integrated transportation demand management (tdm… · integrated transportation demand management...

$: INTEGRATED TRANSPORTATION DEMAND MANAGEMENT (TDM… · INTEGRATED TRANSPORTATION DEMAND MANAGEMENT STRATEGY VANCOUVER ISLAND UNIVERSITY Y:\Project Files\1170 - VIU Integrated TDM$
INTEGRATED TRANSPORTATION DEMAND MANAGEMENT (TDM) STRATEGYVancouver Island University

File no. 1170

15 February 2011

Prepared by Boulevard Transportation Group Ltd.

I N T E G R A T E D T R A N S P O R T A T I O N D E M A N D M A N A G E M E N T S T R A T E G Y

V A N C O U V E R I S L A N D U N I V E R S I T Y

Y:\Project Files\1170 - VIU Integrated TDM Strategy\Report\VIU Integrated TDM Strategy_Feb15-10.doc

2/14/2011

E X E C U T I V E S U M M A R Y

The Integrated Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Strategy seeks to create a framework for

Vancouver Island University (“the University”) to facilitate sustainable transportation behavior,

improve parking management, and demonstrate leadership in environmental stewardship within the

community. The TDM Strategy provides specific guidance to both the University’s Nanaimo and

Cowichan campuses and builds on the findings of previous TDM studies in 2005 and 2008, both of

which set forth a considerable number of recommended actions in pursuit of a reduction in single-

occupant vehicle travel and encouraging the use of alternative modes. The Strategy brings both these

existing documents up-to-date to account for on-going planning processes and provide further details

to ensure all recommendations are directed toward action.

The Malaspina University-College Transportation Demand Management Report (2005) sets forth 24

recommended actions for the University to pursue specifically for the Nanaimo campus, but most are

also applicable to the Cowichan campus. Recommendations include strategies to address vehicle use,

increase transit use, cycling, and walking, and support the overall objectives of TDM. See Table 1.

T a b l e 1 - S u m m a r y o f R e c o m m e n d a t i o n s f r o m 2 0 0 5 T D M R e p o r t

Strategy

1 Increase parking fees 11 Expand bus waiting area

a) Allow daily parking only 12 Explore establishing exchange on campus

b) Increase daily fees 13 Improve passenger information

c) Introduce variable lot pricing 14 Establish bicycle users committee

d) Fees for evenings / weekends 15 Install covered bike parking

2 Increase enforcement 16 Increase secure bike lockers

3 Increase the number of meters 17 Advertise after-trip facilities

4 Install ‘General Loading’ zones 18 Identify / promote bicycle routes to campus

5 Clarify the purpose of designated spaces 19 Establish a road skills course

6 Promote ridematching system 20 Establish a bike loan program

7 Establish carshare program on campus 21 Develop pedestrian network plan

8 Establish carpool only areas 22 Establish a TDM coordinator

9 Introduce the U-Pass 23 Implement guaranteed ride home (GRH)

10 Subsidize transit pass for employees 24 Introduce staggered class start times




2/14/2011

While the University has had good intention, only a portion of the previous recommendations have

been implemented primarily due to limited resources, funding, and staff resources. A primary objective

of this document is to revisit the 2005 and 2008 recommendations and provide greater detail on steps

to implementation.

P a r k i n g M a n a g e m e n t

A 50% increase in parking rates is recommended for the Nanaimo campus over the next two (2) years

(2011-2013), increasing the cost of daily parking from $4.00 to $6.00, and monthly rates from $24.00

to $36.00 (student) and $48.00 to $72.00 (staff). The number of parking permits issued currently

exceeds the capacity of the campus, causing spillover of vehicles into surrounding areas. To address

this issue, it is recommended that the number of permits offered is reduced 10% in 2011-2012 and

reduced another 10% in 2012-2013. In 2013-2014 it is recommended that the University eliminate all

long-term permits, instead offering daily parking at rates consistent with the 2012-2013

recommendations. This will introduce an element of inconvenience to vehicle drivers and offering

financial incentive to use alternative modes on a daily basis, reducing overall parking demand at the

campus. The University may consider offering books of daily permits or a “scratch pass” system for

convenience. Parking occupancy should be examined in 2013-2014 to determine parking occupancy

rates for the campus. It is suggested that 95% occupancy is an appropriate benchmark and if occupancy

exceeds 95%, consideration should be given to further increasing rates to reduce demand. A variable

pricing scheme may also be considered which puts a premium price on the highest priority lots, and

increases the revenue available to fund alternative transportation programs.

The Cowichan campus currently offers free parking, however the University’s desire to encourage

sustainable transportation behaviour necessitates consideration for priced parking. It is recommended

that parking is priced at $1.00 per hour to a maximum of $3.00 per day, with no differentiation

between student and staff rates. Monthly, semester, and annual passes should not be made available. It

is suggested that parking conditions are monitored over the course of the first year of operation to

determine the effects of parking spillover, if any. If issues arise, consideration should be given to

restricting parking to two (2) or three (3) hours at the Island Savings Centre and developing an ISC

staff and visitor permit system. The University may also offer a portion of their parking facility to ISC

patrons on game nights to help address their peak demand. The University wishes to maintain a

positive relationship with the Cowichan Place partners and it is critical that parking management is

undertaken proactively to counteract any negative impacts.




2/14/2011

T r a n s i t P a s s e s

Transit pass programs are to be encouraged at the University. The ProPass is already an option for the

University’s employees and should continue to be encouraged through improved marketing.

Opportunities should be explored to expand the ProPass to the Cowichan campus.

The U-Pass is a student-oriented universal bus pass offered by BC Transit that has gained a higher

level of acceptance at other institutions and has proven very effective is shifting travel demand to

transit. Transit ridership is expected to increase on the order of 50% based on other examples and a 10

– 15% decrease in parking demand is also expected as a result. The successful implementation of the

U-Pass is expected to have the greatest positive impact on mode share and is the single most important

TDM measure recommended in this strategy.

The cost of the U-Pass to students will depend on discussion with BC Transit, however the Provincial

government has stated that all institutions will have access to a U-Pass for a maximum of $30 per

month per student. Costs are expected to actually be less based on other Vancouver Island institutions,

including the University of Victoria where student costs are $17.31 per month. Start-up costs will vary

depending on the arrangement made with BC Transit, however based on examples from the University

of BC and Simon Fraser University, the University can expect start-up costs of approximately

$500,000 and significant administrative time. After year one, annual costs will include approximately

$40,000 administrative costs and significant administrative time. An annual subsidy of $500,000 by the

University is also suggested, which equates to approximately $35 per student annually. The costs

incurred by the University could be funded through increased parking revenues.

B i c y c l e / P e d e s t r i a n I m p r o v e m e n t s

Bicycle and pedestrian programs are recommended to encourage human powered travel. The

University should consider re-establishing an inter-campus bicycle users committee to assist in

implementation and oversee the details of bicycle planning in future. Once established, the committee

in coordination with a TDM Coordinator should see that the following actions are taken:

Increase quality of existing bicycle racks, address lack of weather protection;

Increase supply of secure bicycle parking for long-term use;

Consider electric bike charging stations and increase supply as demand increases;

Establish a bicycle repair station on both Nanaimo and Cowichan campus;

Establish a bicycle and accessories loan program; and

Offer an annual bicycle skills workshop.




2/14/2011

A pedestrian network plan should also be developed for the Nanaimo campus which identifies existing

pedestrian routes, needed improvements, and future routes to be developed in coordination with

campus development.

S h a r e d V e h i c l e s

Carsharing presents an opportunity to provide the benefits of a personal vehicle without private

ownership. This would be beneficial to students in residence on the Nanaimo campus who would be

required to obtain a refundable membership, pay a small monthly administration fee, and a per-hour

and per-kilometre fee based on usage. The University may also pursue corporate membership in a

carshare cooperative to give employees access to carshare vehicle, reducing demand for fleet vehicles.

The Nanaimo CarShare Cooperative was recently established and should be consulted for opportunities

to station a vehicle(s) on the Nanaimo campus. The University should consult further with the

Nanaimo CarShare to determine the feasibility of a service on-campus, and should plan to take the

following actions:

Conduct a survey of students in residence and communicate with campus operations to assess

the number of potential student and staff carshare users;

Budget $30,000 to purchase of a new vehicle for Nanaimo CarShare under the agreement that

the vehicle will be stationed on-campus for a fixed period; and

Budget for revenue guarantee to the Nanaimo CarShare that commits the University to

recouping costs should usage rates fall short of a defined threshold to make the service

feasible.

The University offers a ridematching service through its website which seeks to pair up those needing

a ride with those offering a ride. The University should develop a brand image for the service, increase

exposure through marketing and promotions, and maintain current carpool parking rates as general

parking rates rise.

M a r k e t i n g , C o o r d i n a t i o n , a n d A d m i n i s t r a t i o n

A TDM coordinator is needed to take overall responsibility for the implementation of the TDM

Strategy and for the long-term success of TDM at the University. The TDM Coordinator may be a full-

time staff position or a shift in responsibility for existing staff. Specific responsibilities include:

Oversee day-to-day administration of TDM programs (cycling, carshare, transit, etc);

Crease marketing image for TDM at the University;




2/14/2011

Deliver promotional events to increase exposure;

Develop educational material;

Coordinate with internal University contacts; and

Communicate with external contacts.

S u m m a r y

Considerable opportunities to institute TDM are identified in this document, but it is the responsibility

of the University to commit money and resources to ensuring successful implementation. Appointing a

TDM Coordinator is vital to ensuring the successful delivery and coordination of the various programs.

Committing to aggressive parking management and implementing the U-Pass will significantly impact

the choice students and employees make when travelling to the University each day, as well as build

demand for the various other TDM initiatives needed to present a comprehensive set of options to

meeting personal travel needs without access to a personal vehicle.




2/14/2011

C O N T E N T S

Executive Summary

1.0 Introduction ..................................................................................................................................... 1

1.1 Purpose .......................................................................................................................................... 1

1.2 Why TDM? .................................................................................................................................... 1

1.3 Document Organization ................................................................................................................. 2

2.0 About VIU ........................................................................................................................................ 3

2.1 Location ......................................................................................................................................... 3

2.2 University Characteristics .............................................................................................................. 4

2.3 Future Plans ................................................................................................................................... 5

3.0 Existing TDM Plans ......................................................................................................................... 8

3.1 2005 TDM Report ......................................................................................................................... 8

3.2 2008 TDM Strategy Update ......................................................................................................... 11

4.0 Parking Management .................................................................................................................... 12

4.1 Nanaimo Campus ........................................................................................................................ 12

4.2 Cowichan Campus ....................................................................................................................... 26

4.3 Parking Revenues ........................................................................................................................ 29

5.0 Transit Pass Programs .................................................................................................................. 31

5.1 Universal Bus Pass (“U-Pass”) .................................................................................................... 31

5.2 Employee Transit Pass (“ProPass”) ............................................................................................. 38

6.0 Bicycle / Pedestrian Facilities ........................................................................................................ 40

6.1 Bicycle Users Committee ............................................................................................................ 40

6.2 Pedestrian Network Plan .............................................................................................................. 40

6.3 Bicycle Parking ............................................................................................................................ 40

6.4 Bicycle Station ............................................................................................................................. 42

6.5 Bicycle Loan Program ................................................................................................................. 42

6.6 Bicycle Skills Course ................................................................................................................... 42




2/14/2011

7.0 Shared Vehicles .............................................................................................................................. 43

7.1 Carshare Cooperative ................................................................................................................... 43

7.2 Ridematching Service .................................................................................................................. 46

8.0 Marketing, Coordination, and Administration ........................................................................... 49

8.1 TDM Coordinator ........................................................................................................................ 49

8.2 Staggered Class Times ................................................................................................................. 52

8.3 LEED Credits (Cowichan Campus) ............................................................................................. 53

9.0 TDM Targets + Monitoring .......................................................................................................... 57

9.1 Targets ......................................................................................................................................... 57

9.2 Monitoring ................................................................................................................................... 61

Terminology ......................................................................................................................................... 64

References ............................................................................................................................................ 65




2/14/2011

P A G E 1

1 . 0 I N T R O D U C T I O N

Boulevard Transportation Group Ltd. was retained by Vancouver Island University (“the University”)

to develop the Integrated Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Strategy in an effort to

facilitate sustainable transportation behavior, improve parking management, and demonstrate

leadership in environmental stewardship within the community. The TDM Strategy builds on the

findings of previous TDM studies and provides guidance specific to both the University’s Nanaimo

and Cowichan campuses.

The University has previously undertaken TDM planning through the 2005 Transportation Demand

Management Study and the 2008 update of that study. These two documents set forth a considerable

number of recommended actions in pursuit of a reduction in single-occupant vehicle travel and

encouraging the use of alternative modes. Unfortunately, for a variety of reasons, few of the

recommended actions have been implemented. This strategy is the continuation of this process, but

with a focus on short- and long-term implementation.

1 . 1 P u r p o s e

The purpose of this strategy is twofold. First, the two (2) previous TDM studies must be brought up-to-

date to account for on-going planning processes, both internal to the University and external. Second,

actions and recommendations from the previous plans must be considered in further detail to set forth

action items toward change.

1 . 2 W h y T D M ?

Transportation demand management (TDM) refers to policies, programs and services that reduce the

demand for vehicle use by influencing individual travel behaviour and providing expanded options.1

Shifting demand to walking, cycling, transit and ridesharing results in fewer GHG emissions attributed

to personal transportation and provide personal health benefits through increased active transportation.

Equity benefits are realized through investments in transportation modes that are accessible to a wider

demographic than personal vehicle travel. TDM also presents a more cost-effective approach to

meeting transportation demand by delaying or eliminating the need for costly vehicle infrastructure

improvements in favor of utilizing existing capacities in alternative transportation systems. The

University, through this TDM Strategy, is seeking to ensure that future transportation demand is met

pro-actively in a sustainable, equitable, and economical manner.

1 Fraser Basin Council, Transportation Demand Management: A Small and Mid-Size Communities Toolkit, p4.




2/14/2011

P A G E 2

1 . 3 D o c u m e n t O r g a n i z a t i o n

The following is a brief overview of the contents and organization of this document.

Section 2.0 highlights the characteristics of both the Nanaimo and Cowichan campus that

influence travel demand and future planning, including their location, demographics, floor

area, growth projections, and future plans.

Section 3.0 provides a review of the recommendations of previous TDM reports prepared for

the University.

Section 4.0 reviews existing parking conditions at both campuses, existing management

techniques, recommends new management techniques, and suggests the implications new

management will have on parking conditions and revenues.

Section 5.0 highlights the Universal Bus Pass (“U-Pass”) and employer ProPass programs,

reviewing the programs and impacts at other post-secondary institutions and recommending

actions toward reduced-rate bus pass programs at the University.

Section 6.0 identifies opportunities to fund and implement additional TDM strategies,

including a transportation coordination function, carsharing, bicycle / pedestrian

improvements, a ridematching service, staggered class time principles to reduce peak parking

demand, and considerations for Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) at

the Cowichan campus.

Section 7.0 sets future transportation and parking targets for both campuses to track the

success / failure of TDM and an on-going monitoring process.

Section 8.0 provides a summary of recommendations specific to each campus and action

items for the University to pursue TDM.




2/14/2011

P A G E 3

2 . 0 A B O U T V I U

Formerly known as Malaspina University-College, Vancouver Island University (“the University”) is

one of two four-year degree granting post-secondary institutions on Vancouver Island. The University

currently serves a full and part-time student population of approximately 19,000 and employs more

than 2,000 faculty and staff. The main campus is in Nanaimo, with regional campuses located in

Duncan, Parksville and Powell River. Nearly 10% of students participate online or in off-campus

settings. The Nanaimo and Cowichan campuses are the focus of this document, and are considered in

detail in the sections below.

2 . 1 L o c a t i o n

2 . 1 . 1 N a n a i m o C a m p u s

The Nanaimo campus is located to the east of the Inland Island Highway, between 4th and 5th Street.

The campus is approximately two kilometres from downtown Nanaimo, accessed by 4th Street.

Public transit serves the campus on four (4) routes – no. 5 Fairview, no.6 Harewood, no.15 VIU

Connector and no.44 VI University. The VIU Connector offers the most frequent service,

approximately once every 30 minutes in peak periods. A regional transit exchange was recently

completed at the western terminus of 4th Street.

2 . 1 . 2 C o w i c h a n C a m p u s

The Cowichan campus is currently located on Cowichan Way in the City of Duncan, at the south end

of the downtown. It has been located at this location since 1989.

In 2011 the campus will relocate to the Cowichan Place in the District of North Cowichan. The new

site is at the north end of downtown Duncan, immediately to the north of James Street and west of the

Island Highway.

The campus will be adjacent to four (4) transit routes on James Street - no.2 Mt. Prevost, no.3

Quamichan, no.6 Crofton-Chemainus and no.10 South Cowichan. The Mt. Prevost route offers the

most frequent service, approximately once every 40 minutes in peak periods. The University is

working with BC Transit to see that transit service extends into the campus.




2/14/2011

P A G E 4

2 . 2 U n i v e r s i t y C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s

2 . 2 . 1 P o p u l a t i o n

Nanaimo Campus

The total student enrolment at the Nanaimo campus for 2009/2010 was 14,155 students, 5,907 (42%)

full-time and 8,248 (58%) part-time.2 The campus population is approximately 6,896 full-time

equivalents (FTEs), 84% of the University’s total FTEs.3 It should also be noted that 87% of Nanaimo

campus students take classes at the Nanaimo campus exclusively, 5% also take web-based courses, and

3% also have classes at the Cowichan campus4.

There are a total of 1,018 permanent and temporary staff employed through the Nanaimo Campus,

including 636 permanent full-time, 185 permanent part-time, and 197 temporary part-time. There are

approximately 758 permanent FTE positions. See Table 2.1.

Cowichan Campus

The total student enrolment at the Cowichan campus for 2009/2010 was 2,604 students, 335 (13%)

full-time and 2,269 (87%) part-time.5 The campus population is approximately 533 FTEs, 6% of the

University’s total FTEs.6 It should also be noted that 78% of Cowichan campus students takes classes

at the Cowichan campus exclusively, while 14% also take courses at the Nanaimo campus.

There are a total of 81 permanent and temporary staff employed through the Cowichan Campus,

including 24 permanent full-time, 43 permanent part-time, and 14 temporary part-time. There are

approximately 46 permanent FTE positions. See Table 2.1.

T a b l e 2 . 1 - S u m m a r y o f C a m p u s P o p u l a t i o n , N a n a i m o a n d C o w i c h a n

Nanaimo Cowichan Total

Student FTEs 6,896 533 7,429

Staff FTEs 758 46 804

Total 7,654 579 8,233

2 VIU, Student Enrolment for Fiscal Year 2009-10, Nanaimo Campus. 3 VIU, Student FTEs Year-to-Year by Campus: Three-year Snapshot, S-60. 4 VIU, Student Headcount – Breakdown by Multi-Campus Enrolments, S-7. 5 VIU, Student Enrolment for Fiscal Year 2009-10, Cowichan Campus. 6 VIU, Student FTEs Year-to-Year by Campus: Three-year Snapshot, S-60.




2/14/2011

P A G E 5

2 . 2 . 2 B u i l d i n g F l o o r A r e a s

Nanaimo Campus

The Nanaimo campus consists of a total of 84,405 m2 gross floor area (GFA). See Table 2.2.

Cowichan Campus

The existing Cowichan campus consists of a total of 4,203 m2 GFA7. Plans for the new Cowichan

campus include 4,364 m2 GFA, an increase of approximately 4% from the existing campus. See Table

2.2.

T a b l e 2 . 2 - S u m m a r y o f C a m p u s F l o o r A r e a , N a n a i m o a n d C o w i c h a n

Nanaimo Cowichan

Existing GFA 84,405 m2 3,322 m2

Future GFA 4,364 m2

2 . 3 F u t u r e P l a n s

2 . 3 . 1 C a m p u s M a s t e r P l a n

The VIU Campus Master Plan provides information regarding the VIU Nanaimo campus. Its goal is to

identify the most productive and responsible use of campus lands, establish a rational and meaningful

physical context for all future facilities, and provide a set of strategies to guide all future development.

The Campus Master Plan stresses a densification goal of people, buildings, and services. To create a

university centre, the Plan proposes to include traffic and parking plans to reduce the number of private

vehicles on campus, the volume of carbon emissions, more even distribution of peak parking

requirements, increasing public transit use, and reducing the amount of surface parking spaces from

2,200 to 1,0008.

The Campus Master Plan suggests that vehicle traffic and parking can be significant detriments to the

pedestrian-oriented aesthetic sought for the campus. Parking supply can also have a profound effect on

the campus population’s choice of travel mode, and if reduced will improve the ability of the campus

to meet its sustainability objectives. Over time, private vehicle travel and parking will be restricted to

the campus’ perimeter so that vehicles will not travel through the campus to access parking. The

7 Adapted from http://www.viu.ca/facilities/Campus_Development/CampusAreaSummary.aspx 8 Nanaimo Campus Master Plan, January 2009, Page xii




2/14/2011

P A G E 6

parking supply rate will decrease as the campus redevelops, decreasing 6% over the first 5 years,

another 1% the following 5 years, then nearly 50% more 20 to fifty years from now. See Table 2.3.

T a b l e 2 . 3 - P a r k i n g S u p p l y p e r U n i t F l o o r A r e a 9

Campus Floor

Area

Parking

Spaces

Parking

Supply Rate Change

Existing 73,000 m2 2,295 1 / 31.8 m2

Phase 1 (approx. 5 years) 93,500 m2 2,275 1 / 41.1 m2 -6%

Phase 2 (approx. 10 years) 99,065 m2 2,378 1 / 41.7 m2 -1%

Phase 3 (approx 20-50 years) 116,700 m2 1,390 1 / 84.0 m2 -47%

The Campus Master Plan also states a desire to pursue TDM initiatives to encourage the use of

alternative travel modes such as walking, cycling and transit. General strategies centre around

increasing parking costs and improving alternative transportation facilities, with specific pedestrian

and bicycle routes identified. Transit mode share targets are set at 25% in the short-term (5 years), 40%

in the mid-term (10 years), and 60% in the long-term (20-50 years). 10

2 . 3 . 2 A c a d e m i c P l a n

Sustainability is also a key element in VIU’s new Academic Plan, completed and approved by the VIU

Board of Governors in late 2010. The Academic plan is a blueprint for VIU’s future and was

completed as part of the University’s transition from university-college to special purpose, teaching

university. Sustainability is integrated throughout the Academic Plan including the high level vision

statement, as a key element of the University’s approach to community engagement and as an aspect of

institutional effectiveness, where it gives direction to develop a VIU operational sustainability plan.

2 . 3 . 3 C o m m u n i t y P l a n s

planNanaimo

The City of Nanaimo’s Official Community Plan (OCP), known as planNanaimo was adopted in

September 2008. It identifies the area around the VIU Nanaimo campus as an ‘Urban Node’, which is

intended to be one of five (5) commercial, service, and high density focal points for Nanaimo11.

9 Adapted from Nanaimo Campus Master Plan, January 2009, Page 1-70 10 Nanaimo Campus Master Plan, January 2009, Page 1-71 11 planNanaimo, September 2008, pg30.




2/14/2011

P A G E 7

Emphasis is on meeting transportation demand through walking, cycling, and transit, and all future

development in the University node is to be oriented toward the transit exchange with convenient

pedestrian and bicycle access provided.

North Cowichan OCP

The District of North Cowichan is in the process of updating their OCP and is anticipated to be

complete in 2011. The existing 2002 OCP identifies the site of the new Cowichan campus as a ‘growth

centre’, where future development will be encouraged and infrastructure provided to reflect the more

urban nature of these areas. James Street is identified as an area for improved aesthetic features and for

improved walkability, as well as being designated as a future multi-use trail route.

Duncan OCP

The new VIU campus is located approximately 100 metres north of the City of Duncan’s boundaries

and the City of Duncan’s 2007 Official Community Plan (OCP) provides insight into the area’s land

use and transportation characteristics into the future. The City’s OCP designates ‘downtown’ to extend

as far north as approximately 300 metres south of the new Cowichan campus, and includes provisions

for high quality pedestrian and cycling facilities. Future multi-use trails are identified along James

Street and Canada Avenue.

2 . 3 . 4 C o w i c h a n V a l l e y 2 5 - Y e a r T r a n s i t P l a n

BC Transit is currently undertaking a 25-year planning process for the Cowichan Valley Regional

Transit system. While the plan has not yet been finalized, some preliminary information is available

that impacts the Cowichan campus.

BC Transit recognizes the need for a transit exchange at the north end of Duncan, but is not

convinced the VIU campus is the preferred location at this time.

Transit will not access University Way for the Spring 2011 opening, stops will remain on

James Street. BC Transit may consider a stop on-campus in the future.

BC Transit is prepared to work with the University to review service frequency and adjust

timing to meet University transit needs.

The University is on the stakeholder panel and will be consulted throughout the process.




2/14/2011

P A G E 8

3 . 0 E X I S T I N G T D M P L A N S

The University has already undertaken a number of TDM and sustainable transportation planning

exercises. Findings have covered a broad range of strategies that are relevant and applicable to the

University today, but few of the previous recommendations have been implemented primarily due to

limited resources, funding, and staff resources. The primary goal of this strategy is to build on the

recommendations of the previous studies and provide detailed guidance toward successful

implementation. The following sections highlight the recommendations of previous studies for

consideration in this strategy.

3 . 1 2 0 0 5 T D M R e p o r t

The 2005 Malaspina University-College Transportation Demand Management Report sets forth a

considerable number of recommended actions for the University to pursue in accomplishing a

reduction in single-occupant vehicle trips and encouraging the use of alternative modes. All strategies

were developed specifically for the Nanaimo campus, but most are also applicable to the Cowichan

campus.

3 . 1 . 1 S t r a t e g i e s t o A d d r e s s V e h i c l e U s e

The first series of strategies address vehicle travel demand primarily through a new approach to

parking management. It was recommended that parking rates increase from their 2005 rates to more

accurately reflect the cost of providing parking and to be more consistent with rates at similar

institutions. Specifically, it was recommended that monthly and semester parking passes are eliminated

in favor of daily fees, forcing commuters to pay to park each day that they drive and providing

incentive to consider using alternative modes on a daily basis. Daily rate increases were also to be

increased 25% to 75% and introduced with new parking meter technologies to mitigate the predictable

negative reaction. Variable lot pricing schemes were suggested, where the most sought after lots are

priced highest to encourage a more even distribution of parking demand. It was also suggested that pay

parking be extended to weekday evenings and weekends. Recommendations were also made to

increase the number of parking meters to meet an increasing demand for short-term parking, increasing

enforcement, and identifying priority parking spaces for carpool vehicles and for general loading. See

Table 3.1.

Two (2) non-parking related recommendations were made to address vehicle use. It was recommended

that a ‘ridematching’ service be provided for the University population. A ridematching service

facilitates carpooling and vanpooling by matching those seeking a ride with those offering one.

Ridematching services can be a service unique to the University or promotion of existing services (ie.

carpool.ca, Jack Bell, etc), and are most effectively hosted online. A second recommendation was




2/14/2011

P A G E 9

made to establish a carshare program at the University. A carshare is typically a cooperative

organization with a group of members collectively owning and operating a fleet of vehicles. Members

pay a one-time membership fee, a small monthly administration fee, and per-kilometre and per-hour

usage rates. It was suggested that the University pursue membership in the Cooperative Auto Network

(CAN), a Vancouver-based organization with vehicles already in Nanaimo.

T a b l e 3 . 1 - S u m m a r y o f S t r a t e g i e s t o A d d r e s s V e h i c l e U s e

Strategy

1 Increase Parking Fees

a) Eliminate Permit System (daily parking only)

b) Increase Daily Fees

c) Introduce Variable Lot Pricing

d) Parking Fees for Evenings and Weekends

2 Increase Enforcement

3 Increase the Number of Meters

4 Install ‘General Loading’ Zones

5 Re-Visit and Clarify the Purpose of Designated Spaces

6 Improve and Promote the Ridematching System

7 Establish a Cooperative Carshare Program on Campus

8 Establish Carpool Only Areas

3 . 1 . 2 S t r a t e g i e s t o I n c r e a s e T r a n s i t U s e

Transit-related recommendations include both pass programs and infrastructure/service improvements.

It was recommended that the University pursue a ‘UPass’ program to provide unlimited transit use to

students at a reduced rate. A 50% subsidy was also recommended to offset monthly transit passes for

University employees.

Infrastructure recommendations included expanding the bus waiting area on the 5th Street side of the

Nanaimo campus and exploring establishing a regional transit exchange on-campus. The University

has since taken action on both items. See Table 3.2.




2/14/2011

P A G E 1 0

T a b l e 3 . 2 - S u m m a r y o f S t r a t e g i e s t o I n c r e a s e T r a n s i t U s e

Strategy

9 Introduce the U-Pass

10 Subsidize a Transit Pass for Employees

11 Expand Bus Waiting Area

12 Explore Establishing an Exchange on Campus

13 Improve Passenger Information

3 . 1 . 3 S t r a t e g i e s t o I n c r e a s e C y c l i n g

Improvements and increased quantities were recommended for end-point bicycle facilities, to include

additional covered bike racks, additional secure bicycle parking, and increasing awareness of after-trip

facilities at the Nanaimo campus. It was also recommended that a road skills course be established and

made available to the campus population, that safe routes to campus are identified and promoted, and a

bicycle loan program be established. A bicycle users committee was also recommended as a way to

implement the cycling-related recommendations and ensure on-going advocacy and expertise for

cycling issues on-campus. See Table 3.3.

T a b l e 3 . 3 - S u m m a r y o f S t r a t e g i e s t o I n c r e a s e C y c l i n g

Strategy

14 Establish a Bicycle Users Committee

15 Install Covered Bike Parking

16 Increase the Inventory of Secure Bike Lockers

17 Advertise After-Trip Facilities

18 Identify and Promote Bicycle Routes to Campus

19 Establish a Road Skills Course

20 Establish a Bike Loan Program

3 . 1 . 4 S t r a t e g i e s t o I n c r e a s e W a l k i n g

The only pedestrian-related recommendation was around the need to develop a pedestrian network

plan to guide the development of walking routes through the campus which considers access, safety,

wayfinding, and minimizes conflicts with other modes.




2/14/2011

P A G E 1 1

3 . 1 . 5 S t r a t e g i e s t h a t S u p p o r t t h e O v e r a l l T D M P l a n

Three (3) additional strategies were recommended to support the TDM Plan. It was recommended that

a TDM Coordinator be appointed to oversee implementation. A ‘guaranteed ride home’ program

permits a low-cost ride home for commuters in case of emergency, and was recommended to address

carpooler or cyclist concerns. Lastly, it was recommended that class times are staggered to better

distribute traffic, parking, and transit demands outside of peak periods. See Table 3.4.

T a b l e 3 . 4 - S u m m a r y o f S t r a t e g i e s t h a t S u p p o r t t h e O v e r a l l T D M P l a n

Strategy

22 Establish a TDM Coordinator

23 Implement Guaranteed Ride Home (GRH)

24 Introduce Staggered Class Start Times

3 . 2 2 0 0 8 T D M S t r a t e g y U p d a t e

The 2008 Transportation Demand Management Strategy Update revisits many of the 2005

recommendations and emphasizes parking management approaches to pursue objectives of the original

study. It was recommended that the parking fee structure is altered from 15-minute increments to 1-

hour increments, resulting in no change to existing costs but an increase in revenues. It was reiterated

that parking passes should be phased out in favour of pay-by-day parking, and the number of permits

‘capped’ at 1,000 in the mean time. It was also reiterated that high demand lots should be priced at a

premium. The final recommendation identified a need for a reserve fund for sustainable transportation,

including a sustainability coordinator, transit pass programs, and bike and pedestrian facilities.

3 . 3 2 0 0 9 P a r k i n g M a n a g e m e n t S t u d y , C o w i c h a n C a m p u s

The 2009 Cowichan Place Parking Management Study was prepared for the University to consider

parking management issues and solutions in anticipation of relocating the existing Cowichan campus

to the Cowichan Place site. It was recommended that pay parking instituted at the new Cowichan

campus at rates consistent with those at the Nanaimo campus, which has since been reconsidered for

rates appropriate to the Cowichan area. Further support was given for the rates increases recommended

in the 2008 update. Recognizing that Cowichan Place is also home to the Island Savings Centre and

potentially Cowichan Secondary School in the future, parking management solutions were also

suggested for these buildings in anticipation of changing parking dynamics on the site. The study also

provided recommended TDM strategies to reduce parking demand, including on-site transit facilities,

transit pass programs, end-point bicycle facilities, and priority carpool spaces.




2/14/2011

P A G E 1 2

4 . 0 P A R K I N G M A N A G E M E N T

Parking management is an integral piece of TDM. No amount of incentives or promotion of alternative

transportation options will result in positive change without the corresponding shift in parking

management to manage supply, pricing, and convenience. The Nanaimo and Cowichan campuses

experience unique parking management challenges. The Nanaimo campus is a mature campus, with a

considerable parking supply and noted spillover into surrounding areas. The Cowichan campus has not

yet been occupied and has sufficient space to provide a parking supply to meet expected demand. Each

campus is addressed individually below.

4 . 1 N a n a i m o C a m p u s

4 . 1 . 1 E x i s t i n g P a r k i n g S u p p l y + D e m a n d

As of 2010, the Nanaimo campus consists of 2,139 total parking spaces. The campus includes 1,681

general spaces, 354 employee spaces, 45 handicap spaces, 21 reserved carpool spaces, and 38 spaces

reserved for a variety of specialty parkers. See Table 4.1.




2/14/2011

P A G E 1 3

T a b l e 4 . 1 - S u m m a r y o f 2 0 1 0 p a r k i n g s u p p l y b y t y p e , N a n a i m o c a m p u s 12

Lot General Employee Handicap Carpool Reserved Total

A 553 0 0 0 0 553

B 140 0 0 0 0 140

C 114 0 5 0 10 129

D 23 0 2 0 1 26

E 112 0 5 18 0 135

F 24 24 3 0 1 52

G 0 81 0 0 1 82

H 0 28 6 0 3 37

I 0 63 5 0 0 68

J 116 0 2 0 1 119

K 91 0 0 0 5 96

L 118 0 0 0 0 118

M 45 0 0 0 0 45

N (upper) 0 61 6 0 7 74

N (lower) 98 0 1 0 3 102

P 11 0 1 1 2 15

Q 3 46 2 2 0 53

R 0 36 0 0 0 36

S 60 0 0 0 0 60

T 64 0 0 0 0 64

U 109 0 5 0 0 114

V1 0 5 0 0 4 9

V2 0 10 2 0 0 12

1,681 354 45 21 38 2,139

Parking lots are generally arranged with short-term lots nearest the centre of campus for most

convenient access and general lots at the perimeter, intended for long-term parking. The largest

parking areas are Lots A/B/C at the southeast portion of the campus and Lots I/J/K/L/M at the

southwest. See Map 1.

12 Adapted from parking data provided by Robbins Parking, 17 September 2010.




2/14/2011

P A G E 1 4

M a p 1 - O f f - s t r e e t p a r k i n g l o t s , N a n a i m o c a m p u s

Parking data was analyzed for a seven week period in winter 2010 to understand campus parking

utilization. Results indicate that parking demand is typically highest on Wednesday with an average of

1,890 vehicles parked on campus, and lowest on Friday with an average of 1,348 vehicles. The

maximum observed utilization was 2,015 vehicles, an occupancy rate of 97.8%13. The 85th percentile

13 The total parking supply noted was 2,060 spaces, not 2,139 as was observed in more recent surveys.




2/14/2011

P A G E 1 5

rate for Wednesday is 2,014, which is an indication of the number of observations falling in the top

15% of the surveyed rates. See Table 4.2. This figure is an appropriate indicator of typical maximum

demand, downplaying any extreme outlying observations.

T a b l e 4 . 2 - S u m m a r y o f p a r k i n g u t i l i z a t i o n b y w e e k d a y , W i n t e r 2 0 1 0 14

Week Mon. Tues. Wed. Thurs. Fri. Total

Feb 08-12 N/C N/C N/C N/C 1,349 N/A

Feb 15-19 1,764 1,854 1,940 1,912 1,316 8,786

Feb 22-26 NO DATA - READING WEEK

Mar 01-05 1,659 1,893 2,013 1,792 1,422 8,779

Mar 08-12 1,805 1,837 1,955 1,744 1,398 8,739

Mar 15-19 1,773 1,748 1,572 1,741 1,331 8,165

Mar 22-26 1,850 1,844 2,015 1,848 1,273 8,830

Mar 29-Apr 02 1,850 1,800 1,847 1,548 N/C N/A

Average 1,784 1,829 1,890 1,764 1,348

85th Percentile 1,850 1,864 2,014 1,864 1,404

It was noted in conversations with University staff, Robbins Parking, and the City of Nanaimo that an

estimated 10% of the University’s parking demand is satisfied off-site, in neighbourhoods surrounding

the campus. Assuming this estimate is accurate, the University’s maximum parking demand is 2,215

vehicles and exceeds the current parking supply by 76 vehicles.

4 . 1 . 2 F u t u r e P a r k i n g S u p p l y

The Campus Master Plan suggests a reduction in parking supply into the future, as stated in Section

2.3.1 of this document. The end goal stated is a total parking supply of 1,390 spaces 20 to 50 years

from now, 749 fewer spaces than at present. The forecasted campus floor area 20 to 50 years from now

is 116,700 m2, resulting in a supply rate of one (1) parking space per 84 m2 GFA. See Table 4.3.

14 Adapted from parking data provided by Robbins Parking, 17 September 2010.




2/14/2011

P A G E 1 6

T a b l e 4 . 3 - P a r k i n g s u p p l y p e r u n i t f l o o r a r e a

Campus Floor

Area Parking Spaces

Parking

Supply Rate

Existing 84,405 m2 2,139 1 / 39.5 m2

Future (approx 20-50 years) 116,700 m2 1,390 1 / 84.0 m2

The ratio of parking spaces to campus population is currently one (1) space for every 3.58 FTEs. The

Campus Master Plan forecasts 9,150 student FTEs in 2032/3315 (approximately 20 years from now).

Assuming staff FTEs increase at the same rate, the parking supply ratio will be of one (1) parking

space per 7.31 FTEs. See Table 4.4.

T a b l e 4 . 4 - P a r k i n g s u p p l y p e r f u l l - t i m e e q u i v a l e n t ( F T E )

Student

FTEs

Staff

FTEs

Total

FTEs

Parking

Spaces

Parking

Supply Rate

Existing 6,896 758 7,654 2,139 1 / 3.58 FTE

Future (approx 20-50 years) 9,150 1,006 10,156 1,390 1 / 7.31 FTE

It is suggested that the University establish incremental parking supply targets to guide toward the

long-term goal of a reduction in parking of 750 spaces from present. A more detailed supply target is

provided in Section 7.1.

As a measure of comparison, the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Parking Generation

handbook references average supply rates of one (1) space per 3.33 FTEs and approximately one (1)

space per 77.4 m2 GFA as typical of observed urban University/College campuses.16 These figures

suggest that VIU’s supply rate is slightly lower than is typical. However, the handbook also states an

average parking demand rate of one (1) space per 4.54 FTEs, suggesting that most universities do not

experience occupancy rates as high as VIU and VIUs demand rate is higher than most.

15 VIU, Nanaimo Campus Master Plan, pg 2-35. 16 Institute of Transportation Engineers, Parking Generation Handbook (4th Ed.), 2010, pg. 153.




2/14/2011

P A G E 1 7

4 . 1 . 3 C o n s i d e r i n g A p p r o p r i a t e P a r k i n g R a t e s

Student parking rates are currently $24 per month, $80 per semester, and $160 per year. Employee

passes are double the price of student passes. Short-term parking is available at $1.00 per hour, to a

maximum of $4.00 per day (9hrs). See Table 4.5. Motorcycle permits are available at 75% the cost of

the student and staff monthly, semester, and annual passes. Carpool permits are also available to

students at $22.50 per semester and staff at $99.00 per year.

T a b l e 4 . 5 - E x i s t i n g p a r k i n g r a t e s , N a n a i m o c a m p u s

Student Employee

Short-term $1 per hour, maximum $4 per 9 hours

Monthly Pass $24 $48

Semester Pass $80 $160

Annual Pass $160 $320

The 2005 TDM Study found that parking rates were too low to encourage a shift in travel mode choice

to walking, cycling, transit, and even carpooling. 2010 parking rates are approximately triple what they

were five (5) years ago. Daily rates have increased from $2.00 to $4.00, monthly student parking from

$7.50 to $24.00, and annual staff passes to $320.00. See Table 4.6.

T a b l e 4 . 6 - P a r k i n g r a t e s c o m p a r i s o n , 2 0 0 5 - 2 0 1 0

Student Staff

2005 2010 2005 2010

Daily $2.00 $4.00 $2.00 $4.00

Monthly $7.50 $24.00 $15.00 $48.00

Semester $22.50 $80.00 $45.00 $160.00

Annual $49.50 $160.00 $99.00 $320.00

University parking rates are inexpensive relative to other post-Secondary institutions in British

Columbia. See Table 4.7. Daily rates range from $3.00 to as high as $14.00 with an average of

approximately $5.75 per day. Monthly rates range from $24.00 at VIU to $131, with an average rate of

approximately $56. Annual passes range from $160 at VIU to as high as $1,500 at Simon Fraser

University, with an average of approximately $572. Both Camosun College and Thompson Rivers

University do not offer annual parking permit options. It is also worth nothing that in all cases, with the




2/14/2011

P A G E 1 8

exception of VIU and the University of British Columbia, institutions charge equal rates to students

and staff/faculty. Many institutions also have “variable pricing” schemes in place where high demand

lots are priced higher than lower demand lots to encourage a more even distribution of parking

demand.

T a b l e 4 . 7 - P a r k i n g r a t e s a t o t h e r B C p o s t - S e c o n d a r y i n s t i t u t i o n s

Daily Monthly Semester Annual

Vancouver Island University $4.00 $24 / $48 $80 / $160 $160 / $320

University of Victoria $7.84 $88 $265 $459

Camosun College $5.00 $100* $400* $1,200*

University of BC $6 - $14 $85 $320 $600 - $864

Simon Fraser University $13.00 $52 - $131 $208 - $524 $624 - $1,572

University of BC – Okanagan $5.00 $22 - $40 $90 - $160 $270 - $470

Thompson Rivers University $3.00 $50 $300 $900*

University of Northern BC $3.00 $45 $180 $540

Capilano University $3 - $5 $50 $135 $235

Average (approximate) $5.75 $56 $234 $572

* Rate not offered, stated rates are projected based on known rates.

University parking rates are generally lower than public pay parking rates in other areas of Nanaimo.

See Table 4.8. Daily rates range from $3.00 to $8.00, with an average rate of approximately $5.00.

Monthly parkade rates range from $25.00 to $95.00, with an average of approximately $50.00. Daily

parking is available to Nanaimo Regional Hospital employees at $11.20 for a book for five (5) daily

permits, or $2.25 per day.




2/14/2011

P A G E 1 9

T a b l e 4 . 8 - C i t y o f N a n a i m o o f f - s t r e e t p u b l i c p a r k i n g r a t e s 17

Day (24 hrs) Month

Port of Nanaimo Centre Parkade $8.00 n/a

Harbour front Parkade $8.00 $95.00

Bastion Street Parkade $6.00 $60.00

Cavan Street $3.00 $60.00

Wallace/Wentworth $3.00 $40.00

Comox Road n/a $25.00

Dunsmuir Street n/a $40.00

Civic Arena $3.00 n/a

Nanaimo Regional Hospital $2.25 n/a

Average $5.17 $53.33

Another method of cost comparison is to consider the cost of parking relative to the cost of other travel

options. Daily parking presents a $0.50 savings over daily transit, while monthly and semester parking

rates are approximately half that of transit. See Table 4.9. There is a financial disincentive to use

transit to/from the University as compared to parking a vehicle.

T a b l e 4 . 9 - P a r k i n g a n d t r a n s i t c o s t c o m p a r i s o n

Parking Transit

Student Staff Student Staff

Daily $4.00 $4.50

Monthly $24.00 $48.00 $49.50 $60.25

Semester $80.00 $160.00 $158.50 n/a

4 . 1 . 4 P a r k i n g R a t e I n c r e a s e

The University’s Nanaimo campus is virtually built-out, with no new land available for surface parking

areas. Providing additional parking supply would require either acquisition of additional property

adjacent to the campus or building structured parking on-campus, both are costly solutions. The

University has also set a “no net additional parking supply” policy in the Campus Master Plan to

17 City of Nanaimo parking services website, available at: http://www.nanaimo.ca/EN/main/departments/Permits-

Bylaw-Properties/5294/Parking.html




2/14/2011

P A G E 2 0

ensure that new additional parking is provided until 2020. If parking demand is going to be met with

no additional parking supply, parking rates need to be set so that they will decrease parking demand to

a level consistent with existing supply.

Elasticity is the term used in economics to describe the change in demand for an item in response to a

change in price. Studies have shown that the elasticity of vehicle trips relative to parking prices is

typically -0.1 to -0.3.18 Accordingly, the expectation is that a 10% increase in parking rates will

decrease the number of vehicle trips by 1–3% and a 50% increase will reduce vehicle trips by 5%-

15%. Interestingly, increases in parking rates have been shown to be 1.5- to 2-times more effective in

reducing vehicle trips than the equivalent increase in gas prices.19

It was determined that the current parking supply is 2,139 spaces and the peak period campus parking

demand is for 2,215 parking spaces, which includes an estimate of unmet demand currently satisfied

off-campus. A 3.5% reduction in demand is necessary to bring demand to a level consistent with

supply. However, it is suggested that the University should seek a parking occupancy rate of 95%

overall to ensure that a small amount of parking remains unoccupied during the peak periods.

Accordingly, an 8.3% reduction from existing demand is needed to achieve a 95% overall occupancy

rate. Parking rate increases of approximately 50% are expected to achieve the desired reduction in

parking demand. A 50% increase to monthly rates means raising student rates from $24.00 to $36.00

and employee rates from $48.00 to $72.00. Daily rates would increase from $4.00 to $6.00. These rates

should be used as a guide to incremental increases in parking rates over the next five (5) years to

ensure that existing parking demand is met by the existing parking supply. Increases in rates should

only be considered if it is made clear that revenue increases are being used to support the alternative

travel modes that those unwilling to pay increased rates will be encouraged to use.

4 . 1 . 5 S t u d e n t v s . E m p l o y e e R a t e s

Employee parking rates are currently double that of student rates. In a self-contained campus setting

where parking occupancy rates are extremely high, such as at VIU, all parking spaces are at a premium

regardless of the intended user. It is therefore more efficient to think about the value of the space itself

than it is to think about the vehicle or person that will occupy that space. Of all the BC post-Secondary

institutions researched, only UBC and VIU differentiate between students and employees in their

parking rates.

18 Todd Litman, Transportation Elasticities, Victoria Transport Policy Institute, May 2010. Available at:

http://www.vtpi.org/tdm/tdm11.htm#_Toc161022578 19 USEPA, Technical Methods for Analyzing Pricing Measures to Reduce Transportation Emissions, Report no. 231-

R-98-006, 1998. Available at: http://www.epa.gov/clariton/clhtml/pubtitle.html.




2/14/2011

P A G E 2 1

From a parking management perspective, two (2) factors need to be balanced. First, the University is

more likely to achieve a shift away from vehicle travel resulting from parking rate increases from

students than from employees, as students tend to have lower incomes and are less willing to pay a

premium to park. While somewhat insensitive to the needs of students, this makes perfect sense from a

purely TDM perspective. Secondly, the current employee parking areas are located in more central,

sought after locations than student lots are. The employee lots should command a premium price based

on their premium location. Accordingly, it is suggested that the existing disparity in costs is too high,

but that a 50% increase for employee parking is more appropriate. This is more of a long-term

philosophical approach to supplying and managing parking that the University should consider.

4 . 1 . 6 P e r m i t t i n g S y s t e m

Current parking rates encourage the use of monthly, semester, and annual parking passes, rather than

daily parking. If a student purchases a monthly student pass for $24.00 and uses it five times per week

for four weeks (20 times), the cost is $1.20 per day. If a student only travels to campus three times per

week (12 times), the cost is $2.00 per day. Daily parking costs are $4.00. The problem with long-term

parking passes are that they require a considerable investment up-front, but once they are purchased

there is little incentive to travel by alternative modes. It is as if once the initial purchase is made,

parking from that point on is “free”. Where if on a given day a commuter must consider the cost of

parking relative to the cost of transit, cycling, walking, or carpooling, they are more inclined to choose

an alternative travel mode. A secondary benefit of eliminating permits will be relieving the complaints

of students with long-term permits who cannot find an empty space on campus.

It is recommended that the University work toward eliminating long-term parking passes. Daily

parking permits should be sold in booklets contain anywhere from ten to 50 daily permits to avoid the

inconvenience of looking for change and waiting at a metre. Each permit in the booklet would be good

for parking only on the indicated day, which would be scratched into the pass. The Vancouver Island

Health Authority has instituted this system with success at their facilities with pay parking. UBC has

instituted a similar daily pass system which is automated through controlled-access parkades.

4 . 1 . 7 C a p P a r k i n g P e r m i t s

Until long-term passes are phased out, the University needs to address the current oversupply of

parking permits. In 2010 the University issued a total of 6,217 parking permits – 1,630 monthly, 1,760

semester, and 2,827 annual. See Table 4.10. This is an increase in permit sales of approximately 13%

since 2008. In recent years a number of vehicles displaying VIU parking permits have been spotted in

surrounding areas because of a lack of available parking on the campus.




2/14/2011

P A G E 2 2

T a b l e 4 . 1 0 - S u m m a r y o f 2 0 1 0 P a r k i n g P e r m i t S a l e s , N a n a i m o C a m p u s

Staff Student Total

Monthly 96 1,534 1,630

Semester 91 1,669 1,760

Annual 644 2,183 2,827

Total 831 5,386 6,217

It is suggested that approximately 2,630 permit holders demand parking during a typical day

experiencing high demand based on 2010 permit sales,20 which is 491 more permits than there are

spaces on the campus. To avoid oversupply of permits, it is suggested that a maximum number of

parking permits are made available on a lottery system. The University should decrease permit sales by

approximately 10% in 2011-2012 and again in 2012-2013. See Table 4.11. This will decrease the

number of vehicles with permits forced to park off-campus and leave an appropriate number of spaces

unoccupied for hourly/daily parkers, while encouraging a gradual shift to alternative travel modes. The

corresponding increase in permits costs will also help to decrease demand. All permits should be

offered on a lottery system and should be advertised to students and staff well in advance.

T a b l e 4 . 1 1 - R e c o m m e n d e d M a x i m u m P e r m i t s , 2 0 1 1 - 1 2 a n d 2 0 1 2 - 1 3 21

2011-2012 2012-2013

Staff Student Staff Student

Monthly (per month) 12 175 10 150

Semester (per semester) 40 750 35 675

Annual 575 1,950 525 1,750

20 Calculation assumes staff vehicles park 5 days per week, students 3 days per week, and monthly and semester

passes are distributed evenly over 8 months. 21 Figures based on 2010 permit sales.




2/14/2011

P A G E 2 3

4 . 1 . 8 V a r i a b l e L o t P r i c i n g

Variable lot pricing refers to scenarios where the most convenient, highest demand parking lots are

priced highest and the lower demand, less convenient lots are priced lowest. It leaves more spaces open

in the highest demand areas for those that are willing to pay a premium price, and makes more

reasonably priced parking available to those that value cost savings over convenience. From a parking

management perspective, variable pricing will result in more even distribution of parking demand over

the entire campus and relieve parking pressures in the very highest demand areas.

Variable lot pricing is common in virtually all downtown areas where parking is priced and in many

academic and health care campus environments. The 2005 TDM Study recommended variable lot

pricing as a strategy to shift parking demand away from the highest demand lots and into the lowest

demand lots. A number of BC post-secondary institutions already have variable pricing in place

including UBC, UBC-O, SFU, and Capilano. Variation rates range from 20% to 150%.

A variable lot pricing scheme is only effective when there are underutilized parking areas that are not

being used to address overall campus demand. At present, virtually all campus parking spaces are

occupied and spillover occurs into surrounding areas. Variable lot pricing is not recommended as long

as parking occupancy rates are above 95%.

In future, should parking occupancy rates decrease to below 95% occupancy, the University may

consider variable lot pricing. Short-term and employee lots should be priced at a consistent rate that

reflects their central, convenient location on campus relative to general lot. General lots should be

divided into three (3) categories, as shown on Map 2.

General 1: Lots J, K, L, M should be priced highest

General 2: Lots E, C, N, S, T should be priced in the middle

General 3: Lots A, B, U should be priced lowest.




2/14/2011

P A G E 2 4

M a p 2 - R e c o m m e n d e d l o n g - t e r m v a r i a b l e l o t p r i c i n g r a t e s




2/14/2011

P A G E 2 5

4 . 1 . 9 S u m m a r y o f R e c o m m e n d e d P a r k i n g R a t e S t r u c t u r e

It is recommended that the University increase parking rates 50% from existing rates by September

2012 in order to reduce parking demand at the Nanaimo campus. An incremental increase is suggested

over the next two (2) years. See Table 4.12. All rates do not include HST. Parking conditions should

be reviewed in October-November 2012 and future parking rates considered depending on parking

demand levels at that time.

T a b l e 4 . 1 2 - R e c o m m e n d e d P a r k i n g R a t e s , 2 0 1 0 - 2 0 1 2 , N a n a i m o C a m p u s

Existing July, 2011 July, 2012

Short-term $1 / hr,

Max $4 / 9 hrs

$1.25 / hr,

Max $5 / 9 hrs

$1.50 / hr,

Max $6 / 9 hrs

Monthly Pass Student $24,

Staff $48

Student $30,

Staff $60

Student $36,

Staff $72

Semester Pass Student $80,

Staff $160

Student $100,

Staff $200

Student $120,

Staff $240

Annual Pass Student $160,

Staff $320

Student $200,

Staff $400

Student $240,

Staff $480

It is recommended that the University decrease the number of monthly, semester, and annual permits

offered by 10% in 2011-12 and again in 2012-13 to address issues of permit holders unable to find

parking on-campus. The University should then switch to daily parking passes in September 2013-14,

eliminating all annual, semester, and monthly passes. Daily passes should be offered in “books” of ten

(10) or twenty (20) tickets, and should cost $6.00 per day. Parking should still be offered hourly at

$1.50 per hour.

If parking occupancy rates exceed 95% in September 2012-13 and spillover continues to occur, the

University should consider setting the daily rate higher than $6.00 to decrease parking demand. If

occupancy rates are below 95% and spillover is not occurring, the University should consider a

variable lot pricing scheme, pricing high priority lots higher than low priority lots.




2/14/2011

P A G E 2 6

4 . 2 C o w i c h a n C a m p u s

4 . 2 . 1 P a r k i n g S u p p l y & D e m a n d

The existing Cowichan campus has 47 formal parking spaces and approximately another 100 spaces in

a secondary gravel area. A survey of parking areas on Wednesday, September 22, 2010 determined

peak parking demand occurs at 11:00am. During this time 108 parked vehicles were observed, an

occupancy rate of 73% and demand rate of one (1) vehicle per 31 m2 GFA.

The new Cowichan campus consists of 4,364 m2 GFA, an increase of 31% over the existing campus.

The campus includes a total of 146 parking spaces, 122 general spaces, 4 disabled spaces, 15 carpool

spaces, and 5 reserved for electric vehicles. See Table 4.13. If the parking demand rate at the existing

Cowichan campus is applied to the new campus, the expected demand is for 140 spaces. The proposed

supply can accommodate this demand at 96% occupancy. The Institute of Transportation Engineers’

Parking Generation handbook suggests that universities typically supply parking at a rate of one (1)

space per 77.4 m2 GFA. Applied to the University, the expectation would be a supply of 56 parking

spaces, less than half the supply of the new Cowichan campus. Accordingly, it is expected that the

parking demand generated by the Cowichan campus can be accommodated by the proposed supply.

T a b l e 4 . 1 3 - P a r k i n g s u p p l y f o r n e w C o w i c h a n c a m p u s , b y t y p e

Type Parking Supply

General 122

Handicap 4

Carpool 15

Electric Vehicle 5

Total 146

4 . 2 . 2 P a r k i n g R a t e s

The existing Cowichan campus offers free parking, however the University’s desire to encourage

sustainable transportation behaviour to and from the new campus necessitates consideration for priced

parking as a way to discourage single-occupant vehicle travel and in addressing the University’s LEED

Gold requirements.




2/14/2011

P A G E 2 7

The advantages of priced parking are many. First, pricing parking will reduce parking demand at the

campus, resulting in fewer vehicle trips and an increase in the use of alternative travel modes. Pricing

also forces those that demand parking to more directly pay the costs of their travel choice. The

University is looking for all campus services to be financially self-sustaining and failing to price

parking will result in tuition fees being used to offset parking construction costs, even for those

students that do not require parking. Pricing also reduces the subsidy offered to vehicle drivers, making

alternative modes, particularly transit, a more competitive alternative. Pricing offers an opportunity to

increase revenues to fund parking capital costs and on-going maintenance and operations. Where

surplus revenue is generated, funds should be used in support of alternative transportation options,

thereby reducing demand for on-campus parking.

For these reasons, it is suggested that the University price parking at the new Cowichan campus.

Where the Nanaimo campus has priced parking for some time and challenges are the pricing levels, the

Cowichan campus does not have a history of priced parking. It is suggested that the rates

recommended for the Nanaimo campus are responding to a deficient parking supply and are considered

too aggressive for the Cowichan campus. More reasonable rates should be developed which reflect the

lower property values of the area, the lower general cost of parking in the area, and the context and

characteristics of the site’s immediate surroundings.

Parking in downtown Duncan includes both priced and unpriced spaces. All on-street spaces in the

core area are free for customers to a maximum of three (3) hours. Spaces outside the core area are free

but limited to two (2) hours, or available for all day parking at $2.00 per day or $30.00 per month.

There are also a number of less-desirable areas where all-day parking is free.

It is recommended that parking is priced at $1.00 per hour to a maximum of $3.00 per day. Similar to

the daily permit system recommended for the Nanaimo campus, the Cowichan campus should adopt a

daily system immediately, charging $3.00 per day and providing a bulk supply of daily passes to

students and staff. Monthly, semester, and annual passes should not be made available. It is also

recommended that there is no differentiation between student and staff rates.

Concern has been voiced over the potential negative impacts of priced parking at the new Cowichan

campus. The following are the most common concerns, with potential solutions provided.

The added financial burden to students, many of whom have minimal income, is often met

with confusion and unhappiness as to the University’s objectives for pricing. It is important

that the University make information available as to why parking is priced and act




2/14/2011

P A G E 2 8

transparently in explaining that parking revenues prevent the use of tuition to fund parking

and in funding alternative transportation options.

An element of inconvenience will be added by requiring users to acquire parking permits,

where previously they didn’t need to. The University should ensure that parking infrastructure

accepts a variety of payment methods and that daily permits are easy to purchase.

Parking spillover is a concern the adjacent activities on the Cowichan Place site. While it was

reasoned that the parking supply will satisfy parking demand without spillover, there is

potential for parkers to spillover into adjacent areas to avoid pay parking.

4 . 2 . 3 M a n a g e m e n t S t r a t e g i e s

While Vancouver Island University and its transportation demand and parking management is the

concern of this strategy, the University seeks to maintain a positive relationship with its Cowichan

Place partners. As such, the University should suggest the following strategies to help mitigate any

spillover issues.

First, it is recommended that parking management by other Cowichan Place partners remains at status

quo until parking pricing is instituted at the University. At the request of the partners, the University

should review parking conditions on the site to determine if there is a spillover issue and the extent of

the problem. The University should then work with the partners in developing management strategies

that will encourage University-related vehicles to park in the University parking area. The following

strategies are suggested:

Consider restricting parking to two (2) hours at the Island Savings Centre. This will require

occasional enforcement to ensure that restrictions are adhered to.

Consider a staff parking permit system that permits Island Savings Centre employees to park

longer than the two (2) hour maximum.

Consider a guest parking permit system be made available at service desks at the Island

Savings Centre to customers/patrons, which they would place in their vehicle to permit

parking in excess of the two (2) hour maximum.

It should be noted that the suggested system will require additional effort by the Island Savings Centre

in administration and a level of inconvenience added to ISC users to combat potential spillover as a




2/14/2011

P A G E 2 9

result of the University. Conversely, it should be noted the Island Savings Centre experiences parking

challenges during hockey games, and particularly when other activities are occurring at the theatre or

in the community rooms. While there are a number of evening classes offered at the University, it is

expected that parking will be below peak occupancy in the evenings and on weekends when hockey

games are typically hosted. This presents an opportunity to relieve Island Savings Centre parking

issues. This sharing of parking responsibilities is considered a benefit of this shared site and should be

recognized in planning for the University and the other Cowichan Place partners.

4 . 3 P a r k i n g R e v e n u e s

Parking management is a transportation demand management (TDM) approach in that adjusting

supply, price, and regulation has a dramatic affect on travel demands. While pricing works to reduce

parking demand, it often results in increased revenues. From a TDM perspective, parking revenues are

best used as a means to support alternative transportation options and further reduce parking demand.

The following section forecasts parking revenues into the future based on the parking management

recommendations of the previous chapter and highlights opportunities to use revenues in support of

sustainable transportation options.

The Nanaimo and Cowichan campuses are considered separate of one another in the following

sections. It is recommended that parking revenues from each are used to cover maintenance costs for

parking facilities at each campus, and that additional revenues are committed to fund TDM programs.

4 . 3 . 1 N a n a i m o C a m p u s

The University’s parking revenues have increased over the past five (5) years. 2009-2010 revenues are

nearly 2.5-times that of 2005-2006, with the largest increases occurring in 2008-2009 and 2009-2010.

Where increases in rates often correspond with a decrease in parking demand, it was explained in

Section 4.1.1 that the campus parking supply is still at capacity during peak periods with spillover into

adjacent areas. As such, revenue increases are due to increased parking rates over the past three (3)

years, not an increase in vehicles.

Increased parking rates are recommended over the next two (2) years (2011 – 2013). Permits are to

increase by 25% in 2011-2012 and another 20% in 2012-2013, while meter rates increase $0.25 in

2011-2012 and another $0.25 in 2012-2013.

Parking revenues are forecast based on the recommended increase in parking rates and assuming the

same number of vehicles as 2009-2010. 2011-2012 revenues are expected to at approximately $1.1




2/14/2011

P A G E 3 0

million, an increase of approximately $225,000 (25%) from 2010-2011. 2012-2013 revenues are

expected at approximately $1.35 million, an increase of an additional $225,000 (20%). See Table 4.14.

T a b l e 4 . 1 4 - F u t u r e p a r k i n g r e v e n u e s b a s e d o n r e c o m m e n d e d r a t e s ,

N a n a i m o c a m p u s

Permit Meter Total

2009 – 2010 $489,740 $288,010 $777,750

2010 – 2011 $557,500 $336,000 $893,500

2011 – 2012 $696,875 $420,000 $1,116,875

2012 – 2013 $836,250 $504,000 $1,340,250

4 . 3 . 2 C o w i c h a n C a m p u s

The Cowichan campus has no existing parking revenue streams as parking is offered for free.

However, it is recommended that parking is priced at the new campus at $1.00 per hour to a maximum

of $3.00 per day. Monthly, semester, and annual passes are not to be provided.

As there are no existing revenue streams to forecast future streams on, the Nanaimo campus offers an

indication of what to expect. The Nanaimo campus is expected to net approximately $900,000 revenue

in 2010-2011. In the peak period the Nanaimo campus accommodates 2,015 vehicles. The new

Cowichan campus is expected to see demand for 140 vehicles in the peak period based on demand

rates at the existing campus, which is only 7% of the vehicles at the Nanaimo campus. If net revenue

per vehicle is the same at the Cowichan campus as it is at the Nanaimo campus, the 2011-2012 total

revenue will be $63,000. Per vehicle revenue is expected to be relatively similar for both campuses as

the parking rates are lower at the Cowichan campus than at the Nanaimo campus, but all vehicles will

pay by day at Cowichan rather than at a discounted long-term rate as at Nanaimo. The University

should use a portion of Cowichan parking revenues to cover the cost of maintenance of the parking

facility and commit the rest to funding TDM programs.




2/14/2011

P A G E 3 1

5 . 0 T R A N S I T P A S S P R O G R A M S

Transit pass programs are a great opportunity to increase transit ridership to the University by offering

discounted transit passes to a large population. Increases in ridership will result in a gradual

improvement in transit services, leading to further increase is transit use. Two (2) transit passes are

considered in this document: the Universal Bus Pass (“U-Pass”) for students, and the ProPass for staff.

5 . 1 U n i v e r s a l B u s P a s s ( “ U - P a s s ” )

The U-Pass program is a student-oriented transportation package that provides students universal

access to public transit. The program requires mandatory participation from all students, which allows

the transit agency to offer reduced costs with the guarantee of a large pool of users. The U-Passes are

typically made available to any full-time student on a per-semester basis.

In order for a post-secondary institution to implement the U-Pass Program it must first be approved via

student referendum. This process is in accordance to school policy as the U-Pass program requires a

mandatory increase in ancillary fees, which are attached to each student’s tuition. The fees vary

between each institution and are typically less expensive for schools with a larger population of

students and/or in communities with an established transit system. Cases where the U-Pass Program

has been implemented in smaller communities, higher ancillary fees are typically required to include

transit service improvements to the region.

5 . 1 . 1 U - P a s s P r o g r a m s a t O t h e r I n s t i t u t i o n s

The majority of the major post-secondary institutions in British Columbia have established U-Pass

programs. See Table 5.1. The University of Victoria adopted its U-Pass in 1998 and was the first post-

secondary institution in western Canada to do so. Many BC colleges and small universities have

adopted U-Pass programs in the past few years. U-Pass costs range from $10.00 per month at the

University of Fraser Valley to $30.00 per month at Capilano and Langara.




2/14/2011

P A G E 3 2

T a b l e 5 . 1 – B C p o s t - S e c o n d a r y I n s t i t u t i o n s w i t h a U - P a s s P r o g r a m

Institution Established Cost22

University of British Columbia (UBC) 2003 $23.75/month

Simon Fraser University (SFU) 2002 $26.00/month

Capilano University 2007 $30.00/month

Langara 2008 $30.00/month

University of Victoria (UVic) 1998 $17.31/month

Camosun College 1999 $19.00/month

College of the Rockies 2006 $10.00/month

Thompson River University (TRU) 2004 $12.00/month

College of New Caledonia (CNC) 2009 $12.00/month

University of the Fraser Valley (UFV) 2008 $10.00/month

University of Northern BC (UNBC) 2008 $12.00/month

UBC-Okanagan (UBCO) 2006 $11.25/month

5 . 1 . 2 L e v e l o f A c c e p t a n c e

Preliminary discussion of the U-Pass program has been met with resistance in many instances.

Common complaints include the added cost and financial burden it places on those that cannot or

choose not to use transit. However, feedback has been favourable where a U-Pass has been put in

place. Recently, Vancouver Community College and Douglas College students voted 97% and 94%,

respectively, in favour of the U-Pass for 2011. In 2007 92% of SFU students voted in favour of a small

fee increase to sustain the U-Pass until September 2011. Similarly, 90% of University of Alberta

students recently voted in support of extending the U-Pass. These results show that, while often met

with resistance, students are finding the U-Pass to be beneficial

5 . 1 . 3 C o s t t o S t u d e n t s

The costs associated with the U-Pass vary by location and depend on the existing transit system, local

transit costs, number of students involved, and level of subsidy by the institution. See Table 5.2. Costs

are as low as $10 per month at the University of Fraser Valley to $30 per month at Capilano and

Langara. U-Pass costs are between 16% and 27% the cost of adult monthly passes. The largest savings

is presented at UBC, where the monthly cost of the U-Pass is $127.25 less than an adult monthly pass.

22 Many institutions offer U-Pass by semester, monthly costs indicated are derived from semester rates.




2/14/2011

P A G E 3 3

T a b l e 5 . 2 – U - P a s s C o s t s a t O t h e r I n s t i t u t i o n s

Cost of Adult

Monthly Pass

Monthly Cost

of U-Pass

Cost Savings

of U-Pass

University of British Columbia $151 $23.75 -$127.25

Simon Fraser University $151 $26 -$125

Capilano University $151 $30 -$121

Langara $151 $30 -$121

University of Victoria $80 $17.31 -$62.69

Camosun College $80 $19 -$61

College of the Rockies $45 $10 -$35

Thompson River University $45 $12 -$33

College of New Caledonia $54 $12 -$43

University of the Fraser Valley $45 $10 -$35

University of Northern BC $54 $12 -$43

UBC Okanagan $45 $11.25 -$33.75

In June 2010 the Province announced plans to make the U-Pass program available to students of all BC

post-secondary institutions. The cost will be $30 per month, increasing to $35 per month in 2013. The

program still requires that each school approve participation in the program through a student

referendum and a contract must be reached between the institution and BC Transit. Based on costs at

non-Vancouver institutions, it is anticipated that the cost to VIU students would be less than the $30

per month, with amounts to a monthly savings of $30.75.

5 . 1 . 4 C o s t t o t h e I n s t i t u t i o n

Costs will be incurred by the University to initiate the program and on an annual basis. Costs will

depend greatly on the eventual cost of the pass to students, level of administration required, and the

subsidy provided. There will also be costs assumed by BC Transit which are not accounted for.

A 2005 review of the U-Pass at UBC and SFU identifies the costs associated with the start-up and on-

going operation of their U-Pass programs. It notes an annual subsidy of $1.3 million committed by

UBC and $617,000 by SFU. These figures represent an estimated annual subsidy of $30 - $35 per

student on the cost of a U-Pass. Both institutions also note approximately 4,000 hours of

administration time per year. Estimating that VIU’s population is approximately 60% of the average of




2/14/2011

P A G E 3 4

SFU and UBC, known costs from these institutions have been factored to provide an estimate of costs

at VIU. See Table 5.3.

T a b l e 5 . 3 - A n t i c i p a t e d U - P a s s C o s t s a t V I U ( b a s e d o n U B C / S F U ) 23

UBC Costs SFU Costs Expected

VIU Costs

Start-up Costs

Administration Expenditures $50,000 $141,000 $57,000

Administration Staffing 4,400 hrs 1,350 hrs 1,725 hrs

U-Pass Management System n/a 2,100 hrs n/a

Subsidies $500,000 n/a n/a

$550,000

4,400 hrs

$50,000

3,450 hrs

$57,000

1,725 hrs

On-going Costs (annual)

Subsidies $1,150,000 $515,000 $500,000

Lost Parking Revenues $200,000 $225,000 $130,000

Administrative Expenditures $40,000 $102,000 $40,000

Administrative Staffing 3,500 hrs 4,500 hrs 2,400 hrs

U-Pass Monitoring System 500 hrs 400 hrs 270 hrs

$1,390,000

4,000 hrs

$842,000

4,900 hrs

$670,000

2,670 hrs

The UBC and SFU examples also had considerable costs borne by TransLink. If BC Transit were

unwilling to assume a similar level of subsidy, the anticipated costs would increase.

5 . 1 . 5 I m p a c t o n T r a v e l C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s

Experiences at other institutions have shown significant increases in transit ridership as a direct result

of the U-Pass. See Table 5.4. The University of British Columbia saw a 53% increase in transit

ridership in 2003, its first year with the U-Pass in place. Simon Fraser (39%) and UVic (13%) also saw

significant increases in transit ridership in their first year with a U-Pass.24

23 UBC and SFU data adapted from Urban Systems, U-Pass Review Final Report, 2005, p41. 24 Greater Vancouver Transportation Authority (GVTA, TransLink), ‘Increased Ridership Due to U-Pass Surpasses

TransLink’s Forecast’, News release for TransLink, November, 2003.




2/14/2011

P A G E 3 5

T a b l e 5 . 4 - T r a n s i t R i d e r s h i p I m p a c t s o f U - P a s s a t B C I n s t i t u t i o n s

Year 1 Year 2

University of British Columbia (UBC) +53% +30%

Simon Fraser University (SFU) +39% +23%

University of Victoria (UVic) +13% +85%

Average +35% +46%

The increase in transit ridership resulting from the U-Pass is expected to reduce both vehicle trips

to/from the University and on-campus parking demand. Experiences at other institutions show a

significant decrease in vehicle trips resulting from the U-Pass. Experiences at UBC and SFU both

show that single-occupant vehicle trips decreased approximately 10% over the first two (2) years with

the U-Pass in place25. The decrease in parking demand resulting from the U-Pass has varied at other

institutions. UVic experienced a 12% decrease in the number of parking permits issued one year after

the U-Pass was in place26. UBC reports that they have experienced a reduction in demand for

approximately 1,000 to 3,000 parking spaces27.

5 . 1 . 6 S t e p s t o I m p l e m e n t a t i o n

The steps to implementation will vary depending on the specific terms of the program established in

cooperation with BC Transit. Generally three (3) steps are involved – planning, buy-in, and

implementation – as summarized in Figure 5.1.

25 Urban Systems, U-Pass Review Final Report (pg S-5), May 4, 2005. 26 Noxon Associates Ltd. ‘U-Pass Toolkit: The Complete Guide to Universal Transit Pass Programs at Canadian

Colleges and Universities’, Canadian Urban Transit Association, 2004. 27 Greater Vancouver Transportation Authority (GVTA, TransLink), ‘Increased Ridership Due to U-Pass Surpasses

TransLink’s Forecast’, News release for TransLink, November, 2003.




2/14/2011

P A G E 3 6

F i g u r e 5 . 1 – U - P a s s I m p l e m e n t a t i o n S t e p s 28

The 2004 Canadian Urban Transit Association (CUTA) U-PassToolkit outlines the responsibilities of

the various parties involved in implementing the U-Pass. The University’s role is in administering the

program, approving student fee increases, and accepting fees on behalf of the Students Union. In most

cases, however, the Students Union has primary responsibility on the University’s end. Students Union

responsibilities include:

Representing student interests during negotiation of the U-Pass and service improvements;

Obtaining approval for the U-Pass from the student body, typically through referendum;

Collecting U-Pass fees from students, typically via the University administration;

Developing details concerning eligibility and exemptions, creation and distribution of the

actual U-Pass medium (card, sticker or other), and sanctions for abuse of privileges;

28 Image from Noxon Associates Ltd. ‘U-Pass Toolkit: The Complete Guide to Universal Transit Pass Programs at

Canadian Colleges and Universities’, Canadian Urban Transit Association, 2004, p8.




2/14/2011

P A G E 3 7

Informing students about U-Pass operation and conditions; and

Publicizing and enforcing program rules related to abuse and fraud.

It is recommended that the University take actions in pursuit of a U-Pass program at VIU. The steps

should include the following:

Step 1: Develop Internal Partnership

The University should consider a U-Pass working group, with members of both staff and the Students

Union. The goal of the group is to work together to develop consensus on the goals and objectives

around the need for a U-Pass and discuss preferences for the specific terms of a program. It is

important that all parties are in agreement on the objectives of the program as they move forward in

communications with BC Transit and the student body.

Step 2: Undertake Initial Conversations with BC Transit

Members of the working group should approach BC Transit for initial conversations to state an

intention to pursue a U-Pass at VIU and to discuss in principle the terms and conditions of such a

program. The working group should seek to establish clarification on program details such as U-Pass

costs, the students groups that are included, criteria for opting-out, duration of the agreement, and

potential service improvements. Consideration should also be given to whether the U-Pass might be

instituted for the Nanaimo campus only and the Nanaimo Regional Transit System, or whether it may

extend to all VIU campuses and local transit systems. It is important these details are better understood

specific to VIU so that the working group can move forward with reliable information.

Step 3: Momentum Building Campaign

Steps should be taken to build support for a U-Pass through the University’s student population. This

will entail communicating details of the program so that students have accurate information on which

to formulate their opinion, as well as providing education and promotion of the U-Pass to individual’s

and the University as a whole.

Step 4: Study Student Travel Characteristics

The University should consider studying student travel characteristics to determine where students

travel from, how well current transit meets their needs, and the potential to shift single-occupant

vehicle commuters to transit with changes in transit programs and route coverage. This information

will help inform expectations on ridership and highlight where service improvement are necessary.




2/14/2011

P A G E 3 8

Step 5: Establish Key Terms

The working group should undertake further communication with BC Transit to confirm the key terms

of the program, including costs, opt-out criteria, and service improvements (if any).

Step 6: Student Referendum

The University, through its Students Union, will host a referendum to gain approval from the student

body to enter into a U-Pass contract with BC Transit. Criteria for support is based on University

policies.

Step 7: Implementation

If the referendum is successful, the University would proceed with implementation of the U-Pass.

5 . 2 E m p l o y e e T r a n s i t P a s s ( “ P r o P a s s ” )

ProPass is a permanent bus pass available to VIU employees through automatic payroll deductions. It

is available to any organization committing a minimum of five (5) members a minimum of one (1)

year and entitles users to unlimited transit ridership. Costs are reduced from that of a typical monthly

pass to take into account vacation, sick time, and a certain portion of time when a typical user is unable

to use the pass. The pass also entitles the user to claim the 15.25% income tax reduction offered by the

Federal government.29

5 . 2 . 1 N a n a i m o C a m p u s

The ProPass program is currently administered at the Nanaimo campus, with approximately 20 to 25

employees using it. Fees for the program are based on 10.3 months of monthly bus pass usage spread

over twelve (12) months, which saves 14% or approximately $105 annually. The Federal Tax Credit

offers a further reduction of 15% or approximately $95. In total, the ProPass costs Nanaimo campus

employees approximately $530 annually or approximately 27% less than a monthly bus pass. See

Table 5.5.

T a b l e 5 . 5 – M o n t h l y T r a n s i t C o s t C o m p a r i s o n , N a n a i m o c a m p u s

Monthly Pass ProPass ProPass and

Tax Deduction

$60.75 $52.08 $44.14

29 More about the Federal tax credit for public transit at: http://www.transitpass.ca




2/14/2011

P A G E 3 9

The reduced rate offered for the ProPass makes transit costs comparable to parking costs. Currently an

annual staff parking permit costs $320, where the ProPass costs $530. The recommended increases in

parking rates will result in an annual staff permit costing $480 in 2012. It is also recommended that

beyond 2012 that long-term permits are eliminated and parking is charged by-day. If this

recommendation is pursued, the cost to park is $6.00 per day and estimated at approximately $1,200

per year, which is over twice the cost of the ProPass.

Recognizing that the ProPass is already in place at the Nanaimo campus, the University should take

steps to encourage its use among employees. It is anticipated that increasing parking rates and the

inconvenience of finding available parking will increase demand for transit among employees. The

correct marketing of the program will ensure that any employee thinking about using transit is aware

the ProPass exists. The University may also consider offering subsidies on the program to decrease

costs, perhaps in coordination with a subsequent increase in staff parking rates.

5 . 2 . 2 C o w i c h a n C a m p u s

The ProPass is not currently administered at the Cowichan campus. It is assumed that BC Transit

would offer a similar program to Cowichan campus employees if there was uptake of by at least five

(5) employees. If the same cost structure was offered to Cowichan campus employees as at Nanaimo,

the assumed annual cost is $495, $81 less than twelve (12) monthly passes. If the Federal Tax Credit is

applied, the annual cost is $420.

It is recommended that the University pursue the ProPass program for employees of the Cowichan

campus. The University should first communicate its intent to BC Transit to confirm the parameters of

the program, including cost and minimum uptake. The University should then take steps to market the

ProPass to employees to ensure they are aware of the program and its benefits. Marketing should be

conducted in coordination with implementing pay parking at the site. As with Nanaimo, the University

may consider offering subsidies on the ProPass to further reduce costs and encourage uptake.




2/14/2011

P A G E 4 0

6 . 0 B I C Y C L E / P E D E S T R I A N F A C I L I T I E S

Continued improvement of bicycle and pedestrian facilities will encourage University staff and

students to walk or bicycle to the University, thereby reducing parking demand and the negative effects

of vehicle commuting. The following are recommended bicycle and pedestrian improvements for

consideration at both the Nanaimo and Cowichan campuses.

6 . 1 B i c y c l e U s e r s C o m m i t t e e

The University should consider establishing an inter-campus bicycle committee to assist in

implementation and oversee the details of bicycle planning in future. Such a committee was in place in

previous years, but has since dismantled. A new committee should be formed to work within the broad

scope of TDM to ensure compliance of bicycle-related infrastructure and programs with overall TDM

goals, and to provide on-going advocacy for cycling and expertise on bicycle issues at both campuses.

While the committee is likely to be focused on the Nanaimo campus, it is suggested that at least one

(1) representative is from the Cowichan campus.

6 . 2 P e d e s t r i a n N e t w o r k P l a n

A pedestrian network plan should be developed for the Nanaimo campus which is referenced in future

campus development to ensure appropriate pedestrian infrastructure is provided. The network plan

should identify existing pedestrian routes, needed improvements, and future routes to be developed in

coordination with campus development. Routes should provide connections between campus buildings

and parking, transit, and cycling facilities. They should also be developed in coordination with

pedestrian routes beyond the campus. Pedestrian facility guidelines should be included that provide

guidance on the design of pedestrian routes to ensure safety, security, and accessibility is addressed.

The University should consider using parking revenues to fund identified retrofit improvements to

existing pedestrian facilities.

This strategy is not applicable to the Cowichan campus, as it is a single building and appropriate

pedestrian facilities are already provided at the site.

6 . 3 B i c y c l e P a r k i n g

Bicycle parking is to be considered on two (2) levels. First, the University should address the lack of

weather protection for bicycle racks. This was a recommendation included in the 2004 TDM Plan and

something that should continue to be addressed. Providing weather protection for bike racks will keep

bicycle seats dry, prevent chain rust, and generally increase cyclist comfort. Weather protection can be

as simple as moving existing racks into locations under building awnings or creating new shelters




2/14/2011

P A G E 4 1

containing racks. Consideration should also be given to locations that offer natural surveillance to deter

theft and convenient access to shower and change facilities.

Secondly, the University should continue to increase the supply of secured bicycle parking, which was

also a recommendation of the 2004 TDM Plan. Secure bicycle parking is a controlled-access facility

that protects from theft and vandalism, and offers weather protection. A waiting list is currently taken

for cyclists wanting access to secure parking and it has been communicated that the chosen bicycle

locker does not accommodate bicycles with a larger frame size. Bicycle racks, while plentiful at the

Nanaimo campus, are not a substitute for secure storage. It is recommended that the University use

parking revenues to increase the supply of secure bicycle parking to meet current demand. The

University may also include secure bicycle parking in existing and future buildings as a storage room

with controlled access. Ideally these facilities should have opportunities for natural surveillance and

offer convenient access to shower / change facilities.

Examples of secure bicycle parking at the Nanaimo campus.

The University must also consider providing electric bike charging stations in strategic locations

around campus. These stations should be available free of charge and funded through parking

revenues. The number of charging stations should increase into the future based on growing demand.




2/14/2011

P A G E 4 2

6 . 4 B i c y c l e S t a t i o n

The University should consider developing bicycle stations at both the Nanaimo and Cowichan

campuses. Bicycle stations are locations where cyclists can tune-up their bike or make basic repairs,

with added services as needed. A bike station would be best located adjacent to a central campus

service centre, such as a recreational facility or administration building. Typically bicycle stations

include the following elements:

A cover for weather protection and lighting for after dark;

Bike stands to elevate and secure a bicycle;

Tools available for sign-out;

An air pump to inflate tires;

A selection of bicycle parts available for purchase; and

Occasional personnel for assistance or scheduled instruction.

The University of Victoria has a “bike kitchen” adjacent their Student Union Building30. The bike

kitchen has been well used and includes many of the items listed above.

6 . 5 B i c y c l e L o a n P r o g r a m

It is recommended that an inventory of bikes, locks, helmets and packs be gathered to loan, rent or sell

with a ‘buy-back policy’ to students on a per-semester basis. Students - especially exchange students,

do not feel they are on campus long enough to warrant buying a bike. There may also be other barriers.

With a bike loan program – they can be “sold” a complete system – with the funds returned back to

them at the end of the semester. The bike loan program would be funded through parking revenues and

administered by the transportation coordinator.

6 . 6 B i c y c l e S k i l l s C o u r s e

The University should offer bicycle skills courses on an on-going basis. The skills course would teach

new riders bicycle signage, rules of the road, and safety tips. It would also provide a chance for

experienced cyclists who are new to the area to become familiar with convenient and safe cycling

routes. The University should consider working with the Canadian Cycling Association’s CAN-Bike

program to offer a bicycle skills course.31

30 Information on the UVic bike kitchen is available at: http://web.uvic.ca/uvbikes/pages/bikekitchen.html 31 Information on CAN-Bike is available at: http://www.canbike.net




2/14/2011

P A G E 4 3

7 . 0 S H A R E D V E H I C L E S

Sharing vehicles refers to programs intended to use personal vehicles in a more efficient manner. The

following carshare and ridesharing initiatives are recommended for both the Nanaimo and Cowichan

campuses.

7 . 1 C a r s h a r e C o o p e r a t i v e

7 . 1 . 1 W h a t i s a C a r s h a r e ?

A carshare cooperative is a collectively owned organization that operates a fleet of shared vehicles

accessible to all members of the cooperative. Members typically purchase a one-time membership

share that is refunded upon leaving the cooperative, a small monthly administration fee, and a per-

kilometre and/or per-hour usage fee. Members have access to the entire fleet of vehicles and must book

a vehicle prior to usage.

Membership in a carshare program is a cheap and effective way for those who typically walk, bike, or

take transit to gain access to a vehicle on an as-need basis. Students living in campus residences exhibit

low automobile ownership rates and would benefit from carsharing. Carshares may also partially or

entirely eliminate the need for fleet vehicles for work-related personal travel.

7 . 1 . 2 C a r s h a r e O p t i o n s i n N a n a i m o

The Vancouver-based Cooperative Auto Network (CAN) operates two (2) vehicles in the Nanaimo

area. The CAN was contacted about potentially expanding the fleet to include vehicles(s) at the

University and expressed that they have no interest in further expansion in Nanaimo32.

The Victoria Carshare Co-op (VCSC) is a Victoria-based carshare cooperative with a fleet of twenty

(20) vehicles stationed in the Greater Victoria area. The VCSC has shown no interest in expanding

their fleet beyond the Capital Region.

A third option is to work with the Nanaimo-based group that recently established the Nanaimo

CarShare Cooperative. The Nanaimo CarShare does not yet operate vehicles, but is looking to expand

service in the Nanaimo area and has expressed interest in working with the University to provide

service to students and staff33. It is suggested that the Nanaimo-based service is most appropriate for

the University.

32 Personal correspondence with Co-operative Auto Network staff, 19 October 2010. 33 Personal correspondence with Nanaimo CarShare Cooperative board members, 26 October 2010.




2/14/2011

P A G E 4 4

The details of the service are yet to be confirmed, however it has been suggested that service will be

based on the model used by the CAN in Vancouver. The CAN requires individual members to

purchase a one-time $500 membership share and pay a $20 administration fee. The membership share

is refunded upon leaving the cooperative. Monthly administration fees of up to $6.00 are charged

during the months a member uses the service, and usage is $3.00 per hour to a maximum of $36.00 per

day. Mileage is charged at $0.40 per kilometre for the first 35 kilometres, $0.25 for additional

kilometres up to 150 kilometres, and $0.15 per kilometre afterward. A “company car” program is also

offered that requires an organization to become a cooperative member and take responsibility for the

individuals of that company using vehicles.

7 . 1 . 3 C a r s h a r e O p t i o n s i n C o w i c h a n

A captive audience is essential for a successful carshare service. The Nanaimo campus has a

permanent student population living in student residences, offering a dedicated pool of potential

carshare users. The Cowichan campus will not contain student residences and, as such, will not have a

dedicated pool of users. There is a carshare service in existence in Duncan34 that VIU may consider

promoting to its students and staff, however it is recommended that the campus population at the

Cowichan campus will not be large enough to support a vehicle stationed on the site.

7 . 1 . 4 S t u d e n t C a r s h a r e

There are approximately 392 students living in residence on the Nanaimo campus, many of whom

walk, bike, or use transit as their primary mode of travel. Access to a carshare vehicle would offer

flexibility for students needing to complete travel beyond their day-to-day needs, perhaps shopping for

large items, recreational day-trips, or returning home for a weekend.

Students would become individual members of the cooperative, requiring payment of $520 upon

joining. Students will then pay $3.00 per hour of use and $0.40 per kilometre (less on long trips), and a

small monthly administration fee. The administration fee is only charged for months with vehicle use,

so a student would not be charged during the summer when they are not in school. Student members

would be refunded $500 when they terminate their membership in the cooperative.

In a hypothetical scenario, a regular carshare user can expect to pay approximately $2,500 per year,

which includes use from September to April, accessing the vehicle for two (2) shopping trips per week

and a recreational trip once every two (2) weeks. A “casual” carshare user may pay approximately

$500 to use the carshare from September to April, accessing the vehicle for two (2) shopping trips per

34 Information available at: http://www.cowichangreencommunity.org/content/car-share




2/14/2011

P A G E 4 5

month and one (1) recreational trip per semester. Shopping trips are assumed to be three (3) hours and

20-kilometres, and recreation trips are 24 hours and 200-kilometres.

7 . 1 . 5 S t a f f C a r s h a r e

Carsharing may also hold value as a replacement for University-owned fleet vehicles for staff/faculty

use. If anything, staff use of the carshare will increase the viability of such a service on campus so that

student’s in residence can be ensured that the service remains available.

Staff carsharing would operate under an employer-member model, similar to CAN’s “Company Car”

program. The University would become a member of the Nanaimo CarShare. Individual employees

would not be members, but after meeting the criteria required of all drivers of the Cooperative's

vehicles, would have access to any of the Cooperative's cars. The University would be billed for

vehicle usage by its employees, and the University would be responsible for up to $500 in cost (per

incident) for damage or accidents where its employee-drivers were deemed at-fault. While rates have

yet to be determined, it is expected they will be similar to the CAN’s rates, which include a $20 for

registration fee for each staff members and usage fees of $6 per hour to a maximum of $54 per 24

hours.

7 . 1 . 6 I m p l e m e n t a t i o n C o n s i d e r a t i o n s

There are still a number of steps to be taken to ensure stationing a Nanaimo CarShare vehicle(s) at the

Naniamo campus is feasible. The Cooperative itself has only recently been established and has yet to

confirm details of administration, rates, and location/number of vehicles. Preliminary indications are

that the Cooperative will be based on the CAN’s model and the directions of thisstudy are based on

that model. Should the Nanaimo CarShare operate differently, there may be a need to reconsider

implementation at the University.

Once operational, the Nanaimo CarShare will need to know that stationing a carshare vehicle at the

Nanaimo campus will be economically sustainable. It is unclear at this point the number of users or

quantity of usage is needed to sustain a vehicle(s) on campus. The University should survey students in

residence to provide an indication of the level of interest in becoming a carshare member. The survey

should include an education component to ensure students are aware of the options and costs

associated with carsharing.

The University should consider two (2) actions to help ensure that stationing a vehicle at the Nanaimo

campus is economically sustainable for the Nanaimo CarShare. First, the University should budget

$30,000 for the purchase of a vehicle to be stationed at the Nanaimo campus. The vehicle should be




2/14/2011

P A G E 4 6

donated to the Nanaimo CarShare with the caveat that it is stationed on-campus for a minimum term

(ie. 3 years), after which time it may be relocated if carsharing is proven unviable. A vehicle should be

considered which is high-profile and something which will be an attractive option for student. See

image below.

Example of a Victoria Carshare Co-op campaign to select a new vehicle for their fleet.

Secondly, the University should consider budgeting for a “revenue guarantee” element to carsharing.

This would involve working with the Nanaimo CarShare to establish a minimum monthly revenue

threshold for each vehicle stationed at the University. If revenues fall below the threshold, the

University would subsidize the difference. It is unknown what the monthly threshold will be or what

level of usage is needed to meet this threshold. Assuming the University provides vehicles to the

CarShare cost-free, as is suggested, the revenue guarantee would cover insurance, vehicle

maintenance, and administration.

7 . 2 R i d e m a t c h i n g S e r v i c e

7 . 2 . 1 W h a t i s R i d e s h a r i n g ?

Ridesharing refers to carpooling and vanpooling arrangements where a vehicle contains more than one

(1) passenger. Ridematching services link prospective ridesharers that may otherwise have no way of

connecting with one another. The service typically has a user enter information about their commute

into a database, including whether they are offering or seeking a ride, their start/end location, time of

travel, and other preferences (gender, smoking/non-smoking, etc). The database then matches those

offering rides with those needing rides where trip characteristics are compatible. The service only

provides contact information for potential matches, it is up to individuals involved to make contact and

form the terms of the ridesharing arrangement.




2/14/2011

P A G E 4 7

7 . 2 . 2 R i d e m a t c h i n g a t V I U

The University has an established ridematching program available on the University website35. The site

provides a rideshare database for University students and staff. Inputs include gender, start/end

location, and travel days. The database contained 83 users at the time this document was prepared. The

site also contains information on campus parking options, the carpool parking pass, and links to the

Jack Bell Ride-Share and Carpool.ca websites. The University’s Students’ Union has a ridematching

service available online, but it is not operational36.

7 . 2 . 3 S t r a t e g i e s t o P r o m o t e t h e R i d e m a t c h i n g S e r v i c e

It is suggested that the University’s online ridematching service is a well-designed and accessible

service. The issue may come in a lack of awareness among the University population. The following

are strategies intended to promote the University’s ridematching service.

Strategy 1: Develop Brand Image

The existing ridematching service is hosted on the University’s website and is accessed through the

Parking/Security page. While the service is relatively effective and contains the necessary functional

components, it does not have a unique identity to promote to potential users. It is recommended that

the University establish a brand image for the ridematching service that is compatible with the brand

image created for sustainable transportation throughout the University.

Strategy 2: Increase Exposure

There is a need for the University to increase the exposure of the ridematching service to the

University population, both students and staff. Developing a brand image is the first step in the

process. Once the image is created, it is recommended that the University’s TDM Coordinator pursue

all opportunities to reach out to the University population and increase the exposure of the

ridematching service. Opportunities include the following:

Link on University website’s main page

Advertise in school newspaper

Posters around campus

Information at school events (freshman week, new employee packages, varsity events, etc)

35 Available at: http://www.viu.ca/carpool 36 Available at: http://viusu.cfs-services.ca/ride-share




2/14/2011

P A G E 4 8

Strategy 3: Maintain Reduced Rates for Carpool Parking

The University offers a carpool parking permit that allow s registered carpool users to park in

designate spaces in parking lot “E”. These spaces are available only to registered carpool vehicles from

7am to 11am, after which time they revert to general parking. Vehicles must arrive with at least two (2)

passengers and must be registered at the University’s Parking/Security office.

Carpool permits are already discounted from the price of general parking permits, costing

approximately 30% of the cost of student or staff passes. See Table 7.1. Scheduled increases in

parking pass rates are expected for the University’s Nanaimo campus. It is recommended rate increases

are not applied to carpool permits. This will result in a further increase the discount for carpooling.

T a b l e 7 . 1 - G e n e r a l P a r k i n g R a t e s v s C a r p o o l R a t e s

General Carpool

Student $80 / semester $22.50 / semester

Staff $320 / year $99 / year

7 . 2 . 4 S u p p o r t i n g P r o g r a m s

Beyond the specific strategies mentioned above, there are TDM programs recommended in this

document which support ridematching and ridesharing, to include the following:

Preferential carpool parking provides incentive for carpooling;

Access to a carshare vehicle allows ridesharers a vehicle for travel at mid-day; and

A guaranteed ride home provides opportunity to “break” the carpool in case of unforeseen

circumstances.




2/14/2011

P A G E 4 9

8 . 0 M A R K E T I N G , C O O R D I N A T I O N , A N D A D M I N I S T R A T I O N

Transportation demand management is a subtle application of programs and services that are intended

to enhance existing transportation options and provide new options to meet needs. As such, there is the

potential for some of the finer details to be forgotten, which would be prevent successful

implementation.

Careful consideration for marketing, coordination, and administration of TDM are vital if it is to be

successful. The following section includes recommendations for a TDM Coordinator function, class

scheduling to lessen peak demand periods, and Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design

(LEED) considerations specific to the Cowichan campus.

8 . 1 T D M C o o r d i n a t o r

In every successful TDM program, a TDM coordinator position is created to oversee the

implementation of the strategy, ensure there is cooperation among different departments and take

advantage of synergies to derive benefits from tapping into the various resources on campus. It is

recommended that a TDM coordination function is established within the University. The TDM

Coordinator may be a full-time staff position or a shift in responsibility for an existing staff member.

The following are some of the specific responsibilities of the Coordinator,.

Oversee TDM Programs

There are a number of TDM programs recommended in this document that require specific oversight

to ensure they are successful. The Coordinator should be made responsible for the coordination and

execution of the following programs:

Coordinate with Nanaimo CarShare for potential service (explained in Section 6.2);

Act as Chair of the Bicycle Users Committee (Section 6.3.1);

Develop / manage the pedestrian master plan (Section 6.3.2);

Coordinate bicycle parking needs (Section 6.3.3);

Create, organize, and maintaining a bicycle station (Section 6.3.4);

Establishing a bicycle loan service (Section 6.3.5);

Organizing a bicycle skills course (Section 6.3.6); and

Overseeing the ridematching service (Section 6.4).




2/14/2011

P A G E 5 0

Develop Brand Image for Sustainable Transportation

The Coordinator should oversee the development and on-going coordination involved in creating a

brand image for sustainable transportation. The goal is to create something that the campus population

recognizes and which conveys the intent of sustainable transportation. As it is continually used at the

University, the staff and especially students will become more familiar with it and better recognize the

options available to them The brand should be used in promoting sustainable transportation at all VIU

campuses. Examples of similar brand images are shown below.

Sample Sustainable Transportation Brand Images

Promote / Market Sustainable Transportation Options

There is a need for the University to increase the exposure of sustainable transportation options to the

University’s population at all campuses. Developing a brand image is the first step in the process. Once

the image is created, the University’s Coordinator should pursue all opportunities to reach out to the

University population and increase the exposure of the range of alternative travel options available.

Some of the opportunities include the following:

Webpage with link on University’s main page;

Advertise in school newspaper;

Use social networking applications;

Posters around campus; and

Information at school events (freshman week, new employee packages, varsity events, etc).




2/14/2011

P A G E 5 1

Develop Educational Material

The Coordinator should develop education material that addresses some of the contentious and

misleading information that is currently available regarding sustainable transportation at the

University. Specifically, information should be developed that presents a comprehensive overview of

the U-Pass program, identifying administration, costs, and benefits to students. Information should also

be made available highlighting the use of parking revenues to fund sustainable transportation

infrastructure, which will increase acceptance of parking rate increases and increase understanding of

why the University is pursuing TDM.

Communicate with Internal Contacts

The Coordinator should liaise with a variety of internal University contacts to ensure effective

coordination and communication regarding TDM. Internal contacts should include the following:

Parking staff – data collection, carpool passes

Campus planning – integration of TDM in future campus plans

Facilities / Athletics - access to shower / change facilities;

Course scheduling – staggered class times;

The Coordinator is likely to be stationed at the Nanaimo campus, but should establish a key contact at

each of the other campuses.

Communicate with External Contacts

The Coordinator should spearhead the campuses communication and coordination with external

transportation service providers with the purpose of ensuring the University’s transportation needs are

considered in the provision of services. External contacts should include:

BC Transit – U-Pass and transit service;

RDN / CVRD – transit service;

Nanaimo CarShare – carshare service;

City of Nanaimo, District of North Cowichan, and City of Duncan – land use, parking,

walking/cycling routes;




2/14/2011

P A G E 5 2

8 . 2 S t a g g e r e d C l a s s T i m e s

Staggered class times refers to a theoretical strategy where University classes would be scheduled to

fall outside peak parking demand periods to better distribute parking demand over the course of a day

and reduce the total number of parking spaces needed. For example, the Nanaimo campuses parking

demand is highest between approximately 10:00am and 2:00pm, Monday through Thursday. Classes

that were formerly scheduled during this time period would be rescheduled to fall outside these hours,

eliminating the need to provide parking to satisfy the demand created by students and staff attending

that class. The Cowichan campus has classes well distributed throughout the day, with many offered in

the evening. This strategy is most appropriate for the Nanaimo campus.

The University has established course scheduling principles that state that no more that 50% of courses

within a faculty can be scheduled so that they start and end between 10:00am and 2:30pm, Monday to

Thursday. This is to ensure an efficient use of available class space and campus resources, to include

efficient use of parking facilities.

A brief analysis was conducted as part of this plan that concluded nearly half the University’s faculties

have at least 50% of their class time within the peak period. If each of those faculties reduced their

percentage of peak period class time to 50%, the result would be a reduction of approximately 27 hours

of peak period class time. It is estimated this could reduce peak period parking demand anywhere from

100 to 400 vehicles, helping address existing and future campus parking shortfalls.

The analysis represents only an estimation of the potential benefits of staggering class times to peak

hour parking demand. The University should consider staggering class times as a strategy to address

parking supply issues, undertaking further analysis should parking supply shortfalls continue at the

Nanaimo campus. Opportunities to stagger class times should be explored when parking supply is

being considered as part of any new campus development.




2/14/2011

P A G E 5 3

8 . 3 L E E D C r e d i t s ( C o w i c h a n C a m p u s )

The new Cowichan Campus is being built to Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED)

Gold standards in keeping with the University’s commitment to sustainability. While the LEED system

is not a TDM strategy in itself, it does promote site design consistent with the objectives of this study.

The University must obtain 60-79 points for LEED Gold certification. The LEED system provides

opportunity to earn up to twelve (12) points through the provision of sustainable transportation at the

site, with potential for up to five (5) additional points for Leadership in Innovation credit. LEED credit

areas are as follows:

Public Transit

End-Point Bicycle Facilities

Low Emission Vehicles

Parking Supply

Innovation

The following is a summary of the opportunities for the University to earn transportation-related LEED

points at the Cowichan campus.

8 . 3 . 1 P u b l i c T r a n s i t

The Public Transportation Access credit (SS Credit 4.1) provides two (2) credit opportunities that are

applicable to the new Cowichan Campus.

Option 1: Locate the project within 400 metres (¼ mile) walking distance (measured from a main

building entrance) of one (1) or more stops for two (2) or more public transit routes with frequent

service (Value: 6 points).

The Cowichan Place site is located to the north of James Street, which is travelled by four (4) transit

routes – no.2 Mt. Prevost, no.3 Quamichan, no.6 Crofton-Chemainus and no.10 South Cowichan.

James Street is under 200 metres from the entrance to the main entrance of the new Cowichan campus

building. While the distance threshold and number of routes serving the campus satisfy LEED

requirements, the requirement also states that transit must be “frequent”. The no.2 Mt. Prevost route is

the most frequent of the four (4) James Street routes, providing service twelve (12) times per weekday

and on approximately 40 minute intervals in the peak periods. The other routes provide service as little

as five (5) times daily. It is suggested that the site does not satisfy the requirements of Option 1,

however there may be an opportunity to investigate previous Credit Interpretation Requests (CIRs) and

build a case for this credit.




2/14/2011

P A G E 5 4

Option 2: Provide a transportation demand management (TDM) strategy that results in a more

efficient use of transportation resources, demonstrated through reduction of single-occupant vehicle

(SOV) trips by 25% (Value: 3 points) or 50% (Value: 6 points).

Section 7.0 of this strategy highlights existing transportation characteristics and sets forth future targets

and monitoring protocols to work toward a reduction in SOV trips by 25%. It is suggested that this

satisfies the requirement for a TDM strategy and earns the site three (3) LEED points. A reduction in

SOV trips by 50% cannot be justified.

8 . 3 . 2 E n d - P o i n t B i c y c l e F a c i l i t i e s

The Bicycle Storage and Changing Rooms credit (SS Credit 4.2) provides opportunity for one (1)

LEED point, as follows:

Provide secure and covered bicycle racks and/or storage within 183 metres (200 yards) of a

building entrance for 5% or more of full-time equivalent (FTE) occupants.

Provide secure bicycle racks and/or storage within 183 metres (200 yards) of a building

entrance for 5% or more of peak transient users.

Provide shower and changing facilities in the building, or within 183 metres (200 yards) of a

building entrance, for 0.5% of FTE occupants.

In 2009/10 there were 533 FTEs at the Cowichan campus, which necessitates approximately 27 bicycle

parking spaces to meet LEED criteria. While the District of North Cowichan does not have a bicycle

parking requirement in their Zoning Bylaw, it is known that they are working toward incorporating it.

Typical bicycle parking requirements in other communities are as high as one (1) space per five (5)

students,37 which would result in upwards of 100 bicycle parking spaces. The shower/change

requirement is met by providing a male and female changeroom as part of the fitness complex included

at the campus. This is sufficient to meet cyclist needs and meets the LEED requirement. In addition to

meeting the LEED requirement and earning one (1) LEED point, the University should consider

exceeding this amount to encourage bicycle ridership at present and into the future.

37 Victoria Transport Policy Institute, Bicycle Parking, accessed at http://www.vtpi.org/tdm/tdm85




2/14/2011

P A G E 5 5

8 . 3 . 3 L o w E m i s s i o n V e h i c l e s

The Low-Emitting and Fuel Efficient Vehicles credit (SS Credit 4.3) refers to vehicles having a

Combined Fuel Consumption Rating (CFCR) of 6.5L/100km or less. This credit provides opportunity

for three (3) LEED points, which the University is earning by installing electric vehicle five (5) electric

vehicle spaces with plug-ins.

8 . 3 . 4 P a r k i n g S u p p l y

The Parking Capacity credit (SS Credit 4.4) provides a number of ways to earn three (3) LEED points.

The most applicable option for the Cowichan Campus is as follows:

Supply parking to meet but not exceed minimum local zoning requirements;

Do not exceed one (1) parking space per 26.6 m2 of gross floor area (GFA); and

Provide preferred parking for carpools or vanpools for 5% of the total parking supply.

The new campus is being constructed with 146 parking spaces, a supply rate of one (1) space per 28.8

m2 GFA. The supply rate is less than the community hall requirement of one (1) space per 10 m2 GFA,

which is the most applicable designation, and does not exceed the prescribed rate of one (1) space per

per 26.6 m2 GFA. Fifteen (15) carpool parking spaces are included, which is approximately twice the

credit requirement for carpool/vanpool parking. Accordingly, the University will earn three (3) LEED

points for its parking supply.

8 . 3 . 5 I n n o v a t i o n C r e d i t

The Innovation in Design (ID Credit 1) credit provides the opportunity to achieve exceptional

performance above LEED requirements and/or innovative performance in Green Building categories

not specifically addressed by the LEED rating system. ID credits may be earned in two (2) ways:

Achieve significant, measureable environmental performance using a strategy not addressed

in the LEED credits. One (1) point is awarded for each innovation achieved.

One (1) point may be earned for achieving double the credit requirements or achieving the

next incremental percentage threshold of an existing credit. One (1) point is awarded for each

exemplary performance achieved, with no more than three (3) points granted.

Most of the recommendations of this strategy will result in facilities/programs that the University may

use toward innovation credit, either in isolation or in coordination with one another. Strategies such as

the U-Pass and employee transit passes, carshare service, bicycle work station, guaranteed ride home

program, and appointing a TDM coordinator will all result in significant, measurable environmental




2/14/2011

P A G E 5 6

performance, as demonstrated in their respective sections above. Each strategy that is implemented

will earn the University one (1) additional LEED point for innovation to a maximum of five (5).

8 . 3 . 6 S u m m a r y o f L E E D P o i n t s

The University is seeking to earn a minimum of 39 LEED points to achieve LEED Gold certification

based on the LEED NC 1.0 criteria for the new Cowichan campus. It is expected that the University

will earn ten (10) points for public transit, bicycle facilities, low emission vehicles, and parking supply.

An additional five (5) points may be earned for the implementation of many of the TDM measures

suggested in this strategy. In total, up to fifteen (15) LEED points may be earned for transportation-

related credits. See Table 8.1.

T a b l e 8 . 1 - S u m m a r y o f P o t e n t i a l L E E D P o i n t s f o r T r a n s p o r t a t i o n

Credit Points

Public Transit (SS 4.1) 3

End-Point Bicycle Facilities (SS 4.2) 1

Low Emission Vehicles (SS 4.3) 3

Parking Supply (SS 4.4) 3

Innovation Credit (ID 1) Up to 5

Total 15




2/14/2011

P A G E 5 7

9 . 0 T D M T A R G E T S + M O N I T O R I N G

Transportation demand management is an on-going process intended to influence travel behaviour over

an extended time period. The TDM strategies identified in this document will help the University

achieve sustainable transportation objectives. However, it is important that general objectives are

supplemented with specific targets against which the success and failure of TDM can be measured.

On-going monitoring is needed to obtain the information necessary to determine if targets are being

met. The purpose of this chapter is to outline specific targets relative to TDM at the University’s

Nanaimo and Cowichan campuses, and identify monitoring procedures to ensure appropriate

information is obtained for each.

9 . 1 T a r g e t s

Targets are the specific metrics against which the success and failure of TDM will be measured.

Targets are provided in this section that are based on existing conditions, but which may evolve over

time as the University shifts its priorities and objectives as they relate to sustainable transportation.

9 . 1 . 1 M o d e S p l i t

The mode split refers to the percentage of all transportation trips attributed to each travel mode. It

provides an indication of how students and staff travel to/from the campus and the various impacts of

collective travel behavior. Mode split is typically illustrated as a pie chart that includes single-occupant

vehicles, multi-passenger vehicles, transit, bicycling, and walking.

Nanaimo Campus

Mode splits were established in 2004 as part of the original TDM Report and again in 2008 for the

Transportation Background Report for the Campus Master Plan. See Table 9.1. Both mode splits are

consistent with one another, with small increases in auto drivers and passengers from 2004 to 2008,

and a decrease in pedestrian trips.

T a b l e 9 . 1 - S u m m a r y o f P a s t M o d e S p l i t , N a n a i m o C a m p u s

2004 2008

Auto Driver 65.0% 67.0%

Auto Passenger 11.0% 10.0%

Transit Passenger 19.0% 19.0%

Cyclist 0.3% 0.5%

Pedestrian 5.0% 3.5%




2/14/2011

P A G E 5 8

Mode split information is available for 2010 through the Integrated Planning Process survey. The

survey was conducted across all campuses, but 92.5% of responses were from students who identify

the Nanaimo campus as their main campus of study. Results indicate that 54% of students most often

travel to campus by car, 7.1% carpool, 15.9% use transit, 2.9% bicycle, and 15.5% walk. Another 2.1%

indicated they attend via distance / online education. These measures provide an indication of shifts in

travel behaviour from 2004 / 2008, but are inconclusive as they were determined by questionnaire

rather than observation used in 2004 / 2008 and use different categories to account for travel mode.

Mode split targets are suggested based on trends from the 2004 and 2008 data. Targets are set in 5-year

increments which will ensure a constant decline in vehicle trips and a corresponding increase in the use

of alternative modes. Suggested targets are coordinated with the decrease in parking supply explained

in Section 9.1.2 to ensure the number of vehicles seeking parking can be accommodated on campus.

See Table 9.2. Milestones include significant increases in transit mode share as a result of instituting

the U-Pass, with transit trips exceeding single-occupant vehicle trips in 2025-2030.

T a b l e 9 . 2 – M o d e S p l i t T a r g e t s , N a n a i m o C a m p u s

2008 2015 2020 2025 2030

Auto Driver 67% 56% 48% 41% 35%

Auto Passenger 10% 10% 10% 10% 10%

Transit Passenger 19% 28% 32% 36% 40%

Cyclist 0.5% 2% 5% 8% 10%

Pedestrian 3.5% 4% 5% 5% 5%

Cowichan Campus

There are no previous measures of mode split obtained for the Cowichan campus, however data was

collected as part of this document. The 2010 modal split was determined to be 44% single-occupant

vehicle, 30% multi-passenger vehicles, 11% transit, 5% bicycle, and 10% walking. See Figure 9.1.

Modal split figures include responses from both students and staff.




2/14/2011

P A G E 5 9

F i g u r e 9 . 1 - 2 0 1 0 M o d e S p l i t , C o w i c h a n C a m p u s

It should be noted that the existing mode split is based on survey of the existing campus on Cowichan

Way, not the new campus on James Street. It is expected that travel choices will remain relatively

consistent at the new campus, however an additional survey at the new campus may be considered to

more accurately determine the mode split at the new campus.

T a b l e 9 . 3 - M o d e S p l i t T a r g e t s , C o w i c h a n C a m p u s

2011 2015 2020

Auto Driver 44% 40% 35%

Multi-Passenger 30% 30% 30%

Transit 11% 13% 15%

Bicycle 5% 7% 10%

Walk 10% 10% 10%




2/14/2011

P A G E 6 0

9 . 1 . 2 P a r k i n g S u p p l y R a t e

Parking targets should be set that allow the University to monitor its progress in addressing key

objectives. Targets must be different for both the Nanaimo and Cowichan campuses in consideration of

their varied existing conditions.

Nanaimo Campus

The Campus Master Plan indicates that there will be no additional parking provided on the Nanaimo

campus. The Plan also notes that the long-term (20-50 years) parking supply is to be 1,390 spaces, a

decrease of approximately 750 spaces from present supply. See Table 9.3. This decrease in parking

supply is to be coordinated with an increase in campus population of approximately 25% over the same

time period.

T a b l e 9 . 3 - P a r k i n g s u p p l y p e r f u l l - t i m e e q u i v a l e n t ( F T E )

Student

FTEs

Staff

FTEs

Total

FTEs

Parking

Spaces

Parking

Supply Rate

Existing 6,896 758 7,654 2,139 1 / 3.58 FTE

Future (approx 20-50 years) 9,150 1,006 10,156 1,390 1 / 7.31 FTE

It is recommended that the University establish incremental parking supply targets to guide toward the

long-term goal of a reduction in parking of 750 spaces from present. Parking supply should be

considered in five-year increments and on a 30-year timeline (the Campus Master Plan considers long-

term to be 20 to 50 years). Rather than use total parking spaces as an indicator of appropriate supply, it

is suggested that parking spaces per student and staff full-time equivalent (FTE) is used.

Recommended targets are included in Table 9.4. Using supply rates will ensure targets remain

appropriate should the University expand significantly faster or slower than anticipated in the Campus

Master Plan.




2/14/2011

P A G E 6 1

T a b l e 9 . 4 - P a r k i n g s u p p l y t a r g e t s , N a n a i m o c a m p u s

Year Spaces

per FTEs

2010 (existing) 1 / 3.58 FTEs

2015 (short-term) 1 / 4.20 FTEs

2020 (medium-term) 1 / 4.82 FTEs

2025 1 / 5.45 FTEs

2030 1 / 6.07 FTEs

2035 1 / 6.69 FTEs

2040 (long-term) 1 / 7.31 FTEs

Cowichan Campus

Parking supply targets are less applicable to the Cowichan campus as it will include a new building

and a parking supply which is already determined. It is recommended that no additional parking is

provided on the site in the future, and that detailed study is undertaken prior to considering parking

supplies as part of any future campus expansion.

9 . 2 M o n i t o r i n g

Monitoring processes provide an indication of how TDM is progressing relative to goals and

objectives. The following are recommended monitoring activities to ensure the University tracks the

progress of TDM and, when needed, identifies actions where progress fails to meet objectives.

9 . 2 . 1 D a t a C o l l e c t i o n

Mode Split

Mode split refers to the portion of all trips made by each travel mode. It is critical in evaluating the

effectiveness of TDM in changing travel behaviour. It is recommended that mode split is established

by survey each year as part of on-going student and staff questionnaires, such as the Integrated

Planning Process survey. These results may offer an indication of specific fluctuations in travel

behaviour in response to implementing significant TDM strategies, perhaps the U-Pass or increases in

parking rates. This will be useful in assessing the success of these initiatives and determining if

changes are necessary.




2/14/2011

P A G E 6 2

It is also suggested that the University undertake a travel survey for the Nanaimo campus to establish a

current mode split that is comparable to the 2004 / 2008 figures. The survey should be undertaken

using observations, similar to the previous surveys. Once the established mode split is available, the

Parking Supply Rate

As with mode split, the parking supply rate will be critical in evaluating TDM progress. The University

should ensure that the necessary data is collected each year, which includes a full inventory of campus

building floor space and parking spaces. The parking supply rate is only applicable to the Nanaimo

campus.

Program Usage

This document recommends a number of new programs or expansion of existing programs that are

aimed to improve the range of travel options available to University students and staff. It is suggested

that the University assess their usage rate on an annual basis. Usage data should be collected for the

following:

Registered users in the University’s ridematching database;

Carpool passes administered;

Demand for secure bike lockers, including those on a waitlist;

Bike rack occupancy rate (Fall, Winter, and Spring);

Bicycle loans per year (once bike loan program is established); and

Carshare memberships and vehicle usage (once carshare is available on-campus).

Obtaining usage information will allow the University to assess each program on an on-going basis to

determine where funding, promotion, and education can be best applied to further support sustainable

transportation options.

9 . 2 . 2 P l a n n i n g

The fundamental direction of this strategy is limiting vehicle access through parking management

while facilitating increased use of alternative travel options. It is expected that conditions of each will

constantly change in response to the incentive/disincentives that the University applies through its

TDM programs. On-going planning is needed to account for on-going travel conditions and respond

proactively where change is needed. It is recommended that the University establish an on-going TDM

planning process that includes annual reviews and comprehensive 5-year updates.




2/14/2011

P A G E 6 3

Annual Reviews

Annual reviews should be undertaken that assesses usage rates for TDM programs and note

opportunities to facilitate improvements to TDM programs. Annual reviews should be undertaken by

the TDM Coordinator in consultation with internal and external stakeholders, and will be used to

inform the priorities of the TDM Coordinator for the next year. Annual reviews will be especially

critical in years where significant TDM initiatives are implemented, to determine the supporting

programs that are needed.

Comprehensive 5-Year Update

Comprehensive TDM updates should be undertaken on a 5-year basis. Similar to this document, the

comprehensive review will look at both parking and transportation conditions, update transportation

and parking characteristics, consider the effect of TDM programs over the previous five (5) years, and

identify new TDM strategies for consideration.




2/14/2011

P A G E 6 4

T E R M I N O L O G Y

Transportation planning terms are used throughout this document that might not necessarily be

understood by all readers. The following definitions are provided.

GHG Emissions – Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions are those that contribute to global

warming, consisting primarily of carbon dioxide (CO2).

Mode Shift – a shift in travel demand from one mode to another.

Mode Split - the percentage of all transportation trips attributed to each travel mode.

Parking Demand – the number of parking spaces needed to accommodate the vehicles of a

land use(s).

Parking Duration - the length of time that a particular vehicle occupies a parking space.

Parking Occupancy – the number of vehicles observed parked in a given area as a

percentage of the total number of spaces available.

Parking Turnover – the total number of vehicles that occupy a particular space over the

course of an observed period (typically a day).

Peak Period - the time period when travel or parking demand is highest, typically expressed

as the peak hour.




2/14/2011

P A G E 6 5

R E F E R E N C E S

R e s o u r c e s

Institute of Transportation Engineers, Parking Generation Handbook (4th Ed.), 2010.

Noxon Associates, U-Pass Toolkit, Canadian Urban Transit Association, May 2004.

Todd Litman, Transportation Elasticities, Victoria Transport Policy Institute, May 2010.

USEPA, Technical Methods for Analyzing Pricing Measures to Reduce Transportation

Emissions, Report no. 231-R-98-006, 1998.

Urban Systems, U-Pass Review Final Report, 2005.

U n i v e r s i t y & C o m m u n i t y D o c u m e n t s

2005, Malaspina University-College Transportation Demand Management Report

2008, Malaspina University-College Transportation Demand Management Strategy Update

2008, Transportation Background Report, Vancouver Island University Campus Master Plan

2009, Vancouver Island University Campus Master Plan

2010, Vancouver Island University Integrated Planning Process (survey)

2008, planNanaimo, City of Nanaimo

integrated transportation demand management (tdm… · integrated transportation demand management...

Documents