72-8678 DAVIS, Jr., Fra nk White, 1939THE D E T E R MI NA TIO N OF THE ROLE OF BUS TRANSIT IN THE U N I V E R S I T Y ENVIRONMENT: A CASE STUDY OF MI CHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY. Michigan State University, Ph.D., 1971 Business A d m i ni str at io n University Microfilms, A XEROXCom pany, Ann Arbor, Michigan Frank White Davis, Jr 1971 THE D E T E RM IN ATI ON O F THE ROLE OF BUS T RA NS IT IN THE UNIVE RS IT Y ENVIRONMENT: A C AS E STUDY OF M IC HIG AN STATE U NI VERSITY By Frank W, Davis, Jr. A THESIS Submitted to M i c h i g a n State U n i ve rs ity in p a rt ia l fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of D O C T O R O F P H IL OSO PH Y De partment of M a r k e t i n g and Tra n s p o r t a t i o n Adm in is t r a t i o n 1971 ABSTRACT THE DE TE RM I N A T I O N OF THE ROLE O F BUS TRANSIT IN THE U N IV ER SI TY ENVIRONMENT: A CASE STUDY O F MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY By Frank W. Davis, Jr. The purpose of this thesis was to examine in detail a major uni versity transit system to isolate factors affecting the propensity of students to ride the bus, to ascertain those cost or op erating cha ra ct er ­ istics wh i c h limit the univer si ty 's ability to provide the desired level of bus service, and to determine the effect of the attitudes of riders, administrators, and o p e r a t i n g personnel on bus system operation. State University, full a large geographical time students, 23 buses, in-depth interviews, questio nna ir e Conclusions were drawn from surveys of 453 on -c am pus students detailed demographic data on 6,836 riders cent of fall and w in t e r ing reports. scale university w it h over 40,000 and on-campus travel di stances of up to two miles was chosen as the study area. per cent return), Mi ch iga n term riders), and detailed financial (80 (89.5 per and o p e ra t­ All data were collected during the 1969-70 school year. A least squares m ul tiple regression analysis of sixteen independent variables was used to examine ride. significant factors aff ec tin g propensity to The 7 factors finally isolated as being statistically signifi­ cant at the 95 per cent level explained 24 per cent of the variance in Frank W. Davis, Jr. ridership. Other analyses included the effect of weat he r and of prior transit experience on bus ridership. Campus travel patterns and methods used to meet bus schedules we re examined. Finally, students were asked to rank, various service vari ab le s in order of importance. An e xa mi n a t i o n of cost characteristics wh i c h a bil it y to provide the desired limit the university's level of service revealed that although operating profits duri ng fall and win ter terms ran as high as 27 per cent of total revenue, cost. duri ng summer term revenue did not even cover variable In fact v i r t ua ll y all the operating problems of the system stem from the extreme seasonality of demand. cent of total o p e r a t i n g costs) winter For example, labor (58.3 per frequently had to work double shifts during quarter but were not needed at all to drive buses for 30 weeks of the year. An inv es tig at io n was made of the attitudes among riders, a dminis­ trators, and o p e r a t i n g personnel whi ch affected the development of operating objectives. bus The students appeared to desire a high frequency service whi ch wou ld al lo w residents living in remote areas to commute to the heart of campus. If the service were available, they would use it; otherwise they would change class schedules and living areas to make w a l k i n g feasible. to change Like the students, the bus system. feel unable Th ey take pride in op er at ion and maintenance of the fleet but are disc ou rag ed needs. the operating personnel from ''catering" to any individual's The goals of the a d mi nis tr at io n for the bus system mainly seem to involve m in i m i z i n g problems and conflicts rather than attempting to positively utilize the system as an integral part of the university's function. This attitude appeared to stem from the original mandate given Frank W. Davis, Jr. to the bus system w h e n it began o pe rating in 1964. Conceived by an ad hoc c om mittee appointed to recommend a solution to the university's pa rk in g and traffic problem, the bus system was or iginally visualized as a mea ns of easing these conditions so that student cars could be pro­ hibited from p ar ki ng or d r i v i n g o n campus. T hi s m a n da te has never been reevaluated to attempt to attune the bus system more closely to student travel needs nor to integrate it into the design of the campus or the scheduling of c lassroom facilities. The final chapter offers recommendations to help attune the bus system to the needs of the riders and the university. These reco mme nd a­ tions wo ul d also be useful for a u niversity or other major activity center consi de ri ng the i m p le me nt ati on of a bus transit system. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS M a n y people have made the comp le ti on of this work possible. wou ld like to take this opp or t u n i t y to so g r ea tl y to First thank those who have contributed this effort. I would 3 like to thank my major professor. Dr. Frank H. Mossman, who directed both my p ro gram and my dissertation. It was Dr. M o s s m a n who had the gift of d iscernment to k n o w wh en frustration, pressure, or the pressure of the w o r k who w a s always there w i t h counsel who offered I financial load was increasing too rapidly and and a solution. It was Dr. Mossman support and encouragement during the death of my sister and her family and duri ng the period w h e n my entire family was hospitalized w i t h hepatitis. He truly did far more than w a s his duty. N e x t , I wou ld like to thank my committee members, Dr. Jo hn L. Haza rd and Dr. Leo G. E r i c k s o n who offered very constructive suggestions and we re generous with their time and patience, especially during the p l a n n i n g and research period. Also, this project would not have been possible without the complete co operation of the M i c h i g a n State University Administration. P a r t i c u l a r l y I w i s h to thank Roger Wilkinson, Vice President for Business and Finance, who provided funds for the gathering of data and the necesary computer time; Stephen H. Terry, Assistant Vice President for Finance w h o offered considerable help in gathering financial data; J oh n ii Lewis 3 Administ rat iv e Assistant to the Director of the Physical Plant; and Hen ry W. Jolman, General Forem an of Automotive Services, who supplied all cost and o pe rating data requested. These men should be commended for their openness and desire to improve the bus system. It would not have been possible to collect and p ro cess the large volume of data involved in this project during the spring quarter had it not been for five M B A students at Mi chi ga n State Un iv e r s i t y who helped greatly. Oktav, These students, K no wl to n Atterbeary, Cemal Ekin, Mete Frederick Otto, and Richard Seif helped in the c om pi la ti on and admi ni str at io n of the survey, the writing of computer programs, the development of the orig in -d es tin at io n map, and the com pi li ng of many of the tables and figures. I would also like to thank Mrs. Janice H emsley and Mrs. M ar i a n Harper who spent many hours typing the manuscript and pati en tl y made last minute corrections. Finally, I would like to thank my family. My wife M ar ley, who became experienced by c ompleting a M ast er 's thesis, was a great help by proofr ea di ng manuscripts, processing surveys, making suggestions in composition, and giving general Our four-year-old encouragement when it was vitally needed. son Nephi helped by giving up his desire to go fishing and h e lp ing me deliver, collect, and count own parallel old thesis "just like Daddy's" surveys and by w r i t i n g his at the same time. Our one-year- son Michael was very w i ll in g to help wh enever he was able. co ntribution was in helping take surveys to the postoffice. truly a family project. iii His major It was TABLE O F CONTENTS CHAPTER I. PAGE INTROD UC TIO N ................................................. Statement of P u rp ose ..................................... Background to the Study R es earch Background . . .............................. . . . . . C la s s i f i c a t i o n systems ............................ ................................. Factors contri bu ti ng to bus system failures 2 8 8 10 .............. 13 RESEARCH DESIGN AND D A T A ................................... 14 Research D es i g n ............................................ 14 Da ta S o u r c e s .............................................. 15 Bus ri dership profile U n i ve rs it y profile ................................... 15 ..................................... 19 Survey of on-campus bus riders Campus o r i g in -de st in at ion map ....................... .......................... 19 22 W eat he r d a t a ............................................ 25 Bus ticket 25 s a l e s ........................................ Bus system o pe rating reports III. 1 ......... Consumer demand and preference studies II. I .......................... 26 ANALYSIS OF FACTORS AFF EC TI NG T HE DEMAND FOR CAMPUS BUS S E R V I C E ................................................. 29 Major R.idership D e t e r m i n a n t s ............................ 29 Total wee k l y travel distance .......................... 30 F r e que nc y of bus service to the student's living a r e a ................................................... iv 30 CHAPTER PAGE Distanc e between the individual's living area and ..................... 33 S e x ............................................................. 34 Class 36 the center of campus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ......................... Number of trips made each w e e k ............................ 38 Perce nta ge of night travel ............................ 39 .............. 40 . Effect of Weathe r on Bus Ridership . . . . . Seasonality .......................................... Daily v ariation . . . . . 40 ................................. Effect of Price on Bus Ridership 42 ..................... 43 Effect of price on absolute change in bus ridership and arc elasticity of d e m a n d ............................ Effect of price increase on system growth rate . . . . 46 50 Effect of price increase on the seasonality of ridership Ad ditional ................ . Factors Aff ecting Bus Ridership Desired Travel Patterns . . . . . . . . ............... 53 ..................... 57 Individual Re lationship with the Bus Syst em . . . . . . . Bus Ridership Information . . . . . IV. . . . . . . . . . . Ratings . 65 ......................... Ranking and Rating of Bus Service Variables Ranking 51 ................ 72 . . . . . . . 77 . . . . . . 77 ................................ COST AND O P E R A TI NG C HARACTERISTICS O F THE M S U BUS SYSTEM Current Profit Levels Source of Revenue . . . . . . . . . . . . ......... . . . . . . . . . Effect of Charter Revenue on P r ofi ts Se asonality of Profits . 83 .............. 83 .............. 85 . . . . . . . . . . ............................. v 85 91 PAGE CH A PTER Natu re of Bus System C o s t s ................................... 93 Labor C o n s i d e r a t i o n s .......................................... 94 Daily Demand P e a k s ............................................. 98 Op erating Reports V. ............................................. 101 EX AMINATION OF CURRE NT GOALS AN D O B J EC TIV ES ...... ............... 102 Objectives of the Users of the Bus S y s t e m ................... 102 Objectives of the A d m i n i s t r a t i o n ............................ Constraints on the size and growth of the s y s t e m . . . . 107 ..................... 108 Av o i da nc e of conflicts w i t h the p ri vate sector........... 109 R e d uc ti on of administr at iv e problems Objectives of the O p e r a t i n g Pe rs onn el ..................... Changes Required befor e Goals C a n Be Integrated VI. 105 CONCLUSIONS AN D R E C O M M EN DA TI ONS Conclusions . .......... 114 .................................. 120 .................................................. 120 Re co mm endations for Op era ti ng Changes ..................... 123 ........................................ 125 ............................................................. 131 Policy C onsiderations BIBLIOGRAPHY 112 APPENDICES A. Final Report of Ad- Hoc Facult y-S tu de nt M o t o r V eh icle Committee . . . . . ............................................. B. Survey of M ic hi ga n State U n i v er si ty Bus Rider sh ip Patterns C. Text of Initial T e l e p h o n e Contact M a d e Prior . 139 141 to the Ma il in g of the S u r v e y ............................................. 151 D. Photo -R edu ct io n of M i c h i g a n State U ni v e r s i t y Campus Map Indicating Groupings of Buildings into Travel Centers vi . . . 152 CHAPTER PAGE E. Detail D a t a for Or i g i n - D e s t i n a t i o n Groupings ................. 152 F. Buil di ng -Gr ou p Code R e f e r e n c e Chart ............................. 153 G. Bus Time and W a l k i n g D ist a n c e b e t w e e n Origin and D e s t i n a t i o n ......................................................... 159 .........................171 H. Bus Frequency to Each Group A r e a I. Mi ch i g a n State U n i v e r s i t y Pass Sales by Quarter J. Least Squares M u l t i p l e R e g r e s s i o n Ana lysis to Determine Maj or Factors A f f e c t i n g Bus R idership K. .............. ....................... 172 174 Least Squares M u l t i p l e R e g r e s s i o n An al ys is of the Effect of W eat he r on Bus R i d e r s h i p .............................187 L. Format of Punched Card Used in P ro c e s s i n g D a t a ................. 197 M. Detailed E xa min a t i o n of M i c h i g a n State Unive rs it y Bus U t i l i z a t i o n .................................................... 199 N, Q ua rterly F i n anc ia l Statement Ad ju s t m e n t Data 0. Bus S y s t e m G ui delines as Dr a w n Up by M i c h i g a n State Un i v e r s i t y and Bla ck Student Gro up P. ................. .......................... A n n o u n ce me nt of Bus S y s t e m Boycott by Members of 201 202 1 Wonders D o r m C o u n c i l ............................................. 205 Q. M e a d o w b r o o k Trace Bus S c h e d u l e .................................... 206 R. R e s i d en cy and Enr ol lm en t Statistics for M i c h i g a n State Un iv e r s i t y by Quarter fr om 1964 to 1969 S. R e s i d en cy and Rid er shi p ..................... 207 Statistics for M ic hi gan State U n iv er si ty by Quarter from 1964 to 1969 vii ..................... 208 LIST OF TABLES TABLE PAGE 1. Three Year A na ly si s of Bus Pass S a l e s ........................ 16 2. Pr o f i l e of Bus Pass S a m p l e ...................................... 17 3. Residence, Status of Bus R i d e r s ............ 33 4. Index of Bus Pass Sales by Q u a r t e r ............................. 42 5. Effect of 1967 Pric e In crease on Bus R id ership Sex, and Marital of 1966-67 and 1967-68 Academic Years) 6 . Effect of Home A r e a on Bus R idership 7. 8 T r a v e l i n g M o d e Durin g High School (A C om parison ..................... (Percentages) (Percentages) ........ 54 ............ 55 . O p i n i o n R a ti ng of High School Bus S y s t e m ...................... 9. ........................................ D e s t i n a t i o n P r e f ere nc e for Between-Class Breaks of Hour 11. (Percentages) . Lo ca ti on Pr eference (Percentages) 13. (Percentages) 60 One .......................... 61 for Classes of Riders and Non-Riders ................................................. 63 L oc at i o n P re ference for Classes by Class Standings (Percentages) ................................................. 14. Service P r e fe re nce of Riders and Non-Riders 15. Service Pre f e r e n c e by the Frequencies of Bus Service from Livi ng Areas 16. 56 One ........................................ De st in a t i o n P r e f ere nc e for Be tw ee n-C la ss Breaks of Hour by Class Level 12. 56 Fr equency of Bus Service Use D u r i n g High School (Percentages) 10. 47 (Percentages) (Percentages) . ................................... A tt itude towa rd M i s s i n g the B u s ................. viii 64 65 67 6 8 TAB L E PAGE 17. A ttitude toward M i s s i n g the Bus by Sex and Marital Status 18. Student S ch eduling Behavior Patterns 19. Student Sch ed uli ng Behavior P a t t e r n by F r e qu en cy of Bus Service from Living Area 20. .......................... . . . . . 71 .......................... 72 .......................................... 73 Percentages of People Who R e o u e s t e d ' I n f o r m a t i o n about MSU Bus Syste m by Sex and Marital 22. 69 P ercentages of People W h o Asked for I n fo rm ati on about MSU Bus Syst em 21. . S t a t u s .................... MSU Bus Sys tem O p i n i o n Leaders by Sex and Marital (Percentage) 74 Status .................................................... 23. Ridership of O p i n i o n Leaders by R e co mm en da tio n 24. P er ce n t a g e s of Riders and Non-Riders Following Bus Ridership Recomm en da ti on (Percentage). 75 ...................................... 25. Type of R eco mm en d a t i o n Received by Sex and Marital Status 26. Ranking of Service Variables by Rider and Non-Rider 27. Rating of MSU Bus S y s t e m ..................................... 28. Comparative Financial 74 76 . 76 . . . . 78 82 Statement of MSU Bus System 1964-1969 84 29. Perc en tag e Breakdown of Financial Statement 30. U ti li zat io n of M SU Bus System by Terms 31. Yearly Utili za ti on of MSU Bus S y s t e m ....................... 32. Income Report by Quarter 33. Bus System Cumulative Overtime Hours for 1969 Calendar (in Dollars) 1964-1969 1969-1970 . . . 8 6 ............ 8 8 ........................ Y e a r ......................................................... ix 89 92 96 TAB L E PAGE J-l. Statistics on Least Squares Var ia ble s.......................... 181 J-2 . Variance Ex plained by Individual V ar iable .................. 182 J-3. Statistics on T r a n s f o r m Va ri ab le s ............................ 183 J-4. Input Dat a T r a n s f o r m a t i o n P r o g r a m ............................ 184 K-l. Daily Bus Ri de rs hip Index Numbers, Fall Q ua rter, 188 K-2. Number of Student Bus Riders K-3. Number of Fa culty and Staff Bus Riders K-4. Simple C o r r e l a t i o n s ................ 192 K-5. Student Ri de rs hip vs. W e a t h e r 193 K-6 . Faculty and Staff Ride rs hi p vs. W e a t h e r K-7. Student Ri de rs hip vs. W e ath er K-8 . Faculty and Staff R i d e r sh ip vs. W e a t h e r (Adjusted) 1969 . . . ...................... (Adjusted) ......... ................................. ...................... ................................ x ...................... 190 191 194 195 196 LIST O F FIGURES FIGURE 1. PAGE Bus R i d e rs hip vs. Dis t a n c e of D o r m f ro m Campus Center for Four and Eight M i n ut e H e a d w a y s — M al e Students On ly 2. . . . . 31 Bus R i d e rs hip vs. D is ta nce of D o r m from Campus Center for Four and Ei ght'Minute H e a d w a y s — Female Students O n l y . . . 32 3. Rid er shi p of MSU Bus Syst em by A g e ............................ 35 4. P r o p e n s i t y of MSU Students to Use Campus Bus System . . . . 37 5. Number of Bus Passes Sold by Q u a r t e r .......................... 41 T he oretical 45 6 . 7. 8 . Demand Curve for Campus Bus T r a n s p o r t a t i o n . . . Bus Pass Sales T r e n d ............................................ Perce nta ge Increase in Winter Pas se s over Fall Passes 1964-69 9. 52 Cumu la ti ve Pe rcentage of Students R e p o rt in g T he m s e l v e s To Be in Class Are a vs. Mi n u t e s before C l a s s ................ 10. 49 58 C u mu la ti ve Percentage of Students L ea vi ng Class Area vs. Mi n u t e s after Class .......................................... 59 11. Cumu lat iv e W a i t i n g Time To Me et M S U Bus S y s t e m ........ 70 12. Daily Rid er sh ip Compar is on for Two Inbound Routes........ .... 13. Dai ly Rid er sh ip Compa ris on for Inbound and O utb o u n d Routes . 100 S-lo Bus Pass Sales Trend A m o n g On-Campus Residents On ly . . . . 209 99 CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION Statement of p u rp os e This d i s s e r tat io n examines the M i c h i g a n State Univ er si ty Bus Sy s te m to determine: lo w h a t factors significantly affect the demand for bus ser vice in the u ni versity en vironment 2, wh e t h e r there are significant costs or ope ra ti ng factors w h i c h pro hibit M S U from pro vi di ng its residents w i t h the level of service they desire 30 w h e t h e r there are policy and goal conflicts or even c on ­ flicting goals w h i c h prevent the u n i ver si ty from be i n g m o r e eff ec tiv e in m e e tin g campus travel demands 40 w h a t steps can be unde rt ak en to mak e the sys tem more r e s po ns iv e to both ad mi ni strative and student goals. This study should ma ke two maj or c ontributions on bus transport ati on s y s t e m s „ First, to the li terature it is one of the few c om prehensive studies of the w a y riders and m a n ag em ent respond to a ma j o r a ctivity center transit system,^ Second, it is one of the first c omprehensive studies of a m ed i u m - s c a l e transit system w h i c h faces non e of the ^"A more d et ai led d i sc us sio n of a ma j o r a ct ivi ty center transit s y s t e m and the w a y in w h i c h it contrasts to othe r forms of transit systems is contained in the Re search Backg ro un d s ec tion of this chapter. 1 2 2 handicaps to w hi c h transit syste m failures are u su ally a t t r i b u t e d 0 A study of this system, therefore, those such as congestion, w i l l i de nt if y factors auto mo bi le competition, other than and taxes w h i c h contribute to bus system f a i l u r e s , Back gr oun d to the study M i c h i g a n State University, the n a t i o n ’s oldest land-grant 3 college, has near ly doubled its e nrollment in n in e years, from 21,157 L in the fall of 1960 to 40,820 in the fall of 1969, This increase in enrollment has be en paral le le d by a v as t bu il din g pr o g r a m to pr o v i d e not only c la ssroom and r es ea rch space but also on-campus h o us in g facilities for a ma jor it y of the students This increase in enrollment and u n i ve rs ity physical plant ne ce ss it ate d the develo pm en t of a compl ex traffic network- P ri o r to 1957 vir tu al ly all m ov eme nt on campus was ea si l y a c c o m p lis he d by automobile or on footaround Circle Dr iv e 2 A l m o s t all academic buil di ng s w e r e located and could be reached easily For a list of these handicaps, in a ten-minute walk, see below, p. 10, 3 Report Office of the Registrar, M i c h i g a n State University, Annu al (Lansing, Mich-, 1969), 4 Report Office of the Registrar, M i c h i g a n State University, (Lansing, Mich, Fall quarter, 1969), Enrollment ^Census records ma in t a i n e d b y the married housing office and resi dence halls office indicated that for the 1967-68 a ca demic year, for example, the un iversity pr ovided on-campus living facilities for 18,000 dormitory students and another 2 , 2 0 0 students in m a rr ie d h ou sin g units. On-campus hou sing was thus provided for over 53 per cent of the 38,758 students registered for that year. There has, however, b ee n virtually no n ew residential constru ct io n since that time, g Al l street names are shown on the campus map found in A p p e n d i x D. 3 The longest w a l k from a resid en ce hall to an academic are a was less than fifteen minutes. Durin g 1957 and 1958, however, o ve r 1300 apa rt ­ ments w e r e built in the Spartan V illage area, ne ce ss i t a t i n g a 30-minute w a l k to the c l a s s ro om areas for the residents. Consequently, a large percentage of the Sp artan V i l la ge residents b e g a n to dri ve to classes, greatly increasing the n u m b e r of au tomobiles on campus duri ng the class day. ^ Campus travel was further inc reased during the 1960-63 period by the constru cti on of over 5300 on-campus res id en ce h al l units and the b e g i nn ing of the s ci en ce and business ac ademic complexes south of Re d Cedar River. in two ways. the This n e w c o n s t ru cti on in creased the traffic flow First, it in creased the n u m b e r of parking spaces taken up by on-campus residents who n e e de d to garage their cars wh i l e they resided in the dorms. Second, the g eo graphic expansion of the academic area ma de it i n c r e as in gly dif ficult for b o t h faculty and students travel be tween classes during the day unless to they used their automobiles. The remotely located l i v i n g - l e a r n i n g complexes be in g buil t at this time (early 1 9 6 0 ’s) contri bu te d to the problem. The se complexes, co nsisting of cla ss ro om and f ac ulty offi ce space as w el l as dor mitory and c af e­ teria facilities w e r e o r i gi na ll y conceived to allow students and to study in com pl et ely self-conta in ed areas w i tho ut to live the ne ed for ^According to the Office of Publ ic Safety 6,477 student vehicles w e r e registered on campus from July 1, 1957, to Octob er 30, 1957. By 1964 registrations for the same period had increased to 9,746. It is difficult to de termine the increase in faculty and staff r eg ist ra ti on since it was not m a n d a t o r y that they regis te r in 1957 w h e n only 552 cars we re registered. M a n d a t o r y regis tr ati on in 1964 found 6,960 faculty and staff auto mo bil es r eg istered f ro m July 1, 1964 to O cto be r 30, 1964. The July 1 to October 30 figures w e r e chosen since other time periods wo u l d include m a n y dupl ic at e r eg istrations due to car trades, ne w term enrollments, withdr awa ls , etc. A l l cars, however, had to be registered at the b e g i n n i n g of fall term. 4 travel. The actual effect, however, wa s that the total academic area w as increased greatly b e c a u s e m any students found it n ec essary to travel one to two miles b e t w e e n complexes to complete their class schedules. Re co gn i z i n g the need for a campus transit s y s te m Lansing Su bu rb an Lines, the local city bus system, contacted the u ni versity in 1960 re questing p e r m i s s i o n to op erate on M S U streets. This request w as denied since the univer si ty ad mi ni st r a t i o n felt that the service was not necessary. By the next year, however, the traffic s i t u at io n ha d b e c o m e suffici en tl y dif ficult that the univ er si ty instructed Richard 0. Bernitt, Di rec to r of P u b l i c Safety, to request Lansing S ub ­ ur b a n Lines to initiate service b e t w e e n S p a rta n Vill age and the academic area of c a m p u s . A g r e e me nt was reached and service b e g u n in September 1961 w i t h se rvice every 40 minutes fro m 7:40 A.M. to 6:50 P.M. The bus line charged ten cents a ride and its s er vice was apparently w e l l received. In spite of the new bus s er vi ce the on-campus p ro bl em continued to grow, traffic and parking forcing the ad mi ni st r a t i o n to restrict student parking on the campus north of the river and to exclude student traffic on Circle Driv e fr om 6:00 A.M. these re strictive steps, to 6:00 P.M. In spite of the police force issued approximately 1,500 g traffic and p a rk in g tickets per month. In a feature article in the campus newspaper the publi c safety officers w e r e quoted as stating that it was g "T raffic and P ar ki ng Re al H e ad ac he s," State N e w s , October 5, 1962, p. 1, 3. 5 9 futile to issue the large number of tickets. T h e poli ce stated that this only served to al ienate the campus community w h i c h they w e r e trying to serve. T h e students w e r e d e v el op in g a ve ry n e g a t i v e att it ud e toward the officers for giving the tickets and the faculty felt that the off icers w e r e not effective in contr ol li ng the traffic situation.. In an attempt to control parking a syste m of fines ba se d on the n u m b e r of tickets received pr eviously w a s set up, w i t h the fine for the sixth ticket set at $25<,00, Consequently, a special ad hoc Fa cu l t y - S t u d e n t M o t o r Ve h i c l e C o m mi tt ee w as called during the w i n t e r term 1963 to help ar ri v e at a workable solution„ This c om mittee m a d e two recommendations. First, the uni ve rsi ty had to develop an "efficient and s uf ficient bus sy st e m se rvicing all parts of the campus and w i t h s er vice und er the control of the University. The comm it te e considers abs olute e s s e n t i a l , this r e c o m m e n d a t i o n an As co mmittee c ha ir man Johr Lo ck w o o d stated in a ne w s p a p e r article Un ti l we devise an improved tran spo rt at io n system, w e cannot l eg it im ate ly p ro hibit students f ro m driving. This w a s the c o rne rs to ne of the re c o m m e n d a t i o n a pp ro ve d b y the Trustees last s u m m e r . ^ A l t h o u g h the c om mittee did not sp ec ifi ca ll y sta te that the bus syste m should be owne d by the college, it did feel that the u n i v e r s i t y should 9 Ibid. 10 This statement was ma de in a letter from Cha i r m a n Joh n L. Lockwoo d to the ad hoc F ac ult y- St ud ent M o t o r V eh icl e C o m m i t t e e prior to their F eb rua ry 7, 1963 meeting,, '*'1 "Fall Traffic Plans Dra ft ed, " State N e w s , N o v e m b e r 14, p o 10 o 1963, 6 h a v e direct control over it. 12 The second r e co mm en da tio n of the M o t o r Ve h i c l e C o m m i tte e was that all parking for students b e limited to p er i p h e r a l p arking lots and that no driving b e allowed an yw he re on campus except b y the m ost direct route from the p e r i ph er al p ar ki ng lot to an off-campus street. The major emphasis in the committee's repo rt concerned the control of traffic and parking. The pr op os ed b u s s y s t e m appeared to b e pr imarily a means of silencing opp osi ti on to the p ark in g and traffic controls. is indicated by the statement of J o h n D. Lockwood, Fa culty-Student M o t o r Ve h i c l e Committee: This c hairman of the "Until w e d e v ise an improved transportation system, w e cannot le gi ti mat el y pr ohibit students from d r i v i n g . " 13 12 The final report of the ad h o c F a c u l t y -S tud en t Mot or V e hi cle Committee was in the form of a letter f r o m its C h a i r m a n Dr. Jo hn L. L oc kwood to Mr. Starr H. K eesler, A s s i s t a n t Sec ret ar y to the Un iv e r s i t y President. (See Ap pe nd ix A for a copy of this letter.) Rec o m m e n d a t i o n number seven stated that " S a t is fa cto ry bus service on the campus requires that the university control num be r of buses, schedules, and routes." It has b e e n very difficult to d e t e r m i n e w h y the committee felt so strongly about this point since the L an si ng S u b u r b a n Lines' s ervice was initially w e l l received. Since the m i nut es of the co mmittee h a v e now be en destroyed there is no record to indicate the r e as on for the d e t e r i o r a t i o n of relations be t w e e n M S U and L a n s i n g S u b u r b a n Lines. C ha i r m a n Lo ckwood and Mr. Richard Bernitt, D i r e c t o r of P ubl i c Safety, stated from m e mor y that even though the campus o p e r a t i o n w as profit ab le for it, the L a ns ing Suburba n Lines woul d remove buse s w i t h o u t noti ce to ser vice d ow nt own Lansing routes. They also indicated that se rvice on the campus routes was very erratic and that w h e n me eti ng s w e r e sch ed ule d by the U n i ve rs it y administration to discuss the problems the bus lines representatives ofte n w o u l d not appear. Mr. Berni tt in dicated that students b e c a m e so d i s­ enchanted that many of them b e g a n to tender large bills each time they w o u l d board the bus. In any case this co mmittee felt that the Uni ver si ty must have better control of the bus s y s t e m if it w e r e "to dispel any argument that student(s) w i l l ne ed their p er so na l vehicles in the future." 13 "Fall Traf fi c Plans D r a ft ed, " State N e w s , N ov em b e r 14, 1963, p. 10. 7 A p p e n d i x A is a copy of the final le tt e r report m a d e b y the committee0 Of the twelve poi nt s ma de in this report w i t h the d ev elopment of a campus bus system,, three dealt Th es e three points identified problems encount er ed by the La n s i n g Subur ba n Lines and had little concern about the s ervice level that should be p ro vided on campuso In accordance w i t h this report the U n i v e r s i t y asked the Lansing Suburban Lines to submit a p rop os al for pr ovi di ng a total campus service on a franchise basis„ W he n the company repli ed that it was w il ling to continue the existing s er vice but was u n w i l li ng to expand the service as requested, M S U cancelled the e xisting fr an chi se and be gan its own service fall quarter, four used ones 1964u It o rdered eight n e w buses and p urchased to b eg i n its own inhouse cap acity and hir ed Mr„ Henry Jolman, ma n a g e r of the Gr an d R api d s Transit S y st em since 1936, to ma n ag e the o p e r a t i o n „ Cur rently the M i c h i g a n State U n i v e r s i t y Bus System op erates twenty-three 51-passenger GMC buses. owns and In 1969-70 it leased three additional buses during the fall term and an additional two buses during the w i n t e r term,, It operates five di fferent routes co nnecting each of the re sidential areas w i t h the academic campus area,, N e w buses currently on order wi ll b r i n g the 1970-71 fleet twenty-six buses of 51-pas se ng er size. to D ur i n g the 1968-69 school y e a r 24,728 passes wer e sold at $14 per quarter and 5,600,000 rides were provided„ 8 Re se a r c h ba ck g r o u n d In exam in in g the l iterature on this p ro ject three relevant areas w e r e explored; lo the c l a ss if ic ati on and purpose of various urban transit systems 2 o 3, the m a j o r factors contributing to bus s y s te m failures co nsumer demand and pre fe re nce studies. Cl a s s i f i c a t i o n s y s t e m s ,— Bus transit systems have bee n divided into three areas: n e i g h b orh oo d area travel, ma jo r ac tiv it y centers, a nd ex tended area travel. 14 Neighbo rh oo d area travel occurs w h e r e h ous in g units are owned by divers groups or individuals: most travel is generated he re by s ho pping trips, prim ar y school trips, or ind ivi ­ dual visits. Suggested publ ic transit systems for ne ig hb or hoo d area travel include taxi-like operations such as demand bus and dial-a-bus w h i c h schedu le their routes on the basis of telephone calls from p e op le w a n t i n g to catch the transit service. In maj or ac ti vi ty centers 15 (MAC), ow nership or coordin at io n is in the hands of one group and travel dema nd is ge nerated b y functional i n te ra ct io n amo ng the v a r io us locations w i t h i n the MAC, Examples of Robert A, Burco and David A, Curry, Future Ur ba n T r an spo rt at io n S y s t e m s : Impacts o n U r b a n L if e and F o r m , Vol, II: Study in N e w Systems of Urba n T r an sp or ta tio n (Menlo Park, C a l i f „: Stanford R es ea rc h Institute, 1 9 6 8 ) s p, 35, also Euge ne T, Canty, T r a ns po rt ati on and Urban Scale (Warren, M i c h , : General M o t or s Research Laboratories, 1969), pp» 1-11, 15 Canty, T ra ns po r t a t i o n and Urban Scale. p„ 6 , Mr, Canty refers the reader to the f ol lowing texts for additional detail, Nigel H 0 M. Wilson, C A R S : Compu ter A i d e d Routing Syst em (Cambridge, Mass,: Massachu­ setts Institute of Technology, 1967); E, T, Canty et aL, N ew Systems I m ple me nt at ion Study (Warren, M i c h , : General Motors R es earch L a b o r a ­ tories, 1968) p a r t i c ul ar ly "Case Study G" in Volume III; and J, Anders et_al, Study of Evolut ion ar y Urban Transpor ta tio n (Westinghouse Air Brake Co, 1968) VoL- III, A p p e n d i x IV, 9 MAC are airports, shopping centers, universities, government complexes, mi li t a r y bases, etc, has b e e n done in the area of MAC t r a v e l s recent resea rc h centers, V e r y little research perhaps 16 be c a u s e until years c'here have been very few major activity centers w i t h public transit systems other than central bu si ne ss districts or mil it ar y b a s e s . Al th o u g h the CBD h ave b e e n qui te large, (CBD) they ha ve not pioneered the development of special transit systems since they tend to view c ir culation w i t hi n the CBD as a logical e xtension of the role of the urban transit system in b r i n g i n g peop le into the CBD„ M i l i t a r y bases, on the other hand, have b e e n so large that they have tended to be viewed as extended area travel w h i c h is dis cu ss ed below. One of the greatest needs for MAC transit is ex hibited by universities w he r e the numb er of people is very h ig h and the degree of in teraction (movement b et ween bu ildings wi th i n the units) is also v er y higho It was pre dictable that the large state un iv er si tie s w o u l d b e among the first to recognize the need to install MAC transit s y s t e m s . The 16 Two excellent studies have been done. These include Louis E, Keefer, Urban Travel Patterns for A i r p o r t s , Shopping Centers and Industrial Plants (Milford, Cornu : Louis E. Keefer, T r a n s ­ por ta ti on Planning Consultant, 1966) and U r b a n D e sig n and Deve lo pme nt Corporation, -A 1 Study of Internal Circul at ion Systems for the Post Oak c iig 'mm I L -— — . ill.!•« r>IIim ■ I-■ I. I II o il M Urban Center, H o u s t o n , Texas (Washington, D.C.: Urb an D e s ig n and De velopment Corporation, 1970)„ The first w o r k w as sp on so re d b y the H igh wa y Research Board and the National A c a d e m y of Sciences. The second study was sponsored b y The City of Houston, Texas, and the Urba n Mass Trans po rt ati on Admi nis tr at io n of the U.S. D e p ar tm ent of Transportation. "^At the present time u niversities are ra pidly st arting their o wn bus services. The list includes in ad di ti on to M i c h i g a n State University, Indiana University, Kent State University, U ni versity of Michigan, University of Tennessee, U n i ve rs it y of Wisconsin, and many others. Various mana ge men t approaches are taken. For example, the Kent State University bus system is en ti re ly student run and managed under the direction of a faculty member. It is s up ported by a studentimposed tax of $4.00 for each student each term. Individual bus rides 10 un iversity is somewhat di fferent fr om ot he r M AC in that it has a captive group and is not so dependent u po n co nv en i e n c e of mo ve men t w i t h i n the university to attrac t its cl ie nt el e as w o u l d b e a shopping center or a CBD. Likew is e the un i v e r s i t y is not so concerned about the efficiency of mo vement as w o u l d be a res ea rc h comp le x or a gover n­ ment office center since the u n i ve rsi ty does not pay salaries to the students n o r does it expect any direct un ive rs it y - o r i e n t e d output. The third area is the study of e xt ended ar ea travel (urban transit) whi ch connects n e i g hbo rh oo ds and maj or a cti v i t y centers. Travel demand is generated by w o r k trips, and colleges, major p ur chasing trips, ture 18 etc, trips to secondary schools The re is ex tensive litera- on the needs for urban transit systems and the i mplementation of n e w systems such as the San Francisco BART system. Factors c on tributing to bus s y s t e m f a i l u r e s ,— Owe n 19 states that the major factors leading to urban transit s y s te m failures and are then free to all students. The U ni v e r s i t y of Tennessee, o n the other hand, contracts w ith the City of K n o x v i l l e for bus service. The City of Kno xv il le in turn has a m a n a g e m e n t contract w i t h a p r o f e s ­ sional mana ge me nt team w h i c h mana ge s the bus syste m for the entire me t r o p o l i t a n area for a p e rc en tag e of the revenue. The students are able to ride free of charge on campus area but are charged fifteen cents to go to the remote m arried h o u s i n g locations. 18 W ol fg an g S. Homburger, e d . s U rb a n Mass Transit P la nn i n g (Berkeley Institute of Tran spo rt at io n and Traffic Engineering, Un iversity of Ca li ­ fornia, 1967) is a good example of some of the w o r k that has b e e n done in this area. This book presents a theoretical a pp r o a c h for doing urban transit research, a summary of results fro m various mass transit de mo n­ stration studies and case studies of ma ss transit pl an ni ng in San Francisco (BART), Cleveland, Washington, D.C., and the M inn e a p o l i s - S a i n t Paul area. 19 D.C.: Wil fred Owen, The M e t r o p o l i t a n T r a n s p o r t a t i o n P r o b l e m The Brookings Institute, 1966), pp. 66-87. (Washington 11 serv ice declines are b a s i cal ly as follows: a) c o mpe ti ti on fr om the p ri vate a u to mo bil e w h i c h is hig hl y subsi diz ed by public i nvestment in the na tion's highw ay infra str uc tu re b) 20 p ea k - h o u r - o n l y usa ge of the u r b a n transit system,, suggests Owen that 30 per cent of all bus traffic in the d o w n ­ town Ph il a d e l p h i a area moves during the 5:00 to 6:00 P.M. rush h o u r 2^ c) inc re as ed c o n ge sti on on city streets substant ia ll y restricts turn ar oun d time for the b u s e s „ Traffi c delays in the Boston area in 1962 w e r e e st imated to have occupied 18 per cent of the d) bus o p e r at ing time,, 22 the h i g h level of state and local taxes charged as franchise taxes for the pr i v i l e g e of using u r b a n streets. These taxes av er ag ed 9„1 per cent of o p e r at in g revenues for 100 of the maj or p r i va te ly operat ed transit companies. high as e) 2 0 per cent of gross revenue for taxes. o bs o l e t e transit vehicles, schedules, ina de qu ate headways, and overcrowding,, Ibido , pp, 23 i nconvenient 24 But such is not the case at M i c h i g a n State University, ?0 M a n y paid as This syst em 70-79, 21 I b i d ., pp, 79-86. The 30 per cent val u e becomes even m ore sign if ­ icant w h e n it is realized that the m o r n i n g rush ho ur also has a very h igh peak. Very little of the bus traffic then w o u l d flow during periods othe r than the 6:00 to 8:00 A.M. rush ho ur and the 4:00 to 6:00 P.M. rush hour. See Ch art 13, p. 80 of his book, 2 2 I b i d , , pp. 2 Ibidc, p. 87. 3 24 74, 87, I b i d , , p. 137. 12 operates in an environment where a) there is little c o mp et iti on fr om private a ut om obi le s since students' cars are regulated off of the campus d uri n g the a a y25 d . b) the typical m o r n i n g-e ve ni ng peak hour patte rn does not exist since students attend c la sses throughout the day and use the bus system to travel b et we en classes. c) congestion is vig oro us ly regulated by p r o h i b i t i n g student drivers on campus during the daylight hours d) the bus system is not required to pay any taxes, nor is it required to yield a profit on its o p e r at io n e) all buses are of the newest variety, ve hicles have a h eadway of one and one-half mi n u t e s on some routes and never over fifteen minutes on the less-traveled routes. Co nsequently it would appear that M i c h i g a n State Uni ve rsi ty should provide an ideal environment for the o p e r a t i o n of a profitable bus transit system. a bus transit 25 This study then has the d i s t i n c t i o n of examining system whi ch is o p e r a t i n g under ap p a r e n t l y ideal conditions, This statement should be clarified. The f ac ulty and staff are allowed to drive and park on campus but the students, except for a few special cases, are not allowed to do so. Th is study has c o n c e n ­ trated on the examination of student travel patterns since there is very little ridership of the bus by the faculty and staff. Also the faculty and staff are relatively small in number w h e n compared w i t h the total student body. A final factor whi ch make s the travel patterns of the faculty and staff relatively insignificant in c o m pa ri son with the student body is that the students tend to travel around campus much more dur in g the day than do the facu lt y and staff members. 13 C on su me r dema nd and pr ef e r e n c e s t u d i e s .— T h e typical co nsumer demand or pre fer en ce study has t r a d it io nal ly b e e n b a s e d u po n the mod al split concept since it has b e e n the goal of the ur ban transit system to determine why riders h av e de ser te d the transit systems in favor of the automobilec, The first step in this m o d a l split an alysis has be en to identify current bus u s e r s „ T h e Me m p h i s study example of the market i de n t i f i c a t i o n step, 26 pr ov ide s an e xc ellent indicating, for example, that the ma j o r M em phis bus servic e users w e r e commuters, domestics, l ow income groups and families w i t h o u t cars. The second step of the m o d a l split studies dete rmi ne s w h i c h service characteristics are mo st im po rta nt to the user and h o w w e l l each m od e satisfies the needs i n d i c a t e d 0 One of the mo re complete studies of this type was conducted by a faculty group at the U n i v e r s i t y of 27 Maryland's College of B u s i n e s s „ Al th o u g h this type of study has b e e n im portant in d et erm in in g w h y people choose one m o d e over a no the r it was not e s p ec ia lly rel evant for the MS U study since the au to m o b i l e is n o t a real compe tit or on the MSU campus„ Consequently, it was deemed to b e mo re im portant to try to determine actual travel needs rather than to co mpare m o d e s 0 26 Memph is T r a n s i t Authority, M a s s T ra n s p o r t a t i o n Studies in Memphis (Memphis, T e n n 0 : T r a nsi t A ut hority, 1965), pp„ 78-79» This study was sponsored by a mass tr an sp or t a t i o n d e m o n s t r a t i o n grant from the U.S. Housing and H om e Fina nce Agency. It is ide nt ifi ed as p r oje ct numb er T e n n 0 MTD - 1„ 27 S. Jo Hille, F 0 To Paine, A 0 N„ Nash, Go A u Brunner, Tr an sp or t a t i o n Att it ud es in Ba l t i m o r e and P hi lad el p h i a , " T ra n s p o r t a t i o n Journal, VII (Summer, 1968), 30-47„ "Consumer C H A P T E R II R E S E A R C H D E SIGN A N D D A T A R e s e a r c h design The bas i c o r g a n i z a t i o n of this paper arises from the structure of the basic economic model, affect the dema n d curve, i . e . , first looking at factors w h i c h second identifying the ma j o r components of the cost curve and third, examining the goals of the system in order to a s c e r t a i n the a p p r o p r i a t e relationship b etween the supply and demand curves. Hence, C h a p t e r III concentrates on analyzing factors w h i c h affect the d e m a n d curve, i.e., c u r rently riding the bus system, of price, weather, identifying those m a rket segments isolating and me a s u r i n g the effect and service levels on bus ridership, and then deter­ m i n i n g what services are actually desired by bus riders. C h a p t e r IV analy zes the financial structure of the M S U Bus S y s t e m to i d e ntify factors w h i c h control the cost structure and operating constraints. labor issues, It also investigates scheduling practices, and load factor fluctuations to learn h o w resources can b e t t e r be tailored to the demand for bus services. C h a pter V examines the goals of students, bus o p e rating per s o n n e l System. administration, and to determine h o w they relate to the M S U Bu s Special emphasis is given to the p erspective of the college a d m i n i s t r a t i o n s h o wing w h y various policies and goals have been developed for the bus system, and to o p e rating personnel, 14 evaluation of the role of bus 15 In Chap t e r VI a suggested set of goals is d e v e loped and methods are discussed to facilitate the i m plementation of these goalsthis chapter that integrates the findings of Chapters III, It is IV, and V into the development of overall operating objectives and policies. D a t a sources One of the ma j o r reasons for selecting the M S U Bus System as the subject of this case study was the availability of numerous sources of data on the well-defined student body living o n campus a nd using the bus system- This data was collected from seven d if­ ferent sources each of w h i c h will b e discussed in turn. Bus ridership p r o f i l e .— In the fall of 1967 a n e w bus pass p r i c i n g policy was introduced. Prior to this time passes w e r e sold for a flat fee of $12.00 per quarter. In 1967 it w as decided that not only should the cost be increased to $14.00 per quarter, but also that there should b e some means of reducing p e a k load demand during the w i n t e r quarter or at least of requiring the w i n t e r - t e r m - o n l y riders to pay the cost of the service they demanded. It was, therefore, d ecided that a w i n t e r - t e r m - o n l y rider should pay a $6.00 surcharge for the pr i v i l e g e of riding only during the cold w e a t h e r period. a means of polic i n g the assessment of the surcharge, As the purchaser of the w i n t e r pass w a s charged $14,00 if h e turned in his fall term pass but $20.00 if he did not turn in the fall pass. A preli m i n a r y examination of w i n t e r 1968, 1969, and 1970 sales revealed the sales patterns shown in Ta b l e 1. 16 TABLE 1 T H R E E - Y E A R ANALYSIS OF BUS PASS SALES 1967-68 1968-69 1969-70 Fall passes 8,438 8,318 8,956 Win t e r passes $14 6,830 6,697 7,149 W in t e r passes 2,822 3,035 2,822 Per cent riding b o t h terms 71% 69% 72% P er cent of fall passes returned 81% 80,5% 80% Fall term regist r a t i o n 38,758 39,949 40,820 W i n t e r term re-enrollment 34,365 35,804 36,442 Per cent of students re-enrolled 88,6% 89,7 % 89,3% Per cent of re-enrolling fall term riders buying w i n t e r pass 91.5% 90,0% 89,5% Item $20 On the basis of this p r e l i m i n a r y analysis it was felt that a prof i l e of students returning fall passes w o u l d pr o v i d e vi r t u a l l y a complete picture of fall term riders since almost 90 per cent of these students also bought a w i n t e r tern pass if they returned to school ■^This statement is pred i c a t e d on the assu m p t i o n that bus riders dropped out of school at the same rate as n o n - r i d e r s , A l t h o u g h this a s s umption has not b e e n substantiated statistically there is no a priori reason to disprove this assumption. The consequence of a Type I error 17 Also, since 72 p e r cent of the w i n t e r term riders also rode fall quarter it w o u l d also be strongly rep r e s e n t a t i v e of w i n t e r term ridership, The r e t urned b u s pass served as a very excellent source document since it had b l an k s on it for the student to enter his name, student number, and address. Since the bus pass is used for ownership v e r i f i c a t i o n w h e n b o a r d i n g the bus or in case of loss, virtually all of the students did fill in this information. Table 2 provides a profile of the sample o b ta i n e d by using these returned bus passes, TABLE 2 P R O F I L E O F BUS PASS SAMPLE Total all passes wint e r pass turned in for o o Passes de s t r o y e d b y dormitory ele r k , Passes w i t h o u t i nformation filled in or m u t i l a t e d b e yond recognition o 0 Key punch errors or n on-matched student n u m b e r or duplicate n u m b e r Total usable items 0 a ) 6,836/8956 (89,3) = b ) 6,836/9971 = 58 114 141 0 Pe r centage of fall riders who re-enrolled w i n t e r term , , , , P e r c e n t a g e of w i n t e r term riders included in sample , , , „ , „ , 7,149 . 6,836 , 8 5 „ 5%a 0 0 , 6 8,5%b ,855 ,685 Student n u m bers were keypunched and veri f i e d from these bus tickets. Once the tickets w e r e keypunched they w e r e passed against is v e r y low, however, since 80 per cent of the fall tern bus riders were included in the sample. Consequently, if no bus riders dropped out at the end of fall quar t e r it w o u l d provide an 80 p er cent sample. If all of the bus riders d r o pped out it would b e a 100 per cent sample. If bus riders dropped out at the same rate it wo u l d p rovide a 90 per cent sample. 18 the r e g i s t r a r ’s student m a sterfile to select demographic i nformation about the bus r i d e r s „ Information on each student selected from the regis t r a r ' s tape m a s t e r f i l e includes a) sex and marital status b) date of bi r t h c) class d) c o l lege in w h i c h student w as enrolled e) c u m ulative grade point average at M i c h i g a n State Univ e r s i t y f) credits g) home area by state or county in Michigan h) campus r e s idential area by dormitory number, ma r r i e d taken w i nter quarter h o u s i n g area, or off-campus zip code i) cum u l a t i v e credits The 6,836 items, taken at M i c h i g a n State Univ e r s i t y representing those students w ho rode b o t h fall and w i n t e r quarters, were selected onto a separate magn e t i c tape that was then used for tabulation purposes-. It should be pointed out here that n o n e of this i nformation w a s further v e r i f i e d as to its accuracy since it w a s a ssumed that p e ople did not a t t e m p t to dece i ve the university* is not totally valid, its c o l l e c t i o n process graduation, the university feels sufficiently confident of to use this information to send mail, levy college tuition and fees, did appear to be somewhat lacking was does not m a k e any p o l i c y decisions strong effort A l t h o u g h this a s sumption to pol i c e this item. etc. j ustify The one item that the birth day* bas e d on age, Consequently, Since the u n i v e r s i t y it does n ot m a k e a thirty-six of the students did not include their birth day on the records* It is not kno w n h o w many others may have made mistakes on this item but it is 19 pr o b a b l y v e r y small since the student is asked to veri f y this item e a c h time he r e g i s t e r s „ U n i v e r s i t y p r o f i l e ,,— The univ e r s i t y pr o f i l e is compiled by the registrar each quarter,, Basically, the process and inform a t i o n is similar to the ridership profile except are included,, The data on the registrar's m a s t e r f i l e is collected at registration, reports„ that all univ e r s i t y students from the student's a p p l i c a t i o n form and f r o m grade It is updated and corrected at least once a week,, end of the second w e e k of the quarter, classified into various combinations w e e k enrollment r e p o r t s „ A t the the registrar's m a s t e r f i l e is to d evelop the registrar's second The reports are not made until the end of the second w e e k to allow late r e g i s tration and "drops and adds" to be processedc Some of these reports are m a d e public in many forms v a rying from Information S e r v i c e s ' This is M i c h i g a n State U n i v e r s i t y : Facts Book w h i c h is released to various news media, 1970 to the official quarterly e n r ollment report and the A n n u a l Report b o t h p u b l i s h e d by the Registrar's Office,, Other reports are simply filed for the u n i v e r ­ sity's internal uses, Survey of on-campus bus r i d e r s „— For the i nformation that was not available from any other source, it w as n e c e s s a r y to p repare a survey to collect the required data,, The p rimary purposes of the survey w e r e to determine the travel patterns of students throughout the w e e k and to determine what services of the survey is included in A p p e n d i x B„ they actually desire,, A copy The survey s a mple list was selected by the computer from the registrar's m a s t e r f i l e b y taking every 20 thirty-third individual units. 2 who lives on campus or in married housing The sample was restricted to on-campus students for three ma j o r reasons; a) The bus ridership profile indicated that only 916 of the 6,836 w i n t e r term 1970 bus riders lived off-campus. J u d g i n g from the seasonal trends and the lack of off-campus bus service, it was felt that even fewer off-campus residents would be riding spring term. C o n s e quently it was felt that the exclusion of this segment would net seriously alter che results. b) The incidence of ridership among off-campus residents was so mately low a s to m a k e sampling very difficult. 18,000 o f f “C a m p u s c) The campus mail students only 916 Of a p p r o x i ­ s t u d e n t s rode. system was available, for both the d i s t r i ­ bution and c o l lection of the surveys sent on campus. The cost of a d m i n i stering the survey would have been much higher if the sample included off-campus residents since postage would have been required The output from the computer sample the form of "two-up" gummed in both directions. selection program, was in labels which included the student's name, The registrar's m a s terfile is arranged in student number sequence. The number a student r e c eives is primarily determined by the time at which the student's a p p l i c a t i o n is accepted. 21 address, telephone number, and student number. One label was used as the m a i l i n g label and the second label was used for f o l l o w - u p . Before the survey was mail e d each person was called and asked for a p e r sonal commitment of cooperation, of the telephone conversation*; A p p e n d i x C contains a copy The surveys w e r e received by the students w i t h i n twenty-four hours of the telephone c o n t a c t , If the survey had not b e e n returned w i t h i n seven days of the time it was m a i l e d 9 a follow-up call was made n e e d e d a second copy. to determine wh e t h e r the student Twenty additional copies w e r e sent out. The origi n a l sample consisted of 575 students. students had either moved or refused to cooperate. sent, 453 (80%) w e r e returned. Seven of these Of the 568 surveys Eight of those returned w e r e unusable because of incomplete answers. It should be p o i nted out that on the day previously scheduled for r e l e a s e of the surveys, w i d e student strike to close there down w e r e efforts m a d e to start a n a t i o n ­ the n a t i o n ’s college campuses. the effort w a s not successful at M i c h i g a n State University, Although it did cause some co n f u s i o n on the M SU campus for approximately one week. In spite of this, there was a high percentage of return on this survey, but it was felt that returns wou l d have b e e n even higher during m o r e normal times since at least some of the non-respondents were pa r t i c i ­ pa t i n g in the strike. O n the basis of the telephone calls made, surveyors felt that m a n y of the non-respondents either were not attending classes or w e r e not living at their m ailing addresses. In light of the strike it should b e pointed out that the prime factor used in elim i n a t i ng the eight unusable surveys wa s whether they gave a s t r i k e - oriented answer such as "did not attend any 22 classes— on strike," In general, however, most students gave answers for a norm a l w e e k and m a ny even included notes to this effect. O ne of the major editing jobs required o n the survey was to convert b u i l d i n g names to m a c h i n e readable numbers so that travel distance and bus times could be measured. The actual c o nversion scheme will be discussed in the next section. Campus ori g i n - d e stination m a p ,— One of the maj o r data processing problems was the d e v elopment of some means of identifying and grouping the hundreds of buildings on campus. If each of the buildings had been identified individually, the origin- d e s t i n a t i o n m a t r i x w o u l d have been completely unmanageable since the m a t r i x size is d e termined by the square of the number of individually identified locations. O n a map (scale 1 inch = 200 feet) obtained from the campus P l a n n i n g Office, the b u i ldings were grouped according to the following guidelines: a) A l l groups w ere to be m u t u a l l y exclusive, i,e„, each b u i lding would b e included in only one group, b) Collectively each group w o u l d include all m a j o r buildings to whi c h students travel. c) Buildings such as the power plant, laundry, buildings and grounds offices, farms, e t c , 8 however, w e r e not included, experimental Buildings in each group w e r e to be those considered by the students as being in the same general area. For example, the buildings that share an access street or path, lawn, a bus stop or some other distingu i s h i n g feature w e r e grouped together. Since the grouping w as m a d e b y people w i t h three to five years experience traveling be t w e e n 23 campus buildings, intuition was he a v i l y relied upon w h e n there w e r e no clear-cut grouping f e a t u r e s , This m e t h o d resulted in 23 groupings w i t h the average distance b etw e e n group center and each building only 290 feet, If the average w a l k i n g speed of 325 feet/minute m e a s u r e d b y the Campus Park and Pl a nning Office is used, this means that a building in each group averages only 54 w a l k i n g seconds from the group center. contains a map of the campus w i t h the groups circled. (Appendix D Appendix E contains a list of the b u i ldings in each group w i t h the distance b e t w e e n the group center and the building. indicated. W a l k i n g time is also A p p e n d i x F lists each buil d i n g in alphabetical ord e r w i t h its a p propriate group number for reference purposes.) It should be pointed out that the m a r r i e d housing locations w e r e grouped together even though their size might exceed the average distance of the other twenty groups since they w e r e felt to reflect m o r e closely neighborhood c haracteristics rather than maj o r activ i t y center travel patterns. This grouping, however, affected only Spartan Village since the other h ous i n g areas w e r e w i t h i n the average grouping size. Once the b u i l d i n g groups had b e e n identified it was necessary to determine the w a l k i n g distances be t w e e n each group of buildings. Again, on the basis of five years of actually w a l k i n g around campus the distance betw e e n points was determined and was measured w i t h a straight edge. The chosen route was the shortest possible route that can effectively be wal k e d in good weather. For example, w a l k i n g was not restricted to sidewalks if a shortcut w e r e available that did not go through a building. T he Red Cedar River was crossed only at bridges. 24 A l l o w a n c e s w e r e not m a d e for paths beco m i n g m u d d y during rainy or snowy weather. All d i s tances w e r e measured to the n earest fifty feet. Bus times w e r e determined by Henry Jolman, system., foreman of the bus He i n d icated the time required to go from Shaw Lot to each bus stop and f r o m each stop to Shaw Lot. O n the basis of this data, bus time w a s d e t e r m i n e d be t w e e n each of the g r o u p s . To this time was add e d the a v e r a g e w a i t i n g time to make a transfer at Shaw Lot. almo s t all cases In the average w aiting time was considered to b e one-half of the h e a dway time. The wa i t i n g time for the Spartan Village bus, however, w a s cons i d e r e d to b e only four mi n u t e s since it was assumed that the individual w o u l d attempt to schedule his arrival time to coincide w i t h the Spartan Vi l l a g e transfer. It was also assumed that the i n d ividual w o u l d w a l k to the nearest bus stop although no time w a s allowed for w a l k i n g to the bus or for w aiting for the bus. In cases w h e r e the bus routing m a d e riding illogical, bus time was c ons i d e r e d to b e zero. This frequently occurred around Circle Drive w h e r e the o n e - w a y traffic pattern required that a person taking a bus from the l i b r a r y to the Women's w o u l d have to ride to Shaw Lot, Intramural Building, transfer buses, for instance, and then ride through U n i v e r s i t y V i l lage b e f o r e the bus returned to the W o m e n ’s Intramural B u i l d i n g bus stop. The logical alternative w as to w a l k the 1250 feet b e t w e e n the b u i ldings rather than to take the bus. (See Appe n d i x G„) The group n u m b e r s w e r e manua l l y substituted for the building s p e cified on the survey. Since there w e r e only 445 usable returns, it was felt that this m e t h o d would be much m o r e expedient than keypun c h i n g and p r o g r a m m i n g for the m a n y varied abbreviations used by respondents to d e s ignate buildings. 25 Frequency of bus service by each group area was determined from the campus bus schedule. Th e s e are listed in Appendix H. W e a ther d a t a .— All measures of w eather were taken from the Local Climatologicai Par a published mo n t h l y by the Environmental Data Service of the United States Department, of Commerce. Data obtained included: a) Average, daily temperature in degrees Fahrenheit b) Daily p r ecipitation in inches of water between 7:00 A.M. and ]:00 P.M. c) Average daily wind speed d) Average daily sky cover from sunrise to sunset in tenths e) Daily humidity readings at 1:00 P.M. Ea s t e r n Standard Time These readings were Lansing Capital M S U campus. taken by the w e ather bureau station at the City Airport which is six and one-h a l f miles from the Generally, the measures for the two locations are very similar; however, occasi o nally there are large deviations. me a sures are very similar between the two points. T emperature If weather data had been available for M S U during the investigation period it would have, been used, but the service had not started collecting data at the M S U Horticulture Farm at that time. Bus ticket registration, s a l e s .— Each quarter, the International bus tickets are sold at Center Book Store, and at the desk in each of the dormitories. the Student Union, All records of sales and 26 transactions are m a i n t a i ned under the direction of the Comptroller's Office. These records provide complete information on ticket sales by quarter i n c luding the number of commuter or regular tickets sold and the number of fall tickets returned on the purchase of winter passes. A list of ticket sales by quarter is included in Appendix I. Bus system operating; r e p o t t s .— Th e r e are basically three sets of reports m a i ntained first report by the op e r a t i n g section of the bus system. is compiled from data supplied by the driver. The On each run the driver uses a hand counter to determine h ow many people board the bus on that run. If any people were left behind he indicates so by circling the run count on his daily log. These counts are made daily and are used to de termine wh e t h e r additional buses should be added to handle any students wh o may be left behind. One deceiving fact about these counts is the fact that a person who transfers buses is counted twice, first w h e n he boards the bus at his origin and again w h e n he transfers to his destin a t i o n bus. Also, since people may board the bus for short c r i p s , the total bus capacity may be exceeded several times w ithout leaving any student behind if there is a rapid turnover among the bus riders. The second report is m a i n t a i n e d by the garage. bus enters the garage for fueling, direct charges are m a i n t ained Each time a repair, cleaning, or other service, by bus number. At the end of each month these costs are totaled and costs per mile are calculated. charter revenue reports are main t a i n e d on an individual In addition, bus basis. These reports reflect not only direct charter and labor costs but also revenue 27 derived from the charter o p e r a t i o n and con t r i b u t i o n to overhead. The garage also m a i n t a i n s a report of overtime hours w o r k e d by drivers. T he third group of reports, the funds flow ledger, q u a r t e r l y by the B o o k k e e p i n g and Accounts P ayable Office. is generated This office accumulates all receipts deposited and all vouchers paid to determine cash flow prof i t for the quarter. ledger should be p o i n t e d out. Several entries in the cash flow First, no p r o v ision is m a d e for overhead charges for the bus s y s t e m o f f i c e space under the east w i n g of the s t a dium or for the w a t e r used in w a s h i n g the buses. Second, since the p u r c h a s e of buses w as financed through an inhouse loan, no interest charges are recorded. Third, o n l y part of the fringe benefits paid to the drivers are c r e d ited to the bus account. m e d i c a l insurance, social security, The rest of the charges, and retirement, and credited to the U n i v e r s i t y General Fund. Last, are paid by the $45,000 per y e a r c o n t r i b u t i o n to an equipment reserve account w h i c h was started in 1967 seems System. to distort the actual o p e r a t i n g p icture of the M S U Bus In the reports used for this paper the funds flow ledger has b e e n a d j u s t e d to p r o v i d e a b e tter i n d ication of actual bus system operation. a) These a d justments include: T h e a l l o c a t i o n of overhead at $3,000 per year. This figure was ba s e d on $1,200 for u t i lities and $1,800 for office space w h i c h the university b) allocates at $3.00 per square foot. T h e c a l c u l a t ion of interest payments on the net investment level at 7 per cent per year. c) T h e removal of the equipment r eserve transfer. This equip­ ment reserve account has the effect of burdening the existing 28 s y s t e m w i t h the responsibility of payi n g for the current rolling stock as well as for future purchases, d) No adjustment wa s m a d e to reflect the fringe benefits not paid by the bus system n or w a s an attempt m a d e to analyze the cost of transferring bus drivers to the phys i c a l plant pa y roll during the summer. Th e s e adjustments have been made to Tables 28 and Table 32 in C h a p t e r IV. A p p e n d i x N. The amount of each quarterly adju s t m e n t is giv e n in CH A P T E R III AN A LYSIS OF FACTORS AF F E C T I N G THE D E M AND FOR CAMPUS BUS SERVICE This chapter identifies factors a f f ecting the demand for bus service on the MSU campus. The data used for the analysis in this section comes primarily from two sources. First, the data obtained from the surveys were used to correlate bus ridership*'— the purchase of a quarterly bus p a s s — -with various service and travel demands as frequency of service and total w e e k l y travel distance. such Second, the demographic data obtained from the registrar's mast e r f i l e was used to compare market segments to de t e r m i n e the propensity of each group to purchase q u a rterly bus passes. W h e n e v e r possible the results from one data source were used to veri f y the results from the other data source. Ma j o r ridership determinants A least variables squares regression analysis on sixteen independent (see Appendix J for detailed d e s c r i p t i o n of program and run) *The term "bus ridership" is defined as the propensity to buy a quarterly bus pass since ncn-pass h o lders are not legally allowed to ride the bus. It will be conceded that a large number of bus ticket holders do share their passes w i t h non-pass h o l d e r friends but for the purposes of this paper ridership differ e n c e s w i t h i n either the pass holder group or the non-pass holder group will not be considered. 29 30 finally isolated seven factors wh i c h were at the 95 per cent level or greater. statistically significant These 24 per cent of the variance in ridership. seven variables explained Each of these seven factors will be discussed in the following paragraphs. Total w e e k l y travel d i s t a n c e . — This variable, a me a s u r e of the total distance traveled each week in attending classes, me e t i n g work schedules, important and traveling to regular social engagements, w as the most single factor affecting bus ridership. T h i s variable explained 6.34 per cent of the total variance in bus ridership and was statisti­ cally significant at the 99.95 per cent level. The "b" value obtained from this r e l ationship indicates that an additional 7.4 per cent of the students ride w h e n their w e ekly travel distance increases 10,000 feet per week. Frequency of bus service to the s t u d e n t 1s living a r e a .— This variable, measured in minutes between regularly scheduled bus service during the day, was the second most important variable affecting rider­ ship. This variable explained 5.6 per cent of the total ridership variance and was also significant at the 99.95 per cent value indicates that an additional level. The "b" 29.88 per cent of the on-campus students living in any one given area will purchase bus passes if the frequency of service is increased from eight m inutes to four minute intervals. This "b" value is in very close agreement with the values shown in Figure profile. 1 and Figure 2 whi c h were derived from the bus ridership These freehand curves indicate that the propensity to use the bus varies by over 25 per cent between the two service frequency areas. Percentage o f Male Students Who Buy Bus Passes 70 Percentage of Female Students W h o Buy Bus Passes 60 50 40 Co fO 30 20 10 1000 w "3tf0U~ 4000 ~5UUtT Distance of Dorm from Campus Center Fig. 2.— Bus ridership vs. distance of dorm from campus center for four and eight minute headways— female students only, 33 Ta b l e 3 on campus. indicates that 86.6 per cent of all bus riders live Since the student body is almost equally divided among on- and off- c a m p u s residents this value would be expected to be nearer to 50 per cent the bus riders were if w i t h i n the academic area. looking only for a shuttle service This difference between on- and off-campus students in p r opensity to ride would imply that ridership is determined pr i marily by the service to the residence areas and not by the service w i t h i n the academic area. Pi stance between the i n d i v i d u a l 1s living area and the center of c a m p u s .— This variables a m e asure of the shortest w a l k i n g distance between the s t u d e n t ’s residence hall or married housing area and the center of c a m p u s — Farm Lane and A u d itorium R o a d — explained 3.72 per cent of the total variance in q u a rterly pass purchases. especially important T h i s r e l a t ionship was deemed since ridership increased e x p o n e n t i a l l y with this 2 distance. per cent T h i s exponential (x ) relationship was significant at the 99.95 level although the linear relationship w as only significant at the 56 per cent level. TABLE 3 R E S 1 D E N C E S S E X s AND MA R I T A L STATUS O F BUS RIDERS Group Single males Single females M a r ried males M a r ried females Total Total Residence Hal Is Married H ousing Off Campus 31.7% 58.3% 6.8% 3 •2% 27.40% 52.00% .05% .05% .05% .05% 5.90% 1.00% 4.2% 6.3% .9% 2.0% 100.0% 79.50% 7.00% 13.4% Note: This table was constructed from a sample of 6,836 students. This sample contained 90 per cent of all fall term 1969 riders who re-enrolled w i nter term, 1970. 34 A c c o r d i n g to the "b" value 21.3 per cent m o r e of the student b o d y w i l l buy passes if they live 5,000 feet from the campus center than if they live o n l y 3,000 feet from the center of campus. Likewise, 53.2 per cent m o r e of the student b o d y w i l l ride if they live 7,000 feet from the center of campus rather than only 3,000 feet. w h i c h w e r e derived f r o m the bus ridership profile, Figures 1and 2, substantiate this relationship b e t w e e n distance from campus center and the percentage of the student body w h i c h buys a bus pass. Alth o u g h the range of values for this r e g r e s s ion equation is from 1,150 feet to 10,500 feet, the p r e p o n d e r a n c e of observations was in the 3,000 to 5,000 feet range. As could be expected there w a s a correlation b e t w e e n the distance from the d o r mitory area to the center of campus and the total distance traveled each w e e k by the student. c o r r e l a t i o n va l u e was 0,36. In this case the simple It is important to note, however, that once the individual effect of each of these variables had been considered there was very little residual or interaction remaining. This point is examined in detail in A p p e n d i x effect J, S e x .— This v a r i a b l e explained 1.2 per cent of the total va r i a n c e in bus ridership and w as statistically significant at the 98.9 per cent level. Since sex was entered as a dummy variable, the re g ression coefficient can be read directly as indicating that females have a 9.75 per cent higher p r opensity to buy a bus pass under similar conditions. The same result is derived from the bus ridership p r o file by c o mparing Figure 1 and Figure 2. indicates than males This comparison that at every level of distance and frequency, p e rcentage of females p urchase passes. a higher Figure 3 indicated that this Percentage of Students 80 Who Ride All Students x ^ Females only Males only 20 10 17 18 Age of Student Group F i g t 3c— Ridership of MS U Bus System by age 36 relati o n s h i p holds true for all students under twenty-one years of age b u t that there is less diff e r e n c e in riding habits as students age. F i g u r e 4 taken d i r ectly from the bus ridership profile indicated that 47,5 per cent of the single females rode the bus during fall and w i n t e r quarters of the 1969-70 school year versus only 24,3 per cent of the single males. T a b l e 3 shows that 58,3 per cent of the bus riders are single females compared to only 31.7 per cent single males. A p o s s i b l e rea s o n for this difference in ridership b etween sexes is that the girls often buy a pass as a security m easure since they d i s like traveling alone especially at night. This reason was frequently suggested in the open-ended survey questions. A second reason m i g h t be that m i n iskirts are very cold in the late fall and winter. C l a s s .— This v a r i a b l e explained 1.2 per cent of the total v a r iance in the p u r c h a s e of bus passes and was statistically significant at the 98.8 per cent level. The Vb" v a l u e obtained from this r e l a t i o n s h i p indicates that the propensity to purchase bus passes decreased by 3.2 per cent for each year in class standing. Figure 3 indicates an even greater decrease w i t h approximately 42 per cent of the f r e shman class (seventeen-and eighteen-year olds) cent of the senior class (twenty-one-year-olds) and only 10 per riding. This difference b e t w e e n the r e g ression e quation and the bus ridership profile data can be explained in two ways. First, there appears to be a significant degree of concavity in Figure 3 so that the linear constraint imposed on the r e gression coefficient over a range of one through nine might deemp h a s i z e the rapid d e crease during the first four years. For example, the c o r r e l a t i o n coefficient over the range of classes one through nine 37 34.1% riders 65.9% non-riders B a s e — Al l students living on-campus 25.3% riders 74.7% non-riders Base- -All married males living on-campus 1 6 . 9% riders 83.1% non-riders E>ase— All married females living on-campus 24.3% riders 75.7% non-riders B a s e — All single males living on-campus 47.5% riders 52.5% non-riders B a s e — A ll single females living on-campus Fig. 4— P ropensity of MSU students to use campus bus system. 38 w o u l d indicate a d e c r e a se of approx i m a t e l y 25.5 per cent w h i c h closely approximates the total change suggested in the chart b y age relationship. T h e second factor affecting this diff e r e n c e is the fact that the bus ridership prof i le from w h i c h F i gure 3 was constructed was taken from fall and w i n t e r term data instead of spring term data wh i c h was used for the m u l t i p l e regression calculation. As w i l l be shown in Chapter 4, incoming students tend to have a very high propensity to buy a bus pass; however, during spring term a high per c e n t a g e of them stop riding and ne ver seem to b e g i n riding again. The m u l t i p l e r e gr e s s i o n p r o g r a m i d entified two h i g h l y signif­ icant variables w h i c h y i elded results very d i f ferent than w o u l d have b e e n expected a priori. These w e r e the n u m b e r of trips m a d e each w e e k and the p e r centage of night travel. Number of trips m a d e each w e e k ;— As could b e expected, this v a r i a b l e had a rela t i v e ly h i g h positive correl a t i o n w i t h the total w e e k l y travel distance. Th e value of this simple c o r r e l a t i o n w as 0,68, This means that a per s o n w ho travels a very great distance during the w e e k had to make a large number of trips each week. surprising however, It w as somewhat to find that this vari a b l e h ad a strong negative correlation w i t h bus r i dership once the total distance effect had b e e n removed in the m u l t i p l e regression program. In fact, this v a r i a b l e explained 3.9 per cent of the total v a r i a n c e in bus ridership and w a s significant at the 99.95 per cent level. Two factors wo u l d explain this n e g a t i v e relationship. First, the bus system is a p p a r e ntly viewed by riders as bei n g a commuter service from the remote living areas to the center of campus. It is not needed 39 as a shuttle serv i c e w i t h i n the academic community. Consequently, a per s o n w h o m a k e s m a n y trips w i t h i n the academic area often w i l l not purchase a bus pass,^ The second factor that wou l d cause this result is the tendency of those who m a k e a large n u m b e r of trips to m a k e an effort to live in closer dorms so they w i l l n ot b e d e p e ndent upon the bus. In fact this point w a s brou g h t out in the o p en-ended part of the survey. But either one of these reasons w o u l d indicate that the bus is p r i m a r i l y a commuter service to and from the reside n t i a l complexes and is not used as shuttle service w i t h i n the a c a d e m i c area. P erc e n t a g e of n i g h t t r a v e l ,— This v a r i a b l e was also very important since it ex p l ained 2,2 per cent of the total bus ridership v a r iance and was s t a t i s tically significant at the 99,9 per cent level. It was surprising,, however, cient was negative. Perhaps that the ' "b" value c o effi­ the best int e r p r e t a t i o n for this nega t i v e relationship was gi v e n by a student in one of the open-ended survey questions who stated that she bought a pass p r i marily b ecause she did not like to w a l k b a c k to her dorm alone at night. However, she In order that the reader does not confuse the defi n i t i o n of "a trip" as used b y this study it w i l l be emphasized here, A trip is considered to be a n o r m al expe c t e d m o v e m e n t from one group of buildings on the map in A p p e n d i x D to another for social, academic, or w o r k purposes. Trips m a d e w i t h i n one of these groups of buildings w e r e not considered to be trips in this sense since it w o u l d not be feasible to take a bus for the short distance. Also trips w i t h either an origin or d e stination that was not included in the twenty-three groups indicated on the map w e r e ignored since the campus bus s y stem does not provide service to off-campus areas or to some of the remote agricultural research areas. U n e x p e c t e d spur of the m o m e n t trips w e r e not considered since a student w o u l d not purch a s e a bus pass at the b e g i nning of the quarter to facilitate unexpected travel trips. The m o r e accurat e the understanding of this d e finition the m o r e s ignificant is the result of this n e g ative relationship. 40 continued by stating that w h e n she needed the buses m o s t — at night— they ran o n l y also every twenty m inutes instead of the normal frequency. She stated that she had been frightened when the buses ran on different 3 routes at night than the normal ones Later in this chapter it. will go to meet a particular are ready to leave. she had expected. be shown that most students do not scheduled bus but simply go to the stop w h e n they If they do not change their behavior they will have a long wait w h e n the f r equency changes to the night schedule. Perhaps this is an important factor in influencing night travelers to make other arrangements, wh i c h it is possible for them to do since all free to drive and park on campus between 6 P.M. students are and 6 A.M. Effect of weat h e r on bus ridership S e a s o n a l i t y .— An analysis of bus pass sales by quarter shows a strong fluct u a t i o n between quarters in ridership. This can be expected since the w e a t h e r d u r i n g late fall quarter and winter quarter can be severe while spring and summer are c o m p aratively mild in central Michigan. Figure 5 shows the strong seasonal nature of the ticket sales. Index numbers are calculated and presented in Table 4. An night the f r e quency between buses is decreased to one bus every twenty minutes. The longer time span allows some of the buses to cover two routes. For example, when the headway of the Sparcan Village bus is increased from fifteen to twenty minutes at night, it makes a five minu t e run to the commuter lot rather- than wa i t i n g at Shaw Lot interchange for the extra five minutes. It is assumed that the respondent boarded a Spartan Village bus to go to the Brody dormitory area and was frightened w h e n the driver started toward the commuter lot which is located in one of the more secluded areas of campus. Since frequently there are only one or two passengers on this run late at night, it is easy to un d e r ­ stand her concern. 12000 11000 Number of Bus Passes Sold 10000 9000 8000 7000 6000 5000 4000 3000 2000 1000 67 - 68 sold by quarter. Fig. 5.- N u m b e r of bus passes 42 TABLE 4 INDEX OF BUS PASS SALES BY Q U ARTER Year Fall Winter Spring Summer 1 964-65 94.1 182.5 95.7 27.7 1965-66 118.5 177.8 86.5 17.1 1966-67 129.8 167.2 85.2 17.7 1967-68 140.7 160.1 86.2 13.0 1968-69 134.6 157.4 98.9 9.2 Total 617.7 845.0 452.5 84.7 Mean 123.5 169.0 90.5 16.9 Note: Index for year is 400. Average quarter index is 100. F r o m the data in Figure 5 and Table 4 it is v i r tually certain that the reason for this strong seasonal influence is the weather. D a i l y v a r i a t i o n .— In c onsidering the effect of w e a t h e r on bus ridership, it Is also necessary to consider the effect of w e a t h e r on daily ridership w i t h i n the season. This is a different pr o b l e m than the seasonal analysis above since a different decision is involved. The seasonal analysis d etermines the sensitivity of bus pass purchases to expected w e a t h e r conditions over the next ten w e e k s . ’ The daily ridership a nalysis assumes that the pass has already b e e n purchased but questions w h e t h e r w e a t h e r has an effect on daily ridership. To de t e r m i n e this daily ridership effect, data was collected from the bus d r i v e r ’s daily ridership reports for fall quarter, 1969 and compared to m e a s u r e m ents of w e a t h e r as discussed in Chapter 2. First, the ridership data was adjusted to eliminate the effect of the 43 day of the w e e k since M o n d a y and W e d n esday are traditionally he a v y ri d e r s h i p days and T h u rsday and Friday are very light daysunusual days w e r e eliminated, i.e., Thanksgiving, Also the four days w h e n the bus drivers called in "sick," and the " Moratorium Day." This a d j u s t e d data was entered into a least square m u l t i p l e regression pr o g r a m d e s cribed in detail in A p p e n d i x K„ There was no s i gnificance what s o e v e r in the output of this analysiso The total r e gression on six m e a s u rements of w e ather e x p lained only 15 per cent of the total variance in adjusted daily ridership and then only with a 51 per cent confidence l e v e l . No single v a r i a b l e was s i g nificant at an 80 per cent confidence level or g r e ater except aver a ge w i n d speed w h i c h was significant at the 8 9 o9 per cent level and explained 7.1 per cent of the total adjusted daily ridership variance,, When the same test was rup using daily f aculty and staff ridership A p p e n d i x K discusses In general, there was even less significance shown. the output in detail. then, students show a strong p r opensity to buy a bus pass w h e n they expect the we a t h e r to b e bad, but once they have m a d e their d e c i s i o n to ride they b e come regular riders and are not s i g n i f i c a n t l y i n f luenced by the weather. Effect of pr i c e on bus ridership It is difficult to m easure the effect of the price variable since so m a n y a s s umptions m u s t be made. In this section, however, the price change m a d e in 1967 will be examined to a pproximate its effect on ridership. This analysis assumes that there are no shifts in demand but only movements along the demand curve. 44 Before e x a mining the price data, however, there are several theoretical points wh i c h should be discussed and the assumptions indicated. Th e s e factors are g r a p h i c a l l y presented in Figure 6. involves the effect cf a change In price. The first point In Figure 6 ft represents the effect of a price decrease. Here the demand is actually very inelastic for a short; period of time. The demand curve will upward ( ^ a p p r o a c h e s 0) with the passage of time. theoretically shift Blurton substantiates this point in his P e o r i a - D e c a t u r study in which he indicates that with his introduction cf the special schedu.led~se.at premium service, from five to twelve months for equilibrium to be. reached. The data in this almost immediately however, it took -+ study indicates that M S U students responded to the fall 1967 price rise. It could be hypothesized, that the response to a price decrease would have been substan­ tially slower if initiated during a period when riding and living habits had already been established, that is, a quarter other than fall quarter. The second theoretical point concerns the aC kink in the demand curve. A c c ording to several studies, price increases are very elastic until all individuals with, alternative travel modes are priced out In the Pecr.'.a study the growrh rate was generally stable at approximately 0.7 passengers per route per week for fourteen months. In the Decatur study ridership grew to 69 per cent of seat capacity in one month, then was sharply reduced to a very lew growth rate before finally stagnating in a p p r o x i m a tely 7 months. It should be pointed cut, however, that this project had the strong backing of the local employers who gave extensive introductory and follow-up publicity in their house organs. They also offered free service for the first week to encourage acceptance. Under more normal conditions the acceptance of a new service or the adjustment to a price decrease would probably extend over a longer period of time. M a s s T r a n s p o r t a t i o n D e m o n st rat, ion Projects : 111. MTD. 3 , 4 , Michael A. S. Blurton, Project Director (Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1968), p. 85. Price a = f (Alternatives) 8 = f (Time) Ln 0 Ridership Fig, 6,— Theoretical demand curve for campus bus transportation, 46 of the m a r k e t and only those w i t h no alternatives are left,, in this group w o u l d include the p h ysically handicapped, no access to automobiles, d riving a People those w i t h or those w ho are legally p r ohibited from The demand curve for this group then becomes v e r y inelastic and fare increases become effective means for increasing revenue,, The angle a, then, is equal to a function of alternative travel modes av a ilable to the rider. It is d o u btful that a is very large o n the M S U campus since p hys i c a l l y h a n d i c a p p e d students are able to obtain special parking and d r i ving permits w h i c h all o w them unlimited access of campuso to all parts Students who are not h a ndicapped always have the option of w a l k i n g or of rear r a nging their travel and class schedules so that less long dista n c e travel is required. Since they can w a l k from any r e s idence area to the academic area in twenty-six minutes and m o s t w a l k s are considerably shorter, this alternative. they can reasonably consider There would, however, be some discomfort in wa l k i n g during the w i n t e r quarter b e c a u s e of the severity of the weather. A l t h o u g h data w e r e not available to conclusively test the nature of a and 3 these relationships should be kept in mind during the following analysis which includes the effect of the 1967 price increase on the a b s olute change in ridership and elasticity of demand, on the grow t h rate of the system, and on the seasonal natu r e of bus ridership. Effect £ £ price on absolute change in bus ridership and arc e l a sticity of d e m a n d ,--Table 5 indicates that the 1967 price increase of $2,00 y i e lded a d e c r ease of 4,042 in the number of passes sold 47 TABLE 5 EFFECT OF 1967 PRICE INCREASE ON BUS RIDERSHIP (A C O M P A R I S O N OF 1966-67 and 1967-68 ACAD E M I C YEARS) Year Fall Winter Spring Summer 1966-67 price $12 $12 $12 $12 1967-68 price $14 $14a $14 $14 15.4 1 5 04 c 1 5 04 15 „4 P e r c e n t a g e of pr i c e change*3 D e c r e a s e in ridership 4,042 657 2,119 805 461 Base ^ ridership 26,136 8,811 10,711 5*596 1,017 -15.5% -7 o5% - 1 9 o8% -14.4% -45,3% Perc e n t a g e of change in ridership A r c e l asticity of demand 1 i,oie o49 1„ 29e o94 2,94 The price was $14,00 if the fall term pass w e r e turned in. If the w i n t e r term only pass was purchased*, the price was $ 2 0 o0 0 o ^Aver a g e price is used as base price [$2/($12 + $14)/2] = 0154» c This calc u l a t ion does not consider the effect of the $20„00 pass since data w e r e not available,, ^Base ridership equals average ridership for 1966-67 year and 1967-68 year. 0 These values are distorted by virtue of the implementation of the dual pricing s y st e m w i nter quarter. 48 for the 1967-68 year. school year as compared to sales for the 1966-67 Figure 7 likewise indicates that the absolute dropped school level of sales substantially and abruptly w h e n the 1967 price increase was effected. The calcu l a t i o n of arc elasticity for this price change suggests two factors that should be examined. First, the demand curve is substantially different for each of the four quarters; it appears that the bus elasticity. second, system is currently operating very near unitary Fall quarter demand in general seems to be very inelastic; this is probably due r;c the pre-enrollment promotion of the bus system and the general impression of vastness whi c h the campus presents to the new enrollee. A lthough the dual price of the winter q u a rter demand, that of spring quarter. increases obscure the exact elast icity it seems to be nearly unitary as does It is felt that the demand is more elastic the winter and spring quarters due to several year the students have better factors: by this time of learned their way around campus, beginning to schedule classes to be more convenient to their area, in they are living they have established a routine travel pattern among a limited number cf buildings, and/or they begin to choose dormitory rooms on the basis of travel p a t : err. s. For example, several students indicated w h e n surveyed that they frequently postpone a class to a quarter when it is scheduled to be given nearer their rooming areas. The summer quarter appears to be highly elastic as would be predictable due to the warmer weather campus. and a general relaxation of parking regulations on 49 Number of Passes Seasonally Ad j u s t e d (Summer D a t a Omitted) 10000 9000 8000 7000 6000 5000 4000 3000 2000 1000 64-65 65-66 66-67 67-68 Time Fig. 7o— Bus pass sales trend 68-69 69-70 50 One d i f ficulty w i t h this analysis is that it assumes that the demand curve did not shift b e tween the 1966-67 and 1967-68 school years. A second difficulty of this m e a s u r e is the assumption of a linear demand curve, w h i c h is ne c e s s a r y to m a k e any observa tion about future price i n c r e a s e s » A third d i f ficulty centers around the a concept presented in Figure 6. It could be argued, for example, that the 1967 price rise w as effective in e liminating those students w h o had other a l ternatives and that the remaining riders cease buy i n g bus passes w h e n the price was increased. did not It is difficult for the w r i t e r to see any factors w h i c h w o u l d support these two a r g u m e n t s I t seems reasonable, in fact, that the assumption of at least n e a r l i n earity is valid since the location and size limits of the campus b u i ldings prohibit any mass m o v e ments or schedule rearrang e m e n t s w h i c h w o u l d change the demand patterns of the group as a w h o l e . Effect of price increase on s y s t e m growth r a t e .— Perhaps most significant effect of the price increase w as system's growth trend. the to end the bus Figure 7 indicates that the growth rate was very high duri n g the fall 1964 through spring 1967 period but that growth was v i r t u a l l y eliminated as soon as the $2.00 per quarter price increase was implemented and has vi r t u a l l y leveled off since that time. It must be conceded that this growth rate was also affected by a "leveling out" of u n iversity enrollment and the completion of the do r mitory and m a r ried h o using building pr o g r a m ^See above, p. 46. (see A p p e n d i x R ) . 51 A p p e n d i x S, therefore, makes an e xamination of bus pass sales as a perce n t a g e of the o n - campus residency census. This analysis indi­ cates that the p r o p e n s i ty of the on-campus student to ride also w a s s h a r p l y reduced after the price increase. Figure S-l indicates that this w a s true for each quarter. Effect of price increase on the season a l i t y of r i d e r s h i p .— One of the major reasons given by the a d m i n i s t r a t i o n for the imple­ m e n t a t i o n of the $ 2 0 . O O - w i n t e r - t e r m - o n l y bus pass was h e l p eli m i n a t e the w i n t e r quarter seasonal peaks. that it would If one examines the s e a s o n a l peaks for only one period before and after the $20.00w i n t e r - o n l y ticket w a s implemented, then there is a d e f i n i t e decrease in w i n t e r - t e r m r i d e r s h i p over f a l l - t e r m ridership. For example, in w i n t e r quarter, 1967, quarter, A f t e r the $20.00 bus pass was implemented, however, 1966. 29 per cent more riders rode than during fall this increase was only 14 per cent. h a v e a c c o m p l i s h e d its objective. trend of these s e a s o n a l cycles This action then appeared to If, however, is made, an e xamination of the it appears that the preceding three years had also seen an e q ualizing of the w i n t e r t e r m peak w i t h o u t the price increase. Figure 8 indicates that 94 per cent more students rode d u r i n g w i n t e r term 1965 than d u r i n g fall term, 1964, 50 per cent m o r e d u r i n g w i n t e r term 1965 than duri n g fall 1965, and o n l y 29 per cent more d u r i n g w i nter t e r m 1967 than d u ring fall 1966. It is apparent, then, that the w i nter term peak was gradually b e i n g equalized even w i t h o u t the price increase. It is questionable h o w ef f e c t i v e the price increase is in leveling seasonal demand. 52 100 P e r cent 80 50 40 Pr i c e Increase 10 Year Figo 30— P e r c e n t a g e i n c rease in w i n t e r passes over fall passes 1964-69 53 One f e a s i b l e e x plan a t i o n for this apparent leve l i n g of demand is that riding the bus has n o w become somewhat of a habit. supported by T a b l e 1 w h i c h indicates This is that 91.5 per cent of fall-term bus riders w h o r e - e n r o l led w i n t e r term pu r c h a s e d a bus pass wint e r term. Pr i o r to 1967, however, there was a very rapid ridership growth rate w h e n m a n y p e ople began the bus riding ha b i t during w i n t e r quarter. Each of these years, however, the ridership growth rate b e g a n to d e c r e a s e so the w i n t e r term seasonal p e a k b e c a m e relatively smaller. By 1967 the w i n t e r term p e a k was probably limited to a rela t i v e l y small group w i t h a very inelastic demand. Consequently the $20.00 w i n t e r - t e r m - o n l y pass was an effective means of extracting addi t i o n a l revenue even though it did not alter the w i n t e r term peak £ ridership significantly. A d d i t i o n a l factors af f e cting bus ridership One of the factors tested in this study was the effect of e n v i r o n m e n t a l c o n d i t ioning prior to M S U a t tendance o n the propensity to b u y bus passes. O n e q u e s t i o n concerns the effect of urb a n or rural orient a t i o n o n the individual. It was felt that those wh o w e r e reared primarily in an ur b a n a r e a m i g h t h a v e a greater acceptance of the bus system due to their g r e ater c h ildhood exposure to bus T a b l e 6 indicates transit systems. that this is true to a slight degree since a larger p e r c e n t a g e of riders came from city and suburban areas ^The students a ppeared to be w i n t e r - t e r m - o n l y p r i c i n g method. In the student showed strong resentment during w i n t e r q u a r t e r w h e n they need than rural very aware of this effect of the the o p en-ended part of the survey to the "gouging" of students the bus most. 54 areas; however, this could b e accepted at only a 67 per cent conf i d e n c e levelo TABLE 6 EFFECT OF HOME A R E A ON BUS RI D E R S H I P (Percentages) City Suburb Town Rural Riders 16.4 52.3 16.4 15.0 128 No n -riders 12.3 47.6 21.1 19.0 317 Note; Sample C h i - s q u a r e = 3.43942 Le v e l of s i g n i f i c a n c e at 3 degrees of f r e e d o m = 0.3287 A second q u e s t i o n concerns a p o s s i b l e l e a r n i n g curve effect from ridership patterns w h i c h m i g h t have b e e n e s t a b l i s h e d during hi g h school. T a b l e 7 indicates that a slightly h i g h e r p e r c e n t a g e of riders came from the group w h o rode the y e l l o w school bus during hi g h school; however, the statistical s i g n i f i c a n c e of this c o nclusion was v e r y low w i t h o n l y a 14 per cent level of c o n f i d e n c e that there w a s a causal effect b e t w e e n the travel m o d e d u ring h i g h school and M S U ridership. A third q u e s t i o n in this group cons i d e r e d the p o s s i b i l i t y that the students had d eveloped a dislike for us i n g the bus duri n g h i g h school and that this atti t u d e had n e g a t i v e l y a f f e c t e d their use of the M S U system. The response to this q u e s t i o n a p p e a r e d to bear out just the o p p o s i t e conclusion. Table 8 indicates that of the a p p r o x i m a t e l y 60 p e r cent of the respondents who a n s w e r e d this question, 55 those w h o rode the MSU bus s ervice tended to rate their h i g h school systems lower than the non-riders. It is somewhat d i f f icult to u n d e r s t a n d w h y this relationship existed unless those w h o rated their high school systems lower also had their e x p e c tations of the M S U sys t e m lowe r e d by past e x p erience and con s e q u e n t l y they did not b e c o m e d i s i l l u s i o n e d and d i s c o n t i n u e ridership after their first two quarters at M S U as m a n y of the other students did. TABLE 7 T R A V E L I NG M O D E D U R I N G H I G H SCHOOL (Percentages) Walk Bike Riders 30,7 0.8 9,4 37,0 22,0 127.0 Non-riders 32,1 1.5 10.7 32.4 23.3 317.0 Note: City Bus Yellow Bus Car Sample C h i - s q u a re = 1,31984 Level of s i g n i f icance at 4 degrees of fr e e d o m = 0,8580 A fourth question c o ncerning the e n v i r o n m e n t a l p r e c o n d i t i o n i n g of the students h y p o t h e sized that the m o r e freq u e n t l y the student had used a public transit system pr i o r to entering MSU, p r o p e n s i t y to p u r chase a bus pass. Table 9 does the greater his appear to indicate a slight relationship since a somewhat h i gher p e r c e n t a g e of those wh o had never used a transit system b e f o r e w e r e non- r i d e r s at MSU. Also the m o n t h l y and w e e k l y prior users h ad a slight tendency to ride m o r e w h i l e at MSU, cent. The confidence level for this relationship was 81 per 56 TABLE 8 O P I N I O N R A T ING O F H I G H SCHOOL BUS SYSTEM Riders Bad Fair 10.8 29.7 4,2 19,0 N o n -riders A v erage Good Excellent 28.4 25.7 5.4 33.9 35.4 7.4 Note: Of the 127 riders and 306 n o n - r i d e r s w ho responded to this survey 41.7 p e r cent of the riders and 38.2 per cent of the n o n ­ riders i n d icated that they had either not used a bus system during h i g h school or else they had no op i n i o n about the bus sys t e m that they had used. Consequently, Table 8 is bas e d on r esponses from 58.3 pe r cent of the riders and 61.8 per cent of the non-riders. Chi - s q u a r e = 8,88 Level of s i g n i f icance at 4 degrees of f reedom = 0.0678 TABLE 9 F R E QUENCY OF BUS SERVICE USE D U RING H I G H SCHOOL (Percentages) Never Used O n ce A Year Once A Month Once A Week Once A Day More Frequently Sample Size Riders 33,1 26 ,0 22 .0 11.9 4.0 3.1 127 Non-riders 39,5 25 ,0 17 .1 6.6 8.0 3.8 316 Note: C h i - s q u a r e = 7.44183 Level of signif i c a n ce at 5 degrees of freedom = 0.1898 57 D e s i r e d travel patterns It is the purp o se of this section to determine student travel p refe r e n c e s to help predict their responses First, to n ew services. an attempt was m a d e to determine w h e n students desired to arrive and leave their classroom areas. Survey questions 20 and 21 w e r e used to a s c ertain an answer to these questions. F i g u r e 9 indicates that 73 per cent of the students prefer to arri v e at class approximately five m inutes or m o r e b e f o r e the class starts. It is difficult to explain the d i s c ontinuity be t w e e n six m i n u t e s and five m i nutes except that p e ople tend to think in blocks of five m i n utes and responded to this question by approximating five m i n u t e s as a familiar value. It is probable, however, that the students w o u l d also p l a n their arrival time on the same basis. Figure 10 indicates that the desire to depart after class is d i s m i s s e d is almost instantaneous. Almost two-thirds of the students desire to depart w i t h i n two m i n utes of the time class is dismissed. Figures 12 and 13 in C h a pter IV also support the contention that arrival and de s t i n a t i o n times are similar for most students and p roduce very high pe a k loads during the class breaks but that ridership during class time is very low. It w o u l d not be important w h e n students arrived or left for class if they did not use the bus for their arrival and departure. T h e r e f o r e it was n e c essary to determine where students go during class breaks so that load factors could be projected. indicates that their Table 10 70.6 per cent of the riders prefer to return to their living a r e a — w h i c h is usually a bus trip. Only 12.7 per cent w i s h e d 58 100 Pe r c e n t a g e of Re spondents 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 8 9 10 Minutes before Class Figo 9 0— Cum u l a tive percentage of students r e p o rting themselves to be in class area vs <. minutes before class 59 100 P e r c e n t a g e of Respondents 50 40 10 10 Minutes after Class Figo 10— C u m u l a tive percentage of students leaving class area vs. minutes after class 60 to r e m a i n in the c l a s s r o o m area or in the department library. Since the desire to ret u r n to the living area be t w e e n classes wa s not related to the p u r c h a s e of a bus pass, this indicates that any changes in bus ridership-— increases or decreases-— w i l l not change the bus load factor patte r n s throughout the day. TABLE 10 D E S T I N A T I O N PREFERENCE F OR BETWEEN" CLASS BREAKS OF ONE HOUR (Percentages) Retu r n to Living A r e a Remain in Class Area Go to Go to Main Dept, Library Library Other3 Sample Size Riders 70,6 6»4 6,3 3.2 13.5 126 Non-riders 66 o0 8,3 8,0 5.4 12.2 312 All Respondents 67,4 7,8 7,5 4.8 12,5 438 Including the Union Building and International Center Note: C h i - s q u a r e = 2,45814 Level of s i g n i f i cance at 5 degrees of freedom = 0,7828 It is important to realize that graduate students do tend to return home less and to go to department libraries or to their offices more than undergraduates. See Table 11. This wo u l d tend to reduce the class b r e a k load factors near the graduate facilities, TABLE 11 DESTI N A T I O N PREFERENCE FOR BETWEEN-CLASS BREAKS OF ONE H O U R BY CLASS LEVEL (Percentages) Class Level Ret u r n to Living A rea Remain in Class Area Go to Department Library Go to Main Library Freshman 80.0 7.2 3.3 3.7 Sophomore 72.5 10.9 4.5 3.1 Junior 72.0 4.7 5.9 Senior 53.0 9.7 Graduate 18.4 6.1 Other3 5.8 152 9.0 110 4.6 12.8 85 14.6 0.8 21.9 41 24.4 18.5 32.6 49 a Including the Union Building and International Center Note: Sample Size Chi-square = 101.15 Level of significance at 16 degrees of freedom is less than 0.001 62 An additional factor affecting the bus load factor pattern is the locational scheduling preferences for classes. If a student makes an effort to schedule all of his classes in the same building then he will probably make use of the bus only twice a day. case as shown in Table 12, Such was not the since almost 75 per cent of the respondents indicated that they preferred to schedule classes in different w h i c h necessitated additional travel effort. Since this was true for both riders and ncn-riders it would not affect passes, only the number of rides per pass. buildings the propensity to buy bus This is especially interest­ ing in light of the fact that most of the recently constructed MSU residence halls have included living-learning facilities in which class­ room and office s p a c e , as well as the normal are grouped together in a single building. living and eating facilities, A c c ording to this survey only 16.5 per cent of the students prefer having all classes in the same livin g - l e a r n i n g complex. This q u e s t i o n makes the assumption that the students will classes in harm o n y w i t h their stated not always the case since they are limited where they are offered. Such is co selecting classes w h e n and It is probably safe to assume, however, the student has a choice of two he will locational preferences. schedule chat if locations in which the class is offered choose the one which allows him to travel preceding and following class. Table 13 indicates that even though there is a significant r e lationship between class and and graduate choices, location preference with upper classmen students preferring less diversity in their class there are still 44.9 per prefer to travel between classes. cent of the graduate location students who TABLE 12 LOCATION PREFERENCE FOR CLASSES OF RIDERS A ND NON-RIDERS (Percentages) Sample Size ; Riders Non-riders i All Respondents All Classes in Living Complex All Classes in Same Building One or Two Classes in Different Buildings 125 19 ,2 8,8 45,6 26,4 310 15,5 8,7 47,1 28,7 435 16,6 8,7 46. 7 28,0 i Note: Each Class in Different Building Chi-square = 3,41901 Level of significance at 3 degrees of freedom = 0=3374 TABLE 13 LOCATION PREFERENCE FOR CLASSES BY CLASS STANDINGS (Percentages) Sample Size All Classes in Living Complex All Classes in Same Building One or Two Classes in Different Buildings Each Class in Different Buildings Freshman 151 20 =5 2 =0 47.0 30 =5 Sophomore 108 17 =6 3 =7 42.6 36 =1 Junior 85 11,8 1 =1 56 =5 30 =6 Senior 41 17 =1 17 =1 46 =3 19 =5 Graduate 49 8 =2 46 =9 38.8 6 =1 434 16 =4 8.7 46 =7 28 =2 All Respondents Note: Chi-square = 121=49 Level of significance at 12 degrees of freedom is less than 0=001 65 In d ividual r e l a t i o n s h i p w i t h the bus s y stem It is the p u r p o s e of this s ection to examine w h i c h factors the stud e n t feels are m ost important about the bus system and the way in w h i c h he coord i n ates his relationship w i t h it. D u r i n g the p r e -test ph a s e of the survey, one statement was r e p e a t e d l y m a d e on the o p en-ended part of the questionnaire. Often students w o u l d sing l e out p a r t i c u l a r bus drivers they knew by name and w o u l d i n d i c a t e that these w e r e the only drivers who provided the service they d e s i r e d of the bus system. A further investigation i n d icated that the a d m i n i s t r a t i o n felt that these same f re q u e n t l y to b l a m e for delays in m e e t i n g they w e r e p a c k i n g too m any peop l e into q u e s t i o n 36 was added to the survey drivers were their schedules and that the buses. (Appendix D ) „ Consequently, Table 14 provides the p e r c e n t a g e t a b u l a t i o n from this ques t i o n to indicate the type of service the students prefer. TAB L E 14 SERVICE P R E F E R E N C E OF RIDERS AN D NON-RIDERS (Percentages) Strict Punctuality Serve Everyone Limit Crowding Sample Size Riders 16.9 68,5 14.6 124 Non-riders 33 1 55.5 11.4 308 All R e spondents 28. 5 59,, 3 12.2 432 Note: C h i - s q u a re = 11 ,,37881 Level of s i g n i f i c a n c e at 2 degrees of freedom = 0.0034 66 As this table clearly indicates the respondents feel that strict p u n c t u a l i t y and overcrowding are not so annoying as having the bus pull out as the student is leaving the building to catch it. This is in perfect a g r eement w i t h the observed behavior of the studentp r e f e r r e d driverso Th e se drivers regularly made it a habit b e fore p ull i n g out to look in the doorways of each dormitory to m a k e sure that there w e r e no m o r e students on the way. mo r e students who could be loaded onto the bus Also, if there w e r e these drivers w e r e ve r y vocal in joking about the crowding and in trying to increase the crowding so that e v eryone could be loaded. This beha v i o r was not only o b s erved by the w r i t e r but was also v e r b a l i z e d by both the drivers and the riders. It is interesting to note that non-riders felt that p unctuality was m o r e important than those who w e r e actually riding. This is p r e d i c t a b l e since it is normal to think of the goal of any transporta­ tion sys t e m to be punctual; however, exposure to the syst em appears to m o d i f y this notion. It is interesting to n o t e in Table 15 that punctu a l i t y w a s m o r e important w h e r e the headway b etween the buses was slightly greater, but that the concern about crowding was v i r tually u n c hanged from 1 0 per cent. appears In the essence then the m o s t important service criterion to be to serve everyone even if the bus is slightly delayed or overcrowded. A l t h o u g h this study did not delve into the importance of k e e p i n g the same driver on a route, informal comments and observations tend to indicate that this does improve the attitude of the student toward the bus service. Five girls, for example, who w e r e leading a 67 boycott against the bus system to try to improve service to the South Complex mentioned that one of the preferred d rivers recognized them and said "Good M o r ning." A lth o u g h T h is made a strong positive impression. this response was not m e as u r e d it did tend to agree with Peoria-Decatur study which indicates that their in effect a large carpcol and that special ic was "their bus." Blurton's service became In the P e o r i a study the only significant complaint r e g istered c o n cerned the ch anging of drivers. It was interesting to note that 52 per cent of the survey respondents made this complaint while the next highest complaint had a frequency of only 7 per cent.^ TABLE 15 SERVICE PREF E R E N C E BY THE FREQUENCIES O F BUS SERVICE FROM L I V I N G AREAS (Percentages) Frequencies Strict Punctuality Serve Everyone Limit Crowding Sample Size 15 minutes 35.6 5 3.6 10.8 28 7.5 - 8 minutes 4 minutes .30.6 57.5 11.9 160 25.9 61.3 12.8 243 Note: C h i-square - 1.8614 Level of significance at 4 d e grees of freedom = 0.7616 ^Mass T r a n s portat:ion D e m o n s t r a tion P r o j e c t s : 1 1 1 . M T D . 3,4, p. 93. 68 M o s t p e o p l e feel v e r y a p p r e h e n s i v e about m i s s i n g the bus and a r r i v i n g late at their destination,, This feeling w a s first br o u g h t out w h e n a s k i n g bus pass ho l d e r s living in S partan V i l l a g e w h y they wo u l d dr i v e their cars some days and ride the bus o t h e r s 0 r e s p o n s e was A typical that if they left their a p a r t m e n t less than five minutes b e f o r e the bus was due, they w o u l d drive rath e r than run the risk of m i s s i n g the bus. students. This fe e l i n g ap p e a r s to b e w i d e s p r e a d among all T a b l e s 16 and 17 indi c a t e that almost 68 per cent of the students w e r e a p p r e h e n s i v e about m i s s i n g sex, m a r i t a l status, the bus and that ne i t h e r or bus ridership, m a d e an y signif i c a n t difference in this a p p r e h e n s i v e feeling. T A B L E 16 A T T I T U D E T O W A R D M I S S I N G T HE BUS Apprehensive Not A p p r e h e n s i v e Sample Size Riders 68.0 32.0 124 Non-riders 71,0 29.0 293 Note: C h i - s q u a r e = 0.09668 L e v e l of s i g n i f i c a n c e at 1 d e gree of f r e e d o m = 0,7558 T h e r e are p r o b a b l y two m a j o r factors w h i c h c o n t r i b u t e to this a pprehe n s i v e n e s s . First, p e o p l e have diff i c u l t y m e m o r i z i n g a bus schedule since they tend to think in time b l ocks of five, fifteen minutes. In fact, ten, or t r a n s p o r t a t i o n schedules a re proba b l y the only thing that they h a ve to s c h e d u l e that does not b e g i n on the 69 hour or q u a rter hour as most meetings and appointments do. Consequently, the m e m o r i z i n g of a timetable is probably f oreign to a person's thought pattern. Secondly, most, people do not have their watches a common source. In fact, synchronized by substantial variance between w atches is not u n u s u a l , and people may simply lack confidence in the complete c o o r d i n a ­ tion of their timepieces w i t h those of the bus drivers. TABLE 17 A T TITUDE T O WARD M ISSING THE BUS BY SEX AND MA R I T A L STATUS Sex and Mari t a l Status A pprehensive Not Apprehensive Sample Size 66.1 33.9 186 Married Males 75.7 24.3 33 Females3 72.7 r>CM Carried Note; and 198 single females have been grouped together. C h i - s q u a r e - 2.56051 Level of significance at 3 degrees of freedom = 0.4645 In light of these facts, cent of all people felt wait m Single Ma l e s it was not surprising that 62 per that they should allow at least a five minute (see Figure 11) at the bus stop if they were going to try to meet a certain schedule. minu t e wait First, It is significant, however, that a five substantially removes the advantage of the bus system. it nearly doub l e s the length of time required to make all but 100 Cumulative Per c e n t a g e of R espondents 90 80 50 20 10 0 1 2 Buffer Time Required 3 5 4 to Meet Bus F i g r 1 1 c — Cum u l a t i ve wa i t i n g time to meet MSU (Minutes) Bus Syst e m 6 7 71 the longest trips o n c a m p u s , Secondly, the five m i n u t e w a i t will s e e m e s p e c i a l l y long to the student in a h u r r y or to the apprehensive coed w a i t i n g for a bus at an isolated bus stop on a cold night. It w a s not s u r p rising then to find that 82 per cent of the bus riders a b a n d o n e d the effort required to try to m e e t a given bus schedule but simp l y left w h e n they w e r e ready and took the first bus w h i c h came along. In T a b l e 18 this b e h a v i o r is labeled as "random" scheduling as o p p o s e d to the m o r e orth o d o x b e h a v i o r m o d e l of the individual " s c h e d u l i n g " of d e p a r t u r e time. TABLE 18 STUDENT S C H E D U L I N G B E H A V I O R PATTERNS S c heduled Random Sample Size Riders 18.0 82.0 126 N o n -riders 31,8 68,2 226 Note: N o n - r i d e r s i n d i cated h o w they thought they w o u l d schedule. C h i - s q u a r e = 14.59209 L e v e l of s i g n i ficance at 2 degrees of f reedom = 0.0007 Ta b l e 19 points out that the bus sche d u l i n g b e h a v i o r is strongly de p e n d e n t u p o n the h eadway b e t w e e n bus runs. It appears that the p e r c e n t a g e of indivi d u a l s going to m e e t a particular schedule increases v e r y r a pidly if the h e a d w a y fifteen minutes. increases from eight to This is reas o n a b l e sin c e a rational mod e l w o u l d suggest tha 72 a p e r s o n should shift his b e h a v i o r to m e e t i n g a given timetable w h e n the e x p ected w a i t i n g time for r a n d o m s c heduling exceeds the time no r mally allowed in m e e t i n g a particular b us schedule. TABLE 19 ST U DENT S CHE D U L I N G B E H A V I O R PATTERN BY F R E Q U E N C Y OF BUS SERVICE FROM LIVING A R E A F r e quencies S cheduled Random Sample Size 15 minu t e s 76,1 23,9 21 7,5-8 31.5 68.5 130 24.5 75.5 200 minutes 4 m i n utes Note: Ch i - s q u a r e - 24,328 Level of s i g n i f i c a n c e at 2 degrees of f reedom is less than 0,001 In this case the largest per c e n t a g e of respondents felt that it was n e c e s s a r y to al l o w five minutes to meet a bus schedule. If the e x p ected w a i t i n g time on a r a ndom basis were one-half of the headway, then ten m i n u t e s w o u l d be the point w h e r e most individuals felt it prudent to b e g i n to meet a schedule. Bus ridership infor m a t i o n This s e c t i o n examines the process of communication about the M S U Bus Syst e m to d e t e r m ine whether any part i c u l a r groups are p a r t i c ­ ularly effective in influencing people to ride the bus. This section will attempt to identify those opinion leaders and to determine their recommendations and w h e t h e r these recommendations are followed. Survey 73 questions 29 through 32 w e r e used to gather this information. A c c o r d i n g to T a b l e 20, 63.5 per cent of the riders and 52.5 per cent of the n o n - r i d ers asked other people about the bus system b e f o r e they decided to ride or not to ride. Table 21 indicates that the girls had a h i g h e r prop e n s i t y to solicit inform a t i o n than the ma l e s b y a p p r o x i m a t e l y 10 per cento TABLE 20 P E R C E N T A G E S OF PEOPLE W H O AS K E D FOR I N F O R M A TION ABOUT M SU BUS SYSTEM As k e d for Info r mation Did Not A s k for Information Sample Size Riders 63.5 36.5 118 Non-riders 52.5 47.5 314 Note: C h i - s q u a r e = 3„77776 Level of significance at 1 degree of freedom = 0.0519 It is inte r e s t i ng to learn that each group has a different opinion l eader. For example, Table 22 indicates c onsult pr i m a r i l y w i t h their spouses. that m a r r i e d males This tends to support the frequently voi c e d reason given by m a n y of the m a r r i e d students for riding the b u s — the need to leave the family car for the spouse. It should also be no t e d that a very low p e rcentage of all students consulted their parents but rather a roommate or close acquaintance. Of course it is not known wh e t h e r the student first d e v e loped a desire to ride and then asked his parents wh o supplied the funds and m i g h t exercise veto power. 74 TA B L E 21 PERCE N T A G E S OF PEOPLE W H O RE Q U E S T E D I N F O R M A T I O N A B O U T M S U BUS S Y STEM BY S EX A N D M A R I T A L STATUS a Sex and M a r i t a l Status Asked Single Ma l e s 49,2 50,8 191 M a r r i e d Males 56,4 43.6 39 F e m a l e s 3, 61,7 38,3 205 D id Not A s k Sample Size M a r r i e d and single females have b e e n gr o u p e d together,, Note: C h i -square = 11,26815 Le v e l of s i g n ificance at 3 degrees of f r e e d o m = 0,0104 TABLE 22 M S U BUS S Y STEM O PINION LEADERS BY SEX A N D MA R I T A L STATUS (Percentage) Parents Sex and Marital Status Spouse Room­ mate Close Friend Acquaint­ ance Other Sample Size Single Males 5,1 0,0 28.6 45,9 12,2 8,2 98 Marr i e d Males 4,2 45,8 4,2 12.5 25.0 8.3 24 Females3 9,6 1,7 38.8 25.9 11.2 12.9 116 Carried and single females have been gr o u p e d together 75 T a b l e 23 indicates that m o s t o p i n i o n leaders r e c ommend that others foll o w the choice the o pinion l e ader h imself has made. Here 80 per cent of the favorable r ecommendations came from riders and almost 80 per cent of the u n favorable r e commendations came from n o n ­ riders . It is also obvious g i v e n to them. For example, that people foll o w e d the recommendations in Table 2 4 p 86.8 per cent of those students s t a ting that they received a favorable rec o m m e n d a t i o n also pu r c h a s e d a bus p a s s 0 On the other hand, 76.4 per cent of those r eceiving an u n f a v o r a b l e recommen d a t i o n did no t p u r c h a s e a bus pass. TABLE 23 RIDERSHIP O F OPINION LEADERS BY REC O M M E N D A T I O N (Percentage) O p inion Leader Rides O p i n i o n Leader Does Not Ride F a v orable Recommendation 80.2 19.8 131 Unfa v o r a b l e Recommendation 21.5 78.5 181 Sample Size Note; Chi-square (with Yates correction) = 102.68486 Level of s i gnificance at 1 degree of f r eedom = .0001 It was likewise interesting to n o t e that the o pinion leaders feel that single males should not ride b ut the same o p i n i o n leaders w e r e d i v ided on w h e t h e r or not the girls and m a r r i e d m e n should ride. See Table 25. 76 TABLE 24 P E R C E N T A G E S OF RIDERS A ND NON-RIDERS F O L L O W I N G BUS RIDERSHIP REC O M M E N D A T I O N P urchased Bus Pass Did Not Purchase Bus Pass Favorable Recommendation 86.8 23.6 Unfavorable Recommendation 13.2 76.4 Sample Size 91 233 Note: C h i - s q u a r e = 105.212 L e v e l of s i g n i f i c a nce at 1 degree of f reedom is less than 0.0001 TABLE 25 T Y P E O F RECOMMEN D A T I O N RECEIVED BY SEX A N D MA R I T A L STATUS Single M ale Married Male Females Fa v o r a b l e R e c o m m e n d a t i o n 33.3 48.1 47.1 Unfavorable Recommendation 6 6 .7 51.9 52.9 138.0 27.0 159.0 Sample Size £ M a r r i e d and single females have been grouped together. Note: C h i - s q u a r e = 8.24991 Level of s i g n i f i cance at 3 degrees of freedom = 0.0411 77 In summary, then, it appears that potential riders do seek out the o p i n i o n s of others wh o generally recommend that the solicitor of i n f o r m a t i o n do the same thing that the advisor d o e s 0 Consequently it is felt that student attitudes are fairly important in determining acc e p t a n c e of the bus system,, R a n k i n g and rati n g of bus service variables R a n k i n g o--The last step in analyzing demand for the bus s ys t e m s e r vice was to d etermine w h i c h service variables the students felt w e r e m o s t i m p ortant and ho w well the M S U Bus Service w as m eeting these n e e d s „ On the survey, respondents w e r e asked to rank eight variables a c c ording to their i m p o r t a n c e „ Table 26 is a tabulation of these results o T h e f o l lowing points should be e m p h a s i z e d „ First, service va r i a b l e s w e r e deem e d to b e the most important offered b y the bus system,, The m o s t important service varia b l e was frequency of s e r v i c e . This agrees w i t h the results of the bus ridership profile w h i c h indicates that service that the students desire and respond to a high frequency they can interface w i t h on a random basis,, mo s t important v a r i a b l e was dependabilityo Although The second the question did not d i s t i n g u i s h b e t w e e n exact timetable dependability and interval dependability, dependability„ the w r i t er feels that the consensus favored interval One of the major objections often voiced in the open- ended sect i o n of the survey and during the preliminary investigation was the tende n c y of buses to bunch up, Consequently interval integrity is a critical factor if the random scheduling approach to me e t i n g the 78 TABLE 26 R A N K I NG OF SERVICE VARIABLES BY R I D E R AND N O N - RIDER Variable M e dian Medi a n Rank M ode Mode Rank Riders H e a dway 1,927 1 1 1 Dependability 2,822 2 2 2 Coordination 3.423 3 2 3 Cost 3,984 4 3 4 Directness 4 o361 5 5 5 D r i ver's A t t i t u d e 5,236 6 6 6 C r o wding 6,008 7 7 7 Cleanliness 7,187 8 8 8 N on-Riders H e a dway 2,630 1 2 3 Cost 3,045 2 1 1 Dependability 3,553 3 1 2 Coordination 3,562 4 3 4 D ir e c t n e s s 4,657 5 4,5 5 D r i ver's A t t i t u d e 5,858 6 7 7 Crowding 5,916 7 6 6 Cleanliness 7.035 8 8 8 Note: S p e a r m a n R a n k C orrelation Coefficients r riders = 1*0 Y non-riders = 09G5 Y riders - nonriders = .928 for m e dian Y riders - nonriders = .815 for mode (rg) . 79 bus is going to be effective,, Otherwise, the d e v i a t i o n b e t w e e n expec t e d w a i t i n g time and actual w a i t i n g time can b e c o m e u n a c c eptably large. The third factor, coordination b e t w e e n the bus schedule and class schedules, p r o bably reflects the lack of c o o r d ination be t w e e n night school and the night bus service and/or the coo r d i n a t i o n p r o b l e m to the Spartan Village and South C o m p l e x . The second point w h i c h should b e emphasized is that so-called c omfort features are not deemed to be especially important. ness was ranked as the least important variable. cleanliness kept Cl e a n l i ­ It is not k n o w n if is really considered unimportant or if the buses are so w e l l that cleanliness is not now considered to b e a p roblem b u t mi g h t g b e c o m e so if the buses were not cleaned so effectively. m o s t s u r prising was P e rhap s the low ranking of the need to eliminate crowding since the bus system is usually very crowded during fall and w i n t e r quarters. The low ranking of crowding and cleanliness is emphasized b y the high relative ranking of the driver's attitude which would be expected to rank very low in a high frequency, convenienc e low type of service w h i c h the students appear to desire. The third point that should be emphasized is the consist ency in the rankings b o t h w i t h i n the rider and no n - r i d e r groups and b e t w e e n these groups. For the riders, the modal and m e d i a n rankings w e r e g Fr o m July 1, 1969, to April 30, 1970, the M S U Bus System spent approxi m a t e l y $29,000 on cleaning labor alone. This does not include w a t e r or power cost since they are not allocated to each d e p a r t ­ m e n t of the university. T he cleaning e xpenditure represents over 43 per cent of the total operating expense of the bus system w h i c h includes repair labor, parts cost, fuel cost, tire costs, and other m i s c e l l a n e o u s labor. This information is compiled mo n t h l y by the gara g e on its "Campus Bus System Mainte n a n c e Report." 80 identical„ Also the w i d e range of the m e d i a n scores, 1.937 to 7.187, q indicates that the d e v i a t i o n in individual rankings w as v e r y small. The only factor w h i c h was no t c o n s i s t e n t l y ranked w as cost. (The cost d i f f e r e n c e w i l l b e di s c u s s e d in the following p a r a g r a p h under the fourth point.) The slight d i f f e r e n c e in the i m p ortance of h eadway and d e p e n d a b i l i t y b e t w e e n riders and n o n - r i d e r s was quite predic t a b l e in light of the r a n d o m s c h eduling p r e f e r e n c e s of the riders over the non-riders„ This d i s t i n c t i o n was d i s cussed in deta i l in a p r e ceding section of this chapter. T h e fou r t h point r e q u iring close scrut i n y is cost. the non- r i d e r s cost w a s m e n t i o n e d as bei n g m o r e times than any o t h e r variable. Amo n g the m o s t important v a r i a b l e It was also listed as the m o s t important v a r i a b l e m o r e often than it w as given any other ranking. Conseq u e n t l y it is sug g ested that the m a j o r factor w h i c h prevents n o n -riders from us i n g the bus s y s t e m is its cost. Even w i t h the v a r i a t i o n b e t w e e n the cost, ability factors, frequency and d e pend­ there w as still a v e r y h i g h c o r r e l a t i o n 10 b e t w e e n the The spre a d of the m e d i a n scores is an i n d icator of the c o n s i s t ­ ency of the rankings among individuals. For example, if all individuals ranked h e a d w a y as b e i n g m o s t important or "1" and cleanliness as least important or "8" then the m e d i a n values of the r anking w o u l d b e "1" and "8" respectively. If on the o t h e r h a n d one-half of the individuals listed h e a d w a y as m o s t important or "1" a nd the ot h e r half felt it was least important or "8" then the m e d i a n val u e w o u l d be "4." Furthermore, if they gave the o p p o s i te ranking to c leanliness then it w o u l d likewise have a va l u e of "4." C o r r e l a t i o n w as c a lculated using the Spearman R a n k correlation coefficient. This c o e f ficient is d e fined as: N 6 I d±2 w h e r e N = total n u m b e r of x- y rank pairs d^ = the d i fference b e t w e e n the two ranks, that is 81 mode and median ranks in each group and between the riding groups. wa s equal The corr e l a t i on for riders the correlation between the two rankings was between the med i a n and the mode m e d i a n values, to 1.0. .905. and non-riding For non-riders This high correlation i n d i c a t e s , as did the spread between the that there is very close agreement among all respondents in the way that they rank the eight variables. R a t i n g s .— In c o n j u n c t i o n w i t h the r anking q u e stions the students were asked to rate the current M S U Bus Syst e m on a seven-point scale w i t h a "1" being the best ratings "4" an average rating, and a "7" lowest possible rating. Table the 27 presents a tabu l a t i o n of the results. It is interesting to note that c leanliness is rated very high. Most other factors are rated around average except for cost and crowding. Overall the system is considered to A very important o b s e r v a t i o n M S U bus pass. be average. can be made about the cost Cost was given an aggregate rating of 5.8 which indicates that it was felt to be excessive by v i r t ually all respondents. that even those people who ranked, cost bus pass cost was u n r e a sonably high. This means low in importance felt that the Since cost w as important factor for n on-riders this is a variable cern. of the listed as the most that should be of con­ Crowdings on the other hand, wa s felt to be great but was not deemed to be an important variable. Since cleanliness importance, scored so high and yet was ranked so low in there is seme j u s t i f i c a t i o n for reducing the amount of cleaning that is done if a reduction in pass cost could be realized. X i “ 7-^ • Sidney Siegel. Nonparametric Sciences (New York: M c G r aw-Hill, 1956), measure in detail. Statistics for the Behavioral pp. 202-213, describes this 82 TABLE 27 R A T I N G O F M S U BUS SYSTEM Factors Rating P e rcentage Cleanliness 2 o79 70,1 Attitude 3o 19 63.5 C o o r d i n a t i on 3,59 56.8 Dependability 3,84 52,7 Headway 3 ,87 52,3 Dire c t n e s s 3,91 51,5 Crowding 5,02 33,0 Cost 5,80 20,0 Ov e rall 4,00 50,0 b 3 Based on 1 b e i n g m o s t favorable and 7 be i n g least favorable r a t i n g , ^ R a ting converted to percentage basis w i t h 100% being most favorable and 0% being least favorable rating,, CH A P T E R IV COST A N D O P E R A T I N G CHARACTERISTICS OF T HE M SU BUS SYSTEM It is the p u r p o s e of this chapter to examine the current cost structure and op e r a t i n g characteristics of the MSU Bus System,, This is n e c e s s a r y not only to determine a b a s e from whi c h to m a k e decisions but also to identify those factors w h i c h m o s t strongly affect cost or o p e rating l i m i t a t i o n s „ Current profit levels It w a s n e c e s s a r y first to construct a work a b l e income statement since the existing funds flow ledger did not consider factors such as the a l l o c a t i o n of o v e r h e ad and the assessment of interest charges. In addition, the p u r c h a s e reserve account w as eliminated since it does not truly reflect a period expense as does depreciation or direct w a g e s but is m e r e l y an a rbitrary fund for the future purchase of n ew buses. Income statements w e r e constructed for a period of five years from 1964-65 w h e n the s y stem was initiated through 1968-69. As can b e seen in Ta b l e 28 the net profit from the bus operation has yielded a ret u r n of 8 per cent or better o n gross R e v e n u e P r o f i t as a ^This profit level does not include the cost of steps n e eded to over­ come the labor problems wh i c h are covered in the latter part of this chapter. A l s o the direct labor cost did not include the university's cont r i ­ b u t i o n to the worke r ' s social security benefits or hospi t a l i z a t i o n fund since these benef i t s are paid from the general u n i versity fund and are not a s s i g n e d to the bus system as a cost. 83 84 TABLE 28 COMPARATIVE FINANCIAL STATEMENT OF MSU BUS SYSTEM 1964 - 1969 1964-65 1965-66 1966-67 1967-68 1968-69 170,080.55 14,123.80 1,060.24 284,728.45 25,777.17 2,888.13 300.00 53.00 10.35 353,402.85 54,031.72 6,016.08 380,179.05 45,344.32 5,790.47 122.50 379,587.18 72,125.12 1 5,990.25 599.77 185,264.59 313,757.10 413,760.73 431,436.34 458,302.32 36.433.49 3,000.00 79,866.76 25,504.62 18.593.50 62,480.36 3,000.00 138,823.51 38,773.11 21,345.28 91,905.81 3,000.00 215,201.06 51,315.75 24,143.16 89,658.15 3,000.00 221,627.54 57,042.96 21,972.45 96,519.74 3,000.00 244,958.97 57,916.68 17,918.70 163,398.37 264,422.26 385,565.78 393,301.10 420,314.09 21,866.22 49,334.84 28,194.95 38,135.24 37,988.23 Investment (prev) Purchase Depreciation Investment (net) 52,179.99 238,946.10 25,504.62 265,621.47 265,621.47 78,084.27 38,773.11 304,932.63 304,932.63 91,285.38 51,315.75 344,902.26 344,902.26 26,032.84 57,042.96 313,892.14 313,892 14 Previous Retained Earnings Profit New Retained Earnings Level 21,866.22 21,866.22 49,334.84 71,201.06 28,194.95 99,396.01 38,135.24 137,531.25 37,988.23 21,866.22 71,201.06 99,396.01 137,531.25 175,519.48 1 Receipts: Tickets Charter Shuttle Rental Misc. Damage Bus Shield Sales Total Receipts Disbursements: Operating Expense Overhead Labor Depreciation Interest Total Net Profit Profit - per cent of Revenue Profit - per cent of Investment Charter Contribu­ tion @ 56.5% Charter as per cent of Profit 310.08 57,910.68 255,981.46 11.8 15.7 6.8 8.8 8.3 8.2 16.2 8.2 12.1 14.8 7,979.95 14,564.10 36.5 Total Charter Contribution for 64-69 Total Charter Contribution as per cent of Total Profit 29.5 30,527.92 108.3 119,442.20 68.0 25,619.54 67.2 40,750.69 107.3 85 p er c e n t a g e of investment is even higher; it was 14„8 per cent in 1 968-69 and appears to be increasing each year as w o u l d be expected since the investment level is being lowered by depreciation, (Although the 1969-70 funds flow report w as not complete at the time of publi­ cation, there w e r e indications that profits mi g h t b e lower for the c urrent period,) Source of revenue M o s t of the revenue of the M S U Bus System is derived from the sale of q u a rterly passes w i t h the resc coming primarily from charter operations. As shown in Table 29, charter revenue w as 15,8 per cent of total receipts during the 1968-69 fiscal year but during the 1969-70 year several ma j or charter groups w e r e lost so the percentage w i l l p r o bably be substantially less for the current fiscal year. The shuttle service busin e s s is largely determined by the numb e r of home football games and the a ttendance at these games since this service is o f f e r e d only to people attending the football games and has not b e e n extended to include basketball games. Effect of charter revenue on profits Prior to MSU ' s entry into the bus operation in 1964, the university operated two buses w i t h w h i c h they offered charter service to the various academic departments on campus. This operation had not been p r o fitable on a fully allocated cost basis. has changed, however, This picture now that the university has a regularly scheduled fleet of buses and it is explained primarily by the w a y in w h i c h costs are allocated. If the bus system had buses exclusively for charter operations then the entire overhead allocation must be assigned to 86 TABLE 29 P E R C E N T A G E BREAKDOWN OF FINANCIAL STATEMENT 1964-1969 1964-65 1965-66 1966-67 1967-68 1968-69 Receipts Tickets 91o8 90,75 85,4 88,1 CM OO C harter 7 o6 8 o20 13,1 10,5 15,8 Shuttle o6 □92 1,5 1,4 1.4 Rental .13 .1 Total R eceipts 100,0 100,00 100 „0 100,0 100,0 Disbursements Disburs e m e n t s O p e rating Expense 1964-65 1965-66 1966-67 1967-68 1968-69 22 „3 23,6 23,8 22,8 23.0 1 c8 1,1 ,8 ,8 .7 Labor 48 „9 52,5 55,8 56,4 58,3 D ep r e c i a t i o n 15,6 14,7 13,3 14,5 13.8 Interest 11,4 8,1 6,3 5,6 4.3 100.0 100,0 100,0 100,0 100,0 O v e rhead Total Disburs e m e n t s 87 the charter o p e r a t i o n and the present not be profitable. The level of charter operation would same would be true if additional buses had to be purchased to hand l e the charter overload. at MSU. M S U has being scheduled. But such is not the case substantial unused capacity wh i c h is not currently As shown in Table 3 1 s annual hour l y u tilization is less than 30 per cent. Table 30 indicates that ma x i m u m utiliz a t i o n is d u r i n g the five m o r n i n g hours of w i nter term when 83.7 per cent of the buses are used. cent. 2 At. no other time does bus u t i l i z a t i o n exceed 75 per C o n s e q u e n t l y , it is a d i s t o r t i o n of the fact to charge d e p r e c i a ­ tion to the charter o p e r ation to determine its profitability w h e n the buses are actually purchased and used primarily for the scheduled operation. T h i s p r o b l e m is not u n u s u a l , however, for a transportation system. To o v e rcome the problem of allo c a t i n g overhead, "c o n t r i b u t i o n to overhead" the concept of is used as a measure of the benefit derived from a particular part of the business. " C o ntribution to overhead" defined as the d i f f e r e n c e between revenue and variable cost. ing the total operation, profit In e v aluat­ tran s p o r t ation activity it is considered that the fixed charges ace incurred w h e ther the the " c o n t r i b u t i o n to overhead" service is supplied or not* consequently, becomes the equivalent of profit due to the p e rformance of the marginal activity. all I n e valuat­ is the residual of " c o n tribution to overhead" after all fixed charges have been accounted for. ing a marginal is This is true since the over­ s y s t e m ’s profit would be reduced by the amount of the contribution of the marginal 2 service if it were not performed. It is not expected that 100 per cent u tilization will ever be reached since good management practice will always dictate that several buses be kept in reserve in case of mechanical failure. Also buses should p e r i o d i c a l l y be w i t h drawn from use to perform routine maintenance. 88 TABLE 30 UTILIZATION OF MSU BUS SYSTEM BY TERMS 1969-19703 We ek 1y Capacity (bus hours) Daily Utilization (bus hours) Service Days Per Week Total Utilization (bus hours) Per cent of Uti lization FALL - 25 buses . (23 owned + 2 leased) A.M. (5 hr s .) P.M. (6 hrs.) Night (5 hr s .) Weekends (16 hrs. ) 625 750 625 800 92 103 25 64 5 5 5 2 2,800 Total 460 515 125 128 73.5 68.6 17.3 16.0 1 ,228 42.3 585 615 130 128 83.7 73.1 18.6 14.3 1 ,458 46.5 WINTER - 28 buses (23 owned + 5 leased) A.M. (5 hrs.) P.M. (6 hrs.) Night (5 hrs.) Weekends (16 hrs. ) 700 840 700 896 117 123 26 64 5 5 5 2 3,136 To ta 1 SPRING - 23 buses (all owned) A.M. (5 hrs.) P.M. (6 hrs.) Night (5 hrs.) Weekends (16 hrs. ) 575 690 575 736 67 76 23.5 64 5 5 5 2 2,576 To Lai 335 380 117.5 128 58.3 55.0 20.4 17.4 960.5 37.2 75 90 0 0 13.0 13.0 0 0 165 6.4 SUMMER - 23 buses (all owned) A.M. (5 hrs.) P.M. (6 hrs.) Night (5 hrs. ) Weekends (16 hrs. ) Total 575 690 575 736 15 18 0 0 2,576 aSoo appendix M lor bus utilization detail. 5 5 5 2 TABLE 31 YEARLY UTILIZATION OF MS U BUS SYSTEM3 Terms Weeks Per Term Weekly Use Fall 11 1,228 13,508 2,800 30,800 Winter 11 1,458 16,038 3,136 34,496 Spring 11 960,5 10,566 2,576 28,336 Summer 11 165 1,815 2,576 28,336 8 0 0 2,576 20,608 Break Time Total Total Utilization 41,927 Ann u a l Hour ly Utilization 3 See A ppendix M for bus utilization d e t a i l 0 Weekly Capacity Total Capacity 142,576 29.4% 90 In this sect i o n the marg i n a l charter o p e ration was examined to see how large a c o n t ribution it m a d e to overhead (or p r o f i t ) „ Since the report m a i n t a i n e d by the bus system dispatcher w as on a c a l e n d a r y e a r ba s i s rather than a fiscal year basis it was necessary to convert co n t r i b u t i o n s to a fiscal year base, This was approximated b y c a l c u l a t i n g an aver a g e p e rcentage contribution figure for a three- 3 y e a r period,, For the three-year peri o d gross charter revenues exceed the v a r i a b l e cost of operating the bus system by 56„5 per cent. The figures given n e a r the b o t t o m of Table 28 indicate c h a rter c o n t r i b u t i o n by years. indicate the calculated The next row of values in Table 28 that the charter contribution m a d e up the maj o r portion of the entire bus sys t e m profit. In fact over the entire five-year p e r i o d the charter c o n t r ibution amounted to 68 per cent of the gross system profits. A l t h o u g h it may not be completely correct to call the charter c o n t r i b u t i o n "profit" since overhead is not allocated to the c h a rter o p e r a t i o n 2 it is true that profits would have been s u b stantially reduced for the year if the charter service had not been offered. It should be p o i nted out that an analysis wa s not m a d e of the s h u ttle service o p e r a t i o n since it m a d e up such a small portion of gross revenue; however, it would be logical to assume that the same pr i n c i p l e applies and that a m a j o r p o r t i o n of the revenue generated fr o m this service can be considered as contribution to overhead, 3 The average p e r c e n t a g e of charter revenue that exceeded v a r i a b l e cost for the calendar years 1966-68 was calculated as followss a v e rage p e r c e n t a g e c o n t r ibution to overhead = 1968 1968 y (TR.-VC.)/Y TR. i t 1966 1 1 i=196fe w h e r e TR^ = total charter revenue in year i; VC_^ = vari a b l e costs for year i 91 Seasonality of profits One of the m o s t obvious factors brought out in both the section on seasonal ticket sales (see Table 4 or Figure 5) and the section on s easonality of bus u t i l ization (see Table 30) is that the bus system is highly s u s c e p t i b l e to seasonal demand. The effect of this seasonality is amplified even m o r e w h e n profits are e x a m i n e d „ Table 32 presents an analysis of profit by quarter for five years„ The una d j u s t e d quarterly incomes are taken directly from the funds flow statement,, The adjusted income figures have been modified to reflect the 7 per cent interest charge, the overhead allocation and the reabso r p t i o n of the post-1967 purchase reserve as shown in A p p e n d i x N. These figures indicate that fall and w i nter terms have b e e n consistently profitable. In 1967-68, for example, these two quarters generated $ 7 9 f346 profit on a gross revenue for the same per i o d of $312,042.45. In 1968-69 comparable quarters yielded profits of $90,190 on revenues of $328,907.34. This represents a 25.4 per cent return on sales in 1967-68 and a 27.5 per cent return in 1968-69. The si t u a t i o n is entirely different for spring and summer terms w h e n the system does not even cover variable cost of operation. For example, depreciation, if fixed cost of operation is defined as the sum of interest, and overhead then the system wo u l d lose only $20,504 a quar t e r if it did not operate in 1967-68 and $19,707 a q uar t e r in 1968-69. As Table 32 plainly demonstrates, summer losses and the spring quarter 1969 loss are definitely greater. Consequently total profits for the year 1967-68 could have been improved by $13,430 or 35.5 per cent if the buses had not been operated summer term. TABLE 32 INCOME REPORT BY Q UARTER (IN DOLLARS) 1964-65 1965-66 1966-67 1967-68 1968-69 UNADJUSTED Fall 10,409,54 25,124c 69 29,650,13 23,780,00 24,131,54 Winter 3 2 , 872c 75 58,357=35 46,936,09 38,052,28 46,518,41 Spring 177 c43 4 ?145„04 ( 3 , 2 7 2 , 98f (16,034,00) (32,148,12) (24,521,09) (27,690,59) (24,588,95) Summer (13,946,96) AIJJUSTED Fall 5,011,17 19,038,37 22,864,34 32,536,89 33,901,86 Winter 27,474,38 52,271,03 40,150,30 46,809,17 56,288,78 Spring ( 5 , 2 2 0 c94) Summer brackets (1,941c28) (10,058,77) (20,033,28) (31,306,88) (7,277,11) (22,377,80) (33,933,70b ) (29,818,63b ) indicate l o s s . ^ P u r c h a s e reserve transfer was not m a d e summer quarter. Note: A d justment formula and quarterly adjustment values are given in A p p e n d i x N» 93 L i k e w i s e profits could have b e e n increased $12,782 or 33.6 per cent for the 1968-69 a c a demic year if the bus s y stem had n ot b e e n in operation spring and summer terms. T h e ab o v e analysis, of course, makes three very strong a s s u m p t i o n s w h i c h n e e d to be examined in detail. is that the labor force can easily b e w a y it has b e e n in the past. The first assumption shifted to physical plant the This is q u e s t ionable and will be discussed in detail in the labor section of this chapter. The second assumption is that the u n i v e r s i t y w o u l d be unable to lease, rent, charter, or m a k e other i n c o m e - p r o d u cing use of the buses during these periods. The third a s s u m p t i o n is that the u n i versity is only concerned about the bus sys t e m as a funds flow generator and does not v i e w it as an integ r a l part of the campus service facilities. This w i l l be di s c u s s e d e x t e n s i v e l y in Chapter 5. N a t u r e of bus s y s t e m costs Ta b l e 29 provides a percentage b r e a k d o w n of bus system costs for the first five years of operation. b e n o t i c e d are as follows. fuel, tires, m a intenance, First, cleaning, P e r t inent points that should the operating expenses w h i c h include etc., have been held v i r t ual ly constant for the entire five-year period due primarily to good operations ma n agement, the u n i v e r s ity's purchase of n ew buses, of leasing used ones. and discontinuance This has s u b s tantially reduced the m a i n t e n a n c e and repair r e q uired for the fleet, b ut this decrease has b e e n offset b y a subst a n t i a l pr i c e increase for both parts and labor. For example, m e c h a n i c a l labor required for repair w o r k was previously priced at $5.00 per h o u r and is n ow charged at $6.50 per hour due to increase 94 in w a g e rates. It is q uestionable ho w m u c h longer operating expenses w i l l be h e l d in line since vi r t u a l l y all of the equipment is relatively new, so continued economies in this area can be expected to be limited w h i l e prices are c o n tinuing to i n c r e a s e 0 The second and perhaps the most important point to be derived f r o m Table 29 is that the cost of drivers to operate the buses has i n c reased substan t i a l l y from 48„9 per cent in 1964-65 to 58„3 per cent in 1 9 6 8 - 6 9 o It should be emphasized that this is not only the major cost of o p e rating the bus system b ut that it is also the only cost that is incr e a s i n g p e r c e n t a g e w i s e „ The fixed o v e r h e a d is dropping as could be expected w i t h the i n c reasing cost base, Interest charges are likewise decreasing as debt is r e t i r e d through the use of depreciation,, Depreciation f l u c t u a t e s only as the cost base varies since there have b e e n no n e w pu r c h a s e s w i t h i n the last several y e a r s „ Lab o r considerations W h e n m a n a g e m e n t attempts to use a fixed labor supply to meet a hig h l y seasonal demand w i t h i n reasonable cost limits, problems developo As can b e expected the M S U Bus System is no exception in spite of the fact that every effort is m a d e to transfer bus drivers over to the M S U b u i l d i n g and grounds facilities during the slack season., T h e s e labor problems can be grouped into three e x c essive overtime, labor categories: grievances, and safety violations. The M S U Bus Service maintains a staff of thirty-two full time drivers. Duri n g the fall and wint e r term these thirty-two men cannot p o s sibly do the driving required. During the spring and 95 summer quarters only a part of the drivers are n e e d e d „ this p r o b l e m two steps are taken. To overcome First every effort is m a d e to hire off-duty firemen or other n o n-college students w ho can drive during the fall and w i n t e r term on a part-time b a s i s . There are a limited n u m b e r of part-time peo p le available and it is d i f f icult to schedule duty hours and run cuts for people who have other jobs. As a c o nsequence excessive o v ertime is required during the fall and w i n t e r quarters,, As indicated in Table 33 the drivers averaged 470 overtime hours and m a n y w o r k e d over 600-750 hours overtime. A n a verage of 470 hours of overtime m a y not be excessive w h e n v i e w e d in light of a n o r m a l 2000 hour w o r k year. during spring quarter, When it is realized, summer quarter, of b e t w e e n - q u a r t e r breaks, however, that and during the e i g h t we e k s there is a large excess supply of drivers, then vi r t u a l l y all of this overtime m u s t occur during the fall and , 4 w i n t e r quarters and it is probably greater during w i n t e r quarter. C o n s e q u e n t l y ? w h e n this 470 hours of overtime is v i ewed in light of the 880 hours of n o r mally scheduled w o r k during this p e riod then it is seen as excessive. It seems unlikely that one individual can b e an effective driver w h e n he works 745^ overtime hours in a d d ition to his regular w o r k schedule of 880 regular hours. It is easy to understand w h y the m e n are scheduled so m a n y overtime hours. to w o r k In addition to the fact that the m e n we l c o m e 4 It is n e c essary that some over t i m e be incurred during spring and summer terms to allow for scheduling problems, run cuts, etc., b u t there should be very little since a driver can always be shifted b a c k from physical plant for all or part of a day. ^One driver in Table 33 w o r k e d a overt i m e for the calendar year 1969. total of 745.4 hours of 96 TABLE 33 BUS S Y S T E M CUMULATIVE OVERTIME HOURS F O R 1969 C A L E N D A R Y E A R Employee3 Num ber of Ov er t i m e Hours Employee N u m b e r of Overtime Hours A 6 6 ? o6 R 561,3 B 568 o5 S 441,6 C 687,4 T 384,7 D 111.5 U 589,4 E 131 o 3 V 128,2 F 409 o9 W 685,1 G 594,9 X 622,3 H 684,7 Y 517,7 I 485 o5 Z 286,1 J 745,4 AA 192,7 K 628,1 BB 668,0 L 502,3 CC 540,7 M 411.5 DD 512,1 N 587.9 EE 286,6 0 401,3 FF 295,2 P 525,1 GG 223,6 Q 340,1 HH 574,4 Total 15, 992,7 Av e r a g e 470,4 3 All employees w i t h less than 100 hours of overtime were ex c l u d e d because, w i t h o u t exception, they either r efused to w o r k overtime, w e r e p a r t - t i m e employees, or had terminated employment w i t h MSUo 97 it as a m e a n s of inc r e asing their earnings, the bus system views it as the lowest cost a l t ernative to the hiring of additional employees w h o w o u l d b e n e e d e d only eleven to twenty-two weeks each year, The second problem, labor grievances, stems from the w o r k a ssi g n m e n t s given to the bus drivers during spring and summer terms and during buseso the school vacat i o n periods w h e n they are not driving their Since the bus drivers receive the same pay as general labor, they are c o n sidered as such w h e n they are transferred to physical plantc However, h i ms e l f to b e a bus driver he is often not happy w i t h "just any" job assignment,, if a p e rson is hired to drive a bus and considers C o n s e q u e n t ly there is an extensive filing of grievances about job assignments. A l t h o u g h there w e r e no figures available about the amount of time lost in negotiations, meetings, hours are involved. L i kewise there etc., many may be a general decline in employee m o r a l e w h e n e v e r such g r ievances are processed,, A l t h o u g h there w e r e no data available and no estimates were made, there are serious questions about how effectively the bus drivers can be u s e d by physi c a l p l a n t . three gene r a l areas,. First, di f f i c u l t if there is always These problems stem primarily from the scheduling of w o r k crews is very the possib i l i t y that they m ay be recalled b y the bus sys t e m for a charter o p e r ation or some other special run. Secondly, the drivers m ay not b e particularly adaptable to the physical p l a n t jobs either by skill, by aptitude, or by attitude. Last, it is q u e s t i o n a b l e if physical plant actually needs the additional manpower during the spring and summer quarters and during breaks. Certainly there is m a i n t e n a n c e that can be done b e tter during the periods when the u n i v e r s i t y is op e r a ting at reduced levels, but there are also 98 numerous physical plant personnel released from their regular university support functions at this time, This report, however, will not attempt to delve into these areas since it is the basis for a study in i t s e l f <, The third m a j o r area of labor difficulty stems from charter assignments., If a charter run is made on short notice, during fall or w i n t e r quarter, especially it is often n e c essary to a sk a driver to m a k e the o v e rnight run after working a full all-day shift as well as p o s s i b l e o v e r t i m e 0 It is easy to understand the burd e n placed on the dispatcher who is c onfronted by a v e r y limited supply of drivers who are already w o r k i n g excessive overtime and also the charter demands from the m o r e influential academic c o m m u n i t y „ knows The dispatcher also that the charter business yields the ma j o r portion of the system's pr o f i t and h e does not w a n t to lose itr, In spite of the reasons given., it m a y be in v i o l a t i o n of ICC regulations and of common regard for safety to have drivers w o r k i n g excessive hours, especially o n charter runs w h e r e highway speeds greatly increase the danger of fatalities. D a i l y demand peaks Not only are there extensive fluctuations in seasonal demand but there are also extensive fluctuations in demand throughout the day. Students pr i m a r i l y use the bus system to go from their living areas to class and to return. Consequently, there are high peak usage periods just prior to the beginning of each class period on the inbound trips and just after class breaks on the outbound runs,, At the other times during the day the buses frequently have very low load factors. Figures 12 and 13 are graphical presentations of the extent and p r e d i c t a b i l i t y of the load peaks. Figure 12 indicates that there are peaks on both inbound and outbound routes. The Spartan Village route AVERAGE NUMBER OF RIDERS 120 February 2 “ Febrary 6,1970 no 100 HUBBAR D -SHAW 90- AVERAGE NUMBER OF RIDERS BRODY-SHAW 80- 70- 60- (D- 50- 40- 30- 20 - 7a.m. 11p.m. DEPARTURE TIME Fig. 12.— Dai l y ridership comparison for two inbound routes AVERAGE NUMBER OF RIDERS ON BUS 120 no February 2 -February 6,1970 © SPAR TAN -SHAW 100 S H AW -SPAR TAN 90 80 70 100 60 50 40 30 20 10 DEPARTURE TIME ridership comparison for inbound and outbound routes 101 was s e l ected since it provides a good mi x t u r e of both ma r r i e d students and r e s idence hall s t u d e n t s „ routes Figure 13 provides a comparison of to two different sections of the campus along the most heavily traveled rout e s — to Brody and to the East Complex, po i n t e d out It should be that these charts present the average ridership for the five-day w e e k of February 2, 1970 to February 6, 1970 since this was felt to be rep r e s e n t a t i ve of a typical w i n t e r q u arter week. The figures in the circle represent the n u mber of days in w h i c h that particular bus was una b l e to load every o n e that was w a i t i n g „ O p e r a t i n g reports P e r haps one of the m o s t interesting facts about the operation of the M S U Bus System was the complete lack of any goal-oriented reports w h i c h w o u l d m e a s u r e its effectiveness and efficiency in m e e t i n g adm i n i s t r a t i v e goals, indicate they There are funds flow reports which r e v enue and expense items for each three mon t h period, but are ge n e r a l l y at least one quarter late in being compiled. The garage m a i n t a i n s e x t ensive data on each bus and p a s s enger counts on each bus run each day, but there was little evidence that this data was used for eva l u a t i n g the efficiency or effectiveness of the system. In fact this l a c k of goal orient a t i o n was true not only in the reporting sys t e m but also among the many administrative levels responsible for the system b o t h directly and indirectly. For these reasons an entire chapter has b e e n devoted to an examination of the p urpose of the bus sys t e m as vie w e d from each group concerned about it; rider, the operating personnel, the student and the college administrator. CHAPTER V EXAMI N A T I O N OF C URRENT GOALS A N D OBJECTIVES D u r i n g the course of this study, in-depth interviews w e r e held w i t h the m a j o r groups involved w i t h the M S U Bus System: those of the student body w h o ride the bus system, u n iversity administrators, and the operations p e r s o n n e l „ that each group in It was obvious general as w e l l as individuals w i t h i n each group held v a s t l y different o pinions about the role, p urpose and obje c t i v e s of the bus system,, This chapter attempts to identify the salient current attitudes of people in each of these three g r o u p s „ It is hop e d this will facilitate a d e t e r m i n a t ion of u n i v e r s i t y - w i d e long-range goals since no o r g a n i z a t i o n can b e effective w i t h o u t some u n a n i m i t y in o b jectives among its p e o p l e „ Objectives of the users of the bus s y stem The student is a consumer w h o does not feel that h e is able to influence the bus system but feels that he must s i mply take advantage of the service offered "^During spring quarter 1970 there w e r e two groups wh o organized action against the M S U Bus S y stem for the first time, The first group, led by m e m b e r s of the dormitory councils in the South Co m p l e x dorms, attempted to o r g anize a boycott of bus pass sales to force the u n i v e r ­ sity to increase the frequency of service through the C a s e - W i l s o n area to one bus every four m inutes as was then scheduled for the Brody and Fee c o m p l e x e s 0 (See A p p e n d i x P„) The boycott was l argely inef­ fective, The second group, composed of b l a c k students from the u n i v e r ­ sity, formed as the results of d i s a greements over the enforcemen t of 102 103 As C h a pter III indicates;, frequency service, or at least a service w h i c h will mini m i z e the u n c e r ­ tainty cf cryi n g to meet schedule. students are w i l l i n g to pay for a high an u n c e r t a i n and difficul t - t o - u n d e r s t a n d bus They are nor p a r t i cularly Interested in a high-priced shuttle service w i t h i n the academic c o m munity but are primarily interested in a mea n s of c o m m u t i n g frcm remote Jiving areas to the academic complex. The group is w i l l i n g to pay a premium to ride d u ring cold weather, and a p o r t i o n is a n x ious to pay for p r o tection or security in night travel. 2 The students are w i l l i n g to pay for improved service but are not p a r t i c u l a r l y concerned about aesthetic and comfort factors. pass p r o cedures by a bus delter. As a c onsequence of the action of this gr o u p a code of conduct was dra w n up for both drivers and riders. A copy of this cede is given in Appendix 0. P e r h a p s one reason for the usual lack of student effort to mod i f y bus system services is a complete lack of channels available for the p r o c e s s i n g cf c o m plaints or requests for new services. The telephone number' listed in the campus di r e c t o r y under 'bus system" is manned by the d i s p a t c h e r d u r i n g the day and by the garage m e c h a n i c s during the night. A l t h o u g h the bus system m anager is available from 7:30 A.M. until 3:00 P.M. he does net. have the authority to make major policy de c isions about changes in bus service. The m e c h anics who man the garage phone after the m anager leaves have neither the authority nor the interest to do this. For example., w h e n the representative of the dorm council called the garage at 7.00 P.M. to inform the appropriate channels cf the p r o posed boycott she w as answered by a mechanic, and was infuriated w h e n he did net show proper' interest in her demands. As can be expected minor c o n sumer requests for information or service changes frequently lead to an irate consumer "fed up" with the rigid unresponsive system and a bewildered mechanic unable to understand why anyone would feel that he was not p e r f o r m i n g his job adequately. 2 In tne open-ended part or the survey 42 (almost 10%) stated that to improve f.he bus service increased frequency of service during the e v e nings was necessary. They indicated that at night when they most need the security that the bus system could provide, it drastically reduced service and implemented new route patterns. One coed stated that she *was ex t remely frightened one night w h e n she was the 104 such as m o r e cleanliness, softer seats, less crowding, etc,, if it 3 increases the cost or decreases the service levels. In g e n eral the students feel that they must take the bus system as they find it, It is part of the "establishment" (fifteen persons used this w o r d in the open-ended part of the survey) m a n y students feel and that since they are only here for four years they can always re a r r a nge their class and w o r k schedules or move to a n o ther r e s idence area to find the best campus living and traveling combination. They have no strong sense of pride in the bus s y s t e m n o r do they feel that it is part of any concern about social p r o b l e m s or a potential experiment source for w orking on u r b a n t r a n s p o r t a t i o n problems. if it me e t s It is only a service to be used their needs. o n l y rider o n the b u s going to one of the residence complexes. Instead of m a k i n g the normal turns on the route she expected, it h e a d e d off campus to the commuter lot whi c h is added to the normal n i g h t - t i m e loop. Others stated that the twenty m i n u t e bus frequency can seem like a long w a i t on a cold w i nter night w h e n the campus is largely quiet except for y o u w h e n you are a lone girl wa i t i n g at a bus stop pr o t e c t e d by one lone l y street light and deserted academic buildings, 3 This is cons i stent w i t h the practice of eliminating one line of seats (three instead of four across) at Kent State U n i v e r ­ sity since this p r a c t i ce allows more comfort w h e n load factors are low but g r e atly increases the m a x i m u m n u mber of standing riders who can be loaded onto a bus during peak periods, 4 The author should note that since he has b e e n wo r k i n g on this bus p r o j e c t — from April 1970 to August 1970— no less than seven individuals con t a c t e d h i m about the advisability of using the campus bus s y s t e m as a r e s e a r ch subject for n e w ideas in urban planning, p o l l u t i o n control, and in ecological sciences. There definitely appears to be a renewed interest in bus transportation research. It should be mentioned, on the other hand, that twenty-three of the people (over 5 per cent) surveyed indicated that the bus system w a s a m a j o r source of po l l u t i o n on the university campus and ma ny of these felt that for this reason the bus system should be eliminated. Th e s e responses w e r e on the open-ended part of the survey. 105 They feel that the that if the so high; cost of the service is v e r y h i g h and admi n i s t r a tion were being "fair" the cost w o u l d not be therefore, they have no compunction about sharing passes even though the pass states emphatically that it is n o n - n e g o t i a b l e and that it is not to be used by other riders, In the in-depth surveys not a single student denied having shared passes or having friends w h o shared p a s s e s 0 (It is virtually impossible for the bus drivers to control this type of sharing since the drivers do not have time for extensive checking of the s t u d e n t ’s i d entification and verifying it w i t h his bus p a s s ^ ) In summary then, the student is a v e r y cost-conscious customer who has a need and wants it filled at the lowest possible price, but does not feel that it is his role to have to force the syst e m to be m o r e receptive to his n e e d s 0 Objectives of the a d ministration The second group involved w i t h the M S U Bus Syst e m is composed of the administrators directly responsible for its o p e r ation and for As an interesting sidelight the passes returned w i n t e r quarter, 1970 had some very original names, addresses and student n u m b e r s „ One student indicated that his name was "King Richard the Li o n Hearted" and that his address was "Camelot Castle," In the space m a r k e d "student number" he stated "I am N u m b e r 1„" M a n y passes h a d two or m o r e names and student numbers on them. Vi r t u a l l y all of the unre a d a b l e ones had no name or address on them. In addition m a n y appeared to have b een bleached wh i t e w h e n they w e r e w a s h e d w i t h the students' loads of wash. But still all of these tickets w e r e accepted by the bus drivers as well as the d e s k clerks who a c c epted the fall term passes for the $6,00 discount on the w i nter pass o In light of the difficulty incurred by the bus s y s t e m in checking passes and the protest raised by a group of b l a c k students during spring quarter, 1 9 7 0 , the n e w bus passes p rinted for fall term, 1970 no longer have the n o n-negotiable clause printed on them and ha v e become simply a bearer instrument. The results of this move are not yet known. 106 the f o r m u l a t i o n of o p e r ating g o a l s 0 To unde r s t a n d the basis upon wh i c h these goals h a v e b e e n f o rmulated it is first n e c e s s a r y to r e view the original m a n d a t e gi ven to the bus syst e m w h e n it was introduced in 1 9 6 4 o As in d i c a t e d in Ch a p t e r I the bus s y stem was organized in response to the r e c o m m e n d a t i o n of a special ad hoc F aculty-Student Motor V e h i c l e C o m m i t t e e „ This committee was not called to develop a bus sys t e m n o r to develop a campus-wide t r ansportation syst e m but only to find some m e t h o d of s olving current pa r k i n g and traffic problemso As w o u l d n o r m a l l y be expected, the committee m a d e numerous r eco m m e n d a t i o n s for r e s tri c t i n g the use of a u tomobiles on campus and of d e t e r m i n i n g w h o should b e allowed d riving p r i v i l e g e s 0 committee r e c o m m e n d e d the bus s y stem only as a mea n s See A p p e n d i x I for its list of r e c o m m e n d a t i o n s <, to this endo In v i e w of the fact that these r e c o m m e ndations w e r e never further developed, is easy to u n d e r s t a n d w h y The it those responsible for implementing the bus s y s t e m did n o t v i e w it as a constructive, cohesive service w h i c h provided support and f l exib i l i t y to other functions of the university but only as a serv i c e r equired to eliminate W h e n the bus m a n a g e r w as hired he was traffic p r o b l e m s 0 instructed to provide the service r e q u i r e d b u t w as strongly a d monished not to do any "empire b u i l d i n g T h i s service m e r e l y an adjunct atti t u d e was reinforced by m a k i n g the bus to the u n i versity m o t o r pool o p e r ation and by giving the bus sys t e m m a n a g e r the title "General Fo r e m a n — A u tomotive S e r v i c e s „" Consequ e n t l y , the bus s y stem op e r a t i o n is view e d b y the campus a d m i n i s t r a t i o n as part of the motor pool operation wh e r e the only m a j o r d e c i s i o n that needs of vehiclesu to be made revolves around the purchase 107 The admi n i s t r a t i ve goals for the bus system have never been exp l i c i t l y formulated except for the very brief in the comm i t t e e ' s report. See Appendix A. statement included The omission of formal bus system goals has clouded the positive aspects of the bus operation, parti c u l a r l y in three general areas; 1. constraints on the sise and growth cf the system 2. r e d u c t i o n of administrative problems 3. a v o idance of conflicts with the private sector. Constraint s on the size and growth of the sy s t e m .— Since the bus system is viewed only as a required service w h i c h is a b s o l u tely support required service, then only that should be provided. Just as any a d m i n i s t r a t i o n is anxious tc reduce overhead expenses, so the u n i v e r s i t y adm i n i s t r a t o r s are careful to m a i n t a i n control over the bus system to prevent any "empire building" or unrequited growth. O n e ad m i n i s t r a t o r could be eliminated. stated that he wishad that the bus service His j u s tification for this was that the cost of o p e r a t i o n was risi n g so rapidly that he felt eventually the system would no longer be b r e a king even. In addition he felt that the service was not needed. the physically handicapped did not He Indicated that need it since they had on to say that mcst of the students do not either live near special d riving and parking permits. He went need it. since they can the academic area or take classes in the living- learning complexes and besides he felt than it is not difficult to 108 w a l k anywhere on campus and the exercise would be beneficial. There was a strong consensus among the administrators i nterviewed that they were not interested in ways to increase bus ridership but would appreciate learning of ways to decrease ridership. In f a c t 9 the $20.00 w i n t e r - t e r m - o n l y pass was implemented as a m e a n s of curt a i l i n g w i n t e r ridership peaks so that the number of buses would not have to be increased to handle the w i nter overload. a dminis t r a t o r stated his position very succinctly: One "We are not in the bus business unless it is absolutely required to facilitate the educational and research process." R e d uction of adm inistrative p r o b l e m s .— Another reason frequently given for c o n s t r a i n i n g the sice cf the bus system is the desire to eliminate administ r a t i v e difficulties. For example, the street design in the academic area is not conducive to good traffic flow. adm i n i s t r a t o r s feel Drive, that if the buses could be removed from Circle c o n gestion would be reduced and "essential" flow more Several traffic could smoothly. A second administrative problem is the frequently voiced o b j e c t i o n to the noise and pollution created by the buses. twenty-three students (over 5 per cent) on this survey responded that noise and p o l lution were bus system. question. In fact, sufficient cause to eliminate the This number was especially high for an open-ended 109 A third a r e a that pr e s e n t e d a d m i n i s t r a t i v e d i f f iculties is the seasonal labor p r o b l e m d i s c u s s e d in C hapter IV. It is reasoned that any e x p a n s i o n of the bus s y s t e m w o u l d further increase the problems invol v e d w i t h drivers during the spring and summer. a d e c rease in s e r v i c e w o u l d reduce Likewise, these problems. T h e fourth a r e a of a d m i n i s t r a t i v e co n c e r n is the increasing n u mb e r of c o m plaints from riders. Several of these prob l e m s w e r e me n t i o n e d un d e r the p r e c e d i n g s ection on student goals for the system. In general, however, they s t e m from the e n f o r c e m e n t of the use of the bus pass and com p l a ints about service, inadequate headways, etc. i.e., b u n c h i n g of buses, Duri n g fall term 1969 there w as also the p r o b l e m of r e f u n d i n g p a rt of the cost of tickets due to the days that the bus drivers w e r e out on strike. A l t h o u g h all these issues are part of a n o r m a l c u stomer s ervice program, they are somewhat resented if they are v i s u a l i z e d as part of an u n n e c e s s a r y service. A final a d m i n i s t r a t i v e c o n s i d e r a t i o n is the level of investment required for the p u r c h a s e of r olling stock. It is easy for an ad m i n i s t r a t o r to v i e w the bus syst e m as an u n n e c e s s a r y user of funds w h i c h are o b t a i n e d at the ex p e n s e of the academic and research functions. C o n s e q u e n t l y there is still further r e l uctance to expand the bus sys t e m o r to c o nsider addi t i o n a l services. A v o i d a n c e of confliccs w i t h the p r i v a t e s e c t o r . — Th e third objective of the bus s y s t e m p o l i c y is the m i n i m i z a t i o n of conflicts w i t h privately owned bus services. E v en n o w there are pr i v a t e bus systems w h i c h would like to han d l e the u n i v e r s i t y ' s c harter runs,and the a d m i n i s t r a t i o n is p a r t i c u l a r l y co n c e r n e d about co m p e t i t i o n w i t h pr i v a t e carriers. During 110 the 1 9 6 9 - 7 0 school year, for example, the developers of one of the n e w a p a r t m e n t d e v e l o p m e n t s contacted the M S U Bus S y stem to request service to the a p a r t m e n t complex since m o s t of its residents are studentso The u n i v e r s i t y flatly rejected any interest w h atsoever in p r o v i d i n g the s e r v i c e since they w e r e not given this authority in their o r i g i n a l m a n d a t e „ Since the university wou l d not provide this s e r vice the d e v e l o p e r has be g u n its o wn bus service w i t h a school bus type of vehicle,, During summer term 1970, the first q u ar t e r the s y s t e m w a s in operation, nine round trips w e r e scheduled each sch o o l day„ See A p p e n d i x Q for a copy of the s c h e d u l e „ T he charge for this serv i c e is twenty cents per ride„ This e x a m p l e is not presented, however, to prove that there is a d e m a n d but to show that the administration's concern about avoid i n g c o m p e t i t i o n w i t h it n e e d be„ the private section is m u c h g reater than In this case the adm i n i s t r a t i o n was intent on avoiding g c o m p e t i t i o n w i t h the L a n s i n g Metro Lines or p r i v a t e taxi fleets as w e l l as h o l d i n g d o w n on the growth of the M S U system,, M e t r o Lines, however, has v e r y definite flow routes that are primarily radial into the central business district of L a n s i n g „ taken by students com m u ting from their residences usually more, perpendicular T he Lansing to those The routes to campus are of the existing bus l i n e s „ Fu r t h e r ­ the L a n s i n g M e t r o Lines w h i c h has b e e n servicing the Lansing m e t r o p o l i t a n area is not anxious to expand service since they have b e e n losing m o n e y on e xisting o p e r a t i o n s „ In fact, the City of Lansing ^ T h e L a n s i n g S ubu r b a n Lines b e c a m e the La n s i n g M e t r o Lines after it w a s taken o v e r b y the City of Lansing during Spring 1970. Ill found it n e c e s s a r y to b uy out the Lines in spring 1970 to prevent a c o m plete c o l lapse of the bus transit system,, L i k e w i s e the taxi is not a v i a b l e alternative for the offcampus student b e c a u s e of the high cost of commuting v ia this mode,, C o n s e q u e n t l y , there is a complete lack of alternatives for commuting o ff - c a m p u s s t u d e n t s „ In e f f e c t , the private sector for transportation does not exist for the student,, Furthermore, the a d m i n i s t r a t i o n ’s fear that it w i l l compete w i t h the p r i vate sector is not a valid concern. There is, in fact, litt l e chance that any o ne w i l l be w i l l i n g to p r ovide this service except perhaps as a n e c e s s a r y adjunct to another service as in the case of the apartment c omplex that felt it m u s t p rovide transportation to attract students to its apartments., George Smerk sums up the p r o b a b i l i t y of an entrepreneur coming forth to offer the service q u i t e well,, It is difficult, or impossible, to operate mass t r a n s p o r t a t ion as profit making, p rivate enterprise in the U n i t e d States t o d a y „ In cities already e n j oying transit service, its m e r e continuation, m u c h less improvement, requires public action and pub l i c funds. In cities wi t h o u t transit, it is rare, indeed, today for an entrepreneur to come forward to offer s e r v i c e . ? The c o m p e t i t i o n be t w e e n the public and p rivate sector does arise in another area b ut is view e d differently. The univ e r s i t y has a v e r y large i n v estment in dormitories but has b e e n having difficulty w i t h low occ u p a n c y rates due to the large number of apartments built ^George M. Smerk, Wo r k i n g Draft of Report on Department of T r a n s p o r t a t i o n P r o ject Number IND-MTD-1, Chapter 2„ (mimeographed.) 112 b y the private s e c t o r „ toward A l t h o u g h the reasons for the m i g r a t i o n off- c a m p u s l i v i n g w i l l not be di s c u s s e d in this paper it is important to p o i n t out that the a d m i n i s t r a t i o n is concerned that improved o f f - c a m p us bus service m i g h t further lower the dormitory o c c u p a n c y rate. off-campus On the other hand it m i g h t be argued that improved t r a n s p o r t a t ion e n a b l i n g students to go to local shopping centers and stores w o u l d m i t i g a t e the off - c a m p u s a d v a n t a g e „ This issue was not r e s e a r c h ed in this study but should be the subject of further c o n s i d e r a t i o n if the u n i v e r s i t y w i shes to protect its h o u s i n g i n v estment a g a inst c o m p e t i t i o n from the private s e c t o r „ In summary then, the u n i v e r s i t y adm i n i s t r a t o r s in charge of the campus bus s y s t e m tend to v i e w it as a service they are required to prov i d e b u t see little v a l u e to any m o r e than a m i n i m a l system,, They have m a d e little effort to incorporate transit s y stem plan n i n g into the very s o p h i s t i c ated l o n g - r a n g e u n i v e r s i t y design,, Although there have b e e n several class projects inves t i g a t i n g operationa l aspects of the bus system, this study is the first p roject looking at the role of the transit s y s t e m in the university,, As of the p r e sent time there has b e e n v i r t u a l l y no effort m a d e to encourage the involvement of the v arious academic d e p a r t m e n t s in research p rojects usin^ the campus bus systenu O b j ectives of the o p e r a t i n g personnel O p e r a t i n g p e r s o nnel h a v e v e r y little goals or poli c y making, to do w i t h overall systems but they strongly reflect to the customer their p e r c e p t i o n of the a d m i n i s t r a t i o n ’s g o a l s „ They receive a given 113 leve l of e q u i p m e n t and they are instructed as to w h a t level of service shou l d be p r o v i d e d 0 One a t t itude was the o p e r a t i o n s people,. frequently v o iced during interviews with T h e y stated that they w e r e to p rovide a campu s - w i d e level of service and that they w e r e to be careful not to " c a t e r ” to individual s t u d e n t “s n e e d s „ The w r i t e r p e rsonally felt that this was a reflection of the attitude of p r o v iding the s e r vice n e c e s s a r y so that driving and parking could be restricted but of not trying to expand the service,, This feeling wa s m a nifested even m o r e strongly in the attitude of supervisors w h o m the students felt most e f f e c t i v e „ toward drivers As m e n t i o n e d in Chapter III, the students w e r e im p r e ssed w i t h two or three drivers w h o m they felt p r o v i d e d the b e s t service; that is, they felt that these drivers did n o t leave b e h i n d those running to m e e t the bus nor w o u l d they leave if they could "pack on" a few m o r e riders so that all of those w a i t i n g could boardo The supervisors of operating personnel, however, felt that these same drivers w e r e some of their less effective drivers since they w e r e of t e n slightly d elayed by following this procedureo P r i m a r i l y the o p e r ating p e r s onnel feel that it is their r e s p o n s i b i l i t y to be professional and to p r ovide a professional service; they are hi r e d to do a job, including m e e t i n g published sc h edule commit t m e n t s and using clean buses that are in good r e p a i r „ The drivers are to m a k e sure that passes are checked, are observed, safety rules and that their uniforms are neat and clean,, However, they feel that t;hey are not hired to define s y stem goals, and they know 114 they do not rea l l y h a v e the authority to do t h i s 0 Thus, complaints and r e q uests for s e r vice changes o u tside the scope of their authority are v e r y frus t r a t i n g to operations p e r s o n n e l „ Confused, they can only v i e w these as a c r i ticism of their "professionalism," yet somehow w h e t h e r the driver w a s courteous, safety rules w e r e obeyed, does not s e e m to be at the root of the problem,, e t c 0, Consequently, student requests for changes m a d e directly to operations personnel are f r e quently misunderstood,, T he final goal or responsibility as v i ewed by operating personnel is control over m a i n t e n a n c e and repair costs of the bus f l e e t „ This they have done very effectively and they have b e e n able to maintain a v e r y stable repair cost in spite of inflation,, di s cussed in detail in Chapter IV„ This point was As could be expected one of the pr i m e reasons for p u r c h a s i n g n e w buses according to this group is to reduce m a i n t e n a n c e costs,, Chan g e s required b e f o r e goals can b e integrated Any complaint that can be made against the M S U Bus System stems from the fact that there seem to b e no overall goals for it w h i c h consider the needs of the university as a w h o l e „ But before the u n i v e r s i t y needs can be considered and an overall set of goals can be determined, there are five obstacles that need to be overcome,, The first o b s t a cle to b e overcome is the lack of a f e e d b a c k sys t e m to m e a s u r e the effectiveness of the bus system in m e e t i n g consumer n e e d s „ vi e ws In the private sector the firm generally its goal as increasing profits and realizes that its profits are larg e l y det e r m i n e d by its ability to tailor its services to its 115 customer's n e e d s „ Consequently, the pr i v a t e firm can closely check its daily revenue to see h o w w e l l it is d o i n g . However, the n o n ­ profit setting of the u n iversity plus the desi r e not to pr o v i d e any m o r e support service than ne c e s s a r y v i r t u a l l y eliminates any effective f e e dback sys t e m that w o u l d reflect the needs of the bus riders and potential riders. T h e second o b s t acle w h i c h needs to b e over c o m e is the low status of the bus service in the eyes of u n i v e r s i t y personnel. If the bus service w e r e a h igh-status service such as the computer center or the p l a cement c e n t e r , then there w o u l d be numerous committees a p p ointed to continually evaluate the service and make ne c e s s a r y c h a n g e s \ or if the bus service required a very h i g h capital out l a y and e x perienced severe c ompetitive p r e s sures from the p rivate sector as does the campus food service and residence h a l l s , then extensive adm i n i s t r a t i v e effort w o u l d be exerted on m a r k e t research to protect the mar k e t share. However, such is not the case and the bus syst e m is left w i t h o u t any form of m a r k e t research or an effective basis for the r e e v a l u a t ion of goals. The third o b s t a cle w h i c h needs to be overc o m e is the feeling that the bus system is of little importance and serves only a small part of the student body. It should b e remembered, however, the campus bus system has m o r e contact w i t h the students the c o m puter center or the placement c e n t e r . bus s y s t e m m o r e frequently than either Bus riders u se the (approximately six rides p er day) they pat r o n i z e the campus food service. that than Also the bus s y stem is h e a v i l y used in those areas w h e r e it provides a n e e d e d service. example, in the m o r e remote dorms almost 75 per cent of all For 116 d o r m i t o r y re s i d e n t s p u r c h a s e bus p a s s e s . These statements are not m a d e to d e t r a c t f r o m o t h e r services but only to indicate the i m p o r ­ tance of the bus s y s t e m in the lives of a large n u m b e r of students. The a t t i t u d e that the bus s y stem lacks importance is further a m p l i f i e d by the u n i v e r s i t y vs o r g a n i z a t i o n a l structure. The bus s y s t e m is a d m i n i s t e r e d by the Physical Plant group wh i c h is charged w i t h the m a i n t e n a n c e of n o n - s t u d e n t orie n t e d services. Furthermore, the bus s y s t e m is p l a c e d directly under the ’’General F o r e m a n ™ A u t o m o t i v e S e r v i c e s ” w h o s e m a i n r e sponsi b i l i t y is the m a i n t e n a n c e of vehicles on campus. There is, in f a c t S) no org a n i z a t i o n a l structure to main t a i n c o m m u n i c a t i o n b e t w e e n the student and his transportation. other h a n d s the s t u d e n t - o r i e n t e d On the r e s i dence services are administered by an e x t e n s i v e s y s t e m of area m a n a g e r s s hall m a n a g e r s „ and resident assistants. The r e s i d e nt assistants, for instance, than one floor away f r o m the s t u d e n t ’s r o o m s . are never m o r e Th e s e resident a ss i s t a n t s are g i v e n extensive o r i e n t a t i o n to answer v i r t u a l l y any q u e s t i o n the stude n t s m ay have about u n i v e r s i t y services. In case the r e s i d e n t a s s istant cannot pr o v i d e an answer or solve a grievance, there is a w e l l - d e f i n e d line of a u t h ority w h i c h is very w i l l i n g to h a n d l e s u g g e s t i o n s and grievances, or to supply information. In a d d i t i o n there are d o r m councils w i t h elected m e mbers who provide i n f o r m a t i o n and sugge s t ions to be at each meeting. to the d o r m mana g e r s w ho are required In contrast, views w i t h r e s ident assistants, and area m a n a g e r s that bus the w r i t e r disc o v e r e d in inter­ dorm managers, d o r m council members, that n othing about the bus syst e m was kn o w n except tickets could be p u r c hased at the d o r m desk, schedules could 117 b e o b t a i n e d f r o m the drivers and the bus system's ph o n e n u mber was 353-5280o They k n e w of no grievance or s u ggestion channel other than to call the g a r a g e „ This was amazing in light of the 35,000 to 40^000 rides per day provided by the bus s e r v i c e „ But it is com p l e t e l y u n d e r s t a n d a b l e if the service is c o nsidered to be only a r e q u i r e d o v e rhead f u n c t i o n „ The fourth o b s t acle w h i c h needs to be overcome is the g eneral feeling that the bus system makes no posi t i v e contribution to the u n i v e r s i t y but is only a non-to o - s a t i s f a c t o r y solution to an a n n oying p a r k i n g and traffic problem,, changedo This perspe c t i v e needs to be It should be remembered that the traffic and parking p r o blems w e r e caus e d by the increase in of the campuso the size and design C o n s e q u e n t l y , it is the bus current campus design, size, system w h i c h makes the and scheduling patterns possible,, If the u n i v e r s i t y chooses a particular design pattern, in this case a large g e o g r a p h i c a l s c a l e , then it must consider the movement patterns that w i l l be created and plan accordingly,, If it plans for a u t o m o b i l e m o v e m e n t then it must provide adequate p arking and street facilities. If on the other hand, street and park i n g facilities, a limit is placed on the then bus lanes and loading areas need g to b e int e g r a t e d into the campus plans, g It is f r e q u e n t ly felt that the location and size of buildings are e f f ective m e a n s of p r edicting traffic f l o w s „ O n a university campus, however, traffic flows are also dependent upon ho w the buildings are used,, Since b u i l d i ng use is largely determined by class schedules, the sche d u l i n g of classes becomes a m a j o r d eterminant of campus traffic flows,, For example, by shifting room assignments for several of the larger, m o r e p o p ular classes from one side of campus to the other the c l a s s r o o m scheduler can change travel patterns drastically,, 118 Furthermore, the freedom of m o v e m e n t of students around the campus is important to the educational p rocess of the u n i v e r s i t y „ Students n e e d easy access to all the facilities and o p p o rtunities the large campus a f f o r d s „ and the bus s y s t e m is in effect the ci r c u l a ­ tory syst e m of the u n i v e r s i t y „ to some h o w get f r o m class Students no t only need to be able to class but also to have the fr e e d o m of feeling that they are able to m o v e w i t h i n their e n v i r o n m e n t „ The trapped feeling e x p ressed by so m a n y of the students w i t h o u t cars mi g h t v e r y w e l l be the r e flection of a lack of a recogn i t i o n by the bus sys t e m of its true role as a giver of f reedom of m o v e m e n t „ It should also be p o i nted out that the m a i n strength of the large u n i v e r ­ sity is the p o t e n t i a l i ntera c t i o n among all students, departments, c o l l e g e s , and f a c ulty m e m b e r s as well as the w i d e s p r e a d use of sp ecialized facilities w h i c h can econ o m i c a l l y be o f f e r e d only at a c e n tralized l o c ation however, The actual re a l i z a t i o n of these benefits, is largely dependent upon e f f e ctive and convenient campus transportation,, 9 The fifth o b s t a cle w h i c h needs to be over c o m e is the general feeling that the bus is not important enough to require administrative at t ention and should be ma n a g e d at the op e r a t i n g l e v e l „ m a n ifests itself in two ways.. First, This attitude o p e r ating p e r sonnel simply assume that the operating goals have not changed f r o m the original 1964 m a n d a t e given in the report of the ad hoc F a c u l t y - S t u d e n t Motor 9 The s t u d e n t s ’ strong desire to travel around the campus was revealed in Chapter III,, For example* Ta b l e 10 indicates that ap p r o x i ­ m a t e l y 80 p e r cent of all students p r efer to travel b e t w e e n c l a s s e s „ Table 12 indicates that almost 75 per cent of all students prefe r to have classes in v a r ious buildings and only 16=5 per cent desire to schedule all their classes in the livin g - l e a r n i n g c o m p l e x e s . 119 V e h i c l e Committee. changes until C o n s e q u e n t l y , they feel that there will a crisis obtains administrative attention. be no goal Such a crisis will p r o b a b l y be either a large operating deficit or strong consumer resentment Seconds as m a n i f e s t e d by the two student groups this spring. since the o p e r a ting personnel facilities, do not have the authority, research prestiges cr perspective to set university goals, that they must c o n c e n t r ate o n daily op e r a t i n g goals. o p e r a t i n g gcals ccnsist of m e e t i n g the published for bus p a s s e s , m a i n t a i n i n g their personal cleanl i n e s s , they feel These daily schedule, checking appearance, mainta i n i n g bus etc., w h e t her these goals are relevant to the riders or not. However, the a d m i n i s t r a t i o n must not a f u n ction that they can delegare realize that goal m a k i n g is to the operating personnel. The d e l e g a t i o n of the goal m a k i n g r e s ponsibility in this manner is the e q u ivalent of a b d i c a t i o n since the o p e r ating personnel do not have the r e s o u r c e s to integrate bus system goals with university goals. CH A P T E R VI CONCLUSIONS A ND R ECOMMENDATIONS Conclusions The observations m a d e duri n g the course of this study lead the w r i t e r to several conclusions: 1. The M S U Bus S y s t e m is n o w providing a v e r y valu a b l e service to the o n - campus students w h o live in the more remote d o r m i ­ tory complexes. This is indicated by the fact that ap p r o x i ­ m a t e l y 50 per cent of the male students and 75 per cent of the female students in the remote dormitories purchased bus passes spring quarter, 2. 1970. (See Figures 1 and 2.) The M S U Bus S y s t e m does not provide an effective service to the faculty and staff at the university even though they are allowed to ride at no charge. This is substantiated by the fact that fewer than 100 faculty and staff members ride the bus each day. 3. (See Table K-3.) There is a lack of any means for mainta i n i n g the sensitivity of the bus s y s t e m to student travel needs, 117.) (See pages 116- This is indicated by such factors as the dissonance b e t w e e n riders and managers as to desired driver behavior, the m a n a g e m e nt's instructions not to "cater" to riders, student boycott, the black student protest, 120 the and the complete absence of channels of c o m m u n i c a t i o n b e t w e e n the riders and the man a g e m e n t of the bus system. Two v a r i a b l e s , total w e e k l y travel distance and distance b e t w e e n the i n dividual's living area and the center of campus, ex p l a i n e d o v e r 10 per cent of the total v a r i a n c e in r i d e r ship. (See pages 30-34.) This w o u l d tend to indicate that the m a j o r service the bus s y s t e m has to offer is to provide t r a n s p o r t a t i o n b e t w e e n a student's residence area and the academic complex. campus students, A l t h o u g h the data w e r e limited to onit is felt a priori that off-campus students w o u l d not h a v e r a d ically different travel needs f r o m on-campus students mer e l y b ecause they live w i t h i n different political b o u n d a r i e s and travel in a different direction. This extrapolation, however, needs to be researched. A l t h o u g h the ad hoc F aculty-Student M o t o r V e hicle Committee reco m m e n d e d that bus service be made available to all students (see i t e m 8, A p p e n d i x A), current u n iversity policy excludes a p p r o x i m a t e l y 47 per cent of all M S U students b ecause they do not live in on-campus h o u s i n g facilities. Altho u g h they are allowed to purchase bus passes, off-campus students do not h a v e the same service a v a ilable that on-campus students do. The univ e r s i t y has v e r y low over all u t i l i z a t i o n of its r o l l i n g sto c k and its drivers. load factors b e t w e e n classes This is indicated by the low (see Figures 12 and 13) and d u r i n g spring and summer quarters, by the low u t i l i z a t i o n of 122 e q u ipment (Table 31 indicates an annual usage rate of 29.4 per cent w i t h nev e r more than 75 per cent of the buses s c h e d u l e d for service except d u r i n g the mo r n i n g of w i nter q u a r t e r ) , and b y the excessive overtime paid bus drivers d u r i n g 22 w e e k s of the year and the intra-university trans­ fers d u r i n g 19 to 30 weeks of the year. (See Table 33 and pages 94-98.) 7. It is u n l i k e l y that the bus s y s t e m can remain self-supporting u n d e r its present m o d e of operation. b y the d a t a in Chapters This is substantiated III and IV wh i c h indicated that a) student r i d e rship is no longer increasing, b) revenue cannot be expected to increase through further price increases, c) o p e r a t i n g costs can no longer be s u b stantially decreased by the purch a se of ne w equipment, d) labor costs n ow comprise 58.3 per cent of total o p e r a t i n g costs and have increased f r o m 48.9 per cent in 1964-65. These facts w o u l d lead the w r i t e r to c o n c l u d e that the M S U Bus S y stem is entering the spiral of i n c r e a s i n g costs and d e c r e a s i n g revenue and service. 8. The u n i v e r s i t y has established specific policies which prohibit any o p e r a t i n g economies whi c h might accrue from a larger o p e r a t i n g base. These policies include prohibiting city transit and private bus systems f r o m p r o v iding the service, and the policy of on-campus service only which p r e cludes i n c r e a s i n g u t i l i z a t i o n and load factors by s e r v i c i n g n e w off-campus markets. 9. T h e u n i v e r s i t y is not i ntegrating the bus s y stem into the 123 d e s i g n and p lan n i n g of the univ e r s i t y nor in the criteria for the s c h e d u l i n g of classroom space. (See pages 117 and 118.) R e c o m m e n d a t i o n s for o p e r a t i n g changes The fo l l o w i n g o p e r ating recommendations are based on data obtained f r o m this study. First, the bus s y s t e m is p r o v iding a good service to the majority of the o n - campus students. There are, however, several areas on campus that w o u l d p r o bably yield a substantial increase in ridership if the f r e q u e n c y of service w e r e increased. These are the Brody c omplex which n o w has an 8-minute h e a d w a y and the C a se-Wilson co m p l e x w i t h a 7 1/2m i n u t e headway. By u s i n g the "b" va l u e of 29.88 given in Chapter III (see above, p. 30), r i d ership can be projected to increase by ap p r o x i ­ m a t e l y 760 people in the Brody co m p l e x and 1275 in the Case-Wilson c o m p l e x if service w e r e increased to 4-minute headways instead of the current 7 1/2- and 8-minute intervals. This wo u l d appear to justify the s c h e d u l i n g of add i t i onal buses to each of these areas. doubtful, however, It is that a reduced h eadway could be justified in the S p a r t a n V i l l a g e or U n i v e r s i t y Village complexes since the student po p u l a t i o n in these two areas is relatively low and many of these are g r a d u a t e students w h o have permits to drive and park on campus. In the other residential areas where the headways have already b e e n r e d uced to 4-minute intervals, it is doubtful that many more students could b e induced to ride at the current fare levels. This is emp h a s i z e d by the fact that over 70 per cent of the female students and 50 per cent of the m ale students in the more remote dorms are 124 a l r eady riding. A l t h o u g h the propensity to ride drops r apidly in the dorms w h i c h are closer to the campus center, it is questionable if the bus serv i c e can or should attempt to encourage these residents to use its service unless the cost of the service could be substantially reduced. Increased f r e quency in the Brody and C ase-Wilson dormitory areas should, however, generate enough revenue to pay for the cost of the service, especially w h e n it is considered that buses and drivers are already available. The second r e c o m men d a t i o n suggests that the university should develop channels for improved contact w i t h the university community wh i c h uses the bus. be developed. There are many ways in wh i c h the channels could The m i n i m u m r e s ponsibility of these channels should include the c o n ducting of periodic research into student travel needs, the r e c e i v i n g and h a n d l i n g of all g r i e v a n c e s , suggestions and requests for bus service, and ed ucating the d o r m managers, resident assistants and the stud e n t body in general about the services and policies of the campus bus system. The major purpose in d e v e l o p i n g a channel for improved contact w i t h the riders is to increase the over all e f f e c t i v e ­ ness of the service w h i c h is be i n g supplied. The third r e c o m m endation is that the u n iversity should take steps to o b t a i n part time employees to w o r k in the part time job of bus driver. It is extremely expensive to pay bus drivers overtime to w o r k an average of 61 hours per w e e k d u ring fall and w i nter quarters and then let t h e m stand idle or shift them to physical plant need for additional employees is open to question. w h e r e the Consequently, it is s t r o n g l y recommended that the university beg i n to view and define 125 many of the current d r i v i n g hours as a part time or temporary e m ploy­ ment need so that students, off- d u t y firemen, or other seasonal or temporary employees could be engaged to h a n d l e those peak h o u r needs. This should do m u c h to lower the cost of p r o v i d i n g the current level of service. The fourth r e c o m m e n d a t i o n is that the u n iversity take strong steps to integrate the bus s y s t e m into the planning and d e s i g n of the u n i v e r s i t y campus and in the s c h e d u l i n g of academic c l a s s r o o m s . This w o u l d i n c lude the d e s i g n a t i n g of bus lanes and all-weather loading areas near each of the m a j o r residence and academic areas rather than the current p r a c t i c e of l o c a t i n g bus stops on streets w h e r e they w i l l not "interfere w i t h traffic" but m a y be far from the student's origin/destination. It wo u l d also include the sche d u l i n g of classroom areas and s t a r t i n g times so that bus capacity and routes are coordinated to the riders' actual travel needs. This proposal should provide greater design f l e x i b i l i t y and over all u n i v e r s i t y effectiveness as w e l l as o pen i n g up areas of increased e f ficiency as cost tradeoffs between campus design, c l a s s r o o m scheduling, student travel needs and available bus service are identified. Policy c o n s i d erations This study has b r o u g h t to light m a n y areas wh i c h demand further research, but the d i r e c t i o n for this r e s e a r c h and a means for evalu a t i n g it can be d e t ermined only w h e n the role and p u rpose of the bus s y s t e m is c l e arly visualized. Since goals for the s y s t e m at the p resent appear to be w i d e l y divergent, the rest of this chapter will present some of the goals various campus groups prescribe for the bus 126 service and w i l l indicate the d i r e ction future research would take if that p a r t i c u l a r goal w e r e ascribed to. O n e group feels that the purpose of the bus s y s t e m should be to p r o vide a tra n s p o r t a t i o n a lternative so that the regulation of traffic and p a r k i n g on campus is feasible. This group w o u l d define the mission of the bus s y s t e m as the min i m i z a t i o n of cost and service as long as traffic and p a r k i n g can be restricted to a reasonable level without undue complaint f r o m the u n i versity community. established, If this policy were then future research should be directed to determining r e a s o n a b l e levels of congestion, cost of alternative pa r k i n g f a c i l i t i e s „ and the a c c eptance of the bus s y s t e m by each group on c a m p u s . This ob j e c t i v e w o u l d support efforts to reduce the n u m b e r of buses to the point that the campus c o mmunity wo u l d begin to complain about having to w a l k and the l o w frequency of bus service. The second group explains that the State of M i c h i g a n gives the un i v e r s i t y the authority to establish and o perate an on-campus t r a n s p o r t a t i o n s y s t e m to serve the main p urpose of the university as an institution. This p o sition would grant the administration the r e s p o n s i b i l i t y of us i n g the bus s y s t e m to serve whatever travel needs they saw w h e t h e r they be to facilitate remote parking, to relieve congestion, or to transport a team to an event at an out-of-state college. This group w o u l d further state that the u n i versity should ma i n t a i n ownership and control over the bys s y s t e m so that it can co n trol the availa b i l i t y and response of the bus s y s t e m to its needs. If this p o s i t i o n is accepted, then effective management would be defined as the a b i l i t y of the bus s y s t e m to shift as much of the cost of the 127 o p e r a t i o n of the bus s y s t e m as possible onto the users of the s y s t e m so that the buses could bec ome s e l f - s u p p o r t i n g if at all possible. The backers of this policy would encourage research into means of m a i n ­ ta i ning the s e l f - s u p p o r t i n g nature of the bus system. For example, they might consider taxing each of the students each quarter so that the revenues and demand for bus service might be stabilized. This position might be called the institutionally-oriented approach. The third p o s ition might be called the consumer-oriented a p p r o a c h . This group would indicate that the purpose of the bus s y s t e m should be to serve the travel needs of the individual student and faculty members at the university. Effective management should be judged then on h ow effe c t i v e l y the bus s y s t e m is tailored to the needs of the university population. These people would say further that the bus s y stem should be used to furnish transportation whenever and wherever it is needed as long as the riders are w i l l i n g to pay their share of the cost. students, All this group wo u ld reason, should be served w h e t h e r they live on campus or in o f f -campus apartment buildings, The prime objective, then, sororities or fraternities, is to provide the bus s y s t e m management w i t h a strong consumer orientation that will aggressively promote and op e rate the s y s t e m to provide service at the lowest possible cost. pr o v i d i n g many and varied services such as occasional runs centers, charter op e r a t i on for professional spor t i n g events, By to sho pping spring b r e a k excursions, etc., they wo u l d largely eliminat e the need for the student h a v i n g to own a car. Proponents of this goal-orientation w o u l d just i f y these trips as bei n g w i t h i n the op e r a t i n g authority of the campus bus s y s t e m since the goal of the s y s t e m would be to expand 128 the broad educational, r ec r e a t i o n a l and voc a t i o n a l options a v a i lable to the people the bus s y s t e m was establ i s h e d to serve. m anagement of the bus system, By the efficient the i n dividual cost of this service can be decreased through i n c reased u t i l i z a t i o n and load factors. If this v i e w is accepted, r e s e a r c h w o u l d be dire c t e d toward c onsumer-oriented r e s e a r c h to d e t e r m i n e what type of regular and charter service wo u l d be d esired by a r e a s o n a b l e number of students. For example, the bus s y s t e m might consider initiating runs to off-campus s h o pping centers w h e r e c o m m u t i n g students could board. Defi n i t e l y the bus service w o u l d consider the needs of the off-campus students. For example, r e s e a r c h could be done into the possib i l i t y of h a v i n g buses extend their routes to off-campus locations instead of the current practice of r e t r a c i n g their routes d u r i n g class w h e n the load factors are low. (See Figures 12 and 13.) The fourth point of v i e w might be called the economic approach. The proponents of this point of v i e w w o u l d indicate that bus s y s t e m is actua l l y a state - s u p p o r t e d transportation. h a v e as its objectives the e f f iciency and effectiveness of government expenditures. role, efficiency the It should thus total Consequently, w h e n not s erving its prime the p r o v i d i n g of t ra n s p o r t a t i o n for the u n i versity community, the bus service should b e m a d e a v a i lable to other government agencies or functions s u c h as the state legislature, the 4-H Clubs, Guard groups, or the State P o l i c e organization. National This a t t i t u d e stems p r i m a r i l y f r o m the feel i ng that it is not logical to tie up public funds to d u p l i c a t e t r a n s portation equipment, w h e n each agency or poli­ tical unit has such seasonal demands and often, unused capacity. In 129 fact, some memb e r s of this group would go so far as to say that if there is sti l l excess c a p a c i t y available after s e rving the needs of the u n i v e r s i t y and the state, then the buses should b e used to serve the needs of vari o u s public groups such as the churches, Boys Clubs, C o m m u n i t y A c t i o n Centers, etc. the Boy Scouts, The advocate of total economic e f f i c i e n c y w o u l d also state that if o p e r ating economies could be obtained f r o m c o m b i n i n g the La n s i n g Metro Lines, System, and the State of M i c h i g a n motor pool, the M S U Bus it w o u l d be wast e f u l to let po l i t i c a l or age n cy j u r i s diction prevent over all economic public benefit. They mi ght also suggest that if these agencies could not co o p e r a t e then perh a ps economic efficiency could be improved by tu r n i n g ownership over to a private group wh i c h m i g h t be able to implement o p e r a t i n g economies and a l location of service among the agencies. As a brief sketch of these views indicates, the goals discerned by each group are not s h arply d e lineated nor m u t u a l l y exclusive. The final poli c y de v e l o p e d by M S U will u n doubtedly take each of these positions into consideration. In fact, the r e s u l t i n g policy will pr o b a b l y not be based on such al l - e n c o m p a s s i n g principles as stated in these points of view. However, the w i d e d i v e r g e n c e of present goals does tend to indicate that the university will have some very b a s i c q u e stions to answer: 1. W h a t is the purpose of the bus system? 2. W h o m should the bus s y s t e m serve? 3. Is it d e s i r a b l e that off-campus students b e deni e d the s e r v i c e w h i c h is most desired by on-campus students, 130 ioe«, t r a n s p ortation f r o m living area to the academic complex? 4. Is it d e s i r a b le for the u n iversity to continue to m a i n t a i n an exc l u s i v e uni v e r s i t y bus s y s t e m w h i c h has a low u t i l i z a t i o n of buses and drivers? 5. H o w m u c h emphasis should be given to me e t i n g ne e d s of the univ e r s i t y p o p u l a t i o n the travel w h i c h are only obliquely r ela t e d to the dai l y instructional process of the u n i versity? W h e n the u n i v e r s i ty has de f i n e d its goals for the campus transit, system, then the d i r e c t i on for f urther research w i l l be established.. BI B L I OGRAPHY BIBLIOGRAPHY Books Berry, D o n a l d S.; Blomme, George W . ; Shuldiner, Paul W , ; and Jones, J o h n Hugh. T h e Technology of Urb a n T r a n s p o r t a t i o n . Evanston, 111.: N o r t h w e s t ern Univ e r s i t y Press, 1963. Creighton, Ro g e r L. of Illinois Ur b an Tra n s p o r t a t i o n P l a n n i n g . Press, 1970. Urbana; Homburger, W o l f g a n g S., ed. Urb a n Mass Tr a n s i t P l a n n i n g . U n iversity of California, 1967. Johnston, J. 1963. E c onometric Methods. Mitchell, Robert B., and Rapkim, of L a n d U s e . N e w York: N e w York: University Berkeley: M c G r a w - H i l l B o o k Company, Chester. U r b a n T r a f f i c — A Function Columbia U n i v e r s i t y Press, 1954. Owen, Wilfred. The M e t r o p o l i t a n T r a n s p o r t a t i o n P r o b l e m . The Brookings Institute, 1966, Washington, D.C. Schneider, Lewis M. M a r keting Urban Mass T r a n s i t , Boston: D i v i s i o n of Research, Graduate School of Business Administration, H arvard University, 1965. Siegel, Sidney. N o n p a r a metric Statistics for the B e h avioral S c i e n c e s . N e w York: M c G r a w - H i l l B o o k Company, 1956. Smerk, George M . , ed. Readings in Urban T r a n s p o r t a t i o n , I ndiana U n i v e r s i ty Press, 1968, _________ . Bloomington: See also entry under " R e s earch Projects". Wilkofsky, David, U r b a n Mass T r a n s p o r t a t i o n i n P e r s p e c t i v e . T a x Foundation, Inc., 1968. 131 N e w York: 132 R e s e a r c h Reports Au t o m o t i v e Safety Foundation, Urban Tr a n s i t D evelopment in Twenty M a j o r C i t i e s , Washington, D.C.: A u t o m o t i v e Safety Foundation, 1968, Burco, Rob e r t A, and Curry, Da v i d A. F u ture Urban Transpo r t a t i o n Sy s t e m s i Impact on Urban Life and F o r m Vol. II: Study in N ew Systems of Urb a n T r a n s p o r t a t i o n , Menlo Park, Calif,: Stanf o r d R e s e a r c h Institute, 1964, Canty, Eugene T , T r a n s p o r t a t i o n and Ur b a n S c a l e . Warren, Mich.: G e n e r a l Mot o r s R esearch Laboratories, 1969, _________ , Also see "General Motors R e s e a r c h L a b oratories" entry, Deutschman, Harold, Ur b an Tra n s p o r t a t i o n P l a n n i n g . Sources of Infor m a t i o n on Urban T r a n s p o r t a t i o n , Report N u mber 4_. N ew York: The J o u rnal of Urb a n T r a n s p o r t a t i o n Corporation, 1968, Fertal, M a r t i n J,; Weiner, Edward; Balek, A r t h u r J, and Sevin, Ali F. M o d a l S p l i t , Washington, D 0C„: Government P r i n t i n g Office, 1966, General M o t o r s R e s e a r c h Laboratories. N e w Systems Implementation S t u d y , Vol. II: Plan n i n g and E v a l u a t i o n M e t h o d s : Final Report to Urb a n T r a n s p o r t a t i o n A d m i n i s t r a t i o n , U . S . D e p a r t m e n t of Ho u s i n g and Urban D e v e l o p m e n t . E„ T, Canty, p r o g r a m manager. Warren, Mich,: General Motors R e s e a r c h Laboratories, 1968. Golob, Thomas F, The Survey of User C h oice of A l t e r n a t e T r a n s p o r t a t i o n M o d e s , Warren, Mich,: General Motors Research Laboratories, 1970, Hanson, M a r k E, , ed„ P r oject M e t r a n . Institute of T e c hnology Press, Cambridge: 1966, The M a s s a c h u s e t t s Keefer, Louis E, U r b a n Travel Patterns for A i r p o r t s , Shopping C e n t e r s , and Industrial P l a n t s , National C ooperative H ighway Rese a r c h P r o g r a m Report 2 4 . Washington, D.C.: Highway Resea r c h Board, Na t i o n a l A c a d e m y of Sciences, 1966, Mass T r a n s p o r t a t i o n D e m o ns t r a t i o n P r o j e c t s : MTD-2 and J3. M e t r o p o l i t a n Pl a n n i n g Commission, M e t r o p o l i t a n T raffic and Pa r k i n g Commission, and N a s h v i l l e Transit Company, Sponsors. Nashville, T e n n . : M e t r o p o l i t a n P l a nning Commission, 1966, Mass T r a n s p o r t a t i o n D e m o n s t r a t i o n P r o j e c t s : Illinois M T D 3 , 4 . Mi c h a e l A, S» Blurton, Project Director, Urbana: U n i versity of Illinois Press, 1968, Memp h i s Tran s i t Authority. Mass T r a n s p o r t a t i o n Studies in M e m p h i s ; Transit S y s t e m ’s History 1 9 5 7 - 1 9 6 5 ; Suburban Ridership Demons tration P r o j e c t , Memphis, Tenn,: M emphis T ransit Authority, 1965. 133 R e s e a r c h and Pol i c y Co m mittee of the Committee for Economic Development, D e v e l o p i n g M e t r o p o l i t a n Tra n s p o r t a t i o n P o l i c i e s : A Guide for Local L e a d e r s h i p , Frazar B, Wilde, acting chairman,, N e w York: Co m m i t t e e for E conomic Development, 1965, Smerk, George M, " W o rking Draft of Report on D e p a r t m e n t of T r a n s p o r t ­ a t i o n Proj e c t N u m b e r IND-MTD-2," (Mimeographed,,) Smith, Wilbur, and A s s ociates, P a r k i n g in the City C e n t e r , Prepared for the A u t o m o b i l e M a n ufacturers Association, N ew Haven, Conn,: W i l b u r Smith and Associates, 1965, _________ o T r a n s p o r t a t i o n and P a rking for T o m o r r o w ^ C i t i e s , Prepared for the A u t o m o b i l e M a n u f a c t u r e r s Association. N ew Haven, C o n n , : W i l b u r Smith and Associates, 1966, Solomon, K a t h l e e n M , ; Solomon, Richard J ,; and Silien, Jose p h S, P a s s e n g e r P s y c h o l o g i c a l D y n a m i c s , Sources of Inform ation on U r b a n T r a n s p o r t a t i o n , Report N u m b e r _3, N e w York: The Journal of U r b a n T r a n s p o r t a t i o n Corp,, 1968, Solomon, R i c h a r d J,, and Silien, Joseph S, Mod e s of T r a n s p o r t a t i o n : Sources of I n f o rmation on Urban T r a n s p o r t a t i o n , Report Number 2_, N e w York: The J ournal of Urban Tra n s p o r t a t i o n Corp,, 1968, St a nford R e s e a r c h Institute, P roceedings of Stanford Research I n stitute Ur b a n T r a n s p o r t a t i o n A l t e rnatives S y m p o s i u m , Menlo Park, Calif, S t a nford R e s e a r c h Institute, Ma y 27, 1964, Urban D e s i g n and D e v e l o p m e n t Corporation, Phase II R e p o r t : A Study of Internal C i r c u l a t i o n Systems for the P o s t O a k Urban C e n t e r , H o u s t o n , T e x a s , Washington, D,C,: Urban Desi g n and Development Corporation, 1970, U,S„ D e p a r t m e n t of Commerce, Environmental D a t a Service, Local C l i m a t o logical D a t a : L a n s i n g , M i c h i g a n Capital City A i r p o r t , W a s h i n g ­ ton, D,C,: U,S, Government P r i n t i n g Office, Publications for m o n t h s of Oct,, Nov,, and Dec, 1969 w e r e used. 134 M i c h i g a n State U n i v e r s i t y In-House Reports and Correspondence A d - H o c F a c u l t y - S t u d e n t M o t o r Ve h i c l e Committee, M i c h i g a n State University. I n t r o d u c t o r y letter from Chairman, Dr. J o h n L. Lockwood, to each o f the c o m m i t t e e members, Feb. 7, 1963. This l e tter also included a statement of the p r o b l e m a n d a list of points that should be considered, _________ o Recommendations traffic and p a r k i n g L, Lockwood, to the Dr, J o h n A, Fuzak, of the Committee concerning changes in policy, A letter from Chairman, Dr. John Chai r m a n of the Student Affairs Committee, Feb. 20, 1963. _________ . Final Rep o r t in the f o r m of a letter f r o m Chairman, Dr. John L. Lockwood, to Mr, S t a m H. Keesler, A s s i s t a n t Secretary to the U n i v e r s i t y President, Feb, 14, 1914, A copy of this report is included in A p p e n d i x A, A g r i c u l t u r a l E x p eriment Station, M i c h i g a n State University, "STAT Series D e s c r i p t i o n No, 1. Introduction to the STAT System." (Mimeographed,) _________ , "STAT Series D e s c r i p t i o n No, 7. Calculation of Least Squares Problems o n the L.S. Routine." (Mimeographed.) _________ , "STAT Series D e s c r i p t i o n No, 8. Stepwise D e l e t i o n of Va r i a b l e s f r o m a Lea s t Squares Equa t i o n (LSDEL Routine)." (Mimeographed,) _________ . "STAT Series D e s c r i p t i o n No, 12. We i g h t i n g of Observations in Least Squares Problems (Weighted Regression) or in C alculating Basic S t a tistic (L,S, Routine). (Mimeographed.) B o a r d of Trustees, M i c h i g a n State University," R e c o m m e n d a t i o n s Relating to Campus P a r k i n g and Driving." A p p r o v e d in m e e t i n g May 22, 1964. Copy sent in letter from Dr, John L. Lockwood to Mr. Starr Keesler, M a y 26, 1964. Campus Bus System, M i c h i g a n State University. "Maintenance Reports." A p r i l 6, 1970 and June 1970 year-to-date, _________ . "Technical R epo r t No, 40. (Mimeographed.) N o n p arametric Statistics," C o m p u t e r Institute for Social Science Research, M i c h i g a n State University. "Technical Rep o rt No. 42, Nonpa r a m e t r i c Chi-square Tests and A n a l y s i s of Var iance," (Mimeographed.) D a t a P r o c e s s i n g Department, M i c h i g a n State University. "Michigan State U n i v e r s i t y Student M a s t e r Record Layout." D e p a r t m e n t of I n f ormation Services, Mich i g a n State University. This Is M i c h i g a n State U n i v e r s i t y , 1970 Facts B o o k , E, Lansing: M i c h i g a n State University, December, 1969. 135 D i v i s i o n of Dorm i t o r i e s and Food Services, M i c h i g a n State University* " Weekly H o u s i n g Report*" January 16, 1970* Jolman, H e n r y W,, Foreman, A u t o m o t i v e Services, M i c h i g a n State University* M e m o r a n d u m to John Lewis, A d m i n i s t r a t i v e Assistant, concerning p r o f i t a b i l i t y of charter operations for 1967-1969* February 3, 1970* O f f -Campus H o u s i n g Office, M i c h i g a n State University, H ousing Report for Fall T e r m , 1 9 6 9 , E, Lansings Mich i g a n State University, D e c e m b e r 1969, O f f i c e of the Registrar, M i c h i g a n State University, _________ , Enr o l l m e n t R e p o r t , Fall Term, _________ , E n r o l l m e n t R e p o r t , W i nter Term, Annual R e p o r t , 1 9 6 9 , 1969, 1970, T e r m - E n d Report of Degrees C o n f e r r e d , Grade-Point A v e r a g e s , and G r a d e s , W i n t e r Term, 1970, "Student M a s t e r f i l e Computer Tape" main t a i n e d by Data P r o c e s ­ sing Dept,, W i n t e r Q uarter 1970, P h y s i c a l Plant, M i c h i g a n State University, List, ( X e r o x e d ,) Chronological Buj 136 Periodicals Hill, So Joj Paine, F„ T c; Nash, A„ N„; and Brunner, G 0 A"Consumer T r a n s p o r t a t i o n Attitudes in Baltimore and Philadel p h i a , " Trans­ p o r t a t i o n J o u r n a l , VII (Summer, 1968), 30-47„ Waters, L„ L e s l i e „ "Free Transits A W ay Out of Traffic Jams," Business H o r i z o n s , Indiana School of Business,, Vol., II, N o c 1, Spring, 1959 o 137 N e w spaper A r t icles Lans i n g State J o u r n a l . J u l y 18, 1963. (Lansing, Mich.) "MSU M a y Curb Campus Driving,'’ State News (E. Lansing, Mich.). "Bus Route Will and South Campus," Augu s t 16, 1961. ________ . "Rest for the Weary," Sept. 25, Serve Both Brody 1961 . ________ . P i c t u r e of M S U bus driver, Ha r r y Mclntcch, Oct. 3, 1961. The c a p t i o n und e r this picture gives i nformation on routes and fares for the newly announced bus system. ________ . "New P a r king, Dr i v i n g Regula t i o n s Announced," by Gerry Hinkley, Sept. 28, 1962. ________ . "Traffic and P a r k i n g Real Headaches," Oct. 5, 1962. ________ . "Mass T r a n s p o r t a t i o n Planned," ________ . "Fall T r a f f i c P l a n s Drafted," ________ . " V e h i c l e Gr o u p Maps Bus Plan," by Dave Jaehnig, by Sue Jacoby, Nov. by Sue Jacoby, Nov. by Sue Jacoby, Nov. 13, 1963. 14, 15, 1963. 1963. 138 Interviews Bernitt, R i c h a r d 0., M i c h i g a n State University, Director of Public Safety, p r i v a t e i n t e rview at the university, Ma r c h 16, 1970. Blurton, M i c h a e l A, S. P rivate interview at Kent State University, Kent, Ohio, July, 1970. Kyle Andrus, E. Lansing, Mich., w a s also present. A PPENDICES APPENDIX A F I N A L R E P O R T O F A D - H O C F A C U L T Y-STUDENT MOTOR VEHICLE COMMITTEE 139 M I C H I G A N STATE U N I V E R S I T Y East La n s i n g 48823 D e p a r t m e n t of B o t a n y and Plant P a t hology February 14, 1964 Mr. Starr H. K e e s l e r A s s i s t a n t Secretary 317 A d m i n i s t r a t i o n B u i l ding Campus D e a r Mr. Keesler: This is a s u m mary of the recom m e n d a t i o n s of the F a c u l t y-Student M o t o r V e h i c l e C o m m i t t e e w h i c h y o u r e q uested concerning ma t t e r s affecting future student d r i v i n g and p a r k i n g at M i c h i g a n State University. It reit e r a t e s the poi n t s I d i s c u s s e d w i t h y o u per s o n a l l y a w e e k ago. 1. The c o n cept of d i v i d i n g students into commuter and resident groups is sound. R e s i d e n t s and commuters should b e p r o hibited from dr i ving on the campus d u ring business hours. Commuters only should have access to one or m o r e pe r i m e t e r p a r k i n g lots. 2. T h e r e s i d e n t group should include all campus residents, including those of S p a rtan and U n i v e r s i t y Villages, and most of East Lansing. 3. A c o m m u t e r p a r king lot should b e c onstructed on South Campus off F a r m Lane, p r e f e r a b l y just n o r t h of the Gra n d T r u c k tracks to avoid this haz a r d and the delays it m i g h t impose. If this is not possible, a l o c a t i o n s o m ewhere nor t h of the C & 0 tracks is suggested. 4. A n o t h e r c o m m u t er pa r k i n g lot near the Kalamazoo Street entrance w o u l d faci l i t a te entry to the campus from the west, and wou l d reduce probl e m s at the rail r o a d tracks on F a r m Lane. A third lot on the e a s tern p e r i m e t e r of the campus w o u l d be d e s i rable if space permits. 5. A l l e x i s t i n g s tudent p arking lots on South Campus, except storage lots for d o r m i t o r y residents, should be removed from student use in the Fall, 1964. 6. It is i m m aterial to this committee w h e t h e r the student lot serving the d o r m i t o r y c o m p l e x o n East Camp u s is n o r t h or south of the Grand T r u n k tracks. A l o c a t i o n south of the tracks creats (sic) obvious safety problems, however. 140 Mr. K e e s l e r Page 2 Fe b r u a r y 14, 1964 7. S a t i s f a c t o r y b us service o n the campus requires that the U n i v e r s i t y control n u m b e r s of buses, schedules and routes. 8. Bus s e r v i c e should b e m a d e a v a ilable to all of the resident group of students i n c luding those residing off campus in East Lansing. Service should b e m a d e available to a nd f r o m commuter lots. 9. For reasons of efficiency, a card or pass s y s t e m good for one quarter, is s u g g e s ted for all students w ho w i s h to u se the bus system. This could b e o b t a i n e d at r e g i s t r a t i o n for a giv e n fee, w h i c h should b e u n i f o r m for all students. Systems involving tokens, change-making, etc. sho uld b e avoided. No free bus rides, such as to and f r o m c o m m u t e r lots, should b e provided. 10. G r a d u a t e a s s i stants and f u l l -time employees w h o s e spouses are students h a v e long b e e n u n d e r p r i v i l e g e d and frequently hampered in their a b i l i t y to carry out their r e s p o nsibilities to the University. If s t u dent p a r k i n g is p r o h i b i t e d in the present South Campus lots as recommended, w e suggest that these two groups of U n i v e r s i t y employees b e g r a n t e d fa c u l t y - s t a f f pa r k i n g privileges. If this is not possible, they sho u l d b e p e r m i t t e d to p a r k in those lots va c a t e d b y students, such as Lots E, S, D, and I; they should also b e given p e r mission to u s e N o r t h Cam p u s Lot G. 11. G r a d u a t e a s s i stants should b e required to pay a faculty p ark i n g fee (if any is imposed) if they h a v e faculty-staff parking privileges. If they h a v e lesser privileges, they should pay the s tudent r e g i s t r a t i o n fee. 12. The n e w Student M o t o r V e h i c l e regulation, w h o e v e r w r ites it, should be simple and w i t h as few exceptions as possible. Use of colored m a p s to d e s i gnate areas a nd lots a u thorized for use by holders of the di f f e r e n t types of permits is suggested. T h e C o m m i t t e e a p p r eciates b e i n g ask e d to express its views on these questions, and w i s h e s to indicate its willin g n e s s and desire to.coo p e r a t e further, if y ou desire. Very truly yours, John L. Lockwood, Chai r m a n F a c u l t y - S t u d e n t M o t o r Ve h i c l e C o m m ittee J L L :sjd APPENDIX B SURVEY OF M I C H I G A N STATE U N I V E R S I T Y BUS R I D E RSHIP PATTERNS 141 A f t e r y o u h a v e c o m pleted this survey, p l e a s e fold, on the outside), staple, (with this page and return by campus m a i l to: M S U CAMPUS BUS STUDY c/o F R A N K DAVIS, JR. 315 EPPLEY C E N T E R CAMPUS 142 This survey is being conducted as part of a doctoral diss e r t a ­ tion in tra n s p o r t a t i o n at M i c h i g a n State University, Its p u rpose is to exam i n e the effecti v eness and a c c eptance of univ e r s i t y transit systems. The u n i v e r s i t y a d m i n i s t r a t i o n has expressed a strong interest in this study and pl a n s to give it careful consid e r a t i o n in m a k i n g changes in the M S U bus system. A t the end of the survey y o u will be asked to state your suggestions for improvements to the M S U system, NOTE; Since the p u r p o s e of this survey is to improve the bus service for the entire student b o d y — n ot just present bus r i ders— it is very i m p ortant that y o u answer all questions even if y o u do not ride the bus. Y o u r answers w i l l lead to n e w service w h i c h w i l l adapt the bus s y s t e m to your needs. 1. W h a t class are y o u in? 1. 2. 3. 4. 2. Special U n d e r g r a d u a t e ______M asters Doctoral Other ______ single m a l e ______ single female ______m a r r i e d m a l e m a r r i e d female W h a t college are y o u enrolled in? 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. W h a t is your sex and m a r i t a l status? 1. 2. 3. 4. 3. ______ Fr e shman ______ S o p homore ______Jun i o r Senior A g r i c u l t u r e and Na t u r a l Resources A r t s and Letters Business C o mmunications Ed u c a t i o n E n g ineering Home Economics H u m a n M e d i c ine James M a d i s o n Justin Morrill Lym a n Briggs N a t ural Science Social Science V ete r i n a r y Medi c i n e No P r e f e r e nce Other H o w m a n y terms h a v e y ou b e e n enrolled at MSU? terms 143 5» H o w m a n y terms h a v e y ou purchased a bus pass? 6. W h i c h of the f o l lowing terms did yo u purchase a bus pass? 1, 20 3„ 4, 5o 7. un d e r 18 18 19 20 21 c e n tral city area? s u b u r b a n area? 1, _automobile _ m o t o r c y c l e or mot o r bike 3. __ b i c y c l e ot h e r (please specify) 4o 22 23-25 26-35 over 35 3. 4. Town? ______ rural area? W h a t m o d e of travel did y o u regularly u se in going to h i g h school? walk _bike city bus 11„ 6. 7. 8. 9. W h i c h of the f o l lowing transportation vehicles do y ou own or have frequent u s e of o n campus? (Please check even if they are not l i c e n s e d to drive on campus) 2. 10, W i n t e r 1969 Fall 1968 Summer 1968 Other W e r e y o u rai s e d in p r i m arily a: 1. 2. 9. 6. 7, 8„ 9. Wh a t is y o u r age? 1. 2. 3. 4, 5, 8. Spring 1970 W i n t e r 1970 Fall 1969 Summer 1969 Spring 1969 terms 4, 5, 6, _yellow school bus _car other H o w fre q u e n t l y did y ou m a k e use of a local bus syst e m prior to en t e r i n g MSU? (include all trips for w h i c h y o u paid a fare but not free trips such as those provided by the y e llow school bus„) 1. 2 . 3. never _one trip per year o ne trip per m o n t h 4o 5. 6. _one trip per w e e k one trip per day m o r e frequently 144 12. How w o u l d y o u rate the bus service that y ou used prior to entering MSU? 1. 2. 3. 4. 13. ______n e v e r used ______b a d ______ fair ______av e rage 5. ______good 6. ______excellent 7. ______no op i n i o n Wh e r e do you n o w live w h i l e attending MSU? 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. ______ campus residence hall (name of hall _____________ ______m a r r i e d student housing (name__________________ ______ East L a n sing excluding campus ______Lansing ______ot h e r off campus area (name of town________________ ) _) ) 14. How m a n y hours are y o u taking this quarter? 15. How m a n y of these hours are taken in your residence h a l l complex? 16. H o w m a n y hours a w e e k are yo u w orking (outside of n o rmal classwork) this quarter?________________________________________________ ____________ __ _____________________ ______ If you are employed on campus whi c h building do yo u w o r k in? 17. In order to d e t ermine the effectiveness of the M S U bus schedule it is n e c e s s a r y to learn of your regular campus travel patterns w h e t h e r or not you ride the bus. The easiest m e t h o d of r emembering your travel p a t terns is to first list your Spring classes in Col u m n 1 below. class class location depart from t r ips/week 1. 2 . 3. 4. 5. 6 . 7. (For additional space see next page) time available (minutes) 145 17o Continued class 8 class l ocation depart from , time available _____ _ _ _ _ _ 9o____________ 10. t r ips/week _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _____ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ A f t e r y o u h a v e listed your classes in column 1 indicate the building in w h i c h the class is held in column 2„ If the class mee t s in two different locations treat each location as a d i f f erent c l a s s „ In column 3 i n d i c a t e the location from w h i c h yo u n o r m a l l y depart to attend the class listed in column 1„ In column 4 indicate the n u m b e r of times y o u m a k e that trip each week„ If y o u have a previous class or w o r k assi g n ment w h i c h limits the time y o u h a v e available to m a k e the trip please indicate the time av a i l a b l e in column 5„ If any of these classes are attended at night plea s e circle the class in col u m n 1„ 18o If you are w o r k i n g on campus or in East La n s i n g p l e a s e list your w o r k trip p a t terns using the format p rovied in q u e s t i o n 17„ If any of these trips are m a d e at night plea s e circle column 1 to indicate w h i c h ones,, Job w o r k locat ion depart from t r ips/week time available (minutes) 1. 2„ 3. 4. 5. 19o If y o u h a v e any other w e e k l y trips (not listed in q u e s t i o n 17 or 18) w h i c h y o u r e g ularly make please list them h e r e a c c ording to the same format gi v e n in question 17 or 18„ (Example trips may include study trips, dates, social trips, student government trips, etc,,) D o not include local trips w i t h i n your ow n living area, Purpose Location depart from trips/week 1. 2o (For additional space see next page) time available 146 19o C o n tinued Purpose Location depart from t r i ps/week time available 3„__ ______ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 4 0__ ______ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 5 ° 6 , _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___ 7„ _ _ _ _ _ 8. _____ 9o _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ ___ ________ _ _ _ _ __ __________ _ _ _ ____ ______ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _______ H o w m a n y m i n u t e s b e f o r e class starts do y o u p r e f e r to arrive at y o u r c l a s s r o o m building? P l ease indicate y o u r preference by c i r cling the a p p r o p r i a t e time b e l o w 5 ^ . 6 ^ 7 h 8 ^ . 9 ^ 10 or more H o w m a n y m i n u t e s after class ends do you prefer to leave your class b u i lding? P l e a s e indicate your p r e f e r e n c e by circling the a p p r o p r i a t e time b e l o w 0 0 h 1h 2 h 3 h 4 ^ m i n u t e s after class starts 22„ _ _ _ _ _ _ _____ _ _ _ _ _ _ 0 h 1h 2 h 3 % A h minutes b e f o r e class starts 21„ _ ________ _ 10„_____ 20„ _ 5 h 6 % 7 h 8 h 9 h. 10 or more If y o u h a v e a one hour b r e a k b e t w e e n classes w h e r e w o u l d y o u prefer to go if it did not take longer than 10 m i n u t e s to make the trip? 1- ______retu r n to dorm or living area 2, rem a i n in c l a s sroom area 3„__ ______ go to d e p a r tmental library 4,__ _____ go to m a i n library 5 0__ ______ go to union or international center 6 0__ ______o t h e r (please specify) __ ________ _ 23„ P l e a s e indicate the ap p r o x i m a t e per c e n t a g e of the regular on campus trips that you m a d e last w e e k a c c ording to the following purposes„ (Do not include trips m a d e to other parts of your l ivi n g c o m p l e x „) 147 23o Continued 10 20 3o 40 240 A p p r o x i m a t e l y w h a t p e r c e n t of your trips last w e e k w e r e made lo 2„ 25„ ______ to r e g ular s c h eduled classes ______ to r e g ular sc h e d u l e d w o r k assignments _____ regular study trips _____ social and other trips at ni g h t ______ during the school day D u r i n g spring term y o u r longest regular trip is be t w e e n ______________________ 26,, 3, 40 ______all classes located in your living complex ______ all classes in the same class b u i l d i n g b ut not in y o u r r e s i d e n c e hall area. ______m o s t of y o u r classes in the same b u i l d i n g but one or two classes in a different area each class in a different buil d i n g W h a t is the p r i m a r y m e t h o d of campus travel,of m o s t of your friends? 1. 2. 28. w alking bus b ike car 2o no O f t e n peo p l e discuss the merits of bus ridership befo r e actually b u y i n g a bus pass. Have y o u discussed the merits of bus ridership w i t h anyone? If y o u do not ride the bus, did y ou discuss the merits of bus ridership w i t h anyone b e fore deciding not to ride? I. 30. 3. 4o Do y o u u s u ally travel o n campus w i t h a friend? I. ______yes 29o and___ ______________ P l e a s e i n d icate y o u r p r e f e r e n c e as to class location,, lo 20 27, (building name) y es 20 ______no Who w a s m o s t i n f l u ential in h elping y ou arrive at your decision? lo 2o 30 _y o u r parents your spouse your roommate 4» 50 60 a very close friend a casual acquaintance o ther___________________ 148 31. D i d the p e r s o n y o u c hecked in n u mber 30 recommend riding the bus? lo 32o Does bus? yes this p e r s o n 1o 33o 2o 37. es 2c ride the M S U no y es 2o no 2 h . 3 H 4 % 5 h 6 h 1 seven minutes W h i c h of the fol l o wing best describes your scheduling behavior? I. 36. (the on e w ho was most influential) H o w m u c h time do y o u try to allow so that y ou w i l l not miss the bus? If y o u do not ride the bus, how m u c h time do y ou feel it w o u l d be n e c e s s a r y to allow? O h 1 h zero m i n u t e s 35. ______no Do y o u feel m o s t bus riders are apprehensive about mi s s i n g the bus and a r r i v i n g late? lo 34„ 20 _I lea r n the bus schedule and arrive at the bus stop to m e e t a p a r t i c u l a r bus, _I go to the bus stop w h e n I am ready to leave and take the first bus that arrives,. W h i c h do y o u feel is most important? 1. For the bus to be p r e cisely o n time even though it w i l l not be able to w a i t for straggling s t u d e n t s „ 2„ For the driver to m a k e every effort riders who are w a i t i n g for the bus even though the b us w i l l be more crowded and m ay be late at the next stop. 3. For the driver to limit crowding even though itmeans that he m u s t leave some students behind. to p i c k up al In o r d e r to d e t e r m ine h o w well the M S U bus system meets your e x p e c t a t i o n s it is ne c e s s a r y to o b tain your e v aluation of the system. First, r a nk the following eight attributes to indicate w h i c h y o u feel are m o s t important. Pla c e a 1 by the factor that is m o s t i m p o r t a n t „ a 2 by the second m o s t important factor, etc. If y o u do not ride the bus your opinions are still important. 1. frequency of service (waiting time b e t w e e n buses) 2° de p e n d a b i l i t y of service (the importance of arriving at the same time each day) 149 37. Continued 3. cleanliness of the bus 4. a t t i t u d e of the bus driver 5. cost of bus pass 6. deg r e e of crowding of bus 7. directness of route 8. c o o r d i n a t ion of bus and class schedules Circle the number on the scale below to Indicate your ranking of the present MSU bus system. Remember your opinion is still valuable even if you do not ride the bus. a) frequency (waiting time between buses) 1 2 ACCEPTABLE b) 5 6 7 UNA C C E P T A B L E 3 4 5 6 7 AL WAYS LATE 3 4 5 6 7 V ERY DIRTY 3 4 5 6 C l e anliness 1 2 VERY CL E A N d) 4 dependa b i l i t y 1 2 A L W A Y S ON TIME c) 3 bus drivers 1 2 V E R Y C O U RTEOUS AND HELPFUL 7 VERY UNF R I E N D L Y e) cost of bus pass 1 VERY L O W f) 2 4 5 FAIR PRICE 6 7 VERY H I G H control of crowding 1 2 NO C R O W D I N G g) 3 3 4 5 6 3 4 5 6 3 4 5 6 7 VERY C R O W D E D c o n v e n i e n c e of routes 1 2 VERY CONV E N I E N T h) schedules 1 2 COORDINATED BUS AND CLASS SCHEDULES 7 VERY I N C O N VENIENT 7 UNCOORDINATED BUS AND CLASS SCHEDULES 150 38„ H o w w o u l d y o u rate the M S U bus s y stem overall? 1 EX C E L L E N T 39o 3 4 5 6 7 VERY P O O R Do y o u feel that the u n i v e r s i t y should adopt a free bus system? 1 40o 2 ° y es 2 „ _____ _no H o w should this bus s y stem be supported? 1 0 „ 3o 4o 2 50 b y an increase in student fees b y d i v e r t ing funds f r o m academic c o n s truction b y di v e r t ing funds from residential construction by di v e r t ing funds from athletic, social, and cultural programs o t h e r (please indicate) _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _______________________ _ 4l0 What is the m a j o r r e ason that y o u do or do n ot ride the M S U bus system? 42o What w o u l d y o u like to see done to improve the M S U bus system? 43o If y o u h a v e any o t h e r comments n ot contained in this q u e stionnaire feel free to r e s p o n d 0 APPENDIX C T E X T O F INITIAL T E L E P H O N E C ONTACT M A D E P R I O R TO T HE M A I L I N G O F T HE SURVEY 151 Initial T e l e p h o n e C o n t a c t : Ao I n t r o d u c t i o n and p u r p o s e — n a m e — I am a m e m b e r of a group of g r a d u a t e students doing a resea r c h study on the M S U bus s y stem to determine h ow service can b e improved w i t h o u t increasing the cost of the bus pass, B„ T h e i r r o l e — B e fo r e w e can suggest changes to b e m a d e w e n e e d to k n o w w h a t service y ou desire. f a c i l i t a t e the gathering of this To information w e h a v e developed a survey w h i c h asks y o u about y o u r campus travel habits and preferences. T h e a d m i n i s t r a t i o n has p r o m i s e d to use the r esults of this study to make changes in the bus s y s t e m next fall, Co C o m m i t m e n t — W i l l y o u answer this survey so that w e can d e t ermine your travel needs? (Yes) I will m a i l the survey to y ou tonight so y o u should receive it tomorrow. To return it simply fold it w i t h the front sheet on the outside, staple, or tape it closed and place it in the campus mail, If y o u h a v e any difficulty w i t h any of the questions, p l e a s e feel free to call me- - I w i l l place m y n u m b e r on the top of the first page. (No)---Why? Th a n k you, Record answer b e s i d e name. APPENDIX D P H O T O - R E D U C T I O N OF M I C H I G A N STATE UNIV E R S I T Y CAMPUS MAP INDICATING GROUPINGS OF BUILDINGS INTO T R A V E L CENTERS 'gmS’ffl \— - ■ . ! RIVIBIOMI M V . 4/ /1 I0 C/ tM l EXISTING CAMPUS M VV . 4 /U R C . t //W rft my . i i t/ va s .. mv a /3u / a7aM ut (4M3UI PIAHMIN* UNIT M V 4 / 1 / 4 MV T»//IO /*7tt. . NIIIIMI ITdTl VIIVCIIITT 3 i W I. ( .*/3*9l.t. AtT LAMIMt, MICHHAW_____ OIIICTOI:rtOMItO*HAflOlDW.1AUTHIK ■CALfi/*•400' DATC 9/3 0 / 9 ! PILINB.i04- 9 0 ORAMN n-.tj.M.'AjcQ-K.r.r C cH hI iCKKDrf:4l ARMOVtD It V-SV '•*-. ((£>« N v j i ffi s a 300/ f1.' '•iffi EjfHra Mqgir «3\ » ..... \ / // y , . U \ \ '•••■ ''--v 'M-. " "% n s, L .;y l\V i y ;.......... \\\\v . i X L \'^ V, ; jj® N&. , 0 \ \ W >>A( 0 \^\\“; i < $ & m ) \ \ ^ \ ' ' m \ i \p p. >j ■ H -J£1P I !F” III___ 1 Mr APPENDIX E DETAIL DATA FOR ORIGIN-DESTINATION GROUPINGS 153 O R I G I N - DE S T I N A T I O N GROUP PROFILE Group No, Access 1 , Spartan V i l lage H a r r i s o n & Crescent 2 , U n i v e r s i t y Village M a x Aptc from Center 3. 4. 5. 6 , 7o 8 „ 9, to; Cherry Lane to Shaw Lane to Birch & Wils o n to W i l s o n & H a r r i s o n Shortest W alking Dist a n c e from Group Center 1400' 1 W alking Time in Minutes 4 C300 700’ 2,160 ' 650’ 300' 3,080 2 , 0 0 0 350' 550’ 250 ' • 550’ 350* 250' In 080 1,690 ,770 1,690 1,080 ,770 0 0 0 ,924 Brody A r e a Rat h e r Bryan B u t terfield Armstrong Bailey Emmons Cafeteria Kell o g g Center 450' D e m Hall Area D e m Hall Jeni s o n M e n 1s IM 350’ 350' 1,080 1,080 Case - Wonders Case Wonders 150' 2 0 0 ' ,462 ,615 ' ' ,615 ,615 150' 0 0 ' -462 ,308 W i l s o n - Holden Holden Wilson ~ 0 - 0 2 0 0 2 0 0 1,380 Mu s i c - W o m e n ’s IM Music W o m e n *s IM 1 W e s t C i r c l e Dorms Williams Yakeley Gilchrist 500' 150' 300* 1,540 , 4 6 2 ,924 154 A P P E N D I X E TAB L E — C o n t inued Group No, O o 9, 1 1 . Access to: o 13 o 14. Wa l k i n g T ime in M inut es W e s t C i r c l e Dorms Landon Campbell Mary Mayo Wi l l s Ho u s e * 500v 150* 250’ ,615 1,540 ,462 ,,7 70 Un i o n - 0 1 in Union H o m e Economics Morrill Olin L i n t o n Hall Eustace Hall Beaumont Tower 500' 250' 1 0 0 ' 550' 400’ 450' 500* 1,540 ,7 70 ,308 1,690 1,230 1,380 1,540 500* 300' 1 0 0 ’ 400v 550* 1,540 ,924 ,308 1,230 1,690 0 0 * 250' 2 0 0 * ,615 ,770 ,615 0 0 * 350 ’ 400* 1 0 0 ’ 250* 550’ 600' ,308 1,080 1,230 ,308 ,770 1,690 1,850 500* 1,540 400* 50* 350 * 150* 150* 1,230 ,154 1,080 ,462 ,462 L i b r a r y - Ad Building L i b rary Olds Hall Ad, Building C o m p u t e r Center Museum 1 2 Shortest Wa l k i n g Dist a n c e from Group Center Wells - Erickson Wells I nterna t i o nal Center Erickson E n g ineering - A n t h o n y M e a t Lab E n g ineering Building J u d g i n g P a vi l i o n Anthony Foods Science Pac k a g i n g N a t ural R e s ources Agricultural Engineering Berkey - Nat, Science Berkey H o r t i c u l t u r e House S tudent Services Natural Science Soil Science 2 0 0 2 1 155 A P P E N D I X E TA B L E — C o n t inued Group No. 14. (cont.) 15. Access to: B e r k e y - Nat, Science A g r i c u l t u r e Hall M a r s h a l l Hall Journalism C h i t t e n d e n Hall C o o k Hall Home Management Bessey - K e dz i e Kedzie 17. 18. 19. 2 0 o 400' 350' 350' 450' 550* 550' Wa l k i n g Time in Minutes 1,230 1 „080 1 „080 1,380 1„690 1 o690 1 5 0 ’' 300' 250v 2 0 0 v ,462 ,924 ,,770 r,615 150' 250' 150’ 250’ 250' .462 .7 7 0 o462 o770 .770 300* 0 0 ' 150' 250' „924 o308 ,462 c,7 70 Shaw- E p p l e y E „ Shaw Wo Shaw Shaw Lot Eppl e y Planetarium 2 0 0 ' 400' 150' 250’ 550' ,615 1,230 ,462 ,770 1,690 Science Area Chemistry Cyclotron Biochemistry Pl a n t B i o logy Lab 250' 250* 150' 450' ,770 o 770 ,462 1,380 O w e n - V a n H o usen Owen V an H o u s e n 150’ 2 0 0 * Giltner Auditorium Bessey 16. Shortest Wa l k i n g Distance from Group Center A b b o t t ~ Snyder Mason Abbott Phill i p s Snyder Phys i c s K r e s g e Art Center Kre s g e Chapel Baker Hall P s y c h o l o g y Research 1 ,462 ,615 156 A P P E N D I X E T A B L E — C o n t inued Group No. 2 1 2 2 „ . 23. Access tos Shortest W alking D i s t a n c e from Group Center M c D o n e l - Holmes McDonel Holmes 400v 250’ East Campus Conrad Ak e r s Fee H u b bard 250' 300' 300' 300* Vet Clinic 0 Walking Time in Minutes 1.230 .770 .770 .924 .924 .924 - APPENDIX F BUIL D I N G -GROUP CODE R E F ERENCE CHART 157 B U I L D I N G - GROUP CODE REFERENCE CHART Building Group Code Abbott Administration Agricultural Engineering A g r i c u l t u r e Hall Akers Anthony Armstrong Auditorium 16 11 13 14 22 13 4 15 Bail e y Bak e r Beaumont To w e r Bessey Berkey Bioch e m i s t r y Bryan Butte r f i e l d 4 17 10 15 14 19 4 4 Campbell Case Chapel C h e mistry Cherry L a n e C h i t t e n d e n Hall C o m puter C e n t e r Conrad Cook Cyclotron D e m o n s t r a t i o n Hall 9 6 17 19 3 14 11 22 14 19 5 Building Group Code H o lden Holmes Home Economics Home M a n agement H o r t iculture and Greenhouses Hubbard 7 21 10 14 International Center 12 J enison Journalism J udging P a v i l i o n 5 14 13 K e dzie K ellogg Center Kresge 15 4 17 L a ndon L ibrary L int o n 9 11 10 Mason Marshall Mayo Mc D o n e l Meat Lab 16 14 9 21 13 Men's Intramural Mo r r i l l Museum Music 5 10 11 Natural Resources Natural Science 13 14 11 10 20 Emmons E ngin e e r i n g Eppley E r i ckson Eustace 4 13 18 12 10 Fee Food Science 22 13 Olds Hall Olin Health Owen G i l christ Giltner 9 15 Packaging Phillips Center 14 22 8 13 16 158 A P P E N D I X F TA B L E — Continued Building P h y sics Psychology Research Planetarium Plant Biology Rather Group Code 16 17 18 19 4 Shaw Snyder Soil Science Spartan V i l lage S tudent Services 18 16 14 1 14 Union 10 B uilding Uni v e r s i t y V illage Group Code 2 Van H o osen Vet Clinic 20 23 Wells Hall Williams Wills House 12 9 9 W i lson W o m e n vs Intramural Wonders 8 7 Yakeley 9 6 APPENDIX G BUS TIME A N D W A L K I N G DISTANCE B E T W E E N O R I G I N A N D DESTIN A T I O N 159 BUS TIME AND W A L K I N G DISTANCE B E T WEEN ORIGIN AND D ESTINATION O r i g i n Group Number 2 1 D e s t i n a t i o n 7750* 1 7750* 5 6 4150' 7250' 7250' 4950' 7 4300’ 7 4150' 7 7250' 4 P N u m b e r 4 24 2700' 7 4150' 5 6 8 3300’ 3950' 4750’ 2 3 G r o u 27 3 27 7250’ 17 4300’ 2700' 3 3300' 4950' 6 3950* 3000' 18 2 1 5 2 2 3650' 3650' 3000' 15 1250' 1250“ 3 1 3250' 4150' 18 2 2150' 2 1 0 0 19 * 3150* 13 3 3250’ 1250' 1 2150' 2 0 16 15 3 1 2 1 0 0 14 ' 1 2 0 0 ' 6 8 4150’ 2 0 4750' 2 1250' 7 8 8450’ 8 24 8850' 9 2 1 2 1 4550’ 7 3300* 5 1 4250' 17 4650' 14 17 4150 • 18 3000' 4 3400' 2 1 2 3150' 3 1350' 8 1800* 8 1 2 0 0 * 1 3400* 15 3850’ 1 2 4350' 16 4650' 13 160 A P P E N D I X G T A B L E — Continued Orig i n Group Number 8 9 8450' 8850' 1 0 1 1 9500’ 8550' 14 13 1 2 7150' 6900' 9350’ 1 2 1 D e s t i n a t l o n G r o u 4550* 2 5 4250’ 3 15 8450’ 4 4 1350* 3300’ 4400' 5 4650' 1800’ 4 4200' 5 2550' 2 0 0 4450' 1 1 ' 3 3 2 0 3850' 4 3900' 5 5700’ 8 4350’ 15 5 2 6 4750' 4 9 5250' 6 14 3400* 9 2 1 2 0 2400' 5 9 6200' 1 2 3850' 5 5500' 15 3500' 9 18 6550' 5 5650' 1 0 5100' 4 3300' 3 P N u m b e r 3400* D 13 4350' 7 14 3850' 4250' 13 14 4650’ 5100’ 14 15 900’ 1 2 0 0 3350' 4 4 4250* 5 ' 2900' 3000' 5 1250' 2350' 3150' 5 2750' 6 3450' 8 1 900* 2 1500' 9 0 1 0 2 2 0 0 13 8 ' 3550' 7 1 2 4600' 1 1 4400' 9 5000' 1 0 2050* 3 2550' 2 161 A P P E N D I X G T A B L E — Continued O r i g i n Group Number ' 1 D e s t X n a t i 15 16 17 18 19 8450' 9550' 9200' 8500" 8200' 17 6250* 2 7 5100' 3 9 17 7450’ 5 6200’ 9 17 7650' 5 5850' 9 1 2 7450' 8 5200' 6 2 0 1 2 6900' 8 5100' 6 9600' 19 8550' 13 6300' 13 2 1 10,750' 2 0 9700' 14 7300' 14 0 4900* n 6100' 6400' 5600' 7100' 4 1 0 G r o u 2950’ 5 P N u m b e r 4 4100v 8 4150’ 3 5300' 8 4350' 3 4950' 6 8 4300’ 7 9 2300' 8 5400' 9 3100' 8 5050' 9 3500' 1.1 3950’ 5 4350’ 5 4350' 6 3950' 1 1 5000' 5 4350' 6 4050’ 6 4450’ 7000' 16 4950' 1 0 5450' 13 5450' 13 5050' 7800' 17 6150' 1 1 6550' 14 6400' 14 6200' 8 7 3050' 9 6 4 3650' 3 4 4250' 3 8 4700* 7 8 5200' 7 13 5800' 1 2 14 6900' 13 162 A P P E N D I X G T A B L E — Continued Or i g i n Group Number 23 2 2 D e s t i n a t 10,750' 1 2 2 10,300' 2 9050' 19 7950' 16 13 7700' 6000 1 o n G r o u 3 16 8450* 4 19 13 8150' 16 P N u m b e r 7650' 5 13 6900’ 6 15 6600' 7 16 6800' 8 16 7550' 9 15 6050' 1 0 5250' 13 4900' 13 5500' 13 8600' 1 2 163 A P P E N D I X G TABLE— Continued O r i g i n Group Number 1 4 3 2 5 6 7 9500’ 1 0 2 0 D e s t i ' n a t i o n 8550’ 1 1 25 7150' 4400' 7 5250' 6 5700' 1 2 1 1 6900’ 1 1 6200' 13 G r o u 1 2 9350’ 6550' 14 P N u m b e r 1 1 2 0 8450' 15 17 9500’ 16 18 9200' 17 18 8500' 18 14 6 6250' 1 0 7450' 1 0 7650' 1 0 7450' 1 1 4750' 13 4350' 18 3850' 4 3850’ 5 5650' 13 5100' 1 0 6200' 1 1 5850’ 1 1 5200' 7 2550' 4200' 4 9 3900' 2 3 4450' 8 0 0 0 1 1 ' 2400' 2900’ 3000’ 3300' 3 1 1 4900' 2950' 7 13 6100' 4150' 7 17 6400' 4350' 7 17 5600' 3950' 14 8 * 4250' 17 14 5100' 1 2 16 3500' 8 3550' 5100' 9 1 1 5500' 4250' 2 3150' 3 4400' 1 1 4100’ 8 5300' 9 4950' 9 4350' 5 3 2750' 4 5000’ 1 2 4300' 9 5400' 1 0 5050' 1 0 4350* 6 164 A P P E N D I X G TAB L E — Continued Orig i n Group Number 9 8 1 2 0 0 ’ 1 0 1 1 1500’ 13 1 2 1150’ 2 2 0 0 ’ 14 3400’ 1150’ 1 0 0 1250’ 0 2 2 0 0 0 ’ 6 1150’ 1 2 0 0 1 0 ’ 1 2400’ 1300’ 13 14 1 1 p O H - r t - ( u 3 H - r r 1 1 2 2350’ 5 13 3450’ 14 2050* 4 15 o' g C 2 'O C O t-iO 9 2300’ 4 16 17 18 3 2 3550’ 6 2 2 0 0 0 ’ 7 4600’ 3400’ 1 0 1 1 2550’ 1150’ 5 3050’ 5 0 1900’ 5 3100r 3650’ 2250’ 1 0 1 1 1 2 4250’ 3000’ 1 0 1 1 1 2 3950’ 4700’ 3500’ 3500" 5 6 6 1 2 0 0 * 1 2 0 4 2400’ 1 2 0 9 2600’ 4 2 2900v ' 2900’ 5 9 1500’ 1950’ 2550’ 3000’ 2 0 0 ’ 3 1850’ 0 5 1050’ 7 3 2 850’ 5 0 9 2250’ 0 2450’ 2 2250’ 2450’ 2 2 1050’ ’ 2 8 1300’ 0 2650’ 7 0 2 0 0 0 ’ 0 1800’ 2 2650’ 7 165 A P P E N D I X G T A B L E — Continued Origin Group Number D e s t i n a t i o n 10 15 16 17 1900’ 2250’ 3000' 5 11 1050' 8 12 1500’ 1 G r o u 13 4 P N u 1950' 14 850' e 4 e r 2 2250’ 6 2550' 2 3000' 5 1050' .1 1150' 15 0 16 1200 ' 2 18 1800* 1 2250’ 6 2200 ' 2 2650' 5 2000 ' 1 1200 ' 0 800' 1150' 2 17 2 0 800' 8 19 3500* 6 2600’ 9 1850' 2 1800' 2 2650' 5 1800' 1 2300' 3 1450' 3 0 2300' 18 1450' 8 4000r 6 3100' 9 2150' 2 1350' 0 3150' 5 2300' 1 3100' 3 2250' 3 900' 0 20 21 4600' 5700' 11 3400’ 14 2950' 3 2900' 6 3750' 10 2900' 6 2050' 8 1200 ' 8 1100 ' 2 12 4800' 15 4050' 6 3650' 10 4850’ 11 4000' 7 3350' 9 2500' 9 2200' 3 166 A P P E N D I X G TAB L E — Continued Ori g i n Group Num b er 23 2 2 6350* 5050' 1 0 14 D e s t i n a t i o n G r o u 1 1 17 1 2 4700’ 8 13 4050’ 1 0 14 5500' 13 P N u m b 5450’ 15 4350* 9 r 16 42501 1 2 17 3400' 1 2 18 2850’ 6 1 1 4150' 14 3200' 3 2400' 6 4200’ 1 0 4650' 6 3250' 8 2400 s 8 1500' 2 167 A P P E N D I X G TAB L E — Continued O r i g i n Group Number D e s t i n a t i o n 19 17 G r o u 20 P 21 9600’ 22 e r 23 6900' 13 8550' 18 14 10,750’ 9700’ 18 N u cr g 8200' 10,750' 15 10,300’ 21 16 9050’ 7950’ 18 14 5100' 7100' 5000’ 4350’ 8 4050’ 10 10 17 6300’ 7000’ 4950’ 11 11 19 7800’ 6150’ 12 20 7700’ 8450’ 7650’ 14 13 22 13 14 6050’ 5250’ 4900’ 7300' 1 1 6000' 11 8150' 11 19 5450 ‘ 9 6550’ 9 6900' 9 9 5450’ 10 6400’ 10 6600’ 10 168 A P P E N D I X G TA B L E — Continued Origin Group Number 1 n a t i o n G r o u 9 8 T) e s t 19 4450’ 8 5050' 1 0 52001 9 5800' 4000' 1 0 4600' 3100' 7 3400’ 14 13 1 2 1 1 2150’ 1 2950' 1350' 5 2900' 3150* 5 3750' 2 0 1 0 6200" 1 1 6900' 1 2 57001 9 4800' 3 4050' 7 3650' 7 4850' 2 1 1 1 1 2 13 1 0 4 8 8 P 6800' 7550' 6350’ 5450’ 4700' 4050' 5500' 2 2 N u m b e r 13 23 5500’ 1 0 14 8600* 1 1 15 5050' 1 2 1 2 4150’ 9 6 3200’ 3 1 0 2400' 7 1 0 4200' 7 169 A P P E N D I X G TA B L E — Continued Origin Group N u mber D e s t i n a t i o n 16 15 19 2300’ 4 2900* 17 3100’ 2250’ 4 2050' 18 2 0 0 1650' 3 1 ' 1 1 0 0 2 1 2 0 900* 4 1 19 ’ 2300' 6 1300' 1650’ 2 0 6 G r 6 3 6 2 1 0 u 4000* P N u m b 3350' 2500' 2 2 0 0 ' 2300’ 1300' 2 1 7 4350’ 7 4250’ 7 3400' 4 2850' 3 2650* 1 2 1 0 0 ' 1050' 2 2 9 9 9 6 5 3 2 p r 23 4650’ 6 3250’ 6 2400' 6 1500’ 3 1050' 2 1750' 0 1600’ 1 170 A P P E N D I X G T A B L E — Continued O r i g i n Group Number D e s t i n a t i o n 23 2 2 19 2650’ 3 8 2 1 0 0 ' 1750' 2 0 3 G r o u 1050' 1050' 0 1600' 2 1 2 1 P N u m b e r 1700' 2 2 3 23 1700' 3 APPENDIX H BUS F R E Q UENCY TO EACH GROUP A R E A hi 171 BUS F R EQUENCY TO EACH GROUP A R E A Group Num b e r 1 2 Day Frequency 15 Minutes Night Frequency 20 Mi n u t e s 8 2 0 7-1/2 2 0 4 8 2 0 5 8 2 0 6 7-1/2 2 0 7 7-1/2 2 0 8 4 2 0 9 4 2 0 1 0 4 2 0 1 1 4 2 0 1 2 7-1/2 2 0 13 7-1/2 2 0 14 4 2 0 15 4 2 0 16 4 2 0 17 4 2 0 18 4 2 0 19 4 2 0 2 0 4 2 0 2 1 4 2 0 2 2 4 2 0 23 4 None 3 APPENDIX I M I C H I G A N STATE UNIVERSITY PASS SALES BY Q UARTER 172 M S U BUS PASS SALES Quarterly Bus Passes Winter-Only Bus Passes Commuter Passes Year Quarter 1964 Fall 3173a 12083 1965 Winter 6164 1054 Spring 3232 911 Summer 1966 Fall 6619 1137 Winter 9935 979 Spring 4834 887 Summer Fall 1967 1968 1970 354 956C 9140 1 2 1 2 Winter 11771 1037 Spring 5999 943 Summer 1247d 251 Fall 84836 1264e Winter 6830 Spring 5194 Summer 1969 380 935b 2822 1098 839 7 86f g Fall 8318 Wint e r 6697 Spring 6111 856 Summer 567 g Fall 8956 1230 Wint e r 7149 Spring 5487 1067 3035 1060 -—v n, 2822 1216 967 173 M S U BUS PASS SALES (Footnotes) aA l l campus passes Issued be t w e e n fall 1964 and fall 1967 w e r e pri c e d at $12 per quarter. Commuter passes w e r e priced at $ 6 per qu a rter and w e r e only good from the commuter lot to Shaw lot. ^ A l t h o u g h 935 summer term bus passes w e r e sold, th§y w e r e not all for the full term. D u r i n g this tern 349 full-term passes were sold for $12 each* 504 passes w e r e sold for the first five weeks and 82 passes w e r e sold for the second five weeks. The five-week pas s e s w e r e sold for $ 6 each. The five-week passes are required for summer q u a r t e r since m a n y courses are taught on a five-week a c c e l e r a t e d basis. C414 f u l l - t e r m passes, five w e e k passes, 449 first five-week passes, 93 second ^533 f u l l - t e r m passes, f i v e - w e e k passes. 591 first f i v e -week passes, 123 second T h e pass pr i c e was increased to $14 per quarter for all campus passes and $ 8 for c o m m uter passes. ^433 f u l l - t e r m passes, f i v e - w e e k passes. 285 first f i v e-week passes, 6 8 second ^C o m m u t e r lot was closed during the summer term so no bus service w a s provided, 336 f u l l - t e r m passes, f i v e - w e e k passes. 217 first five-week passes, 14 second APPENDIX J L E A S T SQUARES M U L T I P L E R E GRESSION ANALYSIS TO DETERMINE M A J O R FACTORS A F F E C T I N G BUS RIDERSHIP 174 APPENDIX J LEAST SQUARES MULTI P L E REGRESSION ANALYSIS TO DE T E R M I N E M A J O R FACTORS A F F E C T I N G BUS RIDERSHIP The purp o s e of this analysis was to determine w h i c h travel c h aracteristics had the greatest influence on the p r opensity to buy passeso The data used to calculate these factors was obtained from two s o u r c e s „ First, travel patterns and demographic data w e r e taken from the survey whi c h had been keypunched onto punched c a r d s , L indicates the format used for these cards. in traveling between various The distances involved origins and destinations were taken from the o r i g i n - d e s t i n a tion map o b t ained from Henry Jolman, Appendix (Appendix D) and the bus times w e r e foreman of the bus service, (See A p p e n d i x G for o r i g i n - d e s t i n a t i o n bus travel times and w a l k i n g distances,) The bus system frequencies were taken from the printed bus schedule, (See A p p e n d i x H„) A t r ansformation pr o g r a m was then w r i t t e n to calculate and group the following v a r iables for entry into the least squares m u l t i p l e r e g ression program. Bus ridership during spring term 1970 (X^), the dependent v a r i a b l e s w a s taken directly from survey question 6 , If the person purchased a bus pass during spring quarter 1970 this value was 1; o t h erwise it was set equal to zero. Total distance traveled each w e e k C ^ ) > had to be calculated from the i n formation given in survey questions 17, 18, and 19 and from the distances m e a s u r e d on the o r i g i n - destination map and stored in 175 core. It w a s calculated as follows: n = £ (distance) . (trips)^ i=l Where d i s tance = w a l k ing distance as m e a s u r e d from the origindestination map in thousands of feet. (See A p p e n d i x G.) trips number of w e e k l y trips m a d e be t w e e n that origin and destin a t i o n for that purpose. (See survey questions 17, 18, and 19 column 4). n num b er of entries m a d e in questions 17, 18 and 19, i ori g in as given in questions 17, j d e s t ination as given in questions 17, 18, and 19. Total n u m b e r of trips m a d e each w e e k questions 17, 18, and 19, column 4. 18, and 19. (X^) was taken from If the respondent indicated a trip m a d e b e t w e e n two points located in the same group area, ori g i n and d e s t i n a t i o n w e r e both in Spartan Village, i.e., then the trip was ignored„ F r e quency of daytime bus service to s t u d e n t 's residence area (X^) was d e t ermined as follows: X^ = F r e quency^ where: F r e q u e n c y = number of mi n u t e s be t w e e n buses on regular daytime routes as they pass student's living area. (See A p p e n d i x H„) i = student's living ar e a - f r o m question 13 176 W e e k l y time a d v antage (X,.) was a m e a s u r e of the mi n u t e s saved each w e e k b y taking the bus instead of w a l k i n g „ This was calculated as follows: n X5 = ~ ^ i=l ^buS where: X2 = 325 = total w e e k l y travel distance in feet a v e rage w a l k i n g speed in feet per m i n u t e as m e a s u r e d by the U n i v e r s i t y Campus Park and Planning Office n = Total n u m b e r of trips m a d e by the individual during the week bus time = bus time required to travel be t w e e n the two p o i n t s „ (See A p p e n d i x Go) i = o r i g i n of trip j = d e s t i n a t i o n of trip T h e w e e k l y time constraint (X^.) was a m e a s u r e of the class or w o r k time lost due to being unable to w a l k to class or w o r k w i t h i n the time a v a i l a b l e 0 X6 n I - [ 0 n = total numb e r of w e e k l y trips m a d e d^. ij = d i s tance involved in trip k 177 = time a v a ilable to m a k e trip k from questions 17, 18, and 19 column 5 ij = o r i g i n and d estination for trip k Classload (X^) is a me a s u r e of the n u m b e r of class credit hours ta k e n during spring quarter 1970, This val u e w as taken directly from q u e s t i o n 14, o a_d _W o_r k_l_ (X0) ^ was a m e a s u r e of the numb e r of hours w o r k e d during spring q u a rter 1970, P r i o r bus usage This was taken from question 16, (Xg) was a m e a s u r e used to determine if students w h o rode a city bus prior to entering M S U w e r e m o r e likely to ride the bus w h e n they entered the university. w a s taken f r o m q u e s t i o n Attitude 1 1 This measur e m e n t „ (X1 Q ) toward the M SU s y stem was thought to be an ind ic a t i o n of c o n sumer acceptance and its effect o n ridership. measure was This taken from question 38, T h e p e r c e n t a g e of trips m a d e at night taken from q u e s t i o n 24, w a s included to indicate the importance of night travel on bus ridership. T h e d i s tance of the longest trip m a d e during the week was taken f r o m q u e s t i o n 25 to d e t ermine w h e t h e r people boug h t a bus pass to ease their longest j ourney during the week. X..„ 12 where: = distance.. ij 178 i = o r i g i n from ques t i o n 25 j = dest i n a t ion from question 25 distance Class = d i s tance from Appe n d i x G (X.^) was taken from question 1. Mari t a l Status (X^) c o n structed from question 2 „ and sex (X^) was set equal to zero if the person w e r e single and equal to one if married. if the p e r s o n w e r e a male; w e r e dummy variables X^,. w as set equal to zero otherwise it w as set equal to one. The distance from the student *s living a r e a to the center of the campus (X^) X-.- = 17 was calculated as follows: distance. , c 1 15 distance = distance from A p p e n d i x G i = location of campus residence area from where: q uestion 13 15 = location of campus cent e r — Farm Lane and A u d i t o r i u m Road exponential qualities observed in the bus ridership profile. These sixteen v a riables were entered into the least squares m u l t i p l e r e g ression p r o g ram created as part of the STAT series prepared by the M i c h i g a n State U n i versity Agricultural Experiment Station,,'*' ■*"The A g r i c u l t u r a l Experiment Station at Michi g a n State U n iversity has produ c e d a series of statistical programs w h i c h are described in forty m i m e o g r a p h e d writeups, each writeup describing a different feature of the program. The least squares mult i p l e regression routine is described in d e s c r i p t i o n num b e r 7. The least square routine w i t h automatic stepwise 179 In the first pass the least squares delet i o n o p tion w as used to e liminate all independent variables hypothesis, that did not reject the null i 0 e or that the variable did not account for a ny of the v a r i a n c e c at the n i n e t y -five per cent confidence levelo T h e purpose of the deletion run was to eliminate all variables w h i c h w e r e not statistically significant t h e m s e l v e s „ N o r m a l l y the p rintout from this run also gives the statistics for the total regression equation but such is not the case w h e n the dependent v a r i a b l e is 2 b i n a r y in n a t u r e as it was in this instance,, Johnston's m e t h o d o l o g y w a s used as follows to compensate for the h e t e r o s c e d a s t i c i t y of the disturbances„ Step 1: Use the regular least squares m u l t i p l e regression analysis to d e t ermine the 8 r e g ression coefficients for each of the independent v a r i a b l e s „ Step 2; Calculate w e i g h t i n g vari a b l e for each individual observation,, we i g h t ing variable^ = [B X^(l - X^)] d e l etion of variables is covered in d escription n u mber 8 , Lastly, the least squares routine w ith the w e i g h t i n g of v a r i ables is defined in descr i p t i o n number 1 2 „ 2 The classical least squares approach assumes homoscedastic disturbances throughout the entire range of the dependent variable,, This is not the case for the dummy dependent variable since all values had to be either 0 or 1, A brief descri p t i o n of the pr o b l e m and a suggested m e t h o d for c o mpensating for the he t e r o s c e d a s t i c i t y of the disturbances whe r e there may be interaction be t w e e n the independent variables is given in J„ Johnston, Econometric M e t h o d ^ (New Yorks M c G r a w Hill, 1 9 6 3 ) s pp, 207-211 and 227-228, Johnston states that a m o r e detailed, theoretical analysis is given in G, H, Orcutt„ M a r t i n G r e e n b e r g e r ; John Korbel, and Alice M„ Rivlin, M i c r o a n a l y sis of S o c i o ­ economic Systems^ A Simulation S t u d y (New Yorks Harper and Row, 1961) 180 where: X. = i 8 = t>l [ x .- x .„ o n , x . ] ll i2 im m x ^ Step 3; = v a l u e of vari a b l e x^ for individual observ a t i o n i R u n data through w e i g h t e d least squares m u l t i p l e reg r e s sion p r ogram using the we i g h t i n g variables calculated in step 2 - 2 As a resu l t of this compensation, explained variance, R increased from 19-42 per cent to 24-03 per cent. This , was transformation yields almost 24 per cent improvement in the pred i c t i v e ability of the relationship- Results of least squares m u l t i p l e regr e s s i o n a n a l y s i s ,— Table J-l is a summary of the detailed results of the w e i g h t e d least squares runIn a d d i t i o n to the raw data from this run it is necessary to indicate the m a n n e r in w h i c h the individual v a r i a b l e was d e t e r m i n e d „ 2 This was done by comparing the R va r i a b l e w i t h the total R equation- 2 deletes column for each individual value of 24-03 per cent for the entire The following individual effects determined on this basis are gi v e n in T a b l e J~2- TABLE J-l STATISTICS ON LEAST SQUARES VARIABLES XC1) = P(X(2) ... X(4), XCI1), X(13) , X(15), X(18)) DEPENDENT VARIABLE— X( 1) RIDERSHIP AOV FOR OVERALL REGRESSION SUM OF SQUARES DEG. OF FREEDOM MEAN SQUARE Reg ression (about mean) 18.39544913 7 2.62792130 Error 58.15873224 406 0.14324811 76.55418136 413 Total (about mean) OBSERVATIONS 414 0.2403 VAR REGRESSION COEFFICIENTS STD. ERRORS OF COEFFICIENTS MULTIPLE CORR. COEF. R R BAR 2 0.4902 BETA WEIGHTS 0.2272 STD. ERRORS OF BETAS Constant 0 0.65890334 Di stance x2 X3 0.00733927 0.00126089 0.45904 0.07886 Trips -0.02437434 0.00532765 -0.33870 0.07403 Freq. Bus X4 -0.07474692 0.01366380 -0.47496 0.08635 Night Bus *11 -0.00402678 0.00117113 -0.15498 X13 -0.03153654 0.01249920 -0.12559 X 15 -0.09753282 0.03856375 X 18 0.01328636 0.00298204 Class Sex Sqeddist 0.08050189 0..0005 S STANDARD ERROR OF ESTIMATE R BAR 0.4766 TB 18.3452 S1G 181 R2 F 0. 37848132 FB S1G PARTIAL CORR. COEFS. R2 DELETES 8.1849 66.9933 0.0005 5.8207 33.8805 0.0005 -4.5751 20.9312 0.0005 -0.22142 0.20113 -5.4684 29.9037 0.0005 -0.26192 0. 18434 0.04597 -3.4384 11.8223 0.001 -0.16821 0.21817 0.04978 -2.5231 6.3660 0.012 -0.12425 0.22838 -0.11209 0.04432 -2.5291 6.3965 0.011 -0.12454 0.22832 0.45143 0.10132 4.4555 19.8512 0.21591 0.20315 0.0005 0.27753 0.17690 182 TABLE J - 2 : VARIANCE EXPLAINED BY INDI V I D U A L VARIABLE Variance Explained By Individual Variable Variable Di s t a n c e 6,34% Fr e q u e n c y of bus service 5,60% N u m b e r of w e e k l y trips 3,92% Dorm- c a m p u s d i s tance squared 3,72% Per cent of travel at night 2 Class 1,19% Sex 1 ,2 ,2 1 0 % % The degree of i nteraction b e t w e e n each of these individual v a r i a b l e s can be d e t ermined by comparing the v a r i a n c e explained b y the total overall r e gression and the sum of the individual effects. Total effect Total individual effect 24,03% 24,18% Interaction effect ,15% Co n s e q u e n t l y the i n t e r a c t i o n can b e c o nsidered to be negligible, Ta b l e J-3 o n the following page provides basic statistics on the transformed va r i a b l es after they w e r e w e i g h t e d to compensate for the h e t e r o s c e d a s t i c i t y of the disturbances. The following two pages p r o v i d e a listing of the transformation p r o g r a m used to prepare the data for the w e i g h t e d least squares program. The constants in statement 1627 w e r e o b t a i n e d f r o m the preceding least squares p r o g r a m as e x p l a i n e d un d e r step 2 above. TABLE J-3 STATISTICS ON TRANSFORMED VARIABLES LABEL VAR Riders 1 MINIMUM VALUE 0.00000 STANDARD DEVIATIONS MAXIMUM VALUE MEAN 1.00000 0.24488 0.4305360 SUM 101.38007 SUM OF SQUARED DEVIATION FROM THE MEAN SUM OF SQUARES 101.38007 76.55418 2 0.00000 196.35000 45.11996 26.9279669 18679.66253 1142298.24500 299472.65972 Trips 3 0.00000 36.00000 13.42706 5.9825684 5558.80317 89420.12262 14781.73452 Freq. Bus 4 0.00000 15.00000 6.05536 2.7357194 2506.91927 18271.25842 3090.95835 Nigbtbus 11 -0.00000 80.00000 17.22288 16.5696852 7130.27305 236194.84451 113390.99670 Class 13 -0.00000 8.00000 2.54440 1.7146151 1053.38169 3894.40527 1214.18068 0.4947766 238.49517 238.49517 101.10400 14.6284187 7494.06848 224032.87218 Distance Sex 15 0.00000 1.00000 0.57608 Sqeddist 18 1.32250 71.40250 18.10161 88378.13207 SIMPLE CORRELATIONS Riders 1 1.00000 Distance 2 0.26524 1.00000 Trips 3 0.02671 0.68234 Freq. Bus 1.00000 4 -0.00109 0.22904 -0.15604 1.00000 Nightbus 11 -0.14111 0.03127 -0.08565 -0.00633 1.00000 Class 13 -0.01847 0.07524 -0.19464 0.40598 0.00127 1.00000 Sex 15 -0.15248 0.00506 -0.01551 0.18799 0.02193 0.12149 1.00000 Sqeddist 18 0.19004 0.35653 -0.13597 0.85718 -0.06619 0.47250 0.13284 11 13 1 Riders 2 Distance 3 Trips 4 Freq. Bus Nightbus Class 15 Sex 1.,00000 18 Sqeddist 184 TABLE J- 4 INPUT D A T A T R A N S F O R M A T I O N PROGRAM PROG RA M SURVEY M AT RIX (J»J, 1) = DIS TAN CE MATRIX ! J VJ, 2) = BUS TIME D I M E N S I O N K0UNTI24) D I M E N S I O N M A T R I X < 2 3 , 2 4 , 3 ) , F R E A K ( 2 3 J , D E S T ( 16), 2 R I G I N ! 1 6 ) pT RIP !1 6 1 , T I M < 1 6 J THE FIRST S E C T I O N OF THIS P R O G R A M READS CARDS C O N T A I N I N G THE D I ST AN CE AND BUS TIMES BETWEEN EA CH O R G I N AND D E S T I N A T I O N AS WELL AS THE FRE QU E NC Y OF BUS S E RV IC E TO EACH AREA SO TH AT V A R IA B LE S X 2 , X 4 , X 5 , X 1 2 AND X I 7 COUL D BE CA LC UL AT ED ® R E A D ( 6 0 » 1 0 0 1 II(MATRIX!I , J , K ) ,J = l , 2 3 1,1=1,23), K= 1,2) 100 FORMATI 1615) R E A D !60,86) ( F R E A K ! I ) p1 = 1,23 1 86 F O R M A T (19F4 «l / 4 F 4 o 1) 6 999 98 97 31 85 96 32 8 DO 6 1 = 1 v24 K O U N T (I 1= 1 CO NTI NU E W R I T £ ( 6 1 p999 1 F 0 R M A T ! * 1 * p 2 X , * Q R I G I N * 84 3 X , * D E S T INAT ION*I WR IT £C6 l,9 8) (K O U N T ( I J * I = 1 * 13) FORMAT 1 1 I X s 1 2 ( 1 2 * 8 X 1 p 12 I DO 31 I =1 s>23 WRITE { 6 1 , 9 7 M b I (MATRIX! I , J , K ) , J = 1 ,13 I p K = l 93) F O R M A T ! #-*,12, 1 3 i3 X * 17 )/(3 X , 13<3 X , 17 iI ) CO NT I NU E WRITE (61,35) ( K O U N T ! I ) ,1=14,24) F0KMAT<*1*,11X,11U2,8X)) DO 3 2 1= Ip 23 WRI T E! 61 p9 6l £p ( I M A T R I X ! I , J ,K ) ,J=1 4,2 4), K= ip 3 J F O R M A T ! * - * , I 2 , l l ( 3 X , I 7 ) / ( 3 X ,1 1 { 3X , I 7 ) JI CO NT IN UE WR3 T£ ! 6 1 s8) (FREAK!Ml , M = l p 2 3 1 F O R M A T ( * — * 8 10 Xp23!F4olplX)J THIS S.ECTION RE A DS O B SE RV AT IO N® THE DATA CA R D S FO R EACH 11 LI 6 U S = 0 o 0 $ X 2 = 0 o 0 $ X 3 = 0 o0$TIME = 0 o 0 $ S A V E = 0 o 0 $ X 5 = 0 $ X 6 = 0 o 0 1 R E A D ! 6 0 v 1011 N U M B E R , X I 3 p X 2 4 , X I ,X 9 , X 4 1 ,X 7 ,X8 101 F O R M A T ( F 4 ® 1,F 1 ® 0 ,F1®0 ,6 X,F I ® 0 , 1 2 X ,F 1®0,2X,F2«0, F2® 0, 2 2X,F2® 0 ) I F 'EOF, 6012, 3678 185 TABLE J - 4 3678 666 667 668 23 123 4 104 61 707 7 8 12 ( C O N T IN U E D ) I F ( X 2 4 « E Q o 1 o 0 « O R « X 2 4 „ E Q o 2 « 0 l GO TO 6 6 6 X 1 4 = l $ GO T O 6 6 7 X I4=0 I F I X 2 4 o E Q c l e 0 o 0 R o X 2 4 o E Q c 3 o 0 ) G 0 TO 6 6 8 X 1 5 = 0 $ GO T O 2 3 X 15=1 READ( 6 0 v123 ) (DEST I I ) , R I G I N ( I ) , T R I P ! 1 1 , T I M I I I , 1 = 1 • 1 6 ) FORMAT( 5 X S8 ( 4 F 2 o O ® l X I / 5 X » 8 1 4 F 2 . 0 * i X ) J READ( 6 0 s 1 0 4 ) X I 1 , N 2 1 » N 2 0 * X 10 FORMAT( 1 7 X * F 2 o 0 s 1 2 v 1 2 » 2 8 X * F l o O I 00 7 M=1,1 6 I=R IG IN {M l J = D E S T CM) I F I R I G I N ( M ) o E Q c O . O ) GO TO 8 I F ( R I G I N ( M ) o E Q o O E S T ( M ) ) G Q TO 7 0 7 W ALK=(M ATRIX!I, J , 1 ) / 3 2 5 ) - ( T IM (M )) I F ( W A L K o L E o O o O ) GO T O 6 1 X6=WALK+X6 B U S = M A T R I X ! I , J , 2 ) * T R I P { M l «-BUS X 2 = M A T R I X CI 8 J v 1 I * T R I P C M I + X 2 TIM E=TIM (M )*TR IP(M )+TIM E X3=TRIP!M )+X3 CONTINUE CONTINUE X 5 = ( X 2 / 3 2 5 o O I —BUS X12=FL0AT( M A TR IXIN 21,N 20,1 ) I X4=FREAK( X 4 1 } I=X41 X17=M ATRIX(1 ,1 5 8 1 ) X17=X17/1000o0 X18=X17**2 X2=X2/1000c 0 X12=X12/1000c0 X19=X3**2 X20=X3**3 o o o o u o THE C O N S T A N T S I N S T A T E M E N T 1 6 2 7 WERE O B T A I N E D F R O M T HE F I R S T L E A S T SQUARES PASSo T H E Y ARE T H E BETA VALUES F OR T H E V A R I A B L E S T H A T WERE S T A T I S T I C A L L Y S I G N I F I C A N T AT THE 9 5 % L E V E L . . 1627 S I G M A = 0 « . 6 6 9 3 9 8 3 3 * 0 „ 0 0 6 6 3 9 6 2 * X 2 —0 o 0 2 2 5 2 1 2 4 * X 3 - 0 o 0 7 5 7 2 7 4 2 3 *X 4 -0 o 0 0 3 2 3 5 4 8 *X li-0 o 0 3 4 9 3 648*X13-0o09959257*X15«-0o01 3 3 6 1 811*X18 S I G M A = SI GMA SIGMA**2 X16=loO /SQ R T( ABS(SIGM A)) W R IT E (32,105IX 1,X 28X 3,X 4,X 5,X 6,X 7,X 8,X 9,X 10,X 11,X 12,X 1 2 3 PX 1 4 8 X 1 5 8 X 1 6 , X 1 7 » X 1 8 , X 1 9 , X 2 0 186 TABLE 105 J-4 (CONTINUED) F O R M A T ( F 1 « , 0 S2 F 9 . 3 v F 4 o 1 s 2 F 9 . 0 # 2 F 2 o 0 s 2 F 2 . 0 , F 2 « 0 , F 7 « , 3 * 3 F 2 2o0»F15«,9,F7o3*F10«,6,F10.3*F12;3> W R IT E (6 1 ,1 0 6 )X l» X 2 sX 3 v X 4 *X 5 ,X 6 ,X 7 » X 8 ,X 9 ,X 1 0 ,X ll,X 1 2 *X l 2 3 s X 1 4 s X 1 5 SX 1 6 CN U M B E R r S I G M A v X 1 7 » X 1 8 1 0 6 F O R M A T ( * * » F 1 « , 0 1 2 F 9 o 3 SF 4 , 1 * 2 F 9 o 0 , 2 F 2 « . 0® 2 F 2 « . 0 , F 2 « 0 , F 7 . 3 2 « 3 F 2 oOsF 1 5 o 9 p F 7 e l » F 1 5 « > 9 » F 1 0 « , 3 j F 1 0 o 6 ) GO T O 1 1 1 1 2 CONTINUE END RUNt>l oOOt 1000 APPENDIX K LEAST SQUARES MULTIPLE R E GRESSION ANALYSIS OF T H E EFFECT O F W E A T H E R ON BUS RIDERSHIP 187 APPE N D I X K LEAST SQUARES MULTIPLE REGR E S S I O N ANALYSIS O F THE E F FECT O F WE A T H E R ON BUS RIDERSHIP The purpose of this analysis as stated in Chapter w h e t h e r various w e a ther III was to see factors affected daily bus ridership. Data were obtained as follows: Daily Bus R i d e r s h i p — these data were obtained from the da i l y counts made by each bus driver on each run the end of the day by the office Gate ca r d s — Faculty and and totaled at staff. staff members can ride the bus system without charge by showing the gate card they normally use to gain entry to faculty parking areas. Since the drivers keep a daily count of the number of gate cards used as boarding passes on each run, this count w as used to e s t a blish the number of faculty and staff members who used Weather m e a s u r e s — the bus. Daily indicators of w eather were obtained from the Local C l i m a tologists Data published mo n t h l y by the E n v i r o n ­ mental D a t a Service of the United States Department of Commerce. Data obtained included: a. average daily temperature in degrees Fahrenheit b. da i l y precipitation in inches of water between 7 A.M. and 7 P.M. c. average daily wind speed in miles per hour 188 d. average da i l y sky cover from sunrise to sunset in tenths e. daily h umi d i t y readings at 1 P.M. f. average daily wind chill index Eastern Standard Time (average daily t empera­ ture in degrees Fahrenheit mi n u s average daily wind speed in mi l e s per hour). These d a t a w e r e collected for fall quarter such as T h a n k s g i v i n g holidays, " M o r a t o r i u m Day" were omitted 1969. Unusual days the days the drivers were on strike, and since they did not represent typical r i d e r s h i p patterns. The d a i l y bus r i d e rship for both faculty and staff and for students w a s adjusted to e l i minate the daily fluctuation. This w as necessary since M o n d a y s and W e d n e s d a y s w e r e typically heavy ridership days with T h u r s d a y and Fridays su bstantially lighter. student riders are given in Table K-l Da i l y index numbers for below. TABLE K-l D A I L Y BUS RIDERSHIP INDEX NUMBERS FALL Q U A R T E R 1969 Day Index Number Monday 1.080 Tuesday 1.002 Wednesday 1.010 Thursday 0.973 Friday 0.935 189 Adjusted da i l y r idership was defined as the actual divided by the d a i l y index number. ridership Table K -2 indicates the adjusted number of student riders and Table K -3 indicates the adjusted number of faculty and staff riders. These adjusted bus ridership data were entered into the least squares m u l t i p l e r e g r e s s i o n program^ w i t h one run usi n g student ridership as the dependent v a r iable and the other run usi n g faculty and staff ridership as the de p e n d ent variable. Table K - 4 gives the simple correlations b etween each of the entered variables. T a b l e K - 5 presents the analysis of variance and reg r e s s i o n d a t a for student ridership w i t h respect to all variables. Table K - 6 p resents the same data; however, faculty and staff ridership has been substituted as the dependent variable. and K - 8 present a simple r e g ression against the most v a r i a b l e — average wind speed. six weather Tables K-7 significant single Student ridership is the dependent variable in Table K-7 and faculty and staff ridership is the dependent variable in Table K - 8 . The A g ricultural Experiment Station at M i c h i g a n State Un iversity has produced a series of statistical programs w h i c h are described in 40 m i m e o g r a p h e d descriptions. Each d e s c r i p t i o n d e s c ribes a different feature of the program. The least squares mult i p l e regression routine is described in d e s c r i p t i o n number 7. 190 TABLE K-2 N U M B E R O F STUDENT BUS RIDERS (ADJUSTED) Mon. Tue. Wed. Thur. 1 37142 38646 40824 36245 34949 2 38738 37161 22947 38898 39256 3 36193 35052 39602 36638 35519 4 34946 35343 37858 36937 35925 5 36036 37489 30712 34710 33579 6 37191 36409 41467 37708 38132 7 34623 36217 39511 39044 35956 8 35713 34304 38726 30677 37323 Week Fri. 191 TABLE K-3 N U M B E R O F FACULTY AND STAFF BUS RIDERS We e k ---------------Mon. (ADJUSTED) Tue. Wed. Thur. Fri. 1 91 81 76 44 124 2 72 6 6 33 51 19 3 57 71 48 87 30 4 73 49 83 8 8 81 5 71 54 89 44 57 6 71 81 74 69 116 7 59 75 118 8 64 8 6 6 8 1 2 2 72 127 59 TABLE K - 4 SIMPLE CORRELATIONS Ridership Avg.Temp. Avg.Wind Pr e c i p i ­ tation Skycover Humidity Pass 1 I.00000 Avg. Temp 2 0.05081 1 Avg. Wind 3 0.26617 0.24093 1 . 0 0 0 0 0 Precipitation 4 0.01167 0.27676 0.37863 1 . 0 0 0 0 0 Skycover 5 0.19722 0.21234 0.28921 0.36381 1 Humidity 6 0.05670 0 .21170 0.19276 0.51177 0.70314 1 . 0 0 0 0 0 Chillidx 7 0 . 0 0 1 1 1 0.93727 -0.06250 0.13641 0.09506 0.14734 Gatecard 8 0.02313 -0.20513 -0.06847 0.05862 0.13525 0.22556 4 5 6 1 .0 Chillidx Gatecards 0 0 0 0 2 3 .0 0 0 0 0 1 . 0 0 0 0 0 -0.17193 7 1 . 0 0 0 0 0 8 TABLE K-5 STUDENT RIDERSHIP VS WEATHER X(1) = P(X(2) ... X(7)) AOV FOR OVERALL REGRESSION SUM OF SQUARES Total (about mean) 6 4986624.06103516 172500047.32421875 32 5390626.47888184 202419791.69140625 38 OBSERVATIONS R2 0.1478 39 Var Regression Coefficients MEAN SQUARE 29919744.36669922 Regression (about mean) Error DEG. OF FREEDOM MULTIPLE CORR. COEFS. R R BAR 2 0.3845 -0.0120 Std. Errors of Coefficients Beta Weights 0.9251 SIG 0.490 STANDARD ERROR OF ESTIMATE 2321.77227110 R BAR 0.0000 Std. Errors of Betas F TB FB Sig 13.2001 174.2426 0.0005 R2 Partial Corr.Coefs. Deletei Constant 0 35430.98155594 2684.14516866 Avg.Temp 2 -229.24737712 192.62920822 -1.14855 0.96509 -1.1901 1.4163 0.243 -0.20587 0.11009 Avg.Wind 3 371.14463598 204.74272547 0.58434 0.32235 1.8127 3.2860 0.079 0.30516 0.06030 Precip. 4 -1901.70611003 5123.15987432 -0.07711 0.20774 -0.3712 0.1378 0.713 -0.06548 0.14414 Skycover 5 23.15519347 18.87769348 0.29732 0.24240 1.2266 1.5045 0.229 0.21191 0.10774 Humid 6 -23.18206505 40.32377460 -0.14711 0.25589 -0.5749 0.3305 0.569 -0.10111 0.13901 Chi 1lidx 7 218.64982485 182.13725615 1.11807 0.93136 1.2005 1.4411 0.239 0.20759 0.10943 TABLE K-6 FACULTY AND STAFF RIDERSHIP VS WEATHER (UNRESTRICTED LEAST SQUARES) X(8) = P(X(2) ... X(7)) Dependent Variable— X( 8) Gatecard AOV FOR OVERAL1 REGRESSION Sum of Squares Regression (about mean) Error mean) Total (about i OBSERVATIONS Regression Coefficients Std. Errors of Coefficients Mean Square 2994.14370316 6 499. 02395052 19845.59988642 32 620. 17499645 22839.74358940 38 MULTIPLE CORR. COEFS. R2 R R BAR 2 0.1311 0.3621 -0.0318 39 Var Deg. of Freedom Beta Weights Constant 0 71.31520629 28.79012210 Avg.Temp 2 -1.73422864 2.06613953 -0.81796 Avg.Wind 3 0.61888565 2.19606903 Precip. 4 7.54312402 Skycover 5 Humid Chi 1iidx Std. Errors of Betas 0.8047 Sig 0.574 S STANDARD : ERROR OF ESTIMATE 24.90331296 R BAR 0.0000 TB F FB Sig R2 Partial Corr.Coefs. Deletes 2.4771 6.1359 0.019 0.97451 -0.8394 0.7045 0.407 -0.14677 0.11196 0.09173 0.32550 0.2818 0.0794 0.780 0.04976 0.12894 54.95097658 0.02880 0.20977 0.1373 0.0188 0.892 0.02426 0.13058 0.03126159 0.20248201 0.03779 0.24476 0.1544 0.0238 0.878 0.02728 0.13045 6 0.43181764 0.43251252 0.25798 0.25839 0.9984 0.9968 0.326 0.17381 0.10403 7 1.15276348 1.95360292 0.55493 0.94045 0.5901 0.3482 0.559 0.10375 0.12164 TABLE K-7 STUDENT RIDERSHIP VS WEATHER (UNRESTRICTED LEAST SQUARES) XU) P(X(3)) Dependent Variable— X( 1) Pass AOV FOR OVERALL REGRESSION Sum of Squares Regression (about mean) Error Total (about mean) 14341142.53100586 37 202419791.69140625 38 Var Constant 0 Avg. Wind 3 MULTIPLE CORR. COEFS. R R BAR 2 R2 0.0708 Regression Coefficients Std. Errors of Coefficients 0.2662 Beta Weights 169.05952368 100.65066564 0.26617 R BAR 0.2139 Std. Errors of Betas TB 0.15847 F Sig 2.8213 0.101 5083206.73400879 0.0457 34848.95250416 1161.09796414 Mean Square 14341142.53100586 1 188078649.16015625 OBSERVATIONS 39 Deg. of Freedom STANDARD ERROR OF ESTIMATE 2254.59680074 FB 30.0138 900.8277 1.6797 2.8213 Sig Partial Corr.Coefs. R2 Deletes < 0.0005 0.101 0.26617 0.00000 TABLE K-8 FACULTY AND STAFF RIDERSHIP VS WEATHER (UNRESTRICTED LEAST SQUARES) X(8) = P(X(3)) Dependent Variable— X( 8) Gatecard AOV FOR OVERALL REGRESSION Sum of Squares Regression (about mean) 107.06687675 Error Total (about mean) 37 22839.74358940 38 R2 0.0047 Var Regression Coefficients Std. Errors of Coefficients Constant 0 78.57745866 12.76510534 Avg. Wind 3 -0.46192911 1.10655293 MULTIPLE CORR. COEFS. R R BAR 2 0.0685 -0.0222 Beta Weights -0.06847 Std. Errors of Betas 0.16401 Mean Square 107.06687675 1 22732.67671251 OBSERVATIONS 39 Deg. of Freedom F 0.1743 Sig 0.679 614.39666791 STANDARD ERROR OF ESTIMATE 24.78702620 R Bar 0.0000 TB FB Sig 6.1556 37.8920 < 0.0005 -0.4174 0.1743 0.679 Partial Corr.Coefs. R2 Deletes -0.06847 0.00000 APPENDIX L FORMAT O F P U N C H E D CARD USED IN P RO C E S S I N G D A T A 197 .CARD CO LUMNS IT EM Card SURV EY Q U EST IO N 1 S u r v e y number 1-3 Card number 4 Class 5 1 6 2 Col lege 7-8 3 T e r m en rolled at M S U 9-10 4 T e r m bus pass pu rchased 1 1 - 1 2 5 Sp ec if ic terms bus pass purchased 13-21 6 Age 2 2 7 Ho me area 23 8 V e h i c l e s owned 24 9 H i g h school travel mode 25 1 0 26 1 1 R a t i n g of p re -MS U bus service 27 1 2 Re s i d e n c y ca te go ry 28 13 D o r m location 29-30 13 31-32 14 33-34 15 35-36 16 S ex-marital status F r e q u e n c y of bus use prior to M S U C ur re nt qu arter credit load Hou rs taken in residence hall ' W o r k hours d u r i n g current quarter Work Cards location 2 37-38 and 3 S u r v e y number 1-3 Card number 4 Da y or night trip 5 17,18,19 T ri p d e s t i n a t i o n 6-7 17,18,19 Trip origin 8-9 17,18,19 Numb er of 1 0 - 1 1 17,18,19 12-13 17,18,19 trips each week Ti me a v a il ab le each wee k The above format w as repeated seven times on card o n card 3 as needed. 2 and eight times 198 ITEM CARD COLUMNS S U R V E Y QU ES TI ON Card 4 Surve y number 1-3 Card number 4 Arrival preference 5-6 2 0 De parture pr eference 7-8 2 1 Break destina ti on 9 2 2 Pe rcentage of trips by ca tegory 10-17 23 Pe r c e n t a g e of trips at night 18-19 24 O r i g i n of longest trip 2 0 - 2 1 25 D e s t i n a t i o n of longest trip 22-23 25 Class 24 26 Travel mode of friends 25 27 Travel 26 28 Did per so n seek i n fo rm at ion 27 29 In fo rm a t i o n source 28 30 R e c om me nd at ion 29 31 Ride rs hip of info rm at io n source 30 32 Ap p r e h en si on about bus schedule 31 33 De sired w a i t i n g time 32-33 34 S c he du li ng method 34 35 Desired 35 36 Ra n k i n g of service variables 36-43 37 R a t i n g of M S U system 44-51 37 Ov erall 52 38 Free bus system ad op ti on 53 39 Support of free bus system 54 40 location prefe re nc e companion service rating of M S U system APPENDIX M D ET AI LE D E X A M I N A T I O N O F M I C H I G A N STATE U N I V E R S I T Y BUS U TI LI ZA TIO N 199 1969-70 WEEKDAY BUS UTILIZATION (Number of Buses) Brody Spartan Commuter Circle Express Total Excess Capacity 11 12 P.M. 1______ 2 FALL TERM 5 5 3 3 2 2 4 4 4 4 3______ 4 3 3 2 4 4/ 5 3 2 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 5 3 2 4/ 5 2 2/ 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 5 4 3 4 4 5 3 2 4 4 5 3 2 4 4 5 3 2 4 4 5 3 2 4 4 5 3 2 4 4 20 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 18/14 14 14/10 9 4 4 4 4 5 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7/11 11 11/15 16 21 21 21 21 7 4 2 5/ 7 2 2/ 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 4 4 4 24 24 24 WINTER TERM Brody Spartan Commuter C i rc 1e Express Total Excess Capacity 7 5 3 5 5 7 4 2 5 5 7 4 2 5 5 7 4 2 5 5 7 4 2 5 5 7 4 2 5 5 7 4 2 5 5 7 4 2 5 5 25 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23/18 18 18/13 11/9 4 3 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5/10 10 10/15 17/19 24 7 4 2 5 5/ 7 4 2 5 SPRING TERM Brodv Spartan Commuter Ci re le Express 5 3 1 4/ 5 2 1/ 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 13 13/9 8/7 4 4 4 4 10 10 10/14 15/16 19 19 19 19 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 3 3 3 3 3 20 20 20 20 20 5 4 2 4 5 3 1 4 5 3 1 4 5 3 1 4 5 3 1 4 5 3 1 4 5 3 1 4 5 3 1 4 5 3 1 4 5 3 I 4 15 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 Excess Capacity 8 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Brody Spartan 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 Total 3 3 3 3 3 3 20 20 20 20 20 20 Tol nl SUMMER TERM Excess Capacity 200 1969-1970 W E E K E N D BUS UTIL IZA TI ON (Number of Buses) Fall 7 A.M. - 11 P.M. Brody 2 Spartan 2 Total 4 Excess Capacity 21 Winter Brody 2 Spartan 2 Total 4 Excess Capacity 24 Spring Brody 2 Spartan 2 Total 4 Excess Capacity 19 Summer Excess Capacity 23 APPEN D I X N Q U A R T E R L Y FINANCIAL STATEMENT A D JU ST ME NT DATA 201 APP E N D I X N Q U A R T E R L Y FINANCIAL STATEMENT AD JUSTMENT DA TA 1964-65 1965-66 1966-67 1967-68 --------' 1968-69 1/4 Annual Interest 4,648.37 5,336.32 6,035.79 5,493.11 4,479.68 1/4 Annual Overhead 750.00 750.00 750.00 750.00 750.00 Qu a r t e r l y P ur c h a s e Reserve Qu a r t e r l y Adjustment (5,387.37) (6,086.32) (6,785.79) 15,000 . 0 0 s 15,000.O O 3 8,756.89 9,770.32 £ Pu rc h a s e reserve transfer was not ma de summer quarter. NOTE: A dj ust ed Income = R ep or te d Income - 1/4 annual interest c ha r g e - 1/4 annual overhead + q u a r te rl y purchase reserve. APPENDIX 0 BUS S Y S T E M G U IDELINES AS DRAWN UP BY MICHIGAN STATE UNIVE RSI TY AND BLACK STUDENT GROUP 202 MI CH I G A N STATE UNI V E R S I T Y - CAMPUS BUS S Y ST EM G u id el in es for Pass en ger s 1. The buzzer cord to signal a desired stop should not be pulled until after the bus leaves or passes the pr eceding bus stop. The buzzer cord should be pulled in time to permit safe o p e rat io n of the bus as it approaches the desired stop. 2. Only the bearer of a pass will be allowed to ride the bus. O n c e the passenger has entered the bus, he cannot allow another individual to use his pass by ha n d i n g it out through the w i n d o w or to someone e xi ti ng the bus. 3. If a bus pass is mu ti lat ed or defaced, it will not be accepted as a legitimate pass. A mu tilated or defaced pass m a y be exchanged for a new one at no cost at Room #142, J o h n A. Hann ah A d m i n i s t r a t i o n Building. Expired bus passes are void and will not be honored. 4. Pas sengers should not walk in front of the bus upon exiting. gers should exit at the rear door and enter at the front door. 5. Passengers will be loaded at bus stops only. stand on the curb at the bus stop at any time. 6 . Pa ssengers No one should Passen­ sit or should refrain from c o n v e rs at io n w i t h the driver. 7. P as senger^ are not to stand in front of the wh i t e safety line at the entrance to the bus. The drivers are not to proceed if loading is such that the area in front of the wh ite line is oc cup ie d by passengers. 203 M I C H I G A N STATE U NIV E R S I T Y - CAMPUS BUS S Y ST EM Op e r a t i n g Gui d e l i n e s for Drivers 1. Buses will load and unload pas se nge rs at any time the bus is normally stopped at bus stops. U n l o a di ng at other locations where the vehicle is nor mally stopped m a y be pe rmitted by the driver if traffic conditions permit. The re will be no additional stops, wi th the exc ep ti on that blind passengers or c ri ppled p as sengers will be helped in any manner determined feasible by the driver. O n c e a bus has started in motion, loading of any additional passengers. to this guideline. it will not stop to allow the Shaw Lot will be the only exception Drivers will follo w the practice of common courtesy. Safe load limits, traffic conditions, and safety of the passenger and vehicle will be the factors d e t e r m i n i n g w h e n the driver will not permit additional passengers to load. S ta n d i n g p a ss eng er s must be behind the white line. 2. Drivers are to m a i n t a i n to the best of their abi lity a schedule that corres po nd s to the printed bus schedule. Time of de parture should not be before the scheduled time but can be after at the d i scr et io n of the driver. 3. C onv er sa ti on b et we en the driver and the rider will be limited to a courteous g ree ti ng and answers to direct questions. The re will be no talking between drivers and passen ge rs whil e the bus is in motion. 4. Initial contact wi th a pa ssenger by the driver should be verbal and performed in a cou rteous manner. Physical restraint of the passenger should not be employed by the driver. 5. If a p ro bl em occur s that threatens the security of the passenger, the driver, or the bus, the driver will have the prerogative to shut down the bus and to leave to call the approp ri at e authorities. W h e n so doing, the driver will remove the k e y and o p e n the two doors so that passengers will be able to exit and board other buses. 6 . The bus will not normally be pulled off its route for any reason per ta ini ng to conflict w it h p as sengers unless the driver determines the situation to be an emergency. 7. The driver will check all passes under normal op e r a t i n g conditions. W h e n a qu est io na bl e (forged - mut ilated) pass is presented, the driver will ask the rider for the pass and identification. The driver has the authority to conf is ca te a forged or mut il at ed pass. If a conflict occurs, the driver will ask the rider to leave the bus. If the rider refuses and further conflict is evident, the driver will have the prerogative to shut down the bus and to leave to call the appropriate authorities. Wh en so doing, the driver will remove the k ey and open the two doors so that passengers will be able to exit and board other buses. 204 . Bus drivers will wear ident if ica ti on tags and will also identify themselves at the request of a passenger. 8 APPEN D I X P AN NOUNCEMENT O F BUS S YS T E M BOYCOTT BY MEMBERS O F W O N D E R S D O R M COUNCIL 205 Dear Resident of South Complex, You are pro ba bl y aware of and have heard students c omp la i n i n g of the ine quality of bus service that our complex receives. As is evident, the other complexes have more efficient service. In addition, their buses run di re ct ly through m a i n campus. The me mbers of W ond er s General Council feel that it is time for South Complex to voice its complaints. Thus, we wou ld like to urge you t o , 1. 2. Revie w your spring term schedule, and if at all possible, do not buy a bus pass. We realize that in m a n y cases not buying a bus pass will be an impossibility. For those of you who must ride the busses spring term, we would like to suggest a line of action as demonst ra ti ve as b oy c o t t i n g the sale of passes. Every time a bus is late, every time a bus passes you by, every time you have to stand in the rain or a driver is di sco ur te ou s to you, please call the f o l l o wi ng number to voice your complaint. Call, 35280 Central Bus Services The important idea is m a k i n g the voice of South Complex heard outside of our dorms. We wou ld a p pr eci at e your co op er a t i o n and any suggestions. Sincerely, Vicki Jacobs 32328 J e a n M al esky 32465 Wo n d e r s General Council [NOTE: The telephone number given in this announ ce men t is listed in the MSU Tel eph on e D i r e c t o r y under the h e a d i n g of "Bus Service." In the evenings it is a ns wered by one of the mot or pool mechanics.] APPENDIX Q M E AD OW BR OO K T R A C E BUS S CHEDULE 206 I&TRR©B A <1 — 4 9 2 5 D U N C K EL RD . '■ j'fteo^mvbfcok T r a c e Bug l& hectuie : Lew s [ftsaclowkrcok T-iS A W g:3S A.m. M S AM. 10:SS A.m. iz:os p.m. i:iS p.m. &-IS p.m. 3:3s pm. +.'4? p.m. Leous 0kau> Lot, tTl^U 8:00 A,m. 9:10 Am. 10:20 A.m. 11:30 A.m. 12:40 pm. i :so p.m. 3:00 p.m. 4:10 p.m. 5:20 pm. Pick up a t trleftslouikraak Truce cm BeoudfodinlOr. by A-2, t C-l fand lb s >"■ II L A N SIN G , M ICH IG AN 4 8 9 1 0 P hone 5 1 7 /3 9 3 -0 2 1 0 T ree. BY K A SSU BA • T H E APA RTM EN T P E O P L E APPENDIX R RE S I D EN CY AND ENROLLMENT S TATISTICS FOR M ICH I G A N STATE UN I VE RS IT Y BY Q U A R T E R F R O M 1964 TO 1969 207 APPENDIX R RE SI DE NC Y AND E NR OLLMENT S T A TI STI CS FOR MIC HI GA N STATE UNIV ER SIT Y BY Q U A R T E R F R O M 1964 TO 1969 YEAR QUARTER 1964 Fall 31,268 17,945 1965 Winter 29,316 16,903 Spring 28,364 1 6 , 1 8 8 Summer 10,371 2,714 Fall 35,451 20,181 Winter 33,242 19,473 Spring 32,140 18,529 Summer 11,884 2,473 Fall 38,107 21,357 Winter 35,475 20,435 Spring 34,122 19,463 Summer 13,664 2,681 Fall 38,758 21,119 Winter 36,265 20,154 Spring 35,072 19,308 Summer 15,003 2,787 Fall 39,949 21,519 Winter 37,557 20,415 Spri ng 36,607 19,308 Summer 16,009 2,293 1966 1967 1968 1969 ENROLLMENT ’ RESIDENTS ON SOURCES: Office of the Registrar, M i c h i g a n State University, Annual R e p o r t , 1 9 6 9 ; D ivi si on of Do rmitories and Food Services, M i c h i g a n State University, "Weekly H o us in g Report." The total number of do rmitory res idents w a s taken from the 2nd we ek report for each quarter listed in this appendix. The estimated census for mar ried student ho u s i n g was obtained from Mr. J oh n Roetman, M an ag er of the MSU Ma r r i e d Ho u s i n g Office. APPENDIX S R E S ID EN CY AND R I D E RSH IP STATISTICS F O R M I C H I G A N STATE UN IVERSITY BY QU A R T E R F R O M 1964 TO 1969 208 R E S I D E N C Y A N D R I D E R S H I P STATISTICS F O R M I C H I G A N STATE UN IVERSITY BY QU A R T E R FROM 1964 TO 1969 Year Quarter 1964 1965 Fall Wint er Spring Summer Fall Winter Spring Summer Fall Winter Spring Summer Fall Winter Spring Summer Fall Winter Spring Summer 1966 1967 1968 1969 Re sidents on Campus 17,945 16,903 16,188 2,714 20,181 19,473 18,529 2,473 21,357 20,435 19,463 2,681 21,119 20,154 19,308 2,787 21,519 20,415 19,308 2,293 Bus Pass Sal 3,173 6,164 3,232 935 6,619 9,935 4,834 956 9,140 11,771 5,999 1,247 8,483 9,652 5,194 786 8,318 9,732 6 , 1 1 1 567 Per Cent Ri dership 17.7 36.5 20.0 34.5 32.8 51.0 26.1 38.7 42.8 57.6 30.8 46.5 42.1 47.9 26.9 28.2 38.7 47.7 31.7 24.7 SOURCES: The total numbe r of do rm it or y residents was taken from the second w e e k report for each quarter listed in this appendix. The estimated census for marr ied student h o u s i n g was obtained from Mr. John Roetman, M a n a g e r of the M S U M ar ri ed H ou si ng Office. This estimate was very ac cu ra te for the fall, winter, and spring quarter. Summer quarter, however, could not be estimated closely since it w as not kno w n h o w m a ny of the marri ed h o u s i n g residents attended school duri ng summer quarter. 209 Perc en tag e 60% of On-Campus Re sidents P u r ch as in g Bus Pass 50% Winter Quarter Fall Quarter 40% Summer Quarter (estimated) 30% Spri ng Quarter 20% - Da te of Price Increase 10% 0% F W S S 64-65 F W S S 65-66 F W S S F W 66-67 Ac ad e m i c Quarter S S 67-68 F W S S 68-69 Fig. S-l.— Bus pass sales trend am on g on-campus re si de nts only.