UBC Social Ecological Economic Development Studies (SEEDS) Student Report Sustainable Transportation Solutions for UBC Athletics & Recreation Adam Dreihaar, Kailee Hirsche, Kyuwon Kim, Suzanne Yuen University of British Columbia APSC 364 March 1, 2012 Disclaimer: “UBC SEEDS provides students with the opportunity to share the findings of their studies, as well as their opinions, conclusions and recommendations with the UBC community. The reader should bear in mind that this is a student project/report and is not an official document of UBC. Furthermore readers should bear in mind that these reports may not reflect the current status of activities at UBC. We urge you to contact the research persons mentioned in a report or the SEEDS Coordinator about the current status of the subject matter of a project/report”.             APSC  364        [SUSTAINABLE  TRANSPORTATION  SOLUTIONS  FOR  UBC  ATHLETICS  &  RECREATION]  March  2012  By  Adam  Dreihaar,  Kailee  Hirsche,  Kyuwon  Kim  &  Suzanne  Yuen  [TRANSPORTATION  GROUP  2]   APSC  364      1    Table  of  Contents  LIST  OF  TABLES   2  LIST  OF  FIGURES   2  1.0  INTRODUCTION   3  2.0  BACKGROUND   3  2.1  UBC  TRANSPORTATION  SYSTEM   3  2.2  UBC  A&R  CURRENT  TRANSPORTATION  SYSTEM   4  2.3  ECONOMIC  IMPACT  CONSIDERATIONS   5  2.4  ENVIRONMENTAL  IMPACT  CONSIDERATIONS   5  2.5  SOCIAL  IMPACT  CONSIDERATIONS   6  2.6  JURISDICTIONS   6  2.7  EFFECTS   7  3.0  SUSTAINABLE  TRANSPORTATION  OPTIONS   7  3.1  UBC  THUNDERBIRDS  TRANSIT  PROGRAM   8  3.2  THUNDERBIRDS  AS  AN  AGENT  OF  CHANGE   9  3.3  UBC  ATHLETICS  &  RECREATION  BICYCLE  INCENTIVES   10  3.4  UBC  ATHLETICS  &  RECREATION  COMMUNICATION  &  AWARENESS  STRATEGIES   11  4.0  SUSTAINABILITY  INDICATOR  MATRIX   12  5.0  OUR  FINDINGS   13  6.0  RECOMMENDED  ACTION  FOR  UBC  A&R   13  7.0  REFERENCES   15  APPENDIX  A:  SUSTAINABILITY  INDICATOR  MATRIX   18  APPENDIX  B:  TABLES  &  FIGURES   21  APPENDIX  C:  ALTERNATE  SUSTAINABLE  TRANSPORTATION  OPTIONS   25  APPENDIX  C.1  ALTERNATE  OPTION:  WEBCASTING  UBC  SPORTS  EVENTS   25  APPENDIX  C.2  ALTERNATE  OPTION:  RIDE-­‐SHARING  APP   26  APPENDIX  C.3  ALTERNATE  OPTION:  UBC  THUNDERBIRDS  SHUTTLE  SERVICES   28        [TRANSPORTATION  GROUP  2]   APSC  364      2    List  of  Tables  TABLE  1:  SPECTATOR  TRANSPORTATION  COSTS   5  TABLE  2:  BICYCLING  INCENTIVES   10  TABLE  3:  CHANGE  IN  PERSON  TRIPS  BY  MODE  FROM  1997  TO  2010   21  TABLE  4:  IMPACT  OF  FARESAVER  TICKETS  ON  REVENUE   22  TABLE  5:  IMPACT  ON  REVENUE  FOR  REGULAR  SEASON  AND  PLAYOFF  GAMES   23  TABLE  6:  CO₂E  EMISSIONS  REDUCTION   24  TABLE  7:  WEBCASTING  IMPACTS  &  IMPLICATIONS   26  TABLE  8:  RIDE-­‐SHARE  APP  IMPACTS  &  IMPLICATIONS   27      List  of  Figures  FIGURE  1:  MODE  SHARE  DISTRIBUTIONS   21    [TRANSPORTATION  GROUP  2]   APSC  364      3    1.0  Introduction  UBC  Athletics  and  Recreation  (UBC  A&R)  already  has  a   leadership  role   in  maintaining  school  spirit  and  modelling  positive  sportsmanship.    The  University  of  British  Columbia  (UBC)  as  an  institution  is  striving  to  be  a  world-­‐leader  in  sustainability,  so  it  is  fitting  that  UBC  A&R  has  begun  looking  for  ways  to  become  a  leader  on  campus  in  this  avenue  as  well.    A  life-­‐cycle  analysis  of  a  UBC  basketball  event  revealed  that  about   three   quarters   of   associated   greenhouse   gas   emissions   came   from   the   transportation   of   team  members   and   spectators   (Dolf   et   al.,   2011).    Consequently,   a   focus   on   transportation   is   necessary   to  improve  the  sustainability  of  UBC  A&R’s  events.    The  following  study  assesses  the  current  state  of  UBC  A&R’s   transportation   solutions   and   explores   four   options   for   reducing   associated   greenhouse   gas  emissions.    Each  of  these  four  options  is  evaluated  with  a  matrix  of  indicators  to  pinpoint  the  strengths  and  weaknesses  of  each  option.    Finally,  UBC  A&R   is  provided  with   recommendations   for   leading  UBC  into  a  more  sustainable  future.  2.0  Background  The  transportation  options  available  to  spectators,  staff  and  participants  at  UBC  Athletics  &  Recreation  events   have   a   large   influence   on   UBC   A&R’s   ability   to   set   and   meet   sustainability   targets   for   their  operations.   In   order   to  make   changes   to   the   current   transportation   systems   and   to   set   realistic   goals  around  sustainability,  an  understanding  of  the  current  transportation  systems  for  UBC  and  for  UBC  A&R  is   required.   This   section   briefly   outlines   the   current   transportation   patterns   at  UBC   and   for  UBC  A&R  sports  events.  Some  of  the  current  cost  implications  to  both  parties  are  presented,  as  well  as  the  social  and  environmental  impacts  that  these  transportation  systems  have  on  UBC  and  the  surrounding  areas.  In  order   to  outline  the  difficulties   that  may  be  encountered  when  attempting  to  make  changes   to   the  current   transportation   system,  a  description  of   the   jurisdictions  governing   transportation   to  and   from  UBC  and  the  populations  that  may  be  affected  by  these  changes  are  included.  2.1  UBC  Transportation  System  The  past  13  years  has  seen  significant  changes  in  the  modes  of  travel  to  and  from  UBC.  According  to  the  UBC  Fall   2010  Transportation  Status  Report,   the  main  modes  of   transportation   include   transit,   single-­‐occupant  vehicles   (SOV’s),  high-­‐occupancy  vehicles   (HOV’s),  bicycles,  on   foot  and  others   such  as   truck  and  motorcycle  (UBC  TP,  2011).  The   UBC   Fall   2010   Transportation   Status   Report   provides   a   summary   of   the   transportation   data  collected   between   1997   and   2010   and   examines   the   trends   seen   over   this   time.   Of   particular  significance   is   the   increased   use   of   public   transit:   over   13   years,   an   increase   of   233%  was   seen  with  ridership   more   than   tripling.   This   increase   is   largely   attributed   to   the   introduction   of   the   U-­‐Pass   in  September   2003,   which   is   a   subsidized   transit   pass   for   UBC   students.   A   full   summary   of   the  transportation  modes  in  1997  and  2010  are  provided  in  Appendix  B.    According   to   the  UBC  2009  Vancouver  Transportation  Survey   (a  survey  of  UBC  students,   staff,   faculty,  residents  and  other  employees),  the  majority  of  transit  users  are  students.  62%  of  students  and  44%  of  [TRANSPORTATION  GROUP  2]   APSC  364      4    staff  claimed  to  use  transit  everyday,  while  only  22%  of  residents  and  faculty  made  the  same  claim.  It  is  noted  in  the  report  that  faculty  and  visitors  use  transit  the  least,  and  that  the  use  of  transit  by  students  is  mostly  due   to   the  U-­‐Pass   system  (UBC  TP,  2010).  This  demonstrates   that   the  mode-­‐share   to  UBC   is  affected  by  the  payment  structure  for  transit.  There   are   currently   six   express   bus   routes   into   UBC   (routes   43,   44,   84,   258,   480,   and   the   99   B-­‐line)  which,  when  combined,  make  up  63%  of  trips  to  and  from  UBC  (TransLink,  n.d.;  UBC,  2011).  According  to  TransLink’s  website,   five   of   these   routes   travel   between  UBC   and   a   SkyTrain   station   (TransLink,   n.d.),  suggesting  that  a  large  portion  of  trips  made  to  UBC  originate  from  far-­‐afield.  2.2  UBC  A&R  Current  Transportation  System  Athletics  and  Recreation  at  UBC  employs  approximately  100  persons  and  manages  the  over  20  venues  which  are  home  to  30  UBC  Thunderbirds  sports  teams  (Dolf,  2012).  Many  of  these  venues  host  events  that   attract   50,   000   spectators   annually   (Dolf,   2012),   resulting   in   significant   volumes   of   travel   to   and  from  UBC.  A  survey  by  UBC  Athletics  &  Recreation  of  eight  UBC  Thunderbirds  events  in  found  that  66%  of  staff  and  spectators   travelled  an  average  of  107  km  by  car,  with  an  average  vehicle  occupancy  rate  of  2.7   (Dolf  2012).  Approximately  one  in  ten  participants  arrived  by  city  bus  and  one  in  seven  chose  to  walk  or  cycle  to  the  events.      [TRANSPORTATION  GROUP  2]   APSC  364      5    2.3  Economic  Impact  Considerations  Below   is   a   table   outlining   the   costs   that   spectators   pay   for   a   one-­‐way   trip   to   a   UBC   Athletics   &  Recreation   event,   based   on   the   average   distances   travelled.   Currently,   UBC   A&R   does   not   pay   for   or  subsidize  spectator  travel.    Table  1:  Spectator  Transportation  Costs  Travel  Mode   Average  Distance  (km)  Average  Vehicle  Occupancy  Cost  of  Trip  per  Person  Notes  on  Cost   Source  Car   107   2.7   $4.64  ($12.52  if  SOV)  Fuel  efficiency:  9.0L/100km  Cost  of  gas:  $1.30/L    Walk   4   1   $0.00   No  charge    Bus  City   32   1   $5.00   32  km  =  3  zones,  Rate  applies  to  adults   Translink,  n.d.  Bus  Coach   77   1   $10-­‐15   Greyhound  tickets  vary  depending  on  time  of  travel   Greyhound,  2011  Plane   2814   1   $200-­‐$400   Using  trip  from  Winnipeg  to  Vancouver  to  represent  distance  of  2800  km  Varies  with  distance  and  time  Flight  Network,  2012  Bike   5   1   $0.00   No  marginal  cost;  Cost  of  bike  is  fixed  and  variable    All  distances  and  vehicle  occupancies  retrieved  from  Dolf,  2012.  2.4  Environmental  Impact  Considerations  The  environmental   impacts  of   travel   to  and  from  UBC  are   largely  attributable  to  vehicle   traffic.    A  Life  Cycle   Analysis   of   a   UBC   Thunderbirds   basketball   game   attributed   100%   of   transportation-­‐related   CO2  emissions  to  car  and  bus  traffic  (SOV’s  contribute  the  most  per  capita  emissions).  In  order  to  reduce  the  carbon   footprint   of   transportation   to   and   from   UBC   games,   the   number   of   SOV’s   must   be   reduced;  increasing   car   occupancy   to  people   reduces  per  person  emission   levels   to  below   that   of   transit   (Dolf,  2012).    This   is   particularly   important   to   note   given   that   68%   of   spectators   at   the   basketball   game  travelled   by   car   (Dolf,   2012).  While   vehicle   traffic   is   important   to   target,   an   analysis   of   more   sports  events  revealed  that  a  surprising  4.5%  of  spectators  flew  to  Vancouver  to  attend  the  event  (Dolf,  2012).  Combined,   vehicle   and   airplane   travel   are   responsible   for   the   bulk   of   the   CO2-­‐equivalent   (CO2e)  emissions  associated  with  UBC  A&R  events.  While   CO2   is   a   major   concern   due   to   its   effects   on   the   climate,   there   are   a   number   of   other  environmental   impacts  associated  with  vehicle  transit.    These  include  direct  emissions  of  methane  and  nitrous   oxide,   as   well   as   fugitive   emissions   of   HCFCs   associated   with   mobile   air   conditioning   (B.C.  [TRANSPORTATION  GROUP  2]   APSC  364      6    Ministry   of   Environment,   2011).    Other   environmental   impacts   of   transport   to   and   from  UBC   include  gradual  damage  to  roadways,  particularly  associated  with  heavy  trucks  (UBC  TP,  2011).  2.5  Social  Impact  Considerations  The   social   effects   of   transportation   vary   greatly   by   mode   of   travel.    Those   taking   public   transit   are  subject  to  longer  travel  times  (compared  to  travel  by  car),  long  waits  between  connections,  being  passed  by   full   buses,   and   overcrowding   during   peak   hours   (Cato,   2006).    Furthermore   public   transit   is   not   a  feasible  option  for  everyone  as  some  individuals  are  travelling  from  areas  outside  the  city  of  Vancouver.  In   these  areas,   there  may  not  be  adequate  accessibility   to   transit.  The  ability   to  have  productive   time  (i.e.   reading  or   studying)  on   the  bus  may   compensate   for   the   longer   travel   times  associated  with   this  mode,  but  this   is   limited  by  the  availability  of  seating  (Cato,  2006).    The  increased  use  of  public  transit  since  the  implementation  of  the  U-­‐Pass  has  had  positive  implications  in  terms  of  equality;  taking  transit  has   come   to   characterize   part   of   the   student   experience,   as   opposed   to   something   only   tolerated   by  those  who  cannot  afford  a  car  (UBC  TP,  2011).  It   is   well   documented   that   cycling   contributes   to   improved   fitness.    Commuting   by   bicycle   has   been  associated  with  decreased   levels  of  obesity  and   increased  cardiovascular   fitness   (Oja  et  al.,   2011).    As  walking   is  also  an  active   form  of   transportation,   it   likely  has  similar  effects  depending  on  the  distance  travelled.    Unfortunately,   these   modes   of   transportation   also   leave   travellers   most   susceptible   to  weather  conditions.    Additionally,  people  may  not  feel  safe  walking  alone  at  night.  To  mitigate  this  UBC’s  student  society,  the  AMS,  have  implemented  a  program  called  Safewalk  (where  a  co-­‐ed  team  will  walk  people   to   their   destinations).   However,   their   services   offered   by   Safewalk   are   limited   to   on-­‐campus  routes  only  and  visitors  to  the  campus  may  not  be  aware  of  this  service  (AMS  Salfewalk,  n.d.).  Many   people   consider   travel   by   car   the   most   convenient   and   comfortable   mode   of  transportation.    Based  on  high  rates  of  SOV’s,  most  drivers  actually  have  more  seats  than  passengers  in  their  vehicles  (UBC  TP,  2011).    Car  travel  also  provides  privacy  and  flexibility  in  one’s  schedule;  however,  travel   by   car   has  many   costs   that   in   some   cases  may   outweigh   the   benefits.    Traffic   congestion   and  deliberate   limited   parking   at   UBC   may   contribute   to   drivers’   stress.    Both   of   these   have   further  implications   for   door-­‐to-­‐door   travel   time  and  accessibility   (Cato,   2006).    In  most   cases   this  mode  also  provides  less  opportunity  for  exercise  than  any  other  modes  of  transportation.  Car-­‐pooling  can  alleviate  some  of  these  social  impacts,  as  some  parking  spaces  at  UBC  are  reserved  for  high-­‐occupancy  vehicles;  however,  coordinating  with  another  person  on  car-­‐pooling  reduces  the  flexibility  in  the  driver’s  schedule  (UBC  TP,  n.d.).  2.6  Jurisdictions  There  are  three  major  jurisdictions  that  are  responsible  for  UBC  Athletics  &  Recreation’s  transportation  systems.   They   are   as   follows:   UBC,   TransLink   and   the   City   of   Vancouver   (UBC   TP,   2005).  While   these  three  jurisdictions  are  distinct  from  each  other,  they  collaborate  to  assume  the  responsibility  of  moving  people  to  and  from  the  UBC  Vancouver  campus.  [TRANSPORTATION  GROUP  2]   APSC  364      7    The   Strategic   Transportation   Plan   represents   UBC’s   views   on   the   university’s   transportation.   UBC’s  Board  of  Governors  approved  the  Strategic  Transportation  Plan  (STP)   in  1999  (UBC  TP,  2005).  Since   its  conception,   the   STP   has   been   responsible   for   portraying   “a   wide   range   of   transportation   initiatives  intended  to  reduce  automobile  traffic,   increase  transit  ridership  and  manage  travel  demand”   (UBC  TP,  2005).  Collaboration  between  these  three  parties  is  crucial  to  reduce  the  carbon  footprint  of  transportation  to  and   from   UBC.   For   example,   UBC   and   TransLink   negotiated   to   produce   the   aforementioned,   widely  successful  U-­‐Pass   program.   Currently,   all   three   parties   are   in   round-­‐table  meetings   to   create   a   rapid-­‐transit  plan  for  the  Broadway  corridor  to  UBC  (UBC  TP,  2005).  When  these  three  parties  reach  a  consensus,  they  recommend  policies  to  the  Ministry  of  Transportation  to  be  implemented.  For  example,  the  STP  recommended  that  the  Ministry  of  Transportation  “implement  further  parking  restrictions  and  prohibitions  on  Marine  Drive  and  16th  Avenue”  in  order  to  discourage  UBC  commuters  from  parking  off-­‐campus  (UBC  TP,  2005).  UBC,  TransLink,  the  City  of  Vancouver,  and  the  Ministry  of  Transportation  are  the  decision-­‐making  stakeholders  on  UBC’s  transportation  matters.  2.7  Effects  Decisions   related   to   UBC's   transportation   system   have   an   effect   on   a   large   portion   of   the   UBC  community   (students,   faculty,   staff),   the  University  Neighbourhood  Association   and   the  population  of  the  Greater  Vancouver  Regional  District.  Moreover,  it  can  be  argued  that  UBC  transportation  decisions  have  an  effect  outside  the   lower  mainland:  UBC  Athletics  &  Recreation  holds  varsity  sport  events  that  draw  competitors  and  spectators  from  across  Canada  (Dolf  et  al.,  2011).  For  these  reasons,  it   is  crucial  that   multi-­‐stakeholder   meetings   take   place,   so   that   all   stakeholders   have   an   input   in   making   UBC’s  transportation  system  sustainable.  3.0  Sustainable  Transportation  Options  In  order   to   improve   the   current   transportation   situation  with   regards   to  UBC  Athletics  &  Recreation’s  events  and  to  promote  sustainable  transportation  options,  we  put  forward  a   list  of  four  programs  and  technologies   as   options   for   UBC   Athletics   &   Recreation   (UBC   A&R)   to   consider.    The   social   and  environmental  impacts  are  outlined  for  each  option,  as  well  as  the  cost  for  stakeholders.  Each  of  these  options   shows  some  potential   for   research  and   they  all  aim  to   improve   the  sustainability  of  UBC  A&R  and   the   events   they   are   responsible   for.    These   four   options   include   1)   the   introduction   of   transit  discounts,  2)  competition  between  UBC  Thunderbirds  teams  to  help  promote  cycling  and  to  encourage  UBC   sports   teams   to   act   as   agents   of   change   towards   sustainable   practices,   3)   biking   incentives   to  increase  the  number  of  people  cycling  to  events,  and  4)  online  communication  &  awareness  strategies.  These   options  were   selected   from   a   longer   list   of   options   considered   and   the   decision  was   based   on  which  options  other  groups  were  developing,   the   interests  of  our  group  members,  and  the   interest  of  UBC  A&R   in  exploring  and   investigating   these  options.  We  have   included  a  description  of   three  other  options  in  Appendix  B  for  reference.  [TRANSPORTATION  GROUP  2]   APSC  364      8    3.1  UBC  Thunderbirds  Transit  Program  This  option  is  a  program  to  help  increase  the  usage  of  public  transit  for  transportation  to  and  from  UBC  Thunderbirds   sporting   events:   the   aim   is   to   decrease   the   greenhouse   gas   (GHG)   emissions   associated  with   UBC   Athletics   &   Recreation.   According   to   a   survey   of   spectators   and   staff   conducted   at   8   UBC  Thunderbirds  home  games,  only  7%  of  spectators  arrived  by  bus,  while  68%  of  spectators  arrived  by  car  (Dolf,  2012).  If  the  number  of  spectators  using  transit  can  be  increased,  a  positive  impact  on  UBC  A&R’s  GHG  emissions  could  be  realized.  In  order  to  encourage  the  use  of  public  transportation  to  and  from  UBC  Athletics  &  Recreation  events,  spectators  who  use  transit  could  be  rewarded  with  a  TransLink  FareSaver  ticket.  This  card  would  cover  the  cost  of  one  zone  of  travel  (Translink,  n.d.)  and  would  perhaps  cover  the  cost  of  their  ride  home  after  the   event.  When   the   spectator   arrived   at   the   game,   they  would   present   their   transit   ticket   (that   had  been   validated   within   the   previous   hour)   while   purchasing   their   event   ticket   and   would   receive   a  complimentary   FareSaver   ticket.   This   deal  would   not   be   available   for   UBC   students   or   the   University  Neighbourhood  Association  since  they  only  pay  $2  per  event  ticket  and  students  already  have  a  U-­‐Pass  (UBC  Thunderbirds,  n.d.).    Since   partnerships   with   TransLink   are   difficult   to   negotiate,   the   responsibility   of   implementing   and  covering  the  costs  of  this  program  will  rest  primarily  with  UBC  A&R.   It   is  hoped  that  a  discounted  rate  could  be  negotiated  for  the  FareSaver  tickets  due  to  the  volume  that  would  be  purchased,  but  all  cost  estimations   are   performed   using   the   prices   of   FareSaver   booklets   ($21.00   and   $17.00   for   Adult   and  Concession  10-­‐ticket  booklets,  respectively)  that  can  be  purchased  at  retailers  around  Metro  Vancouver  (Translink,  n.d.).  A  breakdown  of  the  2011/2012  Thunderbirds  ticket  sales  and  the  potential   impact  on  ticket  revenue  is  provided  in  Appendix  B.  From  our  calculations,  the  cost  of  handing  out  FareSaver  tickets  could  lead  to  a  22%  decrease  in  ticket  revenue  if  100%  of  people  attending  games  used  public  transit.  It  is  hoped  that  this  program  would  help  increase  the  number  of  spectators  attending  games,  but  an  increase  of  29%  would  be  needed  to  offset  the  lost  revenue.  In  order  to  combat  this  risk,  it  is  suggested  that  this  program  be  implemented  during  playoffs  when  Adult  tickets  are  $15  instead  of  the  regular  $10  (UBC  Thunderbirds,  n.d.).  It  is  also  highly  unlikely   that   every  person  attending   the   games  would   arrive  by  bus,   so   Table   5   in  Appendix  B   shows  scenarios  for  100%,  50%  and  25%  transit  ridership  during  both  the  regular  season  and  the  playoffs.  To  achieve  25%  transit  usage,  UBC  A&R  would  only  see  a  6%  revenue  loss  during  the  regular  season,  or  a  4%  loss  during  playoffs.  It  is  clear  that  the  impact  of  the  FareSaver  tickets  decreases  with  higher  Adult  ticket  prices  and  that  the  impact  is  also  tied  to  transit  ridership.  As  stated  before,  only  about  7%  of  spectators  took  the  bus  to  8  UBC  Thunderbirds  games   in  a   survey  by  Dolf   (2012).  Using   the  data  provided  by   the   survey  and  CO2e  emissions   factors   from   the   ecoinvent   database   (Swiss   Centre   for   Life   Cycle   Inventories,   2010),   an  increase  in  transit  ridership  to  25%  could  lead  to  a  decrease  in  CO2e  emissions  of  7%  (see  Appendix  B  for  [TRANSPORTATION  GROUP  2]   APSC  364      9    calculations).   This   decrease   in   GHG   emissions   is   kept   small   due   to   the   immense   impact   of   those  spectators  who  fly  to  Vancouver  to  attend  games  at  UBC.  The   long-­‐term   benefits   of   initiating   such   a   program   are   primarily   the   behavioural   changes   that   are  hoped   to  occur   in   the  people   travelling   to  and   from  UBC  Thunderbirds  games.   If   these  people  can  be  shown   the   convenience   and   affordability   of   using   transit,   it  may   become  habitual.   This   program  may  also   result   in   increased   ticket   sales   at   UBC   Thunderbirds   games   and   may   provide   opportunities   to  conduct  behavioural  research,  studies  on  the  effects  of  increased  transit  usage  on  the  overall  impact  of  Thunderbirds  games,  or  studies  on  advertising  methods  and  their  effectiveness.  While  this  program  will  require  that  UBC  A&R  incur  some  costs  for  purchasing  and  distributing  FareSaver  tickets,  there  is  the  potential  to  increase  the  number  of  spectators  attending  UBC  Thunderbirds  games  and  to  reduce  UBC  A&R’s  environmental  impact.  The  economic  impacts  to  UBC  A&R  to  increase  transit  ridership  to  25%  are  relatively  low,  but  the  improvement  in  GHG  emissions  could  be  high  –  especially  if  high-­‐emission  modes  of  travel  are  targeted.    3.2  Thunderbirds  as  an  Agent  of  Change  UBC’s   Thunderbirds   sports   teams   are   no   strangers   to   competition.    This   option   addresses   how   to  mobilize   our   Thunderbirds   teams   to   cultivate   active   agents   of   change   in   the   UBC  community.    Specifically,  this  option  will   increase  the  spectator  mode  share  of  cyclists  from  its  current  rate  of  3%.  A  point  system  (“Cycle  Points”)  will  harness  the  competitive  spirit  of  UBC  Thunderbirds  and  encourage  them   to   be   leaders   and   role   models   in   their   community.    Thunderbirds   teams   will   earn   points   by  promoting   cycling   to   games   on   campus.    Creativity   is   encouraged.    Some   examples   of   strategies   they  may  use  are  personal  interaction,  Facebook  events,  or  poster  campaigns.    Team  members  will  incur  any  costs  for  promotion.  Points   are   recorded  when   cyclists   (including   bicycling   Thunderbirds)   show   up   to   Thunderbirds   games  and   check   in   with   a   volunteer   at   the   bike   racks   where   they   can   demonstrate   they   arrived   on   their  bikes.    They  would  be  asked  whether  they  biked  due  to  a  Thunderbirds  initiative  and  if  so  which  team  it  was   (and   how   they   heard   about   it).    Whichever   team   spurred   the   change   would   acquire   a   Cycle  Point.    Cycle   Points   would   accumulate   throughout   the   year   and   would   be   divided   by   the   number   of  players  on  the  team  at  the  end  of  the  year.  The  team  with  the  most  Cycle  Points  per  team  member  at  the  end  of  the  year  wins.  Some  of  the  possible  prizes  that  could  be  provided  by  UBC  A&R  are:  • Symbolic  title/annual  trophy  [free  to  $100]  (Trophy  Centre,  n.d.)  • All-­‐You-­‐Can-­‐Eat  Sushi  dinner  at  BC  Sushi  [$20/person]  (Urban  Spoon,  n.d.)  • Westcadia  BBQ  catered  meal  [$26/person  +  space  booking  fee]  (Westcadia,  n.d.)  • 3  hour  Bike  Kitchen  workshop  at  UBC  [$10/person]  (AMS  Bike  Co-­‐op,  2012)  [TRANSPORTATION  GROUP  2]   APSC  364      10    Sponsorships  could  be  solicited  to  cover  expenses  or  to  donate  prizes.    If  prizes  are  on  a  per-­‐person  basis  (such  as  with  dinner)  it  is  recommended  that  varsity  teams  be  broken  down  to  a  more  manageable  size  (eg.  8-­‐12  people)  for  the  purposes  of  this  competition.    For  instance,  the  Varsity  Football  team  would  be  subdivided   into   roughly   ten   sub-­‐teams   who   would   compete   against   each   other   and   differentiate  themselves  from  each  other  for  their  promotion  initiatives  with  sub-­‐team  names  or  colours.  This  program  can  be  expanded  so  Cycle  Points  can  be  earned  at  other  Athletics  &  Recreation  events  (eg.  Storm   the  Wall)   or   even   on   regular   school   days   by   setting   up   check-­‐in   points  with   volunteers   (these  would  be  specifically  advertised  by  the  teams,  perhaps  as  a  “Bike  to  School  Day”  with  clear  directions  as  to  where  to  check  in).    Coaches  might  also  track  points  for  Thunderbirds  who  arrive  to  team  practice  on  their  bicycles  for  additional  Cycle  Points.    Other  non-­‐varsity  teams  such  as  UBC  Triathlon  Club  and  junior  teams  could  also  be  invited  to  opt  in.  This  program  would  develop  an   image  of  Thunderbirds  as  people  who  are  enthusiastic  about  bicycling  and  eager  to  lead  by  example  to  make  travelling  to  their  events  more  sustainable.    The  ability  of  team  members   to   earn   Cycle   Points   regardless   of   which   Thunderbirds   team   is   playing   would   increase  attendance  at  games  in  general,  as  there  would  be  encouragement  for  fans  that  would  be  loyal  to  one  team   to   check   out   other   teams’   games.    It   also   has   true   potential   to   shift   regular   patterns   of   travel  across   campus   through   the   “Bike   to   School   Days”   mentioned   above,   and   also   through   the   example  Thunderbirds  would  set.    The  Cycle  Points  would  make  tracking  the  success  of  this  initiative  possible.    As  cycling  becomes  a  more  mainstream  part  of  UBC  students’  and  Thunderbirds  spectators’  culture,  A&R  can  show  that  they  helped  lead  the  way.  3.3  UBC  Athletics  &  Recreation  Bicycle  Incentives  This  option  is  aimed  to  increase  the  likelihood  and  attractiveness  of  cycling  to  UBC  games.  The  main  idea  is   to   provide   freebies   for   cyclists   to   increase   motivation   to   cycle   to   games   and   as   an   added   bonus  promote  these  incentives  (UBC  A&R’s  logo  could  be  incorporated  in  the  give-­‐aways).  Below  are  ideas  for  this  option  as  well  as  some  suggestions  for  carrying  out  the  idea  and  cost  implications.  Table  2:  Bicycling  Incentives  Prize   Cost  to  UBC  A&R  “Freebies”     o LED  Tyre  tire  Valve  Caps  Neon  Lights  for  bikes:  small,  can  get  UBC  Thunderbirds  colors,  increases  safety  when  cycling  at  night,  comes  in  a  variety  of  colors  [Cost:  $0.99-­‐  $3.00  CDN  (Ebay)]  o Food  at  concession  stands  (ie.  hot  dogs,  chocolate  bars,  drinks)  [Cost:  $1.50-­‐$9.00  (depending  on  venue  and  item)  (Haas,  forthcoming)]  o T-­‐shirts  with  UBC  A&R  or  Thunderbirds  logo  and  biking  incentives  on  it  [Cost:  $3.95-­‐$4.95/T-­‐shirt  (Great  West  Graphics,  2012,  Orion  Screen  Works,  2012)]  o Water  bottles  with  UBC  A&R  or  Thunderbirds  logo  and  biking  incentives  on  it  [Cost:  $45  for  one-­‐time  set  up  charge,  $1.58/bottle  (for  150  bottles)  (Print  A  Promo,  2011)]  [TRANSPORTATION  GROUP  2]   APSC  364      11    Provide  a  bike  valet  service   o Offer  a  secure  place  for  cyclists  to  park  their  bikes  during  the  game  [Cost:  ~$400  on  average—amount  can  be  subsidized  if  we  found  sponsors,  had  volunteers,  provided  fencing,  etc.  (The  Bicycle  Valet,  2012)]  Incorporate  a  stamp  system  to  trade  for  freebies  o The  first  time  someone  cycles  to  an  event,  they  will  be  given  a  stamp  card,  where  they  can  accumulate  stamps  each  time  they  cycle  to  attend  an  event.  After  accumulating  a  certain  amount  of  stamps  (i.e.  10)  can  obtain  a  prize.  [Cost:  aside  from  cards  and  stamps  (which  should  cost  less  than  $50  altogether),  it  will  vary  depending  on  the  prizes  given  out]  Draws  at  the  end  of  each  game/season  for  prizes  (draw  tickets  given  to  cyclists)  o Cyclists  to  events  will  be  entered  in  a  draw,  to  be  drawn  at  the  end  of  each  game  or  accumulated  to  draw  for  a  prize  at  the  end  of  a  season  [Cost:  depending  on  the  demand  for  these  ticket  stubs,  may  not  be  very  costly,  again,  probably  less  than  $50,  and  extra  cost  will  be  dependent  on  the  prize]    The   above   options   can   be   implemented   alone   or   in   combination.   Although   it   is  mainly   aimed   at   the  individual  level,  it  may  spread  to  a  community  level  as  it  gets  passed  around  by  personal  communication  or  by  promotion  (seeing  the  logos).  This  aims  to  promote  positive  ideas  about  cycling  to  events,  and  in  some  cases,   increases  the  safety  of  cyclists  outside  of  events  (eg.  bike  lights).  This  works  well  with  the  UBC  sustainability  and  GHG  emission  goals,  since  cycling  may  decrease  the  number  of  people  driving  to  events,   promote   healthier   lifestyles,   and   spread   the   idea   of   sustainability   throughout   the   UBC  community.  3.4  UBC  Athletics  &  Recreation  Communication  &  Awareness  Strategies  UBC  A&R  has  indicated  that  they  would  like  a  bigger  online  presence.  In  this  option,  the  goal  is  for  UBC  A&R   to   fully   integrate   sustainability   education   into   their   online   platform.   This   option  will   have  many  steps.  First,  UBC  A&R  should  begin   to  sell   their   tickets  online.  As  potential   spectators  buy   their   ticket,  the  various  sustainability  initiatives  (i.e.  transit  fare  rebate,  bike  valet)  will  be  advertised.  Second,  as  the  event  approaches,  ticket-­‐holders  will  receive  a  reminder  newsletter.  In  this  newsletter,  there  could  be  a  “How   to   Get   Here”   section   that   encourages   sustainable   modes   of   travel   (transit,   bike,   walk)   by  summarizing  personal  benefits  of  choosing  a  sustainable  mode  of  travel.  Some  examples  are  below:  • You  will  save  $10  on  parking  • You  will  have  “productive  time”  on  the  bus  (i.e.  time  to  read)  • You  will  get  your  daily  exercise  -­‐  did  you  know  that  biking  for  30  minutes  burns  300  calories?  Furthermore,  this  section  may  include  facts  regarding  climate  change.  For  example:  • Cars  are  the   leading  source  of  GHG  emissions   in  Canada  –  help  UBC  A&R  reduce   its   impact  on  the  environment  by  taking  an  alternate  mode  of  transportation  [TRANSPORTATION  GROUP  2]   APSC  364      12    Online  advertising  on  UBC  A&R’s  website  has  the  potential  to  reduce  the  environmental  impact  that  is  associated  with   spectators’   transportation.   This   option   is   attractive   as   it   has   very   low   capital   costs   to  UBC   A&R   (mainly   hiring   a   Web   Developer   to   launch   a   new   website   and   send   out   e-­‐newsletters).  Moreover,  there  are  lots  of  advertising  options  on  the  newsletter,  which  may  be  a  source  of  revenue  for  UBC  A&R.  4.0  Sustainability  Indicator  Matrix  In   order   to   compare   the   feasibility   of   our   options   and   their   potential   benefit   in   terms   of   sustainable  modes  of  transportation,  we  have  developed  10  indicators.  We  compared  each  of  our  proposed  options  against  our  matrix  of   indicators  to  obtain  the  best  option  for  UBC  A&R  to  implement.  These  indicators  aim  to  evaluate  the  social,  environmental  and  economic  aspects  of  our  options  to  ensure  that  they  are  feasible  and  that  they  help  UBC  A&R  achieve  their  sustainability  goals.  In  order  to  judge  the  suitability  of  our  indicators  for  UBC  Athletics  &  Recreation  to  consider  when  trying  to  increase  the  sustainability  of  their  events,  we  used  a  relative  ranking  system.  Due  to  lack  of  data  and  the   variability   of   our   options,   in   terms   of   their   individual   target   populations   and   objectives,   it  was  decided    that    an    absolute    determination    of    our    options’    rank    in    terms    of    sustainability    was  both  unattainable  and  impractical.  Our  ranking  system  required  that  our  options  were  ranked  relative  to  each   other   (from   first   to   last)   for   each   indicator,  with   the   first   place   option   being   the   one   that  most  effectively  met   the  objective   for   the   individual   indicator.   Some  of  our   indicators  were  weighted  more  heavily  than  others  due  to  their  relative  importance  (e.g.  economic  cost  to  UBC  A&R  was  weighted  more  heavily).  To  achieve  a  final  determination  of  our  most  effective  option,  the  rank  was  multiplied  by  the  weight  for  each  indicator  and  all  ranks  were  summed  for  each  option.  The  option  with  the  lowest  score  was  deemed  to  be  our  best  option.  In  order  to  compare  our  options,  we  assumed   that  each  one  would  be  a  “resounding  success”  and  we  ranked  them  according  to  what  we  believe  to  be  their  maximum  potential.  Our  indicators  were  chosen  to   reflect   our   interpretation   of   the   vision   UBC   A&R   presented   to   us   and   to   highlight   the   relative  strengths   and   weaknesses   of   our   options.   This   method   still   included   an   analysis   of   negative  consequences  (e.g.  more  people  taking  transit  may  reduce  the  number  of  cyclists)  while  allowing  us  to  focus  on  the  (anticipated)  impacts  of  each  of  our  options.  While  our  options  are  almost  entirely  choice-­‐based  and  behaviour-­‐oriented,  we  approached  them  with  the  assumption  each  will  have  an  impact  on  sustainable  transportation  to  and  from  UBC  A&R  events.  It  should  be  noted  that  this  ranking  system  reflects  our  opinions  of  the  options  and  our  interpretations  of  the  individual  indicators.  This  is  by  no  means  the  only  interpretation  of  the  Options;  others  may  have  slightly   different   rankings   and   rationale   for   those   rankings.   This   is   one   of   the  main   drawbacks   of   this  approach:   the   results   of   the   Sustainability   Indicator   Matrix   are   based   on   speculation   and   are   quite  subjective.   It   is   entirely   possible   that   our   matrix   could   provide   different   results   if   more   information  became   available,   or   if   another   person   or   group   of   people   evaluated   our   options   using   this   matrix.  [TRANSPORTATION  GROUP  2]   APSC  364      13    However,  we  think  that  with  the   information  available,   the  results  of  our  analysis  are  reasonable.  The  Sustainability  Indicator  Matrix  that  we  have  completed  for  our  options  can  be  found  in  Appendix  A.    5.0  Our  Findings  Our   feasibility  matrix   demonstrated   that   Communication  &  Awareness   Strategies   is   the  most   feasible  option   for  UBC  A&R   to   implement  because   it   is   the   least   costly  and   is   available   to  nearly  all   users.    It  provides   information  to  decrease  travel  times  and   increase  ease  of  travel  while  promoting  sustainable  modes   of   travel   to   and   from   UBC   A&R   events.   Because   it   will   enumerate   various   options   for   each  person,  and  each  person  in  turn  can  account  for  their  personal  barriers  to  various  forms  of  transit  (e.g.  travelling   with   children,   needing   wheelchair   accessibility,   etc.),   it   scored   the   highest   for   equity   and  safety;  none  of  the  other  options  are  as  accommodating  to  such  diverse  needs.  Second   place  was   given   to   the   Bicycling   Competition   option   because   it   has   the   potential   to   increase  overall  game  attendance  while  increasing  the  cycling  mode-­‐share.    However,  it  may  not  be  accessible  or  available   to   all   spectators.   Bicycling   Incentives   came   in   at   a   close   third,   for   similar   reasons   to   the  competition  option,  but  it  may  not  reach  out  to  such  a  large  population  and  may  involve  a  greater  cost.  The   Thunderbirds   Transit   Program   was   deemed   the   least   feasible,   mainly   because   of   the   high   cost  implications  for  A&R.    6.0  Recommended  Action  for  UBC  A&R  We  recommend  that  UBC  A&R  implement  the  Communication  &  Awareness  Strategy  as  soon  as  possible.  We  recommend  the  following  steps:  1. Re-­‐launch  a  new  UBC  A&R  website  that  allows:  a. Online  purchasing  of  tickets  b. Newsletters  to  ticket  holders  2. Clearly  list  all  the  transportation  options  available  to  spectators  on  the  website  a. Emphasize  the  benefits  of  more  sustainable  modes  of  travel  (i.e.  walk,  bike  transit)  by  talking  about  health  benefits  and  the  productive  time  b. Discourage  unsustainable  modes  of  travel  (SOV’s)  with  high  parking  rates  and  carbon  footprint  information  3. Launch  interactive  infographics,  graphs  and  maps  to  help  spectators  visualize  their  transportation  impact  on  the  environment  We   believe   that   a   robust   new   website   that   can   communicate   transportation   options   is   necessary   in  order  for  UBC  A&R  to  achieve  sustainability.  Furthermore  this  option  is  very  feasible  because  it  has  a  low  capital  cost.  By  communicating  this  valuable  information  to  people,  UBC  A&R  will  be  able  to  encourage  spectators  to  choose  more  sustainable  modes  of  travel.  [TRANSPORTATION  GROUP  2]   APSC  364      14    That  being  said,  one  limitation  of  our  relative  ranking  system  is  that  it  is  not  conducive  to  identifying  a  particular  threshold  beyond  which  our  options  are  considered  worthwhile  to  implement.    By  highlighting  the   strengths   and   weaknesses   of   each   individual   option,   we   have   provided   UBC   A&R   with   the   tools  required   to  make   their   own   decisions   regarding   our   proposed   options.    Each   one   of   our   options   has  significant  strength  and  potential  for  creating  positive  change  on  campus.    None  of  our  options  require  infrastructural   changes   or   large   initial   capital   investments.    Furthermore,   all   four   options  would  work  very   well   with   one   another.    Therefore   we   recommend   that   UBC   A&R   consider   implementing   a  combination   of   these   options.    The   Communications   &   Awareness   Strategy   can   actively   promote   the  other  three  options  (Bicyclings  Competition,  Biking   Incentives,  and  FareSaver  ticket  rebates).  UBC  A&R  should  run  a  trial  period  where  at  least  one  other  option  is  advertised  through  their  website  and  email  newsletter.          [TRANSPORTATION  GROUP  2]   APSC  364      15    7.0  References  AMS  Bike  Co-­‐op.  (2012).  Women's  Night  -­‐  March  28.  Retrived  on  March  25,  2012  from,      AMS  Safewalk.  (n.d.)  http://www.ams.ubc.ca/services/ams-­‐safewalk/  B.C.  Ministry  of  Environment  (December  2011).  Methodology  for  Reporting  B.C.  Public  Sector     Greenhouse  Gas  Emissions.    Retrieved  on  January  30,  2012  from,        Baecker,  R.,  Fono,  D.,  Blume,  L.,  Collins,  C.,  Couto,  D.  (2007).  Webcasting  made  interactive:  persistent     chat  for  text  dialogue  during  and  about  learning  events.  Department  of  Computer  Science,     University  of  Toronto.  Retrieved  on  Feb  13,  2012  from,     http://faculty.uoit.ca/collins/publications/docs/BAE2007a.pdf    Bicycle  Valet,  The.  (n.d.)  General  Information  for  Organizers.    Retrieved  on  February  13,  2012  from,      Cato,  N.  (August  3,  2006).  Social  Sustainability  of  Alternate  Transportation  Modes  at         The  University  of  British  Columbia.    Retreived  on  January  30,  2012  from,      Carnevale,  D.  (6  August  2007).  Colleges  Too  Small  for  Prime  Take  Sports  Online.  Chronicle  of  HIghter     Education.  Vol.  53.  Issue  40.  P.  A26-­‐A27.  Retrieved  on  Feb  13,  2012  from,     http://web.ebscohost.com/ehost/detail?sid=2bb1f825-­‐57d8-­‐4354-­‐8b26-­‐   17c45d4744d4%40sessionmgr4&vid=1&hid=14&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZQ%3   d%3d#db=aph&AN=25407993    Cozza,  J.  (26  Dec  2011).  The  rideshare  revolution.  Clean  Technica.  Retrieved  on  Feb  13,  2012  from,     http://cleantechnica.com/2011/12/26/rideshare-­‐apps-­‐to-­‐revolutionize-­‐ride-­‐sharing/    Dolf,  M.  (2012).  A  Life  Cycle  Assessment  framework  to  assess  the  environmental  impact  of  UBC     Athletics  &  Recreation  ‘Thunderbirds‘  teams,  events,  and  venues.  UBC  Centre  for  Sport  and     Sustainability.  Dolf,  M.,  Vigneault  A.,  Storey,  S.,  Sianchuk,  R.,  Teehan,  P.,  Zhang,  S.,  Adams,  T.  (6  July  2011).  UBC     Athletics  &  Recreation  Sustainability  Project:  Measuring  the  Climate  Change  Potential  Impacts  of     a  UBC  Thunderbirds  Men’s  Basketball  Game.  UBC  Centre  for  Sport  &  Sustainability.  Retrieved  on     Jan  22,  2012  from  cIRcle  online  depository,  https://circle.ubc.ca/handle/2429/36294  [TRANSPORTATION  GROUP  2]   APSC  364      16    EBay.  (2012).  LED  Tyre  Tire  Valve  Caps  Neon  Lights  for  Bikes.  Retrieved  on  March  25,  2012  from,      Flight  Network.  (2012).  Flight  fares.  Retrieved  on  January  30,  2012  from,    Geraci,  J.  (2012).  Building  Ridersharing  App  Works.  DIY  city.  Retrieved  on  Feb  12,  2012  from,     http://diycity.org/discussions/building-­‐ridesharing-­‐app-­‐works    Google.  (2012).  Google  Maps.  Retrieved  on  February  13,  2012  from,        Greyhound.  (2012).  Travelling  by  bus.  Retrieved  on  January  30,  2012  from,    Great  West  Graphic  Inc.  (2012).  Promo  Deals.  Retrieved  on  March  25,  2012  from,      Heartline,  F.  (2012).  Carsurfing  app.  Personal  letter  to  UBC  A&R.  Oja,  P.,  Titze,  S.,  Bauman,  A.,  de  Geus,  B.,  Krenn,  P.,  Reger-­‐Nash,  B.,  &  Kohlberger,  T.  (18  April  2011).     Health  benefits  of  cycling:  a  systematic  review.  Scandinavian  Journal  of  Medicine  &  Science  in     Sports,  21,  496-­‐509.  Orion  Screen  Works.  (2012).  Custom  T-­‐shirt  Printing  Vancouver.  Retrieved  on  March  25,  2012  from,      PrintAPromo.  (2011).  Cyclist  Bike  Bottle  24oz.  Retrieved  on  March  25,  2012  from,      Swiss  Centre  for  Life  Cycle  Inventories.  (2010).  ecoinvent  Centre  Life  Cycle  Inventory  database  v2.2.     Retrieved  March  11,  2012  from,    Total  Motorcycle.  (2011).  2011  Motorcycle  fuel  economy  guide.  Retrieved  on  January  30,  2012  from,      TransLink.  (n.d.).  Retrieved  on  January  29,  2012  from,    Trophy  Centre.  (n.d.)  Trophy  Centre  Catalogues.  Retrieved  on  March  25,  2012  from,      [TRANSPORTATION  GROUP  2]   APSC  364      17    UBC  Centre  for  Sport  and  Sustainability  (UBC  CSS).  (n.d.).  UBC  Athletics  &  Recreation.  Retrieved  January     29,  2012  from      UBC  Thunderbirds  (n.d.).  Retrieved  on  March  25,  2012  from,    University  of  British  Columbia  Transportation  Planning  (UBC  TP).  (1  Apr  2011).  Fall  2010  Transportation     Status  Report.  Retrieved  on  January  29,  2012  from,      University  of  British  Columbia  Transportation  Planning  (UBC  TP).  (25  Feb  2010).  2009  Vancouver     Transportation  Survey.  Retrieved  on  January  29,  2012  from,      University  of  British  Columbia  Transportation  Planning  (UBC  TP).  (13  May  2005).  2005  Strategic     Transportation  Plan.  Retrieved  on  Jan  22,  2012  from,      University  of  British  Columbia  Transportation  Planning  (UBC  TP).  (n.d.).  Car  and  Vanpooling.  Retrieved     on  January  30,  2012  from,    Urban  Spoon.  (n.d.)  B.C.  Sushi  Menu.  Retrieved  on  March  25,  2012  from,        West  Coast  Express.  (2010).  Station  and  Parking  Information.  Retrieved  on  January  30,  2012  from,      Westcadia.  (n.d.)  Our  Menues.  Retrieved  on  March  25,  2012  from,        [TRANSPORTATION  GROUP  2]   APSC  364      18    Appendix  A:  Sustainability  Indicator  Matrix      Category Criteria Indicators Objectives Justification Indicator Ranking Social Health Participant physical activity [increase/decrease compared to business as usual levels (before these incentives were put in place)] Improve health of participants and community. UBC must take initiative to be a leader in promoting health in the community in order to "promote the values of a civil and sustainable society", in line with UBC's TREK 2010 vision. 1 Social Safety Feeling of security [increase/decrease, low/med/high] Improve the safety of people travelling to/from UBC A&R events. Compromised safety of users not only increases the cost of our transportation Options, but will also reduce the likelihood people will want to use them. 1 Social Morale/school spirit # of spectators [increase/decrease compared to BAU/before these incentives/programs were put in place] Sustain or enhance current levels of community participation and engagement at games. Attendance at the games enables community members to experience entertainment and inspiration. It also motivates the team members. Spectator presence is seen as an essential component to Thunderbirds games. 1 Social Sustainability education Promotes involvement & awareness [low/medium/high] Increase sustainability awareness to UBC community Since UBC has goals set for sustainability in their policies, raising awareness will allow for increased support and eventually lead to practice by the community. 1 Social Accessability/equity Available to everyone [Fully, partially, not accessible] Provide services for all persons. We believe equity to be a vital component of social sustainability, and acknowledge that UBC upholds equity as a value as evidenced by their Equity Office. 1 Social Demand on personal time Projected travel time [increase/decrease] Provide viable and sustainable method of travel that do not burden consumers unnecessarily by taking up a lot more of their time. Bears on the feasibility of the project - users may not opt for Options that dramatically increase demands on personal time. 1 Environmental GHG's & air pollution Projected mode-share distribution relative to other Options [increase/decrease of various modes] Decrease use of SOVs and airplanes, increase cycling and walking and help UBC meet targets for GHG emission reductions. UBC has commitments to reduce GHG emissions. The mode-share distribution should show higher numbers for HOV, cycling, walking and/or transit in order to be seen as helping UBC meet those targets. 2 Economic Cost to A&R Cost implications relative to other Options Provide Options that are affordable for UBC A&R to implement, and are thus feasible. If costs of implementation are too large, they may pose an insurmountable obstacle. We would like to ensure the Options we propose are feasible to implement. 2 Economic Profit Revenue from ticket sales [increase/decrease] Maintain or increase profit while increasing sustainable practices. Allows A&R to continue to operate and undertake further sustainability initiatives. 2 Economic User affordability Potential cost savings for user? [Y/N, low/medium/high] Provide sustainable travel methods that are also affordable. People will not use a method of travel if it doesn't have a benefit, which is often cost (but can be in terms of time or health improvements). 1  [TRANSPORTATION  GROUP  2]   APSC  364      19    Category Criteria Indicators Transit Ticket Option Communication/Awareness Strategy Ranking Reasons Ranking Reasons Social Health Participant physical activity [increase/decrease compared to business as usual levels (before these incentives were put in place)] 4 This Option may improve the physical activity of those who forgo driving, but we fear it may deter people from walking or cycling to the events. 3 Includes information for all modes of travel, so may not directly influence users' choices with regard to healthy travel modes. Social Safety Feeling of security [increase/decrease, low/med/high] 1 If more people are walking back and forth between the venue and the nearest bus stops, spectators should feel a greater sense of security in numbers. 2 Information online does not threaten security and may encourage behaviors outside of someone's comfort zone, but consumer makes the ultimate decision. Social Morale/school spirit # of spectators [increase/decrease compared to BAU/before these incentives/programs were put in place] 3 This Option may not specifically promote an increase in spectators, but an increase will be required to offset the revenue loss per ticket. 1 Online ticket sales may increase the number of spectators attending and may make it easier to buy tickets and plan for events and nights-out at games. Social Sustainability education Promotes involvement & awareness [low/medium/high] 4 No promotion of sustainability education is included, but this Option could be used to show the positive impact caused by switching from driving to using transit. 3 Educational information can be presented via this Option, but it is expected that retention of or interest in that information will be limited. Social Accessability/equity Available to everyone [Fully, partially, not accessible] 2 TransLink has made transit use available to nearly everyone: all buses can transport riders in wheelchairs and scooters, and are accessible to the elderly with priority seating. Transit service decreases further inland, but service is still available. 1 Most people have internet in their homes or have access to the internet. Of all our Options, this will likely be the most accessible. Social Demand on personal time Projected travel time [increase/decrease] 2 Transit is faster than cycling or walking, and provides significantly more productive time than driving. 1 The information provided will save users time in terms of finding venue locations and planning the best travel routes. Environmental GHG's & air pollution Projected mode-share distribution relative to other Options [increase/decrease of various modes] 2 Has the potential to significantly decrease the number of SOVs because buses serve a large portion of Metro Vancouver. It may slightly decrease the number of people walking and cycling, since they will want to get a discounted rate as well. 1 Provides the opportunity for A&R to advertise the modes that they see as most sustainable and encourage their use, through statistics against unsustainable modes and improved access to information about sustainable ones. Economic Cost to A&R Cost implications relative to other Options 4 The cost of purchasing FareSavers will be much more than the cost of any of our other Options. This cost may be too much for UBC A&R to consider this Option. 2 Development and maintenance of the website will cost money, but there is a wealth of student and professional talent around campus to help in its creation. A new website may not be required, just changes to the current web page. Economic Profit Revenue from ticket sales [increase/decrease] 4 The cost of purchasing FareSavers could be high, and may reduce the total revenue from ticket and season's pass sales by 20%. A large increase in spectators would be required to compensate for these losses. 2 Online ticket sales will make UBC Thunderbirds games more accessible and may increase the number of people attending. Economic User affordability Potential cost savings for user? [Y/N, low/medium/high] 3 Users will get a cost savings on their tickets in the form of a TransLink FareSaver. 4 The use of systems like Ticketmaster or Eventbrite cost money for the consumer and could result in higher ticket prices. 39 Rank: 4th 25 Rank: 1st  [TRANSPORTATION  GROUP  2]   APSC  364      20    Category Criteria Indicators Bicycling Competition Bicycling Incentives Ranking Reasons Ranking Reasons Social Health Participant physical activity [increase/decrease compared to business as usual levels (before these incentives were put in place)] 1 This has the potential to create a culture of cycling around campus that promotes active, healthy lifestyles. 2 This will involve a bike valet, and is more individual based (rather than attracting a group effort to bike). Social Safety Feeling of security [increase/decrease, low/med/high] 3 Cycling imposes dangers on its own, but since the majority of the target population will likely be on campus or near campus, these dangers may be diminished. The possibility of group travel may also increase security. 4 Cycling imposes dangers on its own (ie. other cars, unevenly paved roads, etc), and when cycling at night or in the dark, increases the risk (especially for people cycling alone). Social Morale/school spirit # of spectators [increase/decrease compared to BAU/before these incentives/programs were put in place] 2 All varsity athletes promote any game on campus, regardless of who is playing. 4 There will be no direct monetary ticket discount, but rather a freebie, unsure of turnout/attractiveness of freebie incentive (therefore, may not increase # spectators). Social Sustainability education Promotes involvement & awareness [low/medium/high] 2 Athletes can choose to incorporate sustainability education into their promotion campaigns. 1 Can use freebies given at games as a promotion of the existence of these incentives (ie. print incentive reason on the item or just have logo, etc). Social Accessability/equity Available to everyone [Fully, partially, not accessible] 4 Not everyone who attends games go to the UBC campus where varsity athletes will likely focus their campaign. 3 Not everyone has access to a bike, and only those who are physically capable of riding a bike can take part. Social Demand on personal time Projected travel time [increase/decrease] 3 Travel by bike is not "productive time" (though it counts for exercise) and takes longer than driving. It's faster than walking and similar to riding buses, depending on transfers and timing. [Same for both cycling Options] 3 Travel by bike is not "productive time" (though it counts for exercise) and takes longer than driving. It's faster than walking and similar to riding buses, depending on transfers and timing. [Same for both cycling Options] Environmental GHG's & air pollution Projected mode-share distribution relative to other Options [increase/decrease of various modes] 3 This Option promotes cycling, and the promotion of other teams' games by varsity athletes will bring cyclists who wouldn't otherwise come, so the biking mode share will increase. 4 This option promotes cycling, and gives cyclists incentive to pass on the message, or will attract new cyclists to bike to games, thus increasing the biking mode share Economic Cost to A&R Cost implications relative to other Options 3 Most costs are minimal (eg. photocopying) and incurred by team members. UBC A&R only needs to provide a prize, such as dinner for the team. 1 The money for freebies should be relatively inexpensive and we could also get sponsors for these items (therefore free for UBC A&R). Economic Profit Revenue from ticket sales [increase/decrease] 1 There is projected to be at least some increase in the number of people to attend, and ticket prices are unaffected. 3 Doesn't affect ticket sales, since there is no discount on the tickets (unless one of the incentives we decide to use is a discounted sale price). # people may increase, attracted by the freebies/incentives. Economic User affordability Potential cost savings for user? [Y/N, low/medium/high] 2 Assuming people don't buy a bike specifically to attend the game, costs to the user are negligeable (bike maintenaince). 1 Virtually no user costs (except for the initial purchase of a bike) and all incentives are of benefit to the user (supported by UBC A&R or other sponsors). 31 Rank: 2nd 34 Rank: 3rd [TRANSPORTATION  GROUP  2]   APSC  364      21    Appendix  B:  Tables  &  Figures  Table  3  below  shows  the  changes  in  the  number  of  person  trips  by  travel  mode  from  1997  to  2010  as  described  by  the  UBC  Fall  2010  Transportation  Status  Report.  The  same  information  is  displayed  in  Figure  1  as  mode  share  distributions  for  1997  and  for  2010.   Table  3:  Change  in  Person  Trips  by  Mode  from  1997  to  2010  Travel  Mode   Fall  1997   Fall  2010   Change  from  1997  to  2010  Person  Trips   %  of  Total   Person  Trips   %  of  Total  Transit   19000   17.9%   63300   48.7%   44300   233.2%  SOV   46000   43.4%   44500   34.3%   -­‐1500   -­‐3.3%  HOV   36100   34.0%   18300   14.1%   -­‐17800   -­‐49.3%  Bicycle   2700   2.5%   1300   1.0%   -­‐1400   -­‐51.9%  Pedestrian   1400   1.3%   800   0.6%   -­‐600   -­‐42.9%  Truck  &  Motorcycle      900   0.8%   1700   1.3%   800   88.9%    Totals   106100       129900       23800   22.4%  Source:  UBC  Fall  2010  Transportation  Status  Report  (UBC  TP,  2011)    Source:  UBC  Fall  2010  Transportation  Status  Report  (UBC  TP,  2011)  Transit  48.7%  SOV  34.3%  HOV  14.1%  Truck  &  Motorcycle  1.3%  Bicycle  1.0%  Pedestrian  0.6%  Fall  2010  Mode  Share  Transit  17.9%  SOV  43.4%  HOV  34.0%  Truck  &  Motorcycle  0.8%  Bicycle  2.5%  Pedestrian  1.3%  Fall  1997  Mode  Share  Figure  1:  Mode  Share  Distributions  [TRANSPORTATION  GROUP  2]   APSC  364      22    The  impact  of  handing  out  FareSaver  tickets  as  part  of  the  UBC  Thunderbirds  Transit  Program  is  outlined  below.  The  information  for  gate  sales  came  from  personal  communication  with  Andrew  Haas  (Facilities  Coordinator  for  Thunderbird  Park  and  Stadium),  consisting  of  numbers  from  the  2011/2012  season.  These  numbers  were  not  used  to  obtain  absolute  revenue,  but  rather  to  calculate  relative  decreases  in  revenue;  the  numbers  provided  a  sample  of  the  distribution  of  ticket  sales.  It  should  be  noted  that  Youth,  Seniors,  Visiting  Students  and  UBC  Faculty  &  Staff  were  all  counted  together,  so  in  order  to  estimate  the  revenue  losses,  their  numbers  have  been  split  evenly  (as  seen  in  Table  4).  Table  4  also  assumes  that  100%  of  spectators  would  be  using  transit  and  would  receive  a  FareSaver  ticket.  Table  4:  Impact  of  FareSaver  tickets  on  Revenue  Sources:  (A.  Haas,  personal  communication,  March  7,  2012;  TransLink,  n.d.;  UBC  Thunderbirds,  n.d.)  Table  4  assumes  that  100%  of  spectators  will  receive  FareSaver  tickets.  Table  5  outlines  the  revenue  scenarios  for  regular  season  and  playoff  games  for  varying  success  of  the  program.  “Transit  Ridership”  means  the  percentage  of  total  spectators  who  would  receive  FareSaver  tickets.          Individual  Game  Tickets   Ticket  Cost   Proposed  FareSaver  Discounts   Revenue  Per  Ticket  %  Revenue  Loss  Number  of  Tickets  Sold  Revenue  w/o  FareSavers  Revenue  w/  FareSaver  Discounts  Adult   $10.00   1  adult   $2.10   $7.90   21%   3418   $34,180.00   $27,002.20  Youth,  Seniors,  Visiting  Students   $5.00   1  concession   $1.70   $3.30   34%   1488   $7,440.00   $4,910.40  UBC  Faculty/Staff   $5.00   1  adult   $2.10   $2.90   42%   1488   $7,440.00   $4,315.20  UBC  Students,  UNA   $2.00   No  discount   $2.00   0%   4198   $8,396.00   $8,396.00  Family  Pass  (max  2  adults)   $20.00   2  adult   $4.20   $15.80   21%   169   $3,380.00   $2,670.20  Approximate  Required  Spectator  Increase:   29%     22%   10761   $60,836.00   $47,294.00  [TRANSPORTATION  GROUP  2]   APSC  364      23    Table  5:  Impact  on  Revenue  for  Regular  Season  and  Playoff  Games  Adult  Ticket  Cost   Transit  Ridership   %  Revenue  Loss  Required  Spectator  Increase  Regular   $10.00   100%   22%   29%  Playoffs   $15.00   100%   17%   21%  Regular   $10.00   50%   11%   13%  Playoffs   $15.00   50%   9%   10%  Regular   $10.00   25%   6%   6%  Playoffs   $15.00   25%   4%   5%  Sources:  (A.  Haas,  personal  communication,  March  7,  2012;  TransLink,  n.d.;  UBC  Thunderbirds,  n.d.)  In  order  to  estimate  the  reduction  in  CO2e  emissions  associated  with  25%  transit  ridership  to  UBC  Thunderbirds  games  the  transportation  survey  data  from  Dolf  (forthcoming)  was  used.  The  emissions  factors  used  were  taken  from  the  ecoinvent  database  v2.2  provided  by  the  Swiss  Centre  for  Life  Cycle  Inventories,  and  were  used  assuming  an  average  vehicle  occupancy  rate  of  2.6  for  cars  traveling  to  UBC  Thunderbirds  games.  As  can  be  seen,  the  majority  of  the  emissions  are  caused  by  those  flying,  while  those  driving  cars  cause  bulk  of  the  rest.  It  is  assumed  in  this  estimation  that  all  of  the  spectators  switching  to  transit  use  would  normally  have  driven  to  the  games.  This  assumption  may  not  be  completely  realistic,  since  spectators  who  would  normally  walk  or  cycle  to  events  may  be  inclined  to  take  transit  to  get  a  FareSaver  ticket.                  [TRANSPORTATION  GROUP  2]   APSC  364      24    Table  6:  CO₂e  Emissions  Reduction  Travel  Mode   25%  Transit  Ridership   Business  As  Usual   Emissions  Factors  %  People   t  CO₂  eq   %  People   t  CO₂  eq   Occupancy   kg  CO₂  eq  /  pkm  Bike   2%   0.0   2%   0.0   1   0.0096  City  Bus   25%   0.7   7%   0.2   Ave.   0.1040  Coach  Bus   6%   0.2   6%   0.2   Ave.   0.0520  Car   51%   5.8   68%   7.8   2.6   0.1215  Motorbike   0%   0.0   0%   0.0   1   0.1218  Plane   5%   14.9   5%   14.9   Ave.   0.1258  Walk   10%   0.0   10%   0.0   1   0.0000  Totals   100%   21.6   100%   23.1   Reduction:   7%  Source:  (Dolf,  forthcoming;  Swiss  Centre  for  Life  Cycle  Inventories,  2010)      [TRANSPORTATION  GROUP  2]   APSC  364      25    Appendix  C:  Alternate  Sustainable  Transportation  Options  Over  the  course  of  this  project,  a  number  of  possible  Options  were  brought  to  the  table.  Due  to  the  high  capital   costs   of   some   and   the   close   cooperation   required   by   TransLink   for   others,  we   decided   not   to  investigating  these  options  any  further  and  to  concentrate  on  those  seen  in  the  main  body  of  this  report.  We  have  decided  to  include  our  extra  options  in  the  Appendices  so  that  UBC  A&R  will  have  more  ideas  to  draw  from  than  just  those  presented  in  the  report.    Appendix  C.1  Alternate  Option:  Webcasting  UBC  Sports  Events  Webcasting  UBC  sporting  events  will  be  a  sustainable  way  to  support  UBC  Thunderbirds  without  having  to  travel  to  UBC  via  unsustainable  modes  of  transportation.  In  his  on-­‐going  research,  Dolf  (forthcoming)  found  that  in  a  study  of  eight  UBC  basketball  games,  forty-­‐two  spectators  traveled  on  airplanes  (4.5%)  to  see   the   games   at   UBC.   Compared   to   other   transportation   modes   (i.e.   coach   bus,   transit,   bike,   car),  airplanes  have  the  highest  carbon  footprint.  Webcast  refers  to  a  process  of  streaming  media  on-­‐line  for  viewing  on  a  web  browser  on  a  personal  computer  (Baecker  et  al.,  2007).    If  UBC  A&R  were  to  webcast  sports  events,  there  is  the  potential  that  spectators  will  not  board  airplanes  to  watch  games  as  webcasts  provide  a  way  to  be  a  spectator  at  UBC  A&R  events  without  having  to  travel  to  UBC.  Table  7  summarizes  the  costs  and  benefits  of  webcasting  sports  events.                          [TRANSPORTATION  GROUP  2]   APSC  364      26    Table  7:  Webcasting  Impacts  &  Implications  Economic  cost  implications   Environmental  impacts   Social  impacts/potential  community  response  Low  capital  costs  o Armstrong  Atlantic  University  spent  $5000  in  start-­‐up  costs  in  website  construction,  camera,  and  camera  operators  (Carnevale,  2007)  Virtually  no  GHG  emissions   An  effective  way  to  keep  a  dedicated  fan  base  (Carnevale,  2007)  o Engages  UBC  fans  who  cannot  physically  travel  to  the  games  to  be  able  to  watch  the  sports  events  live  Very  low  projected  operating  costs  o The  consumer  bears  the  cost  of  accessing  a  computer,  internet  o A&R  staff  costs  (i.e.  camera  operator,  web  master)  o Potential  for  generating  money:  Abilene  Christian  University  in  Texas  charges  $89.95  for  a  1-­‐year  subscription  to  their  sports  webcasts  (Carnevale,  2007)  UBC  A&R’s  energy  used  to  stream  the  sports  events  on-­‐line   Positive  community  response  o Saves  the  spectators  time  and  money  because  they  are  not  traveling  to  the  sports  event  (Carnevale,  2007)  o Webcasts  still  offer  a  forum  for  interactive  engagement.  E.g.  instant  messaging/virtual  chatting  with  other  fans  (Baecker  et  al.,  2007)     By  in  large,  the  consumer  bears  the  energy  requirements  to  watch  the  sports  events  Potential  controversy  o May  decrease  attendance  at  sports  events;  UBC  A&R  loses  money  in  ticket  sales  Webcasting   sports   events   is   an   attractive   option   for   UBC   A&R   when   looking   for   ways   to   reduce   the  number  of  spectators  traveling  by  airplane  to  sports  events.  Furthermore,   investment   into  webcasting  technology   provides   a   valuable   research   opportunity   in   the   field   of   community   engagement   and  marketing.  UBC  can  spearhead  an  exciting  field  in  academia:  webcasting  to  achieve  sustainability.  Appendix  C.2  Alternate  Option:  Ride-­‐Sharing  App  UBC  Transportation  Planning  is  seriously  considering  developing  a  real-­‐time  ride-­‐sharing  app  in  order  to  transform  SOV   trips   into  HOV   trips.  The   idea  of  a  mobile  device  app   that  allows  carpooling   is  nothing  new  (Cozza,  2011).  This  app,  called  Carsurfing,  will  match  a  driver  and  rider(s)  who  are  traveling  along  the   same   route.  Carsurfing   is  unique   in   that   it  will   have   “a   fully   automated  cashless  payment   system,  safety   features,   real-­‐time   passenger   information   and   commute   reporting   to   enable  more   flexible   and  verifiable  carpooling”  (Heartline,  2012).  Table  8  summarizes  the  costs  and  benefits  of  webcasting  sports  events.  [TRANSPORTATION  GROUP  2]   APSC  364      27    Table  8:  Ride-­‐Share  App  Impacts  &  Implications  Economic  cost  implications   Environmental  impacts   Social  impacts/potential  community  response  Medium  capital  costs  o UBC  A&R  needs  to  develop  the  App  and  market  it  o The  consumer  bears  the  cost  of  buying  the  app,  using  the  app  on  a  mobile  device  Reduction  in  GHG  by  reducing  the  number  of  SOV   Builds  a  stronger  community  o People  sharing  their  cars,  creates  an  opportunity  for  people  to  interact  Positive  feedback  (Heartline,  2012).  o Saves  money  o Convenient:  doesn’t  have  to  conform  to  rigid  carpooling  schedules  well-­‐in-­‐advance  of  their  travels  Potential  controversy  (Geraci,  2012).  o It  may  be  too  hard  to  find  a  ride  to/from  the  desired  destination  o Lack  of  trust/friend  network  may  be  a  barrier  for  people  to  use  this  app      In  order  for  this  app  to  be  successful  it  needs  to  consider  some  of  the  changes  below:  • Ride-­‐sharing  needs  to  have  more  of  an  incentive  (i.e.  cheaper  parking  for  HOV  than  SOV  on  UBC  campus)  • Marketing  this  app  towards  people  who  make  a  long  commute/an  inter-­‐city  travel;  people  are  more  likely  to  plan  more  for  a  long  trip  than  if  it  were  a  short-­‐distance  trip  or  where  transit  is  abundant  (Geraci,  2012).  • “Users  can  only  see  information  for  the  trips  that  they  are  interested  in.  This  eliminates  unnecessary  noise  and  creates  community  around  specific  routes  that  people  drive  frequently”  (Geraci,  2012).    If   UBC   Transportation   Planning   were   to   commit   to   implementing   this   Carsurfing   app,   then   the   UBC  community’s   transportation   habits   could   become   more   sustainable.    Carsurfing   will   provide   ample  research  opportunities  in  the  field  of  behaviour  change  in  transportation.  [TRANSPORTATION  GROUP  2]   APSC  364      28    Appendix  C.3  Alternate  Option:  UBC  Thunderbirds  Shuttle  Services  The  shuttle  option  is  aimed  to  help  decrease  the  number  of  cars  travelling  from  one  side  of  campus  to  the  other,  and  to  encourage  usage  of  public  transit  to  UBC  Thunderbirds  sporting  events.  As  mentioned,  most   spectators   are   arriving   by   car   to   the   southern   campus   events   and   we   aim   to   decrease   these  numbers  in  order  to  make  UBC  A&R  events  more  sustainable.  Some  of  the  UBC  A&R  facilities  are  located  south  of  the  main  body  of  the  UBC  campus.  These  facilities  include   the   Doug   Mitchell   Thunderbird   Sports   Centre,   the   Tennis   Centre,   Thunderbird   Park,   and  Thunderbird  Arena.  According  to  a  beta  program  from  Google  Maps,  these  facilities  are  on  average  1.5  km  from  the  UBC  Loop  bus  station  and  would  take  approximately  17  minutes  to  walk  to.  This  may  be  an  unacceptable  distance   for  some  users   (parents  with  children,  people  with  disabilities,  etc.),  or  may  be  inconvenient  for  others,  and  as  such  a  high  number  of  people  have  been  seen  to  arrive  by  car  to  UBC  Thunderbirds  games  (as  indicated  by  surveys  taken  by  Dolf  (forthcoming)).  In   order   to   make   the   use   of   transit,   walking,   and   cycling   more   appealing,   we   propose   the   following  options   for   a   shuttle   service   from   the   UBC   Loop   bus   station   to   some   of   the   more   distant   facilities,  namely  Thunderbird  Stadium.  1. Run  a  shuttle  bus  from  UBC  North  Loop  to  Thunderbird  Stadium  (and  perhaps  have  a  few  pick-­‐up  stops  along  the  way)  2. Runs  for  1  hour  before  kickoff  until  15  minutes  after  kickoff  3. Will  run  for  30-­‐60  minutes  (depending  on  needs  of  the  shuttle)  after  the  game,  back  to  UBC  North  Loop  4. Shuttle  service  from  event  to  Mahoney’s  (maybe  also  have  a  combo  package  to  the  restaurant  with  ticket)  5. This  will  use  the  existing  bus  service  offered  by  Mahoney’s  6. Encourages  people  to  visit  the  bar  7. If  people  don’t  want  to  go  to  the  bar,  the  bus  loop  is  within  reasonable  walking  distance  8. Only  enable  shuttle  service  into  and  out  of  event  areas  (mainly  to  prevent  congestion  and  for  safety  around  the  area  for  pedestrians,  cyclists,  etc.)  9. Especially  for  Thunderbird  Stadium,  if  the  parking  lots  will  be  closed  down,  people  will  take  the  shuttle  if  the  shuttle  was  the  only  vehicle  mode  of  transportation  allowed  into  the  area  (along  with  walking  and  cycling)  10. We  can  add  more  incentive  for  using  the  shuttle  option  by  making  it  a  combo  for  people  who  took  transit  or  biked  (match  up  bus  times  or  have  priority  over  those  who  drove?)    The  shuttle  itself  may  not  be  very  sustainable  (depending  on  the  type  of  vehicle  we  use  as  a  shuttle),  but  in  comparison  to  the  alternatives,  may  be  more  convenient  and  reduces  the  amount  of  cars  traversing  campus   if   there   are   events   taking   place   on   different   ends   of   campus.   In   a   way,   we   can   also   raise  awareness  of  sustainability  to  a  broader  audience,  in  hopes  that  there  will  be  behavioural  changes  of  the  [TRANSPORTATION  GROUP  2]   APSC  364      29    people  who  were  exposed  to  this  initiative.  However,  it  may  be  very  costly  to  purchase  shuttles  to  begin  this  proposal.  As  well,  we  don’t  know  for  sure  what  response  we  should  be  expecting  from  users  of  this  shuttle,   since   it  may   be   inconvenient   for   individuals   of   certain   age   groups   (ie.  mothers  with   strollers,  young  children,  elderly,  disabled,  etc.).