Cashing-Out Employer Paid Parking in Minneapolis - St. Paul Research partners: Minneapolis and St. Paul TMO Research funded by the US EPA (Market-based Initiative Grant program) and MPCA Patty Carlson, Manager Metro Commuter Services - Twin Cities Metropolitan Council

Parking Cash-Out An employer-funded program under which an employer offers their employees the cash equivalent of any parking subsidy (California cash-out legislation) Provide employees with a comparable incentive regardless of which transportation mode used

Cash-out Results LA (Shoup) vs Twin Cities

Parking Cash-Out Options Full cash-out (CA Legislation) vs Partial (Twin Cities) Employer leased parking Employer owned parking (ie: shift to equitable transportation allowance) Suburban: “free parking” the norm for developers and employers

Parking Subsidies Employer-paid parking (1999)  Minneapolis CBD - 13%  St. Paul CBD - 34% Suburban: outside of two downtowns only universities and hospitals charge for parking

Parking: If You Build it (and give it away) They Will Drive Alone

University of St. Thomas Case Study

Subsidy TypeBeforePartial Cash-Out Parking Subsidy$138/month Commute Alternative Subsidy $0$100 Drivers/ Non-Driver 207/31190/48 (8% mode shift) Subsidy/Employee$119.59$ Total Commuter Subsidy $28,463$30,925 ($2462) Background/Program University of St. Thomas  Partial  Leased

Thrivent Financial for Lutherans Case Study

Background Before  800 drivers get free parking, others nothing  Management perspective:  Lack of parking conflicts with treating employees equitably  Desire to create a flexible benefit while asking employees to be accountable for choices Thrivent Financial for Lutherans  Full  Employer-owned

Program After Cash-Out  $100 transportation allowance  Begin charging for parking ($5/day)  Metropass = $40/month additional take home pay  New incentive for pooling, bicycling or walking to work  14% shift from SOV to Non-SOV  Increased costs offset by 30% MN State Tax Credit Thrivent Financial for Lutherans

Supervalu Foods Case Study

Background/Program Faced parking limits Hoped to get traffic signal at building entrance $3/day (at cafeteria or grocery) pay-not-to-park incentive Impact: 6% fewer drive alones (car and vanpoolers) Supervalu Foods  Suburban

The Big Picture Region-wide costs: free parking nearly equal to all externalities (i.e: congestion, crashes, pollution, etc) Source: The Full Costs of Transportation in the Twin Cities Metropolitan Region (U of M, Center for Transportation Studies)

Transit Subsidies Level the Playing Field State transit tax credit, federal tax-free, Metropass cut bus pass costs cut by 40-60% 20-40% increase in bus use at participating employers. Over ½ employers offer transit pre-tax Over ¼ employers subsidize transit (>$3 million/yr.)

Why Changing Parking is Hard Cultural norms  Parking still a status perk  Full cash-out not revenue neutral Economic development objective trumps transit  Parking subsidies used by Cities to attract development  Downtown direct subsidies, suburbs overbuilt parking minimums Change is slow  1 st meeting with Thrivent Financial for Lutherans two years before cash-out

Enabling Cash-Out / Transit-Friendly Parking Policies Discourage bundling parking in office leases (Bellevue) Discourage employer-specific parking Carsharing employers programs reduce need for parking Proof of parking in suburban development frees up money for on-site TDM Regional parking policy (Transit effective where there are parking taxes or max’s)

Additional Resources David Vanhattum at to order executive summary of Twin Cities PCO report or for more information The Myth of Free Parking Transit for Livable Communities,