Archives
Parking survey results are in
No ramps, additional surface lots planned
By DONNA LONGENECKER
Reporter Assistant Editor
Creating additional metered parking spaces along Putnam Way and allocating more spaces within all parking lots closest to the academic spine for commuter student parking were among the recommendations outlined in a long-awaited study of UB's parking and transportation services by the Chance Management Advisors (CMA) consulting firm.
The report does not recommend building parking ramps or additional surface parking lots on either the North or South campuses, but encourages better promotion of the campus shuttle service. It also suggests the university implement a market-based fee system, whereby individuals pay a higher fee to park closer to desired destinations.
In addition, it urges UB to develop a transportation master plan that would establish goals and objectives for increased transit ridership, as well as identify strategies to support the planned Lee Road development's transit needs and minimize vehicular traffic both to and within the corridor.
The consultant's report may be viewed at www.student-affairs.buffalo.edu/announcements.shtml. The Web site has a feedback section to collect comments, observations and ideas from members of the UB community.
Dennis Black, vice president for student affairs, said that open sessions will be held on both the North and South campuses in early February to review and discuss the plan. Information on those sessions will be published in the Reporter as soon as it becomes available.
Interwoven throughout the in-depth report—part of CMA's three phase study that began in October 2001—are major recommendations for changing the way that the Office of Parking and Transportation Services (PTS) does business, both from a financial and operational perspective.
PTS, which falls under the purview of the Department of Public Safety, has seen revenue increasing between 7-8 percent a year, although its operating budget has recorded deficits of more than $225,000 for three straight years—making it impossible to cover costs, according to CMA. The transportation fee paid by students funds about 81 percent of the PTS budget, a fact that is unique to UB—on most campuses parking fees subsidize transportation, says CMA.
"On an annual operating basis, PTS had a deficit of $225,213 in 2000-01. This has been roughly the same for the past three years. However, when prior carry-overs are included, the year-end cumulative debt is over $2.5 million. This is nearly $500,000 more than the year before," the report states.
There are several reasons for this, according to the report, including low parking fees, the fact that faculty and staff do not pay to park, low vehicle-registration fees and few paid parking lots in convenient locations.
"Clearly, PTS is not covering its costs, and the deficits are rising. Even if there is the desire to have parking and transportation be financially self-sufficient, which is commonly desired or required in university settings, substantial changes would have to be made before PTS could achieve this status," the report said.
Further, "If the university does not move toward covering more of the expenses associated with the necessary infrastructure of parking and transportation, it faces the need to eventually fund several million dollars annually of debt service and operating costs. These funds may be difficult to allocate, given the other needs of the university and increasing operating costs on the campus as a whole."
Faculty and staff collective bargaining agreements also are viewed by CMA as a major hurdle to raising parking fees—it can't be done without reopening negotiations with United University Professions, the union representing SUNY faculty and professional staff.
"These agreements are obviously very important to faculty and staff, but they make providing services even more difficult. Not only do these agreements reduce the potential revenue to support parking and transportation services, but it makes it more difficult to change allocation systems, provide convenient parking that individuals will pay to use and modify parking locations to meet changing needs," the report said.
The parking study, which also included reviews of safety and security on campus, customer service, a peer review of several other universities to provide comparisons and similarities to UB's own services, cites the advantages of moving toward a market-based parking system, which is the case at most major universities. In a market-based system, individuals pay a higher fee to park closer to desired destinations and a lower fee the father away they park. Because UB lacks this distinction, the report notes, parking resources are not more uniformly used or distributed across campus.
"With the inability to convert surface lots close to the spine to better revenue-generating facilities, and the issues associated with establishing faculty/staff fees relative to the prime locations they occupy, it is difficult to generate more parking revenue. The students pay the transportation fee, and to add parking fees adequate to make desired changes or to build garages would put UB at a competitive disadvantage," the report states.
The survey also gathered data from public forums, opinion surveys and a Web-based survey.
According to the study, UB hosts about 25,000 students and about 10,000 faculty and staff—and all must compete for roughly 14,000 parking spaces.
Those competing daily for a parking space on campus (faculty, staff and students) voiced a variety of concerns at campus forums, the report said, among them "parking vultures" who circle lots, creating pedestrian and motorist safety hazards; the difficulty in finding a convenient space after 8:45 a.m.; the fear that on-campus residents might be using commuter spaces; adequate lighting in and around parking areas; the lack of parking and transportation information for commuters provided at freshman orientation and the lack of appropriate notification and signage for special events, resulting in traffic jams and students arriving late for class, and a "horrible" and "deadly slow" shuttle system.
"While these forums raised a number of concerns (and occasionally, some misperceptions) regarding the university's management and operation of the overall parking and transit systems, perhaps no issue is more apparent than the need for improved communication and information flow between service provider and customer," the report said.
The firm's short and long-term recommendations cover all aspects of parking and transportation issues. Among them:
Close the side entrance of Michael Lot on the South Campus (which currently allows uncontrolled exit of vehicles to Bailey Avenue) and consider implementing a cashiered or automated pay-on-exit system. This would eliminate the requirement for Dental Clinic patients to first obtain a parking permit for entry to the Michael Lot, thus reducing the vehicle queuing in front of the Dental Clinic entrance. The patients could therefore obtain their parking validations when they leave the clinic.
Create additional short-term parking opportunities along Putnam Way through the judicious selection and conversion of underutilized spaces to metered parking.
Develop an implementation plan and a corresponding budget plan to install access control equipment (e.g., gates with keycards) in large lots where it is important to eliminate parking by those without suitable permits. These ultimate installation scenarios could potentially affect the number of enforcement personnel needed. In addition, the access control equipment would make feasible a number of the allocation and permit management recommendations.
Allocate additional spaces within all parking lots closest to the academic spine for commuter student parking.
Implementation of a campus shuttle promotional campaign to better publicize shuttle services and promote ridership, including the publication and wide distribution of a consolidated campus transit-system map; posting route maps at all bus stops, residence halls and apartments, and other key locations, and establishing—possibly via a campus-wide contest—a distinctive, university-related transit color and naming scheme to better identify the transit system's areas of service. While this may require modification of the current contract with the transit-service provider, buses should be identified as serving the university, not the contractor.
A new bus schedule should be developed, illustrating routes, as well as the schedule. As of the writing of this report, this effort is already under way.
Installation of additional bus shelters at key locations, such as Lee Loop. PTS should solicit student suggestions and priorities for bus shelters if they cannot be afforded at every stop. The university has six new shelters on order and is planning the physical extension of bus shelters at the Main Circle and Lee Loop transit stops, the report said.
UB should develop a transportation master plan. In addition to establishing goals and objectives for increased transit ridership, this planning document should also identify strategies that would support the Lee Road development's transit needs and minimize vehicular traffic both to and within the corridor.
Ensure that bus and shuttle operating times closely support class schedules by developing a database that profiles course registrations for subsequent analysis and scheduling of transit services.
CMA also reported that compared with other institutions that it surveyed at UB's request, including Cornell, Ohio State, Syracuse, Binghamton University, University of California, Los Angeles, University of Minnesota, University of Nebraska and The University of Virginia, UB has the lowest faculty and staff parking fees (none) and among the lowest student fees.
The results of the peer survey also found that UB is the only institution without a parking garage, although it does have the second highest number of surface parking spaces, after Ohio State, and it is the only institution in this group not to restrict resident students to resident-only parking.