Assessment of Alternatives: Use quantitative analysis to assess the alternatives, and includedetails of all costs and benefits; tests for sensitivity to changed conditions; incorporation of uncertainties; and selection and development of appropriate models of analysis. (Examples: Economic analysis, Discounting, Net Present Value, Cost-benefit, Internal Rate of Return).

13.2 THE ASSIGNMENT2 Your rm, Public Policy Analysis, Inc., has just been hired by State University to examine the parking problem on its urban campus. You decide to conduct a full-cycle policy analysis, from verifying that a problem exists, through specifying evaluation criteria and reasonable alternatives, to conducting an evaluation of the alternatives that you have selected as most reasonable. All of the basic information you need to conduct your analysis is provided in this case. Suggested additional reading material is listed at the end of the case, which provides an overview of parking pricing and supply control theory, methods, and applications. There are ve key constituencies on campus that must be reasonably well satised with any solution you propose. These include: 4,000 resident students, 8,000 commuter students, 2,400 staff, 1,600 faculty, and the adjacent neighborhoods that are concerned about spillover parking on residential streets. Your solution must include shortrange pricing strategies and longrange investment strategies to deal with key parking and transportation issues you identify. Your proposed solution is constrained, in that the overall parking and transportation budget must be balanced on an annual basis, regardless of the specics of who pays how much for which services in any given year. 13.3 BACKGROUND INFORMATION Parking Pricing and Supply at Selected U.S. Universities The supply of parking spaces varies tremendously from one university to another, but in no case exceeds or even nears the combined number of students, staff, and faculty on campus (Exhibit 13.1). Annualized parking rates vary considerably both within and across universities. Staff and faculty generally pay about the same rate for parking, while students often receive discounted rates. Few urban campuses have parking spaces set aside exclusively for students. More conveniently located parking spaces are generally reserved for faculty and administrators. Resident students may face additional parking restrictions; for example, the prohibition of freshmen 'om access to campus parking during their rst year of residency. Parking Supply at State University State University is an urban campus, located within a mile of the core of Big City's downtown, with 12,000 students and 4,000 faculty and staff. The university recently undertook an ambitious parking construction program, adding over 1,500 parking spaces in two parking decks, at an average construction cost of $14,000 per parking space. To amortize the bonded debt associated with this construction program, separate, higher parking fees were imposed on the newly built Student Center parking deck. In addition to the annual parking permit fee of $100 per vehicle, a daily charge of $1.50 is assessed against anyone on campus wishing to use the new facility. This parking pricing policy led to considerable dissatisfaction, particularly among students, who apparently prefer to park a mile away from the center of campus and walk or take the Shuttle Bus, rather than to pay the $1.50 additional charge for daily access to the more centrally located Student Center parking deck. The result has been parking shortages across campus, except in the Student Center parking deck, which often is far from full, even during periods of peak parking demand. The parking and transportation budget is short more than $100,000 in anticipated revenues, principally because of low utilization of the Strident Center parking deck. There are 9,988 parking spaces on campus. They break down as follows: 6,600 are \"scramble spaces,\" 1,328 are short-term daily spaces, 800 are key-card spaces, 600 are reserved spaces, 500 are restricted spaces, 100 are visitor and short-term hourly spaces, and 60 are handicapped spaces. \"Scramble spaces\" are open to anyone who has an annual parking permit. Key-card spaces are restricted in access to those who have key cards to gain access to that specic lot, but are otherwise open to anyone with an annual parking permit. Reserved spaces are identied with a unique number and are assigned to a specic individual on an annual basis. Of the 6,600 scramble spaces distributed across campus, 5,500 are set aside for students, while 1,100 are set aside for faculty and staff. Short-term daily spaces are all located in the Student Center parking deck, and cost $1.50 per day with an annual parking permit, and $3.00 per day without such a permit. Key-card lots and reserved spaces generally are limited in availability to faculty, staff, and PhD. students, and are assigned on the basis of seniority, rank, and demonstrated need. Miscellaneous parking spaces with special restrictions include those allocated to family housing, the athletic association, the faculty club, the alumni association, and the student inrmary. Demand Factors Parking demand varies by location, time of day, day of the week, and semester. Virtually every lot is full at some time during any given week, but some lots reach capacity more often than others. Parking restrictions typically are enforced only between the hours of 8:00 am. and 5:00 pm, on weekdays during regular academic terms. During other time periods, only trafc regulations are enforced, except that requests from reserved space holders to remove illegally parked cars may be honored at any time, and handicapped spaces are always restricted. About 15,000 annual parking permit applications are processed each year. Of the 15,000 annual parking permits sold, 74 percent are for rst vehicles, 15 percent for second vehicles, 3 percent for third and additional vehicles, and 8 percent for replacement vehicles. Only one vehicle per student, staff, or faculty is allowed on campus at any given time. Enforcement of this provision of the parking code is principally through the honor system. Additional vehicle permits are provided as a courtesy to multiple vehicle owners, who may need to drive more than one vehicle to campus during the course of any given year. Replacement vehicle permits are provided whenever an existing car is lost, sold, or destroyed. Of the 15,000 annual parking permits sold, 49 percent go to regular students, 9 percent to cooperative work-exchange students, 20 percent to staff, 20 percent to faculty, and 2 percent to various others. Faculty and staff are more likely than students to register additional vehicles. Students must prove ownership of additional vehicles prior to registration. Faculty are most likely to register their vehicles in the fall semester, while cooperative work-exchange students are least likely to do so at this time. All annual parking permits are nominally Valid from August 1, at the beginning of the academic year, through July 31 of the following year. Average daily weekday utilization of the Student Center parking deck varies signicantly on a monthly basis (Exhibit 13.2). The Annual Parking and Transportation Budget The sale of annual parking permits generates about $1.15 million in revenues annually. This constitutes well over half of the entire parking and transportation budget (Exhibit 13.3). The Student Center parking deck provides $160,000 annually through the collection of daily parking fees. Quarterly transportation fees are assessed against all students at a rate of $9 per quarter, providing another $350,000 per year. Transportation fees are used to cover the operating costs for the Shuttle Bus and the Escort Van Services, which are used primarily by campus residents. The campus police chief has expressed some concern about the high rate of parking violations on campus, particularly among students, who comprise well over 90 percent of all those cited for parking violations on an annual basis. Despite the fairness and objectivity of the Student Parking Appeals Board, and the fact that over half of all parking tickets issued on campus are never paid, the revenues generated from nes assessed against unregistered and illegally parked cars on campus are quite substantial, contributing over $250,000 to the annual parking budget. The cost of enforcing parking regulations is not insignicant, however. Parking and transportation expenses at State University include $946,000 in parking capital expenses, $725,000 in parking operating expenses, and $350,000 in transportation operating expenses. Parking capital expenses include debt service payments for the retirement of parking deck construction bonds (Exhibit 13.4). Parking operating expenses include parking ofce management costs and parking enforcement costs. Transportation operating expenses are for campus transit services approved and paid for by student government The annual parking fee is $100. Cooperative work-exchange students spend less time on campus, for which they receive a 50 percent discount off the regular rate. Key-card lot spaces cost an additional $50, and reserved spaces an additional $100 per year. Annual parking permit registration fees are prorated, based on the number of weeks remaining in the semester at the time the permit is sold. All other parking fees are xed in price, regardless of when sold. Parking costs include capital, operating, and maintenance costs. Capital costs are $1,000 per space for surface lots, $14,000 per space for above-ground parking decks, and approximately $20,000 per space for subterranean spaces. On an annual basis, parking capital costs are about $400 per space, and parking operating and maintenance costs about $200 per space, for parking decks at State University. This includes all costs associated with periodic resurfacing, adequate liability insurance coverage, and maintenance and all other incidental and indirect costs of parking provrsron. Survey Results: Transportation and Mobility Behavior at State University The Parking and Transportation Advisory Committee at State University recently conducted a survey of students, staff, and faculty on transportation and mobility issues. Overall, 358 of 2,000 surveys distributed across campus were returned, yielding an average 17 percent response rate. Almost 50 percent of the faculty and staff surveys were returned, while only about 10 percent of student surveys were rammed. Undergraduate students were particularly unlikely to respond, with a 6 percent average response rate. Faculty were most likely to drive alone, to park on campus, and to have used the Student Center parking deck (Exhibit 13.5). Resident students were most likely to use both the Shuttle Bus and the Escort Van Services provided on campus. Although residents made up only one-third of the total student body, they made up two-thirds of the users of both the Shuttle Bus and the Escort Van Services. Faculty tended to be the oldest and best-paid members of the University community (Exhibit 13.6). Staff were much more likely than other groups to be female, and somewhat more likely than faculty to have children living with them. Commuter students were more likely to complain about parking location, while resident students were more concerned with parking pricing and related issues (Exhibit 13.7). The number of students, staff, and faculty will not change appreciably at State University over the next decade. TABLE 13.1 Parking Pricing and Supply at Selected Universities Number Annual Parking Rates University Students Faculty/Staff Parking Spaces Faculty ($) Staff ($) Students ($) ASU 21,700 4,100 9,200 30 20 15 BSU 33,000 4,000 12,500 144 144 180 CSU 18,500 1,500 5,000 252 252 N/A DSU 10,900 6,000 6,200 120-200 120-200 50-75 ESU 27,700 5,100 7,900 53-150 53-150 10-28 FSU 12,000 7,000 3,600 352-502 352-502 177-376 GSU 18,000 4,500 3,000 900 900 1,296 State University 12,000 4,000 10,000 100-200 100-200 100 HSU 23,500 2,500 3,200 200 200 N/A ISU 10,000 6,200 4,100 26-172 26-172 32-130 JSU 16,400 4,000 8,000 276-420 276-420 90-315 KSU 17,400 3,000 17,000 80-400 80-400 20-120 LSU 26,000 5,000 14,000 72-120 66-114 9-15 MSU 32,300 4,000 13,300 70-140 70-140 10-70 NSU 27,000 8,900 16,000 48-72 48-72 20-40 OSU 26,400 7,000 12,400 60-300 60-300 60-120 PSU 14,000 2,100 9,000 318-540 318-540 318-716 QSU 16,500 6,000 12,300 48-180 48-180 30 RSU 32,500 6,952 10,000 180-420 180-420 N/AStudent Center Parking Deck Utilization Student Center Parking Deck Utilization 1,400 Effective Daily Capacity 1,000 Average Daily Vehicles 500 0 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Calendar Year 2010 Registered Vehicles Unregistered VehiclesTABLE 13.3 Travel Behavior by University Affiliation Travel Behavior Characteristics Resident Students Commuter Staff (%) Faculty (%) (%) Students (%) Current mode(s) of travel to State University3 Drive alone in auto 23 74 74 88 Share the ride in auto 0 18 18 11 Walk 91 18 4 3 Bicycle 5 1 1 0 1 Light Rail 7 6 City bus 0 8 6 Shuttle Bus 28 1 0 Has car available for personal use 77 91 89 97 Would park on campus, if free 81 86 89 97 Currently park on campus 30 75 84 91 Ever parked in Student Center deck 12 17 16 21 Ever used the Shuttle Bus 95 52 35 23 Ever used the Escort Van 53 14 4 1 n'. .n . TABLE 13.4 Demographics by University Affiliation Demographic Characteristics Resident Students Commuter Students Staff Faculty Median personal income ($) 10,000 15,000 42,000 75,000 Mean age, in years 21 27 38 43 Male (%) 72 78 39 78 Female (%) 28 22 61 22 Married (%) 2 30 55 77 Not married (%) 98 70 45 23 With children (%) 49 45 N Without children (%) 98 91 51 55TABLE 13.5 Comments on Parking and Transportation by University Affiliation Comments on Parking and Transportation3 Resident Students Commuter Staff (%) Faculty (%) (%) Students (%) Parking supply is too low for me 23 34 28 22 Student Center parking deck issuesb 16 24 8 7 Parking price is too high for me 23 18 20 11 Parking price is not fair to me, others l4 l6 3 4 All clearly favorable continentsC 0 6 2 5 Need better transportation alternatives 0 6 0 3 Need better parking code enforcement 5 5 6 4 Need better campus transit services 14 4 3 4 Parking supply is too high for others 9 3 11 2 Need better campus security services 5 1 3 3 Need better parking amenities\"1 5 0 0 2 Need better access to Light Rail Station8 0 0 1 l N 00 4; Ln u: 4; No response 23