Park & Ride
Convenient Parking For Transit Users
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Victoria Transport Policy Institute
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Updated 11 June 2014
This chapter describes how to develop Park & Ride facilities, such as parking lots at transit stations and stops, and how they can help support ridesharing and public transit use.
Park & Ride consists of parking facilities at transit stations, bus stops and highway onramps, particularly at the urban fringe, to facilitate Transit and Rideshare use. Some include Bicycle Parking. Parking is generally free or relatively cheaper than in urban centers.
Park & Ride facilities are usually implemented by regional transportation or transit agencies. In some cases, existing, underutilized parking (such as a mall parking lot) is designated for Park & Ride use. Patrols and lighting are sometimes provided to Address Security Concerns that users may have about leaving their vehicles at such a location.
Park & Ride facilities can increase transit and rideshare travel. Turnbull, Evans and Levinson (2004) provide detailed information on the effects of Park & Ride facilities on transportation systems. Morrall and Bolger (1996a & b) find that the supply of Park & Ride facilities has a major influence on the portion of downtown commute trips made by transit. Parkhurst (2000) finds that while Park & Ride facilities reduce urban traffic, they may increase urban fringe vehicle traffic as motorists detour to reach facilities or make additional trips, and in some cases shift from a walk-transit to a drive-transit trip. Actual impacts depend on the quality of Transit and Rideshare services, the existence of incentives such as HOV Priority and Commuter Financial Incentives, and geographic factors such as the distribution of jobs and employment. Some transit agencies are using advanced parking guidance systems to indicate the availability of Park & Ride spaces (SAIC 2008).
Table 1 Travel Impact Summary
|
Objective |
Rating |
Comments |
|
Reduces total traffic. |
1 |
Reduces a portion of car trips. |
|
Reduces peak period traffic. |
2 |
Tends to reduce trips during peak periods. |
|
Shifts peak to off-peak periods. |
0 |
|
|
Shifts automobile travel to alternative modes. |
3 |
Supports transit and ridesharing. |
|
Improves access, reduces the need for travel. |
0 |
|
|
Increased ridesharing. |
3 |
Supports ridesharing. |
|
Increased public transit. |
3 |
Supports transit use. |
|
Increased cycling. |
1 |
Supports cycling when bike parking is provided. |
|
Increased walking. |
0 |
|
|
Increased Telework. |
0 |
|
|
Reduced freight traffic. |
0 |
|
Rating from 3 (very beneficial) to –3 (very harmful). A 0 indicates no impact or mixed impacts.
By encouraging shifts to transit and ridesharing, Park & Ride facilities reduce urban highway traffic congestion and worksite parking demand. These benefits can be significant since Park & Ride tends to be most effective where traffic congestion and parking problems are worst. However, automobile Park & Ride only provides modest reductions in local road traffic, pollution, energy use and consumer costs, since a local automobile trip is still made. Bicycle Park & Ride can provide greater economic and environmental benefits. Shopping centers adjacent to Park & Ride facilities tend to benefit from additional shopping by the commuters who park there (Wambalaba and Goodwill, 2004).
Costs are primarily associated with facility construction and operation. Construction costs typically average several thousand dollars per space, which is usually lower than the costs of providing parking at city centers due to lower land values (Parking Evaluation). Extensive Park & Ride facilities around transit stations tend to contradict efforts to create Transit Oriented Development (CBF, 2001) In some circumstances, Park & Ride facilities may encourage urban sprawl by reducing the cost of long distance commutes.
Table 2 Benefit Summary
|
Objective |
Auto |
Bike |
Comments |
|
Congestion Reduction |
3 |
3 |
Reduced peak-period vehicle travel. |
|
Road & Parking Savings |
1 |
3 |
Reduces road and parking costs in urban centers. |
|
Consumer Savings |
1 |
3 |
Reduces travel expenses. |
|
Transport Choice |
1 |
2 |
Improves transit as a travel choice. |
|
Road Safety |
1 |
2 |
Reduces automobile travel. |
|
Environmental Protection |
1 |
3 |
Reduces automobile travel. |
|
Efficient Land Use |
-1 |
2 |
May encourage urban expansion. |
|
Community Livability |
1 |
3 |
Reduces automobile travel. |
Rating from 3 (very beneficial) to –3 (very harmful). A 0 indicates no impact or mixed impacts.
Although only a portion of travelers use Park & Ride facilities, all road users can benefit from reduced traffic congestion, crash risk and pollution. Park & Ride facilities tend to require government subsidies. Park & Ride is likely to be progressive with respect to income, since lower-income commuters rely more on public transit and ridesharing than people with higher incomes. Non-drivers can benefit from increased demand for transit and ridesharing, and from bike Park & Ride facilities. It tends to support basic mobility by improving public transit and ridesharing, but the effects may be small compared with other types of transit improvements.
Table 3 Equity Summary
|
Criteria |
Rating |
Comments |
|
Treats everybody equally. |
1 |
Only directly benefits users, but other road users benefit indirectly. |
|
Individuals bear the costs they impose. |
0 |
Requires subsidy, but these tend to be smaller than other parking subsidies. |
|
Progressive with respect to income. |
2 |
Lower-income people tend to use transit and rideshare. |
|
Benefits transportation disadvantaged. |
1 |
Can support cycling and increased ridesharing. |
|
Improves basic mobility. |
1 |
Increases transit and ridesharing. |
Rating from 3 (very beneficial) to –3 (very harmful). A 0 indicates no impact or mixed impacts.
Park & Ride is most appropriate at the fringe of large urban areas. It tends to be most effective as part of a comprehensive effort to encourage transit and rideshare commuting. Excessive Park & Ride facilities may be undesirable around transit stations that want to emphasize Transit Oriented Development.
Table 4 Application Summary
|
Geographic |
Rating |
Organization |
Rating |
|
Large urban region. |
3 |
Federal government. |
2 |
|
High-density, urban. |
3 |
State/provincial government. |
3 |
|
Medium-density, urban/suburban. |
3 |
Regional government. |
3 |
|
Town. |
2 |
Municipal/local government. |
2 |
|
Low-density, rural. |
2 |
Business Associations/TMA. |
2 |
|
Commercial center. |
2 |
Individual business. |
0 |
|
Residential neighborhood. |
2 |
Developer. |
1 |
|
Resort/recreation area. |
2 |
Neighborhood association. |
1 |
|
|
|
Campus. |
2 |
Ratings range from 0 (not appropriate) to 3 (very appropriate).
Improved Transport Choice
Park & Ride supports and is supported by Public Transit Improvements, Ridesharing, HOV Facilities, Commute Trip Reduction, Cycling Improvements, and Parking Management.
Park & Ride facilities are usually provided by transportation or transit agencies. Their use may be promoted as part of TDM and Commute Trip Reduction programs.
Park & Ride facilities require funding, adequate transit service and rideshare programs, and suitable incentives. Security Concerns may limit use if Park & Ride lots are perceived as being vulnerable to theft, vandalism or assault.
· Park & Ride facilities should be developed as part of an overall transit and rideshare improvement program.
· Park & Ride facilities should be located within view of businesses or homes, for the sake of security.
· Park & Ride facilities should include bike storage lockers, or other secure bike storage if demand exists.
· Provide motorists with convenient information on Park & Ride facility location, space availability, train departures and downstream roadway conditions (Rodier and Shaheen, 2006).
· Facilities should have adequate lighting, landscaping, and other amenities (bus shelters, garbage cans, etc.).
· It is usually best to have several smaller Park & Ride facilities in different locations, rather than one large one.
The Space Coast Area Transit agency in Southern Florida promotes Park & Ride as part of its Commuter Assistance program. It identifies the following benefits to employers of using Park & Ride:
1.Reduced on-site parking
2.Employer/Employee tax credits
3.Improved Employee Recruitment and Retention
4.Improved Customer Service and Employee Morale
5.Improved Corporate Image
6.Bottom-Line, Profitability Goes Up!
Hospitals in San Francisco, Portland, Syracuse and San Jose provide shuttle buses to remote parking areas. The University of Maryland has operated 25 shuttle buses serving parking areas, residential areas, campus and regional public transit stations. Hartford, CT has a policy allowing parking requirements for new development to be reduced up to 30% if shuttle service is provided from off-site parking. City planners had hoped developers would provide peripheral parking and shuttles, but instead several developers lease nearby surface parking where available and provide it to tenants. In Orlando, FL developers can reduce parking requirements up to 20% in exchange for contributing toward a transportation management fund. The city has constructed 8,000 spaces at the periphery of downtown.
The Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments Commuter Connection Program website a table listing the nearest town, the location and the number of spaces for dozens of Park & Ride lots in the region.
King County, Washington, has dozens of Park-and-Ride lots through the region. The County website provides information on their locations, closure alerts, and regulations.
|
Picture an old western town. Saloon at the end of the street, noisy lunch hour, tiny player-piano in the background, raucous laughter, when in through the batwing doors comes a giant panda bear. The room is suddenly hushed in amazement. The panda goes to the bar and says, “Gimme some food! NOW!” The barkeep shakily hands over a plate of what ever he's got handy; the panda takes it to a table and devours it messily. Then he gets up, and quick as a wink turns to the nearest man and shoots him, then heads for the door. The barkeep sputters, “Bbbbut Mmmr. Bear sir, why’d you shoot him? What’d he ever do to you?” The panda snarls derisively over his shoulder at the man, "I'm a panda you dullard! Look it up!" and disappears as suddenly as he came. The barkeep and several of his patrons go to the dictionary kept in the back office and look up Panda Bear. They read the definition, and nod to each other: “Panda Bear: a large mammal native to Asia. Eats shoots and leaves.” |
Joan Al-Kazily (1991), “Analysis of Park-and-Ride Lot Use in the Sacramento Region,” Transportation Research Record 1321, TRB (www.trb.org), pp. 1-6.
CBF (2001), Building Healthier Neighborhoods with Metrorail: Rethinking Parking Policies, Chesapeake Bay Foundation (www.cbf.org/resources/pubs/rethinking_parking.pdf).
K.T. Analytics (1995), Parking Management Strategies: A Handbook For Implementation, Regional Transportation Authority (Chicago), 1995; available as FTA, TDM Status Report: Parking Supply Management and TDM Status Report: Parking Pricing, Federal Transit Administration (www.fta.dot.gov/library/planning/tdmstatus/tdm.htm).
Herbert S. Levinson, Jerome Gluck and Willa Ng (2009), “Park-and-Ride, Kis-and-Ride, and Change-of-Mode Facilities,” Parking Management – Planning, Design and Operations, Volume 3 in the Parking 101 Series, International Parking Institute (www.new.parking.org); at www.new.parking.org/products/parking-management-pdo.
John Morrall and Dan Bolger (1996), “The Relationship Between Downtown Parking Supply and Transit Use,” ITE Journal February 1996, pp. 32-36.
John Morrall and Dan Bolger (1996), Park-and-Ride: Canada's Most Cost Effective TDM Strategy, Transportation Association of Canada Annual Conference (www.tac-atc.ca).
Kyriacos C. Mouskos, Neville Parker and Maria Boile (2007), Technical Solutions to Overcrowded Park and Ride Facilities, FHWA-NJ-2007-011, Bureau of Research, New Jersey Department of Transportation ; at www.nj.gov/transportation/refdata/research/reports/FHWA-NJ-2007-011.pdf.
G. Parkhurst (2000), “Influence of Bus-Based Park and Ride Facilities on Users' Car Traffic,” Transport Policy, Vol. 7, No. 2, April 2000, pp. 159-172.
Caroline J. Rodier and Susan A. Shaheen (2006), Transit-Based Smart Parking: Early Field Test Results, Transportation Research Board Annual Meeting (www.trb.org); available at http://database.path.berkeley.edu/imr/papers/UCD-ITS-RR-05-15.pdf.
SAIC (2008), Evaluation of Transit Applications of Advanced Parking Management, Research and Innovative Technology Administration (RITA) United States Department of Transportation; at www.itsdocs.fhwa.dot.gov//JPODOCS/REPTS_TE//14460_files/14460.pdf.
Susan Shaheen and Caroline Rodier (2007), “Smart Parking Management to Boost Transit, Ease Congestion: Oakland, California Field Test Shows Promise,” TR News 251, Transportation Research Board (www.trb.org), July-August 2007, pp. 20-32; at http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/trnews/trnews251rpo.pdf.
Nada D. Trout and Gerald L. Ullman (1997), “A Special Event Park-and-Ride Shuttle Bus Success Story,” ITE Journal, December 1997, pp. 38-43.
Katherine Turnbull, John Evans and Herbert Levinson (2004), Park-And-Ride/Pool: Traveler Response to Transport System Changes, Chapter 3; Report 95, Transit Cooperative Research Program; Transportation Research Board (www.trb.org); at http://gulliver.trb.org/publications/tcrp/tcrp_rpt_95c3.pdf.
University of Nottingham, Park & Ride Bibliography, University of Nottingham, ST.15 (www.nottingham.ac.uk/sbe/planbiblios/bibs/sustrav/refs/ST15.html), updated regularly.
UTM (2003), “Park-And-Ride Survey,” Urban Transportation Monitor, Vol. 17, No 11, Lawley Publications (www.lawleypublications.com), June 13, 2003.
Francis Wambalaba and Julie Goodwill (2004), Evaluation of Shared Use Park & Ride Impact on Properties, National Center for Transit Research, University of South Florida
This Encyclopedia is produced by the Victoria Transport Policy Institute to help improve understanding of Transportation Demand Management. It is an ongoing project. Please send us your comments and suggestions for improvement.
Victoria Transport Policy Institute
www.vtpi.org info@vtpi.org
1250 Rudlin Street, Victoria, BC, V8V 3R7, CANADA
Phone & Fax 250-360-1560
#27