Transcript Slide 1

Towards More Sustainable
Transportation at UMD
David Allen
Director, Department of
Transportation Services (DOTS)
1
DOTS History
“Transit Dependent Student”
“If you build it they will come.”
UMD
Parking
Low
Income
Off
Campus
ShuttleUM
More
garages
More
garages
More
cars
1999: Parking expanded fleet to pick up students who could drive, thus removing
commuter vehicles from campus
2002: Shuttle-UM and Parking Services merged creating DOTS
2004: Park and Rides and Intra-Campus service offered to further reduce commuter
vehicles
2
Sustainable Transformation
DOTS continues to search
for innovative
operational solutions
with the lowest possible
environmental impact.
Additionally, we seek to
change the behavior of
students long after they
graduate.
3
Qualitative Decision Making
• We gather information and
recommendations from various
stakeholders comprising of faculty,
staff and students.
• We also engage in collaborative
efforts with various offices
including the Office of
Sustainability, Off-Campus Student
Involvement, Campus Police,
Campus Recreation and Stamp
Student Union and others.
• RESULTS
–
–
–
–
CIER Survey
Student Organization Resolutions
Joint Programming
C-TAC Recommendations
4
Quantitative Decision Making
Shuttle-UM
Parking
Ridership Data
Lot Inventories
• Allows for determination
of headways and the
number of buses
required.
• Determines capacity of a lot
Stop Analysis
• Allows for adjustment of
stop on a route.
Permit Analysis
• Determines demand
Zip Code Analysis
• Determines GHG impact
5
Ridership Data
Ridership data is
collected and
analyzed by semester,
by day of the week
and by run.
Campus demand results in multiple peaks and valleys of demand
due to class schedules. As a result, a bus can be full to capacity at
1:30 and almost empty at 2:40 and full again at 3:30.
6
Address Data
Cluster map showing
local addresses for
students holding
commuter student
permits.
7
Address Data
We can isolate an
address, such as
U-View, to
determine the
number of
permits in the
area.
8
Greenhouse Gas Emission Data (GHG)
Vehicle Count
30.5
30
29.5
29
28.5
28
27.5
27
26.5
26
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
Vehicle Counts
160
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
Fuel Efficiency (MPG)
Collaborations
with the Office
of Sustainability
have resulted in
sophisticated
analyses of our
green house gas
emissions (GHG)
UM Student - Domestic Cars - 2009 Fleet Count
180
31.5
and Efficiency
31
Count: 1,718 ; 17% of fleet
Average Fuel Efficiency: 29.05 MPG
Year
9
Sustainable Initiatives
Current
• Bike Program
• Hybrid Buses
• Park and Rides
• Zimride
• Zipcar
• License Plate Recognition
Technology
• BioDots
Future?
• Parking restrictions
• Vanpools
• Carbon footprint based
permit fees
10
Where are we now?
11
Parking Supply and Demand
Parking Supply & Demand
# of Spaces
21,000
20,500
20,000
19,500
19,000
18,500
18,000
Gross Parking
Supply
Net Parking
Supply
Parking Demand
FY
08
FY
09
FY FY FY
10 11 12
Fiscal Year
FY
13
FY
14
SUPPLY & DEMAND
Gross Parking Supply
Net Parking Supply
Parking Demand
Variance (net supply vs.
demand)
memo: Buffer1
FY 08
21,154
20,404
20,090
FY 09
20,988
20,238
19,680
FY 10
19,856
19,106
19,106
FY 11
19,483
18,733
18,733
FY 12
19,446
18,696
18,696
FY 13
19,846
19,096
19,096
FY 14
19,846
19,096
19,055
314
558
-
-
-
-
41
750
750
750
750
750
750
750
Note1: Buffer represents overflow and special demand (Maryland Day, History Day, etc.) requirements
*Analysis
completed12
in
2008
Shuttle-UM and Alternate
Transportation Ridership Details
Route
Ridership
General Use
Ridership
%change
2002
2009
1,224,757
2,627,029
2004
2009
Campus Connector North
68,245
78,143
14.5%
Campus Connector South
13,497
47,350
251%
2004
2009
Laurel
3,704
8,897
140%
Burtonsville
2,761
11,364
311%
Bowie
4,503
8,223
96%
Intra-campus Service
Park and Ride
Two Wheel Vehicle
Bicycles
Scooters
Registration
118%
%change
2008
2009
280
910
2008
2009
n/a
180
225%
n/a
13
What’s Next?
President Mote signed the Climate Action Plan. This plan calls
for zero emissions by 2050. Suggested milestones for reducing
the commuter carbon footprint are as follows:
• By 2015 – a reduction of 3,450 commuter permits (7,659 MTCO2e annually
by 2015);
• 2015‐2020 – a reduction of an additional 1,200 commuter permits (an
additional 2,664 MTCO2e annually by 2020, >10,323 annually post 2020);
• 2020‐2025 – a reduction of an additional 1,200 commuter permits (an
additional 2,664 MTCO2e annually by 2025, >12,987 annually, post 2025);
and
• 2025‐2050 – a reduction of an additional 6,050 commuter permits (an
additional 13,431 MTCO2e annually by 2050, >26,418 annually, post 2050).
14
How much is 3450?
15
Fixed vs. Variable Permit Costs
D.O.T.S. FY10 BUDGETED EXPENSES
Unrelated Other
Operational Expenses,
4,326,761 , 29%
Variable Permit Expenses,
1,290,351 , 9%
Mandatory Expenses,
4,355,988 , 30%
Mandatory Expenses
Core Expenses
Shuttle Expenses
Unrelated Other Operational
Expenses
Variable Permit Expenses
Shuttle Expenses,
3,218,781 , 22%
Core Expenses, 1,508,525
, 10%
16
Permit Reduction Savings
$1,500,000
D.O.T.S. Variable Permit Impact
$1,290,351
$1,250,000
$1,000,000
$750,000
$500,000
Amount available to
apply to revenue
shortfall from 3450
$352,632
$250,000
$0
27.3%
3,450 Permit Reduction Savings
100.0%
Total Variable Permit Expenses
17
Revenue Shortfall
Revenue Shortfall
$2,500,000.00
$2,000,000.00
Revenue
shortfall if all
3450 permits
came from
student
commuters.
$1,393,800.00
$1,500,000.00
$1,000,000.00
$2,087,250.00
Revenue Shortfall
$734,850.00
$500,000.00
$-
$213.00
$404.00
$605.00
18
Financial Constraints
Savings
$352,632
Shortfall
-$734,859
Developer MOUs
COST $382,277
The cost increases if:
•Shuttle services increase to
meet added demand
•Any of the reduced permits
are faculty or staff
Parking subsidizes
Shuttle budget
Fee increases must be
under 3% a year
High Sensitivity to fee
increases
19
How committed are we?
Only if
someone else
pays for it.
Only in boom
years.
The
environment
is priceless.
20