Here is a Literary Review, I need a conclusion that summarizes the whole text. 200 words are required

In essence, the framework of a university campus is analogous to a mini-city. Naturally, the significance of public transportation pertaining to the daily activities of college students cannot be understated. In addition, transporting students and staff across various university campuses in a punctual manner poses substantial challenges. As transportation systems are an integral component of a student’s life, most universities offer several means of transportation to help students and staff commute, concurrently adopting the urban transportation system framework. In view of various transport options, effective transportation planners must be formulated to streamline the transportation process for both students and faculty. Notably, the availability of on campus transportation methods suffers from various setbacks owing to a lack of safety and resources. This paper will discuss the university transportation system based on the University of California, San Diego. Furthermore, the inherent relation between these modes of transportation and their contributions to this system will be diligently assessed.

Introduction:
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 inadvertently drive up the price of parking areas. 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 and Toor, 2001).
When students enter a university campus, they are predisposed to choose public transportation and micro-mobility more frequently. Despite owning a personal vehicle, public transportation is generally the best option for attending class as it is relatively cheaper and avoids traffic congestion during parking. Conversely, students residing in close proximity to the campus typically prefer micro-mobility to get to class. For instance, folding bikes and skateboards are portable options for students who drive. In particular, they can utilize skateboards and bikes to move quickly between the parking lot and the classroom. On account of the heavy dependence on automobiles in the United States, the country actively formulates its highway infrastructure accordingly. Specifically, automobiles constitute the primary focus of transportation systems and often drive both the planning and decision-making process (Newman and Kenworthy, 1999). Consequently, major cities in the United States lack strong, well-maintained public transportation systems. Fortunately, the city of San Diego preemptively developed a robust transportation system with subways, buses, trains, and other reliable, clean, and inexpensive means of public transportation, as evidenced by the diverse university transportation system in UC San Diego. Presently, the UC San Diego transportation system comprises three crucial components—public transportation (campus shuttles and the San Diego Trolley Blue Line), micro-mobility (bicycles and scooters), and private automobiles for both students and faculty (personal cars and taxicabs like Uber). Intrinsically, the correlation between the three components forms a comprehensive campus transportation system. Furthermore, this paper discusses the characteristics of individual transportation modes and their inherent relationship.
Public Transportation System on Campus:
In San Diego, California, the notion of transit-oriented development (TOD) has attained widespread popularity and remains a well-established concept for the construction of public streetcars (Boarnet, Marlon G.1999). In November 2021, the City of San Diego Light Rail officially inaugurated the Blue Line trolley connecting to the University of California, San Diego. The inception of the new station offers academics, staff, and students a safe, dependable, and affordable alternative to driving while concurrently easing traffic congestion and parking demand. There are seven on campus shuttles that transport students to various venues in the college. Additionally, the campus bus routes are connected to the trolley station, facilitating students’ travel convenience. Presently, a vast majority of UC San Diego employees, staff, and students choose to travel by alternate modes of transportation. According to UCSD, a predicted rise in passenger numbers will aid in promoting overall sustainability.
On the topic of encouraging staff and students to choose public transit, convincing individuals to leave their automobiles represents a major obstacle. Notably, innovative transit (especially light rail, subway, and bus rapid transit) systems can rival automobile modes and fulfill pent-up demand stemming from deteriorating road traffic conditions. Moreover, these systems can increase average transit travel speeds and provide reliable service under densely-populated and high-demand conditions (Chakrabarti, 2017). Above all, one core tenet of TOD is to elevate transit convenience. Public transit-directed regions can provide unique contributions to car-dominated environments by enriching the scale of infrastructure and commercial development. For instance, the following illustration provides suitable methods of improving transportation accessibility: Over a million individuals can travel for free thanks to a new scheme implemented by emerging transit agencies and institutions. Over the past ten years, such an “unlimited access” scheme has witnessed exponential growth. In actuality, programs with unlimited access do not offer free transportation. Conversely, they showcase a revolutionary monetization strategy. Firstly, qualified university community members can travel for free as the institution funds the transportation provider (Brown, 2003). Secondly, UC San Diego provides safe and convenient public transportation. Likewise, on-campus shuttle buses encompass the entire campus, with the inclusion of a weekend route to the Convey business district. Finally, students can avail of free bus services to ride the MTS buses in San Diego City. Overall, such measures have greatly encouraged students and faculty to opt for public transportation.
With the advent of the COVID-19 pandemic, the contribution of the current on-campus public transportation system is witnessing a downward trend in daily ridership. Evidently, such a drastic decline can be attributed to elevated anxiety among transit users and lowered psychological distance stemming from COVID-19, thereby negatively affecting the individual’s perceived safety and transit satisfaction (Javad, E. 2022). Nonetheless, public transportation employees’ solemn duty to safeguard users during a pandemic, maintain their well-being and accommodate travel requirements. Subsequently, operators of public transit must aptly reorient their operational models. In order to prevent passenger overflow, a higher frequency of services should be added in conjunction with the physical separation of people. In addition, the traveler’s perception could be reoriented in accordance with space and time to improve their psychological distance from the epidemic (Dong et al. 2021). For instance, waiting areas at bus and subway stops could be appropriately segregated to prevent congestion. To date, UCSD Transportation Services caters to the needs of passengers by installing physical partitions in every vehicle and providing safety precautions in the form of hand sanitizers and face masks. Thus, such preventive actions would safeguard the passenger’s physical and mental well-being while minimizing people’s distrust of public transportation.

Micro-mobility System on Campus:
At the UC San Diego campus, shared bikes, scooters, and skateboards remain the popular transportation choice among students, which also comprises an extensive micro-mobility network of personal transportation devices (PTDs). Presumably, the ability of shared scooters to complement public transportation by addressing the “first/last mile conundrum” highlights a key value proposition that aligns with the marketing tactics for scooter operators (Abubakr Ziedan,2021). Due to the compact size and portability, people use such transportation devices to travel shorter distances while selecting public or private cars for greater distances. Despite the various benefits of PTDs, they can also result in potential safety hazards. With the booming popularity of micro-mobility, the safety standards of non-bicycle PTDs have recently led to severe traffic violations. As a consequence of the prevalent nature of PTDs and micro-models, regulations concerning interactions among road users in crowded cities and college campuses have culminated in complicated disputes (Dohyung Kim,2021).
Initial conflict: The issue of uncurbed parking of scooters on campus has garnered notoriety. Despite the good intentions of promoting shared scooters on college campuses, the problem of indiscriminate parking on campus is becoming increasingly apparent. Firstly, the root cause of the aforementioned dilemma can be attributed to the rising number of electric scooters and the subsequent lack of charging piles and parking areas to accommodate them. In general, micro-mobility bikes require a large number of parking points, which are usually located throughout the university. Consequently, students are inclined to park their bikes close to their destination, resulting in widespread congestion. Thus, institutions permitting the use of shared scooters should adequately plan the construction of parking areas while concurrently adding sufficient devices. Secondly, scooter users are unable to use and park their scooters in a regulated manner. When electric scooters were first introduced at Arizona State University (ASU), they were eventually banned from campus or banned through geo-fencing. Nonetheless, electric scooters were discovered on campus despite stringent university policies prohibiting their usage (Sanders, Rebecca L,2020). Evidently, accurate parking positioning systems are actively employed by scooter-sharing companies. As the accuracy level of a virtual electronic fence is similar to an actual one, implementing such a measure would prompt students to park in their designated location. Theoretically, parking the scooter a foot outside the specified box would still be ruled as a parking violation, rendering the user incapable of disengaging the lock or checking out their scooter. By virtue of technological advancements and instilling self-awareness in the user, it is possible to streamline the process of uniform scooter parking and avoid future conflict.
In addition, PTDs are highly susceptible to collision with pedestrians and vehicles on campus. According to a study conducted by the University of California, Pomona, on the probability of collisions with bicycles, skateboards, push scooters, and electric skateboards, it was revealed that the likelihood of collisions on campus was linked to the type of PTD. Specifically, the chances of near collisions were significantly higher in non-bicycle PTD riders compared to bicycle riders, which can be accredited to the size of non-bicycle PTDs. In particular, such devices do not require the same amount of space as a bicycle and permit PTD riders to possess superior maneuverability around pedestrians. Consequently, these riders are emboldened to approach pedestrians when riding in a dense pedestrian environment (Dohyung Kim,2021). Accordingly, both UCSD and the University of Illinois at Champaign-Urbana (UIUC) have built new bike lanes to separate micro-transportations from pedestrians, enhance access to PTDs, and promote safety. Thus, the institution can utilize the network of bike lanes to its fullest potential. As the nation’s infrastructure system adopts a gradual approach to include bikeways, fewer vehicles have collided with people (Gharaibeh, N,1998). While using PTDs on campus, wearing protective gear like a helmet and being mindful of other road participants are vitally important. Through the implementation of the above solutions, the frequency of on campus safety accidents regarding PTD can be reduced.

Private automobiles on campus:
The United States has a very high dependence on automobiles. The automobile is not only the focal point of the transportation system but also the most popular form of transportation. Most UCSD students and staff now travel to school by car, most of them driving themselves, and a small percentage taking online rides (such as Uber and Lyft). For instance, many universities start their classes early in the morning, which has an impact on how quickly teachers, staff, and students can get to campus. Concentrated vehicle arrivals result in long lines extending from parking lots to nearby arterial roads and motorways. (Bustillos,2011)
While there are many different campus vehicular traffic planning concerns facing university planners, one of the greatest difficulties is ensuring there is enough parking and putting solutions in place to reduce traffic congestion in and out of parking lots. (Tsai 2004) Parking has long been acknowledged in campus planning as a significant land use issue. Anyone who owns a car is aware of how difficult it can be to locate parking on university campuses and in locations with a lot of student housing and recreational opportunities. As automobile ownership and registration on campus have expanded, the parking issue around activity areas has gotten worse. The issue is significantly more severe, and the need for a solution is even more pressing for major urban campuses that are situated in or close to important business areas.Universities often have campuses in either urban or rural regions, and these campuses have different layouts depending on where they are located. Rural campuses often have horizontal connections, whereas urban campuses typically have vertical connections. Compared to urban campuses, rural campuses often depend more on automobiles. Walking is the preferred form of transit even when other, superior ways of transportation are possible, even though most campuses do not totally ban the usage of cars. (Engwicht,1993) The location is in the city of UC San Diego, but the neighboring public transit is not as good as it is in New York City. Still, a large number of pupils opt to get to school by automobile. UCSD has gradually banned students from driving by raising parking costs to encourage them to use public transportation more often. The 11% increase may have influenced the rise in campus traffic ridership in 2001 in campus parking costs that took effect in July 2000. (Brown, 2003) There is no doubt that the UCLA initiative has been a success. This behavioral model UCSD is currently using as well.
To get to campus, some UCSD students and faculty members presently use on-demand ride services like Uber and Lyft. The study’s findings indicate that ridesourcing fills a gap in urban transport that was previously unfulfilled. Despite the commonalities between taxis and ridesourcing, the study’s findings showed that users’ experiences varied. When opposed to taxis, ridesourcing has substantially shorter and more reliable wait times. Like taxis, ridesharing seems to both supplement and replace public transit. (Rayle, L，2014) It is obvious that ridesourcing is fundamentally the usage of a car despite all of its advantages. Traffic jams, high gas prices, increased travel expenses, and vehicle emissions are all consequences of driving. Additionally, a lot of cars stop on the side of the road or in inconvenient places to wait for passengers, which causes traffic bottlenecks. All of these concerns relate to ridesourcing. However, in essence, drop-off and pick-up zones might be created on campus by transportation planners. On-campus traffic congestion would be less of a concern.