BOISE STATE UNIVERSITY BOISE, IDAHO

Transcription

1 BOISE STATE UNIVERSITY BOISE, IDAHO Prepared for: Boise State University, Department of Transportation and Parking Services August 6, 2010

2 WALKER PARKING CONSULTANTS 5350 S. Roslyn Street, Suite 220 Greenwood Village, CO Voice: Fax: August 6, 2010 Mr. Jared Everett, MBA, CPFM Executive Director of Finance and Planning Boise State University 1910 University Drive Boise, Idaho Re: Parking Master Plan Update Boise State University Walker Project # Dear Mr. Everett: Walker Parking Consultants is pleased to present the following Parking Master Plan Update for Boise State University. This document is organized into three sections: Parking Needs Update, Event Parking Plan, and Mission Statement. The Mission Statement section is based on the findings from the other two sections and is intended to help reestablish the core principles for the Department of Transportation and Parking Services. These principals should, in turn, be used to guide policies regarding parking pricing, enforcement, and future development. This report is intended to update a previous parking analysis completed by Walker in We have enjoyed the opportunity to work with Boise State University on this project. Please feel free to contact me with any questions. Sincerely, WALKER PARKING CONSULTANTS Jeremiah J. Simpson Parking Consultant Enclosure J:\ BSU_Parking_MasterPlan_09\Reports\rpt Boise_State.doc

3 PARKING MASTER PLAN UPDATE BOISE STATE UNIVERSITY BOISE, ID Prepared for: BOISE STATE UNIVERSITY, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION AND PARKING SERVICES PROJECT NO

4 PROJECT # EXECUTIVE SUMMARY... ii TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION Master Plan Background... 1 Parking Study Objectives... 2 Parking Map... 3 SECTION 1: PARKING NEEDS UPDATE EXISTING SUPPLY AND DEMAND Survey Day Parking Demand... 4 Effective Supply Design Day Parking Demand Existing Parking Demand Conclusions PROJECTED FUTURE CONDITIONS Projected Enrollment Changes Projected Parking Demand Impacts Projected Parking Supply Changes Projected Overall Parking Surplus/Deficits Future Parking Demand Conclusions Limiting Conditions PARKING MANAGEMENT Summary of Parking Management Discussions Parking Management Best Practices for Universities Permit Fee Comparison SECTION 2: EVENT PARKING PLAN EVENT PARKING PLAN BSU Event Parking Procedures Recommendation Justification EVENT PARKING BEST PRACTICES Best Practices on Event Parking Fees Shuttle Services Parking Access & Revenue Control Systems Full Wireless Event System Operation Signage LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES Table 1: BSU Parking Occupancies by Stall and Facility Type (April 2009) Page 8 Table 2: Recommended Effective Supply Adjustments by Stall Type Page 12 Table 3: Projected Design Day Surplus / Deficit Page 13 Table 4: BSU and CWI Enrollment for Recent Semesters Page 15 Table 5: Student and Faculty/Staff Growth Projections Page 17 Table 6: Student and Faculty/Staff Parking Demand Ratios Page 18 Table 7: Student and Faculty/Staff Parking Demand Projections Page 19 Table 8: On-Street Parking Displacement Assumptions Page 21 Table 9: Projected 5-Year and 10-Year Parking Surplus / Deficits Page 22 Table 10: BSU Parking Permit Fees Page 32 Table 11: Comparison of BSU Parking Permit Fees Page 33 Table 12: Possible Garage #3 Comparison Page 48 Table 13: Revenue Needed to Support New Parking Construction Page 49 Figure 1: BSU Campus Parking Map ( ) Page 3 Figure 2: Parking Occupancy Summary (April 2009) Page 4 Figure 3: BSU Campus Street Map Page 5 Figure 4: BSU Parking Utilization by Facility Type (April 2009) Page 9 Figure 5: BSU Parking Utilization by Lot Restrictions (April 2009) Page 10 Figure 6: BSU Historical Enrollment (Fall 1999 Fall 2008) Page 16 Figure 7: Projected 5- and 10-Year Growth (estimates) Page 16 Figure 8: Projected 5- and 10-Year Surplus / Deficits Page 23 Figure 9: Parking Priorities Triangle Page 26 Figure 10: FPC Parking Feedback Survey Summary of Top Priorities Page 31 Figure 11: Sample Special Event Sign Examples Page 46 Figure 12: Possible Garage #3 Locations Page 47

5 PROJECT # POSSIBLE GARAGE #3 Possible Event Garage (Garage #3) Locations Cost of an Event Garage SECTION 3: MISSION STATEMENT MISSION STATEMENT Subsidized Versus Market-Based Background Purpose of a Mission Statement Proposed Mission Statement APPENDIX A --- Inventory and Occupancy Data APPENDIX B --- BSU Historical Enrollment Data APPENDIX C --- Parking Best Practices & University Rate Survey

6 PROJECT # Boise State University recently hired Walker Parking Consultants to prepare the following Parking Master Plan Update. This report is intended to supplement the University s latest Master Plan and update findings from the previous parking study which was completed in Specific areas of focus for this report include updated demand projections (taking into account new growth and development scenarios), recommendations concerning special event parking, and a revised Mission Statement for the Department of Transportation and Parking Services to help guide future policies and procedures. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Parking Demand Findings Parking survey data was collected for the campus in April This baseline data was then adjusted to reflect appropriate design day conditions based on current enrollment and comparison to the 2001 statistics. Based on this analysis, Walker concludes the following: As of the 2009/2010 academic year the campus had an effective parking surplus of roughly 480 stalls. However, prior to fall 2010, new development is expected to displace some 438 net spaces. The Lincoln Garage expansion will add 647 spaces prior to fall This addition will be offset somewhat by the addition of new student housing and roughly 400 new beds in August Unrestricted street parking near the campus is expected to decrease over time as new development occurs on these blocks and some new restrictions are enacted. For mid- and long-range projections, Walker has assumed a 2.2% growth rate in enrollment to match historical averages from 1999 through Assumptions regarding on-campus housing were provided by BSU and call for a total of 3,600 on campus beds by 2013 and 5,500 on campus beds by The campus currently supports 2,200 on-campus students. Using the growth scenarios provided, Walker recommends adding 1,235 new parking spaces by Year 5 (fall 2014). These spaces would be in addition to the Lincoln Garage expansion. Walker projects a total need for roughly 2,250 spaces by fall ii

7 PROJECT # Special Event Parking Plan After reviewing the special event parking policies at BSU, Walker strongly recommends that the Transportation and Parking Services department transition from its current per lot fee system to a per space fee for all event types. The justification for this policy would be to bring special event parking in line with the department s stated goal to share parking system costs equitably between all users. At this time, Walker recommends an initial charge of $5 per space per event which is equivalent to BSU s current rate for 4.5 hours. All events would be charged this rate regardless of sponsor. For larger special events, patrons would continue to pay a plus premium rate for parking. $5 of this charge would then be returned to BSU Transportation and Parking Services department to help offset parking costs and fund future parking development. The remaining portion of the premium parking rate would still go back to the to the event sponsor. Other recommendations included under this section include creating an on-line master events calendar for parking reservations and also setting a tier rate schedule for flat fees for large events to cover shuttle service, extra equipment, and extra parking event staffing. Mission Statement Based on conversations with the BSU Transportation and Parking Services department, Walker feels that the following concepts are ones that should be incorporated into both the Mission and Policy statements for the department: The BSU Department of Transportation and Parking Services exists to actively facilitate vehicular and transit-oriented access to, from, and within the University s campus. This goal of providing this access is to help support the University s operational vision as a Metropolitan Research University of Distinction while promoting Academic Excellence, Public Engagement, Vibrant Culture, and Excellent Research. As much as possible, the department strives to be a selfsustaining auxiliary unit which promotes fiscal responsibility. Operationally, the department promotes the following as core strategies: iii

8 PROJECT # o o o Costs are spread equitably between all user groups Operations are transparent and customer focused Students, faculty, and staff have a role in setting prices and policies through the oversight of the Parking Advisory Committee A revised Mission Statement for the department has been proposed on page 55 of this report. Walker encourages all stakeholders to review the rest of this report document for a full discussion on our methodology and findings. iv

9 From 2000 to 2009, enrollment at Boise State University ( BSU ) increased from roughly 16,500 students to over 18,900 students. 1 Over this same period, the University experienced a significant amount of new development including the addition of new athletics facilities and academic buildings, expansion of the student union and recreation center, and two new parking garages. Attendance for campus sporting events also increased, due in part to growing national attention on BSU programs such as football and basketball. INTRODUCTION Previously, Walker Parking Consultants ( Walker ) completed a number of parking studies for the campus, the most recent in January Due to the amount of growth and new development since then, the University asked Walker to prepare an update to the previous study. The primary purpose of the current update is to complement the University s master plan which was also recently revised from its previous (2005) version. MASTER PLAN BACKGROUND In 2003, BSU hired Dr. Kustra as the new university president. With the new administration, increased emphasis was placed on campus growth, sustainability, and the construction of new facilities. An updated Master Plan for the campus was prepared by ZGF Architects and Planners. The Master Plan contains options to expand the boundaries of the campus to include blocks located south of University Drive between Lincoln Ave. and Denver Ave. Expansion in this direction has been going on for several years. The campus is physically constrained on the north by the Boise River and on the east and west by major streets making the southeast quadrant the most logical for future expansion. As part of the Master Plan, the campus is preparing for several immediate projects including the new NORCO building which was recently opened off of Belmont Street, and the pending expansion of the Lincoln Garage. Longer range plans include the possible addition of new student housing and services to the south of University Drive, proposed green space development within the campus core, new pedestrian and vehicular circulation routes, and new or expanded parking options. 1 Statistics are based on the BSU Enrollment Services website. As of spring 2010, enrollment was roughly 18,250 students, a 4.1% increase over the previous spring semester. Parking utilization data used for this study was collected in April 2009; therefore spring and fall 2009 enrollment figures are used for this analysis. 1

10 Off-site parking is also being considered for long-term parking and vehicular storage especial for on-campus resident students. It is assumed that the parking system will play a major role in successfully implementing the growth and sustainability scenarios outlined in the Master Plan. PARKING STUDY OBJECTIVES The primary objectives of this parking study update are as follows: Task Parking Needs Update: Update the 2001 parking supply and demand findings by revisiting the current conditions on the campus and projecting the impact of the revised Master Plan (including new developments, possible parking lot displacement, and future growth scenarios). Task 1 also includes an updated discussion on parking management. Task Event Parking Plan: Review the current parking management policies and pricing specifically for event parking. Make recommendations to improve the way that event parking is currently managed. Task Mission Statement Recommendations: Incorporate findings from Tasks 1 and 2 into a revised mission statement for the Department of Transportation & Parking Services. The updated mission statement will be used to help direct parking policies and address questions such as: Should parking continue to be self-supporting? How much should parking help to fund transit and/or other campus departments? How should parking fees be set? What role should the system play in managing potential parking demand (through fees, policies, etc.)? How does BSU s system compare to other similar colleges and universities? BSU Feedback and Involvement All three tasks of this study include feedback and interaction with the BSU Transportation and Parking Service Department, the administration, special event representatives, and other student, campus, and faculty focus groups. Prior to this report, Walker attended two sets of meetings each with parking staff, the parking advisory committee, and event venue representatives. Walker also attended one meeting with the office of the president and one meeting with the Facilities Planning Counsel ( FPC ). A written feedback survey was distributed to FPC members. FPC feedback will be discussed under the parking management section of this report. 2

11 PARKING MAP Figure 1 below shows the location of parking resources on the BSU campus for the academic year. Note that a revised version of this map is available for the year; however some of the parking designations have changed since the field data was collected for this analysis in April of A larger version of this map is included in Appendix A along with the parking inventory and occupancy survey data. The parking survey data is discussed in more detail under the next section. Figure 1: BSU Campus Parking Map ( ) *Source: Boise State University, 2009 ( 3

12 SECTION 1: PARKING NEEDS UPDATE

13 Parking supply and demand survey data was collected by Boise State students and BSU parking department staff on Monday, April 27, and Tuesday, April 28, These two dates were selected to represent typical mid- semester weekday conditions for spring Both Monday and Tuesday counts were collected since class schedules are typically somewhat different for Monday-Wednesday-Friday classes versus Tuesday-Thursday classes. Parking occupancy counts were collected at 9:00 am, 11:00 am, 1:00 pm, 3:00 pm, 5:00 pm, and 7:00 pm for both survey dates. Complete inventory and occupancy data is available in Appendix A. EXISTING SUPPLY AND DEMAND SURVEY DAY PARKING DEMAND As indicated in Appendix A, parking counts were broken down into four separate zones and then collected on a lot by lot basis (or by block) and by user group type or restriction. Figure 2 below shows a summary of the entire campus-wide parking occupancy data. Figure 2: Parking Occupancy Summary (April 2009) 8,000 7,613 7,000 6,000 5,000 4,000 3,000 4,230 5,056 4,768 5,565 5,557 4,601 4,084 5,099 3,355 3,086 2,841 2,920 2,000 1, :00 AM 11:00 AM 1:00 PM 3:00 PM 5:00 PM 7:00 PM Monday Occupancy Tuesday Occupancy Supply *Source: Walker Parking Consultants, 2010 Peak parking occupancy conditions were observed at 11:00 am on Tuesday (4/28/09) when 5,565 of the 7,613 total campus and onstreet parking spaces were occupied. This total represents a peak hour occupancy rate of roughly 73%. It should be noted that the survey dates selected do not necessarily reflect peak overall parking conditions that typically occur near the beginning of each semester. 4

14 Several adjustments have been made later in this section to more closely approximate parking conditions on an appropriate design day. Survey Zones As indicated previously, the parking survey data is broken down into four zones. The general boundaries of each zone are as follows: Zone 1: Northwest portion of campus and all BSU parking located at and west of the Public Affairs & Arts West Building; Zone 2: Central portion of campus located between Lincoln Street and the Public Affairs West Building and also the residential blocks south of University and north of Boise Ave; Zone 3: Southeast portion of campus between Lincoln Ave., University Dr., Broadway Ave., and Beacon Street; Zone 4: Northeast portion of campus including the stadium lots, Bronco s Circle, and overflow parking at Julia Davis Park. Figure 3: BSU Campus Street Map Zone 1 Zone 4 Zone 2 Zone 3 *Source: Walker Parking Consultants (from Google Maps, 2010) 5

15 The zone definitions themselves are relatively arbitrary and were established primarily to match the data collected for the 2001 study. In total, the BSU campus area is less than one mile long by less than 0.4 miles wide. Therefore, it is reasonable to assume that the majority of students and faculty can (potentially) park at one location and access the rest of the campus on foot. We assume that the walkability of the campus will be heavily promoted as part of any Master Plan improvements that are made over the next several years. Note that students, faculty, and staff are more likely to park in one location all day and walk to other destinations if the parking permits are only good for selected lots or zones, and hourly rates are enforced for all other parking. Pay-by-space kiosks in the garages allow for some flexibility as any group can always purchase sort-term parking if they need to access a part of campus that is not close to where their permit is assigned. Campus Adjacent Parking It should be noted that some amount of parking demand for Julia Davis Park is included in our occupancy totals for Zone 4. Many of the parking spaces near the river are used by students. Therefore, we have included this demand in our baseline demand ratios (i.e., number of cars parked at peak per enrolled student). However, our calculations do not include Julia Davis Park in our parking inventory count. The parking north of the river is not specifically owned by the University. At some future point, the City may opt to enforce parking restrictions; in which case, the University should plan to accommodate these cars either on-campus or at another remote facility. Likewise, residential blocks south of University Drive (in Zone 2 and Zone 3), and residential blocks west of South Capitol Blvd (in Zone 1) are also included in our counts. Walker was instructed by BSU to include these inventories in our counts to match up as closely as possible with 2001 data collection efforts. Any parking that is signed for No Parking or No Parking 7 am 5 pm was excluded from the totals. Therefore the figures include only on-street spaces that are potentially available to commuter students and staff that choose to park on these residential blocks near to campus. Some residential cars may also be factored in though many of the residents on these blocks are also likely to be off-campus resident students. Based on comparisons with the 2001 study, we assume that 50% of the demand for unrestricted street parking (per our counts) is BSU-related demand. 6

16 Under the next section of the report, we have calculated some annual percentage loss in available on-street spaces due to both new construction and added residential neighborhood restrictions over time. By 2020 we assume that roughly half of the existing 1,245 street spaces will still be available for open parking. This assumption, along with the timetable was provided by BSU Transportation and Parking staff. Parking Occupancies by Facility and Group Since the four zones do not represent unreasonable distances between uses, the majority of this parking analysis will focus on how spaces are utilized based on user groups and restrictions. Table 1 on the following page provides a detailed breakdown of parking occupancy data and percentages by user group and space type. (For more detail on zone by zone utilization, please see Appendix A). Figures 4 and 5 present the same occupancy data, but demonstrate more clearly how the utilization of the BSU parking system varies by facility type and by restrictions (within the lots). As would be expected, on-street parking and surface lots tend to be more heavily utilized than the garages. Meanwhile, general parking and Resident Hall parking within the lots is the most utilized segment by restriction. 7

17 Monday Occupancies (4/27/09) Table 1: BSU Parking Occupancies by Stall and Facility Type (April 2009) Facility Type Stall Type Total Inventory 9:00 AM 11:00 AM 1:00 PM 3:00 PM 5:00 PM 7:00 PM Parking Garage All 1,991 1,004 1,133 1, On-Street All 1, Parking Lot General 1, ,096 1, Reserved 1, Res Hall Metered / Pay Housing ADA Julia Davis Park n/a Totals 7,613 4,230 4,768 4,601 4,084 3,086 2,841 Monday Occupancy Percentages Facility Type Stall Type Total Inventory 9:00 AM 11:00 AM 1:00 PM 3:00 PM 5:00 PM 7:00 PM Parking Garage All 1,991 50% 57% 54% 44% 31% 27% On-Street All 1,245 67% 71% 68% 63% 51% 53% Parking Lot General 1,654 56% 66% 68% 56% 34% 20% Reserved 1,014 45% 56% 49% 49% 34% 37% Res Hall % 69% 67% 62% 58% 58% Metered / Pay % 56% 52% 52% 37% 41% Housing % 62% 58% 56% 60% 63% ADA % 33% 22% 27% 23% 22% Julia Davis Park n/a Totals 7,613 56% 63% 60% 54% 41% 37% Tuesday Occupancies (4/28/09) Facility Type Stall Type Total Inventory 9:00 AM 11:00 AM 1:00 PM 3:00 PM 5:00 PM 7:00 PM Parking Garage All 1,991 1,282 1,474 1,484 1, On-Street All 1, Parking Lot General 1,654 1,176 1,369 1,338 1, Reserved 1, Res Hall Metered / Pay Housing ADA Julia Davis Park n/a Totals 7,613 5,056 5,565 5,557 5,099 3,355 2,920 Monday Occupancy Percentages Facility Type Stall Type Total Inventory 9:00 AM 11:00 AM 1:00 PM 3:00 PM 5:00 PM 7:00 PM Parking Garage All 1,991 64% 74% 75% 74% 34% 25% On-Street All 1,245 72% 73% 73% 63% 53% 56% Parking Lot General 1,654 71% 83% 81% 70% 40% 23% Reserved 1,014 50% 62% 62% 60% 36% 40% Res Hall % 70% 72% 65% 59% 57% Metered / Pay % 64% 67% 58% 47% 45% Housing % 68% 63% 61% 59% 60% ADA % 38% 38% 39% 29% 13% Julia Davis Park n/a Totals 7,613 66% 73% 73% 67% 44% 38% *Source: Walker Parking Consultants,

18 Figure 4: BSU Parking Utilization by Facility Type (April 2009) 80% Monday Parking Occupancies by Facility Type 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 9:00 AM 11:00 AM 1:00 PM 3:00 PM 5:00 PM 7:00 PM On-Street Parking Lot (all) Parking Garage 80% Tuesday Parking Occupancies by Facility Type 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 9:00 AM 11:00 AM 1:00 PM 3:00 PM 5:00 PM 7:00 PM On-Street Parking Lot (all) Parking Garage *Source: Walker Parking Consultants,

19 Figure 5: BSU Parking Utilization by Lot Restrictions (April 2009) 80% Monday Parking Lot Occupancies (Detail by Restriction) 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Lot - Reserved Lot - Res Hall Lot - General Lot - Metered/Pay lot - Housing Lot - ADA 9:00 AM 11:00 AM 1:00 PM 3:00 PM 5:00 PM 7:00 PM 90% Tuesday Parking Lot Occupancies (Detail by Restriction) 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Lot - Reserved Lot - Res Hall Lot - General Lot - Metered/Pay lot - Housing Lot - ADA 9:00 AM 11:00 AM 1:00 PM 3:00 PM 5:00 PM 7:00 PM *Source: Walker Parking Consultants,

20 EFFECTIVE SUPPLY When evaluating the BSU parking system, it is important to consider the concept of effective supply. Effective supply is defined as the maximum number of parking spaces that can realistically be used within a given system, while still maintaining adequate circulation. The difference between the effective supply and the total inventory is referred to as the effective supply cushion. The primary function of this cushion is help to decrease traffic congestion by limiting (within reason) the amount of time that drivers must spend looking for an empty space. This cushion also helps to protect against temporary disturbances such as construction, misparked cars, broken glass, and snow removal. For on-street parking, Walker generally recommends an effective supply equal to 85% of the total capacity. The 15% difference allows a reasonable cushion of spaces so that traffic does not back up on surface streets. Off-street parking typically requires less of a cushion generally 90% to 95% of the full supply, depending on the type of facility and the anticipated user group. Smaller cushions are needed for long-term parkers such as faculty, staff, and resident students. These groups tend to be more familiar with the system and their spaces are not subject to as frequent of turnover as visitor stalls. General parking on the other hand, tends to accommodate a mix of commuter students and visitors who may park in different locations each day depending on classes, and typically stay parked for shorter periods of time than employees. In some cases, the most convenient parking lots may fill to 100% of total capacity for busy conditions. This is not ideal from a traffic standpoint as most drivers will perceive a parking lot as being full when occupancies begin to approach 80% to 90% and above. On the other hand, higher occupancy rates are usually expected for the most convenient lots, and cannot really be modified unless the parking is priced at a much higher rate. (Some Universities have experimented successfully with zone pricing where lots become more expensive toward the center of campus.) Based on our analysis, Walker recommends applying the following adjustments to the parking supply to calculate the appropriate usable effective inventory. Various segments of the parking system can be considered to be full or impacted when occupancies begin to exceed the effective supply. Based on Table 2, Walker concludes that the 11

21 estimated effective parking capacity for the campus is 6,993 usable spaces (roughly 92% of the total inventory). Table 2: Recommended Effective Supply Adjustments by Stall Type Facility Type Stall Type Total Inventory Effective Supply Recommended Effective Supply Adjustment Parking Garage All 1, ,891 On-Street All 1, ,058 Parking Lot General 1, ,489 Reserved 1, Res Hall Metered / Pay Housing ADA Julia Davis Park* n/a Totals 7,613 6,993 *Note that Walker has assumed a 0% effective supply adjustment for Julia Davis Park. Though these parking spaces are currently used by BSU students and staff, the inventory does not technically belong to the University. Applying a 0% adjustment insures that the parking demand projections in this report factor in additional on- or off-campus spaces to accommodate these cars in case policies for the park are ever changed. *Source: Walker Parking Consultants, 2010 DESIGN DAY PARKING DEMAND Based on the survey day occupancy counts (Table 1) and the effective supply adjustment (Table 2), the BSU parking system appears sufficient to accommodate mid-semester parking demand. However, it can be reasonably argued that the beginning of the semester is typically busier than what was observed for the mid-semester survey days. For most university campuses, Walker prefers to collect parking occupancy data during the second or third week of fall semester. (Scheduling did not allow for this for this particular study). The second or third week is considered an appropriate design day since class attendance is still high while final class adds and drops are mostly established. The busier of the two semesters is used for the design day, which is typically fall semester (or fall quarter) for most schools. For the BSU campus, an adjustment has been made to calibrate the parking demand data collected in April to the parking demand that could reasonably be expected for the third week of the fall semester (also assuming an appropriate enrollment adjustment). To best approximate this adjustment, parking occupancies from the 2001 Walker study where evaluated along with enrolment figures. 12

22 Based on the previous 2001 findings, Walker estimates that a 17% adjustment to the observed parking demand is appropriate for each demand category overall. Table 3 below shows the adjusted parking demand along with the projected effective surplus and deficits for the current (2009/2010) academic year. Facility Type Total Inventory Table 3: Projected Design Day Parking Surplus / Deficit Effective Supply Observed Occupancy Design Day Adjustment Projected Design Day Demand Projected Effective Surplus / Deficit (4/28/09) Parking Garage 1,991 1,891 1, , On-Street 1,245 1, ,069 (11) Parking Lot 4,377 4,044 3, , Julia Davis Park* n/a (80) Totals 7,613 6,993 5,565 6, *Source: Walker Parking Consultants, 2010 EXISTING PARKING DEMAND CONCLUSIONS For the system as a whole, Walker concludes that the current parking supply is adequate to accommodate the design day parking demand (as of the 2009/2010 academic year) with a calculated effective surplus of roughly 481 spaces. However, increases in enrollment or displacement of surface and street parking may lead to effective shortages within a relatively short timeframe. Prior to fall 2010, for example, BSU is already planning to displace some 400+ net stall. As with any other system, localized shortages will likely occur at some times throughout the semester for the more desirable lots, regardless of the overall surplus. For example the administration building lot filled to 91% on our survey day, which would be considered above the recommended effective capacity. Conditions for this lot are very likely impacted at the beginning of each semester, especially as students are searching for convenient short-term parking. Localized shortages can often be addressed by changing the permit allocations, or by implementing time limits or higher fees for the most convenient spaces. The expansion of the Lincoln garage is an important next step for the BSU campus as the Master Plan calls for several short range projects that will displace existing parking. Since much of the Lincoln expansion is already committed to new student housing, Walker recommends that BSU expedite planning for other possible options to also supplement to existing parking system. The next section of this report expands on this conclusion and projects anticipated parking demand under future conditions with 5- and 10-year growth scenarios. 13

23 Future parking supply and demand conditions for the Boise State campus will be impacted by several factors including: PROJECTED FUTURE CONDITIONS The anticipated growth in student enrollment and in faculty/staff populations, The possible addition of new student housing, Reallocation of first year student parking and new remote parking options (beginning fall 2009), The addition of new garages including expansion of the Lincoln Garage, and Possible displacement of existing lots and on-street spaces. The purpose of this section is to help quantify the amount of additional parking needed to support the five- and ten-year growth projections provided by BSU staff. Most of the analysis will focus on the projected enrollment growth and displacement of existing supplies. New buildings, in themselves, do not generate parking demand. PROJECTED ENROLLMENT CHANGES Table 4 on the next page was provided by BSU Transportation and Parking staff and shows a snapshot of the most recent semesters in terms of total student enrollment. CWI refers to the College of Western Idaho which is an independent community college that operates on the BSU campus. Classes are held primarily at the technology buildings located southwest of the stadium. According to staff, College of Western Idaho will be relocating to a different location by fall of Since CWI cars cannot be separated from BSU parking demand, these vehicles are included in the baseline parking counts. Therefore, changes in CWI enrollment are also included in our demand analysis. As indicated on Table 4, enrollment projections for 2011, 2012, and beyond are not yet known. According to BSU Enrollment Services, the University is currently undertaking a major project to update enrollment projection figures. Official projections from this project are expected to be available by summer 2010 but were not available for this parking analysis. Certain placeholder assumptions have been made for this study to estimate some possible future growth rates for BSU based on past historical growth. 14

24 Table 4: BSU and CWI Enrollment for Recent Semesters Fall 08 Fall 09 Spring / 12 Fall 12 BSU 18,510 18,936 18,520?? CWI 1, off-campus Total 19,667 19,536 19,120?? *Source: Walker Parking Consultants, 2010; from BSU Transportation and Parking Services Growth Rate Estimates Figure 6 on the next page provides a snapshot of the historical enrollment data from 1999 through fall of 2008 (an updated chart with 2009/2010 was not available for this report). As a placeholder, Walker has assumed that 5-year and 10-year enrollment growth at BSU is similar to the trend seen over the last nine years. Since 1999, the average annual growth rate has been roughly 2.2%, with roughly 21.3% overall based on total enrollment (not FTEs). Figure 6 on the next page also provides an estimate of what future enrollment may look like if the same average growth rate continues on a 5- and 10-year horizon. The small decreases shown in 2009 and in 2012 are based on the CWI populations moving off campus as shown on Table 4. The 2009 projection has also been updated to show the actual enrollment which indicated very little growth over Note that the overall enrollment projections are placeholders only, and should be revisited when the University completes its own internal analysis of future growth. In addition, Figure 6 also shows a trend line for Walker s estimated faculty plus staff growth rate. The first ten years show an increase from 2,300 faculty/staff in 2000 to 2,960 in This most recent year saw a drop off in employment due to a slow economy. According to the human resources department, the faculty /staff totals will likely remain relatively stagnant for several years until the economy recovers, but would likely rebound with a 3-4% growth rate after that. For our table, Walker has assumed a 0% faculty/staff growth rate for years 1 and 2 and a 4% growth rate for years 3 to 5. Longer-term, Walker assumes that the faculty and staff growth rate would keep pace (roughly) with the total student enrollment. Student to faculty ratios are typically an important rating factor for universities to benchmark against their peers. Research data for BSU shows a current student to faculty ratio of 19:1. We assume that non-faculty staff would increase at a similar rate as the University grows. 15

25 Figure 6: BSU Historical Enrollment (Fall Fall 2008) *Source: (see Appendix B for additional backup). Figure 7: Projected 5- and 10-Year Growth (estimates) 25,000 23,430 20,000 19,536 21,032 15,000 16,209 10,000 5,000 2,300 2,960 3,402 3, Projected Enrollment Projected Faculty + Staff Enrollment Faculty and Staff *Source: Walker Parking Consultants,

26 Corresponding to Figure 6, Table 5 below provides estimated student and faculty plus staff population estimates for the 5-year and 10-year growth horizons. For the anticipated future growth, the University provided the following estimates regarding on-campus student housing: On campus students 2009/2010 = 2,200 including apartments (families, graduate students, upper division) 400 beds under construction to be completed in August Year Projection = 2,600 to 3,600 (including apartments) 10 Year Projection = 3,000 to 4,000 (including apartments) Table 5: Student and Faculty/Staff Growth Projections Academic Enrollment / Faculty and Growth Year Projected Staff On-Campus ,209 2,300 1, , % 2,300 1, , % 2, , % 2, , % 2, , % 2, , % 3, , % 3, , % 3, , % 2,960 2, , % 2,960 2, , % 2,960 2, , % 3,078 2, , % 3,201 2, , % 3,329 2, , % 3,402 3, , % 3,476 3, , % 3,552 3, , % 3,630 3, , % 3,709 3, , % 3,790 4,000 *Source: Walker Parking Consultants, 2009 Resident student projections are included on the table above. Walker has used the high-point of each estimated range for five-year and tenyear on-campus residents to provide a worst case assessment of future needs. (On campus housing generates more parking demand per student than commuter since the vehicle is basically stored in a lot or garage). Please note however, that on-campus student housing numbers are a moving target and have been revised several times during the course of this Walker s study. The current figures reflect the most up-to-date estimate. However, additional changes to the oncampus goal will of course impact future parking needs. 17

27 PROJECTED PARKING DEMAND IMPACTS Table 6 below provides parking demand ratios for the various user groups on the BSU campus. Two sets of ratios are provided. The first set indicates the ratio that was calculated based on the observed parking demand per our April 2009 occupancy counts. The second set of planning ratios is based on the ratios that were calculated previously for our 2001 parking study to reflect design day conditions. For this analysis, BSU staff requested that the original set of planning ratios from 2001 be applied in order to be more consistent with earlier findings, especially when planning for future resident housing. Survey day occupancy counts for this study were collected during the late spring, rather than the early fall semester when peak parking demand typically occurs. 2 Therefore, the observed ratios do offer an interesting comparison, but should be considered somewhat lower than would be expected for more typical design day conditions. Using the 2001 planning ratios is more appropriate approach for future projections so that planned parking facilities are not undersupplied. User Group Table 6: Student and Faculty/Staff Parking Demand Ratios 2008 / 2009 Population Observed Ratio (April 09) Parking Demand Planning Ratio Commuter Students 17, / student 2, / student (1) Resident Students 2, / resident 1, / resident (2) Faculty + Staff 2, / member 2, / member (3) Total Demand 5, Includes both commuter students and general campus visitors. 2. Includes Residence Hall Lots, Apartments Lots, and some percentage of on-street parking demand near to apartments and family housing. 3. Includes occupied faculty/staff permit spaces, plus some overflow estimated for on-street and general areas. *Source: Walker Parking Consultants, 2010 Note 2 For planning purposes, the first few week of both semesters are considered special circumstances. University ratios are typically designed to project parking needs for a typical busy day during the third week of fall semester. 18

28 Based on the previous discussion, Table 7 below shows Walker s 5- and 10-Year parking demand projections for the various user groups. This table incorporates the calculated ratios from Table 6 and the population projections from Table 5. Table 7: Student and Faculty/Staff Parking Demand Projections Fall 2010 (projected) User Group Fall 2010 Projected Planning Ratio Projection Demand Commuter Students 17, / student 2,664 Resident Students 2, / resident 1,760 Faculty + Staff 2, / member 2,131 Total Demand 6,555 5-Year Projection User Group 5 Yr (2014) Projected Planning Ratio Projection Demand Commuter Students 17, / student 2,615 Resident Students 3, / resident 2,880 Faculty + Staff 3, / member 2,449 Total Demand 7, Year Projection User Group 10 Yr (2019) Projected Planning Ratio Projection Demand Commuter Students 19, / student 2,915 Resident Students 4, / resident 3,200 Faculty + Staff 3, / member 2,729 Total Demand 8,844 *Source: Walker Parking Consultants, 2010 The projection for 2014 indicates a need for approximately 7,944 BSU parking spaces after factoring in the effective supply adjustments. The 10-year projections show a total need for roughly 8,844 spaces by Note that this analysis uses the 2009/2010 academic year as the starting point for Year 1; therefore the 10-year projection carries through to the academic year beginning fall Recall from Table 2, that the current effective supply available to BSU (and adjacent unrestricted streets) is roughly 6,990. At the current rate of growth, the existing parking supply would be sufficient for roughly one to two more years, assuming no additional supply was added to the campus. After that, the effective parking deficits would occur more frequently, which would likely force more commuter students into outlying residential and commercial area. 19

29 At this point however, it is appropriate to factor in changes to the BSU parking inventory that are anticipated over the short- and mid-term. These changes include the spaces that are anticipated as part of the Lincoln Garage expansion. Other parking inventory changes were provided by BSU staff as appropriate assumptions for this report. PROJECTED PARKING SUPPLY CHANGES The following list shows parking inventory changes that are assumed over the short-term based on feedback from the BSU Transportation and Parking department. As of April 2010: UIR Lot, Diploma St., Earl St. displaced = -260 spaces (Towers general -70 for staging included) As of summer 2010: LH Lot displaced = -67 spaces LB Lot displaced = -61 spaces LB/Michigan displaced = -97 spaces Michigan St. displaced = -28 spaces Euclid St. displaced = -25 spaces Block 10 lot added = +100 spaces (south of NORCO building) Total Net Change to BSU inventory = -438 spaces Phase II of the Lincoln Garage is also anticipated for fall 2011 which will add a net +647 spaces to the campus at that time. Some of this garage is already committed to park a new graduate student housing project. The new on-campus housing was already factored in to the projections on Table 5 showing an increase in for fall Street Parking Displaced In addition to the short-term changes, BSU parking staff also requested that Walker assume that many of the on-street spaces are displaced from the campus over time. This displacement would include construction within Zone 3 along many of the blocks (south of University and east of Lincoln). Also, some additional parking may be lost to future restrictions with the residential neighborhoods. The following table shows the model provided by BSU regarding timeframe and the number of spaces lost each year. The space totals 20

30 based on the percentage reductions have been rounded to the nearest stall for our analysis. Table 8: On-Street Parking Displacement Assumptions On-Street Year Reduction Available Start ,245 10% annual reduction in on-street parking 3% annual reduction in on-street parking , , *Source: Walker Parking Consultants, 2010, from BSU Transportation and Parking Services. PROJECTED OVERALL PARKING SURPLUS / DEFICITS The final analysis in this section (Table 9 and Figure 8 on the next few pages), shows the effective supply that is available to each campus user group under current conditions along with the project 5- and 10- year growth projections. The table and chart take into account the changes to the parking inventory including the new Lincoln garage expansion, the construction projects referenced on page 20, and the on-street parking assumptions shown on the table above. Other assumptions have been noted on the table based on estimated allocations of the current inventory. Transit Considerations: For these projections Walker assumes that transit usage for the BSU campus remains similar to current transit usage levels. In some cases, off-site parking or increased transit usage can help to meet some of the projected parking demand. However, parking rates generally need to be set at a high enough so that students and staff are willing to utilize transit (or off-site resources) in place of more convenient on-site parking options. 21

31 Fall 2010 (projected) User Group Fall 2010 Table 9: Projected 5-Year and 10-Year Parking Surplus / Deficits Projected Parking Demand Previous Effective Supply (1) Net changes to the Parking Supply (2) Projected Effective Surplus / Deficits Commuter Students 17,762 2,664 3,060 Resident Students 2,200 1,760 1,552 Faculty + Staff 2,960 2,131 2,381 Total Demand 6,555 6, Year Projection User Group 5 Yr (2014) Projection Projected Parking Demand Previous Effective Supply (1) Net changes to the Parking Supply (3) Projected Effective Surplus / Deficits Commuter Students 17,432 2,615 3,060 Resident Students 3,600 2,880 1,552 Faculty + Staff 3,402 2,449 2,381 Total Demand 7,944 6, (1,235) 10-Year Projection User Group 10 Yr (2019) Projection Projected Parking Demand Previous Effective Supply (1) Net changes to the Parking Supply (3) Projected Effective Surplus / Deficits Commuter Students 19,430 2,915 3,060 Resident Students 4,000 3,200 1,552 Faculty + Staff 3,790 2,729 2,381 Total Demand 8,844 6, (2,251) 1. All general parking and 25% of garage spaces are assumed to be available for student permits; reserved spaces and remaining garage spaces are assumed to be available for staff. However, the estimated allocation is not as important as the total effective supply permits can always be changed to address deficits as needed. 2. Assumes 438 net spaces lost to construction prior to Fall Assumes on-going displacement of on-street parking spaces per Table 8. Also assumes the addition of 647 new spaces within the Lincoln Garage prior to fall An effective supply adjustment of 0.90 has been applied to the net new stalls added. *Source: Walker Parking Consultants,

32 Figure 8: Projected 5- and 10-Year Surplus / Deficits 9,500 9,000 8,843 8,500 8,000 7,944 8,066 8,191 8,319 8,450 7,500 7,000 6,500 6,993 6,512 6,492 6,555 6,555 6,966 7,016 7,013 6,901 7,174 6,800 6,709 6,684 6,660 6,637 6,615 6,593 6,000 5,500 5, Projected Total Parking Demand Anticipated Effective Supply *Source: Walker Parking Consultants, 2010 Figure 8 Assumptions and Notes: 1. The existing effective supply is 6,993 spaces including BSU lots, garages, and campus-adjacent on-street parking that is unrestricted. The effective supply increases to 7,013 for fall 2011 with the opening of the Lincoln Garage expansion. This increase is off-set somewhat by the on-going displacement of spaces due to campus construction. 2. The baseline demand for 6,512 spaces is based on observed conditions on 4/28/09 adjusted for an appropriate design day. Future projections are based on the anticipated demand for an appropriate design day (typically the third week of Fall Semester) using the planning ratios from the 2001 Walker study. 3. Years show q steady increase in the parking demand due to the assumed growth rate in student enrollment and in faculty/staff totals. 4. New student housing is expected to increase in August 2011 with the addition of 400 new beds. New student housing is also assumed to be added prior to fall 2014 and again for fall 2019, though specific housing projects have not yet been identified (only target ranges for number of total beds). Parking for on-campus students is provided at a higher ratio than for commuter students; therefore the growth rate is more pronounced for the years when new student housing is opened. Walker assumes that new parking facilities would be added to the campus at the same time as any new housing development. 5. The available effective supply continues to decreases over time assuming that on-street parking is eventually displaced or restricted. 6. An additional roughly 2,230 spaces are recommended for the campus to accommodate the projected demand in 2019 which is assumed to include 4,000 on-campus resident students (including apartments, family housing, etc.). This figure is in addition to the Lincoln Garage expansion. 23

33 FUTURE PARKING DEMAND CONCLUSIONS Based on the findings on the previous pages, Walker recommends that BSU consider preliminary concept plans for an additional roughly 1,144 parking spaces above and beyond the Lincoln Garage expansion. This figure would increase to roughly 2,229 spaces based on the ten year projected growth figures. The spaces would be used to accommodate some additional faculty + staff parking. However, the largest demand driver would be additional student parking demand, assuming an increase in total enrollment (at 2.2% per year) and an increase in Resident Students. The analysis assumes that new on-campus housing is added to accommodate up to 4,000 beds. Existing parking allocations should 1be changed to rebalance which lots and garages were available to which groups. At this time, no specific schedule was provided for the displacement of the Towers Lot which may be converted to green space as part of the University s Master Plan. Any new green space development on existing surface parking would require replacement parking. Walker assumes that this conversion may happen within five years and that one-to-one replacement for the Towers Lot would be appropriate, considering that Towers is already one of the busier lots on campus. The Towers Reserved Lot has 328 spaces while the Towers General Lot previously had 227 spaces. (70 stalls are assumed to be displaced for URI Lot construction). Displacement of the rest of the Towers Lot would increase Walker s 5-year needs projections by roughly 485. LIMITING CONDITIONS Parking needs projections contained in this report are based on BSU enrollment and faculty/staff growth assumptions. The accuracy of Walker s findings is based heavily on the growth assumptions provided by the University. BSU may want to conduct an update to this part of the analysis if and when more up-to-date enrollment projections become available. In other areas, the parking occupancy counts used in this update were provided by BSU staff. Walker was asked not to provide our own data collection for this study; therefore, we cannot confirm the accuracy of any parking inventory or occupancy data provided in Appendix A. Walker is not responsible for any errors or omissions in the data provided by BSU. 24

34 The following section provides a brief discussion of the current parking management policies at BSU including stakeholder feedback, best practices, and permit pricing. Currently, the campus relies on tiered permit pricing for on-campus lots and garages. The parking garages also have pay-by-space kiosks which allow for hourly parking for students and visitors. The campus has one pay-on-exit parking lot which is located next to the administration building. The parking department is self-operated and is staffed by full-time BSU employees and by part-time student employees. PARKING MANAGEMENT It is Walker s and BSU s evaluation that day-to-day parking operations on the campus are relatively effective. Many parking management suggestions were included in Walker s 2001 study and have been already implemented. These concepts have not been revised for this report. The primary areas for possible improvement are related special event parking. This topic will be discussed in more detail in the next section of this report. SUMMARY OF PARKING MANAGEMENT DISCUSSIONS The following few pages provide a summary of the feedback received from meetings held with the following stakeholder groups: Parking Advisory Committee, Event venue representatives, Office of the President, Department of Transportation and Parking Services (internal staff), and Facilities Planning Council. The issues raised at these meetings were related primarily to parking management on the campus and may be useful to help identify issues for improvement or for additional focus. The summaries are presented in bullet form on the next few pages. 25

35 Concept: The Parking Priorities Triangle Many of the discussions with the various stakeholder groups where started by using the following parking triangle graphic. The Parking Priorities Triangle concept is explained briefly here: Figure 9: Parking Priorities Triangle *Source: Adapted from BSU Department of Transportation & Parking, For broader-based parking planning, it is generally accepted that a parking facility can satisfy two of the three qualities on the triangle but not all three at once. For example, a campus such as BSU can sometimes provide sufficient and inexpensive parking, but often that parking will be in the form of large surface lots and/or remote parking options. The most distant spaces in the system may be comparatively inexpensive but they are certainly not convenient to the campus core. The same concept would hold true for a large parking garage in the center of campus. The parking would be sufficient and convenient but it would be comparatively more expensive to build. Small lots near the center of campus could be inexpensive and convenient, but they would not be sufficient to accommodate everyone. Meeting with Parking Advisory Committee The BSU Parking Advisory Committee is made up of student, faculty, and parking staff representatives. This group is in charge of setting parking rates. Feedback from the committee is included below: The Transportation and Parking Services Department is very well organized. The advisory committee is pleased with the changes/improvements that have been made over the past few years. Parking staff have been very willing to work with special events & accommodate the needs of various groups. The department s director has been a positive addition. Visitor parking on the campus is perceived to be insufficient for Monday through Friday during business hours. Committee members have heard about donors getting parking tickets when they come to campus. There is a general need for more short-term parking in key locations. The advisory committee did not have any specific complaints about parking enforcement; however, members were wondering if maybe the parking enforcement staff could be better trained to offer a customer service role (ie., directing visitors where to go, providing information, etc). The concept of rebranding the enforcement staff as Parking Ambassadors or Parking Liaisons was discussed. It was agreed that the primary avenue for improvement would be to make sure that parking enforcement 26

36 staff were knowledgeable about other campus resources and were trained with customer service skills in mind. Committee members felt that directional signage for parking lots and the campus in general could be improved. Members recommended that parking maps and information be placed on campus at strategic locations. One suggestion was that maps be placed in elevators to the garages (or elevator lobbies). Walker observed that the Lincoln Garage is already doing this. The committee felt that the Transportation and Parking Services department needed better marketing and/or re-imaging. One committee member suggested using the television screens in the Student Union and Engineering buildings to communicate parking information and also general parking marketing messages. It was discussed that some of the residential lots are closed off for special events (such as football). Despite many messages and s from the parking department, it is still sometimes difficult to get students to move their vehicles. Alternative media (such as the TV s or text messaging) might be helpful to reach more of the students. The committee had a long discussion on the parking shuttle service and touched on a few of the following issues: o o o o Very few people know that the shuttle is free to BSU students and paid for by the parking fees. Better marketing may help to point out this benefit. One committee member complained that buses are low quality right now and may not be comfortable. One Advisory Committee member suggested dividing the shuttle into two separate routes (blue and orange) one with a shorter or express route and one with a longer route. The committee agreed that the service would be improved if buses were scheduled to depart from each stop at set times rather than the more arbitrary every 15 minutes schedule that appears to be happening now. This way, regular shuttle riders can schedule when they need to be at a particular stop. o Currently, only two drivers are scheduled (from 7:00 am to 2:30 pm). One committee member complained that the schedule of breaks for the drivers is inconsistent at times and can mean reduced service during the day if both happen to be on break at once. The committee discussed offering some sort of parking system benefit (like a scholarship), which might help improve the visibility and image of the department. No conclusions were reached on this item. Meeting with Event Venue Representatives Walker met with several representatives from various BSU event venues including the Morrison Center, Taco Bell Arena, and the Stueckle Sky Center. The following items were discussed: Most representatives felt there was a need for additional ADA parking. Donors for the University may be from an aging demographic but many are still interested in staying involved with on-campus events. There appears to be some competing interests between where to provide VIP parking versus where to provide ADA parking. 27

37 Representatives had a long discussion on loading/staging requirements for Taco Bell Arena and the Morrison Center. (Bus and trailer staging plans were provided by Taco Bell and will be discussed in more detail under the Event Management section). The Morrison Center currently uses part of the Towers Lot for its staging area. This may be in conflict with some of the landscaping proposed by the 2005 Master Plan. Representatives discussed the impacts of BSU becoming more nationally recognized for sporting and other special events. As a result there are more weekday events that conflict with day-to-day parking needs. There are also issues that arise due to competing events. Parking is often difficult if two large events are held at the same time. As a solution, representatives discussed whether a parking management plan should become a requirement for all types of special events. This would require coordination with the Transportation and Parking department for all events to insure that appropriate parking lots and garages were available. (Some of this is already being done). Walker and event venue representatives spent some time discussing the cost to add additional parking facilities to the campus and what impact it would have on the venues if the parking department needed to raise fees for the lots and garages. Related feedback is listed below: o o Event representatives indicated that they already pay for up to seven parking management staff people for the lots for larger special events. (Walker discussed this comment with the parking department it may be that the event representatives are confusing parking management staff with the traffic control officers that are stationed at intersections.) Event representatives are aware that parking rates charged to the event venues to lease whole parking lots for events are not in line with the actual cost or value of this parking. It is understood that adding new garages to the campus (in part, to accommodate special events) may require added parking revenues be collected from event venues to help pay for new garages. o The Morrison Center in particular may have some difficulty if the lease rate on the parking lots is increased since much of this revenue goes back to the event promoters. Likewise, for headliner concerts at the Taco Bell Arena, it is often the event promoters that require a portion of the parking revenues. Event venue representatives miss having visitor-only spaces near to event venues for day-to-day operations. The representative from the Sky Center would like to allocate parking adjacent to the Sky Center loading docks for employee parking. This way, the owners of the cars can be found easily if these vehicles need to move. Racing, speeding, and towing (by students) appear to be a problem for the West Stadium lot between the student housing/taco Bell and the practice facility. Following this meeting, Walker recommended relocating these students out of this lot. If this racing/speeding is still an issue in other Resident Student parking areas then increased enforcement or the addition of speed humps (across the full width of the lots) may be necessary. Event venue representatives complained that parking lot upkeep during the winter months was not a high priority for the University. Lot and pedestrian safety is a concern as plowing and salting during inclement weather is inconsistent. 28

38 Event representatives were much more in favor of an event garage in the location nearest to Sky Center rather than on the campus periphery. Valet parking was discussed as an option to improve the level of service for certain types of events at the Sky Center or other locations. The event representatives discussed using the back half of the West Stadium student lot (formerly Residence Hall 1 Lot) as a good location for valet, or attendant-assist parking. This lot would not be ideal for visitor self-park even if students are relocated. Various options for a special event parking management plan were discussed including the use of online pre-sale of parking for events, on-line parking reservations, pricing controls to increase the cost of the most convenient premium spaces, and options for discounted remote parking. Traffic flow and pedestrian flow were also discussed. Meeting with Office of the President Walker staff met with a representative of the president s office to get feedback on the parking system at BSU and the objectives for the parking study. An initial suggestion was made to expand Walker s study of best practices to include more than just the official BSU peer list. Cost of living peer cities, such as New Orleans and Dallas, were suggested. Other peer criteria were also suggested such as surrounding population demographics, transit availability, community familiarity with paid parking, schools with similar growth objectives and space constraints, etc. The President s representative commented that parking overall is handled pretty well at BSU and the President s office typically did not receive that many comments or complaints. The few students that do contact the office are the ones that feel they have been ticket unfairly. One complaint is that the parking citation appeals process does not allow for any in-person defense by the person getting the ticket. The representative asked that Walker find out what percentage of appeals are granted and provide a benchmark against similar parking systems to see if this is in line. (A possible solution may be to allow for parking issues to be escalated through the student judicial process for certain types of cases i.e., if there is a precedent to be set with a particular parkingrelated issue.) Occasional complaints come from visitors who get ticketed on campus. Some visitors are confused by lack of signage or become frustrated by lack of available parking near to their destination. The representative suggested that the parking department needed to make sure that front-line staff (enforcement, etc.) is trained to handle comments and complaints from patrons with some degree of ambassadorship. Overall, the representative indicated that the concept of pay parking on campus may always be somewhat foreign to local residents that may not have as much exposure to pay parking. For this reason, the preference may be to have the systems on the campus match up to the pay parking systems downtown, as much as possible. Downtown locations generally use pay on exit cashiering with some pay-by-space for surface lots. Walker understands that some locations use the older lock boxes with numbered spaces approach but some will soon be replaced by automated pay stations for some of these lots. 29

39 The president s office representative supported the idea of a reservation system for parking lots/garages for special events at the various venues. Some discussion was had on whether board members and donors could be added to the no citation database in the T2 parking enforcement software. Meeting with Transportation and Parking Services Department Staff Walker met internally with the Transportation and Parking Services department staff on several occasions to discuss the comments that had been relayed at other meetings. The following notes are related to the discussion on parking management: Department staff felt that there needed to be a more consistent policy as to which (if any) parking patrons receive special treatment. The same goes for special deals in terms of making arrangements for event parking, etc. The parking department mission statement indicates that all parties participate in the cost of the parking system equally. Ideally, board members, administrators, donors, event venues, etc. would all follow the same parking policies as everyone else. Visitors and first time violators are currently the exception as the vision is to create a more user friendly system. The athletics department alone has several thousand donors making a broad policy to not issue parking citations to donors is impractical. Also, parking staff has no way to differentiate various vehicles while in the field. A reservation system is in place where various departments can arrange for free parking for guest speakers. Not all departments follow through with this process. Sometimes lack of funds is cited as a reason to not purchase a guest pass. The department recently implemented a new Road Show to highlight parking policies and procedures. The objective is to educate the office and desk managers at the various departments about the proper steps to arrange for guest parking. (Walker recommended that additional parking education be presented during the summer months as part of training/orientation for new BSU faculty and staff members.) Some discussion was held on strategies to change the perception that parking is not customer focused. Ideas included: o Re-branding the department to remove parking from the name, dropping the name enforcement in favor of parking ambassador or parking liaison, o Providing some campus tour training for parking ambassador staff so they have thorough knowledge of facilities and resources, and o Reinforcing customer service training for parking ambassadors. Pay-by-space kiosks were discussed for the Administrative Building Lot The parking appeals process was discussed. In regards to appeals, the Transportation and Parking Services department indicated that roughly 75% of all appeals are excused or modified. Appeals that are regularly excused are generally first time offenses (exceptions include fire lane, ADA, and meter non-payment). ADA violations are sometimes reduced. Parking staff commented that a fairly high percentage of students still do not purchase a permit but would rather run the risk of getting an occasional ticket. In some instances, the cost of the occasional citation is actually less expensive than the permit. 30

40 Walker and parking staff had an additional discussion on event parking procedures. Event venues representatives indicated that they provide six traffic officers for events of 5,000+ to manage intersection traffic at Beacon & Lincoln, Broadway & University, and Lincoln & University. The Transportation and Parking Services department provides another 9-10 staff for loadout for events. The possibility of purchasing active event parking management software with T2 Systems was discussed. This model would cost BSU an additional $20,000 per year. Events that would be impacted would be the dates when cash handling occurs in the field for special events. Parking staff were in favor of adopting the policy where a parking management plan would be required for any venue that wants to hold a special event on campus. Facilities Planning Council Survey In addition to the meeting with the other groups, Walker participated in a brief introduction with the Facilities Planning Council ( FPC ). To follow up on that introduction, a written survey was distributed to FPC members to obtain feedback about the parking system. The table below summarizes survey results. As indicated, six completed surveys were received. However, the overall priorities for the different Council members varied widely. In general, the concept of providing convenient parking scored slightly higher than the other two categories. Sufficient parking supplies was also judged to be an important factor, while price tended to score lower with most of the Council members. Figure 10: FPC Parking Feedback Survey --- Summary of Top Priorities Day to Day Parking Priorities Special Event Parking Priorities Inexpensive Convenient Sufficient Number of "Top Priority" Votes Inexpensive Convenient Sufficient Number of "Top Priority" Votes *Source: Walker Parking Consultants,

41 PARKING MANAGEMENT BEST PRACTICES FOR UNIVERSITIES Appendix C contains a listing of parking Best Practices that were assembled for BSU. Maintaining and applying these best practices tends to result in superior customer service and helps protect parking department revenue. The items listed in Appendix C are based on strategies used successfully at other Universities that Walker has worked with in the past. For the most part, BSU has already incorporated some of these general concepts into current operations. However, this list may provide a helpful reference if future changes are warranted. Several possible new programs are also discussed in the appendix, such as the Parking Ambassador Program. PERMIT FEE COMPARISON Table 10 below and Table 11 and on the next page show how BSU parking permit fees compare to similar peer institutions and also the monthly fees charged in downtown Boise. Walker understands that raising permit fees can often be a politically sensitive issue. However, based on the priorities expressed by the FPC surveys, it may be that increased permit fees can be justifiable if the increased income can accomplish another goal, such as funding additional parking garages. Table 10: BSU Parking Permit Fees Price List 5% Increase Description Price Price General Permit Student $92.00 $97.00 General Permit Employee $ $ Motorcycle Permit Student $45.00 $47.00 Motorcycle Permit Employee $92.00 $97.00 Accessible Permit Student $92.00 $97.00 Accessible Permit Employee $ $ Towers Plus Student $ $ Towers Plus Employee $ $ Reserve/Garage Permit Student $ $ Reserve/Garage Permit Employee $ $ Designated Reserve $ $ Housing Permits Resident Hall -- RH1 $ $ Resident Hall -- RH2 $ $ University Inn $ $ Towers Resident Hall * $ $ University Square $ $ University Suites -- BGR $ $ Apartment Permit * $29.00 $ nd Vehicle Apartment Permit $92.00 $97.00 Permits are valid from August to August * Permits are increasing to a set rate for next year per agreement with Housing *Source: Walker Parking Consultants,

42 The parking permit fees currently charged at BSU are towards the lower end of fees charged at similar institutions. A broader survey of parking permit prices for other major research and flagship Universities is included at the end of Appendix C. Across Walker s entire database of Universities that charge for parking, the median per year parking fees are as follows: Students: $94 (general) - $288 (premium) Faculty/Staff: $132 (general) - $450 (premium) Table 11: Comparison of BSU Parking Permit Fees 2009 Student Employee School General Reserved General Reserved Boise State University $97.00 $ $ $ University of Alaska Anchorage $ $ $ $ Northern Arizona University $ $ $ $ California State University Fresno $ $ $ $ University of Northern Colorado $ $ $ $ Wichita State University $ $ $ Eastern Washington University $ $ $ $ University of Nevada Las Vegas $ $ $ $ Cleveland State University $ $ $ $ Portland State University $1, $1, $1, $1, University of Texas El Paso $ $ $ $ Weber State University $62.00 $97.00 $62.00 $97.00 George Mason University $ $ $ $ University of Cincinnati $ $1, $ $1, Wayne State University $ $ $ $ Average Excluding BSU $ $ $ $ Average Excluding BSU/Portland $ $ $ $ City of Boise Prices Name Lot Permit Rates Annual Boise City $ $1, Republic Parking $ $1, Grove Roof $75.00 $ Car Park $40.00 $ Diamond Parking $75.00 $ *Source: Walker Parking Consultants, No specific parking fee increases are being recommended at this time by Walker. However, the BSU Parking Advisory Committee may want to periodically survey the peer list on Table 11 and evaluate when and if fee increases are appropriate. Again, fee increases may be inevitable in order to meet funding shortfalls for future garage development. 33

43 SECTION 2: EVENT PARKING PLAN

44 Boise State University currently supports several major special event venues on the campus including: Bronco s Stadium Stueckle Sky Center Taco Bell Arena Student Union, and Morrison Center EVENT PARKING PLAN The largest of these in terms of maximum event capacity is the stadium, which was constructed in 1970 with 14,500 seats and has been expanded several times since then. The current maximum capacity is now listed at 33,610 including the box seats and the removable bleachers which were constructed in the south end zone during the summer of Taco Bell Arena is the second largest venue and accommodates up to 12,820 attendees for basketball and 13,000 for a concert event. At 2.8 to 3.0 attendees per car, an event venue such as the stadium could potentially generate up to 11,000+ vehicles. Keep in mind that the existing BSU parking inventory is only 7,600 spaces including 1,250 unrestricted street parking spaces. (Many of these are likely unavailable during the evening or weekends when area residences are home from work.) Given this fact, it is probable that many event attendees are accustomed to parking off campus in downtown lots or garages, or in adjacent neighborhoods, and walking to the events. Given the limited parking capacity on-campus, campus lots and garages are a valuable resource for all five event venues. Meanwhile, large events should be able to charge a premium parking rate. As with most Universities, however, one of the major issues is that the lots and garages on the BSU campus are not primarily designed or managed for event parking as the first priority. The day-to-day mission for the parking system is to support the University s academic focus. Parking Services also attempts to accommodate athletics and other special events with a high level of service, but ultimately this is the secondary function. This can sometimes lead to conflicts of interest in how to manage or prioritize the use of valuable parking spaces. BSU EVENT PARKING PROCEDURES Currently, campus event parking arrangements are initiated by submitting an on-line Event Request Form to the Transportation and Parking Services department. 34

45 Event Parking Fees: The University parking system maintains that patrons of campus services and/or events should support the cost and maintenance of parking facilities through lot use fees and charges paid by the respective sponsoring venue or by users themselves. Event parking fees and charges are based upon the following general criteria: number in attendance at the event, and whether the event is University sponsored, non-university sponsored, for-profit or not-for-profit. Clarification of Terms and Details: Groups or individuals hosting events on campus may pay a lot use fee, which allows participants/patrons to utilize parking areas on a space-available basis without having to purchase permits. This fee is charged per lot used, per group, per day for the rates noted in the Parking Permit/Fee Cost Schedule. The lot remains a first-come, first-served area unless additional arrangements are made with Parking Services. See the Minimum Notification, which follows. Minimum Notification: To reserve parking lots and/or spaces, the event sponsor may, in addition to paying the lot use fee, request parking attendants to staff the lot. The charge for this service is based on a current hourly attendant rate and other charges that are determined by the Event Coordinator. Sponsors of any event requiring use of parking attendants must make arrangements with the Transportation & Parking Services Events Coordinator a minimum of 14 days before the event. At that time, the location, number of participants and vehicles involved, and other pertinent information is to be provided. Otherwise, the Department may not be able to meet the request for services. Community and Athletic Events: Patrons attending certain community and on-campus events, such as football games and other special events, may be required to pay a fee to park. This fee varies by event and is charged on a per-car or per-space basis. These fees are collected upon entry to the parking lots by traffic attendants, and are based on first-come, first-served, space-available basis. Event traffic attendants will monitor the lots during these events. They provide traffic control during in-load periods and may also assist during out-load. Parking and Traffic Regulations During Events: All Boise State parking and traffic regulations apply during events. Parking is not permitted in fire lanes, no parking zones, accessible spaces (without permits), or other areas not posted for parking. Residence halls and 35

46 housing areas are also monitored by traffic attendants and are not open to public parking. Other special areas may be closed to public parking at the request of, and at an additional cost to, the sponsoring venue of the event. Failure to comply with parking regulations and/or verbal directions by traffic attendants when campus events are in progress may result in issuance of parking citations, actions by Boise Police Department, or impounding/towing of vehicle. Parking Permit Usage During Events: Valid Boise State reserve, general or special permits may park in event fee-payment parking areas free of charge at most events. This includes Boise State accessible permits. Certain events may restrict parking to exclude Boise State permits in some lots. Examples of these events are: NCAA activities (Bowl Football Game, basketball tournaments, National Championship Athletic Events), BAA reserved areas, and special group activities, such as the Wally Byam Caravan. At these times parking fees may be required of all users on a space-available basis. Lot Use Fee Rate Structure: Groups booking use of Boise State University facilities and/or services are expected to pay lot use fees for parking accommodations. The lot use fee rate structure is as follows: 1. Non-University sponsored event, for-profit organizations: $250 to $1,000 per lot per day, based on the event. 2. Non-University sponsored non-profit organizations: $50 per day, per event. 3. University sponsored events Class One events: football, basketball, Arena (5,000+ attendance), or Morrison Center Main Hall: $150 per day, per event. 4. Other University sponsored Class Two events: $100 per day, per event. 5. Other University sponsored Class Three events: $50 per day, per event, Non-profit Boise State sponsored. 6. Academic events and ASBSU Student Programs events: $50 per day, per event; fees are subsidized by the University. 7. Additional charges may include an hourly charge for the parking supervisor, event parking attendants, shuttle service, custom signage, and equipment. For football and large stadium events, all permit holders must relocate their vehicles from the stadium lots prior to the event. For football, BSU closes the lots near the stadium the evening prior to a game for weekend games. Resident parking on levels 2 and 3 of the Lincoln Garage must relocate their vehicles the evening prior to the game to 36

47 the parking structure at the other end of campus. BSU has a reserved parking system that is numbered around the stadium. The Bronco Athletics Association sells these stalls ranging from $125 - $400 per space for the season-typically 6 games. RVs are required to pay $800 or $1,200 per vehicle for the season. In 2007, BSU raised parking prices to $10 on campus for spectators who do not belong to the Bronco Athletic Association. Certain permit holders are allowed to park in the paid parking areas at no additional charge. BSU offers parking downtown with a shuttle to the football game for $5, and other alternative lots off campus (within 1 mile from campus) for $5, which includes a free shuttle to and from the parking lots. BSU offers additional handicap parking lots on campus and shuttle them to the gates, free with a BAA pass, $10 for other spectators, and free to BSU permit holders. Athletics profits from their parking lots. Parking services profits from other parking lots on campus, which include parking structures and dirt lots. RECOMMENDATION After reviewing the event parking policies, Walker strongly recommends that BSU transition from its current per lot fee system to a per space fee for all event types. All events should be charged the same base rate for per space usage. The initial per space fee should be set according to the hourly value of a parking space for the typical duration of an event (including load-in and load-out time). 3 Walker recommends an initial charge of $5 per space per event which is equivalent to BSU s current rate for 4.5 hours. For larger special events, such as football and basketball, patrons would continue to pay a plus premium rate for parking (such as $10 or $15 or $20 per car). However, $5 of this charge would then be returned to BSU Transportation and Parking Services department for every vehicle parked to cover the standard space rental fees. The remaining portion of the premium parking rate would still go back to the athletics program or to the event sponsor. 3 The hourly value of a space reflects the pro rated cost to manage that parking stall, maintain that parking stall, enforce parking rules and regulations, and (to some extent) help to fund transportation programs and possibly future parking development on campus. 37

48 Walker recommends that larger events would have an additional flat fee charge to cover shuttle service, extra equipment, and extra parking event staffing. We recommend that the Parking Advisory Committee meet internally to determine an appropriate rate schedule for various sized events that would include all typical shuttle service costs and extra equipment and staffing. This approach seems more streamlined than trying to parcel out the cost for each individual piece of equipment for each event. Events would be charged the flat fee (regardless of sponsor) based on anticipated attendance level. For example, an event of a certain size would receive X services for a flat fee of Y. Meanwhile a somewhat smaller event would include more limited services. Walker recommends that BSU start an on-line master event calendar to streamline the parking reservation process. Each event venue would be required to file a parking request for any special event held on campus (even smaller events). For events that did not need special parking accommodates, all student permit and hourly charges would apply, just like any daily visitor arriving at campus. No event would receive special free parking accommodations, as this policy creates inequitable conditions between user groups. For any event requesting special event parking, the $5 per space charge would apply. JUSTIFICATION Based on our review, Walker feels that the existing policy of per lot rental is in conflict with the department s stated goal to share parking system costs equitably between all users. BSU s lot use fee system is used to subsidize various venues and organizations on campus. Charging minimal lot use fees to large venue events that in turn charge much higher fees for parking to patrons, effectively transfers income to that organization while minimizing the potential parking system revenue. Since lot use fees do not reflect the true overall operating and long-term replacement costs to the system, the current policy shifts an unfair burden of the cost of the parking to other BSU parkers or the general fund. Walker contends that Parking Services has the fiduciary responsibility to professionally manage parking and secure revenue. Thus, it is Walker s opinion that the best entity to manage event parking should be Transportation and Parking Services. 38

49 The follow section discusses special event parking best practices at other Universities and also provides some background information on shuttle services, signage, and Parking Access and Revenue Control Systems (PARCS). EVENT PARKING BEST PRACTICES BEST PRACTICES ON EVENT PARKING FEES As stated previously, the relatively low lot use fees charged by Transportation and Parking Services does not appear to adequately support the parking system, and does not appear to be equitable in light of the high parking fees charged and significant revenue generated by some campus events. Unfortunately, a survey of the university event market does not reveal a consistent general rule or standard operating margin that reflects the best approach to event parking reimbursements. The cost of operation varies considerably from institution to institution. However, the following research presents a few approaches used at other universities. Walker feels that there is ample justification within these examples to support changes to the current BSU policy. Ohio University, Athens, OH. Ohio University manages athletic event parking for the Athletic Department in an effort to centralize parking on campus. Parking fees are charged for large scale events such as football, basketball & high school tournament games as well as concerts or other events that might draw a large fan base. Athletic event parking takes place in parking areas nearest to the event venue -- football games based on fan base require a much larger scale parking operation than that of other events. Parking Services handles closure of lots and notification of pay to park areas to faculty/staff, students, and community members, as well as providing event specific signage and staffing for the event. The fee for parking is currently $5 per space utilized. While not a University, the City of Manchester, NH, has a comparable arrangement. The City built a 10,000 seat arena about eight years ago, and the arrangement the City parking department has with them is that parking pays the Arena based on the turnstile count at the door. It was assumed that there would be three people per vehicle, and also assumed that the average event parking rate would be $10 per vehicle, and decided that the Arena would take 30% of the revenue generated, or $3.00 per vehicle. The City sells event parking at city parking facilities at whatever rate is deemed appropriate (depends on attendance and type of event) so as to 39

50 maximize revenues. Then, once a month, the Arena sends the City parking department a bill based on the above formula. This system has worked out well, because parking services doesn't rely on the Arena for anything other than sending a bill. The University of Tennessee Parking Services charges a $5 daily rate for smaller campus departmental events such as conferences or sporadic guests visiting various departments. Instead of raising the cost of departmental sponsored events to $10, it was decided UT would continue to offer the $5 rate to departments who pre-arrange their events. This helps those departments on campus who wish to continue offering programs and provide parking, but are faced with budget cuts due to the economy. Other departments pre-arrange support for their event parking in advance, but have never paid for guest parking. Parking Services will continue to provide the $5 rate for conference participants/visitors when such events are pre-arranged with our office. This encourages departments to continue providing their guest with parking information and helps Parking Services to improve the distribution of parking during the academic year. It also reduces illegal parking by visitors and guests who may not understand how parking on a university campus works. Parking Services charges other rates for athletic events. Football is $25, Basketball and all other smaller athletic events are charged $10. Penn State Transportation Services charges a $5 event parking fee upon parking for special arena events. The event parking revenue is used to pay event staff, police and associated charges, then the balance is split with the arena. The University of California San Diego, adds a surcharge to the ticket prices for concerts at $1 per ticket, originally to reduce traffic congestion. However, for Theater and Dance shows, UCSD has (6) paystations within the 3 closest lots to the venue that charge a $2 flat rate for their patrons. UCSD started this as Theater and Dance did not want to add the parking to their tickets and meters are more cost effective than having (2) employees selling permits. When reserving an entire parking lot, UCSD charges $2.75/space per day no matter what the lot size plus a $31.50 Admin Fee that is charged for every day the event continues as a "monitoring fee." SHUTTLE SERVICES The equity of shuttle fees and operating margin is complicated. Shuttles usually are used to address specific needs and overcome 40

51 objections to alternative or distant parking arrangements. As in the case of parking, effort should be used to recover the true cost of providing the service. Many larger universities do provide buses, shuttles, and/or campus circulators to augment their parking on a day-to-day basis. Once in place, these same systems can also be adapted for special event use. It is not uncommon to see the shuttle programs managed from within the same department as parking services and to have the transportation partially funded from parking fees. In other instances, transportation is also funded through student assistance fees. Currently, the BSU Transportation and Parking Services department does help to fund Valleyride (VRT) bus service for all BSU students and staff. If the shuttle program is used only for events, the most common method of payment of shuttle services (industry standard) is an hourly fee per operating hour per bus that is inclusive of all operating and capital costs. However there are a variety of contract agreements in practice. Walker surveyed a number of similar shuttle management contracts. The following examples are of interest. University of Cincinnati First Transit operates the university shuttle system. This contract was renewed in 2007 at approximately $65 per operating bus hour. Cincinnati Children s Hospital Medical Center self operates a complex 8 route employee shuttle system for a reported cost of $57 per operating bus hour. However, this system operates less expensive 22-passenger shuttles and may not fully report all operating expenses. The City of Wichita is exploring the establishment of a downtown circulator shuttle system. The local public transit company, Wichita Transit, has proposed to operate this shuttle for $75 per operating bus hour, subject to negotiation. Given the competitiveness of the market, the application of an average fee of $60 to $65 per operating bus hour is judged to be reasonable. Typical operating margins per passenger are not discoverable as contracts are private, and costs differ with the size and capacity of shuttle vehicles, average number of riders per trip, route length, fuel costs, labor costs, and other variables. The ability to charge a shuttle fee is further dependent on the goal of the service and local practice. 41

52 PARKING ACCESS & REVENUE CONTROL SYSTEMS When discussing the way that event parking is managed, it is important to consider the design of a parking access and revenue control system (PARCS). The PARCS includes both physical barriers, such as gates, cones, etc. as well as the systems for allocating permits and collecting revenues. BSU is already using a T2 wireless system for parking management but has not yet purchased the module specifically for event parking. The following section describes a fully integrated wireless event parking system. BSU already has some pieces in place for this type of system, but would still need to purchase and install loops (or other car sensors) to make sure the system was fully integrated. FULL WIRELESS EVENT SYSTEM For improved management of event parking revenues, Walker often recommends a mobile wireless event system using networked handhelds. A wireless event system offers the following benefits: minimizes queuing with faster processing of transactions Handles credit card and pre-paid transactions Uses proven wireless mobile handheld computers and portable printers Reduces cash handling in lanes Reduces staffing with express lanes Integrates real-time vehicle counts, wayfinding, sign control Controls large and small previously uncontrolled areas Improves cashier monitoring and accountability improves efficiencies, statistical reporting, and planning Event systems can sell transient parking tickets and verify bar-coded parking permits issued by the various venues, as well as parking permits sold online through either the Transportation & Parking Services web-site and/or the venue website. OPERATION o System can be operated with or without detection loops or attendant booths. 42

53 o o o o o o o o o Prior to the start of an event (start of weekday, or 2 hours before event), a pre-event occupancy count is recorded to ensure that parkers do not exceed the available facility capacity. For intermediate size events, cashier at a booth or in the lane will pre-collect a set parking fee upon entry and issue a parking receipt before allowing entry. For large events, cashiering will be moved to the entrance drive or roadway to accommodate multiple transaction lines. Each transaction line will require ticket vendor, cashier and one flagman for each dedicated entry lane in use. Cashiers equipped with wireless handheld units can process payment in lane by cash, credit card, and prepaid vouchers or permits. The units shall have bar code reading capability to accept prepaid parking permits or vouchers in lieu of payment. Contractor is responsible for coordinating and assuring readability of barcodes. General Public: A record of each ticket issued and the amount of the fee charged would be recorded and transmitted wireless to an access point for further wireless or hardwired communication with a system server Prepaid Online Ticket Sales: Patrons that purchase parking online through the University website, Ticketmaster or another third-party website would print out a bar-coded parking permit. In conjunction with this process, a record of the Ticketmaster parking permits purchased online would be downloaded from the Ticketmaster server to an Event Parking server prior to the start of each event. A list of the authorized Ticketmaster permits would in turn be uploaded to each hand-held unit for the event..permit Holders: When purchased, all eligible permit holders would be issued dated, bar-coded Event Day Permits. A database of the permits issued would be downloaded to the event parking server and uploaded to the handheld for the events. Cashiers would scan the bar-coded permits and once they were verified by the system, patrons would be allowed entry into the lot. Once the bar-code is scanned, permit information is sent to the system server for distribution to all other hand-held units being used on that day, which ensures that permits cannot be re-used to enter and park more than one vehicle at a time. Faculty/Staff, Students, and Campus Visitors: Certain types of parking permits could be allowed for parking within the special 43

54 o o event lots as long as they were pre programmed into the system. For other general permit holders the policy would be the same as previously described under Option 1 All users will be issued a receipt-ticket; handheld system has the capability to print the receipt-ticket on the fly in the temporary lanes. Receipt tickets will NOT be collected at exit, but may be used for refund of parking fees after validation by certain tenants. At the conclusion of the event, normal entry may be temporarily suspended and all lanes may be temporarily converted to exit use to assist the post-event tidal flow exit. Additional employees should be positioned at exits to provide increased traffic management. Attendants may request to see and check receipts to ensure that unpaid daily ticket parkers do not exit for free with the post-event tidal flow exit. Each of the handheld units used on the lots communicate via cellular service (purchased through a local cellular service provider) to a Facility Management System (FMS) located in a parking management or security office, and used to track revenue and equipment status throughout the load-in period. In addition, the occupancy at each facility could be monitored on a system server, which would provide valuable management information that could be used to direct or redirect arriving vehicles into lots will available space. These types of event management systems provide for preprogramming of events and rates in advance, which minimizes the amount of data entry and preparation required on event dates. The pre-programming feature also allows for automatic activation on the day of the event without human intervention. Implementing a handheld event system would accommodate the following event payment methodologies: cash processing, credit card payments with major credit cards, online prepaid parking sales, third-party ticket agency prepaid sales, V.I.P. pre-arranged parking, debit and discount cards. A strong example of a wireless event system is the McGann/Amano ipark Event System. Examples include: Conceptual Costs: Handheld Cost $3,500 to $4,500 per unit Training $30,000 to $50,000 Networking System $20,000 to $50,000 per year 44

55 Leased systems may be less expensive. Some manufacturers that do not have proven handheld wireless technology may propose a different technology, but must include in any bid the number of all required devices, including communication requirements, to provide a system meeting the performance requirements of the University. SIGNAGE The ideal design in any setting is one that requires no signage. Since that ideal is simply impossible to achieve, signage plays an integral part in the development of a successful parking management plan. Every parking facility has its own characteristic set of requirements that present specific questions concerning the needs and concerns of the users that must be answered when designing a sign package. Typically, a dark background with white reflective copy or text provides contrast between the signs and the surrounding area. We included a few conceptual signs in this report (Figure 11) to place emphasis on the fact that consideration should be given to implementing a signage system at BSU that compliments the operating plan implemented, and are used to inform special event patrons and improve the overall aesthetic appeal of the campus. The signs depicted provide information in proper sequence that is clear, concise and simple and adds user friendly appeal by creating a unique look and feel and hopefully, a positive parking experience. These concepts are provided to illustrate possibilities for consideration when formulating a master plan for the campus. Any signage upgrades at BSU should be in accordance with the updated MUTCD (Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices) requirements. BSU is currently using Daktronic signs for event parking information. 45

56 Figure 11: Sample Special Event Signage Examples Wind-master Sign Example and Sample Insert: Daily Parking Sign with Event Rate Insert: Event Parking Wayfinding Examples: Temporary Shuttle Wayfinding Example: Source: Walker Parking Consultants, 20009; 46

57 POSSIBLE EVENT GARAGE (GARAGE #3) LOCATIONS POSSIBLE GARAGE #3 As mentioned earlier in this report, Walker is recommending adding an additional (roughly) 2,250 parking spaces to the campus accommodate the University s 10-year growth projections. The following figure shows several possible locations for a third parking garage. The primary purpose for this garage would be to provide added parking capacity needed to accommodate future enrollment growth at BSU and also replace existing lots and street parking that may be displaced by Master Plan improvements. An important second function for the third garage would be to provide some additional parking for special events, specifically at the stadium, arena, sky center, and Morrison Center. (Event parking for the student union is already best accommodated in the Lincoln Garage). Figure 12: Possible Garage #3 Locations 7 4 N 4 S Source: Walker Parking Consultants, 2010; adapted from the BSU parking website ( 47

58 Options 4-and 7 were presented previously in the 2001 parking demand study. Updated PDF sketches were provided for options 4 N (north) and 4 S (south) as part of this update and have been submitted separately from this report. The following matrix provides a brief comparison of the three options. The two newest options (4N / 4S) are intended to be scalable, similar to the Lincoln Garage. Likely the west half of either site would be developed first with the east half developed in a secondary phase. The Garage 4N concept includes some two story frontage retail space along University (13,000 sf per level, expandable to 26,000 sf per level in the second phase). All three options would have some limitations regarding height and setbacks since they are located adjacent the campus boundary. Option No. Footprint (Full build-out) Table 12: Possible Garage #3 Comparison Levels Capacity Existing Surface Lots Net Parking Added Retail Area 7 259'0" x 330'0" n/a 4N 371'10" x 254'6" 5 1, ,077 27,500 sf 4S 371'10" x 254'6" 5 1, ,353 n/a Approximate Walking Distances To: Option No. Stadium / Sky Center LOS Taco Bell Arena LOS Morrison Center LOS 7 2,700' lg event 2,200 ' lg event 1,100 ' C 4N 600' B 1,500 ' D 4,000' n/a 4S 1,100' C 2,000' med event 4,500' n/a * LOS = Level of service and is based on the following industry criteria: LOS A: 400' Med Event: 2,000' LOS B: 800' Large Event: 3,000' LOS C: 1200' LOS D: 1600' Source: Walker Parking Consultants,

59 COST OF AN EVENT GARAGE At current construction costs, a new parking garage can often run upwards of $15,000 per added space for a basic above-ground structure. The break even (per month) revenues needed to fully support this construction are shown on table below. The highlighted fields indicate the monthly revenue need per space to support the standard debt service and operating costs for a single new space. Table 13: Revenue Needed to Support New Parking Construction Monthly Revenue Needed to Breakeven Annual Operating Cost Per Space $ 300 $ 400 $ 500 $ 600 $ 700 $ 800 $ 12,000 $ 86 $ 95 $ 103 $ 111 $ 120 $ , , , , , , , , , , , , Source: Walker Parking Consultants, Project Costs Per Space Given the information on Table 12, a new event garage near the southeast corner of campus would need to generate between $118 and $134 every month (for every space) to be completely self supporting. For example: Walker s concept sketch for the north garage option would include roughly 1,170 stalls at full build-out (two halves). Total construction hard costs may run as much as $17.5M to $22.2M Assuming 1,100+ general student permits, the garage would generate roughly $100 per space per year in permit fees (or roughly $8 / space per month) 49

60 Assuming some daily usage, each space could also be expected to generate maybe $10 - $15 per week on average during the school year. The total income per stall may be as little as $18 per month as compared to a break even income needed of $118 to $134 per month. At two events per week, athletics fees to use this garage would not necessarily close the funding gap. However, from a system-wide perspective the $5 per space per event parking fee would bring the revenue analysis a little bit closer. Converting from the lot rental fee system to a per space charge, per Walker s earlier recommendation, will help to return some parking revenues back to the Transportation and Parking Services department. This is a critical step to help plan for future structures on the BSU campus. As with other garages on the campus, a lot of the funding for construction would still need to be provided by other funding. 50

61 SECTION 3: MISSION STATEMENT

62 There are two general statements that currently help to guide policies and procedures for the Boise State Department of Transportation and Parking Services. The first is the Mission Statement which is stated succinctly on the department s website and is reproduced here: MISSION STATEMENT TRANSPORTATION AND PARKING SERVICES MISSION STATEMENT ENGAGED RESPONSIVE SERVING Mission: Our team is to provide the highest value Transportation and Parking Services in an efficient and responsible manner to the Boise State University community. Be actively engaged with campus and community partners to ensure our team is supportive of the campus strategic master plan to become a metropolitan research university of distinction. Values: Safety Customer Service Communication Innovation Fiscal Responsibility Leadership in Transportation Service Campus and Community Partnerships The second document is the Parking Policy Statement which goes into more detail regarding how the parking system functions and its role in issuing permits and providing access to the campus. This document is also relatively brief (1.5 pages) and is summed up in the following purpose statement: PURPOSE: The goal of the campus parking program is to expedite the safe and orderly conduct of University business and to provide parking facilities and transportation solutions in support of this function within the limits of available space. 51

63 Before recommended possible revisions to the Mission Statement and to the Parking Policy Statement, Walker has provided the following discussion on several concepts including fiduciary structure and the purpose behind a mission statement. SUBSIDIZED VERSUS MARKED-BASED For most universities, the campus transportation and parking services are either self-sustaining divisions or auxiliary services that support the university s academic mission. In some states, facilities with the ability to generate revenue must ensure that they are not reliant on the university s general fund to support their services. There are distinct advantages to making the parking system a budget neutral, revenue generating, or even revenue maximizing entity, although this sometimes conflicts with the broader mission of supporting the university s academic objectives. There are also many advantages associated with removing the financial subsidies associated with campus parking. Advantages: Price based parking systems that are not dependant on university funds to subsidize parking can manage their resources based on supply and demand making the system as efficient as possible. If parking services have the ability to set fees in response to demand, they can determine how to most effectively use their resources to accommodate the broader university mission and support other campus based initiatives. This type of methodology also identifies the full economic cost of driving, helping students, faculty, staff, and visitors make driving decisions based on actual cost and not simply convenience. If the parking system is able to generate margin contribution to the campus, it has the ability to support other activities or provide alternatives to driving a personal vehicle to campus. A robust campus parking system can provide incentives to students to car pool, use transit, car share, or use alternative transportation (e.g. bicycles) to access campus. An unsubsidized parking system more clearly delineates the cost of supplying parking and the value of using parking. In summary, the advantages to removing parking subsidies on campus include: More efficiently use existing resources Reduce parking demand 52

64 Mitigate traffic and congestion on and around campus Provide revenue to other campus initiatives Promote alternatives to single occupancy vehicle use Disadvantages: There are times, however, when there is an overall public benefit or social surplus that can be obtained by subsidizing parking. Free or reduced fee parking allows some campus users access to campus that they may not have if they are forced to pay for parking. If access to campus is a barrier to many students, Boise State may not be fulfilling its mission to be a "comprehensive, urban university serving a diverse population through undergraduate and graduate programs, research, and state and regional public service." Subsidized parking may also help the university attract faculty and staff that are sensitive to price and come from areas where paid parking is anathema. Many campuses subsidize parking to help alleviate some of the financial stress that students face. Other campuses are commuter focused and require substantial parking resources to accommodate the vast number of students arriving on campus daily. Other campuses are in remote or rural areas that do not have sufficient access to public transit to accommodate their student population and must provide parking to accommodate this shortage. The disadvantages of non-subsidized parking include: Limits access to campus for some students Increases the out of pocket cost to attend Boise State University May promote parking spillover into adjacent neighborhoods Walker supports campus initiatives that reflect the fair economic cost of providing parking services. If market rate, or fee based parking is further developed, it is important that students are provided with alternatives to driving including more robust transit or shuttle systems, increased bicycle and pedestrian access, and other initiatives that may increase access to campus without requiring more parking. If the current permit system remains in place, it is important for Parking Services to receive fair market rate for the use of its facilities for events and activities that are not part of the academic mission of the University. BACKGROUND -- PURPOSE OF A MISSION STATEMENT The mission statement should be a clear and succinct representation of the enterprise's purpose for existence. The classic example of a mission 53

65 statement should incorporate socially meaningful and measurable criteria addressing concepts such as the moral/ethical position of the enterprise, public image, the target market, products/services, the geographic domain and expectations of revenue and fiscal management. The intent of the Mission Statement should be the first consideration for any faculty, staff, or employee who is evaluating a strategic decision. The statement can range from a very simple to a very complex set of ideas. In a University setting it should also address social and public responsibility as well as fiduciary duty. PROPOSED MISSION STATEMENT Based on conversations with the BSU Transportation and Parking Services department, Walker feels that the following concepts are ones that should be incorporated into both the Mission and Policy statements for the department: The BSU Department of Transportation and Parking Services exists to actively facilitate vehicular and transit-oriented access to, from, and within the University s campus. This goal of providing this access is to help support the University s operational vision as a Metropolitan Research University of Distinction while promoting Academic Excellence, Public Engagement, Vibrant Culture, and Excellent Research. As much as possible, the department strives to be a selfsustaining auxiliary unit which promotes fiscal responsibility. Operationally, the department promotes the following as core strategies: o Costs are spread equitably between all user groups o Operations are transparent and customer focused o Students, faculty, and staff have a role in setting prices and policies through the oversight of the Parking Advisory Committee Based on these concepts Walker proposes the following as a revised Mission Statement for the department: 54

66 TRANSPORTATION AND PARKING SERVICES MISSION STATEMENT ENGAGED RESPONSIVE SERVING Mission: The Department of Transportation and Parking Services exists to actively facilitate vehicular and transit-oriented access to, from, and within the University s campus. This goal in providing this access is to help support the University s operational vision as a Metropolitan Research University of Distinction. We will accomplish this mission by providing clean and safe parking facilities, reliable transportation services, alternatives to parking, responsive customer service, and fair compliance of regulations by a well trained staff. To be successful, our department must meet our fiscal responsibilities by sharing costs equitably between all user groups and helping to plan for a sustainable future. Values: Safety Transparency Stakeholder Oversight Communication Innovation Fiscal Responsibility Campus and Community Partnerships For the Parking Policy Statement, Walker recommends supplementing the document with the bullet points listed at the beginning of this section. The rest of the existing policy document should be revised to match any parking policy changes (such as the new special event parking fees) that have been recommended in this report. 55

67 APPENDIX A: INVENTORY AND OCCUPANCY DATA

68

69 BSU Parking Inventory and Occupancy Data Summary Monday Occupancies (4/27/09) Zone Total Supply 9:00 AM 11:00 AM 1:00 PM 3:00 PM 5:00 PM 7:00 PM Zone 1 3,243 2,047 2,154 1,928 1,720 1,344 1,332 Zone Zone 3 2, ,190 1,218 1, Zone 4 1, , ,613 4,230 4,768 4,601 4,084 3,086 2,841 Monday Percentages (4/27/09) Zone Total Supply 9:00 AM 11:00 AM 1:00 PM 3:00 PM 5:00 PM 7:00 PM Zone 1 3, % 66.4% 59.5% 53.0% 41.4% 41.1% Zone % 64.8% 64.8% 64.4% 53.0% 61.3% Zone 3 2, % 58.6% 60.0% 49.8% 34.1% 24.7% Zone 4 1, % 59.2% 61.1% 55.1% 41.5% 35.4% 7, % 62.6% 60.4% 53.6% 40.5% 37.3%

70 BSU Parking Inventory and Occupancy Data Summary Tuesday Occupancies (4/28/09) Zone Total Supply 9:00 AM 11:00 AM 1:00 PM 3:00 PM 5:00 PM 7:00 PM Zone 1 3,243 2,259 2,406 2,405 2,309 1,460 1,377 Zone Zone 3 2,031 1,267 1,445 1,421 1, Zone 4 1,646 1,060 1,208 1, ,613 5,056 5,565 5,557 5,099 3,355 2,920 Tuesday Percentages (4/28/09) Zone Total Supply 9:00 AM 11:00 AM 1:00 PM 3:00 PM 5:00 PM 7:00 PM Zone 1 3, % 74.2% 74.2% 71.2% 45.0% 42.5% Zone % 73.0% 72.3% 71.9% 61.0% 58.4% Zone 3 2, % 71.1% 70.0% 64.9% 37.7% 26.1% Zone 4 1, % 73.4% 74.7% 59.2% 43.0% 36.9% 7, % 73.1% 73.0% 67.0% 44.1% 38.4%

71 BSU Parking Inventory and Occupancy Data Zone: Zone 1 Date: Monday, April 27 Occupancy Counts Name Type Stall Type / On-street Location Capacity 9:00 AM 11:00 AM 1:00 PM 3:00 PM 5:00 PM 7:00 PM Notes HSR, West Lot Reserved HSR, North Lot Reserved Metered ADA HSR, East Lot General HSR, South Lot General No data available for 1 pm count; occupancy estimated University Park Lot Housing Metered Lusk St. Street Boise River to Royal, East Boise River to Royal, West Lusk St. Street Royal to Island, East No parking Royal to Island, West line 18. line 18 is all zeros Lusk St. Street Island to Sherwood, East Island to Sherwood, West th St. Street Boise River to Royal, East Boise River to Royal, West No on street parking 9th St. Street Royal to Island, East Royal to Island, West No on street parking 9th St. Street Island to Sherwood, East Island to Sherwood, West Royal Blvd. Street Lusk to 9th, North

72 BSU Parking Inventory and Occupancy Data Zone: Zone 1 Date: Monday, April 27 Occupancy Counts Name Type Stall Type / On-street Location Capacity 9:00 AM 11:00 AM 1:00 PM 3:00 PM 5:00 PM 7:00 PM Notes Lusk to 9th, South Island St. Street Lusk to 9th, North Lusk to 9th, South Sherwood St. Street Lusk to 9th, North Lusk to 9th, South Barnes Towers, east Lot Metered No data available for 9 am count; occupancy estimated ADA No data available for 9 am count; occupancy estimated Towers Resident Lot Residence Hall Towers General Lot General Towers Reserved Lot Reserved ADA Metered Corner of Unv & Capitol Lot Reserved UIR Lot Residence Hall No data available for 9 am count; occupancy estimated Earle St. Adjacent Lot General No data available for 9 am count; occupancy estimated Brady Garage Garage ADA st nd rd th Public Affairs & Arts Lot ADA

73 BSU Parking Inventory and Occupancy Data Zone: Zone 1 Date: Monday, April 27 Occupancy Counts Name Type Stall Type / On-street Location Capacity 9:00 AM 11:00 AM 1:00 PM 3:00 PM 5:00 PM 7:00 PM Notes Metered SV ADA VIR ADA VIG ADA Cesar Chavez Ln. Street From Capitol to SM Bldg., North No Parking Zone From Capitol to SM Bldg., South No Parking Zone Diploma St. Street Capitol to Earle, North No data available for 9 am count; occupancy estimated Capitol to Earle, South No on street parking Diploma St. Street Earle to Brady, North No Diploma Street Earl to Brady. Is the Brady Garage Earle to Brady, South No Diploma Street Earl to Brady. Is the Brady Garage University Drive Street Capitol to Earle, North No Parking Zone Capitol to Earle, South No Parking Zone University Drive Street Earle to Brady, North No Parking Zone Earle to Brady, South No Parking Zone University Drive Street Brady to Chrisway, North No Parking Zone Brady to Chrisway, South No Parking Zone Earle St. Street University to Diploma, East No data available for 9 am count; occupancy estimated University to Diploma, West No data available for 9 am count; occupancy estimated Brady St. Street University to Diploma, East No Parking Zone University to Diploma, West No Parking Zone Theater Arts Lot General

74 BSU Parking Inventory and Occupancy Data Zone: Zone 1 Date: Monday, April 27 Occupancy Counts Name Type Stall Type / On-street Location Capacity 9:00 AM 11:00 AM 1:00 PM 3:00 PM 5:00 PM 7:00 PM Notes Reserved ADA ADA off Boise Ave. Lot ADA Did not find lot University Heights Lot Housing Metered ADA University Village, North Lot Housing ADA University Village, South Lot Housing ADA Psyc Research Group Lot Reserved ADA University Square Lot Housing ADA Metered Health Center, north Lot Metered ADA Health Center, south Lot Metered Housing Boise Ave. Street Capitol to Martha, east Capitol to Martha, west

75 BSU Parking Inventory and Occupancy Data Zone: Zone 1 Date: Monday, April 27 Occupancy Counts Name Type Stall Type / On-street Location Capacity 9:00 AM 11:00 AM 1:00 PM 3:00 PM 5:00 PM 7:00 PM Notes Martha St. Street Boise to Chrisway, north No Parking 7am-5pm Mon-Fri. Boise to Chrisway, south Residential 1/2 hr. only. Martha Circle Street all Residential 1/2 hr. only. U. Village South Meter QS Cot Meters West Side MC Were counted as Barnes Towers East Meters. Totals: 3,243 2,047 2,154 1,928 1,720 1,344 1,332 Percentage Occupied: 63% 66% 59% 53% 41% 41%

76 BSU Parking Inventory and Occupancy Data Zone: Zone 1 Date: Tuesday, April 28 Occupancy Counts Name Type Stall Type / On-street Location Capacity 9:00 AM 11:00 AM 1:00 PM 3:00 PM 5:00 PM 7:00 PM Notes HSR, West Lot Reserved HSR, North Lot Reserved Metered ADA HSR, East Lot General HSR, South Lot General University Park Lot Housing Metered Lusk St. Street Boise River to Royal, East Boise River to Royal, West Lusk St. Street Royal to Island, East Royal to Island, West Lusk St. Street Island to Sherwood, East Island to Sherwood, West th St. Street Boise River to Royal, East Not counted Boise River to Royal, West No Street Parking 9th St. Street Royal to Island, East Royal to Island, West th St. Street Island to Sherwood, East Island to Sherwood, West Royal Blvd. Street Lusk to 9th, North

77 BSU Parking Inventory and Occupancy Data Zone: Zone 1 Date: Tuesday, April 28 Occupancy Counts Name Type Stall Type / On-street Location Capacity 9:00 AM 11:00 AM 1:00 PM 3:00 PM 5:00 PM 7:00 PM Notes Lusk to 9th, South Island St. Street Lusk to 9th, North Lusk to 9th, South Sherwood St. Street Lusk to 9th, North Lusk to 9th, South Barnes Towers, east Lot Metered ADA Towers Resident Lot Residence Hall Towers General Lot General Towers Reserved Lot Reserved ADA Metered Corner of Unv & Capitol Lot General UIR Lot Residence Hall Earle St. Adjacent Lot General Brady Garage Garage ADA st Floor nd Floor rd Floor th Floor Public Affairs & Arts Lot ADA

78 BSU Parking Inventory and Occupancy Data Zone: Zone 1 Date: Tuesday, April 28 Occupancy Counts Name Type Stall Type / On-street Location Capacity 9:00 AM 11:00 AM 1:00 PM 3:00 PM 5:00 PM 7:00 PM Notes Metered MC Permit Reserves UIR ADA UIG ADA Cesar Chavez Ln. Street From Capitol to SM Bldg., North From Capitol to SM Bldg., South Diploma St. Street Capitol to Earle, North Capitol to Earle, South Diploma St. Street Earle to Brady, North This is the location of Brady Garage Earle to Brady, South This is the location of Brady Garage University Drive Street Capitol to Earle, North No on street parking Capitol to Earle, South No on street t parking University Drive Street Earle to Brady, North No on street parking Earle to Brady, South No on street parking University Drive Street Brady to Chrisway, North No on street parking Brady to Chrisway, South No on street parking Earle St. Street University to Diploma, East University to Diploma, West Brady St. Street University to Diploma, East No on street Parking University to Diploma, West No on street Parking Theater Arts Lot General

79 BSU Parking Inventory and Occupancy Data Zone: Zone 1 Date: Tuesday, April 28 Occupancy Counts Name Type Stall Type / On-street Location Capacity 9:00 AM 11:00 AM 1:00 PM 3:00 PM 5:00 PM 7:00 PM Notes Reserved ADA ADA off Boise Ave. Lot ADA did not find lot University Heights Lot Housing Metered ADA University Village, North Lot Housing ADA University Village, South Lot Housing ADA Psyc Research Group Lot Reserved ADA University Square Lot Housing ADA Metered Health Center, north Lot Metered ADA Health Center, south Lot Metered Housing Boise Ave. Street Capitol to Martha, east Capitol to Martha, west

80 BSU Parking Inventory and Occupancy Data Zone: Zone 1 Date: Tuesday, April 28 Occupancy Counts Name Type Stall Type / On-street Location Capacity 9:00 AM 11:00 AM 1:00 PM 3:00 PM 5:00 PM 7:00 PM Notes Martha St. Street Boise to Chrisway, north No parking 7AM- 5 PM Monday thru Friday Boise to Chrisway, south Residential 1/2 parking Martha Circle Street all Residential 1/2 parking Univ. Village So. Metered QS Reserved ADA Totals: 3,243 2,259 2,406 2,405 2,309 1,460 1,377 Percentage Occupied: 70% 74% 74% 71% 45% 42%

81 BSU Parking Inventory and Occupancy Data Zone: Zone 2 Date: Monday, April 27 Occupancy Counts Name Type Stall Type / On-street Location Capacity 9:00 AM 11:00 AM 1:00 PM 3:00 PM 5:00 PM 7:00 PM Notes Cesar Chavez Ln. Street SM Bldg. to Ampitheater, North No Parking SM Bldg. to Ampitheater, South No Parking Business Bldg. Lot Metered Loading zone, 3 spaces ADA Mathmatics / Geo Lot Reserved Metered ADA Administration Lot Lot ADA Pay Parking Library Lot, north Lot Reserved Loading zone, 5 spaces ADA Liberal Arts Lot Lot Reserved Loading zone, 2 spaces Metered ADA University Drive Street Chrisway to Juanita, North No Parking Chrisway to Juanita, South $17.00 University Drive Street Juanita to Joyce, North No Parking Juanita to Joyce, South $15.00 University Drive Street Joyce to Liberal Arts Bldg., North No Parking Joyce to Liberal Arts Bldg., South University Drive Street Liberal Arts to Lincoln, North No Parking

82 BSU Parking Inventory and Occupancy Data Zone: Zone 2 Date: Monday, April 27 Occupancy Counts Name Type Stall Type / On-street Location Capacity 9:00 AM 11:00 AM 1:00 PM 3:00 PM 5:00 PM 7:00 PM Notes Liberal Arts to Lincoln, South No parking Gateway Center Lot Metered Reserved ADA Support Systems Anex Lot Metered Reserved ADA Student Services Lot Reserved Arts/English Lot Reserved Chrisway Dr. Street University to Martha, East No Parking University to Martha, West Chrisway Dr. Street t Martha to Boise, East No Parking Martha to Boise, West /2 hr. limit, residential Juanita St. Street University to Yale, East $13.00/2 $15.00/ 5 $19.00 University to Yale, West No Parking Juanita St. Street Yale To Potter, East Yale To Potter, West No Parking Juanita St. Street Potter to Boise, East Potter To Boise, West No Parking Court (off of Juanita) Street North /2 hr. residential, 8-5 Verna Ln. South No Parking

83 BSU Parking Inventory and Occupancy Data Zone: Zone 2 Date: Monday, April 27 Occupancy Counts Name Type Stall Type / On-street Location Capacity 9:00 AM 11:00 AM 1:00 PM 3:00 PM 5:00 PM 7:00 PM Notes Joyce St. Street University to Yale, East Conctruction, No Parking University to Yale, West Construction, 1 $15.00 Joyce St. Street Yale To Potter, East Yale To Potter, West Joyce St. Street Potter to Belmont, East No Parking 7-5 Potter to Belmont, West No Parking 7-5 Joyce St. Street Belmont to Boise, East Belmont to Boise, West No Parking 7-5 Yale Ct. Street Juanita to Joyce, North Blocked Off (4 construction $13.00 & $15.00 Juanita to Joyce, South Blocked Off, No Parking 7-5 Yale Ct. Street Joyce to end, North Blocked Off Joyce to end, South Blocked Off Street east of A/E Bldg. Street University to end, east Not a street Private parking Lot University to end, west Not a street Private parking Lot Portter Dr. Street Juanita to Joyce, North No Parking 7-5 Juantia to Joyce, soutrh No Parking 7-5 Portter Dr. Street Joyce to Oakland, Norh Joyce to Oakland, south No Parking 7-5 Belmont St. Street Joyce to Oakland, North No Parking 7-5 Joyce to Oakland, soutrh Donald Circle Street North

84 BSU Parking Inventory and Occupancy Data Zone: Zone 2 Date: Monday, April 27 Occupancy Counts Name Type Stall Type / On-street Location Capacity 9:00 AM 11:00 AM 1:00 PM 3:00 PM 5:00 PM 7:00 PM Notes South Boise Ave. Street Chrisway to Juanita, North No Parking Chrisway to Juanita, South No Parking Boise Ave. Street Juanita to Joyce, North Juanita to Joyce, South No Parking Boise Ave. Street Joyce to Beacon, North No Parking Joyce to Beacon, South No Parking Totals: Percentage Occupied: 56% 65% 65% 64% 53% 61%

85 BSU Parking Inventory and Occupancy Data Zone: Zone 2 Date: Tuesday, April 28 Occupancy Counts Name Type Stall Type / On-street Location Capacity 9:00 AM 11:00 AM 1:00 PM 3:00 PM 5:00 PM 7:00 PM Notes Cesar Chavez Ln. Street SM Bldg. to Ampitheater, North No Parking SM Bldg. to Ampitheater, South No Parking Business Bldg. Lot Metered Loading zone, 3 spaces ADA Mathmatics / Geo Lot Reserved Metered ADA Administration Lot Lot ADA Pay Parking Library Lot, north Lot Reserved Loading zone, 5 spaces ADA Liberal Arts Lot Lot Reserved Loading zone, 2 spaces Metered ADA University Drive Street Chrisway to Juanita, North No Parking Chrisway to Juanita, South $17.00 University Drive Street Juanita to Joyce, North No Parking Juanita to Joyce, South $15.00 University Drive Street Joyce to Liberal Arts Bldg., North No Parking Joyce to Liberal Arts Bldg., South University Drive Street Liberal Arts to Lincoln, North No Parking

86 BSU Parking Inventory and Occupancy Data Zone: Zone 2 Date: Tuesday, April 28 Occupancy Counts Name Type Stall Type / On-street Location Capacity 9:00 AM 11:00 AM 1:00 PM 3:00 PM 5:00 PM 7:00 PM Notes Liberal Arts to Lincoln, South No parking Gateway Center Lot Metered Reserved ADA Support Systems Anex Lot Metered Reserved ADA Student Services Lot Reserved Arts/English Lot Reserved Chrisway Dr. Street University to Martha, East No Parking University to Martha, West Chrisway Dr. Street t Martha to Boise, East No Parking Martha to Boise, West /2 hr. limit, residential Juanita St. Street University to Yale, East University to Yale, West No Parking Juanita St. Street Yale To Potter, East Yale To Potter, West No Parking Juanita St. Street Potter to Boise, East Potter To Boise, West No Parking Court (off of Juanita) Street North /2 hr. residential, 8-5 South No Parking

87 BSU Parking Inventory and Occupancy Data Zone: Zone 2 Date: Tuesday, April 28 Occupancy Counts Name Type Stall Type / On-street Location Capacity 9:00 AM 11:00 AM 1:00 PM 3:00 PM 5:00 PM 7:00 PM Notes Joyce St. Street University to Yale, East Conctruction, No Parking University to Yale, West Construction, 1 $15.00 Joyce St. Street Yale To Potter, East Yale To Potter, West Joyce St. Street Potter to Belmont, East No Parking 7-5 Potter to Belmont, West No Parking 7-5 Joyce St. Street Belmont to Boise, East Belmont to Boise, West No Parking 7-5 Yale Ct. Street Juanita to Joyce, North Blocked Off (4 construction $13.00 & $15.00 Juanita to Joyce, South Blocked Off, No Parking 7-5 Yale Ct. Street Joyce to end, North Blocked Off Joyce to end, South Blocked Off Street east of A/E Bldg. Street University to end, east Not a street Private parking Lot University to end, west Not a street Private parking Lot Portter Dr. Street Juanita to Joyce, Norh No Parking 7-5 Juantia to Joyce, soutrh No Parking 7-5 Portter Dr. Street Joyce to Oakland, Norh Joyce to Oakland, soutrh No Parking 7-5 Belmont St. Street Joyce to Oakland, Norh No Parking 7-5 Joyce to Oakland, soutrh Donald Circle Street North

88 BSU Parking Inventory and Occupancy Data Zone: Zone 2 Date: Tuesday, April 28 Occupancy Counts Name Type Stall Type / On-street Location Capacity 9:00 AM 11:00 AM 1:00 PM 3:00 PM 5:00 PM 7:00 PM Notes South Boise Ave. Street Chrisway to Juanita, North No Parking Chrisway to Juanita, South No Parking Boise Ave. Street Juanita to Joyce, North Juanita to Joyce, South No Parking Boise Ave. Street Joyce to Beacon, North No Parking Joyce to Beacon, South No Parking Totals: Percentage Occupied: 68% 73% 72% 72% 61% 58%

89 BSU Parking Inventory and Occupancy Data Zone: Zone 3 Date: Monday, April 27 Occupancy Counts Name Type Stall Type / On-street Location Capacity 9:00 AM 11:00 AM 1:00 PM 3:00 PM 5:00 PM 7:00 PM Notes Lincoln Hall Lot Reserved BSU Vans General Shuttles Lincoln Garage Garage 1000's 's 's 's 's Student Recreation Ctr. Lot Reserved Metered ADA Manitou Lot Lot General ID Small Business Lot Metered ADA Art Annex #1 Lot General Reserved Engineering & Tech Lot Metered Reserved ADA ES General, west Lot Reserved Gone General Gone ES General, east Lot Metered Gone

90 BSU Parking Inventory and Occupancy Data Zone: Zone 3 Date: Monday, April 27 Occupancy Counts Name Type Stall Type / On-street Location Capacity 9:00 AM 11:00 AM 1:00 PM 3:00 PM 5:00 PM 7:00 PM Notes Reserved Gone General Gone Geology Annex Lot Metered Reserved General Alumni Assoc., south Lot General Denver Lot Lot General Beacon Lot Lot General Risk Management Lot Reserved TRIO Programs Lot ADA Metered General Reserved Child Care Lab Lot Reserved International Programs Lot Reserved General Euclid Mods Lot Reserved Metered ADA Tech Help Lot Reserved Landscape Services Lot General No counts avaiable at 11am - 5pm

91 BSU Parking Inventory and Occupancy Data Zone: Zone 3 Date: Monday, April 27 Occupancy Counts Name Type Stall Type / On-street Location Capacity 9:00 AM 11:00 AM 1:00 PM 3:00 PM 5:00 PM 7:00 PM Notes Reserved No counts avaiable at 11am - 5pm SK Lot Lot Reserved LB General Lot General Special Projects Lot Reserved General 0 Children's Center Lot ADA Reserved University Manor Lot Housing General Reserved ADA Metered Belmont Street Street Oakland to Lincoln, North Oakland to Lincoln, South Belmont Street Street Lincoln to Michigan, North No Parking Lincoln to Michigan, South Belmont Street Street Michigan to Vermont, North Michigan to Vermont, South Belmont Street Street Vermont to Manitou, North Vermont to Manitou, South Belmont Street Street Manitou to Euclid, North

92 BSU Parking Inventory and Occupancy Data Zone: Zone 3 Date: Monday, April 27 Occupancy Counts Name Type Stall Type / On-street Location Capacity 9:00 AM 11:00 AM 1:00 PM 3:00 PM 5:00 PM 7:00 PM Notes Manitou to Euclid, South Belmont Street Street Euclid to Grant, North Euclid to Grant, South /2 hr. only Belmont Street Street Grant to Denver, North Grant to Denver, South /2 hr. only Belmont Street Street Denver to Broadway, North Denver to Broadway, South Beacon St. Street Boise to Oakland, North No Parking Boise to Oakland, South No Parking Beacon St. Street Oakland to Lincoln, North No Parking Oakland to Lincoln, South No Parking Beacon St. Streett Lincoln to Michigan, North No Parking Lincoln to Michigan, South No Parking Beacon St. Street Michigan to Vermont, North No Parking Michigan to Vermont, South No Parking Beacon St. Street Vermont to Manitou, North No Parking Vermont to Manitou, South No Parking Beacon St. Street Manitou to Euclid, North No Parking Manitou to Euclid, South No Parking Beacon St. Street Euclid to Grant, North No Parking Euclid to Grant, South No Parking

93 BSU Parking Inventory and Occupancy Data Zone: Zone 3 Date: Monday, April 27 Occupancy Counts Name Type Stall Type / On-street Location Capacity 9:00 AM 11:00 AM 1:00 PM 3:00 PM 5:00 PM 7:00 PM Notes Beacon St. Street Grant to Denver, North No Parking Grant to Denver, South No Parking Beacon St. Street Denver to Broadway, North No Parking Denver to Broadway, South No Parking Oakland Ave. Street Potter to Belmont, East Potter to Belmont, West Oakland Ave. Street Belmont to Beacon, East /2 hr. only Belmont to Beacon, West No Parking M-F Lincoln Ave. Street Univeristy to Belmont, East No Parking University to Belmont, West /2 hr. only Lincoln Ave. Street Belmont to Beacon, East No Parking Belmont to Beacon, West No Parking Michigan Ave. Street Univeristy to Belmont, East University to Belmont, West hr. parking Michigan Ave. Street Belmont to Beacon, East Construction area Belmont to Beacon, West hr. parking Vermont Ave. Street Univeristy to Belmont, East Sidewalk area/rec. University to Belmont, West Sidewalk area/rec. Vermont Ave. Street Belmont to Beacon, East Belmont to Beacon, West Manitou Ave. Street Univeristy to Belmont, East HC area, LZ

94 BSU Parking Inventory and Occupancy Data Zone: Zone 3 Date: Monday, April 27 Occupancy Counts Name Type Stall Type / On-street Location Capacity 9:00 AM 11:00 AM 1:00 PM 3:00 PM 5:00 PM 7:00 PM Notes University to Belmont, West Manitou Ave. Street Belmont to Beacon, East /2 hr. only Belmont to Beacon, West /2 hr. only Euclid Ave. Street Univeristy to Belmont, East Cones cover 1 space University to Belmont, West Euclid Ave. Street Belmont to Beacon, East hr. only, HC area Belmont to Beacon, West Grant Ave. Street Univeristy to Belmont, East University to Belmont, West Grant Ave. Street Belmont to Beacon, East Belmont to Beacon, West Parallel parking/mixed Denver Ave. Streett Univeristy i to Belmont, East University to Belmont, West Part is 1/2 hr. only Denver Ave. Street Belmont to Beacon, East Belmont to Beacon, West Broadway Ave. Street Univeristy to Belmont, West No Parking Broadway Ave. Street Belmont to Beacon, West No Parking Totals: 2, ,190 1,218 1, Percentage Occupied: 47% 59% 60% 50% 34% 25%

95 BSU Parking Inventory and Occupancy Data Zone: Zone 3 Date: Tuesday, April 28 Occupancy Counts Name Type Stall Type / On-street Location Capacity 9:00 AM 11:00 AM 1:00 PM 3:00 PM 5:00 PM 7:00 PM Notes Lincoln Hall Lot Reserved General BSU Vans/Shuttles Lincoln Garage Garage 1000's 's 's 's 's Student Recreation Ctr. Lot Reserved Metered ADA Manitou Lot Lot General ID Small Business Lot Metered ADA Art Annex #1 Lot General Reserved ACP no longer exists Engineering & Tech Lot Metered Reserved ADA ES General, west Lot Reserved Gone General Gone ES General, east Lot Metered Gone

96 BSU Parking Inventory and Occupancy Data Zone: Zone 3 Date: Tuesday, April 28 Occupancy Counts Name Type Stall Type / On-street Location Capacity 9:00 AM 11:00 AM 1:00 PM 3:00 PM 5:00 PM 7:00 PM Notes Reserved Gone General Gone Geology Annex Lot Metered Reserved General Alumni Assoc., south Lot General Denver Lot Lot General Beacon Lot Lot General Risk Management Lot Reserved OSHA TRIO Programs Lot ADA Metered General Reserved Child Care Lab Lot Reserved International Programs Lot Reserved General Euclid Mods Lot Reserved Metered ADA Tech Help Lot Reserved Landscape Services Lot General

97 BSU Parking Inventory and Occupancy Data Zone: Zone 3 Date: Tuesday, April 28 Occupancy Counts Name Type Stall Type / On-street Location Capacity 9:00 AM 11:00 AM 1:00 PM 3:00 PM 5:00 PM 7:00 PM Notes Reserved SK Lot Lot Reserved LB General Lot General Special Projects Lot Reserved General 0 0 No general parking in this lot Children's Center Lot ADA Reserved University Manor Lot Housing General Reserved ADA Metered Belmont Street Street Oakland to Lincoln, North Oakland to Lincoln, South Belmont Street Street Lincoln to Michigan, North car parked in "No Parking Area" Lincoln to Michigan, South Belmont Street Street Michigan to Vermont, North Michigan to Vermont, South Belmont Street Street Vermont to Manitou, North Vermont to Manitou, South Belmont Street Street Manitou to Euclid, North

98 BSU Parking Inventory and Occupancy Data Zone: Zone 3 Date: Tuesday, April 28 Occupancy Counts Name Type Stall Type / On-street Location Capacity 9:00 AM 11:00 AM 1:00 PM 3:00 PM 5:00 PM 7:00 PM Notes Manitou to Euclid, South Belmont Street Street Euclid to Grant, North Euclid to Grant, South /2 hr. only Belmont Street Street Grant to Denver, North Grant to Denver, South /2 hr. only Belmont Street Street Denver to Broadway, North Denver to Broadway, South Beacon St. Street Boise to Oakland, North No Parking Boise to Oakland, South No Parking Beacon St. Street Oakland to Lincoln, North No Parking Oakland to Lincoln, South No Parking Beacon St. Streett Lincoln to Michigan, North No Parking Lincoln to Michigan, South No Parking Beacon St. Street Michigan to Vermont, North No Parking Michigan to Vermont, South No Parking Beacon St. Street Vermont to Manitou, North No Parking Vermont to Manitou, South No Parking Beacon St. Street Manitou to Euclid, North No Parking Manitou to Euclid, South No Parking Beacon St. Street Euclid to Grant, North No Parking Euclid to Grant, South No Parking

99 BSU Parking Inventory and Occupancy Data Zone: Zone 3 Date: Tuesday, April 28 Occupancy Counts Name Type Stall Type / On-street Location Capacity 9:00 AM 11:00 AM 1:00 PM 3:00 PM 5:00 PM 7:00 PM Notes Beacon St. Street Grant to Denver, North No Parking Grant to Denver, South No Parking Beacon St. Street Denver to Broadway, North No Parking Denver to Broadway, South No Parking Oakland Ave. Street Potter to Belmont, East Potter to Belmont, West Oakland Ave. Street Belmont to Beacon, East /2 hr. only Belmont to Beacon, West No Parking M-F Lincoln Ave. Street Univeristy to Belmont, East No Parking University to Belmont, West /2 hr. only Lincoln Ave. Street Belmont to Beacon, East No Parking Belmont to Beacon, West No Parking Michigan Ave. Street Univeristy to Belmont, East University to Belmont, West hr. parking Michigan Ave. Street Belmont to Beacon, East Construction area Belmont to Beacon, West hr. parking Vermont Ave. Street Univeristy to Belmont, East Gone University to Belmont, West Gone Vermont Ave. Street Belmont to Beacon, East Belmont to Beacon, West Manitou Ave. Street Univeristy to Belmont, East HC Space

100 BSU Parking Inventory and Occupancy Data Zone: Zone 3 Date: Tuesday, April 28 Occupancy Counts Name Type Stall Type / On-street Location Capacity 9:00 AM 11:00 AM 1:00 PM 3:00 PM 5:00 PM 7:00 PM Notes University to Belmont, West Manitou Ave. Street Belmont to Beacon, East /2 hr. only Belmont to Beacon, West /2 hr. only Euclid Ave. Street Univeristy to Belmont, East University to Belmont, West Euclid Ave. Street Belmont to Beacon, East hr. only, HC area Belmont to Beacon, West Grant Ave. Street Univeristy to Belmont, East University to Belmont, West Grant Ave. Street Belmont to Beacon, East Belmont to Beacon, West Parallel parking/mixed Denver Ave. Streett Univeristy i to Belmont, East University to Belmont, West Part is 1/2 hr. only Denver Ave. Street Belmont to Beacon, East Belmont to Beacon, West Broadway Ave. Street Univeristy to Belmont, West No Parking Broadway Ave. Street Belmont to Beacon, West No Parking Totals: 2,031 1,267 1,445 1,421 1, Percentage Occupied: 62% 71% 70% 65% 38% 26%

101 BSU Parking Inventory and Occupancy Data Zone: Zone 4 Date: Monday, April 27 Occupancy Counts Name Type Stall Type / On-street Location Capacity 9:00 AM 11:00 AM 1:00 PM 3:00 PM 5:00 PM 7:00 PM Notes Residence Hall 1 Lot Residence Hall Metered ADA West Stadium Lot and RH1 parking inventories have been estimated based on available drawings; original field data counts were inaccurate. Reserved Residence Hall 2 Lot Residence Hall General Metered ADA West Stadium Lot and RH2 parking inventories have been estimated based on available drawings; original field data counts were inaccurate. Note that RH2 spaces were moved from the West Stadium lot to the East stadium lot following the year. RH2 is now available for general parking. Reserved Bronco Circle Street General Metered Diesel Tech Lot ADA Maint. Shop Lot Metered ADA Residence Hall 3 Lot Residence Hall East Stadium Lot Lot General Metered ADA East Stadium Lot and RH3 parking inventories have been estimated based on available drawings; original field data counts were inaccurate. Follow the year, the RH3 designation has been removed. Instead, all RH2 spaces are accommodated in this lot. ISMI Res Cesar Chavez Ln. Street Amphitheater to Broadway, North No parking Amphitheater to Broadway, South

102 BSU Parking Inventory and Occupancy Data Zone: Zone 4 Date: Monday, April 27 Occupancy Counts Name Type Stall Type / On-street Location Capacity 9:00 AM 11:00 AM 1:00 PM 3:00 PM 5:00 PM 7:00 PM Notes University Drive Street Lincoln to Michigan, North Lincoln to Michigan, South University Drive Street Michigan to Manitou, North Michigan to Manitou, South University Drive Street Manitou to Euclid, North Manitou to Euclid, South University Drive Street Euclid to Grant, North 6 7/1H 7/1H Euclid to Grant, South University Drive Street Grant to Denver, North Grant to Denver, South University Drive Street Denver to Broadway, North Denver to Broadway, South Broadway Ave. Street Cesar Chavez to University, West General / 1 Res. Julia Davis Park Other Along JD-W Side Lot JD East JD W-Bam JD Park is not technically part of the BSU campus parking system. However, parking adjacent to river is used by students. Therefore, field auditors were instructed to observe student parking activities and provide an estimate for student cars using the park. This demand has been added into the Zone 4 totals as general student demand. Park Stall Totals: 1, , Percentage Occupied: 52% 59% 61% 55% 41% 35%

103 BSU Parking Inventory and Occupancy Data Zone: Zone 4 Date: Tuesday, April 28 Occupancy Counts Name Type Stall Type / On-street Location Capacity 9:00 AM 11:00 AM 1:00 PM 3:00 PM 5:00 PM 7:00 PM Notes Residence Hall 1 Lot Residence Hall Metered ADA West Stadium Lot and RH1 parking inventories have been estimated based on available drawings; original field data counts were inaccurate. Reserved Residence Hall 2 Lot Residence Hall General Metered ADA West Stadium Lot and RH2 parking inventories have been estimated based on available drawings; original field data counts were inaccurate. Note that RH2 spaces were moved from the West Stadium lot to the East stadium lot following the year. RH2 is now available for general parking. Reserved Bronco Circle Street General Metered Diesel Tech Lot ADA Counts not available for 10 am - 3pm; occ estimated t Maint. Shop Lot Metered ADA Residence Hall 3 Lot Residence Hall East Stadium Lot Lot General Metered ADA East Stadium Lot and RH3 parking inventories have been estimated based on available drawings; original field data counts were inaccurate. Follow the year, the RH3 designation has been removed. Instead, all RH2 spaces are accommodated in this lot. ISMI Reserved Cesar Chavez Ln. Street Amphitheater to Broadway, North No parking Amphitheater to Broadway, South

104 BSU Parking Inventory and Occupancy Data Zone: Zone 4 Date: Tuesday, April 28 Occupancy Counts Name Type Stall Type / On-street Location Capacity 9:00 AM 11:00 AM 1:00 PM 3:00 PM 5:00 PM 7:00 PM Notes University Drive Street Lincoln to Michigan, North Counts not available for 5pm; occ estimated Lincoln to Michigan, South Counts not available for 5pm; occ estimated University Drive Street Michigan to Manitou, North Counts not available for 5pm; occ estimated Michigan to Manitou, South Counts not available for 5pm; occ estimated University Drive Street Manitou to Euclid, North Counts not available for 5pm; occ estimated Manitou to Euclid, South Counts not available for 5pm; occ estimated University Drive Street Euclid to Grant, North Counts not available for 5pm; occ estimated Euclid to Grant, South Counts not available for 5pm; occ estimated University Drive Street Grant to Denver, North Counts not available for 5pm; occ estimated Grant to Denver, South Counts not available for 5pm; occ estimated University Drive Street Denver to Broadway, North Counts not available for 5pm; occ estimated Denver to Broadway, South Counts not available for 5pm; occ estimated t Broadway Ave. Street Cesar Chavez to University, West No parking Julia Davis Park Other Along JD-W Side Lot JD East JD W-Bam JD Park is not technically part of the BSU campus parking system. However, parking adjacent to river is used by students. Therefore, field auditors were instructed to observe student parking activities and provide an estimate for student cars using the park. This demand has been added into the Zone 4 totals as general student demand. Park Stall Totals: 1,646 1,060 1,208 1, Percentage Occupied: 64% 73% 75% 59% 43% 37%

105 APPENDIX B: BSU HISTORICAL ENROLLMENT DATA

106 Fall Enrollment ,209 11,330 16,482 11,613 17,176 12,216 17,714 12,749 18,447 18,456 18,599 13,451 13,344 13,513 18,876 13,716 19,540 Headcount has increased 21.3% over the last nine years ,314 19,667 FTE has increased 28.9% over the last nine years 14,608 Headcount FTE

107 Comparison Fall 10 th Day Figures 2008 Number % Change Change from 2007 Total Students 19, % Total Credit Hours 215, % + 3,976 Total FTE 14, % Undergraduate 16, % + 43 Graduate 2, % Applied Tech 1, % - 73 Ethnicity White 15, % - 50 Hispanic 1,220 0% + 1 Asian American % + 48 Black/African American % + 20 Native American % - 6 Did not respond 1, % Gender Male 9, % + 99 Female 10, % Number % Change Change from 2006 Total Students 19, % Total Credit Hours 212, % + 8,775 Total FTE 14, % Undergraduate 16, % Graduate 1, % + 64 Applied Tech 1, % Ethnicity White 15, % Hispanic 1, % + 65 Asian American % + 50 Black/African American % + 11 Native American % + 9 Did not respond 1, % + 18 Gender Male 8, % Female 10, % + 278

108 Comparison Fall 10 th Day Figures 2006 Number % Change Change from 2005 Total Students 18, % Total Credit Hours 203, % + 3,019 Total FTE 13, Undergraduate 16, % Graduate 1, % Applied Tech 1, % - 84 Ethnicity White 15, % + 53 Hispanic 1, % + 98 Asian American % + 37 Black/African American % + 17 Native American % + 15 Did not respond 1, % + 57 Gender Male 8, % Female 10, % Number % Change Change from 2004 Total Students 18, % Total Credit Hours 200, % + 2,258 Total FTE 13, % Undergraduate 15, % Graduate 1, % + 45 Applied Tech 1, % + 45 Ethnicity White 15, % + 23 Hispanic 1, % + 60 Asian American % + 41 Black/African American % - 14 Native American % + 5 Did not respond 1, % + 27 Gender Male 8, % - 85 Female 10, % + 102

109 Comparison Fall 10 th Day Figures 2004 Number % Change Change from 2003 Total Students 18, Total Credit Hours 197, % Total FTE 13, % Undergraduate 15, % Graduate 1, % Applied Tech 1, % Ethnicity White 15, % + 58 Hispanic % + 22 Asian American % + 19 Black/African American % + 19 Native American % - 2 Did not respond 1, % Gender Male 8, % Female 9, % - 93

110 APPENDIX C: PARKING BEST PRACTICES FOR UNIVERSITIES

111 APPENDIX C: UNIVERSITY PARKING MANAGEMENT BEST PRACTICES ORGANIZATION Parking management typically is separated from police or public safety as the goals and procedures of these disciplines are significantly different. Police enforcement procedures are oriented to controlling or prosecuting criminal behavior. While some scofflaw parkers may view some parking procedures as punitive, parking is best managed as a service provider. As such, the primary goals of parking services is to manage and preserve parking assets, generate revenue for parking needs, and maintain the perception that parking is putting revenue back into parking. The parking department s duties typically include the following: general oversight, public relations, coordination, hiring, reprimands, firing, establishing policies, monitoring enforcement, and review of monthly and audit reports, scheduling, training, uniforms, monitoring cashier performance for personnel and revenue control issues, reviews daily/weekly/monthly reports, and performs cashier and revenue trend analysis. The parking department is also typically responsible for lot maintenance; equipment maintenance; electrical, and custodial maintenance; materials and supplies purchases; and contracting for services such as snow removal; sweeping, striping, power washing, etc. (For BSU it may make sense to reorganize so that snow removal and salting are under the jurisdiction of the Transportation and Parking Department.) POSSIBLE PARKING PROGRAM AND POLICY CHANGES AMBASSADOR APPROACH TO CUSTOMER CONTACT AND PARKING ENFORCEMENT Walker recommends that BSU consider adopting the Ambassador program model or approach to parking enforcement. This program is based on positive customer and visitor contact. The perception of parking enforcement is often negative. Enforcement is seen as punitive, which in many cases it is. The manner in which enforcement is presented to the parker is often the reason. The mission of a Parking Ambassador Program would be to provide hospitality, information and public safety services to students, faculty/staff and visitors, in addition to enforcing campus parking regulations. The Ambassadors would be required to complete a multi-faceted training in hospitality and customer service, emergency response and first aid, wayfinding, transportation and campus services. They should work directly with internal and external clients of the University. This model emphasizes some significant differences between police activities and parking enforcement. The primary goals of an Ambassador program would be to promote the goals of the University, resolve concerns, provide information, and deter criminal activity, and help make the Campus a better, safer and friendlier place to live, work and visit. Ambassadors should initiate personal contacts with the

112 parking system users (known as touches ), issue more warnings and slightly fewer citations, and interact with students, faculty/staff and visitors in a positive manner. The vision of the program is to help promote a more constructive, dynamic experience by extending this service beyond parking lot enforcement. A The Ambassadors may accomplish these goals while providing parking management by monitoring public safety, extending a helping hand in emergency situations, and calling on stakeholders on a regular basis. Beyond enforcing parking regulations, examples of appropriate behaviors of Ambassadors would be: To greet visitors and offer customer service. To provide information and explain local traffic and parking regulations to seek voluntary compliance. To give a positive face to many people s first contact with the University. To give accurate directions to visitors and direct visitors to local destinations and attractions. To distribute brochures and maps. To offer an emergency response and first aid. To deter criminal activity by their presence. Ambassadors would be assigned to patrol areas as defined within the University campus and adjoining residential streets on a frequent basis. The program should be self-funded by citation fees. PARKING ENFORCEMENT PATROL VEHICLE OPTIONS Current enforcement at BSU is conducted on foot, in traditional patrol vehicles, and on bicycle. Ambassadors, or parking enforcement personnel, can efficiently patrol the campus in distinctive patrol vehicles. While some universities prefer foot patrols, vehicles facilitate enforcement in almost all weather conditions. Dedicated enforcement vehicles also increase enforcement visibility by clearly standing out from all other vehicles in the area. Enforcement officers (or Ambassadors) are more visible and are considered easier to approach when using a vehicle with a non-threatening appearance. The average price of these units (i.e.: Club Car, GEM, Cushman, Go-4 (Westward Industries, Ltd.), E- Z-Go (Textron), etc.) varies from $17,500 to $25,000 each, with a 4 to 5-year replacement cycle. RESERVED PARKING ALTERNATIVES Many Universities maintain a policy to set aside Reserved Parking for certain faculty and staff member, donors, etc. Ideally, however, Walker does not recommend reserved parking, as dedicating or reserving parking spaces for specific user groups has a negative effect on parking utility, and increases the number of spaces needed to accommodate the same number of parkers. It does this

113 through a variety of mechanisms. Large parking areas operate more efficiently than subdivided or scattered or nested small parking lots or areas, as it is easier for parkers to see or search for acceptable parking in an undivided parking area. Nested areas (areas that are physically separated by signage or gates) are the most severe example, as this practice precludes other users from accessing the area. In a segregated parking environment, parking ratios must be expanded, as a base parking ratio includes underlying assumptions of oversell and shared parking. Oversell assumes that parking spaces can be sold at more than 100%. The typical oversell factor is 1.15 to 1.20 times. This means that 115 permits to 120 permits can routinely be issued for a 100-space parking area as a number of permit holders are usually absent at any time due to appointments, scheduling changes, illness, vacations, etc. Shared parking is based on the concept that one parking space can be used by more than one user group due to differences in demand that vary by time of day, day of the week, and/or month or season. While there may be demand for dedicated or reserved parking, this demand should be moderated by high reserved permit fees. The current reserved parking fee is $120 per year. This fee amount may be adequate to reimburse annual operating expenses for a surface space, but is not sufficient to amortize the construction cost of new parking, which may cost $3,500± per surface space and up to $20,000± or more per structured parking space. In addition: Reserved parking requires increased signage, record keeping, and enforcement, which increases the cost and complexity of the overall parking management effort. Walker estimates that instituting reserved parking for up to 200 spaces (1/3 of faculty/staff/employee demand) would increase the number of spaces needed by 20 spaces. While not a large number, this is on top of the 190 spaces that will be displaced by proposed campus improvements. Within a parking system that operates at near capacity and depends on neighborhood parking to provide an additional reservoir of parking, reserved parking would tend to shift more demand off campus, which increases the load on on-street parking. Reserved parking is not consistent with the egalitarian atmosphere observed on campus. While everything obviously is not equal between students and faculty/staff/employees, reserved parking clearly puts the convenience of one group of parkers above the needs of others, who may not be equal in the classroom but are equal on the road. Clearly identifying the vehicles of a reserved class of parkers may invite vandalism. Rather than promoting reserved parking as a means of guaranteeing convenient parking for some