1. Urban Planning Question
urban planning writing question and need the explanation and answer to help me learn.
Complete an academic research report on transportation planning as required (this report
is already 10 pages long, fill in the content to meet the 20 page requirement) The report,
and the requirements and supporting materials are in the attachment
Requirements: 20 pages, already done 10 pages
Assignment 4 (SRP).Final Copy of YourSenior Research Project.The sections listed below are
typically included in a scholarly thesis. Please include these sections inyou SRP’s thesis.
Submit your completed thesis on Canvas and indicate if we have your permission toarchive
it (making it available for future students and others who may want to read
it).Section*Approximate lengthGrade Value (x/100)Cover Page with Abstract1
page5.0Introduction2-3 pages5.0Literature Review4-5 pages5.0Research Strategy2-4
pages5.0Findings and Analysis8-10 pages10.0Conclusion2-4 pages5.0Bibliographyten or
more peer reviewedpublications plus other sources5.040%*The page ranges listed above
are approximate.Cover Page (1 page)The first page should include your SRP title, your
name, university affiliation, abstract, four or fivekeywords, andthe start of your
introduction. SeeIllustration1at the end of this set of instructions.Please follow the
formatting shown inIllustration1. Be sure to include four of five keywords at thebase of
your abstract.The abstract should succinctly state in approximately 150 words the issue
addressed by your thesisand summarize its key findings. In contrast to the introduction, the
abstract is a self-containedsummary of the key highlights. An abstract should tell us what
are we going to learn from yourHonors Project that we do not know now and why is it
worth knowing.The abstract should be written in clear, non-technical language so that the
following questions couldbe answered by a member of the general public who reads
it:1.What was the specific purpose of the study?2.What information/research strategy did
you use to arrive at these findings (i.e., whatconceptual and methodological approach did
you use)?3.What are the main findings?Introduction (2-3 pages)Introduce your SRP’s main
argument, question or hypothesis. Why is this important or interesting?What is new about
it? While the original research component of the paper may be quite narrow inscope (e.g., a
case study of a particular program), the introduction should briefly set the stage byframe
your case in a broader context. The introduction also should give the reader an overview of
theorganization of the thesis. Many briefly mention their research strategy in the
introduction, but this isnot necessary. Subdivide your intro (and your whole thesis) into
2. sections with meaning full subtitles(i.e., headers that serve as clear signposts telling the
reader what to expect).Use the introduction to explain to the reader SRP how your study
will help us become moreknowledgeable about about poverty, community economic
development, inequality, industrial
ecology, climate action planning, class conflict, racism, social movements, NGO networking,
orwhatever you chose as the object of your investigation. What will we learn from you
study? Whatkind of questions do you raise about your object of study (i.e., what really
happened? how can wechange this? why did it happen? what's going to happen next? how
can we make people understand?).There is a balance to be struck between what you include
in the intro and the lit review. These sectionsshould be mutually reinforcing without being
redundant.VERY IMPORTANT! Make sure your introduction is an introduction to your SRP
thesis, not to thetopic in general.In other words, make sure you don'tprovide such a broad
background to the topicthat it takes pages to get to your argument (this explains our limit of
2-3 pages). You should give athumbnail sketch of where you’re going to go before you delve
too deeply into background.Sometimes students do not give this thumbnail sketch because
they expect the abstract to be doingthat. Don’t consider the abstract as part of the paper, but
rather a separate summary. (This can create asense of deja vu when you read an abstract
and then read the opening paragraphs of an article, butthat's ok.)Literature Review (4-5
pages)The Literature Review synthesizes existing answers to the same or similar questions.
The literaturereview should not include every work under the sun that is related to your
topic. The literature reviewis not the same as an annotated bibliography (an annotated
bibliography simply lists a series ofsummaries of relevant books and articles). Your
literature review should be integrated. It should beorganized around your main theme or
argument.Think of the literature review as the place to orient your reader to the intellectual
terrain of your topic(i.e., the fields of pertinent scholarly discourse on your subject matter).
Drawing on the work ofothers, your literature review should make clear the assumptions,
reasoning, and arguments thatinform your study. In examining a specific setting or set of
individuals, the writer should show howshe is studying a case of a larger phenomenon.By
linking the specific research questions to larger theoretical constructs or to national policy
issues,the writer shows that the particulars of the study serve to illuminate larger issues
and, therefore, are ofsignificance. Here you show that you know the important work that
has been done in the field andwhat is currently being undertaken. If you know of other
people doing research which sounds verysimilar to your own, explain the crucial
differences, and the additional advantages of being able tocompare the findings of the
studies. When making reference to literature, use Chicago Styleparenthetical citations--for
example: (Smith, 1985: 24), or "Smith (1985: 24) found that..." Allreferenced items must
have a complete citation in the bibliography.Research Strategy (2-4 pages)Here you explain
your research design and your logic for choosing particular methods (why, forinstance, did
you choose to do interviews, content analysis, and/or archival research). Your
researchdesign is your "action plan for getting from here to there, where here may be
defined as the initial setof questions to be answered, and there is some set of conclusions
(answers) about these questions"(Yin 1994: 19). Describe your research strategy
(methodology) so the reader understands what youdid. Identify any shortcomings of your
3. strategy. Define necessary terms. This is not the place to go onand on about the ordinary
trials and tribulations of doing the research (i.e., how difficult it was gettinga hold of a key
informant, the fact that your topic was a moving target and changed over time). Hereyou
have to convince the reader that your approach was rigorous and based in social
sciencemethods-be they qualitative or quantitative. The length of this section can vary
depending on the kindof research you conducted. Someone doing an inductive qualitative
research project will have less to
say about research design than someone doing quantitative hypothesis testing (the former
may needmore room to discuss their findings while the latter may need less).Findings and
Analysis (8-10 pages)Describe your research findings. The descriptive component should
report what you found. Usediagrams, maps, graphs, tables, charts or other illustrations
where appropriate. Depending on the sizeof your maps, tables, and/or illustrations you may
want to include them in an appendix. Anything thattakes up more than one-half a page
should probably go in an appendix. Don't go overboard. If you dodecide to include
attachments, limit yourself to one or two pages. All small diagrams or tables shouldbe
folded into the text. The analysis component should interpret your findings and consider
theimplications for the research question you addressed.Conclusion (2-4
pages)Themaintaskhereistoreiteratethemainpointsofyourstudy,andtosuggestwhyyouthinki
tmatters.Whataretheimplicationsofyourresearch?Whatquestionsremainunanswered?Based
onyourfindings,youmaywanttosuggestanagendaforfurtherstudy,orpointtogapsinpolicythatn
eed to be addressed.Appendices (Optional, 1-3 pages)Appendices can include supporting
documentation such as charts, diagrams, maps, etc., that don'teasily fit into the body of the
text. Tables and charts presenting the research findings should be placedin the text, not in
an appendix.BibliographyInclude at least ten peer reviewed sources in addition to your
other non-academic and primarysources). Please use the Chicago Manual of Style or some
other professional style used in peerreviewed journals. We prefer that you use the Chicago
Manual of Style, but if you are familiar withanother professional style, then you can use that
but be consistent.
UCSD CAMPUS BIKE SITUATION: TRANSPORTATION BENEFIT OR BURDEN?
Abstract:
This project intends to investigate techniques for increasing the number of students on
campus who choose to ride bicycles and enhancing the general experience of biking on the
UCSD campus as a whole. The research will focus on identifying the main barriers to bike
usage among students and developing solutions to address these challenges. The study will
examine factors such as bicycle accidents and insecurity on campus and explore ways to
minimize these issues. Additionally, the study will investigate methods for promoting biking
as a sustainable mode of transportation on campus. This study will provide valuable
insights into how to promote and support biking on campus effectively through an analysis
of data collected from surveys, interviews, and focus groups. The long-term objective is to
make it easier and more secure for students to ride their bikes on campus to persuade more
of them to adopt this method of transportation.
Key Words: Micro-mobility, Bike situation, Bike-friendly environment, Campus
Transportation, personal transportation devices
4. Introduction:
Cities and towns all over the globe are confronting significant transportation challenges.
Rapid urbanization, rising population growth, and increased vehicle ownership have all
contributed to increased traffic congestion, air pollution, and greenhouse gas emissions. As
a consequence, promoting environmentally friendly modes of transportation is more
important than ever. Bicycles are an excellent example of a sustainable method of
transportation that benefits both people and the environment. They are an environmentally
friendly and efficient transportation method that can help reduce traffic congestion, air
pollution, and carbon emissions. Cycling also encourages physical exercise and has been
shown to improve mental health, cardiovascular health, and overall well-being (Pretty,
2007).
Over the past ten years, university campus planners have earnestly attempted to promote
accessibility and mobility without compromising the campus' status as a distinctive
community. In particular, factors such as growing traffic, lack of adequate parking space,
growing community expectations of air quality standards, and exorbitant costs involved in
building parking structures drive up the price of parking areas. Planning for the present and
future transportation infrastructure and services on and off campus is part of the University
Master Plan's transportation component to accommodate campus users and the
surrounding community's mobility demands (Aldrete Sanchez,2010). Because of
insufficient funding and the need to mitigate the impact of traffic on nearby communities,
prominent universities are gradually transitioning to ecologically friendly methods to
reduce traffic and enhance the safety of all campus transportation users (Poinsatte & Toor,
2001).
Bicycling is a popular mode of transportation for many college students, providing a
convenient, cost-effective, and environmentally friendly way to get around campus.
However, several barriers, such as concerns about accidents and insecurity, can discourage
students from cycling. Additionally, despite the many benefits of biking, some campuses
may need the infrastructure or culture in place to fully support and encourage biking as a
viable transportation option. The main questions of this study are how to get more campus
students to ride bikes and how to improve the biking experience on campus. Here's an
example: The University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign (UIUC) has also established a
separate bike lane. This illustrates how bike lanes on campus can enhance access to
personal transportation devices (PTDs) and promote safety. Thus, the institution can take
full advantage of the potential of the bikeway network. (Gharaibeh N, 1998)This study will
explore how to minimize bicycle accidents and bicycle insecurity on campus and make
bicycling a sustainable mode of transportation that is welcome on campus.
This research paper's primary objective is to identify effective strategies for promoting
cycling on the University of California San Diego (UCSD) campus and to recommend that
universities and colleges promote cycling as a primary mode of transportation. The
research findings will contribute to the literature on sustainable transportation and
enlighten campus policymakers and administrators about the most effective strategies for
promoting cycling on campus. Through a combination of surveys, interviews, and focus
groups, this study will gather data from students, staff, and faculty to comprehensively
5. understand the current state of campus biking and identify improvement opportunities. In
conclusion, this research paper highlights the importance of cycling on the UCSD campus,
which benefits the environment and promotes health and wellness. With the appropriate
interventions, universities and colleges can encourage their students, faculty, and staff to
use bicycles as a primary mode of transportation, leading to a more sustainable and healthy
UCSD campus community.
Literature Review:
This study highlights the importance of addressing near misses and collision experiences to
reduce the perceived threat of danger for cyclists and promote cycling as a viable mode of
transportation. The findings of the study provide valuable insights that can be used to
develop strategies to make cycling safer and more appealing for individuals. One way to
improve the safety of cycling is by investing in infrastructure improvements such as
separated bike lanes, calming traffic measures, and intersection design that prioritizes the
safety of cyclists (Jacobsen, 2015). These measures can help to reduce the risk of collisions
and near misses, which in turn can reduce the perceived threat of danger for cyclists.
Another way to improve cycling safety is through education and awareness campaigns.
These campaigns can inform cyclists and drivers about road rules and promote safe
behavior. (Schepers, 2017) Additionally, campaigns that promote the use of safety
equipment, such as helmets, can also help to reduce the risk of injury in the event of a
collision.
In summary, Sanders' study is an important contribution to the literature on the perceived
threat of danger for cyclists. It highlights the need to address near misses and collision
experiences to reduce the perceived threat of danger and promote cycling as a viable mode
of transportation. The study provides valuable insights that can be used to develop
strategies to make cycling safer and more appealing for individuals. By addressing the
factors that contribute to the perceived threat of danger, we can create a more bike-friendly
environment that encourages more people to choose biking as their mode of transportation.
The study by Sanders (2015) on "Perceived traffic risk for cyclists: The impact of near miss
and collision experiences" provides important insights into the relationship between
cyclists' experiences and their perceived threat of danger. The study found that cyclists who
reported experiencing near misses or collisions had significantly higher levels of perceived
traffic risk than those who did not. Additionally, the number of near misses and collision
experiences was positively associated with perceived traffic risk. This suggests that
addressing near misses and collisions can effectively improve the cycling experience and
ultimately increase cycling participation. One of the study's key findings is the importance
of addressing near misses and collision experiences to reduce the perceived threat of
danger for cyclists. This is supported by other studies that have highlighted the importance
of safety measures, such as wearing a bicycle helmet, in reducing the risk of injury in the
event of a collision. (Olivier, 2017)
Overall, Sanders' study is an important contribution to the literature on the perceived threat
of danger for cyclists. It highlights the need to address near misses and collision experiences
to reduce the perceived threat of danger and promote cycling as a viable mode of
transportation. The study provides valuable insights that can be used to develop strategies
6. to make cycling safer and more appealing for students on the UCSD campus. By addressing
the factors contributing to the perceived threat of danger, the study can help create a more
bike-friendly campus environment that encourages more students to choose biking as their
mode of transportation.
Research Strategy:
Data on the quantity and locations of bike racks, bike lockers, and other facilities, as well as
the present infrastructure already available to cyclists on campus, will also be gathered as
part of the study. This data can be used to pinpoint locations that require extra bike parking
or other amenities. The survey will also collect information on the opinions and perceptions
of faculty, staff, and students on biking on campus. These data will be gathered through
surveys, focus groups, and interviews. The information will be examined to determine the
primary obstacles to bike use on campus, such as lack of parking for bikes, fear of danger,
and ignorance of biking on campus. Using this knowledge, measures can be created to
remove these obstacles and encourage riding as a practical form of transportation on
campus. Additionally, the project will use data analysis to pinpoint campus locations where
bicycle accidents are most likely to occur and investigate solutions, such as making
necessary infrastructure upgrades and launching awareness campaigns.
Based on the research study, the data collection plan will involve the following steps:
Surveys: Surveys will be undertaken to acquire information on the attitudes and
perceptions of teachers, staff, and students about biking on campus. The surveys will gather
data on the present state of biking on the UCSD campus and identify areas for improvement.
For the Survey, approximately 30-50 random passersby on campus will be asked the
following questions.
Are you likely to ride a bike in the area?
What stops you from riding a bike?
If so, how often?
Do you think the lack of bike lanes poses a safety risk to cyclists?
Is there a need for a plan for bicycle development on campus? Such as more bike lanes or
bike racks.
Based on these survey questions, the research will likely gather information on the
following:
Participants' likelihood to ride a bike in the area: The response to the first question can
provide information on the participants' willingness to ride a bike.
Barriers to bike riding: The second question can provide insight into the reasons why
participants are not riding bikes, such as safety concerns, lack of infrastructure, or personal
preference.
Frequency of bike riding: The third question can provide information on how often
participants ride bikes, if at all.
Perceived safety risk posed by the lack of bike lanes: The fourth question can provide
information on the participants' views on riding bikes in areas without bike lanes.
Need for a plan for bicycle development on campus: The final question can provide
information on the participants' views on the need for bike infrastructure improvements,
such as additional bike lanes or bike racks.
7. Overall, these survey questions can provide valuable information on participants'
experiences and attitudes toward bike riding and the factors that influence their decisions
to ride bikes. The information gathered from the responses can be used to identify areas for
improvement to promote bike riding on campus and make it a more accessible and
convenient mode of transportation.
Focus groups: Focus groups will be held to acquire input from a smaller group of
participants in a more interactive and conversational setting. The focus groups will allow
participants to share their experiences and thoughts regarding biking on campus and
debate potential solutions to the identified impediments.
Observational methods: Observational methods will be utilized to collect data on the
number and locations of bike racks, bike lockers, and other campus facilities. This
information can be used to identify areas that require more bike parking or other facilities.
The research will also observe the use of bicycles by students at different times in the
school and determine whether the most frequent use of bicycles is related to the location of
the bicycle facilities.
Data analysis: The data acquired from surveys, focus groups, and observational methods
will be analyzed to identify the critical barriers to bike use on campus and the potential for
improvement.
The data collection plan intends to collect thorough information from multiple sources to
provide a comprehensive knowledge of the current riding condition on the UCSD campus
and to identify the potential for improvement. The study will be able to collect both
quantitative and qualitative data by utilizing a variety of data-gathering methods, allowing
it to provide informed suggestions for promoting and supporting biking on the UCSD
campus.
All in all, this research study aimed to examine methods for boosting the proportion of
students who prefer to bike to class and enhancing the campus riding environment in
general. The study will offer insightful information on how to successfully support and
promote riding on campus, which will ultimately inspire more students to use this mode of
transportation. The project will gather information on the current state of biking on the
UCSD campus and pinpoint areas for improvement using a variety of data collection
techniques, including questionnaires, interviews, focus groups, and observational
approaches.
Findings and Analysis:
This research study aims to investigate the potential for sustainable campus construction by
analyzing the traffic distribution data of three different methods. Through the examination
of data collected from various sources such as surveys, interviews, and observational
methods, the study found that students have many misconceptions and mistrusts about
bicycles which have contributed to the lack of development of bicycles as a primary mode of
transportation on campus.
One of the main barriers identified in the study is the perceived threat of danger associated
with cycling. Many students are concerned about the safety of bicycles, as there have been
some collisions between bicycles and pedestrians or cars on campus. Additionally, the study
found that bicycles share some roads with the campus population, leading to bicycle
8. accidents on the UCSD campus. In response to this problem, the study suggests that
bicyclists can greatly reduce their risk of injury or death by taking precautions before and
while riding. Such as wearing a helmet and that campus planners can design sensible bike
lanes that separate bicyclists from other modes of transportation to reduce bicycle
accidents (Olivier, 2017).
Another barrier identified in the study is the problem of bicycle theft on campus. Some
students consider that bicycle thefts have been frequent and that campus police do not
address these well. The study suggests that users need to get into the habit of locking their
bikes and that campus police should be more vigilant about this type of bicycle theft in
order to keep the campus environment safe.
The study also found that the need for infrastructure, such as bike racks and bike lanes, is
another barrier to bike usage on campus. The study suggests that increasing the number of
bike racks and bike lanes on campus can make biking more convenient and appealing for
students.
In conclusion, this research study aimed to investigate the potential for sustainable campus
construction by analyzing the traffic distribution data of three different methods. The study
found that students need more clarification and trust in bicycles, contributing to the need
for more development of bicycles as a primary mode of transportation on campus. The
study suggests that addressing the barriers to bike usage on campus, such as the perceived
threat of danger, bicycle thefts, and lack of infrastructure, can make biking more appealing
and safer for students.
Conclusion:
In conclusion, this research study aimed to investigate strategies for increasing the number
of students on campus who choose to ride bicycles and improving the overall biking
experience. The study used a combination of surveys, interviews, and focus groups to gather
data from students, staff, and professors to identify the main barriers to bike usage among
students and develop solutions to address these challenges. This study will concentrate on
problems and background data about the evolution of sustainable on-campus mobility at UC
San Diego. University campuses sustainable transportation development goal is to consider
the potential to construct sustainable campuses from a micro-mobility(like bicycle) design
viewpoint. In general, university campuses support a shift from vehicles to alternative
forms of transportation, notably biking and walking (Carlos JL, 2003). Overall, this research
provides valuable insights into how to promote and support biking on campus effectively,
ultimately encouraging more students to choose this mode of transportation.
Bibliography
1: Aldrete-Sanchez, Rafael, Jeff Shelton, and Ruey Long Cheu. 2010. Integrating the
transportation system with a university campus transportation master plan: a case study.
Texas Transportation Institute.rosap.ntl.bts.gov/view/dot/17903
2: Poinsatte, F., Toor, W., 2001. Finding a New Way: Campus Transportation for the 21st
Century, 2nd ed, University of Colorado, Boulder.
3: Jacobsen, P. L. 2015. Safety in numbers: more walkers and bicyclists, safer walking and
bicycling. Injury prevention, 21(4), 271-275.
4: Gharaibeh, N., Wilson, C., Darter, M., and Jones, G., 1998. Development of a bike path
9. management system for the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. Transportation
Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 1636, 5663.
5: Sanders, R. L. (2015). Perceived traffic risk for cyclists: The impact of near miss and
collision experiences. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 75, 26-34.
6: Olivier, J., & Creighton, P. (2017). Bicycle injuries and helmet use: a systematic review and
meta-analysis. International journal of epidemiology, 46(1), 278-292
7: Balsas, Carlos JL. 2003. “Sustainable Transportation Planning on College Campuses.”
Transport Policy 10 (1): 35–49,doi.org/10.1016/S0967-070X(02)00028-8
8: Schepers, P., Twisk, D., Fishman, E., Fyhri, A., & Jensen, A. 2017. The Dutch road to a high
level of cycling safety. Safety science, 92, 264-273.
9:Pretty, J., Peacock, J., Hine, R., Sellens, M., South, N., & Griffin, M. (2007). Green exercise in
the UK countryside: Effects on health and psychological well-being, and implications for
policy and planning. Journal of environmental planning and management, 50(2), 211-231.
