The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutTrans 2010-06-07 COMPLETE AGENDA PACKETIll. Business Agenda IV. Old Business City of Tukwila Transportation Committee Verna Seal, Chair Joan Hernandez De'Sean Quinn MONDAY, JUNE 7, 2010 Time: 5 :00 PM Place: Conference Room #1 I. Current Agenda Review II. Presentation(s) A. Sound Transit Parking Pricing Study AGENDA II. Distribution: V. Seal J. Hernandez D. Quinn D. Robertson Mayor Haggerton S. Lancaster K. Matej D. Speck C. O'Flaherty M. Hart S. Norris S. Kerslake B. Giberson F. Iriarte R. Tischmak P. Brodin G. Labanara C. Knighton P. Lau M. Mathia S. Anderson S. Hunstock J. Pace J. Harrison N. Olivas commended Action A. Information Only III. IV. Future Agendas: Next Scheduled Meeting: Monday, June 21, 2010 Committee Goal: Establish a process to provide updates to Council on issues that are brought forward at Council meetings during citizen comment opportunities. IS. The City of Tukwila strives to accommodate individuals with disabilities. P /ease contact the Public Works Department at 206- 433 -0179 for assistance. R. Still M. Miotke J. Trantina C. Parrish B. Arthur File Copy Single side to Ana 2 Extra Copies e -mail cover to B.Saxton, M. Hart, C. O'Flaherty, K. Narog, S. Norris and S. Kirby Pg. 1 TO: City of Tukwila Mayor Haggerton Transportation Committee FROM: Bob Giberson, Public Works Director DATE: June 2, 2010 SUBJECT: Sound Transit Parking Pricing Study ISSUE Sound Transit will present their key findings and next steps from their Parking Pricing Study. BACKGROUND In July 2009, Sound Transit met with Tukwila Public Works and DCD staff when they were scoping their Parking Pricing Study for the commuter rail corridor. The study has been completed and Sound Transit staff will provide an overview of the study, highlighting the following areas: History and background Parking pricing study area Sounder characteristics Study questions Pricing model Parking pricing technologies RECOMMENDATION For discussion only. attachment: Presentation slides INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM W \PW Eng\OTHER \Bob Giberson \Committee_ Council \INFO MEMO 6.7.10 TC ST Parking Pricing Study doc Focus groups Peer transit systems Cost estimates Net revenue estimates Summary of study findings Possible next steps Jim Haggerton, Mayor N:r■F, omv :sir, I Sound Transit Parking Pricing Study Tukwila Transportation Committee June 7, 2010 Project History Background Direction from Transit Operations Task Force Parking utilization and management (October 2008) Parking policies (November 2008) Different situation than when parking policies adopted (2002) Study new parking strategies Coordination with partners and jurisdictio South Sounder Tukwila Kent Auburn Sumner Puyallup Tacoma Today's Presentation No Decision or Action Project History Background Study Purpose Questions Key Findings Possible Next Steps Discussion Questions SOUNDTMN,SIT 2 ■IrV WE NAVE Parking Pricing Study Area South Sounder Characteristics 8,250 daily riders ('09) Over 5,000 parking spaces at and near stations Several leased lots Tacoma Dome includes parking for Link and ST Express Bus Costs and revenues Technologies Rider response Peer agency experiences Local/regional implications 9000 9000 2008 2009 9 2010 7000 6000 5000 4000 3000 0 Study Questions Potential impacts to ridership, parking use, and revenues? averagestrough 203 Uttlzed Parking Ridershfp IrSOMDTVN5ir 5 IMF ME WAVE a SotiNr,TRANstr 11158050Y141 South Sounder Characteristics Over 60% of riders drive Others include walk, bus, drop off, bike 80% of riders use transit pass 60% of passes are paid for by employers SIXINOTRA7/577 6 '100 THE 99714 Pricing Model Estimates quantitative impact of parking pricing on parking demand and ridership Parking demand affected more than ridership Example: $1.00 parking fee Minimal changes in parking demand ridership Example: $3.00 parking fee 3-4% reduction in ridership of parking customers 6-9% reduction in parking utilization a re somata/qui- a 68.. 080 AWE Parking Pricing Technologies Various technology options to implement pay parking Evaluation based on user experience, cost, and consistency with Sound Transit policies and programs Pay-by-space seems most appropriate 4:•4 Pay at machine and indicate space number Gate less j•,)„-; Pay-by-phone option for late arrivals Monthly reserved parking could be handled with designated parking area 50(1. NOTRAtigi 9 urr,,F rfor YW Peer Transit Systems Rail systems in large cities charge for parking Newer systems with strong ridership beginning to consider and implement parking fees Manage demand, encourage other access modes Prices vary by location Often monthly parking options with reserved parking Many show little overall change in parking demand and ridership as result of parking fees Not all programs immediately successful 74,1'4 AVE Focus Groups Customers see parking as limited, but valuable Do not immediately equate fees with management Fare enforcement important Want to know how revenue would be spent Willingness to pay increases if see benefit May seek other free parking (spillover) Want alternative modes to be more accessible Estimated Costs Estimated Capital: $800,000 to $900,000 Assumes fee-collection machines and signage JOUNViRANSIT 10 i/rNt Estimated Operations and Maintenance: $600,000 to $700,000 annually Includes collection of parking fees, enforcement, and management r prSPMPTRANSril2 Estimated Net Revenue Summary of Study Findings Estimated annualized capital plus O &M costs $800,000 to over $1 Million Estimated net positive revenue Potentially achieved in range of $1 to $3 price point Estimated bottom line net revenue at $1 to $3 price $600,000 to $2.4 million Possible Next Steps Incorporate results into Sounder Stations Flexible Access Study Initiate parking policies review Report results and discuss with partners and jurisdictions Initiate larger regional discussion Other project or activity IrSnur+uTrzAEasir ME TME WAVE Costs Potential near -term ridership loss Spillover Local and regional coordination Preserve parking for transit customers Encourage other access modes Provides value of parking to customers Increase overall transit ridership over time Cost recovery and/or improvements Discussion Questions T SouNNDTRAtarr 1s FtDE ME WAV E