Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter.
Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page 24
· Pedestrian Walkways (33 percent). security, enforcement, and amenities. These program
· Information Kiosks (25 percent). categories and their elements are shown in Table 10.
· Intelligent Signing/Messaging (17 percent). The evaluative criteria in Table 10 were applied
to each surveyed program. A rating, based on the
program's compatibility or responsiveness to the
2. C Best Practices
functional elements, was then assigned, as follows:
A best practice may be defined as a discreet man-
1 = Element featured in program and considered
agement action that advances the objective and
a best practice.
purpose of a program and results in a successful
2 = Moderate or limited evidence of element in
program outcome. For this research, a best practice
program.
was determined by applying criteria typically used
3 = Element not included in program.
to evaluate programs that serve the public. Three
categories were evaluated: program administration, The ratings for all of the surveyed programs are
program development, and program operation. The shown in Table 11. The "1" rating indicates that
surveyed programs were rated based on their respon- execution of the element enabled the program to
siveness in each category. achieve its objectives and may be considered a best
practice. Because the purpose of research is to high-
2. C.1 Evaluation Criteria light best practices that may be replicated by other
state DOTs, only elements with "1" ratings were
The category of program administration represents considered.
how the program is managed and covers elements such
as goals and policies, staffing, assets, program needs
2. C.2 Application of Evaluative Criteria
and budget sources. Program development represents
activities that advance the planning, promotion, and Eight of the 12 surveyed programs received the
expansion of the program. Program operation rep- "1" rating in certain areas. The programs are BART,
resents operational features such as maintenance, Denver RTD, Florida DOT, Maine DOT, MTA,
Table 10 Criteria for rating the surveyed park and ride programs.
Function Element Definition
Program administrative methods are documented
Goals and Policies
and easily understood
Staffing and manpower levels satisfactorily address
Program Staffing
program requirements
Program
Asset Inventory Program assets are well documented
Administration
Program needs are understood and strategies are
Program Needs
derived to address them
Program costs are quantified, budgeted, and
Budget and Revenue Source
aligned with viable funding sources
Program development goals and policies are
Goals and Policies
documented and easily understood
Funding Program is adequately funded
Program Program amenities strengthen the viability of the
Amenities
Development program
Program activities and objectives are coordinated
Interagency Coordination
with area or regional stakeholders
Capital Improvement Program Program CIP is well defined and prioritized
Program operation goals and policies are
Goals and Policies
documented and easily executed
If permitted, program fees match demand and
Program Fee Collection
costs
Operation
Security and Enforcement Program facilities are safe for public use
Maintenance Program assets are regularly maintained
Technology Technology is applied to improve efficiency
24
OCR for page 25
Table 11 Ratings of the surveyed park and ride programs.
New Mexico DOT
Transit Authority
Northern District
Maine Turnpike
Phoenix Valley
Virginia DOT
Virginia DOT
Rhode Island
Florida DOT
Florida DOT
Denver RTD
DOT/ Public
Maine DOT
District 6
Caltrans
BART
Metro
ELEMENTS
Program Administration
Program Goals and Policies 3 3 2 1 1 2 2 3 3 3 2 2
Program Staffing 3 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 2 3 2 1
Asset Inventory 2 2 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Program Needs 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Budget/Revenue 2 2 2 2 2 3 2 2 2 2 3 2
Program Development
Goals and Policies 3 2 2 1 1 2 2 3 2 2 2 2
Funding 1 2 2 2 2 1 2 3 2 2 2 2
Amenities 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 2 2
Interagency Coordination 2 2 3 2 2 1 1 2 2 2 2 1
Capital Improvement
Program
2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 2 2
Program Operation
Goals and Policies 3 2 2 1 1 3 2 2 2 3 3 2
Security/Enforcement 2 3 1 2 2 3 2 3 3 2 2 2
Maintenance 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 2 3 3 2
Technology 2 3 1 2 2 3 3 3 3 2 3 3
1 = Element featured in program and considered a best practice.
2 = Moderate or limited evidence of element in program.
3 = Element not included in program.
Phoenix Valley Metro RPTA, and Virginia DOT-- month of 21 days. Each month BART reviews the
Northern District. Their best practices are discussed number of monthly parking permits purchased. If
here (see Table 14 for additional information). the number is less than 10 percent, the fee is $42 per
month or $2 per day, a reduction of $1 per day. If
2. C.2.a BART. The BART program received a "1" the number is greater than 10 percent but less than
rating in program development/funding. The agency 25 percent, the fee remains $63 per month or $3 per
received this rating because of its creative method day. If the number of parking permits is greater than
for generating program funds and managing lot uti- 25 percent, the fee is increased to $84 per month or
lization. The Customer Access staff, responsible for $4 per day. A $30 monthly fee is assigned to lots that
the program, convinced the BART board of directors are underutilized. The $115.15 monthly fee is for those
that a fee structure for parking was beneficial to the experiencing high demand. This approach balances
program in managing demand. This was a departure demand and encourages greater use of properties with
from past policy that established free parking at all least demand. Moreover, the fee program generates
BART stations. The fees were imposed to discour- about $12 million per year in revenue.
age use of lots with heavy demand and to encourage The BART parking fee program is applicable to
parking at locations with available spaces. state park and ride programs in that it manages lot
The parking fees, which are market based, range utilization where parking demand exceeds capacity.
from $30 to $115.15 per month. In the initial stage of Further, the program generates revenue that may be
the program, a parking fee of $63 per month or $3 per used to support lot development, management, and
day was charged for all stalls based on a working maintenance.
25
OCR for page 26
2. C.2.b Denver RTD. The Denver RTD rated a "1" residing outside of the district must pay for lot usage,
in program administration/asset inventory, program whereas district residents only pay after a 24-hour
operation/security and enforcement, and program parking duration.
operation/technology. Enforcement is performed by attendants driving
through the lots with a camera mounted to the vehicle
Asset Inventory. Although all of the surveyed pro- and connected to a computer which, through a geo-
grams have some form of inventory, the Denver coding process, identifies whether the vehicle is
RTD offers the best example in spreadsheet format. registered to a district resident. If residency is outside
The data fields include: the district, the computer produces a beep which alerts
the attendant and the vehicle is cited.
· Name of lot; In addition to parking enforcement, one-half of
· Number of spaces; the RTD lots have cameras and the rest have real-time
· Percent utilization; enforcement. This approach enabled RTD personnel
· Lot address; in 2009 to conduct 3,476 video investigations of
· Lot amenities--bike racks/lockers, bus shelters, customer service complaints, ADA issues, liability
benches, and ADA provision; claims, and security concerns. In the first 6 months
· Lot ownership; of 2010, 2,800 investigations were conducted.
· Type of transit service to facility; This approach is applicable to state DOTs with
· Estimated patronage by district and non-district; park and ride program policies relating to prioritized
and use based on geographic origin, variable parking pric-
· Financial information on projected revenue, ing, and facility security or surveillance.
estimated cost, and net revenue.
The data covers all of the park and ride lots man- Technology. The Denver RTD program also rated a
aged by the agency. Percent utilization and patronage "1" for program operation/technology. The agency
are collected on a daily basis. Annually the data is applies cutting-edge technology in the following areas:
summarized to estimate program revenue to support
· Use of cellular phone technology to access the
facility maintenance and operations.
Internet for retrieval of real-time bus sched-
The inventory serves as a model that may be
ules and payment of parking.
applied to any state park and ride program and may
· Use of automated pay stations that accept var-
be enhanced with the addition of other data fields such
ious forms of payment.
as the date and time of lot maintenance. The infor-
· Use of Geographic Information Systems
mation aids in the preparation of annual or biennial
(GIS) to locate the residence status of parked
progress reports, the identification of program short-
vehicles based on license plates.
falls and needs, and the assessment of services and
· Use of computer technology to interface with
amenities. It is also a helpful tool for determining
digital cameras to read and interpret a license
future capital improvements and upgrades. For state
plate.
programs that do not charge for parking, the RTD data
· Use of video technology to investigate abnor-
fields on projected and net revenue would not apply
mal behavior.
and may be eliminated.
The technologies reduce manpower requirements,
Security and Enforcement. The Denver RTD park improve user access to lots resulting in higher utiliza-
and ride program is rated "1" in security and enforce- tion, improve the enforcement of parking lot policies,
ment because of its methods for monitoring and and assist in the collection of fees.
enforcing program policies. A new management
policy was initiated in 2009 at 34 of the 75 lots. The 2. C.2.c Florida DOT. The Florida DOT rated a
purpose of the new policy is to maintain an accurate "1" in program administration/goals and policies,
inventory of park and ride assets, to assess lot uti- program development/goals and policies, and pro-
lization, and to establish fees based on the origin gram operation/goals and policies. The department
of the users and their duration of stay. The origin of has two instructive documents that explain the
the user is particularly important because the lots goals, objectives, procedures, and organization of its
are intended for residents living in the RTD. Those park and ride program. These goals, objectives, and
26
OCR for page 27
organizational features are captured in the document · Report annually on occupancy levels.
Park & Ride Lot Program, Topic No. 725-030-002-f, · Provide grants to local governments for the
issued May 14, 2001. The roles and responsibilities project phases of park and ride facilities
of the central office and each district are explained, including those associated with promotion.
as follows: · Provide technical assistance to local govern-
ments.
Central Office Role · Ensure coordination with corridor and special
· Maintain communication with district offices. lane planning.
· Develop program policies and procedures. The policy document also explains how facility
· Monitor compliance. maintenance, inspections, and inventories should
· Develop, maintain, and publish the State Park be undertaken and performed. A sample of several
and Ride Lot Planning Handbook. directives is provided here:
· Maintain the State Park and Ride Facilities
Inventory. · Maintenance is coordinated between the
· Provide technical assistance to districts. District Public Transportation Office and the
District Maintenance Office. If the facility is
District Office Role a shared-use operation, or operated by others,
· Maintain communication with the central office the department negotiates and executes a main-
on program status and implementation. tenance agreement with the party sharing or
operating the facility.
· Establish and maintain communication with
· If the facility is owned and operated by others
local transit systems, commuter assistance pro-
(e.g. church owns property and agrees to joint
grams, Transportation Management Associa-
use agreement), a formal, written, executed
tions/Organizations, and others interested in Maintenance Agreement is provided to the
developing park and ride facilities. department.
· Develop and document park and ride facilities · Facilities are physically inspected at least
in accordance with established procedures. twice a year. Documentation of the inspections
· Develop regional or district-wide park and ride and corrective measures taken are maintained
plans or lists. in the district office.
· Assist Metropolitan Planning Organizations · The district submits a report to the central office
(MPOs) and transit systems in the development by the end of the tenth month of each fiscal
of park and ride plans. year indicating dates inspected and average
· Ensure implementation and promotion of facil- usage for each facility.
ities in coordination with the District Commuter · Facilities failing to meet minimum occupancy
Assistance Program. standards for a period of 1 year may be closed.
· Plan and implement the state-funded program, · Any facility operating at a level of 95% or
including coordinating with those responsible greater is a prime candidate for expansion.
for design, construction, right of way acquisi-
tion, promotion, and maintenance of facilities. The second Florida DOT document is the State
· Assist transit systems and local governments Park & Ride Lot Program Planning Manual, Sep-
in the planning and implementation of locally tember 1996, as amended April 2001. Here methods
initiated park and ride lots. for inspecting, evaluating, assessing and expanding
· Provide funds to contract with local agencies park and ride facilities are outlined as guidance for
for the planning, design, and construction of district personnel. The manual explains:
park and ride lots. · How to evaluate the performance of park and
· Prepare plans, prepare contracts for Florida ride lots.
DOT authorization, manage, and monitor park · Planning methods for the implementation of
and ride facility development by other public park and ride facilities.
agencies under the terms of a Joint Participation · Processes for facility development and site
Agreement (JPA). selection.
· Monitor and evaluate all park and ride lots in · Methods for estimating demand and facility
which state funds are utilized. size.
27
OCR for page 28
Table 12 Florida Department of Transportation park and ride facility performance evaluation input.
Data Element Evaluation Type Collection Frequency Unit of Measurement
Spaces by type* Capacity On file 2 to 4 times annually Number
Parked vehicles by space type Usage 2 to 4 times annually Number of vehicles
Illegally parked vehicles Capacity 2 to 4 times annually Number of vehicles
Extent/severity of cracking,
potholes, raveling,
Pavement condition Maintenance Semiannually
patching, rutting, spelling,
etc.
Type and condition both
Traffic control device inventory Safety Same frequency as counts
on- and off-site
Capacity, safety,
Continuing, summarized
Complaints maintenance, illegal Number by type
annually
parking
Accidents related to facility Safety Once per year Accidents by type
Adjacent property inventory Expandability Annually Land use type and amount
Type(s) of service, stop
Accessible transit service Service adequacy Once per year or as required
locations
*Space types include long-term, short-term and handicapped.
Source: State Park & Ride Lot Program Planning Manual, September 1996, as amended April 2001, p. 10-3.
· External and internal conceptual design of park The planning manual recommends various
and ride facilities. corrective measures to improve the performance
· Procedures for assessing impacts of park and of low or marginally utilized park and ride facili-
ride facilities. ties, summarized here in Table 13. The planning
· Economic analysis and park and ride project manual offers formulas and calculations for mea-
justification methods. suring the reduction in vehicle miles traveled
· Park and ride program performance measures. (VMT) attributable to a park and ride facility, ex-
· Park and ride program promotion methods plained here.
and techniques.
For example, the planning manual identifies the VMT REDUCTION. The VMT reduction value is used
initial steps for inventorying park and ride assets, to compute a number of other performance measures
summarized here in Table 12. including those related to user cost savings, fuel
Table 13 Florida Department of Transportation conditions for corrective actions
at marginally operating park and ride facilities.
Action Potential Usage Increase Conditions
½ to 1% increase per 1% improvement Market area supportive of transit.
Added Transit in frequency. Area planned for express service. Congested access to major
Service Potentially 100% increase with new destination area.
service. Existing headways greater than 15 minutes.
Congested access roads to park and ride facility.
Access 50% increase per 5 minute Heavily traveled corridor with major destination area.
Improvement improvement in access times. Site is visible and otherwise appears attractive.
Market area not serviced by other park and ride facilities.
Transit Amenities Indeterminable, probably slight. Other improvements planned for facility.
Security problem exists.
Slight unless full-time security is
Improved Security Peripheral facility adjacent to area with undersupply
provided.
of parking.
In conjunction with special transit promotion programs.
Characteristics of origin market influence area supportive
Promotion Less than 10%. of park and ride facility.
Congested commuting corridor.
Source: State Park & Ride Lot Program Planning Manual, September 1996, as amended April 2001, p. 10-11.
28
OCR for page 29
consumption, vehicle emissions, value of accidents, organizational framework, and methods for achiev-
and fatalities. The approach begins with totaling the ing expected program outcomes. This level of detail,
number of parked vehicles by lot type. These totals guidance, and instruction was not apparent in the other
are then multiplied by the average trip lengths from surveyed park and ride lot programs.
lot to destination for each lot type. This product is
then converted to an annual amount using the annu- 2. C.2.d Maine DOT/MTA. The Maine DOT pro-
alization factor for each lot type. The formula for gram rated a "1" in program development/funding.
this computation is as follows: As explained by the manager, biennially the depart-
ment receives a $1.2 million federal CMAQ grant
VMTi = 2 Parkedi Li Afaci for the purpose of planning and improving its park
and ride program. While the manager was unable to
System VMT reduction = I = 1, lot types VMTi explain the history and circumstances of this arrange-
ment, it is deemed a best practice because it provides
where: a reliable funding source for the program. The fed-
VMTi = VMT reduction for lots of type i eral funding establishes a baseline and enables the
Parkedi = Number of parked vehicles in lots of department to consider requests from local or regional
type i interests on where and when facilities should be built
Li = Average lot-to-destination distance for or expanded. Moreover, the funding establishes
lot type i parameters on how much can be accomplished within
Afaci = Annualization factor for lot type i the 2-year time frame and what will be required for
local match. Maine DOT meets the 20 percent local
The planning manual also offers methods for match through a variety of sources such as state high-
measuring user cost savings, summarized here. way funds, state bonds, and cash or in-kind contribu-
tions from local municipalities. Each circumstance
USER COST SAVINGS. The computation of user cost differs.
savings consists of calculating the savings in vehi- Maine DOT and the MTA together rated a "1"
cle operating costs. The approach does not consider in program development/interagency coordination.
costs saved through avoidance of parking fees or They received this rating because of their support of
costs incurred such as transit fares and parking fees. commuter bus and commuter education services.
The approach is simply to multiply the annual VMT The Go Maine Commuter Connections Program is
reduction for each lot type as computed by the above administered by the Greater Portland Council of
method by the average operating cost. The formula Governments and funded by Maine DOT and MTA,
for this computation is as follows: which contributes $115,000 annually to the program.
Go Maine is an Internet site that encourages and
Costi = VMTi Opcosti educates people about alternative commuter choices.
The total number of registered commuters in the
Systemwide User Cost Savings = i = 1, program is 7,612, which is a record high. The agen-
lot types Costi cies also subsidize the ZOOM Turnpike Express
commuter bus. Weekday ZOOM buses connect
where: to two park and ride lots and run express along the
turnpike. The service is cited as one reason for the
Costi = Annual cost savings for users of lot
construction of overflow parking at the Saco Park
type i
and Ride Lot, to accommodate the increasing number
VMTi = Annual VMT reduction for lots of
of ZOOM commuters.
type i
From the perspective of a state DOT, establish-
Opcosti = Average vehicle operating cost for
ing a partnership with the U.S. Department of
vehicles parked at lots of type i
Transportation--which results in federal funding
From the perspective of a state DOT wishing to within a fixed time interval for the specific purpose
establish or strengthen its program goals, objectives, of improving the state park and ride system--is con-
policies, and procedures, the Florida DOT example sidered a best practice. Moreover, the Maine DOT and
is instructive and noteworthy. The agency policies MTA partnership has produced a successful com-
provide structure and context, purpose and intent, an muter bus operation and commuter education and
29
OCR for page 30
membership program, which results in a higher aware- representing $4.5 million for each planned facility.
ness and usage of state park and ride facilities. This Any cost above the budgeted amount is borne by the
is also a noteworthy best practice. locality in which the facility is located. The CIP was
recently re-evaluated with a Re-Prioritization Study
2. C.2.e Phoenix Valley Metro RPTA. The Phoenix conducted in 2008. The study updates the CIP and
Valley Metro RPTA is rated a "1" in program devel- generates a list of new policies for improved imple-
opment/user amenities and program development/ mentation of the plan.
capital improvement program (CIP). The RPTA CIP process is a good example for
state DOTs on the importance of preparing a long-
User Amenities. The Phoenix Valley Metro RPTA term capital plan with costs, identifying a funding
amenities attract park and ride users. When a lot is mechanism to accomplish the plan, and revisiting and
underutilized, the agency responds by increasing updating the plan to ensure its viability over time.
the number of shade canopies at the lot. It provides
shade canopies in summer months to increase lot 2. C.2.f Virginia DOT--Northern District (NOVA).
utilization. Another useful amenity is the provision of The Virginia DOT--Northern District (NOVA)
retail services within or near the park and ride facility. comprises the most densely populated and heavily
In a study conducted by the city of Phoenix, it was traveled counties in the commonwealth. They are
determined that 35 percent of park and ride users shop Arlington, Fairfax, Loudoun, and Prince William
at the retail service closest to their lot. When negotiat- counties. The NOVA park and ride program rated a
ing shared use agreements with retail managers, the "1" in program administration/program staffing and
RPTA presents these findings. This secures additional program development/interagency coordination.
stalls, attracts new users, generates customers for
retailers, and activates idle parking stalls. Of course, Program Staffing. Staffing for the NOVA park and
this only works in retail centers with a parking supply ride program is represented by one Senior Trans-
above the code required amount. According to the portation Engineer dedicating 50 to 60 percent of his
RPTA, most of the retail centers have parking supply time to the program. The position is central to the
above code. implementation, administration, and advancement
From the perspective of other state DOTs, the use of the program. When asked to explain his duties
of the shade canopies is instructive. RPTA designed and responsibilities, the manager described a series
an amenity unique to its environment and market of functional tasks which, taken as a whole, provide
sector. This suggests that a successful program should for the smooth execution and advancement of the
consider uniquely designed amenities as factors to program. The manager:
attract users. This may vary by geographic location.
For example, whereas RPTA offers shade canopies, · Coordinates and applies the district's technical
an Anchorage, Alaska, program may offer electrical and manpower resources as needed to address
outlets for engine block heaters. program needs such as traffic engineering,
RPTA has also identified a market niche. With planning, surveying, permitting, mapping, and
over one-third of the Phoenix area park and ride lot maintenance.
users prone to shop in retail centers nearest to them, · Is routinely involved in negotiations for pro-
the placement of stalls within retail centers simulta- gram planning and funding that occur within
neously generates new patrons for the retailers and a regional decision making forum with repre-
new users of the park and ride program. sentatives from local municipalities, county
governments, and regional transit agencies.
Capital Improvement Program (CIP). The RPTA · Directly oversees and coordinates leasing
rated a "1" in program development/CIP program. agreements such as the Parking Lot License
The agency has a 20-year capital program that was Agreement and Standard Project Administra-
developed in 2002 to construct 13 new park and ride tion Agreement used to lease private land for
lots. The program of improvements was approved by park and ride facilities. Thirty-five percent of
area voters as a 1/2 cent regional sales tax. RPTA has district lots are governed by these agreements.
prepared maps of each facility, tables summarizing · Assesses site conditions and locations for
the year of construction, and funding schedules proposed new or expanded facilities.
30
