The Bus and Us
Green Action Fund Proposal
Kansas State University
January 31, 2015
Tanniqua-Kay Buchanan,
Undergrad, Regional & Community Planning
Dereatha Cross,
PhD student, Environmental Planning & Design
Beth Krehbiel
Graduate student, Landscape Architecture
Richard Dean Prudenti,
Graduate student, Landscape Architecture
Erin Wilson,
Graduate student, Landscape Architecture
Brent Chamberlain, Ph.D.
Assistant Professor, Landscape Architecture/
Regional & Community Planning (brentchamberlain@ksu.edu)
Smart Transportation Planning + Social Incentives + Geospatial Technology =
A vision for molding a new sense of place for the APDesign and K-State communities
Introduction
The College of Architecture, Planning & Design (APDesign) will commence a two-year
construction project in Seaton Hall tentatively scheduled to begin in May 2015. As such,
approximately 600 graduate and undergraduate students who currently have on-campus
studio space in Seaton Hall will need to be relocated. In addition, APDesign’s computer
laboratory, critique spaces and a few seminar rooms will be located to a new offsite location.
The university is currently in the process of discussing the feasibility of purchasing or renting a
building near the Manhattan Regional Airport to serve the College’s needs. Our
Environmental Land Planning & Design studio course (LAR704) have taken on the challenge of
developing a College-wide transportation plan for the temporary relocation. The initial idea
was proposed by Stephanie Rolley (Department Head) and Tim de Noble (Dean) and discussed
with Dr. Chamberlain in early January. The project is an excellent fit for the scope of the
course’s learning objectives and provides a unique learning opportunity.
This ensuing transition will carry additional costs and logistical challenges for students, faculty
and staff, and for the university as a whole. Currently many individuals walk, bike or drive to
campus each day, some making more than one round trip a day to campus. With some of the
infrastructure and learning facilities located on and off campus, the university and the
Manhattan community will contend with increases in student and faculty transportation to
and from home, campus and the offsite location, increasing demands on community and
university infrastructure (roads, parking, shuttles, etc.), especially during peak travel times. If all
students were to drive a single passenger car, the financial burden to students alone is
estimated at $1,500/student or $900,000 for the college during this time (see page 5i).
Environmental impacts will also be significant, especially due to increases in air pollution and
carbon emissions. We estimate that it would require over 1 acre/student/per year of U.S.
production forest to offset a single student’s carbon emissions (see page 5i). If each student
were to drive a single passenger car, this would require 1,200 acres of production forest or
roughly 2mi2 of land - nearly double that of K-State’s Manhattan Campus. Our vision is to
mitigate these impacts through smart transportation planning, incentives and effective use of
geospatial technology to increase ridership.
The K-State 2025 Master Plan identifies a transit system as an option for managing increased
mobility. The project aims to address the immediate needs of APDesign, and we anticipate
that outcomes from the process could help to inform the 2025 vision.
Project Goals



Social: As per K-State 2025, promote a more sustainable mindset associated with the
use of alternative modes of transportation.
Environmental: avoid the significant environmental impacts caused by increased use
of passenger vehicles.
Economic: minimize financial burdens by reducing additional transit costs for
students, faculty and staff.
Project Objectives
1. Build a comprehensive database of student and faculty needs, interests and
experiences, et cetera, in order to:
2. Develop proposals for an APDesign transportation plan, including schedules, routes,
drop-off locations and connections to existing systems.
3. Develop and test a GPS Fleet tracking and mapping system
Team
The five student investigators represent a variety of disciplines and skills. All are currently
enrolled in the Environmental Land Planning & Design course (LAR 704) taught by Assistant
Professor Dr. Brent Chamberlain. We are inspired by the challenge and are confident in our
ability develop an effective transportation solution. Students will lead the collection of primary
and secondary data, conduct geospatial model analyses and produce the final transportation
plan. Primary data include student and faculty survey and stakeholder engagement processes.
Professor Chamberlain will support students’ efforts, guide technical training, provide
strategic consultation, and support administrative efforts.
Proposal
The figure below illustrates our proposed process, with each box representing a different
component (i.e. action, product or procedure). Details can be found in the project timeline
(Page 5). The proposal uses concepts from the Ecological Planning Model (Steiner 2012) and
The United States Department of Transportation Planning Process (FHA and FTA 2007) in
order to develop a project-specific process flow and associated tasks. The components of our
process are connected through linear steps and feedback loops. The process begins with the
initial data collection. This will include geospatial data, and contextual oral or written data
from the university, city and college administrations (key informants). This data will help us
create a better understanding of the spatial, political and social constraints of the project. The
initial collection will also include a student and faculty survey that will help us better
understand the needs, experiences and preferences for potential system users. Following the
initial data collection, we will develop geospatial, administrative and socio-behavioral analyses
that will be used to inform the plan and design exploration. This exploration process will
consist of multiple iterations, which will include developing conceptual plans, schematics,
design critiques and involve engagement with different levels of administration. The final
product will be delivered to the APDesign community (with university guests) to showcase the
plan and be used as an educational opportunity for demonstrating the environmental and
social benefits of alternative methods of transportation. Details of each of the process
components are provided below.
Stakeholder Engagement
The stakeholder engagement component will involve multiple engagements with students,
faculty and various level of university and municipal engagement. Three formal engagements
with stakeholders in the College (APDesign) will take place at various times during the project
(see project timeline for details):


Phase I & II: Qualtrics surveys will help us understand student and faculty needs,
interests, preferences and behaviors (Phase I), as well as, giving us feedback after initial
plan and design concepts (Phase II) in order to ascertain our potential ridership. For
each phase we will award 25 K-State Student Union Gift Card valued at $10.
Phase III: A forum and associated “open-house” event will be held in order to
showcase the final plan(s), rationale and to obtain feedback. We are anticipating
providing food and refreshments for students to increase attendance.
We also anticipate engaging with students and faculty informally, as well as formal meetings
with university administration, APDesign decision-makers and other municipal transportation
organizations. We are developing an application to the Institutional Review Board to ensure
protocol for data collection, storage and use related to this project complies.
Data Collection and Analysis
In addition to primary data collection, we will obtain geospatial data from the City of
Manhattan, as well as conduct site visits to ascertain potential routes and stops. As part of the
course objectives the spatial analyses will be conducted using state-of-the-art GIS software to
conduct network analyses in order to identify the most efficient routes and opportune
locations for stops which address student’s interests and demands for using alternative
transportation. Our process will be based on a simplified version of The United States
Department of Transportation Planning Process tasks (FHA and FTA 2007). The analyses will
provide vital statistics that will be deeply considered in the design process.
Plan and Design Exploration & Final Product
The process from initial design to final product will inevitably require multiple iterations of
design, analysis and engagement with adminstrative bodies, students and faculty. The plan
and design process involves many different activities from route identification, scheduling,
and related logistics, as well as developing a student incentive program to promote ridership.
Included in the design process is the development of our GPS fleet tracking system and the
associated instructions and recommendations for drivers and our adminstrators. The
technology we are proposing to use is based on a free mapping and tracking service called
CorvusGPS1. This service enables the communication of GPS locations from smartphones to
their servers and then translates that to a web browser or
desktop software. This technology would enable students
and faculty to track the current location of the shuttles and
determine the best location and estimated arrival time. The
capability to track the shuttles provides two benefits: 1)
makes traveling more convenient by reducing wait
time, and 2) bring attention to the service
through novel technology that should pique
student’s interests and awareness of the
shuttle system.
K-State and local transportation organizations
will benefit from the efforts of this semester's
Environmental Land Planning & Design class, should they ever be interested in using the same
technology. Our final product will present a comprehensive set of policies, recommendations
and strategies for the most efficient and effective transportation plan. All documentation will
be delivered in a forum and open house to the faculty, staff and students in APDesign.
Budget and Funding Request
The acquisition of technology, including cell phone data service for 6 shuttles/busses:


6 (Data Plans) x $50 (Service Fee) x 22 (months) + Fees and Startup
6 (simple smartphones) x $100
$8160
$600
Incentives for improving responses (Dillman 1991, Lesser et al. 2001) and event attendance:




Phase I:
Phase II:
Phase III:
Ridership:
$10 K-State Union gift cards for 25 students2
$10 K-State Union gift cards for 25 students2
Design Forum/ Open House pizza and beverages
$10 K-State Union gift cards for 34 students2
Total
1
2
http://corvusgps.com or Evertrack on Google Play
Gift cards will be assigned randomly for survey respondents and riders
$250
$250
$400
$340
$10,000
Data Collection February
March April Wks 15‐16 Wks 13‐14 Wks 11‐12 Wks 9‐10 Wks 7‐8 Wks 5‐6 Activities Wks 3‐4 Wks 1‐2 Project Timeline
May 1 Objectives 2 3 Deliverables|Outcomes GeoSpatial Data x x Survey Preparation and Collection x x Key Informant Data Precedent and Literature Studies x x
Analysis Geospatial Data Analyses x Survey Information Analyses x Key Informant Analyses Plan and Design Exploration Route Id.|Evaluation|Prioritization x x o Database|Photography|Video x x o Paper|Digital Survey x x o o
Documentation Maps|Diagrams|Database
x x x o o Maps|Diagrams|Textual Support x x x o o Maps|Diagrams|Textual Support x x o o Maps|Diagrams|Textual Support x x x o Trace Paper Plans|Documentation Schedule Iterations and Evaluation x x x o Documentation Technology Research and Purchase x x o o Documentation|Devices Deploy and Test Technology x o Field Work|Metrics Ridership Incentive Plan Iterations x x o o Documentation Preliminary Plans x x x o o o Trace Paper Plans|Poster Drafts Professor|Peer Critiques x x o o o Documentation Final Product and Outreach Metrics x x x o Graphic Representation Plan Production and Rendering x x o Posters|Slides|Video Final Exhibit | Presentation x o Posters|Slides|Video Product Implementation x o ?? *Product Monitoring* o ?? Stakeholder Engagement Phase I x x o o Involvement|Feedback Phase II x x o o Involvement|Feedback Phase III x o o Feedback References
Dillman, D. A. 1991. The design and administration of mail surveys. Annual review of
sociology:225-249.
Federal Highway Administration, and Federal Transit Administration. 2007. The Transportation
Planning Process: Key Issues. U.S. Department of Transportation, Washington, DC.
Lesser, V., D. Dillman, J. Carlson, F. Lorenz, R. Mason, and F. Willits. 2001. Quantifying the
influence of incentives on mail survey response rates and their effects on nonresponse error.
Pages 1-6 in Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the American Statistical Association.
Steiner, F. R. 2012. The living landscape: an ecological approach to landscape planning. Island
Press.
i
Student financial burden and carbon emission estimates based on 32 week year, 8 round trips/wk. @ at 22mpg.
$2/gal (fuel). 5 cents/mi (maintenance – 2014 AAA report), 170/yr. (Parking K-State). Does not include insurance and
other fees.