OWNSY STADIUM TRAFFIC SIMULATION OREM 4390 Senior Design May 11, 1988 Karl Groesser Don McClure Tony Pache OWNBY STADIUM TRAFFIC SIMULATION OREM 4390 Senior Design May 11, 1988 Karl Groesser Don McClure Tony Pache - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - OWNH3Y s H AD I LJTV TRAFFIC SIMULATION Senior Design Presentation OREM 4390 April 29, 1988 I I I Table of Contents OBJECTIVE 1 I BACKGROUND 1 ON-CAMPUS STADIUM ALTERNATIVES 2 GOAL 4 I RESEARCH 4 ASSUMPTIONS 5 Stadium seating capacity of 32,000 6 Number of people arriving per car Is 3.6 7 I Number of people within walking distance is 8,000 7 Number of cars expected to arrive for the game is 6667 8 System boundaries 8 I Parking on Bishop Boulevard 8 Arriving traffic only, no departing traffic 9 Distribution of arriving traffic 9 DATA GATHERING 10 I THE MODEL 11 Reasons for SLAM 11 11 MODEL OVERVIEW 12 I Assumptions Within the Model 12 Entities Entering the System. 13 Program Coding 14 Intersections With Stop Signs 15 I Intersections With Traffic Lights 16 SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS 17 Case 1 Results I Case 2 Results Case 3 Results SUMMARY OF SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS 21 I RECOMMENDATIONS 21 CONCLUSIONS 23 I APPENDICES I I I I I I IOBJECTIVE Our objective is to develop a simulation network I modeling the arrival traffic flow to a football game In • Ownby Stadium. BACKGROUND In 1987, the National Collegiate Athletics Association (NCAA) slugged Southern Methodist University (SMU) with the death penalty for football recruiting violations. This penalty meant that SMU would not play football at all In 1987. SMU later voluntarily dropped football for the 1988 season as we I . in the catharsis that fol lowed the death penalty announcement, a reevaluation of academic and extracurricular needs was begun. A professional atmosphere was linked to several of the football violations. One proposal to remove the professional atmosphere and return the amateur status to collegiate athletics was to move the football games back on campus. Football has always been important to SMU. According to the 1987 Rotunda: When the doors of Dallas Hall opened 1915, university bishops realized In order to have a first-rate university, the school needed a football team. So the bishops allotted $2,000 to hire Ray Morrison, who arrived on campus to find no team, no schedule, and no field. Several temporary fields were used both on and off campus, but the need for a large on-campus stadium became I Ownby Stadium Traffic Simulation 2 apparent. in 1926, construction work was begun on Ownby stadium. This 18,000 seat facility was the home of the Mustangs until after World War Ii when the likes of Kyle Rote, Bob Folsolm, and Professional Football Hall of Famer IDoak Walker filled Ownby beyond capacity. SMU was forced to look for a larger stadium. I The Cotton Bowl was built In 1930, but it was expanded greatly when the Mustangs moved into It in 1948. These expansions eventually brought the seating capacity to 75,503 and gave the Cotton Bowl a nickname--"the house that Doak I built." The Cotton Bowl served the Mustangs well for 30 years. In 1978, the Mustangs moved to Texas Stadium in Irving. Poor attendance and lack of excitement were reasons cited for the move. it was an obvious recruiting advantage to tell prospective football players that they would be playing In the same stadium as America's team--the Dallas Cowboys. For nine seasons all was well until in 1987, the death penalty was levied against SMU. ON-CAMPUS STADIUM ALTERNATIVES There are two alternatives for using an on-campus stadium. The first Is to scrap everything presently in place and build a new stadium. The Independent "Return Football to Campus" Committee recommended a cut and fill stadium similar to that in place at Stanford and Yale (see I I — — — — — — .- •*ATM;_-- tDOPMI1ORY L, r I IP 1 jLJ I--i I I I I I L___j LJ r"ooDl. I1AGC,A1 - COLItOr' TENNIS - --I. STADIUM I I I I 6 I I L Iex 1!5rlmepI A 1teMrAI. I4A1L. C I I-i I COMPLEX E CE1-4T f? (.PPoxii R 3 I I cI 0 g L.____ W 4WD C, I!,UILOHJG ID \ o 4.ocF'c.S OI(6 It Rcr,vj BIC. ( ID PRAc1tt INTRAMURAL- 4D ( FIELD 1° Jo n - \\ \ Ci 61 I 0-- I I -flflI ;.I t , ID 2LIL1 ________ 0 Irni'I rr=T9 POTENTIAL MEW STADIUM SITE POittTi D d Poicrn' II' 5MU CAMPUS P BOItDIPE1PUC.ATN IO i __________- PDUCAT 1I'4 ) L 'I 0 F-TPARRING o MOT ',HO\.Vp4 2 UPJoerkC,Rou pID PAP 0 (LOtAtto UMOlt if oFIELD FIELD PtR II. aTER. cits.o) 0 oID - P-i O I'i .- ri .I r, 0 0 () - c r) r' I fl 1 V I Ownby Stadium Traffic Simulation 3 Appendix A). The new stadium would provide for: - Appropriate ground level recreational facilities (Intramural fields and landscaped setting. Practice areas for football, soccer, cheer leading, and band use. Parking In underground garages with practice fields on the top level. A campus pedestrian esplanade (Ownby Street) which would focus on the north end of the stadium. The only problem with this new stadium Is cost. Presently - SMU is in a financial crisis and does not have the money to build the new stadium. Also a new sense of academic priorities has been stated by the present administration. These priorities include building a new Engineering School before a new stadium is built. The second alternative is to upgrade Ownby with temporary bleachers to hold the minimum number of fans as required by the NCAA. The SMU Athletic Director, Doug ? Single, has indicated that this second alternative will be( If at all possible; )therefore, the problems of traffic flow and parking in the existing areas has become a primary concern. I I .1 — — as — UI FRATERNITY.' H O U SES . S •, .. - — — — -- PSIUQUT REsIDENCE I . , HALL •tI COMPLEX ./'-.\ IL ir r .1.. AN •'cm7 I,' (ARPUNG1 L TRACK • 1 . i LOT • J -c £ ?41' E a J it I FIELD I. 'COMPLEX ': U :2) ' -•' PORTIO14 OF SPU CAMPUS oI I I3.' I:i:....:.o11, 1 ( !IG w q!) - 1;"c. I P#JVIKII I. !'"" , I :.v '.:: . 1i1' •. I II u.I. •1••. •I•I•1•• •. •II•••I•••••I::-. • ::• • i .:.• •:• :• :.:•'..• •:.:.:.1. a •,J• ?r • WitII aI aI ,I . • I 1 I ii , • •••. .'.':D..'.',' • :: ::i:.:.:'::: • •:. •:.::* c_. _______________________________________ r •:•::•<::•:•:•: ; • • : ..:::;:: : • :'. i z A •• • • •)• • :: ,:':•.'•: : •':'i ' PRIVATE 1-$OU5E PARKING LOT I I L.,..:. :•:•:•:•:•:•:•: : . II.• I. • Z........... - E r p p u p -' lj •,• •..,.)c LLA. C, I:0t:i1 .•. ... ...: • l;:::• : ::: ::: : • •, •':•::: 1 :f I 1r'a.I II_• 1 rrfNU .C.NILP'( OPEN . FICLD Si I Ownby Stadium Traffic Simulation 4 GOAL The goal of our project Is to predict problem areas (streets and intersections) and to recommend alternatives for minimizing traffic entity time In system. RESEARCH We researched past situations where large crowds were handled on campus. A SMU Department of Public Safety report dated October 21, 1983, describes a traffic plan for SMU basketball games (see Appendix B). SMU DPS also told us that the crowds will disperse after a basketball game in 16 minutes when officers direct the traffic and in 18 mInutes If they do not. Our observations indicated that IMPOst of the traffic plan described in the report was not followed by DPS for the 1988 season. We s p eculate that the plan was not helpful enough, and that the traffic was able to proceed In a safe and timely manner both to and from the bal igame thus there was no need for the plan. We also consulted the SMU physical plant and Inquired on any Information regarding the Dallas Tornado professional soccer team that played at Ownby Stadium in the late '70s. The director of the. physical plant, H. L. Patterson, Jr. Indicated that crowds for the soccer games were relatively small compared to plans for a football stadium, and that the basketball parking procedures were adequate at that time. He also mentioned that parking was still available on I 1 I Ownby Stadium Traffic Simulation 5 I Bishop, In the lot where the Hughes-Trigg Student Center Is - now located, and in the lot where the Maguire building is now located. The preliminary research Indicated that the past data would not be extremely useful because of the number of cars In our problem as compared to the number of cars in previous studies. in order to effectively simulate a network of a large size, we chose to limit our model to the areas on campus. The model is developed in a modular form so that another group could come in and develop the relevant areas outside of our system boundaries. ASSUMPTIONS Stadium seating capacity of 32,000. Number of people arriving per car is 3.6. Number of people within walking distance of stadium Is 8000. Number of cars expected to arrive for the game Is 6667; (32,000 - 8,000)/3.6 = 6667. System boundaries. Parking on Bishop Boulevard. Arriving traffic only, no departing traffic. I I r-hr/ ,I"- Ownby Stadium Traffic Simulation 6 I Distribution of arriving traffic: From Percentage I East 60% West 25% I North 15% South Not significant i Discussion of Assumptions Stadium seating capacity of 32,000 When we first decided to do our senior design project on the new proposed on-campus stadium, we met with SMU Athletic Director, Doug Single, to discuss the plans for this new stadium. Mr. Single supplied us with all the Information regarding a plan to renovate Ownby Stadium in order to have a seating capacity of 24,000 people.