Improving Access to Transit through Innovative Parking Practices Daniel Rowe King County Metro Transit, Transportation Planner Seattle, WA King County is growing rapidly Investing in service throughout the region and ridership is up. Park and rides are getting full and customers are frustrated. Access to transit is a major concern for constituents but positions vary on the right solutions. Strong political pressure to provide more parking, but the return on investment from building parking often doesn’t pencil This presentation is about how Metro is working to improve access to parking by managing demand and increasing supply in a cost efficient way.

Presentation Overview King County Growth Context and Long Range Plan Park-and-ride Existing Conditions Review of Strategies Exciting new draft long range plan that sets the service and policy vision for Metro Lots of data collection in 2015, show some highlights Review of strategies and finish with some examples on projects underway

King County Metro Transit Context One million more people and 850,000 more jobs will come to our region by 2040. 65% growth in Metro service, from 3.5 million service hours to 6 million hours by 2040. 6 – current, 20 new RapidRide lines around the county, that would arrive every 5 to 15 minutes or better all day—a total of 26 lines. Focus on connections to Link. As Sound Transit extends Link, Metro service would get people to light rail stations. Expanded travel options such as community shuttles, “right-now” ride-sharing apps, partnerships with companies like Lyft, Uber and Microtransit, and more innovations as new technologies and services emerge. Double transit ridership 20 to 70% of people who live within walking distance of frequent transit 14 to 24% transit mode split growth the future network would reduce vehicle miles traveled for King County by more than 8 million miles per day, which equates to an annual reduction of about 1.7 million metric tons of GHG emissions.

Parking in the Long Range Plan 3,800 stalls by 2040 $710M (YOE $) What does the long range plan say about parking? 3,800 new stalls. No new stalls in dense areas of transit service, only in suburban and rural areas. Almost 10k coming from ST (planned and proposed) Equal parking investment compared to walk/bike. $x in parking

Variety of ownership and funding 34% customer satisfaction Existing Conditions 25k stalls in King County Variety of ownership and funding 34% customer satisfaction 60% of lots are overcrowded Lots of parking in KC, most in surrounding suburban communities Variety of ownership and funding sources – which can make coordination challenging (more on that later) Customers are unsatisfied, mostly those who are having trouble finding a spot a crowded facilities 60% of lots overcrowded, with Some underutilized due to changes in service

Data Collection Needed Before 2015, Metro did not really collect much information other than utilization data Knowing that interest transit access was building, I set out to collect as much data as possible License plate surveys for all lots in KC – Median distance – 2.86 miles 52% drive 3 miles or less 3% drive less than a half mile Average fill rates show that lots are filling early in the morning, with lots reaching 85% full by 8am.

Parking Management Study (2015) Agency Interviews Local Jurisdiction Actions Near-term Actions Evaluation of permits/pricing Recommendations A culmination of our data collection work last summer resulted in a parking management study where we: Conducted peer agency interviews Developed a list of local jurisdiction actions Developed near term actions Conducted an evaluation of a proposed permit program And made recommendations for next steps Great resource for staff to use in making the case to management for budget adds, policy change, and program development Long Range plan Focus on the near-term strategies, both supply and management

Expand Supply Supply Strategies Study demand for future public expansion Expand shared/leased lot program Restripe existing lots Expand/improve bike parking

Examples - Restriping In our peer agency interviews, we found a lot of success in restriping. The parking management study did some analysis and found that we might be able to gain 5-10% increase in parking by restriping Engineers would simply follow the code Worked with the City of Kent at this particular lot and requested a variance to reduce the stall widths which yielded a 10% increase in stalls

Multifamily Park-and-ride Who will benefit? Customers MF building managers Local cities Transit agencies Another example of expanding supply in a cost effective manner is using shared parking. Many might be familiar with shared parking as a strategy to use during TOD development We’re trying to tap into all the underutilized MF parking during the day, parking that is overbuilt and vacated from commuters leaving the lot. Grant from FHWA to support this program Developed a business model last year and found 70K stalls available within 1/10 mile from frequent transit that serves paid parking destinations After applying a 50 space threshold, we still found 50k stalls hiring a parking management firm, recruit properties 10 buildings, 500 stalls goal for our pilot which we plan to launch early next year

Management Strategies Manage Supply Market underutilized lots Permit parking Security and enforcement First/last mile solutions Simple economics would show we have a major imbalance between supply and demand which would warrant a pricing response Pricing parking has been floated many times over the years, mostly in recession eras, for revenue generating purposes Major management strategy proposed by our sister agency, ST

Permit Parking Program Goal: Help users find parking quickly and reliably Benefits: Increased transit ridership Improved customer satisfaction Reduced crush-loads Reduced local congestion Increased non-auto access Social equity Goal would be to increase HOV use of parking, reduce non-compliant parking, and reduce crush loads

Program Details Program Design Details: HOV permits, free to customers SOV permits, priced Low income discounts Permit parking reserved until 9:30 AM Permits first-come, first-served Renewed monthly or quarterly

Permit Program Evaluation Developed evaluation framework that calculated diversion rates of customers in response to a permit program Estimated those that would apply for permits and made assumptions for their mode changes Estimated diversion rates for those without permits, some displaced to different lots, some changed modes Fun exercise to map this out.

Results Scenario 3 – low price Permits - $30/month SOV; $5/month HOV) 2,149 net new riders | $2.1M annual revenue High utilization of parking maintained Scenario 4 – high price HOV Permits and Daily - $6/day or $5/month HOV) 603 net new riders | $5.7M annual revenue Vacant spaces available for mid day use (0-30%)

Collect data to help make your case Summary Collect data to help make your case Maximize efficiency of what you have before you build more Look to private partners to expand supply Work with local jurisdictions

APTA Standards Document: Parking 101 Thank You! Daniel Rowe Daniel.rowe@kingcounty.gov 206-477-5788 Reference: APTA Standards Document: Parking 101