1 / 54

Sustainable Access to CSUEB Hayward

Cars vs. Transit. Sustainable Access to CSUEB Hayward. Outline. Current Access and Proposed Parking Alternatives The Beeline Bus: Fast, Frequent, Free Travel Time Enough Ridership? Comparative Costs and Financing Summary. Current Access to CSUEB Hayward.

mimir
Download Presentation

Sustainable Access to CSUEB Hayward

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Cars vs. Transit Sustainable Access to CSUEB Hayward

  2. Outline • Current Access and Proposed Parking • Alternatives • The Beeline Bus: Fast, Frequent, Free • Travel Time • Enough Ridership? • Comparative Costs and Financing • Summary

  3. Current Access to CSUEB Hayward • The campus has many large parking lots. • At the start of fall and winter quarters parking spaces are scarce. • Parking permits cost $130 per quarter. • AC Transit Bus Route 60 runs every 20 minutes from Hayward BART, and takes 18 minutes to get to campus. • Students can ride a free campus shuttle, also slow.

  4. Proposed Parking The CSUEB Hayward Draft Master Plan (CSUEB Hayward Master Plan, 2008)

  5. What’s behind these numbers? • Planners propose reducing demand for parking using various policies called Transportation Demand Management (TDM). • Even so, planners project a need for more parking before and after 2017. • Academic buildings would be built on some current parking lots, reducing needed spaces. • Planners propose a parking structure for 1,100 cars to meet parking needs projected for 2017.

  6. Alternatives

  7. Stanford University • Stanford began the Cash for Clean Air pro-gram in 1994, paying students NOT to park on campus – now $180/year per student. • Rather than spending millions on parking garages, Stanford chose to invest in bike and transit programs to maintain campus aesthetics and promote clean air.

  8. UC Santa Cruz • The University invests in transit & bike paths. • Parking spaces are limited. • 1 space per 3 students. • Cars on campus are not allowed for Freshmen & Sophomores. • Parking fees are extremely high. • $684/year

  9. OtherCampusPrograms Access policies also include: Ample, safe, protected bicycle parking Pedestrian-friendly walkways Car pooling and car sharing Quick, reliable public transportation Planned reduction of traffic and parking Chico... Cal Poly... the whole U.C. system has increasing enrollment and award-winning transit.

  10. Alternatives to a Parking Structure • Alternative land use: Student Housing A residence hall here would be closer to campus than the proposed housing on the west low terrace, where students would have to walk up past the parking structure to reach the campus. Then, the terrace could be used for low-cost surface parking or recreation. • Alternative access using fast, frequent, free buses: “The Beeline Bus”

  11. The Beeline Bus – fast, frequent, free

  12. Fast in traffic • Mid-size, 30 foot, buses keep up with traffic • Less obtrusive than the usual 40 foot bus or articulated bus • Faster and more nimble in traffic • Mid-size bus seats 30 passengers • Diesel – electric dual mode motor or all electric • Faster hill climbing with electrical torque • Regenerative braking downhill recovers energy • Can run on sustainable biodiesel, e.g., waste cooking or motor oil

  13. Fast On-Off Boarding • The bus has wide doors on floor level, no steps. • Bus stops have raised platforms for no-step on-off boarding. • Docking parks buses very close to platform. • Prepaid fares are checked at random by inspectors (“proof of purchase”). • Driver does not collect fares, for faster on-off boarding. Las Vegas MAX

  14. Frequent • The bus is frequent, every 10 minutes. • Travel time BART to campus is 8 minutes. • It runs all day; it starts before 8:00 am classes and ends after 10:00 pm. • The bus keeps on schedule, using signal changing equipment to change red lights. • The bus may use “right-lane preference” to use right turn lanes to cut past cars at intersections.

  15. Free • All students would ride for free • Parking charges would pay for the bus • Parking charges would increase less than for a parking structure • Students using the free bus benefit the most • All students benefit from lower parking charges and less traffic

  16. The Beeline Route Distance = 2.25 miles

  17. Convenient Stops, BART to Campus Campus Bayview Village Mission at Carlos Bee Mission at Highland Mission at Fletcher C Street B Street Hayward BART Station

  18. Stops on campus Library PE Bldg

  19. Campus stops make sense • Faster, more efficient route than Loop Road for transit-walk trips • Safer than driving around the Loop Road: Crosses three walkways on campus; crosses too many walkways and cars to count on Loop Road • More visibility & advertising for the service • Other campuses have transit stops on campus: Stanford’s Marguerite, Berkeley’s Bear Transit • Visibility and sustainability would help promote the campus

  20. Travel Time

  21. Total travel time is important • “In-vehicle” time is only part of total trip time • Total time needs to include all stages: • parking and walking to bus stop • average waiting time for a bus • the in-vehicle time (bus or car) • parking on campus (car) • walking from bus or car to building entry

  22. Time from BART to campus • Driving: In-vehicle time to Lot C using Hayward Blvd. and proposed new entry road, park, walk to center of library: about 16 minutes • AC Transit: In-vehicle time to downtown, park, walk to bus, wait, in-vehicle time to campus, walk to center of library: about 35 minutes • Beeline Bus: In-vehicle time to downtown, park, walk to bus, wait, in-vehicle time to campus, walk to center of library: about 20 minutes

  23. Why not AC Transit? • AC Transit Route 60 is slow: • Slow, under-powered articulated bus • Round-about route using 2nd St. • 18 minutes run time (8 minutes for the Beeline) • Travel time 35 minutes (20 minutes for the Beeline) • AC Transit is expensive: $148 per bus operating hour ($68 for MV Transportation in Union City) • Many campuses run their own bus systems for control, efficiency, and cost savings

  24. Why not the CSUEB Shuttle? • A 20 minute run time; it should be 8 minutes • A 20 minute headway; it should be 10 minutes • No service Friday evening or weekends • It is limited in whom it serves • It supports no corridor development • It has a circuitous route

  25. Driving vs. BART • BART is expensive, but the average cost per mile for a car is even higher. • However, the marginal cost of driving (the cost of gasoline) is low. Gasoline is about 18% of the average cost. Cars are expensive to own, but cheap to drive. • BART, round trip, Oakland - Hayward $5.60 • Average driving cost, 30 miles, $.55/mile $16.27 • Marginal cost of gas, 25 mpg, $3/ gallon $3.58 • The Beeline Bus supports a car free lifestyle, saving a large amount of money—no car costs, no parking fees

  26. Enough Ridership?

  27. The Goal for a Rapid Bus:Equal the Parking Structure • CSUEB estimates 18,755 students, faculty, and staff need access to the campus in 2017. • The master plan projects about 2,695 students will live on-campus, leaving 16,096 people needing access from off-campus. • With no structure, there would be about 4,460 surface spaces, 1,100 spaces short of need. • Transit would need to serve the equivalent of 1,100 parking spaces, or about 1,300 people, to meet the goal of the proposed structure.

  28. Data bases for analyzing transit Data sources: • Zip codes of student residential location • Traffic model data of origin zones of 2005 • Days of the week that classes meet • Time of day when students attend class • City of Hayward traffic counts by half hour • Bus capacity

  29. Where Are Students Coming From? How many students use the “downtown corridor” from Hayward BART to campus? • Zip code data on student residential location • About 23.4 % come via I-580 from the North via Foothill or live in the downtown Hayward area • About 10.4 % come via I-880 from the North, and could use A St. or Winton Ave. • County traffic model data on origin zones to campus • About 18.6 % come via I-880 from the North • About 14.7 % come via I-580 from the North • Both sources show about33 % using this corridor

  30. Most classes meet on Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, and Thursday

  31. Monday classes mostly 9:00 am to 7:30 pm

  32. Tuesday classes mostly 10:00 am to 7:30 pm

  33. Traffic Counts in Hayward • City counts were adjusted using the County traffic model to show campus only. • They show a pattern similar to class meeting times. • Both traffic counts and class schedules show travel spread evenly across the day with no strong peak concentrations. • Even flow is ideal for transit.

  34. Rider capacity of a two-bus system • Each bus can carry 30 passengers, and goes one way 3 times per hour: 90 riders one way per hour. • Each bus operates 14.5 hours to serve morning and evening classes. • If buses on average are half full, they would carry 1,305 round trip riders per day. • In practice, some runs will have few riders and others have standing room only. • Even if only half full, rapid buses could meet the same need as the parking structure.

  35. Would enough students ride? • About 33% of students come through downtown Hayward • They would walk, take a bus or BART, or use parking along the route to reach the bus • Only 36% of students using this downtown corridor would need to ride the bus to make it feasible • They would save about $200 per quarter with little loss of time on average • For some times of day and some campus destinations they would save time. • Some students could then live car free and afford to attend CSUEB Hayward

  36. Comparative CostsandFinancing

  37. Estimated Cost of Parking Structure • Per space construction cost: about $29,200 • Amortization over 25 years at 5% interest: about $2,050 per year • Operating costs: about $500 per year • Total costs per space: about $2,550 per year • Total cost for 1,100 spaces: $2,800,000per year

  38. Estimating the Fee to Pay for A Parking Structure • Parking permits must pay for parking costs, including the parking structure. • Permits are sold fall, winter, and spring. • About 4.95 quarterly permits are sold per space per year.

  39. Two ways to estimate the parking fee • 1) Unsubsidized parking fee: those who park in the structure pay the cost of the structure. • 2) Subsidized parking fee: those who use surface parking are over-charged to help cover the cost of the parking structure.

  40. Unsubsidized Parking Fee • The cost of a parking structure space divided by the number of permits sold per space per year equals the cost per quarter of a student parking fee. • The unsubsidized parking permit for the structure would cost about $515 per quarter.

  41. Subsidized Parking Fee • Students can be over-charged for surface parking to pay for the parking structure. • In 2017 the plan calls for 1,100 structure spaces and 4,460 surface spaces, totaling 5,560. • The quarterly parking fee overcharge for the structure would be about $102.

  42. One more way to look at the cost of a parking structure • Suppose we build surface parking on the same spot as the structure. • Then, the structure only adds parking on the upper levels. • We can subtract the surface costs from the structure costs and the surface spaces from the total structure spaces. • The result is the cost per space for the upper spaces.

  43. The structure diagram shows that at least 223 spaces could be built on the same footprint. • A surface lot would cost about $790 per space per year for amortization and operations, far less than the $2,600 per space for the structure. • The unsubsidized surface parking permit would cost about $160 per quarter, far less than $515 permit cost per quarter for the structure.

  44. Net cost of upper levels • The parking structure gains about 877 spaces above the surface. • The cost of the structure minus the cost of surface parking equals the net cost of the upper levels. • The unsubsidized permit cost for the upper level spaces would be about $606 per quarter. • Any parking fee based on the cost of the structure is uneconomic; it won’t work.

  45. Cost of A Two-bus System • Capital costs are about $4.3 million: • High-tech buses are expensive, about $550,000 each • Signal changing equipment • Raised platform stops with shelters • Guided docking at platforms • Garage for office, parts, and servicing • Ramp to PE Building and Loop Rd. intersection realignment • Amortized at 5% over 25 years = $300,000 per year • Operating costs would be about $70 per bus operating hour • Operating costs for a full schedule all year = $741,000 • Yearly capital and operating = $1,040,000

  46. Paying for the Beeline Bus • Parking fine revenue: About $150,000 per year • Parking permit fee revenue from about 4,460 surface spaces in 2017 pays for surface parking and the bus • At 4.95 permits sold per space per year, 22,073 permits would be sold • Only $40 per permit above the cost of surface parking covers all of the cost of transit to campus And… • Class Pass - All students get a free pass.

  47. Summary of Cost Estimates • A 1,100 space parking structure would cost: • $102 parking fee/quarter, subsidized (added to base permit cost, currently $95 per quarter) • $515 parking fee/quarter, unsubsidized • $606 parking fee/quarter, upper levels alone • New surface parking on structure footprint would cost $160/quarter • Frequent, rapid bus would cost $40/quarter

  48. Summary

  49. More Parking? • Expensive for the student • Has to be subsidized by surface parking • Expensive for the environment • Increases traffic and congestion • Increases fossil fuel use and pollution • Increases health and safety problems from accidents and a sedentary life style • Continues dependency on cars and foreign sources of energy

More Related