FINAL REPORT. June Parking Pricing Study. Sound Transit 401 South Jackson Street Seattle, WA 98104

Transcription

1 FINAL REPORT Parking Pricing Study Prepared by: Prepared for: NE 122nd Way Suite 320 Kirkland, WA Sound Transit 401 South Jackson Street Seattle, WA With: UrbanTrans Consultants Carl Walker, Inc. Strategic Economics

2 Sound Transit Parking Pricing Study Final Report Prepared for: Sound Transit 401 South Jackson Street Seattle, WA Prepared by: Fehr & Peers NE 122nd Way, Suite 320 Kirkland, Washington (425)

3 TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary... 1 Chapter 1. Introduction... 1 Reason to Study Parking Charges... 1 Policy Choices... 2 Organization of the Report... 3 Chapter 2. South Sounder Commuter Rail... 4 Sounder System... 4 Commuter Rail Ridership... 5 Access Mode to Sounder Stations... 8 Parking Facilities at or near the Train Stations... 9 Payment Methods Profile of Stations and Surrounding Communities Other Jurisdictional Comments Economic Development Issues Reaction to Potential for Parking Pricing Chapter 3. Peer Agency Review Data and Studies Available Parking Utilization Synthesis of Results Chapter 4. Rider Interviews Introduction Process Key findings from the Focus Group Sessions Chapter 5. Pricing Tool Methodology Factors Affecting Parking Utilization Application to Sounder Chapter 6. Parking Pricing Technologies Transient (Daily) Parking Technology Alternatives Monthly Parking Technology Alternatives Conceptual parking technology Approach Chapter 7. Revenue and Cost Comparison Cost Revenue Chapter 8. Policy and Implementation Existing Parking Policies Policy Perspectives Implementation Concepts Conceptual Phased Approach... 53

4 APPENDICES Appendix A. Interviews with Jurisdictions Appendix B. Summary Peer Review of Parking Pricing Appendix C. Focus Group Documents Appendix D. Supplemental Analysis for Pricing Tool Appendix E. Parking Technology Assessment Appendix F. Cost and Revenue Estimation

5 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Key Questions Investigated in this Report Study Purpose The primary intent of the Sound Transit Parking Pricing Study is to better understand what charging for car parking at stations could mean for Sound Transit s regional transit system. Charging for parking is a strategy commonly applied by both public and private entities to manage a limited supply. Transit agencies across the United States and abroad often charge for parking as a means to help manage demand for limited parking spaces at rail stations, to provide revenue that supports parking and accessrelated facilities and services, and to encourage riders to shift from driving to more environmentally-friendly access modes such as bicycle, walk, or bus. What are the existing conditions at South Sounder Commuter Rail stations with parking? Experience of peer transit agencies why and how they charge? How do South Sounder riders perceive parking charges? How would various parking charge levels impact Sound Transit ridership, surrounding communities, and other transit agencies? What is the availability and applicability of various technologies for Sound Transit s implementation of parking fees? What are the potential revenues and costs associated with implementing parking fees? Similar to other transit agencies in the region, Sound Transit s current policy is to not charge parking fees. However, as a result of experience gained through implementation of Sound Move, and in anticipation of future Sound Transit 2 investments, Sound Transit is considering an update to its existing parking policies. This study provides information intended to help Sound Transit update those policies, as well as manage and implement improvements to existing and future parking and system access facilities. Study Area South Sounder Commuter Rail Rising demand for transit services has placed growing pressure on parking supply. At the time this study was initiated, most of the parking facilities served by Sound Transit were at or above 85 percent utilization of available spaces. It is expected that demand will continue to expand with the implementation of programs and projects in the Sound Transit 2 regional transit system plan. Particular pressure for parking is currently experienced along the South Sounder Commuter Rail line. Parking facilities in this corridor are located at the Tacoma Dome, Puyallup, Sumner, Auburn, Kent and Tukwila stations. Sound Transit decided to examine the concept of parking pricing at these stations, since demand is so high. Although the study is limited to a small area, its findings are intended help staff and stakeholders better understand the effects of instituting parking charges regionally. Policy Issues Choosing to charge for parking is a decision with multiple policy and implementation questions. The more complex issues surrounding the pricing discussion relate to the policy choices facing Sound Transit, local jurisdictions, and other transit providers. Sound Transit s customers, the Sounder riders, also would be faced with multiple decisions as they respond to the potential parking charges. For Sound Transit, parking pricing offers the opportunity to better manage its parking supply, generate revenues to help with station improvements, and encourage riders to use alternative access modes. However, implementing parking pricing also carries the cost of instituting a system, potential decreases in ridership, and potential challenges with jurisdictional issues, such as parking spillover. i

6 Peer Agency Findings In an effort to understand how other transit agencies are addressing parking demand, several peer agencies were surveyed to learn more about their parking pricing policies and implementation experience. Overall, it was found that the idea of charging for parking at transit stations is gaining momentum. While most of the transit agencies that currently charge for parking are established heavy rail systems in large cities, newer systems with strong ridership are beginning to consider these fees. Across the interviewed transit agencies, pricing often varied by location, with charges ranging from free to $5 per day. Many agencies offered monthly parking passes with discounts and, in some cases, guaranteed spaces. Of the agencies that charge for parking, it was found that most have higher population densities around their stations than exist today for Sounder stations. Focus Group Findings The focus group sessions provided valuable insights into how Sound Transit riders perceive the current parking situation, how they would react to implementation of paid parking, and what improvements they feel could be implemented at stations to improve their experience and usage of alternative modes. The focus groups yielded some key revelations: Station parking supply is generally limited, but is viewed as a valuable asset. Most riders do not currently equate paying for parking with managing parking demand. They see it more as a revenue generator or as a deterrent to riding the train. While some are opposed to implementing paid parking, Sound Transit can make its case by proving that it is enforcing fare payment and that it is investing revenues into station and system improvements. Paying to park is costly and can be inconvenient. Passengers want to get something in return for paying for parking be that better managed facilities, available parking throughout the day, ability to park at night, or station amenities. They also stress that the payment method should be quick and convenient. Encouraging people to switch to alternative modes to access stations requires making these modes more appealing providing financial incentives, improving bus connections, and/or providing changing facilities for bicycles and pedestrians. Charging for parking will also encourage use of alternative modes. Pricing Tool A parking pricing tool was developed for Sound Transit to quantify the impacts of different parking strategies on parking lot utilization and ridership at Sounder commuter rail stations. The tool was developed based on analysis of parking pricing, parking utilization, and ridership data from peer agencies around the country, with a specific emphasis on three systems: Chicago Metra, San Diego COASTER, and Caltrain commuter rail systems. Two scenarios were forecast: A high elasticity scenario, which assumed that riders were more sensitive to parking charges, found that as parking prices increase from free to $5 per day, ridership may decrease by around 8 percent and parking demand by a little over 20 percent. Under a low elasticity scenario, ridership would only decline by 4 percent and parking utilization by about 12 percent. It is worthwhile to note that experiences elsewhere show that riders are relatively insensitive to parking charges of up to $1.50 per day. Above this charge, parking lot utilization erodes more quickly than ridership, as patrons first find new ways to access stations (walk, bike, bus, or park off-site) before switching from rail altogether. Riders ii

7 sensitivity to parking charges is also tempered by the total cost of their commute trip parking charges in Downtown Seattle and the cost of gas would factor into their decision of whether to continue riding Sounder. High Elasticity Range Low Elasticity Range 7,500 7,500 Utilized Parking or Daily Ridership 7,000 6,500 6,000 5,500 5,000 4,500 4,000 3,500 Utilized Parking Daily Sounder Boardings Utilized Parking or Daily Ridership 7,000 6,500 6,000 5,500 5,000 4,500 4,000 3,500 Utilized Parking Daily Sounder Boardings 3,000 3,000 Parking Fee Parking Fee Technologies Findings Five technologies were evaluated for their applicability to implement daily pay parking at Sound Transit facilities. Pay-by-space was chosen as the most promising technology, based on its ability to provide a positive user experience, cost to implement, overall consistency with Sound Transit s existing parking facilities, and ability to be expanded and accommodate future payment options. Pay-by-space machines can be used in on-street and offstreet parking environments and accept a variety of payment options. After parking a vehicle, patrons insert payment into the pay machines and note their parking space. These machines offer time savings, as they are a gateless technology and do not require patrons to return to their vehicles. The study also evaluated ways to accommodate monthly parking passes. To reduce enforcement needs and better protect monthly parking areas, Sound Transit could consider eventually purchasing an access control technology. In either implementation scenario, having a designated parking area introduces the opportunity to offer reserved parking for either monthly parking permit holders or other users who would be willing to pay a premium for a guaranteed parking space. Revenues and Costs Implementing the pay-by-space technology for daily parking charges at the six Sounder stations would have an initial capital cost of about $705,000 (including machine installation and signage) and operational costs of almost $530,000 (mostly staff time for machine maintenance and enforcement). These costs translate to an annual cost of approximately $831,000 to maintain a pay-by-space system in Sound Transit lots. This study applied the parking pricing tool to estimate the amount of revenue that would be generated under different daily parking rate scenarios, ranging from $0.50 to $5 per day. As shown in the following table, it is reasonable to conclude that parking costs of $1.00 or higher would be likely to generate a positive revenue stream. iii

8 Ranges of Net Revenue Parking Cost Annualized Cost Low Elasticity Parking Revenue Lost Farebox Revenue Net Revenue High Elasticity Low Elasticity High Elasticity Low Elasticity High Elasticity $ 0.50 $ 831,200 $ 836,300 $ 836,300 $ - $ - $ 5,100 $ 5,100 $ 1.00 $ 831,200 $ 1,419,900 $ 1,419,900 $ - $ - $ 588,700 $ 588,700 $ 1.50 $ 831,200 $ 2,003,500 $ 2,003,500 $ - $ - $ 1,172,300 $ 1,172,300 $ 2.00 $ 831,200 $ 2,541,100 $ 2,518,600 $ 85,600 $ 127,000 $ 1,624,300 $ 1,560,500 $ 3.00 $ 831,200 $ 3,545,900 $ 3,443,100 $ 257,600 $ 385,100 $ 2,457,100 $ 2,226,800 $ 4.00 $ 831,200 $ 4,459,600 $ 4,228,600 $ 426,500 $ 641,000 $ 3,202,000 $ 2,756,500 $ 5.00 $ 831,200 $ 5,280,100 $ 4,877,600 $ 599,600 $ 897,000 $ 3,849,300 $ 3,149,500 Potential Next Steps The study found that parking pricing is only one of several parking management strategies. Pricing is best implemented as part of a parking management program that may also include improving transit access options, improving station amenities, enhancing user information and providing better enforcement. If Sound Transit implements a parking charge, a phased approach would allow the Agency to demonstrate its potential benefits to riders and to test the sensitivity to different pricing levels. A conceptual four-phase approach, outlined below, could set the framework for proceeding in an incremental manner. Phase 1: System Operations Improvements Begin by implementing system improvements that demonstrate Sound Transit s commitment to its riders and improve rider experience. Phase 2: Introduce Paid Guaranteed Parking in Select Sections of Each Station Parking Area Create reserved or guaranteed parking as an option that drivers could pay for using their ORCA card and conveniently-placed card-readers. Use revenues to help fund station area shelters, fund a passenger survey at each station, and begin a shuttle feasibility study. Phase 3: Introduce Paid Parking with Monthly Discounts Gradually expand the paid parking area to up to 50 percent of the station area and introduce a discounted monthly parking pass and reservation system. At the same time, create an incentive program for those who do not drive, rewarding them with cash or gifts for finding another way to the station. It is likely that the paid parking area would be most attractive to later train passengers who currently have a difficult time finding a parking space. Phase 4: Implement Systemwide Paid Parking Introduce paid parking for all spaces at all Sounder Stations only after Phases 1-3 have been fully implemented. iv

9 CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION REASON TO STUDY PARKING CHARGES Everyday, Sound Transit successfully draws customers to its system of regional bus and rail services. Continual growth in system ridership indicates increasing demand for high-capacity transit in the Puget Sound region. During implementation of Sound Move, the Central Puget Sound s regional transit system plan, Sound Transit added 12,500 parking spaces at 25 facilities throughout King, Pierce, and Snohomish counties. Bus and/or rail transit serves over 50 different transit facilities owned and operated by Sound Transit, WSDOT, and local transit agencies. Key Findings in this Chapter Most parking facilities served by Sound Transit (particularly along the South Sounder) are at or near capacity Future investments will likely increase demand for parking Charging for parking may help address a variety of issues, including managing demand and raising revenue for additional parking or access improvements This issue should be evaluated from a variety of perspectives, including Sound Transit, other transit agencies, local jurisdictions, and Sounder riders Growing Demands for Parking Rising demand for transit services has placed growing pressure on parking supply at the time this study was initiated, most facilities served by Sound Transit were at or above 85 percent utilization of available parking spaces. It is expected that demand will continue to expand with the implementation of programs and projects in the Sound Transit 2 regional transit system plan. Similar to all other transit agencies in the region, it is currently Sound Transit s policy to not charge parking fees. However, as a result of experience gained during implementation of Sound Move, and in anticipation of future Sound Transit 2 investments, Sound Transit is considering an update to its existing parking policies. This study is intended to generate information that will help Sound Transit update those policies and to manage and implement improvements to existing and future parking and system access facilities. Particular pressure for parking is currently experienced along the South Sounder Commuter Rail line. Parking facilities in this corridor are located at the Tacoma Dome, Puyallup, Sumner, Auburn, Kent and Tukwila stations. Sound Transit decided to examine the concept of parking pricing at these stations, where demand is high. Although the study is limited to a small area the results of the study are intended to help staff and stakeholders better understand the effects of instituting parking charges regionally. Using Parking Charges to Address System Needs Charging for parking may help to address a variety of issues it faces as the agency continues to develop its transit market. Potential applications or objectives of instituting parking fees could be multifold, and may include managing parking demand, raising revenue for recovery operating costs, and/or raising revenue for additional service and access improvements. The study focused on the feasibility and implications of instituting charging for parking along the South Sounder Commuter Rail Line between Tacoma and Seattle, and considers how charging for parking could be integrated into Sound Transit s and the region s priorities for transit system use and access. The study acknowledges that market development and access needs and solutions may vary by transit mode and the specific communities where facilities are operated. As a result, parking management through pricing or other means may need to be tailored to each situation. This report is a synthesis of findings documented in a series of technical memoranda submitted to Sound Transit throughout this study. The technical memoranda are included as appendices. 1

10 POLICY CHOICES The concept of charging for parking at the South Sounder Commuter Rail stations is relatively straight-forward from a technical perspective. For example, this study identifies a range of technology options to safely and efficiently manage the collection of parking fees. The more complex issues surrounding the pricing discussion relate to the policy choices facing Sound Transit, local jurisdictions, and other transit providers. Sound Transit s customers, the Sounder riders, also would be faced with multiple decisions as they respond to the potential parking charges. Listed are several of the key questions that need to be examined. From Sound Transit s Perspective: Why consider paid parking? How would parking pricing help to manage the demand for Sounder service? How would Sounder patrons react to a parking charge? How would parking pricing affect Sounder parking demand and ridership? What are the costs and revenues? What can be learned from other transit systems that have implemented or considered parking pricing? What are the implications of parking pricing for other Sound Transit services? What are the implications of parking pricing for partner agencies? How would paid parking affect implementation of the Sound Transit 2 regional transit system plan? From the Rider s Perspective: Why is Sound Transit charging for parking? If parking charges were instituted, what would I do? At what point would I change the way I travel to the station? At what point would I discontinue riding Sounder? What would I expect from Sound Transit in return for me paying for parking? From the Local Jurisdiction s Perspective: What effect will the parking charges have on the surrounding streets and parking facilities? How would local businesses be affected? Will this cost my agency more money? How would this policy affect our agency s strategic plans? 2

11 From Other Transit Providers Perspective: How would parking pricing affect our ridership? How would parking pricing influence demand at our facilities? What are the implications for implementing parking charges at our own parking facilities? ORGANIZATION OF THE REPORT The report is organized to help provide insights into many of these policy choices, as follows: Chapter 2 - South Sounder Commuter Rail: The South Sounder commuter rail system is described, including unique profiles for each station. Included are insights gained from interviews conducted with the local jurisdictions along the South Sounder route. Chapter 3 - Peer Agency Review: Several peer agencies were examined around the country, with their lessons learned related to paid parking programs. Chapter 4 - Rider Interviews: Reactions from South Sounder riders are examined through focus group interviews. Chapter 5 - Pricing Tool: A tool was developed to estimate rider reaction to various parking pricing rates. Chapter 6 - Parking Pricing Technologies: Various pricing technologies are evaluated to identify a conceptual implementation strategy for Sound Transit. Chapter 7- Revenue and Cost Comparison: The costs and potential revenues of a parking pricing program and compared at different price levels. Chapter 8 - Policy and Implementation: The chapter summarizes many of the parking pricing policy choices listed previously and provides guidance to Sound Transit on how those choices can be addressed. 3

12 CHAPTER 2. SOUTH SOUNDER COMMUTER RAIL The South line of Sounder commuter rail is described in this chapter. Several important factors are introduced including ridership, parking capacity and utilization, access modes, and current payment methods. We describe the overall system and trends, followed by detail about each train station. SOUNDER SYSTEM Sound Transit has been building the foundation of the regional high-capacity transit system approved by voters in A key component of the regional system is the Sounder commuter rail system, known as the Sounder System. It now provides service from downtown Seattle north to Everett and south to Tacoma during morning and evening commute hours. The South Sounder System shown in Exhibit 1 is the study area for this project. Stations at Tacoma, Puyallup, Sumner, Auburn, Kent and Tukwila are served with daily morning and evening service seven round-trips into Seattle and two reverse trips from downtown Seattle to Tacoma, Monday through Friday. In Tacoma, the first train departs northbound just before 5 am; the last leaves at 8 am for the one hour ride to Seattle. Southbound, the first train from Seattle arrives at 7:08 am, the second at 7:48 Key Findings in this Chapter Since 2000, the Sounder South Line has grown to provide the nine round trips envisioned in the 1996 Sound Move Plan. Most riders are destined for King Station, but other stations (Kent and Tukwila) are also major destinations. Each of the stations along the South Sounder draw riders from a broad geographic area. While riders use all modes to access Sounder stations, drive and park is the predominant mode choice. At most of the station areas along the South Sounder, parking is viewed as a valuable, but limited resource. am in Tacoma. The afternoon service mirrors the morning with seven trains departing Seattle from 3:15 pm to 6:15 pm (arriving in Tacoma from 4:14 pm to 7:14pm) and the two reverse trains arriving in Seattle at 5:23 pm and 5:58 pm from Tacoma. History of the South Sounder The South line of the Sounder commuter rail system began operation in September 2000 with two peak period round trips operating northbound in the morning and southbound in the afternoon. Trains use BNSF Railway and Tacoma Rail tracks between Tacoma Dome Station and Seattle. Since 2000, Sound Transit has worked closely with BNSF to gradually increase service as track and signal improvements have been completed along the line. A third round trip was implemented in February 2003, followed by a fourth in September A major service enhancement occurred in September 2007 when Sound Transit added two more round trips, including a reverse direction peak trip. In September 2008, Sound Transit added seventh and eighth round trips, including a second reverse direction peak trip. The ninth round trip, originally scheduled to start in September 2008, was delayed until June 2009 because of modifications needed at Tacoma s L Street coach yard to store additional trains. Sound Transit has now implemented all nine round trips called for in the 1996 Sound Move Plan. 1 1 Source: Sound Transit 2010 Service Improvement Plan. 4

13 Exhibit 1. South Sounder Commuter Rail On Nov. 4, 2008, voters of the Central Puget Sound region approved a Sound Transit 2 ballot measure. The plan adds regional express bus and commuter rail service while building 36 additional miles of light rail to form a 55-mile regional system. The plan increases Tacoma-Seattle commuter rail passenger capacity by 65 percent by adding additional trains and expanding train lengths. Station access improvements may include additional parking at many Sounder stations. COMMUTER RAIL RIDERSHIP Sounder has proved to be a very convenient and hence popular mode for commuters in the South Sound. Over the last decade, daily ridership on the South Sound system has grown steadily. While ridership declined slightly during 2009, likely a result of the economic recession and lower gasoline prices, the 2010 Service Implementation Plan assumes that ridership will rebound from 2009 levels over the next few years: Staff predicts that the South Line ridership will recover with gradual increases in total boardings between 2010 and 2012, with a larger increase in 2013 following the opening of the Lakewood extension. Alightings and Boardings by South Line Station As Exhibit 2 shows, the number of AM peak period boardings ranges from 310 at Tukwila to nearly 1,000 at Kent and Puyallup stations. Surveys confirm that most morning riders are destined for King Street Station, but some riders use the train to get to other stations along the Tacoma to Seattle route. Notably, there are 510 alightings at Tukwila Station and 260 at Kent Station. At the Tukwila Station, there are actually 200 more people alighting than boarding the train in the morning peak. 2 Many of these alightings are destined for the Boeing Plant in Renton, for which there is a shuttle that meets each train. 2 Source: Sound Transit Spring 2009 Sounder Count 5

14 Exhibit 2. Boardings and Alightings by Rail Station for the AM Peak Period Who Drives to Sounder Stations? In an effort to understand who drives to the Sounder stations, Sound Transit has conducted surveys of license plates, which has produced a map showing the origin location of riders. Based on a 2009 license plate survey, the primary catchment area for each station in is shown in Exhibit 3. For most drivers, the Sounder rail station intercepts their trip to work; in general drivers do not drive the reverse of their commute direction to reach a station. However, some riders do drive a long distance to reach the station, particularly for the Pierce County stations. For example, the map shows the Sumner station catchment area extending past Bonney Lake, where buses shuttled passengers from the Bonney Lake park-and-ride lot to the Sumner station. 3 3 The Bonney Lake shuttle was recently discontinued. 6

15 Exhibit 3. Primary Catchment Areas for Commuter Rail 7

16 ACCESS MODE TO SOUNDER STATIONS Riders use a variety of modes to reach the commuter rail stations some walk or bicycle, others drive alone or ride with someone and park, a few are dropped off or take a taxi, and others transfer from another bus, train or ferry. Exhibit 4 shows how the access mode varies according to counts collected at each South Sounder station. Exhibit 4. Mode Used to Access Sounder Mode of Access Average Tacoma Puyallup Sumner Auburn Kent Tukwila Drive 61% 70% 75% 62% 54% 65% 56% Drop Off 8% 8% 7% 13% 11% 12% 6% Transit 8% 7% 2% 13% 16% 12% 9% Bike 2% 1% 2% 2% 2% 4% 8% Walk 21% 15% 13% 11% 18% 8% 22% Source: Sound Transit Sounder Rider User Surveys (2009) On average, 62 percent of station patrons drive and park. At stations where more transit serves the station, such as Auburn, Kent and Tukwila, there are fewer who park near the station. Approximately 20 percent of all riders reported that they walk to the stations. This percent could include some people who actually park off site or transfer from other modes and then walk. 8

17 PARKING FACILITIES AT OR NEAR THE TRAIN STATIONS Transit commuter parking is provided at all the stations and satellite lots except King Street. A total of 5,276 spaces are available through a combination of surface lots and structures at or adjacent to the stations. The Tacoma Dome, Auburn, and Kent stations have parking garages and surface lot spaces. The Sumner and Puyallup stations also have satellite lots providing 706 additional spaces. 4 Exhibit 5 shows the parking availability at each station area, and Exhibit 6 shows parking utilization rates. The primary and adjacent lots average 92 percent occupancy, while the satellite lots are less well utilized at 57%. Overall parking utilization is 88%, which is considered fully occupied.characteristics about individual stations, including supply and demand and access mode, are described later in this chapter. Exhibit 5. Parking Spaces Available at South Sounder Stations Source: Sound Transit Sound Transit owns the primary parking lots at all stations except for the Tacoma Dome, which is owned by Pierce Transit. The adjacent lots are privately owned and leased for transit purposes. The South Hill satellite lot is owned by Sound Transit, while Pierce Transit owns the Bonney Lake lot. Most of the available parking at the station lots is used by Sounder riders. Some spaces are being used for ridesharing, particularly where overnight vanpool parking is allowed in the lot. Both the Tacoma Dome and Kent stations attract substantial numbers of bus riders; the Tacoma Dome also serves Tacoma Link light rail. 4 Two satellite lots will become available at the Puyallup Fairgrounds in the Blue Lot (100 spaces) and the Red Lot (219 spaces). A parking garage for Tukwila is currently under design. 9

18 Exhibit 6. Parking Facility Utilization Station Total Spaces Percent Occupied Empty Spaces Tacoma Dome (P) 2,410 98% 48 Puyallup South Hill (S) % 124 Puyallup Annex (A) % 2 Puyallup Station (P) % 19 Bonney Lake (S) % 181 Sumner Annex (A) % 0 Sumner Station (P) % 0 Auburn Station (P) % 133 Kent Station (P) 1,101 86% 153 Tukwila Station (P) % 34 Total Primary/Adjacent Lots 5,276 92% 419 Total Satellite Lots % 305 Total Lots 5,982 88% 724 P=Primary Lot A= Adjacent Lots S= Satellite Lot Source: Sound Transit 2nd Quarter 2009 Utilization Report; Bonney Lake and South Hill 2009 Annual Utilization from Pierce Transit PAYMENT METHODS Sound Transit train riders can use cash or passes. The introduction of the One Regional Card for All (ORCA) has become the accepted standard pass for all passengers in the regional system Sound Transit, Metro Transit, Pierce County Transit, Community Transit, and Everett Transit. There are no longer paper transfer passes; without an ORCA card the rider must pay full fare when transferring to another connecting mode. Sounder fares are based on miles traveled so the greater the distance, the larger the fare, as shown in Exhibit 7. 10

19 Exhibit 7. Sounder Fares for the South Sounder Line Station Type Tukwila Kent Auburn Sumner Puyallup Tacoma Distance to Seattle (Miles) Seattle Tukwila Kent Auburn Sumner Puyallup Adult $3.25 $3.50 $3.75 $4.25 $4.25 $4.75 Youth $2.25 $2.50 $2.75 $3.00 $3.00 $3.50 Sr/Disabled* $1.50 $1.75 $1.75 $2.00 $2.00 $2.25 Adult $2.75 $3.25 $3.50 $3.75 $4.00 Youth $2.00 $2.25 $2.50 $2.75 $3.00 Sr/Disabled* $1.25 $1.50 $1.75 $1.75 $2.00 Adult $2.75 $3.25 $3.50 $3.75 Youth $2.00 $2.25 $2.50 $2.75 Sr/Disabled* $1.25 $1.50 $1.75 $1.75 Adult $3.00 $3.00 $3.50 Youth $2.25 $2.25 $2.50 Sr/Disabled* $1.50 $1.50 $1.75 Adult $2.75 $3.00 Youth $2.00 $2.25 Sr/Disabled* $1.25 $1.50 Adult $3.00 Youth $2.25 Sr/Disabled* $1.50 *Requires a Regional Reduced Fare Permit. Medicare card holders are eligible for a permit Source: Sound Transit website; Sounder Fares

20 Exhibit 8 shows information about how transit passes are funded. 5 More than 80 percent of the Sounder riders in the South Sound corridor used a transit pass. About 60 percent of these transit passes are paid in full or in part by the employers. As a result, almost half of all South Sounder riders travel with employer-supplied passes. Exhibit 8. Payment Methods for South Sounder PROFILE OF STATIONS AND SURROUNDING COMMUNITIES The next section profiles each station in the South Sound System by identifying the key characteristics of the riders such as the mode of access to the station; describing the parking facilities at the station and in adjacent lots and satellite lots; providing key demographics for the half-mile area surrounding the station; and the supply and demand for parking. A summary of comments gathered from short interviews with city staff in jurisdictions with a South Sounder station are also included with each station profile. Overall concerns are summarized at the end of this chapter. It is worthwhile to note that these station descriptions are snapshots in time, representative of conditions in Fall In some cases, some station characteristics may have changed since these station evaluations were conducted. Moreover, station conditions are occasionally compared to those observed for Sound Transit s peer agencies. More detailed description of our peer agency review is available in the following chapter. 5 It is worthwhile to note that this information was collected prior to release of the ORCA card in late

21 Tacoma Dome Station The Tacoma Dome Station is a major regional transportation hub that includes Sounder trains, Tacoma Link, and local and regional buses operated by Sound Transit and Pierce Transit, as well as intercity bus service operated by Greyhound. This facility is served by Sound Transit Express Routes 574, 582, 586, 590, 593, 594, 599. Tacoma Link is a 1.6 mile light rail line running to downtown Tacoma that serves UW Tacoma campus, the Convention Center, and other downtown businesses and offices. Tacoma Link rides are currently free of charge. To accommodate cyclists, there are 24 bike lockers that are owned and maintained by Pierce Transit. Tacoma Dome Station includes two parking garages with a total of 2,410 parking spaces. Customers using the Tacoma Dome Station parking facility were surveyed in July Over 54 percent of commuters parking in the garage used bus service to travel to their destination. Nearly 16 percent used Tacoma Link and 14 percent used the northbound Sounder commuter rail. To access the station, the majority (69%) drives and parks, but a sizable number use other modes to access the station, including transit (7%) and bike/walk modes (16%). There are a number of local buses operated by Pierce Transit that serve the station. The population density within a half mile of the station is low compared to the peer agency stations that were reviewed. The downtown core and the UW Tacoma campus are more than a half-mile from the station; however, patrons park at the station s garage and use Link Light Rail to travel downtown. The Tacoma Dome Station servess a wide area - half a million people Tacoma Dome Station including the dense urban area of Tacoma and the Gig Harbor Peninsula. The station is a regional transit hub. Half Mile Employment 2,800 Half Mile Population 400 Discussions with the City of Tacoma and input from the focus groups included comments that the garage is always nearly full. On-street parking is free and well used 6. Downtown parking is $10/day and $125/month, so Catchment Population 498,600 there is an incentive to use the parking garages and take Link service for those who work in the downtown area. There is a shared parking agreement between Sound Transit and Pierce Transit and both parties would need to agree to price the garage. The City of Tacoma is not party to the agreement. 6 At the time this study was conducted, on street parking was free but pricing policies were under consideration by the City Council. 13

22 Puyallup Station The station is located at Main Street in downtown Puyallup. This facility is served by Sounder Commuter Rail, ST Express Routes 578 (Puyallup to Seattle) and 582 (Bonney Lake to Tacoma); and Pierce Transit route 495, which provides service from South Hill Mall park-and-ride to Puyallup Station. The station includes 20 bike lockers, available for rent by bicycle commuters. There are 364 parking spaces at the Sounder station virtually all (97%) of these spacess are occupied on a typical weekday. Additional spaces are available at two leased locations: 57 spaces in the Eagles lot and 96 spaces at the city-owned Cornforth Campbell parking lot between 2nd and 3rd Street SE, and North of Meeker Avenue. With connecting bus service to the station, the South Hill park-and-ride has 350 spaces and a utilization rate of 64 percent for The Washington State Fairgrounds Red Lot, located a half mile south of the station, is being designed for joint use by Sounder commuters and fair attendees. The Blue Lot opened in February 2010 with 100 spaces, while Pierce Transit Route 495 will connect riders to the Sounder station from the Red Lot (219 spaces) by October A recent survey of Sounder riders at Puyallup Station reported that slightly more than three-quarters of Sounder patrons drove alone or in a carpool and parked; 15 percent walked or biked to the station; 7 percent were dropped off; and the remaining 2 percent transferred from a bus. The Puyallup station has a population of about 2,900 living within a half mile, which is denser than the other stations in the South Sound Line Puyallup Station and somewhat below the averagee of the peer agencies studied. The Half Mile Employment 3, 400 transit catchment is a large areaa that overlaps somewhat with the Half Mile Population 2, 900 Tacoma Dome and Sumner stations. Catchment Population 140,000 Currently, the existing Sounder parking lot is typically full. Community perception is that non-residents are primary users; but surveys show it is heavily used by residents. The City desires to establish a market for parking. It plans to establish paid parking throughout downtown and wants Sound Transit to be a part. The goal is to establish the idea that parking has a cost, whether or not there is a direct charge for its use. 14

23 Sumner Station Sumner Station is the northernmost stop in Pierce County. The transit catchment area extends into the southeastern part of Pierce County and includes the rapidly developing area around Bonney Lake. Sumner Station is served by Sounder commuter trains, ST Express routes 564 (South Hill Mall to Renton to Overlake) and Pierce Transit 408 which travels from Bonney Lake to Sumner via local streets. 7 The Sumner Station has 14 bike lockers available for bike commuters to rent. The Sumner Station is located on Maple Street between Narrow Street and Traffic Avenue a few blocks from the downtown area. The station parking includes 286 parking spaces with 41 overflow spaces in a lot at State Street and Hunt Avenue. Over 60 percent of the Sounder riders at this station drive and park, 13 percent transfer from another bus, 13 percent walk or bicycle; and 13 percent are dropped off. The Bonney Lake park-and-ride has 356 spaces with a 49 percent utilization rate; Pierce Transit 408 travels on local streets between Sumner and Bonney Lake all day. Sumner s half-mile population density is mid-range of the South Sounder stations, but in the low range when compared to the peer agencies. The catchment area overlaps with the Puyallup and Auburn stations. Spillover parking is an issue in Sumner since the lot is always full early in the day. The residential parking zones have been expanded continually and now go quite a distance from the station. Enforcement is good. The City supports more shuttle runs (it was noted that many people drive from outside of the city to the lot).once midday Sounder service is provided; people may be frustrated with the lack of available parking. Sumner Station Half Mile Employment 1,200 Half Mile Population 1,700 Catchment Population 79,000 7 At the time of this study, Sound Transit also provided bus service (Route 582) between Bonney Lake and Sumner Station. This route was terminated in October

24 Auburn Station The Auburn Station is located in downtown Auburn midstation also serves as a way along the South Corridor. The transit center for residents and employers. It is connected to Seattle, Bellevue, and Pierce County by Sound Transit Express bus service. Auburn is also served by an extensive local bus system operated by Metro Transit. VanShare serves the station and 12 bike lockers are also provided for riders. The station is served by Sound Transit Express routes 564 (Puyallup South Hill to Renton to Overlake), 565 (Federal Way to Renton to Overlake), and 578 (Seattle Puyallup Express). In addition, the Auburn Station is served by Metro Transit routes 152, 164, 180, 181, 915, 917, 919 and a custom Boeing bus. The addition of service to the Lakeland Hills development provides access to Sounder service. Parking is available in a six-story parking garage and surface spaces totaling 676 spaces with a utilization rate of 81 percent. There is currently a shared parking agreement between the City and Sound Transit. The informal adjacent parking charge is $20 per month. The Sounder survey showed that over half of the Sounder riders drive and park; 11 percent are dropped off, nearly 20 percent walk or bicycle, and around 16 percent transfer from another bus. The population density within a half mile of the station is somewhat higher compared to other South Sounder stations, but below the average of the peer agency stations. Employment density is comparable to that around the Kent and Puyallup stations. The station catchment area is large, extending east-west from an area just north of Fife on Puget Sound to East King County. Interviews with the community show that spillover parking is somewhat of an issue since the lot is usually full (except for city spaces). The garage is full before the last train. The City also sells space in temporary lots near the station for $20 per month and this space is reasonably well used. The new Lakeland transit shuttle is perceived to work well. Auburn Station Half Mile Employment Half Mile Population 3,100 2,500 Catchment Population 215,000 16

25 Kent Station The Kent Station is located just north of downtown Kent between First and Railroad Avenues, and Smith and James Streets. The station is served with ST Express routes 564 (South Hill to Renton to Overlake) and 565 (Federal Way to Overlake). In addition, VanShare vehicles and 14 bicycle lockers are available. The station is also served by King Metro routes 150, 153, 158, 159, 162, 164, 166,168, 168, 180, and 183, two DART buses and special 952. About 1,100 spaces are available in the garage and in surface parking. The garage is generally full, with an average utilization rate of 86 percent. The parking garage has a shared parking agreement with the City of Kent that allows for public parking after 10 am. The Sounder rider survey reported that 64 percent of riders drive and park at the station. The remaining either walk or bicycle (12 percent), are dropped off (12 percent), or transfer from another bus (12 percent). The population density within a half mile of the station is below the mid range of the South Sounder stations. The land adjacent to the station has some mixed use and single residential households. Employment density is mid range of the other stations. The rider catchment area crosses from Puget Sound and Des Moines to the west to east King County. Residents west of I-5 have a number of other bus options for travel to downtown Seattle or Tacoma; however, some patrons do travel between Des Moines and Kent on Metro 166 to Kent Station to meet the commuter rail service. The City cites spillover parking an issue within the private lots surrounding the garage. People late for the train often park at the Kent Station surface lots. Retail parking focuses on the surface lots, but people use the Sounder garage if needed. Kent Station Half Mile Employment 3, 500 Half Mile Population 1, 900 Catchment Population 237,

26 Tukwila Station The Tukwila station is the last stop south of King Street station. Sound Transit is moving forward with plans to replace the existing temporary Sounder station in Tukwila with a permanent commuter rail station. The future station will include passenger platforms and shelters, security and safety features, accessible station access, approximately 350 parking spaces and bike storage. The station provides access to both Sounder and Amtrak services. The station lies at the eastern Tukwila city boundary within a few blocks of the Renton Boeing Plant locations. The station is served by Metro Routes 140 and 154. Over 70 VanShare vehicles park overnight at the station and provide access in the mornings employers in Tukwila, Renton, Seattle, and the Eastside. The current station also offers 27 bike lockers. There are 233 surface parking spaces available, which are 84 percent full on most days. The survey showed that a little over half (55%) of the riders drive and park to access the station, with the remainder divided among bike and walk (30%), transit (9%), and drop off (6%). A small number of parkers are using the station to access Amtrak. The population density within a half mile of the station is very low. Few people live in close proximity. Conversely, several employers are located nearby, as evidenced by the strong employment density and prevalence of VanShares. The rider catchment area is similar in size to that of Kent and Auburn, but more concentrated in the surrounding area. There is currently no spillover issue with the existing parking lot, but demand is expected to grow. The City of Tukwila has adopted a draft sub-area plan for the Southcenter Urban Center, an area which includes the train station. Tukwila's new redevelopment strategies will support more urban mixed-use development including residential, entertainment, restaurant, life-style retail, and office components. Tukwila Station Half Mile Employment 5,900 Half Mile Population 200 Catchment Population 227,000 18

27 OTHER JURISDICTIONAL COMMENTS The local agencies identified that most of the available parking spaces are occupied by the arrival of the first train. Spillover parking onto local streets and private lots is a concern for many jurisdictions. However, they are controlling these impacts through residential parking zones or parking permits, hourly limits for on-street parking, and parking enforcement. On-street parking, where not controlled or enforced, tends to be fully occupied. Nearby park-and-ride lots that have transit connections to the Sounder station are highly used. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ISSUES There is concern among some local jurisdictions that instituting paid parking in the Sound Transit lots or garages, many of which are adjacent to downtown shopping districts or malls, could negatively impact those businesses. Most jurisdictions feel that free retail parking is important to supporting economic development and that paid parking at Sounder lots may result in an increase in commuter use of available spaces in the retail areas. Two of the jurisdictions (Tacoma and Puyallup) view paid parking at the Sounder station as an impetus for paid parking on nearby streets or within the downtown core. There is interest on how the revenue generated through paid parking could be used to benefit economic development or encourage commuters to alternative travel modes. REACTION TO POTENTIAL FOR PARKING PRICING Local agencies are concerned that paid parking might exacerbate the current supply-related parking issues and increase spillover parking. While some see pricing as an opportunity to create a market for paid parking, others feel that paid parking must also lead to additional parking capacity for commuter rail. This additional capacity can be accommodated at the station, as part of nearby transit oriented development (TOD), or at shuttle-connected park-and-ride lots. In addition, many jurisdictions called for the expansion of transit feeder services that connect local neighborhoods to the station. Jurisdictions feel that money raised by parking pricing should be used to support additional parking or improvements to transit, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities. 19

28 CHAPTER 3. PEER AGENCY REVIEW Several peer agencies were interviewed to learn more about their parking pricing policy and issues during implementation. In addition, the Dallas Area Rapid Transit (DART) provided the results of a comprehensive study, including peer review data. This chapter summarizes the insights gained from the interviews and provides examples, notes trends and commonalities, and gives Key Findings in this Chapter direction for future study and action. A list of peer agencies interviewed is included in Exhibit 9. Further information is provided in Appendix B. The chapter is organized as follows: Data and studies available describing the available documents, as well as documents that may become available in the future. This section also highlights agencies that provide the best examples for Sound Transit and future study. Parking utilization highlights of utilization found at peer agencies parking facilities. Synthesis of results including major themes derived from the research. DATA AND STUDIES AVAILABLE Several transit agencies nationwide have implemented pay parking programs. Most systems started with free parking and evolved to pay parking. Other factors: charges often vary by location, with charges ranging from free to $5 per day. Many systems offer monthly parking passes that are either discounted or guarantee spaces. Parking charges are often below market rate, but cover most or all of operating costs. All of the agencies contacted have thought about charging for parking but only half of the agencies actually charge parking fees. None of the agencies have a straight or flat parking rate that applies to all users or all locations indicating that Sound Transit faces a complex problem largely based on local conditions. In general, the parking fees are driven by the surrounding land uses and utilization of the facilities. Fortunately, there is information available from peer agencies that can help guide the decision making process. Several agencies have conducted parking pricing studies, including DART (Dallas), RTD (Denver), LA Metro (Los Angeles), and BART. Continually full park-and-rides and usage by out-of-district patrons have driven the need for parking management studies in each of these cities. DART is similar to Sound Transit in that they have commuter rail, light rail, and express buses that all serve parkand-rides. Their study was initiated because many of their parking lots had been over-utilized, and often by people who lived outside of the DART service area. The DART study included a comprehensive review of multiple agencies approach to parking pricing. Also included in the DART study was a summary of outreach and focus groups, as well as a review of applicable approaches and technology. The DART study also included a comprehensive review of multiple agencies approaches to parking pricing. The DART study findings have been used in the synthesis of results and to recommend strategies for Sound Transit. RTD implemented their first parking management program in They provided a summary document that includes the rationale for implementing a paid parking program, goals of the program, and summary details on implementation. In addition, RTD provided parking utilization trend data before and after the implementation. The outcome of the study was that RTD now charges for long-term and out-of-district parking. 20

29 Exhibit 9. Peer Transit Agencies Contacted Regarding Parking Pricing Agency Contact Charge or Parking? Documentation Received North County Transit District (San Diego COASTER) Regional Transportation District RTD (Denver) Virginia Rail Express West Coast Express (Vancouver) Washington Metro Area Transit Authority Metro (DC) New Jersey Transit Utah Transit Authority Ed Singer Real Estate Asset Manager Errol Stevens Senior Manager Facilities Amanda Vitko Passenger Support Specialist Greg Blasco Director of Operations Ms. Price Parking Office RJ Palladino Assistant Director Capital Planning Mick Crandall Deputy Director for Planning No Yes No Yes Yes Yes No Phone interview Phone Interview Parking Management Program Report (2008) Parking Utilization Trends* Summary Table of Peer Review* Phone interview Phone interview Phone interview Phone interview Phone interview King County No Feasibility of Instituting Parking Fees at Metro Park & Ride Lots Report (2006) Dallas Area Rapid Transit DART Los Angeles Metrolink Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) Robert Park Planning & Policy Division Alice Tolar Manager, Commuter Rail Parkand-Ride Val Menotti Deputy Director for Stations No Yes Yes Park- and- Ride Pricing Feasibility Study, Alliance Transportation Group, August 24, 2009 Phone interview response Parking Management Toolkit* BART Station Access Guidelines UCTC Parking Fee Analysis* Note: Subsequent interviews were conducted with San Diego Coaster, Chicago Metra, and Caltrain (Bay Area). Data from these peer systems were used to developed a parking pricing tools (See Chapter 5). LA Metro is underway on a Parking Policy update which will increase fees at every park-and-ride on the commuter rail line. The update was undertaken because parking is generally full and in very high demand. This study will be available in

30 BART completed surveys before and after implementation of parking pricing strategies at two stations. The BART findings showed that ridership was largely unaffected by the pricing. PARKING UTILIZATION RTD and West Coast Express (Vancouver) both indicated that parking utilization field surveys are the primary tools used for predicting parking demand and revenue. Prior to implementing parking pricing, and as a part of the Parking Pricing Study, DART completed a comprehensive review of utilization at all of their 25 park-and-ride lots. Utilization at DART lots was a total 63 percent; however, many lots are over-capacity, mostly those in close proximity to downtown. RTD provided their parking utilization data before and after the implementation of the parking management program. RTD has not found any correlation between paid parking and park-and-ride utilization. Though LA Metro has not completed surveys, staff feels there is no effect of parking pricing on ridership since some stations have over 300 people on a waiting list for paid permits. Prior to the implementation of the paid parking program approximately 20 percent of all RTD park-and-rides were regularly at or above capacity (95% or more utilized). Many of the full lots were at light rail stations with 50 percent of the light rail park-and-rides at or above capacity. Similarly, approximately 40 percent of the Sound Transit park-and-rides are currently at or above capacity. 8 SYNTHESIS OF RESULTS General trends about paid parking are summarized below based on the national review. Interview Questions Do you charge for parking at park-and-ride facilities? If so, can you expand on the details of the program; cost to park, implementation procedures, etc What has been the effect on ridership? Has it been measured or observed? If it has been measured, can you share the results? What was the purpose for charging for parking? How did the program begin and what were the goals? What other management techniques did you try before or instead of parking pricing? If you do not have a policy, but studied it, what were the factors that lead to that decision? How do you estimate demand for parking? How do you estimate demand for transit based on the change in parking pricing policy? Have you done surveys testing rider willingness to pay or after surveys to indicate the reactions of riders to parking pricing? Have you observed spillover effects from the parking pricing strategy? Observed reactions from riders? Most of the transit agencies that currently charge for parking are established heavy rail systems that serve large cities (San Francisco, Washington DC, Atlanta, Chicago, LA Metro etc.). Most agencies started with free parking and evolved to a pay parking system. Pricing typically varies by location and is generally at the suburban stations as most stations within the cities do not include parking facilities. Fees generally range from free for day users to $5 per day. Monthly passes are typically available for locations that charge daily rates. 8 Based on Appendix F of the Developing a Sound Transit System Access and Parking Management Program: A Proposed Blueprint, 22

31 More than half of agencies who charge for parking offer a guaranteed monthly space to subscribers. Some agencies have a combination of paid and free parking, sometimes at the same location. Parking rates are typically set below market rates. Parking rates are set at levels to cover most or all of operating costs. Other strategies include long term secured parking (Metro, Washington, DC), single day reserved space (MARTA, Atlanta), price breaks for those who live within the service area (RTD), monthly parking available with monthly bus pass (Pittsburgh). The idea of charging for parking at transit stations is starting to gain momentum in cities with newer transit facilities that have developed a strong ridership base. Several agencies noted that they did not want to charge for parking initially to encourage ridership. However, as the ridership continues to grow on these systems, they are running into problems of full parking facilities. It was noted that the economy has caused a decline in ridership and parking demand. Therefore, parking is not as critical of a problem now as it was a year or so ago and will be when the economy rebounds. 23

32 CHAPTER 4. RIDER INTERVIEWS INTRODUCTION Four focus groups were held to discuss parking, station access, and parking pricing at Sounder stations on December 2 and 3, The purpose of holding these focus groups was to: Understand the value of parking relative to: cash or other payment, other station access options, other commute options, and personal sense of fairness Understand how to excite or entice people to access Sounder stations without their cars Understand how to balance charging for parking with commuter benefits to seem fair To facilitate the focus group discussions, a discussion guide was developed with questions that pertained to each goal. This chapter describes the process for holding the focus groups and summarizes the key findings of the sessions. For more detailed discussion about the focus groups and materials developed for the focus group evaluation, please see Appendix C. Key Findings in this Chapter Focus groups were held to obtain perspectives on parking charges from a broad cross section of Sounder riders. In general, users see parking as a valuable, but limited resource. Many riders do not equate parking charges with system management. Riders feel Sound Transit should prove it is fully utilizing existing revenues before charging new fees. Paying for parking can be costly and inconvenient users want something in return for paying for parking (e.g., better managed parking capacity, available spaces at any time of day). Getting people out of their cars will require making other modes more attractive. PROCESS Participant Recruitment Participants were recruited a month prior to the focus group sessions by distributing flyers at Sounder stations during the evening commute. Recruiters offered flyers advertising the focus groups to people boarding and alighting from all Sounder trains at every station between King Street and Tacoma Dome, as well as Sound Transit buses at Tacoma Dome. The flyers advertised the planned times and locations of the focus groups, offered $50 to each participant, and invited those interested to fill out an on-line survey indicating their availability. The survey also queried potential participants about the station where they access Sounder, their mode of access, and some demographic questions, such as age. Participant Selection Based on the 177 completed surveys that were submitted, 11 people were selected for each focus group session (for a total of 44 participants). The mix of participants selected for each focus group was determined based on participant availability, stations where they accessed Sounder, age, and gender. The selection process also considered mode of access to stations, to ensure representation of all modes (those who drive and park, those who bike, those who transfer from the bus, etc.). Lastly, participants were selected such that each focus group included participants for whom transit is their only mobility option. 24

33 Focus Group Sessions Four focus group sessions were held on the evenings of Wednesday December 2, 2009 and Thursday December 3, Two sessions were held each evening, one starting at 5:00 and the other at 6:30 and each lasted no more than 75 minutes. The Wednesday sessions were held in Auburn, and the Thursday sessions were held in Tacoma; the locations were chosen for their proximity to the participants. Each of the focus group sessions addressed the questions posed in the discussion guide. However, given the diversity of participants, each focus group discussion developed its own tone and questions on the discussion guide were not always asked in order so that the discussion could flow more naturally. KEY FINDINGS FROM THE FOCUS GROUP SESSIONS Exhibit 10 summarizes the findings of the focus groups by topic. The main topics discussed included current station access, perceptions of parking, price sensitivity to parking charges, station improvements to Sounder service and stations, and promotion of alternative modes for accessing stations. Perceptions of Parking Supply Quality Paying for Parking at Stations Overall Resistance to Paying Exhibit 10. Key Findings from the Focus Groups With the exception of parking at Tacoma Dome, parking availability is perceived as scarce. Participants differentiate between Sound Transit parking and other parking surrounding the station areas. Participants report that regardless of the supply at station areas, there will always be those who, out of necessity or preference, park on the street or in other areas close-by. They acknowledged that this practice is can be very annoying to residents. Participants were generally supportive of the station agents, but feel that security in the parking areas could be increased and improved. Some felt that just the principle of paying for parking is wrong; it should be a public service. Others argued that imposing a price for parking at a park-and-ride is imposing punishment to riders who are a) riding transit and b) doing what they are supposed to do by parking at a parkand-ride. Other participants felt that paying for parking is unreasonable given that Proposition 1 passed and they are paying higher taxes that support Sound Transit. Most participants observed that in rural areas (Sumner, Auburn and Puyallup), there are no good alternatives to driving to the station, and that charging at those station areas seemed particularly unfair. Some participants observed that suddenly charging for parking without offering any new services seemed unfair. Participants felt that a fee would deter ridership. Participants suspected the motives of paid parking, assuming that charging for parking would be done to increase revenue. Participants felt there were better ways to increase revenues, such as enforcement of fares and increasing fares. 25

34 Overall Support for Paying Impact on Individual s Transportation Budget Inconvenience of Paying to Park Alternatives to Paying for Parking Amount to Charge Recognition that free parking is subsidized by someone it isn t truly free. One participant observed that tax dollars have been used to build the garages, which means, for her, that lots of other people are subsidizing her cheap way of getting to her job. Suggestions that paid parking be available at a monthly discount. Many suggested that paid parking be an option to purchase with a fare card with a discount for monthly pass holders. Several participants expressed interest in parking overnight or on weekends without fear of being towed. Recognition that paid parking would create guaranteed spaces. Several participants said that they would choose to pay to park on days when they re running late or at times when they want to be assured of a convenient parking space. Several suggested that the first two floors, or some reserved section of each parking area, be reserved for those who want to pay to park, but that a majority of spaces remain free of charge. Participants supported an option to costly airport or evening parking. Several suggested that, especially if parking charges were imposed, Sound Transit make parking available for long term or for evenings. They suggested this as a cost savings to themselves and as a new revenue source for Sound Transit. Many concluded that $3 or $5 per day would be too much to spend, and they would not choose to do so; they would find other free parking away from the station instead. (Paying $1 seemed more comfortable financially, but participants felt such a nominal amount is better treated as a fare increase.) Several concluded that the price of parking added to the cost of a daily round trip on Sounder would negate the cost savings associated with riding transit (since the shift in fuel prices back to recent levels) and that they would likely start to drive. A few commented that charging for parking seems unfair during these economic times and that it would be an unfair burden on those who can t afford it. If Sound Transit started charging for parking it would take more time to access the train. In general, those who made this observation said that, given no choice, they would pay the fee to park, but they would prefer that the payment be made easy and fast, for example, chargeable to their ORCA card. A few participants felt that increasing Sounder fare is more justifiable than charging for parking. One participant observed that increasing fares also affects most people less because many employers subsidize the purchase of a transit pass. Her sense was that pass holders would be able to pass on the new fee to their employers, and, therefore, fewer riders could be affected than if Sound Transit started charging for parking. Participants expressed support for a fare discount for not parking rather than a new parking fee. Several participants suggested that, rather than impose a parking fee, most Sounder riders would understand a small raise in Sounder fares with discounts provided for those who choose not to park at Sounder stations. Participants discussed parking fees of $1, $3, and $5. Participants identified similar pros and cons to $3 and $5 fees. Some who were generally opposed to parking charges saw the $1 fee more positively, stating that it would not break their transportation budget. Improvements Participants Would Expect if Parking Charges Were Implemented Service Improvements More train service: midday, late night, and weekend. More/better bus connections. Many participants expressed an interest in the idea of new shuttles that would provide limited-stop service to the Sounder stations. 26

35 Station Amenities More shelters (weather protection) Better Wi-Fi on the train (a more reliable signal in more areas of each train car) More station area security Coffee stands Better signage to indicate on which track the train will approach Better station area circulation (less crowding) More ORCA card readers Better station maintenance (no slippery stairs or sidewalks) Grade-separated pedestrian crossings Participant Ideas for Promoting Use of Alternative Modes to Access Stations Incentives to Use Alternative Modes Barriers to Using Alternative Modes Source: Fehr & Peers and UrbanTrans, 2010 Create a fare discount for people who do not drive alone to station areas Emphasize the cost savings of not paying to park or of using the Sounder pass to also ride on buses Green convenience - taking transit saves time, money, and stress Seek support from commercial sponsors, such as offering free coffee or breakfast for not driving to the station Pay people not to drive to stations. Start charging for parking and see what people do. Bus service is not available to all Sounder riders trying to access Sounder stations. The buses that are available are inconvenient and not timed well to meet the train. Buses are slow, and the combination of waiting for the bus, taking the bus, and then waiting to transfer to the train is a significant time cost. Lack of bike lockers and changing rooms discourages cycling in bad weather. Rideshare databases are not populated with willing carpoolers. Lessons Learned The focus group sessions provided valuable insights into how Sound Transit riders perceive the current parking situation, how they would react to implementation of paid parking, and what improvements they feel could be implemented at stations to improve their experience and usage of alternative modes. The focus groups yielded some key revelations: Station parking supply is generally limited, but is viewed as a valuable asset. Riders do not currently equate paying for parking with managing parking demand. They see it as a revenue generator or as a deterrent to riding the train. While some are opposed to implementing paid parking, Sound Transit can make its case by proving that it is enforcing fare payment and that it is investing revenues into station and system improvements. Paying to park is costly and can be inconvenient. Passengers want to receive something in return for paying for parking be that better managed facilities, available parking supply throughout the day, the 27

36 ability to park at night, or additional station amenities. They also stress that the payment method should be quick and convenient. Encouraging people to switch to alterative modes to access stations will likely require making these modes more appealing be that providing financial incentives, improving bus connections to stations, and/or providing changing facilities for bicycles and pedestrians. Charging for parking will also encourage use of alternative modes. 28

37 CHAPTER 5. PRICING TOOL METHODOLOGY A Microsoft Excel based tool was developed for Sound Transit to quantify the impacts of different parking strategies on parking utilization and ridership at Sounder commuter rail stations. The tool was developed based on analysis of parking pricing, parking utilization, and ridership data from peer agencies around the country, with a specific emphasis on three systems: Chicago Metra, San Diego COASTER, and Caltrain commuter rail systems. The technical analysis was based on three methodologies: Peer system data analysis: this method of analysis was used to compare the individual and collective difference in parking utilization, station ridership, parking fees, total trip cost, and demographics for COASTER, CalTrain, and Metra. This analysis provided the context for refining the pricing tool. Key Findings in this Chapter A pricing tool quantifies the impacts of different parking strategies on parking utilization and Sounder ridership. The tool was based on empirical data from peer transit agencies. Parking utilization and corresponding ridership is influenced more by total trip cost (parking + fare) than parking charges alone. Parking demand may be relatively inelastic for charges under $1.50 per day. For charges over $1.50 per day, elasticities are estimated at -0.4 to -0.6, meaning that a 10% increase in parking charges would result in a 4-6% reduction in parking utilization. Transit ridership would decline only half as much as parking utilization, suggested that many patrons would find other means for accessing stations. Regression analysis: this method of analysis was applied to the Chicago Metra data to determine which specific factors contribute to system wide parking utilization. This analysis provided details that could be used to develop general parking and access policies Elasticity calculations: this method of analysis was used to calculate the difference in parking utilization changes that result from incremental changes in parking cost. Data specific to the CalTrain system were used in this analysis. The key findings and modeling results from each system are summarized in the following section. A supplemental technical analysis is available in Appendix D that provides more detail on the regression analysis, elasticity calculations, and peer system data analysis. The results of the COASTER analysis are inconclusive on the benefits of implementing a paid parking program so they were not included in the final pricing tool. FACTORS AFFECTING PARKING UTILIZATION A regression model was prepared for Chicago Metra to take advantage of the historic data available since parking fees have been in place for approximately 25 years. A regression model was developed with data from 24 Metra stations. These stations were selected as being most similar to the South Sounder locations in terms of nearby population and employment characteristics, travel distances, and train frequencies. This analysis determined which specific factors contribute most to system wide parking utilization. The following station characteristics were considered in the development the regression model: 29

38 Parking supply Cost of station parking Parking fee technology Local bus service Population (1/2 and 1 mile) Fare to Chicago Distance to Chicago Train frequency Travel Time to Chicago Other transit service from the station The selected regression model indicates that parking utilization is primarily a function of parking supply, relative trip cost, service frequency, and the presence of other regional services. Using these variables, we developed a model with a high correlation (R 2 = 0.98). The Metra regression revealed that parking technology is not a significant variable in predicting parking utilization. The local jurisdictions set their method of fare collection and most have cash only boxes. Some of the stations are operated by IMPark, which offers more convenient payment options such as pay by phone. The stations with additional payment options did not have any discernable differences in parking utilization. Most of the Metra stations have utilization rates above 85 percent. A primary conclusion from the Metra regression model was an understanding that parking utilization and corresponding ridership are more dependent on the total trip cost (fare + parking fee) than just parking cost alone. Parking Cost Elasticities Parking Cost elasticities were developed using data from the Caltrain system in the Bay Area. Caltrain manages parking lots at the majority of their commuter rail stations. The parking lots were acquired from the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) in At that time the parking fee was $0.50/day. Since 1992 the following rate changes have occurred: Increase from $0.50 to $1.50 in 2002 Increase from $1.50 to $2.00 on October 1, 2006 Increase from $2.00 to $3.00 on September 1, 2009 Parking utilization ranges at Caltrain stations from 5 percent to 100 percent of parking occupied. Caltrain staff provided data that indicate that in conjunction with the Caltrain parking lots riders also use adjacent city owned parking lots, on-street parking spaces, and private parking lots. Most of the Caltrain parking lots with high utilization rates also have adjacent non-caltrain parking facilities with high utilization rates. Due to the variability of parking utilization and service levels, a subset of stations was selected to develop elasticities for Sounder. The five high utilization stations selected for the elasticity development had utilization rates of 85 percent or more. In addition, these stations were all more than 20 miles from San Francisco and had similar service levels with regular and bullet trains stopping at these locations. Parking utilization elasticities were developed to measure the price sensitivity of parking utilization with respect to fee changes at the high utilization stations. The elasticities and overall ridership trends are summarized in Exhibit 11 and represent the reduction in parking utilization that occurred on average at the high utilization stations. Elasticities represent the relative percent change in parking utilization from a 1 percent change in total trip cost (two-way fare + parking fee). For example, an elasticity of -0.5 represents a 0.5 percent decrease in parking utilization from a 1 percent increase in total trip cost. This means that a 10 percent increase in total trip cost would cause a 5 percent decrease in parking utilization. We used a linear elasticity formulation given its simplicity and reasonable applicability over the small changes in cost that were analyzed. 30

39 Exhibit 11. Caltrain High Utilization Station Parking Elasticities with Respect to Total Trip Cost Time Period Parking Fee Change Average Change in Parking Utilization at High Utilization Stations Range of Parking Utilization Elasticities with Respect to Total Trip Cost Change in Caltrain System Wide Ridership $0.50 $1.50-4% Inelastic -19% $1.50 $2.00 8% Inelastic 10% Sept 2006 Oct 2006 $1.50 $2.00-2% Inelastic -4% April 2009 Oct 2009* $2.00 $3.00-6% -0.6 to % Source: Caltrain parking utilization & ridership *2009 Fehr & Peers October 2009 field survey The time periods used to calculate the elasticities are based on the timeframe of the parking fee changes and the data provided by Caltrain. Elasticities were calculated between and for the increases that occurred in 2002 and A short-term elasticity was also calculated for the 2006 increase based on changes between September and October of The change in Caltrain ridership over the same period was also considered. The elasticities for the September 1, 2009 price change were determined based on Fehr & Peers field studies of the high utilization stations in October of Based on discussions with Caltrain, April 2009 was selected as the before month to ensure local economic trends in the Bay Area that affect Caltrain ridership would not be overemphasized in the modeling. The results of the elasticity analysis are summarized in Exhibit 11. In general, the parking utilization trends followed general ridership trends. For example, between 2001 and 2003 the system-wide ridership dropped significantly and there was a 10 percent increase in fare during this period. The percent decrease in parking utilization was less than the percent decrease in ridership. Therefore, it is likely that the decrease in parking utilization is a factor of the increased fare and overall decrease in ridership rather than the parking fee. Between 2005 and 2007 both ridership and parking utilization increased despite a modest $0.50 increase in parking fee. There were no changes in fares during this time period. This suggests that Caltrain parking demand was relatively inelastic for the small change in price. The short-term 2006 change showed that Caltrain parking utilization was still relatively inelastic at a daily cost of $2.00. The 2009 parking fee increase to $3.00 is the first time that Caltrain parking utilization decreased by more than ridership. This suggests that Caltrain parking utilization started to become elastic with respect to total trip cost at parking fees higher than $2.00. The elasticity ranges suggest that a 10 percent increase in total trip cost could lead to a decrease in Caltrain parking utilization of 4 to 6 percent. APPLICATION TO SOUNDER The first step in applying these elasticity findings to Sounder was to compare the average cost of living, transportation, and parking between the peer regions. The results of this comparison are shown in Exhibit 12. The comparison confirmed that Seattle is comparable to Chicago and San Diego in terms of cost of living and downtown parking rates. San Francisco ranks above the three other regions in cost of living, which may suggest an ability of the people in that region to pay more for transportation and other services. 31

40 Source: Exhibit 12. Peer Region Transportation Cost Comparison Cost of Living Index 1 Transportation Index 1 Daily Parking Rate in CBD 2 Seattle $25 Chicago $25 San Francisco $27 San Diego $ Notes: Cost of Living Index: Total cost of living categories weighted as follows: housing (30%), food & groceries (15%), transportation (10%), utilities (6%), health care (7%), and miscellaneous (32%). State & local taxes not included. Transportation Index: The average cost of gasoline, car insurance & maintenance expenses, and mass transit fare. The cost of the vehicle and vehicle registration and license taxes are not included. The Seattle area has the lowest transportation index of the four regions. Additional analysis was conducted to determine if the transit cost was lower as well or if the lower rating was strictly from vehicular travel being less expensive. Exhibit 13 shows that the Sounder total trip cost (two-way fare + parking fee) is lower than the three peer commuter rail systems by about $2 to $8 depending on the trip length. This suggests that adding a $2 parking fee to Sounder would make the total trip cost more comparable to the peer commuter rail systems. Based on the cost of living and CBD parking data, it appears that the Seattle market would support comparable commuter rail costs. One other factor examined was the density of population and employment within close proximity to the commuter rail stations. This information helps to paint a profile of communities serving the rail line. In general, the population densities near the South Sounder stations are considerably lower than those in Chicago and the Bay Area, and to a lesser extent compared to San Diego. This leads to lower walk and bicycle access modes for Sounder. Employment densities are comparable to those surrounding the Chicago Metra system, but are very low relative to the primary employment destinations served by the commuter rail lines. As a result, a much higher proportion of Sounder riders are destined to downtown Seattle rather than employment centers in the South County cities. Downtown Tacoma has started to grow as an employment destination for Sounder, aided by the limited reverse peak service provided by Sound Transit. The comparison to other regions confirmed that the Metra and Caltrain data could be used to reasonably predict changes in parking utilization and ridership at Sounder stations with parking fees. 32

41 Exhibit 13. Total Commuter Rail Trip Cost by Distance to CBD The following assumptions were used as pricing tool inputs. Parking utilization and ridership will be inelastic with the introduction of daily parking fees of $1.50 or less. This was determined from the Caltrain data which showed that parking utilization did not decrease more than overall system ridership until the parking fees was greater than $2.00 per day. Given the higher cost of living in San Francisco, this threshold was adjusted to $1.50 for Seattle. Also, most stations in Chicago charge $1.50 for parking and have very high utilization rates. With parking fees greater than $1.50, an elasticity range of -0.6 to -0.4 will be used for parking utilization with respect to total trip cost. This elasticity range is based on the latest Caltrain parking fee increase. The change in ridership will be approximately half of the change in parking utilization. This assumes that half of the patrons who no longer park at the station will find another method of arriving at the train, which could include carpooling, getting dropped off, use of transit, bicycling/walking, or parking off-site (e.g., spillover parking). Parking would be charged at primary Sounder lots only; not at adjacent leased lots and satellite lots. All Sounder riders will have the same elasticity to parking pricing. This includes daily and reserved parkers, as well as those patrons who do and do not use passes. There is some likelihood that people who reserve parking or hold passes would be more inelastic to parking costs. Ridership was considered only in the peak direction to/from Seattle. This assumption was made to focus the analysis on the predominant travel movement on Sounder. Ridership was estimated for Sounder users only, recognizing that other transit providers also serve the stations. The exception is the Tacoma Dome, where the large number of Sound Transit Express bus riders was included in the total ridership. Payment options will be efficient and convenient for riders. 33