Commuter-traffic reductions sought during peak hours
BY MICHAEL PEÑA
Provost John Etchemendy has asked university managers to help find ways to quickly and permanently reduce by 10 to 15 percent the number of employees who drive alone to campus during morning and evening peak commute hours.
The voluntary reductions will help the university comply with Santa Clara County requirements, outlined in a General Use Permit (GUP), that limit morning and evening commuter traffic during peak hours to within 1 percent of baseline levels established in 2001. Under the terms of the GUP, traffic counts are done twice a year to record the number of cars arriving on campus in the morning and leaving in the evening.
In addition to recommending that employees be encouraged to carpool and participate in existing alternative transportation programs, the provost suggested that managers:
Since 2001, the university has managed to keep the number of commute trips beneath allowed limits, despite significant increases in the number of university employees, the provost wrote in a July 12 memo sent to deans, directors and department heads.
However, "the last traffic study shows us very close to the limit imposed by the GUP, and the trends suggest we will soon exceed it unless we act aggressively," he wrote. Although both morning and evening peak commute hours are approaching the allowed limits, the evening commute is the most problematic, the provost said.
An average of 40 traffic counts taken in the spring and fall of 2004 showed Stanford to be under the evening limit by only 14 trips; and in 2002, the university came within five trips of reaching the limit, said Brodie Hamilton, director of Parking and Transportation Services (P&TS). The net number of commute trips is calculated not only by traffic counts but also by applying transportation "credits" for university programs, such as shuttles, that reduce traffic within a specified area surrounding the campus.
Under the terms of the GUP, if the university is unable to keep peak commute traffic levels within allowable limits, it must help pay for modifications to more than a dozen roadway intersections in the area—a requirement that would cost millions, Hamilton said.
In the memo, the provost also addressed the possibility of raising parking permit prices. "If our voluntary efforts fail, we may have to turn to other measures, including substantial changes in parking permit policies and pricing," Etchemendy wrote.
"There are penalties that will be imposed if we cannot stay below the limits," Etchemendy said in an interview this week. However, he and President John Hennessy consider other factors to be more important than the penalties, he said.
"First, the surrounding community has, through the GUP requirement and other actions, demonstrated its desire to hold down regional traffic, and Stanford should do its part to achieve this goal," he said. "Second, the larger environmental benefits of cutting the number of commute trips are goals that, as a major employer, we should strive to achieve."
Etchemendy cited alternative transportation programs created by P&TS as a model for local employers. He credited the programs with helping the university keep the number of commute trips below the baseline levels as the number of employees has grown.
"Stanford is already a national leader in the alternative transportation programs it provides and in the number of employees who actually use them," he said. "The immediate impetus for this may be the requirements of the GUP, but the larger benefits are to regional traffic, air quality and the environment. Stanford can and should demonstrate leadership in this arena as it does in research and teaching, and everyone who comes to campus on a daily basis can play a role in that."
Between spring 2002 and spring 2004, the number of employees who reported that they drove to work alone decreased from 72 percent to 63 percent, according to an annual commute survey conducted by P&TS. Hamilton said introduction of the Eco Pass and the GO Pass contributed significantly to the drop.
In the memo, Etchemendy asked that managers identify the work hours and commute schedules of their employees, focusing on those who drive alone during the peak periods. He then suggested a number of ways in which those employees' commuting practices could be changed, including offering them the opportunity to work a non-traditional schedule.
Etchemendy has asked Hamilton and the P&TS staff to assist offices and offer advice in the weeks ahead, including giving presentations on alternative transportation options, incentive programs and commute planning. Exactly how the commute-pattern data from individual university offices will be gathered and assessed is being developed, Hamilton said. In the memo, Etchemendy asked to hear back from offices on their progress by Aug. 31.
Hamilton acknowledged that the ability to voluntarily change commute patterns might vary among different offices. A smaller office with strict hours of operation may have less flexibility than an office with more employees. Managers of larger offices may consider whether normal operations require that every worker show up at the same time in the morning, Hamilton said.
He added that employees with inflexible schedules might be ideal candidates for carpools and vanpools. Meanwhile, workers who have to take their children to daycare may welcome the opportunity to come in to work earlier and leave earlier, Hamilton said.
"We're looking at this as a program where employees will hopefully give their best effort. But we know there will be some challenges in some cases," Hamilton said. "When we look at the fact that there are over 63 percent of employees who are single-occupancy drivers, we feel we have some room to work."
P&TS has done a remarkable job "enticing people out of their cars," Etchemendy said. "But to keep this up, we need a more conscious effort on the part of everyone who works at the university."
Share This Story