Park and Ride Lots Never enough parking....

Utah's FrontRunner has been in service for just about 1 week and already ridership is 120% of expectations.  If planners don't expect much then they don't plan for much parking.

dd

dldance wrote:

Utah's FrontRunner has been in service for just about 1 week and already ridership is 120% of expectations.  If planners don't expect much then they don't plan for much parking. dd

If I were a rail-transit planner, I'd do my best to pre-clear permits and zoning to allow the flat parking lot to become a multi-storey. 

Better yet, if the transit agency has the money, even a "Greenfield" line extension is better than none.  Currently Metra operates the UP west line thru Geneva to Elburn, and I believe it's the MILW-west line that runs thru Elgin to Big Timber.

The ideal, of course, would be to have circulator buses running to the station during peak hours.  There's a lot of that done in the suburbs and subdivisions of Toronto, where the bus schedules mesh with those of the GO trains and the feeder routes come right up many of the culs-de-sac during rush times.  But would American city/county dichotomy politics louse up such coordination? 

PACE (RTA's bus division) does operate rush-hour only feeder buses at several stations, mostly in DuPage County and some north and northwest suburbs.  A fair number of other such routes have been discontinued for lack of ridership.

CSSHEGEWISCH wrote:

PACE (RTA's bus division) does operate rush-hour only feeder buses at several stations, mostly in DuPage County and some north and northwest suburbs.  A fair number of other such routes have been discontinued for lack of ridership.

Right, but "never say never" to the routes that were tried in the past and abandoned.  Metra is getting more riders because of the rising price of gasoline, and extra people who ordinarily would have driven to work, or straight to the train station, might be lured by the prospect of a work day without having to drive the car at all.  

I have limited experience with PACE but I have been impressed on the few rides I took at how well the buses kept to schedule.  Of course, the CTA is quite an "object lesson" by comparison!  - a.s. 

The PATCO Hi-Speed Line has some BIG park and ride lots - all flat.  The downside is that at some, the furthest space is more than 1/3 mile from the station. More like park-walk-and ride lots! 

Parking lots are often shortchanged by transit agencies not because the agencies are dumb, penurious, or shortsighted, but because they're a non-critical path item where economies can be found without causing the project to come up incomplete with the money all spent.  It's not possible to buy less catenary, track, right-of-way, street relocation, or utility relocation, and still open the railroad.  But it is possible to buy half as much parking lot as you'd like to have, and hope that after the railroad opens the taxpayers will agree to fund an expansion.

It's not pretty but it's reality.

RWM

They key here again is that MARC and VRE has found out in places like Germantown and Gathersburg that the Real Estate gets preety valuble next to the train station and that condos and retail next to the tracks could bring in more revenue.------

The problem with Feeder Buses is that you have the labor costs of the drivers which at 40,000.00s a driver and 80,000 for mini-bus or used bus could add up..

My solution would to have eletronic rideshare boards on the trains or have stationmasters help cornidate a rideshare board like the ones you see at colleges

transitrapid wrote:

They key here again is that MARC and VRE has found out in places like Germantown and Gathersburg that the Real Estate gets preety valuble next to the train station and that condos and retail next to the tracks could bring in more revenue.------ The problem with Feeder Buses is that you have the labor costs of the drivers which at 40,000.00s a driver and 80,000 for mini-bus or used bus could add up.. My solution would to have eletronic rideshare boards on the trains or have stationmasters help cornidate a rideshare board like the ones you see at colleges

I keep thinking of an article I read about five years ago about a women who had to get to her VRE station parking lot before 5:00 a.m. or she wouldn't have a place to park.  The train was due close to an hour and a half later. 

Ironically, she would probably appear to be a "satisfied customer" according to ticket sales if she always uses a monthly pass.

Many people disagree with me, but I think it's crazy for people to have to stay up all night for Stevie Nicks tickets or waste part of the early morning just to find a place in the lot.  One solution would be to institute a charge to park or raise the price if VRE already charges.  Another would be a lottery, but that could easily be subject to fraud.

transitrapid wrote:

charge for parking?$$$$$?

Obviously you've never visited Chicago!

Al:

You and I don't disagree often, but you struck a nerve this time.

The cost of parking in center city is one of the major draws that the Lynx light rail has.

When people are interviewed by the press at the light rail station they quote the cost of gasoline and the cost of parking vs the cost of the light rail.  They seldom mention the inconvenience of fighting rush hour traffic.

I believe charging for parking at the park and ride lots would be counterproductive unless the goal is to get fewer people to use mass transit.

We, too, are finding that the planners underestimated the parking need.

The following is not a plan or advocacy, just a thought:

A large part of the cost of transportation systems is the cost of selling, the fare evidence, verifying and enforcing the payment of the fare, collecting, protecting, and accounting for the collected fares, etc.  I often wonder what the difference in cost per rider would be if a tax on city parking spaces was implimented and used to fund a totally free extensive mass transit system.

Phoebe Vet wrote:

A large part of the cost of transportation systems is the cost of selling, the fare evidence, verifying and enforcing the payment of the fare, collecting, protecting, and accounting for the collected fares, etc.  I often wonder what the difference in cost per rider would be if a tax on city parking spaces was implimented and used to fund a totally free extensive mass transit system.

Austin Texas bus system did something like that in the mid 1980's. The bean counters figured it was cheaper not to charge than it was to buy the newfangled fare boxes that could handle bills and coins, as well as collecting, protecting, accounting etc... you mention.

I forget how long that free system lasted, but it was more than a year. I'm assuming the bean counters took another look, or maybe increased fare increased then amount of payment with paper money, which probably is cheaper to handle than coins.

I didn't expect it to be cheaper, just not as much more expensive as one might think.

The loss of the fare revenue would be partially offset by the money saved by not having to administer the collecting of the fare.

Phoebe Vet wrote:

Al: You and I don't disagree often, but you struck a nerve this time. The cost of parking in center city is one of the major draws that the Lynx light rail has. When people are interviewed by the press at the light rail station they quote the cost of gasoline and the cost of parking vs the cost of the light rail.  They seldom mention the inconvenience of fighting rush hour traffic. I believe charging for parking at the park and ride lots would be counterproductive unless the goal is to get fewer people to use mass transit. We, too, are finding that the planners underestimated the parking need. The following is not a plan or advocacy, just a thought: A large part of the cost of transportation systems is the cost of selling, the fare evidence, verifying and enforcing the payment of the fare, collecting, protecting, and accounting for the collected fares, etc.  I often wonder what the difference in cost per rider would be if a tax on city parking spaces was implimented and used to fund a totally free extensive mass transit system.

I see your point and believe your facts.  We seem in this thread to have exhausted what's possible in transit parking.  I've seen those multi-acred PATCO parking lots.  But if you're someone like me who can't stand for long, I could handle the walk but not standing on a train.  VRE must be tremendously effective if it has people literally standing in the aisles! 

Yes, it was dumb of me to insert a disincentive of higher parking cost at the suburban end of the commuter rail system.  Me, I won't drive into D.C. on a bet. 

Al:

I wouldn't use the term "dumb".  It's should be more like "Gosh, I didn't think of that".

For those who can't stand for long or walk long distances, that is what handicap parking spots are for.

The Lynx has one 4 level parking deck, the rest are flat lots.  The deck is large enough, but only just.  If ridership increases much it won't be.  The Arrowood Road lot is way too small.  They are evaluating possible remedies.  One of the thoughts is better bus service feeding the rail stop.  The light rail pass or ticket is good on the bus, too, and the fare is the same no matter how far you travel.  The stops close to city center don't have any parking at all.  Condos and mixed use buildings are popping up near all the stops advertising that they are at, or within walking distance, of the light rail.

Unexpected is the fact that there is a shopping center right across the street from that last stop and a lot of people are taking the train to and from the shopping center.  I don't know from where.  I often sit in one of the restaurants there and watch all the people walking across what is a very busy street that is 6 lanes wide there, carrying bags of stuff headed for the train.

Before they built it, and even during the construction, I was not opposed, but I was skeptical.  I, however, am now convinced and looking forward to the planned expansion.  In fact, I think the plan was too conservative.  It should go farther in both directions.

Note the parking deck on the right.

Phoebe Vet wrote:

For those who can't stand for long or walk long distances, that is what handicap parking spots are for. They are evaluating possible remedies.  One of the thoughts is better bus service feeding the rail stop.

any thoughts on bus service feeding parking lots? For example, Septa Cornwells Heights RR station got a major parking lot expansion, but most of the expansion was gerrymandered so that it's not much different from having 1 small lot next to the station platform and a completely separate large lot connected via a driveway. Septa provides small buses-large vans to shuttle from station to the expansion lot. Meanwhile there's no public transit service from the gigantic Franklin Mills shopping mall, which looks to be not much more than 2 or 3 times further from the station than the farthest parking spot. http://www.mapquest.com/

/maps/station+ave+and+railroad+ave+bensalem+pa/

woodhaven+rd+and+millbrook+rd+philadelphia+pa/ says 1.41 mi

Similarly just a bit north on the Amtrak Philly-NYC main, NJ transit Hamilton station 9:30am on a weekday I saw quite a few people, I'm guessing about 50 in the half hour I was hanging out at the platform, walking from underneath the Sloan Ave overpass. I asked one of them if that was the closest parking spot, he said yes, this time of day there's nothing closer to the station. I'm confused though as to where they parked, my google earth, and mapquest satellite don't show any lot. Is there legal street parking?

And for something completely different, Cherry Hill station on the NJ transit Atlantic City line. When originally built the only nearby attraction was the Garden State Park racetrack, which had a huge parking lot, but which was on the opposite side of the railroad track from the platform. In its wisdom Amtrak/NJ transit positioned the fences so that not only could noone get to the other side, one also had to navigate a bit of a cattle chute to get from the parking area designated for the station to the platform.

In the intervening years since the racetrack is no more, a shopping center has now sprung up on the platform side of the tracks so that now the station is in the back of a supermarket. TIt looks like about 6 legal parking spaces next to the platform to accomodate the apparent limited demand, remember the Atlantic City line itself is not a major hauler. Maybe another 40 spaces nearby in the back of the supermarket, but I can't figure if they're legal, available to riders, or reserved for store employees. Then another 20 spaces on each of the lanes that straddle the sides of the supermarket, guess what, the train station is pretty much smack in the middle of the back of the store, so it's an equal walk from either of those lanes to the platform. And of course there are all the spaces in the front of the store.

On the other side of the tracks, in place of the former racetrack there is yet another shopping center and a fair amount of housing under construction, but as in years past no permissable way to cross the tracks. So in addition to thoughts about feeders and satellite parking areas, how about thoughts on adequate access to the platform?

Cornwell Heights

Hamilton

Cherry Hill

dldance wrote:

If planners don't expect much then they don't plan for much parking.

I don't know that they can always tell; advance surveys are not always reliable. 

In contrast with the successes cited elsewhere in this thread, last year I read somewhere that Nashville's Music City Star had passenger counts below expectations.  One poster noted that its route was not that advantageous to commuters.  Maybe with $4 gas that will change...

Boston's Orange line Wellingon station has the only installation I've seen of a people mover from parking garage over yard and shop to station platform

Boston's Orange line Wellingon station has the only installation I've seen of a people mover from parking garage over yard and shop to station platform

Phoebe Vet wrote:

Al: You and I don't disagree often, but you struck a nerve this time. The cost of parking in center city is one of the major draws that the Lynx light rail has. When people are interviewed by the press at the light rail station they quote the cost of gasoline and the cost of parking vs the cost of the light rail.  They seldom mention the inconvenience of fighting rush hour traffic. I believe charging for parking at the park and ride lots would be counterproductive unless the goal is to get fewer people to use mass transit. We, too, are finding that the planners underestimated the parking need. The following is not a plan or advocacy, just a thought: A large part of the cost of transportation systems is the cost of selling, the fare evidence, verifying and enforcing the payment of the fare, collecting, protecting, and accounting for the collected fares, etc.  I often wonder what the difference in cost per rider would be if a tax on city parking spaces was implimented and used to fund a totally free extensive mass transit system.

http://www.charlotte.com/local/story/656506.html

Pace in Chicago's suburbs has a finite budget and communities have finite patience when it comes to feeder services to Metra.  Low ridership is politically embarrassing as well as costly.

One problem I see is that the discontinued Pace feeder routes were rush-only. 

• Pull out and in took as much time as the one or two scheduled trips and incurred inordinately high costs for the revenue and the public served.
• No reverse-commute to suburban industrial and office parks was offered.
• No all-day service was provided to suburban shopping and professional offices, hospitals, and late trips to the office or early returns home.
• No circumferential route connections for inter-suburban travel, especially to major suburban employment areas.
  

Parking can be a bane to suburban downtowns.  Park Ridge, Des Plaines, Mount Prospect, Arlington Heights and Palatine have adopted the idea promoted by the Center for Neighborhood Technology of high-rise condominium living within walking distance of the Metra station.  The improved land utilization and increased real estate tax revenue from new residential and commercial development pays for building parking decks to replace sprawling flat lots.  Money trumped community character. 

Most of Pace's services in the northwest suburban area are oriented to the CTA Blue Line and River Road/Rosemont transit center.  

I would mention Evanston; but development there is driven more by Northwestern University and a desire to enjoy the related shopping, restaurant, and cultural opportunities within a short walk or transit trip distance as well as access to downtown Chicago.

SoCal Metrolink put in a new station at Buena Park on the Orange County Line.  It had 300 parking spaces and a bus stop for 2 bus lines.  Within 2 months the lot was packed full by 7:30 AM.  I use Metrolink at least once a month and had been using Fullerton.  Buena Park is 1/2 the distance to my house so I used it for a while.  Now I am back to Fullerton, since finding a parking place in BP is impossible for my 8 AM train.  I can always find a spot in Fullerton by using my handicapped placard to park in a time-limited slot.

OCTA's solution is to start a new free shuttle bus from a Park 'n Ride bus lot 3 miles away.  Since I have never seen more than 5 or 6 people get off the existing bus lines for a train, I don't think the shuttle is going to do much good.  People who want to use the train do NOT want to take a bus to get to it.

Jack

Here in Charlotte, our furthest out light rail station has 1120 parking spaces in a park and ride deck.  It is full by 7:30 AM, as are the next two stations in.

The planners greatly under estimated how many riders they would be serving.

And it will increase as all the high rise condos along the light rail line are completed.

Phoebe Vet wrote:

Here in Charlotte, our furthest out light rail station has 1120 parking spaces in a park and ride deck.  It is full by 7:30 AM, as are the next two stations in. The planners greatly under estimated how many riders they would be serving. And it will increase as all the high rise condos along the light rail line are completed.

as HarveyK400 mentioned, if you build the condo within walking distance of the station then increased ridership does not necessarily mean you need increased parking spots.

NIMBY's can be interesting. A multi story housing development less than 3 blocks from the Ambler PA SEPTA heavy rail station, newspaper mentioned one of the oppositions was fear that x number of units would result in x new cars on Ambler streets at rush hour, presumably to get to the turnpike several miles away. Nothing in the article about how at least some of the potential residents would locate there because of proximity to transit and so x residents would result in less than x additional car trips.

I mentioned before in some forum, newspaper mentioned NIMBY opposing NJT River Line station placement because it would lower property values. Generally doesn't proximity to public transit figure prominently in items realtors use as selling points?

Of course the new dwellings will not increase the need for park and ride parking spaces.

The statement about increase was related to the second paragraph:

"The planners greatly under estimated how many riders they would be serving."

The inadequate number of parking spaces is a result of the same under estimate.

They also have discovered that they did not buy enough trainsets.  They have ordered more, but it will be almost 2 years before delivery.