|
Parking As An HOV Incentive
Click HERE for graphic. PARKING AS AN HOV INCENTIVE A. PARKING PASS B. CASH IN YOUR CAR Demonstration Programs Conducted By Department of Metropolitan Services Metro) Metropolitan King County Seattle, WA April 1992 - April 1994 Supervised By William T. Roach Supervisor, Market Development Section Department of Metropolitan Services Metro) Metropolitan King County Seattle, WA Authored By Jeff Wong, Transit Planner Pam Woo, Transit Planner Department of Metropolitan Services Metro) Metropolitan King County Seattle, WA ABSTRACT PARKING AS AN HOV INCENTIVE A. Parking Pass B. Cash In Your Car The following abstract and paper covers two separate incentive parking programs under Parking As An HOV Incentive. Each parking program utilized existing parking facilities in a unique way as an incentive to reduce single-occupant vehicle trips to a worksite. A. Parking Pass The Parking Pass demonstration was conducted by the Department of Metropolitan Services (Metro) with five major employers in downtown Seattle and a private parking operator. The goal was to test the effectiveness of offering four free or discount ($3) parking days per month to employees who purchase bus passes, and to evaluate the effectiveness of increasing bus pass use. Current demographic trends make it difficult for workers to commit to using an HOV mode 100% of the time. Work schedules, family commitments, and unanticipated emergencies complicate trips to and from work. Providing a limited number of SOV parking days for bus commuters provides insurance that they can drive if occasional errands come up. This makes the choice of whether to buy a bus pass more feasible for this type of commuter. The 1990 City of Seattle Employee Transportation Survey indicated approximately 16% of SOV commuters in the Seattle CBD have infrequent need to use their car. This group was the major target of the demonstration. This is also the hardest group to shift to HOV use. There was high interest in having the insurance of flexible parking days as indicated by significant shifts in commute: 9% of participants drove alone before the program and shifted to bus pass use; 27% of participants had a mixed commute before the program and shifted to bus pass use, 15% of existing bus riders paid their fare using cash or tickets and switched to bus passes during the program. Employees were very interested in this incentive as indicated by the number of participants, number of new bus pass holders, and employee feedback. It is an effective tool for encouraging HOV use particularly in areas where there is a charge for parking. B. Cash In Your Car Cash In Your Car (CIYC) was a demonstration program conducted by the Department of Metropolitan Services (Metro) and three private employers in King County, Washington. The goal was to test the effectiveness of offering the monthly cash value of a subsidized parking space to employees as an inducement to commute by a non- single occupant vehicle(SOV) mode. In return for receiving the cash, employees agreed to forgo using the parking spaces. The program objectives were to: 1. Evaluate whether offering the cash value of subsidized parking is effective in causing employees to change their commute mode away from single occupant vehicles. 2. Evaluate whether employees were willing to forgo use of their employer subsidized parking space for an extended period of time (12 months). 3. Compare perceptions and expectations participants had before the program with actual experiences during the program. 4. Identify any systematic or structural barriers which prevented employers and employees from participating in the program. 5. Identify any possible changes or improvements to the basic program structure as implemented in this demonstration. The results of the demonstration are mixed. A total of 26 employees accepted the parking cash-out option. The switch from a single-occupant vehicle mode to an alternative, non-SOV mode was nearly 100 percent among all the participants. However, very few employers and employees took part in the program. The recommendations below attempt primarily to overcome the significant barriers to voluntary participation in a cash out program: 1. Include building owners or lessors in future parking cash out programs. 2. Implement more equitable tax incentives regarding innovative alternatives to drive-alone commuting. 3. Develop and implement supportive commercial development and parking policies. 4. Promote and increase awareness of current Metro safety programs. 5. Offer parking cash-out incentives as part of larger, more comprehensive alternative transportation benefits programs. 6. Provide emergency or discretionary parking days each month for cash-out participants. 7. Provide equitable alternative benefits to employees who do not receive free or subsidized parking. PART A: PARKING PASS Table of Contents Page Introduction and Objectives Program Description 1 Objectives 1 Program Design Methodology 2 Employer Participation 2 Garage Participation 2 Administration 3 Marketing 3 Overall Findings Program Participation 4 Attraction of New Bus Pass Buyers 4 Distribution and Usage 6 Registrant Characteristics 9 Differences in Characteristics of New and Existing Bus Pass Buyers 10 Efficiency of Program Procedures 10 Employee Feedback 11 Summary of Findings 12 Conclusions 14 Recommendations 15 Future Directions 15 Acknowledgments 16 References 17 Findings From Other Companies 18 Attachments A. Registration Form B. Parking Coupons C. Marketing Materials D. Month of Program Registration INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES DESCRIPTION The Parking Pass demonstration was conducted by the Department of Metropolitan Services (Metro). The goal was to test the effectiveness of offering four free or discount ($3) parking days per month to employees who purchase bus passes, and to evaluate the effectiveness of increasing bus pass use. Several local companies currently offer similar parking incentives but research on effectiveness of increasing HOV use is not monitored by these companies. Many employees drive alone to work for flexibility in running errands or responding to emergencies. Providing a limited number of parking days for bus commuters provides insurance that they can drive if occasional errands come up which make buying a bus pass more feasible for this type of commuter. The 1990 Seattle Central Business District Survey indicated approximately 16% of SOV commuters in the Seattle CBD have infrequent need to use their car. This group of commuters was the major target of the demonstration. The demonstration was conducted from April 1992 to June 1993 at five employer sites in downtown Seattle, Washington. Companies that participated were Bogle & Gates (law), Westin Corporate Offices (administration), Hilton Hotel (hospitality), Callison Partnership (architecture) and Bank of California (finance). At four sites employees buying bus passes received four parking coupons good for a discounted $3 parking cost each day. At one site, employees received four free parking coupons each month. Metro contracted with Ampco System Parking to provide spaces at four garages located near company sites. OBJECTIVES The objectives of this program were to: 1. Evaluate interest in the incentive. 2. Compare results of offering four discount parking days and offering four free days per month. 3. Compare expected uses participants have before the program with actual usage. 4. Test program procedures for efficiency to the users and administrators. 5. Conduct a joint public and private program with Metro, employers and parking operators. 1 PROGRAM DESIGN METHODOLOGY Research was conducted from several data sources. Employees requesting parking passes were asked to complete initial registration forms which included questions about current commute mode, parking price and location, typical bus fare medium, trip length, age, and occupation. In addition to registration forms, each company provided Metro with lists of monthly bus pass sales and parking pass distributions. AMPCO returned to Metro the parking coupons that were used each month. A distribution and usage database was developed at Metro to track data on all coupons distributed and coupons actually redeemed. To assess the efficiency of administering the program, personal interviews with company program administrators and the garage contractor were conducted. EMPLOYER PARTICIPATION The five companies that participated were Bogle & Gates, Westin Corporate Offices, Hilton Hotel, Callison Partnership and the Bank of California. All are located in downtown Seattle. The companies were selected based on the following criteria: - located close to parking garages - 100 or more employees - subsidized Metro bus passes - did not offer many free or subsidized parking spaces to employees - did not have significantly higher than average HOV rates compared to the Seattle Central Business District average GARAGE PARTICIPATION Metro contracted with AMPCO System Parking to provide the following services: - provide parking management services and meet daily parking space needs at specific garages - accept and verify coupons, and collect remaining parking fees - make reasonable efforts to accommodate participants on days they park - comply with monthly accounting requirements - work with Metro to troubleshoot various problems that occur Spaces were provided at the following garages: - One Union/Two Union Square Puget Sound Plaza - Park Place - Hilton Hotel All the garages were located within a 4 block vicinity of participating companies. 2 ADMINISTRATION Initial Program Registration - Participants were asked to fill out an initial registration form by the Program Administrator at each site. The form included questions about usual commute mode, parking location and price, average trip length, age and occupation (See Attachment A). Coupon Distributions - Metro sent parking passes to each company on a monthly basis. Employees purchasing bus passes were eligible to sign up for the parking passes. The ETC verified the employee was a pass holder and distributed four passes valid for the month to each participant (See Attachment B). A list was maintained by the Program Administrator of parking pass recipients, parking pass numbers, and type of bus pass bought. Unused parking passes and monthly sign-up lists were returned to Metro each month. Redeemed Coupons - AMPCO sent Metro the actual coupons redeemed each month with a total tally by garage and a list of busy garage days to help monitor the parking services contracted. Garage Reimbursements - The daily parking rate of spaces contracted to Metro was based on a $5 per day early bird rate. Metro paid AMPCO $2 for each discount coupon used and $5 for each free coupon used. MARKETING Promotional efforts were coordinated between the project manager, program administrator at each site and Metro promotion staff. A variety of promotional strategies were used (See Attachment C) including: - descriptive flyers sent to all employees at the beginning of the program information posters posted at work sites - newsletter articles - flyers included in paycheck/direct mail - endorsements by upper management or ETC's through letter and/or electronic mail - kick-off meetings Metro provided the following resources: - promotional materials including posters, flyers, paycheck and direct mail flyers, newsletter information and electronic mail information - program procedures and registration forms - transportation assistance - program presentations to employee groups 3 OVERALL FINDINGS PROGRAM PARTICIPATION A total of 432 people registered for the program. Participation at each site was consistent with number of employees, the estimated market of potential new bus pass holders, and number of existing bus pass holders. Nearly half of all registrants were employees of Bogle & Gates. In Summary: - 45% of the total number of employees at all sites participated - Nearly all existing bus pass holders participated - 17% (or 60 participants) of the potential market of new bus pass buyers participated Table 1 Company Information FT Day Average Potential Program Employees Existing Market Participants Passes/Mo. New Pass Buyers Bogle & Gates 418 (43%) 155 141 212 (49%) Westin Corporate 146 (15%) 59 37 51 (11%) Hilton Hotel 82 (9%) 29 48 25 (12%) Callison 201 (21%) 80 91 94 (22%) Bank of CA. 117 (12%) 39 39 48 ( 6%) TOTAL 964 362 356 432 The potential market of new bus pass holders was estimated by deducting number of existing bus riders and employees with free parking from total employees at each site. ATTRACTION OF NEW BUS PASS BUYERS Before the program, participants commuted using the following modes: Table 2 Typical Commute Before Participating In Parking Pass Bus 58% Drive alone 9% Carpool 5% Other 1% Mixed commutes 27% 4 Nine percent of participants drove alone before participating in the program and switched to bus pass use after the program. This group was a major target of the program. There was also a major shift in number of employees who used mixed commute modes prior to participating (27%) and bought a bus pass during the program. Employees who commute by mixed modes are those who travel by different modes on different days of the week. The parking pass addresses the need potential bus pass users may have to occasionally use their car for errands. Determining whether existing bus riders that paid cash or ticket fares would switch to a bus pass was another objective of this program. Among existing riders, 85% paid using a pass and 15% paid cash or ticket fares and switched to a bus pass during the program. The majority were employees working at the Hilton. Among Hilton employees, about half of the existing bus riders formerly paid their fare using cash or tickets. Feedback from the Hilton indicated many employees prefer to pay their bus fare using cash or tickets instead of allocating a large monthly outlay of money for a pass. Some possible reasons for this include: the hotel is part of the service industry which employs many seasonal or part-time employees, many employees have variable work shifts, many use daily tips to pay bus fare, and many are paid hourly. Another possible reason given was that many cash and ticket fare riders switched to a bus pass because the addition of flexible parking days made the value of a pass more worthwhile to them. 14% of program participants were identified as being new bus pass buyers. These bus pass holders previously commuted using the following modes: Table 3 Typical Commute of New Bus Pass Holders Before Program Drove alone 38% Carpool 18% Other 2% Mixed 20% Unknown 22% REASONS FOR BUYING A BUS PASS (New Pass Buyers Versus Previous Pass Buyers) New bus pass buyers were more likely than existing bus riders to have bought a bus pass because of the parking pass program. 5 Table 4 Reasons for Buying a Bus Pass New Bus Pass Buyers Previous Bus Riders Convenience 31% 60% Parking pass incentive 27% 7% Other 31% 27% Cost savings 11% 6% Bus pass subsidy - 1% DISTRIBUTION AND USAGE Overall Program Statistics: number of coupons distributed 11,300 number of coupons redeemed 6,616 coupon use as percent of total distributed 59% Monthly Statistics: average use per month of all coupons 2.3 days average use per month with discount parking 2.6 days average use per month with free parking 1.3 days Coupon Use By Company: Table 5 Average Parking Use Per Month B&G Westin* Hilton Callison Bank of CA. Average Use By 2.6 1.3 2.3 2.0 1.2 Registrant Per Month Coupon Use As 64% 32% 57% 49% 29% Percent of Total Distributed Coupons Redeemed 3936 497 535 1115 127 * free parking offered Coupon use varied widely by company. Bogle & Gates had the highest participation rates and highest average use per participant. Garage location appeared to be a key factor in determining parking use. Companies such as Bogle & Gates, Callison Partnership and Hilton Hotel had the highest use and were located in the same buildings as the AMPCO garages. Companies located farthest from these garages had the lowest use such as Bank of California and Westin Corporate Offices which are both located 4 blocks from nearest garages. 6 Despite the fact that Westin Corporate Offices was the one company offering employees free parking passes, usage was lower than the other four companies which offered employees $3 parking passes. In addition to garage location, many other factors may have influenced usage including: general garage conditions, employees perceived value that receiving something at a $3 cost is worth more than receiving something at a free cost, the availability of discount or free parking nearby, etc. During most months, about one quarter of participants did not use any of the four parking coupons. On the other hand, about 40% of participants used all four of their parking coupons each month. At the time employees registered for the program, they were asked to indicate how many of the 4 coupons they expected to use. The majority of participants felt they would use the maximum days given. Actual use was lower, at 2.3 days a month. Employers considering the cost of offering this incentive can estimate that actual use will be lower than the maximum possible. Table 6 Number of Coupons Used Per Registrant Per Month Actual Expected 0 coupons 22% - - 1 coupon 13 9% 2 coupons 12 20% 3 coupons 13 14% 4 coupons 39 57% New bus pass buyers attracted by this demonstration were more likely than existing bus riders to expect to use all four parking coupons each month. Table 7 Expected Use of Parking Passes (new bus pass buyers compared to previous bus pass buyers) New Pass Buyers Previous Pass Buyers four or more 81% 53% three 4 81 two 9 21 one 6 10 7 These data support comments received from Program Administrators that employees like having the insurance of parking passes each month even if they do not actually use all the parking passes provided. This incentive eliminates one barrier to committing to a bus pass in that many employees think they need to drive to work in case an errand or emergency comes up. When Employees Registered Most employees registered for this program in the first two months the program was available at their company. Compared to other companies, Hilton had a large percent of employees registering in mid to later months. Many new bus pass buyers attracted during this demonstration also registered in later months, particularly Hilton employees. During the last quarter of the program 30% of the new bus pass buyers registered compared to 12% of existing bus riders registering during that time. (See Attachment D) 8 REGISTRANT CHARACTERISTICS Participants were asked to complete a registration form before beginning the program. Data shown below summarize participant characteristics. 1. Commute distance, home to work: less than 5 miles 15% 5 to 9 miles 30 10 to 14 miles 22 15 to 19 miles 14 20 or more miles 20 average miles one way = 11.7 miles 2. Frequency of varying work hours: daily 23% weekly 7 monthly 1 occasionally 53 never 17 Most respondents have work hours that vary occasionally or daily. 3. Occupation professional/technical 41% secretary/clerical 34 manager/administrative 9 personal services 4 other 11 Most respondents work in professional/technical or secretary/clerical occupations. 4. Age less than 20 years 1% 20 to 29 years 37 30 to 39 years 38 40 to 49 years 19 50 to 59 years 4 60 years or more 1 Average age of respondents was 33.6 years. 9 DIFFERENCES IN CHARACTERISTICS OF NEW AND EXISTING BUS PASS BUYERS There were no significant differences between the two groups with respect to age, commute distance, or location where they parked their car when they drove downtown. There were differences in the following areas: Work Schedule: New bus pass buyers were more likely to frequently vary their work hours. 40 percent of new pass buyers vary their hours at least every week, compared to 29 percent of existing pass holders. Occupation: New pass buyers were somewhat more likely than existing pass holders to work in "other" positions (25% versus 9%), and less likely to work in secretary/clerical positions (23% versus 36%). Month of Program Registration: Many of the new bus pass buyers who were attracted in this demonstration registered for the program in the later months. From February 1993 through April 1993, 30 percent of new bus pass buyers registered for the program. In comparison, only 12 percent of previous bus pass holders registered in these months. Company: About 14 percent of registrants were new bus pass buyers. The proportion of new bus pass buyers among Hilton employees was significantly higher than at the other companies. Among all Hilton employees who registered for the program, 31 percent were new bus pass buyers. (See company feedback for more information) EFFICIENCY OF PROGRAM PROCEDURES Parking Coupon Distribution In discussions with Metro about the demonstration, Program Administrators at each site said the program was very easy to administer and took minimal time. The procedures used in this demonstration were established to complement the existing process companies used for distributing transit passes. Parking passes were distributed at the same time as bus passes for ease of administration. The Program Administrator had the following additional responsibilities: making sure participants filled out an initial registration form, verifying the employee was a bus pass buyer, recording and distributing parking coupons on a monthly basis, and returning parking passes back to Metro each month. 10 Because this was a demonstration program, some troubleshooting occurred to resolve the following issues: high volume of parking passes to monitor some instances where company distribution records were not readable þ coupons used during wrong month þ participants passing coupons to other employees to use Garage Procedures AMPCO garage personnel were responsible for collecting and dating parking coupons and verifying that coupons were signed and not expired. AMPCO submitted the used coupons to Metro on a monthly basis. In discussions with Metro, AMPCO personnel said the program was fairly easy to administer because it was consistent with their daily procedures for collecting coupons. They did feel that the monthly summary tracking of coupons was labor intensive because of the volume of coupons. EMPLOYEE FEEDBACK Most companies gave feedback that employees appreciated the incentive because it provided insurance for days when they need to drive. During the program, Metro bus pass costs increased and a few Callison employees decided to buy an annual pass instead of monthly passes. Before they bought the annual pass they checked with the Program Administrator to verify that they would still receive parking coupons each month because they did not want to lose the flexible parking days. Employees also said the parking enabled them to save time because they could run errands after work. Some employees at the Bank of California suggested that closer garages be used. They felt that the 4 block walk to participating garages was far and inconvenient. Each company that participated had different employee make-ups and occupations which Program Administrators felt had some affect on program use. At the Bank of California office, they had a higher proportion of management, officers and department heads than at their other worksites. At Bogle & Gates there was a mixed proportion of partners, attorneys and professional/administrative staff. At Callison Partnership the majority of employees are architects and designers, and the rest professional/administrative. Many of the architects/designers travel frequently which would affect use. At the Hilton Hotel, the majority of employees are hourly service industry employees who have varying work shifts. For the most part, most employees that participated were in the professional/administrative category with the exception of the Hilton. 11 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS Interest in the program - A total of 432 employees registered for the program which is 45% of the total number of employees at all sites. - 17% of the estimated potential market of new bus pass holders participated in the program. - Nearly 100% of existing bus pass buyers registered for the program. Prior Commute Characteristics - Nine percent of participants drove alone before the program and shifted to bus pass use during the program. - 27% of participants had a mixed commute before the program and shifted to bus pass use during the program. This is consistent with other research indicating commuters often travel by different commute modes throughout the week. - 15% of existing bus riders before the program paid their fare using cash or tickets and switched to bus passes during the program. Program Use - On average, program participants used 2.3 of the 4 parking coupons provided each month. Average use with discount parking was 2.6 days per month, and average use with free parking was 1.3 days per month. - Usage varied widely by company. Garage location appears to be the key factor affecting usage as companies with the highest coupon use were located in the same building as participating garages (Bogle & Gates, Callison Partnership, Hilton Hotel). Bogle & Gates had the highest use per registrant. - Despite the fact that Westin Corporate Offices was the only company offering free parking, usage was lower than the other four companies offering discount parking coupons. In addition to garage location, other factors may have influenced usage such as: garage conditions such as security, employees perceptions that receiving something at a $3 cost is worth a higher value than receiving something free, availability of other parking nearby and specific characteristics of Westin employees. 12 - 27% of new bus pass buyers said they bought a bus pass because of the parking pass incentive. In contrast, most existing bus pass buyers said convenience was the reason they bought a bus pass. 13 CONCLUSIONS USE OF THE PARKING PASS PROGRAM There was high interest in having the insurance of flexible parking days in case of errands or emergencies as indicated by the number of participants, number of new bus pass holders, and employee feedback. During this demonstration there were key increases in: - SOV users that switched to bus passes - mixed mode commuters that switched to bus passes - bus riders who formerly paid cash or ticket fares and switched to bus passes The major target of the program were drive alone commuters in which nine percent of program participants switched from driving alone to bus use. This is significant because these employees have started a commitment to HOV use. This is also the hardest commute mode to shift to HOV use. Over one quarter of program participants (27%) switched from mixed commute modes to bus use. The parking pass addresses the needs of employees who do not take the same commute mode consistently throughout the week, by offering flexible parking every month for occasional needs to drive. This eliminates one barrier that potential bus pass users have to committing to a pass. Also, providing a limited number of parking days can help retain existing bus pass buyers, and encourage cash or ticket transit riders to commit to a bus pass. On average, participants used 2.3 parking passes per month, which is less than the maximum 4 days given. Employers who consider offering this incentive can estimate that actual use will be lower than the maximum possible. In addition to employee benefits, employers benefit because the incentive: - is easy to administer - provides an incentive for potential HOV users - can improve employee morale - can free up SOV parking spaces thereby reducing parking costs and freeing up spaces for client use 14 RECOMMENDATIONS 1. Limited SOV parking is an incentive which can be used to encourage transit use. This incentive can be expanded to include all HOV users. 2. Providing limited SOV parking is an effective tool for encouraging HOV use when the following criteria apply: - offered in areas where there is a charge for parking - offered at sites with low HOV rates to receive the highest number of new bus pass or HOV users. If offered at sites with already high HOV use, the program mainly subsidizes parking for people who are already taking transit. - parking spaces to accommodate users are available from spaces provided by employers or in private garages nearby. 3. This is most effective when offered as part of a larger, more comprehensive transportation program. Linking multiple benefits, such as subsidized transit passes and SOV parking fees enhances overall increase in HOV use. 4. The parking pass incentive addresses commute flexibility issues. Results indicated that over one quarter of program participants (27%) switched from mixed commute modes to bus use. The parking pass addresses the needs of employees who do not take the same commute mode consistently throughout. 5. Involve private parking operators in developing parking strategies which encourage HOV use. The public and private sectors should work together on more joint strategies to encourage HOV use. 6. In addition to employers offering this incentive, private parking operators and building owners can develop programs which offer this incentive. Parking can be provided from employers using their own spaces, through building parking, or contracted with a garage operator. FUTURE DIRECTIONS Metro is currently researching a number of possible options for developing the Parking Pass program. These include: 1. Offer limited SOV parking days to HOV users in combination with a Parking Cash-Out program. 2. Include limited SOV parking as part of Metro's FlexPass agreements with employers. 3. Conduct a similar demonstration in an area where there is no market value for parking (free parking) to determine effectiveness in non-CBD areas. 4. Research possibilities for offering this incentive through retail bus pass sales outlets. There are several local companies such as Puget Power, Skyline Tower Building and the University of Washington which currently offer various forms of limited parking days. (See Findings From Other Companies) 15 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The author would like to acknowledge and thank the following persons for their contributions and support of this demonstration project. Laurie Elder, Metro George Allen, Metro Paul Roybal, Metro Mike Beck, Metro Mary Barker, Metro Brad Parrish, Ampco System Parking Karen Markus, Bank of California Shelley Davis, Callison Partnership Katie Grabow, Callison Partnership Bruce Kendall, Bogle & Gates Susan Pierson, Bogle & Gates Joe Clossin, Hilton Hotel Ken Coar, Westin Corporate Offices Tina Wissmar, Westin Corporate Offices 16 REFERENCES City of Seattle Engineering Department (1990). "1990 City of Seattle Employee Transportation Survey." Seattle Engineering Department, Transportation Services Division, City of Seattle, Seattle, WA. Blumenthal, Cathy (1993). Former Director of the Bellevue Transportation Management Association. Williams, Mike (1993). Manager of Transportation Systems, University of Washington Transportation Office. Parrish, Brad (1993). Branch Manager and Marketing Director, AMPCO System Parking. FINDINGS FROM OTHER COMPANIES Skyline Tower Building - Bellevue, Washington The Skyline Tower Building offers 3 free parking days a month to any employee of the building that is registered as an HOV user (transit, carpool, vanpool). Parking rates in the building normally costs $6 per day. Participation and Usage Rates: (Based on data from May 1993 - June 1993) Average Participants Per Month 140 Average Free Days Used Per Month 1.2 days or (40% of maximum) Participation as Percent of Total Eligible University of Washington (UW) - Seattle, Washington The UW offers a transportation program called the U-Pass to any students or faculty that sign up. For any faculty or staff U-Pass holders that also commute using non-SOV modes, up to 25 commuter parking tickets each quarter can be purchased at $1.25 per ticket paid up-front. They are purchased in books of 10 or 25 tickets. The tickets can be used for on campus parking when U-Pass holders occasionally need to drive to school. The number of staff and faculty that were eligible (had a U-Pass and commuted using non-SOV modes) between January 1992 - July 1992 was 7,699. The University does not have usage information or numbers of eligible U-Pass holders which requested parking tickets at this time but is in the process of tabulating this information. However, there is information on the total number of parking tickets bought each month. Based on this information the following participation and usage is expected: - Average participants each month range between 368 - 919 faculty and staff - Approximately 5% - 12% of the eligible 7,699 U-Pass holders participated. - Average use per month spread across each eligible U-Pass Holder was 1.2 days per month - Based on the fact that tickets must be pre-paid up front at $1.25 each, the majority of tickets requested were probably used. The major reason usage per participant is higher at the UW is because parking tickets are paid for up-front before receiving them. At Skyline Tower the average use per participant is lower at 1.2 days per month. Even thought the parking is free at Skyline Tower actual use per participant is probably lower because there is no up front payment. 18 PARKING PASS BOGLE & GATES REGISTRATION FORM Name: _________________________________________ 1. Before participating in this prop:-am, how many days per week did you use the following means to travel to and from work? _____ Drive alone _____ Take the bus _____ Carpool (2 or more people) _____ Vanpool _____ Other (please specify) 2. If you drove last month, where did you usually park your vehicle? _____ Parking garage at building _____ Parking garage or lot nearby _____ On street parking in downtown Seattle _____ Outside of downtown Seattle 3. How much do you personally pay to park when you drive in to work? $_____ Per day or $_____ Per month 4. If you rode the bus last month, how did you pay your fare? _____ Bus pass _____ Cash _____ Tickets 5. Why did you decide to buy a bus pass this month? _____ Work schedule _____ Parking pass _____ Convenience _____ No one to carpool/vanpool with _____ Other (please specify,) ___________________________ 6. How many clays per month do you expect to use your parking pass? _____ Days per month 7. What is the estimated distance from your home to your work place? _____ Miles (one way) 8. How often do your work hours vary? _____ Daily _____ Weekly _____ Monthly _____ Occasionally _____ Never 9. What is your occupation? _____ Personal services worker _____ Professional or technical _____ Secretary or clerical _____ Sales _____ Manager or administrator _____ Other (please specify) ____________________________ 10. How old are you? _______________ AMPCO PARKING GARAGE LOCATIONS - One Union/Two Union Square - 7th & Union - Puget Sound Plaza - 4th & Union - Park Place - 6th & Seneca - Hilton Hotel - 6th & University If space is unavailable at your choice location, see attendant for assistance, or the other garages may be used. METRO PARKING PASS USAGE This pass can be used only at the listed garages on non-holiday weekdays. Enter garage before 9 a.m. No in-and-out privileges When paying upon exiting garage, give a parking pass and show your bus pass to attendant. BUY A BUS PASS AND GET A LOT PARKING PASS That's right - a parking lot. With Metro's new Parking Pass program, Bogle & Gates employees will get to park in a nearby parking lot four days a month for just $3 a day when you buy a Metro bus pass. After all, we realize there are those days when you need your car. Your bus pass and parking pass, give you the perfect combination of convenience -and cost savings. You can enjoy a relaxing commute on the bus and have your car when you need it. And, you can take advantage of your $15 a month bus pass discount. For instance, if you currently commute 20 miles round trip a day and you pay for parking, you could save $241 a month with the Parking Pass program. Parking Costs Commuting Costs Drive alone and park all month $130 $155* Take the bus, and use your parking passes $12 $32 Getting in on this great deal is easy. Just ask Leslie Clossin, in Human Resources, for your parking passes each month when you pick up your Metro bus pass. To begin buying a monthly bus pass, just register in Human Resources about one week before the last day of the month. For more information on parking passes or monthly bus passes, give Leslie Clossin a call at x3200. Parking Pass is a test Program conducted by Metro. Program is scheduled to run through April 1993. Source: American Automobile association, Your Driving Costs, 1991 edition. Estimated with a mid-sized car at $.37 a mile, including depreciation, gas, maintenance and insurance costs. Assumes a two-zone peak monthly pass. There is an even greater savings for a one-zone or three month pass. Month of Program Registration B&G WESTIN HILTON CALLISON BANKCAL May 92 44% 91% - - - Jun 92 10 2 30% - - Jul 92 8 4 15 46% 68% Aug 92 5 0 10 7 18 Sep 92 6 0 0 3 0 Oct 92 9 0 3 6 5 Nov 92 1 2 23 0 5 Dec 92 0 0 3 10 0 Jan 93 3 0 0 0 0 Feb 93 0 0 8 9 0 Mar 93 2 0 0 11 0 Apr 93 11 0 10 6 5 May 93 - - 0 2 0 Jun 93 - - 0 0 0 n = 210 68 22 40 46 19 PART B: CASH IN YOUR CAR Table Of Contents Page Introduction and Objectives 1 Program Description 1 Objectives 2 Program Design 2 Employer Selection 2 Screening Criteria 2 Administration 2 Calculating Payment Amount 2 Program Registration 3 Metro Payments to Employers 3 Employer Payments to Employees 3 Employee Tracking 3 Marketing 3 Overall Findings 4 Employer Participation 4 Barriers to Participation 4 Other Possible Factors 5 Employee Participation 5 Changes in Commute Mode 7 Reasons Why Employees Left the Program 7 Reasons Why Employees Did Not Participate 8 Employee Suggestions for Improving the Program 8 Conclusions 9 Recommendations 10 Acknowledgments 11 References 12 Attachments A: Cash In Your Car Marketing Materials 13 B: Employee Registration Form 19 C: Summary of Focus Group at Ernst Corporation 21 List Of Tables Table 1: Difference Between Gross and Net Subsidy 3 Table 2: Employee Participation Rates by Employer 6 Table 3: Change in Employee Commute Mode by Employer 7 Table 4: Reasons Why Employees Left the Program 8 INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES PROGRAM DESCRIPTION Cash In Your Car (CIYC) was a demonstration program conducted by the Department of Metropolitan Services (Metro) and three private employers in King County. The goal was to test the effectiveness of offering the monthly cash value of a subsidized parking space to employees as an inducement to commute by a non-single occupant vehicle(SOV) mode. In other words, "cashing-out" the parking space. In return for receiving the cash value of the parking space, employees agreed to forgo using their parking spaces for three-month periods that could be continued through twelve months. In addition, the program was theoretically cost neutral for employers. Since employers are already paying for the parking spaces, employers should not incur any additional costs by transferring payments to employees under Cash In Your Car. In practice, there may have been some administrative expenses associated with the program. Employer subsidized parking is thought to be one of the leading factors influencing whether a person commutes to work by driving alone. A number of transportation researchers have theorized that offering the cash value of a parking space could possibly induce upwards of 20 percent of single occupant vehicle commuters to switch to a non-drive alone mode1. In addition, employers and employees have not always been fully aware of the inequity of subsidized parking. Often, the true cost of subsidizing an employee parking space is not readily apparent or available, due to bundling the lease for parking spaces with floor space. Thus, employers and employees do not realize the size and value of a subsidized parking space, which can be several times the amount of a more traditional high occupancy vehicle subsidy. The demonstration began in May 1992 with Ernst Corporation's corporate headquarters office in Seattle's Central Business District. Two additional employers joined the program, Digital Equipment Corporation located in Bellevue's Central Business District in October 1992, and Minor & James Medical located in Seattle's First Hill district in March 1993. ____________________ 1Shoup, D. and Wilson, R. (1991). "Employer-Paid Parking: The Problem and Proposed Solutions." Revised draft of research paper presented to Metro, Seattle, WA in Dec. 1990. Surber, M., Shoup, D., and Wachs, M. (1984). "Effects of Ending Employer-Paid Parking for Solo Drivers." Transportation Research Record 957, Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C. PROGRAM OBJECTIVES The objectives of the demonstration program were to: 1. Evaluate whether offering the cash value of subsidized parking is effective in causing employees to change their commute mode away from single occupant vehicles. 2. Evaluate whether employees were willing to forgo use of their employer subsidized parking space for an extended period of time (12 months). 3. Compare perceptions and expectations participants had before the program with actual experiences during the program. 4. Identify any systematic or structural barriers which prevented employers and employees from participating in the program. 5. Identify any possible changes or improvements to the basic program structure as implemented in this demonstration. PROGRAM DESIGN EMPLOYER SELECTION Three employers participated in the demonstration: 1) Digital Equipment Corporation in Bellevue's Central Business District; 2) Ernst Home Centers Corporate Office in Seattle's Central Business District; and 3) Minor & James Medical in Seattle's First Hill district. Screening Criteria The following criteria were used to screen potential qualified employers: - Provided free or subsidized parking to some or all of their employees. - Located in an area where parking had at least a $30 per month cash value. - Able to return leased, but unused, parking spaces back to the lessor on a month-by-month basis. Using the criteria listed above, Market Development staff coordinated with Metro Corporate Transportation Representatives (MCTRs) and Bellevue Transportation Management Association (TMA) staff to compile an initial list of potential participants. Nine employers were identified and contacted for participation in the demonstration. Of these employers, three agreed and six declined to participate in the demonstration program. ADMINISTRATION Calculating Payment Amount: Participating employers had to determine whether the subsidy amount to the employee was to be pre or post-taxes (see Table 1 below). Federal tax officials recommended withholding 20 percent for income tax and 7.65 percent for FICA tax purposes. Thus, the total tax liability of any subsidy payment was 27.65 percent. If an employer decided to pay a participating employee a gross subsidy, the employee would receive the subsidy less 27.65 percent. If an employer decided to pay the employee an after-tax net subsidy, then the amount would have to be "grossed-up" to determine the employer's actual cash-out cost. The calculation would be to divide the after-tax amount by 1 - 0.2765 or divide by 0.7235. 2 Table 1 Difference Between Gross and Net Subsidy ($100 subsidy). Amount Employer Amount of Federal Amount Employee Method Pays Out ($) Tax Withheld ($) Receives ($) Gross 100. 27.65 72.35 Net 138.22 38.22 100. Program Registration: Employees were informed at registration that, if they accepted the offer, they would forgo the use of their parking space for at least three months. Furthermore, employees were told the program was available for 12 months. At the time of sign-up, participants completed a registration form which included questions about their titles or positions, commute modes prior to joining the program, intended commute modes while in the program, and reasons for participating for the next three months (see Attachment B). Metro Payments to Employers: The funds that Metro supplied for payments were made available through a federal transportation grant. Payments to participating employers were made on a quarterly basis. A Request for Purchasing Authority (RPA) was completed by Metro's program manager and submitted to the Purchasing Department for approval. Upon approval, a Material Receipt/Voucher was issued granting the program manager authority to request payment to employers. Metro made two payments to employers to cover the first and second three month periods of an employee's participation in the program. The employer was responsible for paying the second six months of an employee's participation. Employer Payments to Employees: Payments made by employers to participating employees were made through regular payroll channels. Employers issued separate checks for the cash-out payment. An alternative method was to directly credit an employee's paycheck the amount of the payment through an employer's computerized payroll system. None of the participating employers elected to use this method during the demonstration. Employee Tracking: Employers were responsible for returning an employee's completed registration form to Metro every three months. Information from the forms was recorded in a database which tracked length of employee's participation, subsidy payment dates, commute mode prior to and after each three month period, and reason(s) for program participation. MARKETING Program promotion was coordinated among Metro's Cash In Your Car program manager, the employer's program administrator or employee transportation coordinator, and Metro's Corporate Transportation Representative. A variety of promotional strategies were used (see Attachment A), including: - kick-off meetings, - information posters and flyers, - articles in employee newsletters and company e-mail systems, and - endorsements by participating employees, program administrators and management. 3 Metro provided the following resources: - design and printing of flyers and posters, - program procedures and registration forms, - gifts for kick-off meetings, - lunches for focus group participants. OVERALL FINDINGS EMPLOYER PARTICIPATION Three employers, Digital Equipment Corporation, Ernst Home Centers and Minor & James Medical took part in the demonstration. The number of participating employers was somewhat less than originally desired for the demonstration. Due to only three employers taking part in the demonstration, the quantity of data which could be collected on the program was limited. This may result in data from one of the employers unduly influencing the overall results in a particular category. As mentioned in the Program Design section, the employer selection process defined three primary screening criteria to employer participation. Nine employers were originally selected and contacted for participation, with the three listed above eventually accepting the invitation to participate. A number of barriers, both anticipated and unanticipated, resulted in the majority of employers either being screened out at the outset or causing them to decline the invitation to participate in the demonstration. Barriers to Participation A number of significant barriers that prevented employers from participating in the program were identified during the initial employer screening and invitation phases. These barriers included: 1. Employer did not currently subsidize employee parking. 2. Employer is located in an area where the market value of parking was quite low (below $30 per space per month). 3. Employer had a long-term building and parking space lease, on the order of five to 15 years. 4. Employer's lease bundled parking spaces together with floor space. 5. Employer used subsidized parking as a perk and reward for employees. The first two barriers were very difficult, if not impossible, for an employer to overcome. It would have been unfeasible and unreasonable for an employer to begin charging its employees for parking just to qualify for this type of cash-out program. In addition, market rates for parking are usually determined by market forces well beyond a single employer's influence. 4 The third and fourth reasons, having to do with leasing arrangements, could possibly be overcome if extensive time and effort were applied in that direction. This would have required direct involvement in the demonstration by a third party, the building's owner or property manager (the lessor). The additional involvement was beyond the scope of the demonstration. Bundling parking in a lease made it extremely difficult to identify the actual cost of a leased parking space and to return the space, on a month-by-month basis, to the lessor for credit. The fifth reason, using subsidized parking as a perk and benefit, is widely practiced throughout metropolitan areas. This is particularly noticeable once an employee has attained a certain level or position within a company. Once again, addressing the issue and testing different strategies to overcome the barrier was beyond the scope of this demonstration. Other Possible Factors Two other factors may have indirectly contributed to low employer participation in the program. The factors were: - Favorable tax code impacts associated with providing subsidized employee parking. - Adverse tax code impacts associated with cashing-out employee parking. Until January 1, 1993, the Federal tax code strongly favored employer subsidized parking over alternative transportation benefits. For example, subsidized parking incurred no federal tax liability regardless of its value, whereas subsidized mass transit passes were taxed if their value exceeded $21 per month per employee. This has made it a smart economic move for employers to provide subsidized parking over other types of transportation benefits to their employees. Recent tax code changes, taking effect on January 1, 1993, have begun to reduce the inequity. Employer subsidized parking is now taxed if its value exceeds $155 per month per employee. The tax threshold for certain alternative transportation benefits has been raised to $60 per month per employee from $21 per month. Still, a large tax inequity continues to exist between subsidized parking and other employer provided transportation benefits. EMPLOYEE PARTICIPATION The number of employees receiving subsidized parking was substantially fewer than the total number of employees at all three of the companies. Furthermore, a notable number of employees were required to have their car onsite and available for work purposes at two of the companies, Digital Equipment Corporation and Ernst Corporation (see Table 2 below). Employee participation rates in the demonstration were defined in two ways: 1) Percent of all employees at a site, and 2) percent of eligible employees at a site. Because not all the employees at a company were defined as being eligible to participate in the demonstration, the participation rate is the same or higher for method #2 than method #1 at each company (see Table 2). 5 All Employees and Eligible Employees at a worksite were defined in the following manner: 1. All Employees - Any full-time or part-time employee who commuted to the worksite by any means at least once a day. 2. Eligible Employees - All employees, as defined above, who also received free parking and were not required to have their personal vehicle at the worksite for work-related purposes. For example, Digital Equipment Corporation employed a sizable number of sales people at the Bellevue worksite. The sales people were required to use their personal vehicles to carry out their sales duties. An assumption was also made these employees could not maintain regular carpool schedules due to the highly variable nature of their work hours and the occurrence of commuting directly to a customer's worksite from their homes. Thus, these employees were no longer eligible for the demonstration and were eliminated from the pool of eligible employees. Table 2 Employee Participation Rates by Employer. All Number % of All Eligible Number % of Eligible Employ Partici Employ Employ Partici Partici Company ees pating ees ees pating pating Digital Equipment 245 20 8.2% 130 20 15.4% Ernst Corp. 270 4 1.5% 62 4 6.5% Minor & James 183 2 1.1% 85 2 2.4% Digital Equipment Corporation and Ernst Corporation had notably higher participation rates among eligible employees than all employees. A higher participation rate for eligible employees versus all employees is not necessarily a desirable goal in a parking cash-out program. If participation rates are decidedly different, as in Digital's and Ernst's cases, this almost certainly indicates a large portion of the employees are being excluded from a cash-out benefit. This calls into question the suitability, equity and economic effectiveness of a cash-out benefit. Offering an alternative transportation benefit which is more widely and equitably available to its employees may be a better strategy for an employer. In Minor & James Medical's case, the company had recently made a big drive to convert its workforce to non-SOV commute options. Thus, the remaining eligible employees for the demonstration were commuting by single occupant vehicles either by necessity or by a strong desire to do so. Therefore, they may have been an especially difficult group to convert to a cash-out program. The nature of an employer's business activities may strongly influence the number of employees who can realistically participate in a parking cash-out program. In Digital's case, the need for its sales people to use their personal vehicles for work was a decisive factor in how these employees commuted to work. An employer's core activities should be carefully considered when examining the cash- out strategy as a possible inducement to reducing SOV rates among their employees. 6 CHANGES IN COMMUTE MODE Table 3 below displays the changes in commute mode by number of employees who participated in the program. Table 3 Change in Employee Commute Mode by Employer. Digital Equipment Ernst Corporation Minor & James Mode Before After Before After Before After SOV 14 0.5 3.5 0 2 0 Carpool 3* 6 0 0 0 0 Bus 3* 12.5 0.5 4 0 2 Vanpool 0 0 0 0 0 0 Other 0 1 0 0 0 0 Total 20 20 4 4 2 2 * Partial mode during the week. Also drove alone during the week. At each company, participating employees shifted from driving alone to either carpooling, riding the bus or some other mode. The data suggests the effectiveness of a parking cash-out incentive to be very high. However, when examining the entire employee population of each company (all employees) in this study, the effect of a parking cash-out incentive is less dramatic. Only a relatively small percentage, between 2 percent and 15 percent of eligible employees, or 1 percent to 8 percent of all employees, actually accepted such an option. Therefore, the overall effectiveness of the parking cash-out incentive was greatly diluted and less than the 20 percent mode change theorized by transportation researchers, such as Shoup, Wilson and Surber. As mentioned previously, a significant number of employees at two of the employment sites were required to have their personal vehicle available for work-related purposes. Additional reasons why employees chose not to participate in Cash In Your Car are detailed in the section titled Reasons Why Employees Did Not Participate. REASONS WHY EMPLOYEES LEFT THE PROGRAM A total of ten employees, in two companies, who began the program left before completing 12 months in the program. Two primary reasons for leaving the program were: - No longer working for the employer. - Change in previous commute arrangements. Six of the ten employees who prematurely left the program did so because they no longer worked for that employer. Table 4 below lists the reasons why and the number of employees who left before completing 12 months in the program. 7 Table 4 Reasons Why Employees Left the Program. Number Reasons for Leaving of Employees No longer working for the company 5 Change in commute arrangements 2 Extended sick or maternity leave 1 Other - Unspecified 2 Total leaving the program 10 REASONS WHY EMPLOYEES DID NOT PARTICIPATE During the demonstration, a number of reasons surfaced as to why employees did not wish to participate in the Cash In Your Car program. Similar reasons were given by employees at all three companies. In addition, a focus group of eight Ernst employees who did not participate was conducted on July 10, 1992. A copy of the focus group's executive summary can be found in Attachment C. Most frequently cited reasons for not accepting the offer of cash for their parking space are: - Driving alone gives an employee the freedom of leaving home and/or work when they please. - Driving alone takes substantially less time than commuting by bus. "Time is money." - The amount of money offered is too low. - There is no meaningful financial gain because a bus pass or other parking would have to be purchased. - Mixed message was received from management concerning free parking and employee status. - An issue of safety and desirability exists when riding the bus, particularly downtown at night. The first two and last reasons closely parallel previous data collected by Metro as to why people do not ride the bus. Even so, this does not fully explain why employees do not use modes such as carpooling and vanpooling. EMPLOYEE SUGGESTIONS FOR IMPROVING THE PROGRAM Several suggestions were put forth by employees at each company concerning ways to increase the attractiveness of a parking cash- out program: - Increase the amount of the cash incentive. - Make available several days a month where an employee could drive to work alone and park for free. - Offer a free or discounted transit pass in addition to the cash. 8 - Provide vehicle maintenance, such as oil changes, or other cost offset incentives for carpoolers. - Provide a clearer, more consistent message from management about not driving alone to work. - Provide additional vacation days for participating in the program. The first suggestion may or may not be feasible for a specific employer to carry out. Each employer will need to examine their resources and financial budget available for a cash-out program. Employees putting forth the last suggestion, additional vacation days, readily admit it is probably not possible for most employers to offer such a program benefit. Suggestions regarding transit passes, free parking days and carpool service benefits can be part of a larger, comprehensive employee transportation program. CONCLUSIONS Cashing out an employer-subsidized parking space has the potential to achieve a high conversion from an SOV commute mode to an HOV or non-motorized commute mode among participants. A high level of mode conversion was clearly evidenced in the demonstration. Countering the mode change success is the issue of low participation among employers and employees. Actual and perceived benefits are currently too low to overcome the convenience, safety and economic benefits derived from driving alone and utilizing a subsidized parking space for the vast majority of employees. Therefore, when program benefits are measured against only those who participated, the successes seem great. Yet, when measured against an entire site or region, the impacts and successes of the program are relatively small, though not insignificant. When designing future programs utilizing the technique of cashing out an employer subsidized parking space, careful planning and consideration must be given to the issue of low participation by employers and employees. If some or all of the previously mentioned barriers can be overcome, cash-out programs can potentially result in higher levels of participation among employers. Participation by employees may be more difficult to address. Convenience and safety factors are very difficult to quantify among individuals who drive alone to work. For some, no amount of cash will be sufficient for them to trade the convenience and safety of their personal vehicle. For others, the amount of cash necessary for a change may be so high as to make a cash-out program economically infeasible for their employer. 9 RECOMMENDATIONS The first set of recommendations primarily attempt to overcome the barriers to voluntary participation by employers in a cash-out program: 1. Include building owners or lessors in any future parking cash- out program. A tenant employer must be able to unlease individual parking spaces on a month-by-month basis. 2. Promote reform of current tax laws to equalize deductions between single-occupant vehicle and high-occupant vehicle or non-vehicle commute incentives. 3. Develop and implement HOV supportive commercial development and parking policies. For example, lowering minimum parking standards will likely increase the desire of tenant employers to investigate and offer alternatives to drive-alone commuting. 4. Continually educate employers and jurisdictions to the long- term benefits of reducing SOV commuting. Changing commute habits is a continual, long-term process. The next set of recommendations attempt to address issues and concerns stated by employees as reasons for not participating in a cash-out program: 1. Promote existing Metro safety programs for different HOV modes, such as prescreening ridematch partners, monitored park and ride lots and additional security teams on buses. 2. Offer parking cash-out incentives as part of larger, more comprehensive alternative transportation programs. Linking multiple benefits, such as subsidized transit passes and parking cash-out, greatly enhances the desirability of a parking cash-out option. 3. Provide emergency or discretionary parking days each month in conjunction with parking cash-out. Even though employees may relinquish their subsidized parking privileges, they still have an occasional need to drive their vehicle to work. 4. Provide an equitable alternative benefit to employees who currently do not received free or subsidized parking. Employers must be aware of and sensitive to the issue of equitable employee transportation benefits. FUTURE DIRECTIONS IN PARKING CASH-OUT PROGRAMS BY METRO Metro is currently examining a number of possible options and strategies to make more effective the parking cash-out incentive. These include: 1. Offer parking cash-out incentives in combination with a Park Free Days program. 2. Offer parking cash-out incentives in combination with Metro's Home Free Guarantee program. 3. Include parking cash-out incentives as part of Metro's FlexPass agreements with employers. 4. Facilitate negotiations between parking space lessors and lessees to help employers unlease parking spaces on a month- by-month basis. 5. Shorten the time period an employee must commit to a cash-out program, perhaps to a month-by-month basis. 10 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The author would like to acknowledge and thank the following persons for their contributions and support of this demonstration project. Allen, George. Metro Corporate Transportation Representative, Municipality of Metropolitan Seattle. Conway, Lynne. Bellevue TMA Representative, Bellevue Transportation Management Association. Honeyman, Joyce H. Administration Specialist, Digital Equipment Corporation. Lufkin, Donna. Employee Transportation Coordinator, Ernst Corporation. Scratchley, David. Employee Transportation Coordinator, Ernst Corporation. Strauss, Jessie. Transportation Planner Intern, Municipality of Metropolitan Seattle. Ward, Anne. Metro Corporate Transportation Representative, Municipality of Metropolitan Seattle. Woo, Pam. Metro Transportation Planner, Municipality of Metropolitan Seattle. Wray, Jo Ann. Assistant Administrator/Personnel Director, Minor & James Medical. 11 REFERENCES Badgett, S. L. (1993). "Transportation Demand Management: Case Studies of Medium-Sized Employers." Innovations Unit, Washington State Transportation Commission, Olympia, WA Research and Market Strategy (1992). "1991 Rider/Nonrider Survey." Transit Department, Municipality of Metropolitan Seattle, Seattle, WA. Research and Market Strategy (1990). "1990 Voter Transportation Issues Survey." Transit Department, Municipality of Metropolitan Seattle, Seattle, WA Shoup, D. and Willson, R. (1991). "Employer-Paid Parking: The Problem and Proposed Solutions." Revised draft of research paper presented to Metro, Seattle, WA in Dec. 1990. Surber, M., Shoup, D., and Wachs, M. (1984). "Effects of Ending Employer-Paid Parking for Solo Drivers." Transportation Research Record 957, Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C. 12 Attachment A Cash In Your Car Marketing Materials 13 Click HERE for graphic. CASH IN YOUR CAR Click HERE for graphic. Would you like to reduce your stress level, increase your productivity and at the same time protect the environment? Metro has a plan that will actually pay you cash to enhance the quality of your life! See attached sheets for details. Click HERE for graphic. CASH IN YOUR CAR Metro is offering the Cash In Your Car program to encourage you to get to work by some means other than driving your car. Ernst Corporate Office is the very first company in the nation to test this one-year demonstration program. The program is partially supported through Metro by a federal grant. In a sense all employees for whom Ernst has been paying parking costs are participants in the demonstration project. Metro will be looking for a significant amount of feedback. This feedback will involve interviews, surveys, and focus groups conducted at the beginning and end of the program. Participants in the evaluation will include people who sign up for the program as well as people who select to continue parking. How the program works You will receive a $100 check each month on the first of the month if you agree to give up your parking space for a test period of three months. After the first three months, you will have the opportunity to sign up for. another three-month period followed by a final six-month period. Ernst has.already paid the taxes for you so that the $100 is net take-home pay. If you participate for the entire 12-month period you will have received $1200 after taxes. How to sign up To receive your first $100 bonus on May first, return the registration form (attached) @o David Scratchley in the Human Resources Office by April 24th. You may begin participating any time between now and February 1993. In May and June you will receive a reminder that you are still eligible. After July, contact David Scratchley, 621-3677, prior to the month you want to start participating. CASH IN YOUR CAR For your wealth Sharing the ride can be a rewarding experience. Digital and Metro will pay you as much as $225 to leave your car at home and try public transportation! All you need to do is give up your parking space for three months, buy a bus pass, carpool or vanpool and pocket the rest. So, take the money and ride. For your environment Our area has the fourth worst traffic congestion problem in the nation. Motor vehicles generate more than 40% of all air pollution in the state of Washington. Without a personal commitment to public transportation, single occupancy vehicles could deposit over 1,000,000 tons of carbon dioxide in King County alone by the year 2000. For your health Take your hands off the wheel and relieve yourself from tailgating in a cloud of noxious exhaust fumes. Lower your blood pressure by relaxing on a Metro bus or vanpool Concentrate on more productive, meaningful things than the vanity plate on the car ahead. Read, lap-top compute, or simply plan a project, Maybe you could walk or bike to work. For your company Help Digital seek and implement creative programs that will meet the requirements of the new state Commute Trip Reduction law. All major employers will be directed by law to reduce their employees' drive-alone commutes. Click HERE for graphic. TUESDAY SEPTEMBER 15 9:00 A.M. OR 2:00 P.M. Quinault Room Please come to one of these Metro presentations and learn all about this exciting, innovative new program. If you cannot attend and would like to learn more about how you can Cash In Your Car, please call Joyce Honeyman at 637-4075. PRIZES - REFRESHMENTS Questions and Answers How do I find out about commute benefits, or how to join a carpool or get to work by bus? Lynne Conway at the Bellevue TMA can help you get into a carpool or provide you with information on which bus to take, where to catch the bus, and how to get a free bus pass the third and sixth months that you ride. Lynne's phone number is 453-0644. Am I promising to never drive my car to work. No. If you find you must have your car for errands on certain days, you may drive to work. The Koll Building provides three free parking days per month for employees who hold transit passes or carpool regularly, and who have registered for the free parking days program. The "Free Parking Days" flyer in your packet describes the program. What if I have to work late, and I miss my ride or bus? Or what if I have an emergency? If you find an emergency makes it impossible to return home by your usual commute mode, you may use the Guaranteed Ride Home provided by the Bellevue TMA May I quit the program at any time? After you sign up for a three-month test period you will not be able to get your parking space back until the end of that period. You will be able to get your parking space back at the end of that period if you choose to discontinue the Cash In Your Car program. The same conditions apply for the second three-month period and the final six-month phase. Are there restrictions on how I can spend my money? You may spend your money in any way you wish. A new stereo? A vacation? You may spend a portion of it on a bus pass or ridesharing expenses. Actually, you will find you save a great deal in addition to the cash bonus you receive. Total costs for the average auto commuter are $7.81 per day.1 Do I have other responsibilities beside not parking? Metro will be conducting a complete evaluation of the Cash In Your Car program. We will be interested in knowing what does or does not work for you. You may be asked to participate in a focus group, an interview and/or a survey. We will also be including those who do not select the program in the evaluation. What is going to happen at the end of the twelve-month demonstration program? Digital and Metro are testing this program to see how effectively it works for you and the company. Metro will evaluate the program, and Digital will decide whether to continue, modify, or discontinue the Cash In Your Car option. lBased upon 20-mile round-trip commute. Includes gas, maintenance, depreciation, and insurance. Click HERE for graphic. Attachment B Employee Registration Form 17 Click HERE for graphic. Cash In Your Car Digital Registration Form Click HERE for graphic. Metro will, be evaluating the "Cash In Your Car" program at Digital. Your input will provide valuable background information for your company's transportation program decisions. Name _____________________________________ Job Title ________________________________ 1. Prior to receiving the "Cash in Your Car' offer, how many days per week did you typically use the following means of travel to and from work? Drive alone _____ days per week Take the bus _____ days per week Carpool (two or more people) _____ days per week Vanpool _____ days per week Bike or walk _____ days per week Other (please specify) _____ days per week 2. Now that you have agreed to "Cash in Your Car", which of the following modes do you intend to use most often to travel to and from work? A. Drive alone D. Vanpool B. Take the bus E. Bike or walk C. Carpool (two or more people) F. Other 3. What is the estimated distance from your home to your office? ______________________ I agree to give up my free parking space for the next three months in return for $75 per month. I understand that I will receive a separate $75 check (less taxes and withholding) for each of the next three months. I understand that I can still drive to work when I really need my car for work or personal matters, and that when I drive I will use one of my free parking days or pay for my own parking. Name ________________________________ Date ________________ Attachment C Summary of Focus Group - Ernst Corporation 19 "Cash In Your Car" Focus Group EXECUTIVE SUMMARY August 11, 1992 Background The Cash in Your Car demonstration Program is offered by Metro to encourage employees to shift from driving alone to work to using a high occupancy vehicle mode. Ernst Corporate Office,- in downtown Seattle, is the first company nationwide to test this one-year demonstration. Eligible employees can receive a $100 check each month ff they agree to give up their free parking space, initially for three months. After the three months, employees may sign up for another three-month period followed by a final six-month period. Any employees who do not wish to continue can resume the free parking they had. The program kicked off in May 1992 with 65 management employees, who received free parking and were offered the cash option. Two employees initially participated, increasing to four in August. Description of Research On Friday, July 10, 1992 a focus group discussion was conducted with Ernst employees who were offered Cash in Your Car and chose not to participate. The purpose was to learn why non-participants did not take advantage of it, and to obtain input to determine what changes could be made in the program to encourage participation. A group of eight Ernst employees met in a conference room at the Ernst Corporate Offices. Conclusions & Recommendations 1) Ernst employees receive a mixed message from management. Free parking is tied to status and work performance which promotes driving alone to work. This conflicts with the corporate message of protecting the environment Employees with free parking are mainly mid to upper management level. The participants appeared to be very informed about Ernst's transportation program and association with the environment Though they were informed, participants did not acknowledge any direct relationship between driving their own car and impacts to the environment. To change this thinking, Ernst needs to alter the association employees make with status and parking. The group suggested more promotions focused on impacts to the environment and traffic when you drive alone. Promotions which include higher management would further support this. 2) Though reducing the parking supply may be the most effective strategy for discouraging driving alone, the group felt it would effect morale and disliked the idea. Participants consider parking a benefit to them but if the benefit was taken away, they would still pay to park and would not quit their jobs. A change in behavior could be achieved with incremental steps towards reducing free parking including: - employees paying part of the monthly parking cost - raising the grade level at which employees automatically receive free parking - assessing which positions need parking 3) "Time is more valuable than money" was strongly expressed by participants. They felt that using the bus or other HOV modes takes more time than driving a car. A few participants also felt the $100 cash option would be an additional tax burden on them. To encourage HOV use, participants suggested the following: - Offer a few free or discount parking days a month in conjunction with the cash option. This gives employees the flexibility of parking only when they have to, and adds additional assurance in case employees feel they occasionally need their cars and cannot completely give up parking privileges. - Provide a free bus pass in conjunction with the cash option. The group felt the $1 00 cash incentive was a "wash". to them because they would have to use this money to either buy a bus pass or pay to park somewhere else. - Reward carpoolers by providing free lube and oil changes or other cost offsets. - Park and Ride lot improvements such as: 1) providing closer park and ride lots to park, then employees could complete their trip utilizing frequent shuttle buses, 2) providing services at park and ride lots such as laundromats, child care, espresso, etc., - Creation of bus service for "professional riders' that would include: - frequent buses - bus service after 5:30 p.m. - fewer stops (not every two blocks) to increase trip speed - more HOV lanes to increase trip speed - Offer participants days off from-work each month although participants admitted they probably could not afford to do so. - Provide a list of potential carpool partners which includes all Ernst employees. RESULTS Current Travel Behavior All of the eight participants drive to work. Five drive alone and the other three carpool, taking advantage of their free parking. The carpoolers said that the carpooL lanes were very helpful to them because It shortens their travel time. Three participants used to ride the bus, but started driving their car to work after being promoted and receiving free parking. About half the participants considered riding the bus but do not because It takes two to three times longer than driving. Some living in the suburbs said the buses "stop running after 5:30 or 6:00 p.m.". Some felt the other bus passengers and people waiting for a bus (especially on 2nd Avenue), as one person said, "are not my kind of people". The major reason given for needing their car is that they "do not work regular hours". At least one of the participants said they have to get to the office early. All agreed that they regularly stay at least 45 minutes after the office closes. The independence of travelling by car was very important to these people. Ernst's Employee Transportation Program For the most part, when participants were asked to explain what was offered in Ernst's transportation program they described free parking for a certain level of employees and a subsidized bus pass for others. A few added the Cash in Your Car Program. Participants voiced that Ernst provides these benefits because "ft is hard to get people to come downtown' and because the company "cares about the environment". One participant felt that because of a recent law the government of King County may be motivating Ernst to encourage employees not to drive alone to work. What's offered in "Cash In Your Car"? When asked to describe the Cash In Your Car Program, participants gave a full range of answers from nothing ("don't remember"), "first time heard of the program" to detailed elements of the program ($100 a month for three months, then another three months, up to a full year, transit and carpool information, and guaranteed ride home). Most of the participants strongly agreed that the $100 a month was "a wash" since the employee has to find and pay for another parking space somewhere else, or spend $50 to buy a bus pass. As one employee said, "You're giving up too much for what you're getting". "Time is money" and "time is a lot more important than money" were strongly expressed in reference to giving, up driving and taking the bus, which many felt takes much longer than commuting by car. Another incentive suggested as more appealing is giving employees a bus pass and tickets for several days of free parking a month. They felt this would enable employees to drive only when it was absolutely necessary instead of every day. Opinions of Presentation Materials Four of the participants attended a 'Cash In Your Car presentation sessions. They generally liked the presentation and materials distributed. One participant was not interested in attending a presentation after reading the materials received beforehand. Participants focused on the list of potential carpool partners they received. Most did not find the computer printout useful. They thought it covered too broad of a geographic area. The group agreed that the printout would be more useful if it included all Ernst employees, not confined to employees with free parking. One participant said she was very interested in carpooling if she could find another employee living near her. Participants Reasons for Not Participating Following are the main reasons given by the group for not taking part in the program: - Commuting by car gives them independence to leave home and leave work when they please. - Travelling by automobile is faster than using a bus - Time is money - The $100 a month incentive does not profit them because they have to use the money for parking somewhere else or to buy a bus pass - They would feel uncomfortable and unsafe using a bus because of the kind of people who wait and ride the buses downtown, especially late at night. Participants Suggestions to Make Program Attractive Giving employees $100 a month or more is not a strong inducement for this level of employees to give up their free parking space. When asked how much money they would accept to give up their space, individuals commented: 1) $3,000 tax credit, 2) $500 a month 3) "if you got enough money to pay for parking somewhere else and money left over. When employees were asked how they felt if they had to pay all or half of the parking cost they said it would cause discontentment among employees, but if they had to pay for parking they would. All said they would continue to drive to work even if they had to pay. The majority of the group felt this would be an erosion of their benefits which were offered when taking their position, and they wondered what would be reduced next. At the same time, they also admitted that none of their benefits were exempt from changes and they would not quit their jobs if they lost free parking. Suggested program changes include: - offer 4-5 free parking days a month in conjunction with the cash option - offer a bus pass in conjunction with cash option to reduce the "wash" of having to use the money to buy your own pass - extra days off for participating in place of or in addition to cash though they said taking time off may not be reasonable for them to do. - reward carpoolers by giving a lube and oil change, or other cost offset Two suggestions not directly tied to program: - one idea that received a fair amount of discussion was establishing closer park and ride lots to park at, then completing trips on frequent shuttle buses. - creation of bus service for "professional riders" that would include: - frequent buses - bus service after 5:30 p.m. - fewer stops (not very two blocks) to increase trip speed - more HOV lanes to increase trip speed One participant added that Metro must decide who they're going to market bus service to: the "professionals" or "others".
