UNM Parking and Transportation Strategic Parking Proposal Draft

					UNM Parking and Transportation Strategic Parking Proposal

                  Draft – August 5, 2010




             Lobo Development Corporation



                          By,
                     Joshua Rogers
Table of Contents__________________________________________________


  1. Executive Summary

  2. Introduction

  3. UNM’s Current Parking and Transportation Situation

  4. UNM Parking and Transportation Strategic Analysis

  5. Transportation and Parking Opportunities for UNM

  6. Proposed Implementation Plan

  7. Appendix

        a. Appendix 1 –University of Nevada-Reno Transportation and Parking

           Assessment

        b. Appendix 2 – University of Washington Transportation and Parking

           Assessment

        c. Appendix 3 – University of Arizona Transportation and Parking Assessment

        d. Appendix 4 – Complete UNM Data against Peer Institutions




                                       Lobo Development Corporation – Draft 8/5/2010 2
Executive Summary________________________________________________




                               Lobo Development Corporation – Draft 8/5/2010 3
Introduction_______________________________________________________
        The purpose of the Lobo Development Corporation Strategic Parking Proposal is to
address the future parking complications which will arise in 2011 with the construction of new
dormitories on central campus. The location of the dormitories and number of beds being
added is still undecided, but they will undoubtedly have an adverse effect on the supply of
parking. It is the goal of this proposal to provide comprehensive background information on the
current UNM parking and transportation system, compare it to a select number of peer
institutions, and finally provide a detailed list of propositions to progress the parking and
transportation systems at UNM.
        Lobo Development Corporation is currently working with UNM and American Campus
Communities to develop new dormitories on the central campus of UNM. The number of
additional dorm beds is undecided but will initially range from 500 to 1000 additional beds in the
first phase, and eventually reach around 4000 total beds. The dormitories will be located on
existing surface lots and/or existing dormitory footprints. The new buildings will reduce the
number of surface lot parking spaces on central campus while concurrently increasing demand
for parking. Currently, 62% of dormitory residents purchase parking permits. Using the same
rate of purchase relative to the total number of dormitory residents in the future, UNM could be
facing demand of 2,640 parking spaces. Currently, there are 1,350 existing residential parking
spaces, and with the new construction on central campus the number of residential parking
spaces will likely drop to 625. This will result in an estimated demand deficit of 2,015 spaces
if there are not significant policy changes which focus primarily on demand. It is imperative for
UNM Parking and Transportation Services (PATS) to acknowledge the reduced supply of
parking and have new policies in place to deal with the increased demand and lessened supply
of parking. Beginning in the fall of 2011, construction on the new dormitories will be underway,
and it is likely the new buildings will be located on existing parking lots. PATS will have to adjust
their parking system to accommodate the lessened supply during construction and permanently.
The following year, there will be a much larger residential campus population than ever before,
and it is imperative for PATS and UNM to act quickly to change policies and strategies to
decrease the demand for parking at UNM.
        This report will detail many of UNM’s peer institutions parking systems across the country
and the innovative and progressive parking policies and systems they have enacted to decrease
the demand for parking. This report will cover the University of Washington, University of
Arizona, University of Texas, University of Nevada-Reno, among others. These universities are
all of varying campus populations and located in more or less dense cities than the University of
New Mexico. Comparing UNM to these universities will provide a comprehensive overview of
parking systems across the country.
        The recommendation for UNM’s parking situation is not going to be adding more parking
garages. The recommendations will be tailored towards a different approach, managing
demand. The goals of the recommendations will be to:
             1. Above all, reduce the demand for parking.
             2. Present new and exciting opportunities for UNM PATS to explore.
             3. Provide recommendations which will lead to a sustainable future.
             4. Encourage use of alternative transportation
             5. Educate the students, faculty, and staff about alternative transportation.
             6. Stop facilitating the use of single occupancy vehicles (SOV’s), and actually
                 discourage the use of the SOV.
The recommendations are a variety of programs and policies which will have to be evaluated
and implemented to understand their successes or failures. With progressive and engaged
leadership the parking problems will lessen, and UNM will head towards a more sustainable
future.
                                                   Lobo Development Corporation – Draft 8/5/2010 4
UNM’s Current Parking and Transportation Situation____________________
        The University of New Mexico (UNM) Parking and Transportation Services department
(PATS) manages 12,378 parking spaces, 1.61 million shuttle rides, and a large number of
special events at UNM. UNM has a complex and difficult parking situation spread out over three
different campuses, North, South, and Central campus. UNM has a very limited number of
parking spaces on central campus, approximately 2,836 permitted spaces, and everyone else
who travels to UNM in a motor vehicle typically has to park and ride a shuttle or walk to campus
from distant parking lots.
        PATS manages 10,309 surface spaces and 2,069 structured spaces through a system of
designated parking lots using a modified zone parking system. The parking lots have
restrictions on the people who can purchase a permit for those lots. Faculty and staff can
purchase permits in parking lots on or near central campus, and have the option of purchasing
park and ride permits for a discounted price. They can also purchase structured permits for a
larger fee, and specialty proximity reserved and structured reserved for a substantial permit fee.
Commuters have to buy parking permits which are park and ride permits at distant parking lots.
Dormitory residents have the option of parking in surface lots or parking structures near the
location of their dormitory for a subsidized price compared to the faculty and staff. They may
also purchase park and ride permits at a much less expensive price, but the surface lots are
over a mile away.
        Last year, PATS operated a system of shuttles, which served 1.61 million riders. This
shuttle system is completely free to students, faculty, staff, and visitors and is funded through
the sale of parking permits and citations. There are six different routes which serve the
University and its large population. The shuttle service transports people between central,
north, and south campus.
        PATS is dedicated to providing awareness of the many forms of alternative
transportation. Their website details free bus travel, Zipcars, light-rail using NM Railrunner,
carpooling, bicycling, and the Veggie Bus. PATS realizes in order to reach a sustainable
parking system, they must advertise and incentivize alternative forms of transportation to
alleviate the parking space demand and reduce the frequency of single occupied vehicles
(SOV’s) traveling to UNM.
        PATS has contracted with the City of Albuquerque to provide a free bus pass to students,
faculty, and staff to use ABQ Ride (The City of Albuquerque’s mass transit bus system) as often
as they would like. This relationship allows for the University to continue its dedication to
sustainability by providing this free service. This service needs to continue into the future, so
the University can facilitate the use of mass transit to its community to promote a sustainable
future.
        UNM has contracted with Zipcar which is a national car-sharing service that provides
short-term vehicle rental to students, staff, faculty and members of the Albuquerque community.
Zipcar is a vehicle sharing service available nationwide for members of the program. UNM
students aged 18+ can join and use the on-campus Zipcars when they are available. This cost-
effective program provides students, faculty, and staff the option to not own or bring their
personal vehicle to campus while providing flexibility and convenience to run errands, attend
appointments, take road trips, etc.
        PATS has developed a carpooling program to help lessen demand for parking and
reduce congestion on streets. The program is currently only for faculty and staff, and a permit
can be shared between 2 to 8 people. The program has been completely underutilized by the
faculty and staff, for unknown reasons, and needs to be reevaluated.
        The PATS bicycling program is called “Bike it” and is a very informative program detailing
bike safety, city bike trails, and bicycle advocacy. The program is dedicated to integrating
                                                 Lobo Development Corporation – Draft 8/5/2010 5
cycling as an important part of on-and off-campus transportation, since it is a healthy and
sustainable alternative to SOV’s. The “Bike It” website provides links to register bicycles with
the UNM Police Department, and shows encouraging statistics of the thefts of bicycles
decreasing on UNM campus. “Bike It” has invested in storage lockers to secure bicycles around
campus providing bicyclists very secure storage facilities. UNM also has a Bike Shop which
offers bike rentals, significantly discounted bike repairs, and information on bicycling.
       The Veggie Bus is a shuttle which operates on UNM’s campus and is completely
powered by disposed vegetable oil from the University’s kitchens converted into 100%
Biodiesel. The program is designed to show the feasibility of a completely self-sufficient, on-
campus transportation resource. It is an incredibly exciting program designed to show the
University’s dedication to a sustainable future.
       Overall, UNM Parking and Transportation Services has started becoming a model for
sustainability for UNM students, faculty, and staff and the City of Albuquerque. Their leadership
and dedication to promoting alternative transportation has reduced the use of SOV’s. PATS
recognizes the relationship between promoting alternative transportation and alleviating demand
for parking. If more people use alternative forms of transportation the less parking PATS will
have to provide and manage. The continued improvements to shuttle routes, bus routes, and
bike routes will undoubtedly continue the trend of reducing SOV usage. Along with promoting
and marketing the alternative forms of transportation to students, faculty, and staff PATS will
one day reach a balanced equilibrium between supply and demand for parking.




                                              Lobo Development Corporation – Draft 8/5/2010 6
UNM Parking and Transportation Strategic Analysis_____________________
       UNM PATS (Parking and Transportation Services) is facing an unprecedented change at
the central campus. They are going to have decreased supply and increased demand in the
next two years for parking, and it is important to understand every aspect of the parking and
transportation model to make some effective and quick changes to the parking policy. PATS
has been analyzed against many of UNM’s peer institutions which have smaller and larger
campus populations to get a full understanding of parking and transportation on varying levels.
The universities were also chosen because of the varying sizes of their metropolitan areas.
Many of the cities have similar size populations as Albuquerque, but a few outliers were chosen
to gain a different perspective of parking and transportation in larger and smaller metropolitans.
The universities chosen to compare UNM to were:

             University of Texas (UT)
             University of Washington (UW)
             University of Arizona (UA)
             University of Kentucky (UK)
             University of Utah (UU)
             University of Nevada-Las Vegas (UNLV)
             University of Nevada-Reno (UNR)

The following pages will present data on UNM’s current parking and transportation situation
compared to several chosen peer institutions. The data will be analyzed and the implications of
the data will be discussed in detail to gain a full understanding of UNM’s current situation
compared to its peers.

UNM and Peer Institution’s Populations

                                                                                        4,000,000.00
  90,000.00
                                                                                        3,500,000.00
  80,000.00
  70,000.00                                                                             3,000,000.00

  60,000.00                                                                             2,500,000.00
                                                              Enrollment
  50,000.00
                                                                                        2,000,000.00
  40,000.00                                                                                                                                          Metro Population
                                                                                        1,500,000.00
  30,000.00
                                                              Total Campus
  20,000.00                                                   Population                1,000,000.00

  10,000.00                                                   Students+Faculty+Staff
                                                                                         500,000.00
      0.00
                                                                                                 -
              UNM   UT   UW   UA   UK   UNL   UU   UNLV UNR                                            UNM   UT   UW   UA   UK   UNL   UU UNLV UNR



     According to the 2009 UNM Fact Book, UNM has an enrollment of 27,304 with 9,944 staff
and faculty in the City of Albuquerque which has a metropolitan population of 857,903. UNM
has been compared to eight other universities ranging in enrollment size of 16,862 to 50,995.
These universities are located in metropolitan areas ranging from 251,624.00 to 3,407,848. The
universities chosen are recognized peer institutions with varying sizes of enrollments as well as
the metropolitan’s population, so there would be a variety of levels of infrastructure and
population densities. This allows for a greater understanding of UNM’s parking and
transportation system as a whole. Understanding a university such as Washington with its very
large metropolitan area and its significantly more capable mass transit systems is vital to
understand where UNM parking and transportation could be in the future. It is also important to
understand a smaller university such as University of Nevada-Reno, who with their limited city-
                                                                                   Lobo Development Corporation – Draft 8/5/2010 7
wide mass transit system, has still found ways to be very progressive towards parking and
transportation.

Percentages of Mode of Travel to Campus Universities

     100%
                   4%
                         7%    9%
      90%    7%                      13%
                   16%   9%

             9%                18%
      80%

             7%    15%   23%                                     Unknown
      70%

                               18%
                                                                 % of Population Who Carpool To Campus
      60%

                                                                 % of Population Who Bike To Campus
      50%
                                                  95%
                                                                 % of Population Who Walk To Campus
      40%                            81%
                                                                 % of Population Who Use Public
      30%                                                        Transportation To Get To Campus
            54%
                                                                 % of Population Who Drive To Campus
                               48%
                                                        42%      Alone Daily (SOV's)
      20%
                   35%

      10%                22%


       0%
            UNM    UT    UW    UA     UK    UU   UNLV   UNR


       The University of New Mexico has always been a commuter school, with little on campus
housing and a large city feeding the majority of the campus enrollment. The most recent survey
shows 54% of the students still using single occupancy vehicles (SOV’s) to arrive at campus,
and 15% using public transportation (UNM Commuter Survey 2010, UNM PATS). There has
been a trend of increased public transportation use to campus as well as biking and carpooling.
       The most interesting piece of data on this chart is the University of Nevada-Reno who
has successfully reduced its SOV usage to 42% without extensively increasing its funding on
mass transit by having an effective marketing campaign against the SOV. Their slogan is “Don’t
bring your car to UNR” which has effectively raised awareness of the many other options
available to students, faculty, and staff who commute to campus.
       The University of Washington and the University of Texas are two universities which
benefit greatly from the city they reside. Seattle and Austin are much larger than Albuquerque,
and so the mass transit options available to students, faculty, and staff are much more sensible
and available. They are located in much denser areas so students, faculty, and staff have many
options for commuting to school.




                                              Lobo Development Corporation – Draft 8/5/2010 8
Percentage of SOV’s vs. Percentage of Students who Live on Campus
                                  100%


                                   90%


                                   80%


                                   70%


                                   60%

                                                                                                                                        % of people who live on campus
                                   50%

                                                                                                                                        % of Population Who Drive To Campus Alone Daily
                                   40%                                                                                                  (SOV's)


                                   30%


                                   20%


                                   10%


                                       0%
                                               UNM      UT        UW           UA         UK      UNL    UU     UNLV      UNR



        This chart is important to understand for the future growth of UNM. It shows the inverse
correlation between SOV usage and students who live on campus. Basically, the more students
who live on campus the less number of SOV’s will be on the campus and vice versa. If a
University can provide everything a student could possibly need on their campus, there is little
need for a student to have a vehicle. With the expansion of the supply on housing at UNM
planned for the next two years, it should be expected to see a decrease in SOV usage.
However, minimizing the number of cars the dormitory students bring with them should be a top
priority.
        The University of Texas has a very different policy than UNM for its residential parking
permits. The students who live in the dormitories can purchase parking spaces located very
close in parking structures, however they get charged a premium price. The price is actually
nearly 2/3 higher than what a faculty or staff member would pay for the exact same spot. This
policy has effectively reduced the number of vehicles dormitory residents bring with them to
campus, thereby reducing SOV usage.

Permit Price, Supply, and Demand for Parking
                 100.0%
                                                                                                                        95%


                  90.0%


                                                                                       81%
                  80.0%



                  70.0%



                  60.0%          58%
                                                                                    54%                                                        Ratio of a Parking Permit Price to Total Tuition Fee Including
                                                                                                                                               Room and Board
                  50.0%                                                  48%                     48%                                           Ratio of parking spaces to Total campus population
                                                                                                                                  43%
                                                                                                                                       42%     % of Population Who Drive To Campus Alone Daily (SOV's)
                  40.0%
                                               35%                  36%
                            33%

                  30.0%

                                                            22%
                                            20%
                  20.0%                                                                                   17%
                                                       16%


                                                     9.4%
                  10.0%

                                        2.9%                      2.1%                         2.8%
                          1.4%                                                  1.4%                    0.9%                    1.8%
                                                                                                                 0.5%
                   0.0%
                            UNM             UT         UW            UA             UK           UNL       UU      UNLV           UNR


        This wide-ranging chart shows some very important related ratios and information. The
ratio of a parking permit price to total tuition fee including room and board is an intriguing piece
of data when compared across all the universities. University of Washington (UW) has the
highest ratio at 9.4% and the lowest SOV usage at 22%. The University of Nevada-Las Vegas

                                                                                                         Lobo Development Corporation – Draft 8/5/2010 9
has the lowest permit price to tuition ratio at 0.5% and the highest SOV usage at 95%. This
data clearly shows the inverse relation of the higher the permit price to the tuition fee, the lower
the SOV usage. This is an extremely important piece of information to understand. It is the
basics of economics, if the supply is fixed the only way to change demand is to change the
price. If parking permit prices are increased, there will be a reduction in use of SOV’s. UW
has taken this theory to an extreme level and it is paying off. It should be noted that they have
also increased the availability and marketing towards alternative forms of transportation at the
same time to keep customers happy.
        The University of Nevada-Reno is an anomaly compared to the other universities also
represented here. They have kept parking permit prices relatively low at 1.8% permit price to
tuition ratio, and their supply is relatively high at 43% of total number of spaces to campus
population, and yet they have kept their SOV usage to a low percentage at 42%. They are not
following the basic laws of economics, so it is important to understand their system as a whole
to figure out how they are managing their SOV usage so effectively. They have enacted a
strategic marketing plan which discourages the SOV and positively markets all other forms of
transportation (See appendix 1 “UNR Parking Assessment” for more information).

Subsidized Structure Spaces
                          450%

                          400%

                          350%

                          300%

                          250%
                                                                                   Ratio of a Structured Permit Price to a Surface
                          200%                                                     Permit Price

                          150%

                          100%

                           50%

                           0%
                                 UNM   UT   UW   UA   UK   UNL   UU   UNLV   UNR



       At UNM a structured space for a residential student is the same price as a surface lot
space for a residential student. This may have been enacted to be an incentive for students to
live on campus, and bring their cars without paying a premium. UNM’s peer universities
(excluding UW who do not have any parking garages) with a tighter parking situation (limited
supply and large campus enrollment) they charge a much higher rate for a residential structured
space than a residential surface space. They do this to encourage the underclassmen to leave
their cars at home, while they are living on campus because they provide all the amenities a
student may need while living on campus. UT is the most extreme example of this, charging
400% more than a surface lot space for a more convenient parking space close to an
individual’s dorms.




                                                             Lobo Development Corporation – Draft 8/5/2010 10
Student vs. Faculty/Staff Parking Permit Prices
                 $1,800.00


                 $1,600.00


                 $1,400.00


                 $1,200.00

                                                                                                    Rate charged for most expensive
                 $1,000.00
                                                                                                    residential parking space

                   $800.00                                                                          Rate charged for most expensive
                                                                                                    Faculty/staff Parking Space same location
                                                                                                    non-reserved
                   $600.00


                   $400.00


                   $200.00


                         $-
                                UNM        UT    UW   UA   UK   UNL    UU        UNLV   UNR


        Another interesting pricing strategy to be investigated was the difference between student
permit prices and faculty/staff permit prices. UNM currently gives the UNM students a
significant subsidy on their parking permit price compared to a faculty/staff member price. This
pricing strategy is completely opposite for most of the peer universities, where the price was
either equivalent or even greater for student prices. It should be noted that the permit price
shown for UNM faculty is not completely accurate because the amount of income a faculty/staff
member makes is the deciding factor for how much they get charged for a parking permit. With
this in mind a faculty/staff member (making over $50,000 per year) may pay nearly $700 or
nearly three times more than a student. The UW has their pricing strategy where it is equally
priced regardless of income or whether an individual is a student, faculty or staff member. It’s
also interesting to look at the University of Texas where a student pays 170% more than a
faculty or staff member. This policy is responsive to the idea that faculty and staff have a
greater need for their car than a student does.

Parking Permit Price Increase
                25.00%
                                                22%

                20.00%


                15.00%


                10.00%                                                                               Average increase of parking permit rates over last
                                                                 7%                                  three years
                                      6%                                                      5%
                                                      4%
                5.00%

                          0.00%
                0.00%
                              UNM     UT        UW    UA   UK    UNL        UU      UNLV      UNR

        This chart is the most revealing about progressive parking policies. The UW has
increased rates steadily in order to change demand from a pricing standpoint. With every price
increase, some part of the campus population is choosing a different avenue to arrive the
campus on a daily basis. Raising prices effectively encourages people to make better decisions
about their commuting choices, and an organization can keep raising prices until they reach an
effective tipping point for decreasing demand. This is a fundamentally important part to
changing parking policy at a university. The increased revenue is in turn used for mass transit,
marketing programs, and if necessary parking garages.


                                                                  Lobo Development Corporation – Draft 8/5/2010 11
Analysis of Supply of Parking Spaces

               60%                           54%
                                                   48%
               50%                                             43%
               40%   33%               36%

               30%
                           20%                           17%
               20%               16%

               10%
                0%                                                    Ratio of parking spaces to Total
                                                                      campus population




      This chart is very revealing of the current parking supply situation at UNM. It reveals if
the necessary steps are taken, UNM has more than an adequate parking supply to satisfy its
needs. Every university which has less SOV usage than UNM has less parking supply. Solving
UNM’s parking problem will not be increasing supply, it will be decreasing demand. UT and UW
have both tackled the demand side of the parking problem, and even with their limited supply of
spaces have retained high levels of customer service to their population through the utilization
and promotion of alternative transportation.




                                                   Lobo Development Corporation – Draft 8/5/2010 12
Transportation and Parking – Opportunities for UNM                          ______________
        The analysis of UNM’s parking and transportation system compared to UNM’s peer
institutions has revealed some significant opportunities for improvement. The data and analysis
shows many opportunities for UNM PATS to begin to look at the demand side of transportation
and parking in order to find solutions to this complicated problem. The peer institutions have
shown that by addressing the demand side of transportation and parking, it is possible to
continue to meet constituent needs without increasing parking and supply. By focusing on the
supply of parking, an organization caters to the SOV, creates an unsustainable system, and
ultimately will never reach a harmonious balance between supply and demand.
        The demand for alternative transportation and parking are inversely related. If there is
increased use of alternative transportation, the demand for parking will undoubtedly decrease
and vice versa. If UNM follows the master plan there will be no increase to the supply of
parking at UNM, so in order to find solutions to the parking problem, the demand side of parking
must be addressed. UNM PATS needs to incentivize alternative transportation and decrease
demand for use of the SOV.
        The research of the peer institutions has revealed many new and exciting opportunities
for UNM and PATS to adopt in order to help solve the University’s parking problem. It should be
understood that by incorporating only one or a few of these opportunities, it will most likely have
a very small effect on demand, and in order to lessen demand significantly, many of these
proposals need to be incorporated to reach a solution. These opportunities have a wide range
of differences in terms of their costs and whether they require major policy changes.
        With the adoption of these parking proposals, there will definitely be a change in the
number of parking permits sold. This effect will decrease revenue for PATS, and in order to
reach equilibrium there will have to be rate increases. The PATS department is a self-funded
department and PATS needs the support of the University to increase permit rates on a yearly
basis to account for the number of decreased permits sold. PATS has obligations to match its
debt service for the parking garages, fund their shuttle service, and the various other services
the department provides. It is imperative for PATS to be able to increase rates in order to meet
its own financial goals.

      Several of these policies have political issues which need to be understood, and
addressed before any major change could come from them. The opportunities have been
organized into five categories;

             Minimal cost changes with minimal policy changes
             Minimal costs with major policy change
             Major cost changes with minimal policy changes
             Major cost changes with major policy change
             Regional parking and transportation changes

1. Opportunities: Minimal cost changes with minimal policy changes
        The research for transportation and for parking has revealed a list of opportunities which
require some minor policy adjustments along with minimal policy changes. These proposals
carry little to no major costs and can be incorporated very quickly. They are focused on
decreasing demand parking to help alleviate the strain on supply at UNM’s central campus. The
effectiveness of these proposals may be minimal to substantial, but if they are incorporated they
have the potential to be part of a variety of solutions to the UNM parking situation.
                                              Lobo Development Corporation – Draft 8/5/2010 13
      1.1.   Create a new image for UNM Parking and Transportation Systems

    PATS largest and most important responsibility is to provide access to the University for the
significant amount of commuters who arrive at UNM every day. PATS recognizes their
dependence on parking, which is reinforced through the financial aspect of parking permits
supporting all functions of the department. However, they have begun making tremendous
strides towards a more sustainable environmental model through increasing the use and
marketing of alternative transportation. Their motto, “We’re more than just permits” reinforces
their dedication to this idea. In order for PATS to more effectively align themselves with this
dedication to alternative transportation, it may be necessary for PATS to change their name and
slogan to a more progressive name which shows their dedication to alternative transportation.
The outside perception of PATS is incredibly important, and the name should reflect the change
the department wishes to portray. PATS has the opportunity to influence thousands of
commuters into making better decisions about their transportation options. PATS should work
to encourage every form of alternative transportation, and discourage at every opportunity the
use of the SOV.
    PATS is currently in the process of revisiting the PATS identity, and along with it addressing
the departments’ name. PATS wants to assess how they are perceived by the campus
community. They are going to conduct a customer survey to determine customer perceptions of
the PATS department. Their goal is to be looked at positively as transportation experts and as
the go-to department for mobility and accessibility.
    When PATS decides on a new image for the department, it is imperative that it is a major
media event. There needs to be a press conference, advertisements, and media coverage to
help spread the word that PATS is now a dedicated department towards alternative
transportation.
    .
Some possible names for PATS to consider are:
     UNM Commuter Services
     UNM Transportation and Parking
     UNM Alternative Transportation and Services
     UNM Walk, Bike, Ride, and Park department


       1.2. Changing website to encourage alternative transportation
   Coinciding with the new image for UNM PATS it is important for the website to be
reconfigured to show the dedication to alternative transportation and sustainability. The
suggestions for altering the website are:
    The beginning page is a flash video (similar to the video on University of Utah’s home
       page, http://www.parking.utah.edu/window.html) which is a video which discourages the
       use of an SOV and encourages walking, biking, and mass transit. This video needs to be
       powerful and resonate with visitors to the website to make them think differently about
       using their personal vehicles.
    The website needs to be tailored, so alternative transportation has the most easily visible
       links and the clearest mapping. Parking information and purchasing parking permits
       should be less visible. This will encourage someone to sift through the alternative
       transportation options before finding information on parking permits. A very good
       example of this organization can be found on the University of Washington’s website
       (http://www.washington.edu/facilities/transportation/commuterservices/parking)

                                             Lobo Development Corporation – Draft 8/5/2010 14
      Increase the advertising of alternative transportation on the website. Many universities
       advertise every form of alternative transportation, walking, biking, shuttles, city busses,
       and carpooling. Each one of these options has a dedicated web page to it, which sells
       the form of alternative transportation by selling the health benefits, sustainability, and
       other perks of each option. The University of Washington is an excellent example of how
       these pages can be added and sold to visitors of the website.
      Coupled with these changes, driving an SOV should be discouraged on the website. The
       University of Nevada-Reno has “Don’t bring your car to campus” in big bold letters on
       their homepage. It is suggested that PATS put similar rhetoric on their page to
       encourage alternative transportation


       1.3. Offering more options for parking permits
   According to The Politics and Economics of Parking on Campus, parking permit systems
encourages people, “to drive to campus alone, encourages overuse of scarce space during
peak hours, and leads to shortages that generate demands for even more campus parking.” In
order to help alleviate these problems associated with parking permit systems, there should be
an offering for different kinds of parking permits.
    Two and Three day parking permits - Some students, faculty, and staff may want the
       option for a less expensive not full time parking permit. They may only come to campus
       a couple times per week or may use alternative transportation on other days.


        1.4. Register Students, Faculty, and Staff for Alternative Transportation
   This option is intended to encourage people to be a part of a group of people who are
dedicated to sustainability, thinking green, and people who do not use SOV’s. By registering
you are disallowed to purchase a parking permit, and there could be other incentives to being a
part of this group such as:
    Offering shirts, stickers, bags, etc. which are given to people who register. Can be seen
        as a very prideful thing to have around campus.
    Possibly receive discounts on campus or local vendors around the UNM area to thank
        them for not congesting the streets.
    Free or discounted bicycle tune-ups.
    Passes for the NM Railrunner
    Possibly given 5 free daily parking permits for the occasional need to drive to campus

         1.5.     Partnering with local business for parking
         This opportunity is a complicated partnership, but could be very beneficial if it is possible.
Currently, UNM is a short distance from downtown, and namely the location of the convention
center and the proposed multi-events center. These two facilities have major parking
requirements on weekends and during special events. It may be possible to partner with these
facilities to get a certain number of parking permits for students, faculty, and staff, who can then
ride the bus to UNM. In return during large events we provide free parking to their customers
and have a park and ride system to get them to the convention center.

        1.6.    Change Redondo Road into a Bicycle Boulevard
        This opportunity is something which could be considered low hanging fruit for having a
significant impact on the bicycle friendliness of the UNM campus. Redondo Road could be a
bicycle boulevard which will raise awareness of drivers about cyclists sharing the road with
                                                Lobo Development Corporation – Draft 8/5/2010 15
them. This initiative will cost hardly anything and will involve changing the signs and maybe
adding new ones.

        1.7.    Market and Encourage Use of Zipcars
        Zipcars are a short term car rental program, which is already located and utilized on
campus. Zipcars provide a way for students, faculty, and staff who occasionally need a vehicle
to rent a car by the hour at a reasonable rate. PATS is taking on a large initiative over the next
year to market and raise awareness for the program. It is going to be heavy tailored to
dormitory residents, and hopefully will gain some strength. Zipcars are extremely important to
decreasing demand of the SOV and reducing the amount of dormitory residents who bring a car
to campus and don’t drive it.

2. Opportunities: Minimal Cost Changes with Major Policy Changes
   Along with previously mentioned minimal cost changes, there are a few more suggestions
which carry minimal costs; however they require major changes in policy at UNM

       2.1. Removing Residential Parking Permits
       The University of Arizona does not have residential parking permits available to the
residents of their dormitories. This policy allows those students to purchase a parking permit in
whatever parking lot they wish to park in at the given price. If UNM were to adopt this policy,
there would be 1350 additional parking spaces available on the central campus going at a
standardized rate possibly similarly priced as a proximity spaces for staff. This option would
allow the UNM dorm residents to park where they wanted and give them more price options as
well. By removing the residential permit, it may alleviate the demand on central campus
because the dorm residents may choose to park in a distant lot since they do not want to pay
the higher cost of parking on central campus. They may also leave their car at home altogether
and find alternative forms of transportation to move around the City of Albuquerque. A major
issue with this suggestion is the high percentage of students who work and go to school. UNM
is about 10% higher in the number of students who work compared to its peers and the national
average, coupled with nearly 10% more people working off campus rather than on compared to
its peers and the national average.

        2.2. Disallowing Underclassmen from Parking on Campus
        There are 3,409 underclassmen at UNM, and if 58% of them are SOV users, then there
are 1,977 freshmen who park on campus. This is nearly 16% of our parking spaces, which is
substantial. There are a few universities who have this policy, and it is not well accepted. This
may be an option to finding a solution for UNM parking, but it should be seen and adopted as a
last resort.

3. Opportunities: Major Cost Changes with Minimal Policy Change

        Moving beyond the suggestions which require minimal cost changes, there are some
policy changes which carry substantial new costs. These opportunities may carry some
significant expenses, but the long term benefit and effectiveness can be tremendous. PATS is
currently engaged in many of these suggestions, however they need to be implemented on a
much larger scale to have the effect the University needs. These initiatives needs to be
implemented across the university and with the engagement of many departments to increase
the effectiveness.

                                              Lobo Development Corporation – Draft 8/5/2010 16
       3.1. Marketing Plan for Alternative Transportation
    This marketing plan would be a centralized, campus wide marketing initiative to increase
awareness and utilization of alternative transportation. Beginning with the new image of the
PATS department, this has an extremely high potential to be effective. The UNM Sustainability
department could champion the effort, with the involvement of student groups and PATS, to
make it a continued success. The University of Nevada-Reno started an aggressive marketing
campaign against the SOV in 2001, coupled with promotion of alternative transportation; their
results have been extremely effective. They have reduced SOV usage by 16% over the last
nine years and continue to increase the percentage. UNM can have the same success with a
campus wide effort and University sponsored campaign. The possibilities for the marketing
campaign could be:
     A green, sustainable ad campaign against the SOV throughout the campus.
     Starting registrations to be an alternative transportation user.
     Initiate an Alternative Transportation Week at the beginning of the fall and spring
        semesters
           o Advertised on PATS website and all over campus.
           o Have people commit to using alternative transportation for one week and then
              decide if they need a parking permit.
           o Could be sponsored by local companies as incentives for student, faculty, and
              staff involvement.

        3.2. Specific Target Marketing of Students, Faculty, and Staff
        The target marketing of students, faculty, and staff is for the people living within a specific
area where alternative transportation options are practical, efficient, and available. This plan
begins with creating a database of the population who purchase parking permits, and then
target marketing them through direct mediums to encourage the use of alternative
transportation. There is data which suggests there is a large percentage of faculty and staff who
live within a five mile radius of campus, and purchase permits. They are a prime population to
target to get them to use bicycles and mass transit.

       3.3. Self-Service Bike Rental Kiosk Program
   A pilot program for the university and the City of Albuquerque which is a series of self-
service kiosks spaced 1/5 of a mile apart with anywhere from 6-18 bicycles per station. A user
swipes a prepaid access card takes a bike and then returns it to any station within two hours.
    Potentially very successful with dorm residents who need short term transportation
       around campus.
    Potentially link south campus to athletic facilities to central campus, and to north campus
       with several kiosks placed all around.
    Potentially be very successful for stations located at distant parking lots for students who
       want to bike rather than wait for a shuttle.
    Could be completely funded by corporate sponsorships or advertisements on bicycles
       and stations

      3.4. Giving Dormitory Residents a Bicycle
      Students who live in the dorm and leave their vehicle at home will receive a free bicycle.
Students who choose this option will be educated on bike paths and safety, and receive free
maintenance and a bike lock.

4. Opportunities: Major Cost Changes with Major Policy Changes
                                                Lobo Development Corporation – Draft 8/5/2010 17
        4.1. Increasing Parking Permit Rates to Reduce Demand
        This is a basic fundamental theory of supply and demand. If supply is fixed, in this case
parking, the only way to adjust demand is by changing the price. If you increase the price of
parking, the demand curve will fall. There is a lot of data to support this policy change, and
many universities have begun to initiate this policy. The University of Washington is the most
aggressive university with this tactic and has averaged a price increase of 22% per year.
However, it should be stated that with the price increase it is appropriate to ensure efficient and
effective alternative transportation is available to the university. Otherwise, the price increases
are impossible to justify. It is highly recommended that UNM increase parking permits
substantially to begin to change the demand curve for parking. Currently, the perception of
parking is it is very convenient for the price for a large percentage of the population. As the
price increases, a certain percentage will truly begin to consider the question, do I really need to
bring a car to campus, or can I find another way?

       4.2. Remove or lessen discount of Student Permit Prices
     Currently, UNM gives a huge discount to students parking on central campus. The analysis
of the data of our peer institutions indicates parking permit rates should be equivalent to
faculty/staff rates or even more than faculty/staff rates! This policy change will equalize parking,
and create a true zone management system. The increase in student rates will also help
discourage students from parking on campus, and encourage alternative transporatation.

       4.3.    Financial Incentives to Discourage Parking on Campus
       Faculty and staff are given a bonus to not bring their car to campus
       Students are given a discount on tuition

   5. Opportunities: Regional Parking and Transportation

The UNM transportation and parking issues are a major concern for the neighborhoods which
border and connect to UNM. Throughout the research of this paper, a few regional parking and
transportation recommendations were discovered.

       5.1.   Creation of Residential Parking Benefit Districts

The neighborhoods surrounding UNM are extremely concerned with parking and transportation
which occurs through their neighborhood. In order to engage the neighborhoods, it may be
possible to get them involved for their own personal gain. This could happen through the
creation of residential parking benefit districts. These districts would begin as a collaboration of
neighbors in a specific neighborhood or on a specific street who join together to have permitted
parking or short term parking meters on their street. The funds generated would then be
reinvested back into the neighborhood for the gain of everyone.
It could lead to
     Improved streetscapes
     Improved sidewalks
     Improved landscaping
     Improved playground facilities
     Improved security
     Personal monetary gains

                                               Lobo Development Corporation – Draft 8/5/2010 18
      Etc.

       5.2.   Take Back the Road Bicycle Promotion

Take Back the Road Bicycle Promotion is an initiative by the University to raise awareness of
bicycles as a major form of transportation, which would be in the form of a ceremonial ride along
one of Albuquerque’s city streets. Needs to be a joint venture between the City of Albuquerque
and UNM, and take place on major streets to raise awareness to motorists about bicyclists
along the city roads.




                                             Lobo Development Corporation – Draft 8/5/2010 19
Proposed Implementation Plan_______________________________________
         The opportunities for UNM PATS are very extensive, and each one has the possibility to be integrated into
the policies. There are many of these opportunities which require little capital expenditures to get them off the
ground and running, and there are some of the options which require significant capital expenditures. Several of
the low cost policies have the opportunity to be tremendously effective and begin to change the demand for SOV
usage at UNM. In order to change the demand, it will require a paradigm shift in social attitudes towards the SOV.
This is not an easy task, and it will require a combination of these opportunities to begin to affect certain parts of the
UNM population.
         The implementation plan is presented into two different approaches to change the policies at PATS, a low
cost option and a high cost option, and each has two phases. Each option covers the period of the next two years
at UNM. The first year, between now and fall of 2011, it is important to get these programs up and running before
the second year. The first year is the beginning of the construction of the new dormitories where the UNM central
campus may lose up to 200 parking spaces during construction, which is less than 2% of its current supply. At the
end of the second phase, fall semester 2012, is when the crisis will hit for parking. It is imperative that many of the
programs are implemented and working to prevent chaos on the central campus and the surrounding
neighborhoods. If nothing changes, the demand or supply for parking, there will be an estimated net shortage of
2,015 parking spaces! In order to better serve the UNM population it is imperative for one of these
implementation plans or a combination of the two, to be in place and followed to begin to change the demand for
parking before the fall of 2012.
         The low cost option is estimated to cost under $100,000 dollars and is very easily implemented. In order to
implement the low cost option, it will require a new individual who works for PATS. Their responsibility will be to
work with PATS and implement these programs. This person needs to be highly motivated and preferably
someone with a specialty in marketing or a specialist in parking demand management. Another option would be to
hire marketing students from the business school. They could be paid a much lower rate and the University could
provide jobs to students. Other than the person’s salary, the other costs will be advertisements. The low cost
option if effectively and quickly implemented will change demand significantly before the new dormitories are
complete.
         The high cost option is estimated to cost over $100,000 dollars, and is a total comprehensive package to
improve the parking and transportation situation at UNM. It incorporates many of the same policies as the low cost
option, but it takes them to a much higher level. The high cost option is the ideal plan for changing PATS, and it will
change the demand for parking much more quickly than the low cost option. It addresses all the major changes
which PATS desires for their department, which will effectively manage the supply of parking and keep customer
satisfaction levels high.
         These two options require one major change which has to be the first policy change to take place. PATS
needs to be able to raise parking permit prices. For the low cost option, in order to pay for the estimated $100,000
dollars, parking permit rates need to be increased a meager $6.13 to cover the new costs. Since the high cost
option does not have a specific dollar amount to it, it will require a larger raise in parking permit rates. However, it
should be noted that in 2012, with the deduction in parking supply, PATS will have to raise rates to meet existing
financial needs. Raising parking permit rates is vital to the success of these programs. Not only will it fund the
PATS department and the new programs, but it will change demand for parking by just raising rates.

Low Cost Option_____________________________________________________________________________

Phase 1 - Between now and Fall 2011

     1a. Create a new image UNM Parking and Transportation
     1b. Change website to encourage alternative transportation (Currently, underway)
     1c. Change Redondo Road to a bicycle boulevard.
     1d. Take Back the Road – Bicycle promotion, held on Redondo
     1e. Begin registrations for alternative transportation users
     2. Specific Target marketing of Students, faculty, and staff before permits go on sale
                Direct mailings and emails to them before the permits go on sale for 2011-2012.
                   Advertisements for alternative transportation, 2 & 3 day permits, registration for alternative
                   transportation commuter
     3a. Offer 2 & 3 day permits for the 2011-2012 year
     3b. Increased Permit Rates
                Raise 2 or 3 day permits to current 5 day permit, raise 5 day permits to much higher prices
     3c. Reducing subsidy of student permits compared to faculty

                                                        Lobo Development Corporation – Draft 8/5/2010 20
                   Increasing student permit rates at a much higher percentage than faculty and staff to reduce the
                    difference
    4.    Contract with the Anderson School of Business to have the marketing students develop a business plan
          for the parking department. Should be advertising, viral, and direct marketing programs to reach as large
          an audience as possible.
                 Students create the program for a class and receive a grade. PATS gets to choose from the
                    projects and implement them on various levels. The viral campaign maybe the most important
                    considering it could be free to implement.
    5.    Heavily promotes Zipcars
                 This will take place in spring of 2012

Phase 2 – Fall 2011 and Fall 2012

    1a.    Increased parking permit rates
    1b.    Reducing subsidy of student permits compared to faculty
    2.     Remove Residential parking spaces and replace with generic permit spaces. Allow residents to
            purchase these permits but at the same rate as faculty and staff. First come first serve basis.
    3.     Initiate the creation of neighborhood business districts around the area where student parking in
            neighborhoods is a problem.

High Cost Option_____________________________________________________________________________

Phase 1 - Between now and Fall 2011

    1.   Hire a marketing firm to:
           Reimage PATS
           Create a new, dynamic website catered to alternative transportation
           Organize and implement alternative transportation week for the first week of the fall semester
           Register students, faculty, and staff to be alternative transportation users.
           Bicyclists get free helmet for registering w/ the PD.
           Develop alternative transportation advertisements for campus, handouts, emails, etc.
           Develop viral campaign
           Direct market to students, faculty, & staff to encourage alternative transportation, direct mailings &
               emails to them before the permits go on sale for 2011-2012. Advertisements for alternative
               transportation, 2 & 3 day permits, registration for alternative transportation commuter
           Create product line t-shirts, bags, stickers, etc for students to be prideful over being alternative
               transportation registered users.
           Take Back the Road – Bicycle promotion,
    2a. Offer 2 & 3 day permits
           Policy change
    2b. Increased Permit Rates
           Raise 2 or 3 day permits to current 5 day permit, raise 5 day permits to much higher prices.
    2c. Reducing subsidy of student permits compared to faculty and staff.
    3. Pilot a self-service bike rental kiosk program. (Needs sponsors)
    4. Fund the implementation of an automotive vehicle locator system for the UNM shuttle system. (150k
        startup, 50k yearly)
    5. Implement Advanced Parking Management Systems in garages and lots on central campus along with
        wayfinding system

Phase 2 - Fall 2011 and Fall 2012

    1a. Increased parking permit rates
    1b. Reducing subsidy of student permits compared to faculty
    2. Initiate the creation of neighborhood business districts around the area where student parking in
        neighborhoods is a problem.
    3. Give dorm residents a bicycle who leave their car at home.
    4. Remove Residential parking spaces and replace with generic permit spaces. Allow residents to
        purchase these permits but at the same rate as faculty and staff. First come, first serve basis.


                                                      Lobo Development Corporation – Draft 8/5/2010 21
Appendix 1______UNR Transportation and Parking Assessment__________

        The University of Nevada-Reno (UNR) Parking Services has a very intriguing parking and
transportation model. They heavily market to their students forms of alternative transportation
options rather than significantly increasing parking permit prices to change the demand curve for
parking. This marketing campaign has effectively reduced single occupancy vehicle (SOV’s)
usage by 16% since 2001. They have effectively reduced the demand for parking at their
university, and according to the 2009 Campus Sustainability Report, have reduced the need to
construct 1,270 new parking spaces. This has saved $19 million in construction costs, since
UNR has run out of land for surface parking. They would have had to have built 1,270 new
parking spaces at $15,000 a space. This parking model is extremely important to understand to
help improve UNM’s parking and transportation model.
        The University of Nevada-Reno has taken a different approach than every other
university mentioned in this report. Their parking and transportation model has been effective in
reducing SOV’s and they have used different tactics than other universities such as the
University of Washington (UW). Whereas UW has raised prices significantly while increasing
effectiveness of mass transportation in order to reduce demand, UNR has reduced demand for
parking by heavily promoting alternative forms of transportation.
        This effective marketing approach is about raising awareness of alternative transportation
to the students, faculty, and staff at UNR. In order to raise awareness, UNR Parking gives
information on transportation options at advising sessions in Las Vegas, Sacramento and Reno;
at new student orientation, on the Parking Services website, in the student newspaper, in
annuals permit renewal letters, and in fliers mailed to their home before they arrive on campus.
Information is also handed out during new student orientation and residence hall move-in as
well. Faculty and staff are given information about parking through the same means, and
spouses who work on campus are sent information on carpooling together. There are also large
signs promoting alternative transportation located in effective areas throughout the campus.
These tactics have been effective over the past nine years, and UNR has not had to build a new
parking garage to this date because of this progressive marketing campaign.
        The areas the marketing campaign promotes are the following:
     Parking Website-The UNR Parking Services website states the following in big bold
        letters, “Don't bring your car to UNR...... Remember there are lots of OPTIONS when
        traveling to campus. Please visit our alternate transportation link to find out more.” It also
        contains all the useful links about transportation and parking.
     Motorcycle Program-UNR understands motorcycles takes up far less space than a
        vehicle, so permit prices are much less expensive for them.
     Bicycle Program-Bikers are provided free registration, bike racks, and air stations
        throughout campus. Bicycle lockers are available at a nominal cost. Registered bikers
        are given five free parking permits for days when biking is not possible.
     Carpool Program-Campus members who register as carpoolers receive a close reserved
        carpool parking space, share the cost of the parking permit with their carpool partner, and
        received a “free Friday” parking permit which allows carpoolers to drive to campus
        separately on Fridays, and each carpooler receives five free daily parking permits to use
        on days that carpooling is not possible.
     Wolf Pass Bus Program-A subsidized bus pass students purchase for unlimited rides on
        the city’s bus system.
     Circus–Circus Program – The University entered into an agreement with the Circus-
        Circus management to use 100 parking spaces in the Circus-Circus parking structures.
                                               Lobo Development Corporation – Draft 8/5/2010 22
       Since campus members come and go at different times of day, and different days within
       the week, 150 free parking permits can be allocated for these structures.
     University Highlands Bus Program – The University entered into an agreement with
       University Highlands management to provide a shuttle service to the apartments so that
       the 700 student residents can shuttle to campus and leave their vehicles behind.
     Sierra Spirit Service – The Regional Transportation Commission (RTC) operates the
       Sierra Spirit bus service, which operates along Virginia Street. The University
       encouraged RTC to change the route and times to better serve the daily riders. Campus
       members can ride the Sierra Spirit to campus and leave their vehicles behind.
     Walking Program – Walking is an option for those who live close to campus. Sidewalks
       and pedestrian paths are located throughout the campus and city for pedestrians. Five
       free daily parking permits are provided to those who register at the parking office as a
       walker.
     Alternative Transportation Club – People register to be a member for free, and receive
       five free permits, and cannot receive a permit for the entire year.
These programs combined with the extensive marketing campaign have created a much more
sustainable and effective parking model at UNR.
    From an operations standpoint, UNR has implemented a zoning parking management
system. This system makes the most convenient parking the most expensive or short term. It
also simplifies the entire parking system because they only have six different permits and
therefore six different parking permit prices. They advertise their parking permit zones with the
following chart:



                       SI
                       LV
                       E T
                       R A
                       G N
                       R
                       EB
                        L
                       E Prices could be adjusted accordingly at UNM to control demand for
This system gives everyone the option of purchasing any permit they want at their desired time
of walking or shuttle ride.
certain lots.          NU
                        E
    UNR has also implemented a policy on any new buildings for the benefit of parking. UNR
requires that in the construction of new buildings on existing surface lots, it is required for the
budget to include a specific dollar amount for every parking space taken. This allocation of
funds is dedicated to preserving the existing supply of parking on campus. The money is placed
into a fund which gets used for the construction of new parking garages. The costs of taking a
new parking space are substantial, and therefore the parking supply is guaranteed to remain
constant.
    The University of Nevada-Reno has taken a different approach to parking and transportation
than the other parking models studied. Their approach has been effective in reducing demand,
offering more sustainable alternatives, and saving money by not building new parking garages.
UNM has the opportunity to incorporate many of the same tactics as UNR to decrease demand.
                                              Lobo Development Corporation – Draft 8/5/2010 23
UNM should create a new marketing campaign which focuses on promoting alternative forms of
transportation. A marketing campaign will cost far less than a new garage, and most importantly
it promotes the University’s dedication to sustainability.
Appendix 2_____University of Washington Parking Assessment___________
        The University of Washington (UW) located in Seattle, Washington currently has an
enrollment of 42,907 with a population of staff and faculty of 29,125. Seattle has a metropolitan
population of 3,407,848. Comparing UW to UNM, who has an enrollment of 27,304 with a staff
and faculty population of 9,944, and a metropolitan population of 857,903, UW is considerably
different in terms of its urban context and campus population. However, they are important
University to study because of their progressive and aggressive parking policies. UW has taken
drastic steps to reduce parking demand, increase the use of alternative transportation to their
campus, all the while reducing their parking supply.
        The University of Washington realizes that solving parking issues begins with
transportation options; mass-transit, carpools, biking, and walking. UW has taken this idea to
full implementation by following their five transportation management strategies:
     1. Manage transportation demand by increasing the price of parking faster than the price of
        greener transportation options.
     2. Expand parking pricing incentives to give faculty and staff reasons to consider other
        transportation options.
     3. Purchase more transit service from providers.
     4. Continue to implement a marketing approach that targets geographic areas.
     5. Integrate pedestrian and bicycle facilities and programs into the fabric of the campus and
        neighboring communities.
By following these management strategies UW has effectively reduced the use of single
occupancy vehicles (SOV) in 1990 of 33% to 23% in 2007. They have increased the use of
public transportation from 21% in 1990 to 39% in 2007.
        The differences between UNM and UW should be noted to understand the context of
transportation and parking. Seattle and UW have a much larger mass-transportation system.
UW has a lot of nearby student apartments which allow for 23% of the population to walk, and
9% to bike. UW also has 16% of its population living on campus, compared to UNM who only
has 8%. UW does not operate or own a single parking garage on its campus, and only has
11,410 spaces which is only enough parking for 16% of its population. This supply has been in
reduction since 1990 even though enrollment has increased 24%.
        UW has taken a very progressive stance on dealing with parking at the University by
many innovative and aggressive tactics. The biggest driver of keeping demand down is the
sizable cost of a parking permit at UW. Their first management strategy to manage
transportation demand by increasing the price of parking faster than the price of greener
transportation options has resulted in an average of 22% increases on parking permits every
year. They have a ratio of 9.45% for a parking permit to total tuition which is significantly more
than UNM which only has a 1.35% ratio. The sharp increases in parking prices started with the
inception of the U-Pass program and a 50% increase in one year of parking permit prices. The
University was reaching a crisis point with its parking and decided to make a drastic decision to
drive up rates and promoting other options. The U-Pass program is a bus pass which is 20%
the cost of a parking permit making it very affordable, and a very sensible option for students,
faculty, and staff. The U-Pass program carries 94% positive customer satisfaction, and is a
model for mass transportation. This policy reflects the basic laws of supply and demand by
increasing the price of parking permits the demand changes while keeping the supply the same.
They have coupled this with offering very attractive, efficient, and affordable alternatives to the
individual.
                                                 Lobo Development Corporation – Draft 8/5/2010 24
        The University of Washington Commuter Services website some notable differences than
UNM’s PATS website.
     The transportation options are listed in order of most environmentally friendly to least
        friendly, i.e. walk, bike, bus or train, carpool or vanpool, and finally drive.
            o By listing options in this order it makes a website viewer read these other items
                before finding options for driving a SOV.
     Each transportation option has its own page dedicated to it.
            o The walking option sells the beauty of the campus, lists walking events, lists health
                benefits, has maps for walking routes, gives information on showering and clothing
                lockers, and includes links for pedestrians.
            o The biking transportation option lists links for bike classes, bike parking, bicycle
                rack map, planning commutes, equipment & repair, other resources, riding in the
                rain, safety, showers & lockers. Also lists benefits of riding a bike to campus.
            o Riding a bus or train lists information on the U-Pass, has alerts, announcements,
                and service changes, bus maps and routes, information for getting to events,
                information on bikes on buses, night riding benefits, link to real time updates on
                bus schedules and delays.
            o Carpool option lists benefits, information on how to get a carpool permit, and links
                to carpooling websites.
            o Driving option gives all the necessary information for parking.
    The University of Washington has also made very innovative parking permit types to help
alleviate some demand from parking.
     Individual commuter tickets (ICT’s) are for commuters who drive to campus twice a week
        or less. ICT’s are five dollars apiece, and you can purchase 6 to 26 at a time, and if you
        purchase 26 you can’t purchase any more for 13 weeks. This gives people the option to
        not bring their cars to campus every day and offers them a significant discount than
        purchasing a $423 parking permit for the same period.
     Short term SOV permit is a single day parking permit which costs $7.05 per day. Allows
        for people who occasionally need to bring a car to campus to pay a higher premium for
        one day but less in the long run.
     Swing shift permits is a half price permit allowing people to park weekdays from 2:30pm
        to 8pm and Saturdays till noon.
     Pay per use parking (PPUP) is designed for flexible commuters. Park as much as you
        want or as little. Automatically deducted from payroll. A SOV will pay $5 per park if they
        park less than 4 days per pay period, and will pay $7.05 per park if they park more than 4
        days per pay period. Parking is located in a dedicated parking lot to PPUP users.
    The University of Washington Commuter Services parking and transportation model is
extremely effective, and should be a model for all university parking and transportation
departments. They have effectively managed their parking supply by changing demand of
SOV’s. It was a very bold move to change the pricing of permits so drastically year after year,
but by offering alternatives which are not only effective and affordable, but are also better for the
environment and the cities. If a city or university has the resources to provide mass transit or
alternative transportation options to a significantly higher portion of students, faculty, and staff
then it should not be a difficult decision to change the demand of parking by driving up prices.
The most important aspect of University of Washington’s parking model is they not only
changed demand, but they aggressively marketed the use of alternative options so the campus
population would still feel confident in arriving to their campus safely and reliably.



                                               Lobo Development Corporation – Draft 8/5/2010 25
Appendix 3_____ University of Arizona Parking Assessment _____________
        The University of Arizona (UA) located in Tucson, Arizona has an enrollment of 36,733,
with a staff and faculty population of 11,842. The population for the Tucson metropolitan area is
1,023,320. UA is very similar to UNM who has an enrollment of 27,304, a staff and faculty of
9,944, and residing in Albuquerque with a metropolitan population of 857,903. These two cities
and universities share many common attributes in terms of population, density, and
infrastructure. UA provides an intriguing parallel to learn from and follow some of their parking
and transportation policies.
        The University of Arizona has 17,403 parking spaces which are enough for 38% of its
population to park which is very similar to UNM who has 36%. The UA is dealing with the same
problems as UNM parking and transportation, but has a significantly reduced percentage of
single occupied vehicles (SOV’s). 18% of the UA population walks and 18% bike to campus on
a daily basis compared to only 7% who walk and 9% who ride to UNM. Considering the
extreme weather of Tucson, it seems unlikely that this would be the situation. The reason for
the greater percentage of walkers and bikers is the proximity of the population to the campus.
Arizona has twice the percentage of people living on campus (15%) and a total of 65% of the
University’s population lives within 5 miles. UNM is unfortunate since the UNM population is
spread out over a much larger area in varying degrees of densities, and it makes walking and
biking inefficient. This is because UNM’s population has over 63% of the population living 5 or
more miles from campus. Considering this piece of data is it fair to say the University of Arizona
does not do a relatively better job at reducing usage of SOV’s on its campus. It is interesting to
note that for students living 2-5 miles from campus at UA, a SOV is the predominate choice for
commuting at well over 50% using one. Biking 2-5 miles in many instances will be more
convenient, faster, and more reliable than driving a SOV.
        An interesting parking policy at UA is there are no residential parking permits. Residents
(people who live in dorms) are allowed to park on campus; however where there parking space
is depends on their willingness to pay. A student may purchase a very convenient parking
space close to their dorm, but they will pay more for it, or they can purchase a more affordable
space further from their dorm. Parking permits basically become a license to hunt for a parking
spot.
        Another piece of data which suggests how the University of Arizona is reducing demand
for parking is their higher ratio of a parking permit to total tuition compared to UNM. UA has
2.06% rate compared to UNM’s 1.35%, which may help in reducing parking demand. According
the “Overview of UA PTS” power point presentation from September 16, 2009, there is a
movement to begin to raise rates considerably to reduce the usage of SOV’s. The presentation
suggested raising rates $282 dollars from 2010 to 2012. This would be an increase of 56% over
three years in hopes of changing the demand for parking. However, this increase never
occurred and prices have remained unchanged heading into 2011. This increase would be
coupled with many new inexpensive programs and provide many options to the commuter.
        The new programs and available options to the commuter are:
     Car sharing-Program where members can rent cars from Hertz at 5 areas around
        campus. They are charged hourly or based on mileage. This would be good for students
        living on campus or anyone in need of a vehicle for an emergency.
     Bike Sharing-PTS makes bikes available for temporary use.
     Substantial increase the Sun Tran Subsidy Pass-Provide free or low-cost bus passes to
        students with better routes
     Park & Ride Lots-Off campus lots with shuttle service which are inexpensive, designed
        for the cost conscious consumer

                                             Lobo Development Corporation – Draft 8/5/2010 26
       New Shuttle Routes
       Busses to support streetcar routes
       Automated pay stations-increase customer service
       Enhanced carpool program
       Emergency ride home
       Prepaid daily parking in garages
       New garage construction funding-With increase of parking rates, funds go directly to
        funding for a new parking garage.
     Deferred student payment plan
    The University of Arizona is the most similar university to UNM, and with a few more years’
growth, UNM and Albuquerque will be the same size. UA provides UNM with the opportunity to
look into the future for the problems and solutions, UNM will have to address. However, UA has
had a very similar parking policy and model as UNM, and both continue to be reactive to the
situation rather than proactive. UA’s presentation on an “Overview of UA PTS” is a very
progressive thinking presentation, and presents some very feasible and creative policy changes
to reduce the use of SOV’s, reduce traffic congestion, and reduce demand for parking. Parking
cannot be fixed by building parking garages, it has to be done through providing alternative
transportation in an effective, efficient, and affordable manner.




                                            Lobo Development Corporation – Draft 8/5/2010 27
                                                                                           Appendix 4 - Complete UNM DATA against Peer Insitutions

                                                        Total Campus                                                                                                                                                                           Ratio of parking
                                                          Population                                                      Permit based                                                                                                % of spaces to Total
                                       Staff/Profess   Students+Facult                                                    system yes or Number of Parking                                                                          structured      campus
University Name      Enrollment             ors             y+Staff    City Population            Metro Population              no           Spaces           Number of Surface Spaces           Number of Structure Spaces          spaces      population
UNM                        27,304.00        9,944.00         37,248.00        521,999.00                       857,903.00 yes                    12,378.00                     10,309.00                           2,069.00                17%             33%
UT                         50,995.00      25,313.00          76,308.00        757,688.00                     1,705,075.00 yes                    15,000.00                      7,192.00                           7,808.00                52%             20%
UW                         42,907.00      29,125.00          72,032.00        602,000.00                     3,407,848.00 yes                    11,410.00                     11,410.00                                -                   0%             16%
UA                         36,733.00      11,842.00          48,575.00        541,811.00                     1,023,320.00 yes                    17,403.00                     10,850.00                           6,553.00                38%             36%
UK                         27,209.00      11,888.00          39,097.00        296,545.00                       453,424.00 yes                    21,227.00                     13,659.00                           7,568.00                36%             54%
UNL                        23,572.00        9,488.00         33,060.00        251,624.00                       251,624.00 yes                    15,879.00                     12,572.00                           3,307.00                21%             48%
UU                         27,000.00      14,362.00          41,362.00       541,811.00                      1,023,320.00 yes                     7,000.00                      7,000.00                                                                   17%
UNLV                       29,069.00        3,300.00         32,369.00        558,383.00                     1,865,746.00 yes and no                        NK                                   NK
UNR                       16,862.00         3,152.00         20,014.00       217,698.00                        337,386.00 yes                     8,677.00                      4,977.00                             3,700.00              43%             43%
                                                                                                                                        What is the cost of
                                                                          Number of                                        % of permits a residential
                                       % of people       Number of        Residential       % of Residential permits sold sold to parking permit per How much is instate tuition                   Ratio of a Parking Permit
                  Number of Dorm       who live on       residential Parking permits       to number of people living on number of        fall & spring including everything living on             Price to Total Tuition Fee
University Name       beds               campus        parking spaces        sold                     campus                  spaces        semester                 campus                       Including Room and Board
UNM                      2,829.00                8%           1,350.00          1,439.00                              66%          107% $           242.00 $                   17,917.00                                   1.4%
UT                       7,205.00              14%            1,564.00          1,564.00                              38%          100% $           708.33 $                   24,816.00                                   2.9%
UW                       7,415.00              16%     NA              NA                                                               $         1,692.00 $                   17,907.00                                   9.4%
UA                       5,345.00              15%            1,878.00          1,878.00                              64%          100% $           460.50 $                   22,382.00                                   2.1%
UK                       5,175.00              13%            2,428.00          2,084.00                              96%           86% $           248.00 $                   17,178.00                                   1.4%
UNL                      5,930.00              25%            2,203.00          2,220.00                             118%               $           405.00 $                   14,724.70                                   2.8%
UU                       3,320.72              12%                 -                 -                                 0%               $           125.00 $                   13,907.00                                   0.9%
UNLV                     2,241.00                8%                                                                                     $           115.00 $                   23,370.00                                   0.5%
UNR                      2,258.00              13%     NA              na                  na                             na            $           375.00 $                   21,000.00                                   1.8%

                                     % of
                                   Population
                                    Who Use
                  % of Population Public
                   Who Drive To Transportatio % of Population % of Population                            Average number of                                                                         Short Term Parking most
                  Campus Alone n To Get To Who Walk To Who Bike To % of Population Who Carpool           cars on campus per Freshmen park on campus yes                                          expensive rate, 7 hours per
University Name    Daily (SOV's)    Campus        Campus          Campus       To Campus       Unknown           day                   or no                                                      day, 74 days per semester        Self-funded
UNM                            58%         16%             7%               9%              7%        3%           15,000.00 yes                                                                 $                     906.50      yes
UT                             35%         30%           15%               16%              4%        0%                     yes                                                                 $                     740.00      yes
UW                             22%         39%           23%                9%              7%        0%           26,000.00 yes                                                                 $                   1,554.00      yes
UA                             48%          7%           18%               18%              9%        0%           42,280.00 yes                                                                 $                     592.00      yes
UK                             81%          2%           13%                2%              2%        0%           30,000.00 yes                                                                 $                     740.00      yes
UNL                                                                                                 100%                     yes                                                                 $                     370.00     yes
UU                                         33%                                                       67%                     yes                                                                                                  yes
UNLV                           95%        0.4%             1%               1%              2%        0%                     yes                                                                 $                     518.00
UNR                            42%                                                          1%       57%                     yes                                                                 $                     518.00 yes



                                     Cost of a new Rate charged for                                                       Price for a non                                                                                      Payback
                    Cost of a new parking space a permit in a          Rate charged for a                                   residential     Total Expenses for                                                               period for a
                  parking space in a in a surface       parking         surface lot space Ratio of a Structured Permit      surface lot        the parking       Total Revenue for the parking                                surface lot
University Name       structure           lot       structure space        residential Price to a Surface Permit Price     space permit        department                 department               Net operating revenue        space
UNM                        17,103.24 $ 3,100.00 $            242.00    $           242.00                          100%    $ 124.00         $ 6,108,364.00       $                6,520,771.00   $                412,407.00 $ 25.00
UT                                                  $        708.00                  175.00                        405%    $ 140.00         $ 12,563,238.00      $               13,089,884.00   $                526,646.00
UW                                                  $ 1,692.00         na                                            0%    $ 1,692.00       $ 13,060,000.00      $               13,060,000.00   $                       -
UA                                                  $        568.00    $           353.00                          161%    $ 278.00
UK                                                  $        248.00    $           248.00                          100%    $ 248.00         $ 15,100,000.00 $                   15,500,000.00 $                    400,000.00
UNL                                                 $        450.00    $           360.00                          125%    $ 360.00         $ 8,640,854.71 $                     8,640,855.00 $                          0.29
UU
UNLV                                                   $       115.00 $          115.00                            100%
UNR                           15000                    $       375.00 $          375.00                            100%




                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               Rate charged
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  for most
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 expensive
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                Rate charged   Faculty/staff
                                     Expenses for Expenses for a                                                                            Average Dollar                                                            Number os                      Parking      for most         Parking
                   Payback period a structure surface lot                                                                               increase of parking Average increase of parking                                average Parking space space to expensive                 Space same student permit
                   for a space in a space per       space per net annual cost Revenue made from parking Revenue per                      permit rates over permit rates over last three Average increase of parking riders per day to permit ratio permit ratio residential    location non- price to faculty
University Name       structure         month        month         per space          citations              space                         last three years            years              meters over last ten years on shuttle for faculty/staff for students parking space      reserved permit price
UNM                            39.05                             $      1,417.00 $              661,000.00 $     53.40                   $              9.05                        0.00%                         75% 9,200.00                  1.2        1.65 $ 242.00        $ 439.00                 181%
UT                                                                                                                                       $             42.00                           6%                               14,977.00                               $ 743.00        $ 408.00                  55%
UW                                                                                         $                 220,000.00 $         19.28 $              56.08                          22%                               24,109.59                               $ 1,692.00      $ 1,692.00               100%
UA                                                                                                                                                                                     4%                                                                       $ 568.00        $ 568.00                 100%
UK                                                                                         $                1,072,100.00 $        50.51                                                                                                                    1.24 $ 248.00        $ 372.00                 150%
UNL                                                                                        $                  553,008.00 $        34.83 $              31.00                           7%                                                                       $ 600.00        $ 535.00                  89%
UU                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                              $ 136.00        $ 270.00                 199%
UNLV                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            $ 125.00        $ 250.00                 200%
UNR                                                                                                                                                      18.9                          5%                                                                       $ 375.00        $ 375.00                 100%

                                                                                                                                     Lobo Development Corporation – Draft 8/5/2010 28

				
DOCUMENT INFO