy percentages wereused to calibrate parking demand generationratios to the UNCG campus. The ratios usedin this analysis are shown in Table A.1.

The baseline used for the above parking demandgeneration ratios was the City of Greensboro LandDevelopment Ordinance (LDO), dated July 1, 2010.The ratios presented in the LDO were adjusted andcalibrated accordingly such that the generationratios matched the existing condition occupancydata that was collected by UNCG, resulting in atailored set of parking demand ratio requirementsfor the campus.

A-2

Appendix – Parking ScenariosTransportation Master Plan Update

Final Report

Figure A.1 Existing Condition Occupancy (8:00 a.m.)

A-3


Final Report


A-4


Final Report


A-5


Final Report


A-6


Final Report

Figure A. Existing Condition Occupancy (12:00 p.m.)

A-7


Final Report

Figure A.6 Existing Condition Occupancy (1:00 p.m.)

A-8


Final Report

Figure A.7 Existing Condition Occupancy (2:00 p.m.)

A-9


Final Report

Future ScenariosThe proposed future scenarios considered in thisstudy are focused around expansion of the existingcampus to the south (i.e. Spartan Village). Severalbuilding use types are involved in the expansion andredevelopment, including institutional support,athletics/recreation, and housing. The proposedfuture scenarios considered in this study are shownin Table A.2.

Table A.2 Proposed Future Scenarios

Proposed FutureScenario Building Use Type Building

Area

Spartan VillagePhase 1

Student Services 25,600 sf

Housing 368,091 sf

New Police Station InstitutionalSupport 16,000 sf

New RecreationCenter

Athletics/Recreation

225,000 sf

Spartan VillagePhase 2


Housing 227,100 sf

Spartan VillageFull Buildout

Instruction 349,800 sf


Housing 184,000 sf

Refer to Figures A.8 through A.12 for a graphicalrepresentation of each of the above scenarios.

This expansion and redevelopment is proposed on acombination of existing property (between therailroad tracks and West Lee Street) and newproperty that UNCG is in the process of acquiring(south of West Lee Street). The above outlinedphasing of the expansion and redevelopment isbased on the latest information provided by UNCGas of the date of this report.

The proposed expansion and redevelopment on theportion of existing property owned by UNCG willresult in permanent loss of existing spaces. Thisincludes the existing remote park-and-ride lotlocated at 1200 West Lee Street that is serviced bythe Spartan Chariot. This parking lot currently has224 total spaces, all of which will be permanentlylost as part of the expansion and redevelopment.

The proposed additional building use types forSpartan Village are the basis for the future parkingdemand calculations. Using their proposed squarefootages, along with parking demand generationratios calibrated to the UNCG campus and time ofday parking distribution, future parking demandwas projected for each of the future scenarios.

Based on smaller projected enrollment growth, noadditional parking capacity is recommended forthe main campus in the planning horizon.

A-10


Final Report

Figure A.8 Spartan Village – Phase 1

Figure A.9 New Recreation Center

A-11


Final Report



A-12


Final Report

Figure A.12 Spartan Village – Full Buildout

Parking Demand AnalysisUsing the data collected during this project and theproposed future expansion and redevelopmentsouth of the railroad tracks and West Lee Street, aparking model was developed to predict parkingdemands for various scenarios for Spartan Village.The future scenarios do not include constructionphases for the expansion and redevelopment—rather the completed, end of phase condition.

To measure localized demands, the UNCG campuswas analyzed with nine distinct parking zones asshown in Figure A.13. Zone 1 through Zone 5includes the main campus, Zone 6 through Zone 8includes Spartan Village, and Zone 9 includesremote storage and park-and-ride lots.

The model includes a walking tolerance assumption,which allows a parking deficit in one zone to bemitigated through surplus parking in an adjacentzone within the accepted walking tolerance. TheCity of Greensboro Unified Development Ordinanceallows the Planning Director to permit up to 100%of required parking to be shared within 1,000 feetwalking distance. It should be recognized that

walking tolerances in a campus setting areinherently different than a typical urbanenvironment, and the observed tolerance forwalking from a parking space to a destination atUNCG often is more than ½-mile or more than twicethe standard set in city code. The 2007 CampusMaster Plan Update sets the walking tolerance as a5-minute walk or ¼-mile, which is carried forward inthe UNCG Transportation Master Plan Update.Figure A.13 shows the ¼-mile (5-minute) walkingradius centered on the pedestrian underpass.

Each of the zones as well as the campus as a wholewas analyzed regarding parking demand versussupply for each of the future scenarios for SpartanVillage. The results of this analysis are provided inTable A.3. The following subsections provide adescription of each of the scenarios and a slightlymore detailed look at the parking demands andeffects of each scenario, through full buildout.

A-13


Final Report

1Figure A.13 Parking Zones

A-14


Final Report

Existing Condition (2011)Based on the data collected by UNCG and ourunderstanding of the parking system, the existingparking supply is adequate to meet parkingdemands on campus. The data collected indicate apeak parking occupancy of 86%. Day-to-dayfluctuations could modify the occupancy levels upor down by 5%; however, even at 91% occupancy,with frequent users of the system, the parkingsupply on campus should be enough to provideadequate access to students, faculty, staff, andvisitors. At this occupancy level, there is anapproximate 979-space surplus in the system.

This occupancy level is adequate; however, it isapproaching the limits of an effective parkingsupply. Once parking occupancy reaches 90%, itbecomes increasingly more difficult for students,faculty, staff, and visitors to find available parking,and the perception of parking problems increases.

Spartan Village – Phase 1After completion of Phase 1 of the expansion andredevelopment of campus south of the railroadtracks and West Lee Street, the overall campusparking occupancy reduces to 85%. Included in thisscenario are the addition of Student Services andHousing building use types as well as additionalparking supply within Zone 8. Also included in thisscenario are the removal of the existing parkingspaces located at the 1200 West Lee Street park-and-ride lot and the addition of 450 spaces at the1600 West Lee Street park-and-ride lot.

In this scenario, there is projected to be a deficit ofapproximately 42 parking spaces in Zone 8. Whilethe overall campus is projected to have adequateparking, Zone 8 is too far from the main campus toeffectively share parking capacity.

Table A.3 Parking Surplus/Deficit by Scenario*

Parking Zone

Future Scenario

ExistingCondition

(2011)

SpartanVillage Phase

1New Police

Station

NewRecreation

Center

SpartanVillage Phase

2

SpartanVillage Full

Buildout

Zone 1 43 43 44 44 44 46

Zone 2 1,009 979 979 979 979 929

Zone 3 14 14 14 14 14 15

Zone 4 955 963 953 844 919 936

Zone 5 0 0 0 0 0 0

Zone 6 0 0 0 0 0 76

Zone 7 0 0 12 8 116 0

Zone 8 14 42 31 31 261 19

Zone 9 962 1,149 1,158 1,079 1,133 1,123

Total CampusSurplus/Deficit

979(86%)

1,149(85%)

1,172(85%)

1,079(87%)

1,509(82%)

1,248(86%)

*Red text signifies a deficit or no surplus, whereas black text signifies a surplus.

A-15


Final Report

New Police StationThis scenario adds a new police station within Zone7, including surface parking spaces associated withthat building. There are 49 reserved spacesdedicated to the police station with 17 spacesavailable for public use. The result of this scenario isan overall campus parking occupancy of 85%.

New Recreation CenterAfter completion of the new recreation center inZone 6, the overall campus parking occupancyincreases to 87%. This scenario adds only therecreation center facility with no additional parking.

This occupancy level is adequate; however, it isapproaching the limits of an effective parkingsupply. Once parking occupancy reaches 90%, itbecomes increasingly more difficult for students,faculty, staff, and visitors to find available parkingand the perception of parking problems increases.

The current master plan does not include anyparking supply for the proposed recreation center.Table A.4 depicts the distribution of parkingdemand over a typical day for a typical recreationcenter. This table shows that the peak demand forparking at a recreation center typically occurs athours where parking demand is “off-peak”;therefore, allowing existing parking facilities(particularly the Oakland Avenue Deck) to shareparking capacity with the recreation center.

Spartan Village – Phase 2For the purposes of this analysis, Phases 2 and 3were combined in to one scenario titled Phase 2.This scenario includes the addition of StudentServices and Housing building use types in Zone 7,as well as additional parking supply to Zone 6, Zone7, and Zone 8. The result of this scenario reducesthe overall campus occupancy to 82%.

Spartan Village – Full BuildoutFull buildout of Spartan Village includesInstructional building use type in Zone 6 and Zone 8,as well as additional Student Services and Housingbuilding use types in Zone 7 and Zone 8,respectively. Full buildout also includes additionalparking supply in Zone 6 and Zone 7, and theremoval of some parking in Zone 8 to make roomfor additional buildings. The result of this expansionand redevelopment is an overall campus occupancyof 86%.

This occupancy level is adequate; however, it isapproaching the limits of an effective parkingsupply. Once parking occupancy reaches 90%, itbecomes increasingly more difficult for students,faculty, staff, and visitors to find available parkingand the perception of parking problems increases

Table A.4 Hourly Time-of-Day Factor (Recreation Center)

Time of Day Percentage Time of Day Percentage

6:00 a.m. 70% 4:00 p.m. 80%

7:00 a.m. 40% 5:00 p.m. 90%

8:00 a.m. 40% 6:00 p.m. 100%

9:00 a.m. 70% 7:00 p.m. 90%

10:00 a.m. 70% 8:00 p.m. 80%

11:00 a.m. 80% 9:00 p.m. 70%

12:00 noon 60% 10:00 p.m. 35%

1:00 p.m. 70% 11:00 p.m. 10%

2:00 p.m. 70% 12:00 a.m. 0%

3:00 p.m. 70%

A-16


Final Report

RecommendationsBased on the results of the parking demandprojections, the UNCG campus as a whole isexpected to remain below its actual capacity foreach scenario of the planning horizon. In fact, thecampus parking system is projected to functionwithin the ideal 85% to 90% occupancy range. Using2011 Existing Conditions data collected by UNCG,the campus has a surplus of approximately 979spaces (86% occupancy) with the current parkingfacility configurations. Based on expansion plans tothe south (Spartan Village), the parking surplus isprojected to increase to 1,248 spaces (86%occupancy). This value assumes full buildout of thecampus expansion south of Lee Street in addition toparking supply modifications to existing park-and-ride facilities and the addition of a park-and-ridefacility at 1600 West Lee Street.

In a typical parking analysis, occupancies greaterthan 85% cause concern as usage in this levelindicates users will have difficulties finding the lastavailable spaces and walking distances mightbecome frustrating. Based on the types of users oncampus and predominance of student, faculty, andstaff parking, the UNCG campus can exceed this85% threshold, especially if the projecteddeficiencies are located in student, faculty, and staffparking areas where users have a goodunderstanding of where to find available spaces.Occupancy in visitor parking locations shouldremain at or below the 85% threshold.

While local zonal deficits occur in each scenario forsome zones after sharing surplus from other zones,the campus as a whole is projected to consistentlyhave parking occupancies between 82% and 87%.Given the types of users who come to the UNCGcampus, the local zonal deficits on the main campusdo not pose much of a concern, as students, faculty,staff, and visitors typically understand they may notbe able to park adjacent to their destination. This isespecially true in locations where several buildingsdo not have parking directly adjacent.

Based on projected parking demands, it will beimportant to continue to utilize park-and-rideservices from remote parking facilities to campus.

This service allows the parking system to operate atoptimal occupancy and reduces the potential forovercrowding of parking on campus. A potentialdrawback to this type of operation is revenuestream. Pushing parking to remote park-and-ridefacilities, where permits are priced lower than on-campus options, reduces the amount of moneycollected by the University for parking. However,this system provides a more customer-friendlysituation on campus to visitors and those whochoose to purchase on-campus permits.

A focus on Spartan Village (Zone 6 through Zone 8)results in an existing condition surplus of 14 spaces(81% occupancy). In the Spartan Village – FullBuildout scenario, the resulting surplus is 57 spaces(97% occupancy). This occupancy exceeds the ideal85% threshold and is near the ultimate capacity ofthe parking supply. Intermediate phases, includingSpartan Village – Phase 1 and New RecreationCenter, project parking demand to exceed theavailable parking supply by 42 spaces (107%occupancy) and 112 spaces (114% occupancy),respectively. As a result of high parking demandcompared to parking supply in the village,additional parking should be added to the supply inplace and operational as part of the Spartan Village– Phase 1 and New Recreation Center scenarios.

For the occupancy within Zone 6 through Zone7 to function in the 85% range for SpartanVillage – Phase 1 scenario, approximately 150additional spaces would need to be providedbeyond what is in the current Master Plan.

For the occupancy within Zone 6 through Zone7 to function in the 85% range for the NewRecreation Center scenario, an additional 125spaces (in addition to the 150 spacesrecommended for Spartan Village – Phase 1scenario) would need to be provided beyondwhat is in the current Master Plan.

With 275 additional parking spaces to the Zone6 through Zone 8 supply, the Full Buildoutscenario in these zones results in a surplus of332 spaces (84% occupancy).