You are here

Projects Updates for Parking Master Plan

Search tips:
  • This form will search for words in the title OR the description. If you would like to search for the same term(s) across both the title and description, enter the same search term(s) in both fields.
  • This form will search for any of the words you enter in a field, not the exact phrase you enter. If you would like to search for an exact phrase, put double quotes (") around the phrase. For example, if you search for Bike Path you will get results containing either the word Bike OR the word Path, but if you search for "Bike Path" you will get results containing the exact phrase Bike Path.
  1. Update from Ben McCall

    Dear Transportation SWATeam,  [Sorry for the barrage of emails...this is the last one for this morning!]

    I met with Michelle Wahl from Parking late last week, and she had some very useful comments on the iCAP draft that I thought I should share with you:

    1) She mentioned that in years past, she used to receive "idling reports" on her vehicles, which must have been equipped with some sort of system that tracked when the vehicles were idling.  This raised the question of whether such technology could be deployed widely on our fleet, rather than focusing only on "class 6 and above trucks" (neither of us knew exactly what that means).

    2) She was concerned about the financial aspects of providing additional opportunities for people to purchase less than full-time parking privileges in lots with wait lists...this is probably something that deserves further discussion.  If Parking allows someone to drop their full-time parking pass for a particular lot and instead purchase less than full-time for the same spot, their revenue will decrease.  This is concerning because Parking is legally required to be self-supporting -- they cannot receive any subsidy from campus, nor can they make a profit.

    3) She recommended adding a recommendation that parking rates be increased to provide a dis-incentive for single-occupancy vehicle use. 

    This would also be essential if the number of parking permits sold were to decrease, as Parking's costs are essentially fixed. Raising rates would be a challenge because they are subject to collective bargaining, but it has been successfully done on other campuses (including UIC). 

    Having an explicit call for this in the iCAP might help provide ammunition for such efforts.

    4) She recommended some investigation of the subsidy that Parking currently provides to MTD.  At present, Parking pays over $500K per year for this, ostensibly to support the buses that run to the "shuttle lot" (E-14, I think).  But this amount greatly exceeds the total revenue that Parking receives from selling permits in the shuttle lot.  She thought it was worth making sure that the amount Parking is contributing towards the MTD is the appropriate amount, because any funds that could be "saved" there could be directed towards other sustainability-related initiatives within Parking.

    5) She pointed out that there are now 18 "Level 1" charging stations for electric vehicles on campus, and Parking has plans to install some "Level 2" charging stations in 2015.  She thought it might be worth showcasing this work on page 29 of the current draft, and I am inclined to agree.

    Cheers,

    Ben

  2. comparison of porous ashpalt and conventional concrete

    Associated Project(s): 

    From: Skaggs, Thomas R
    Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2012 10:58 AM
    Subject: RE: Parking lots

    Parking Lot Construction Comparisons

      Between September 2011 and August 2012 the Parking Department undertook 2 surface lot construction projects.  Each of the two projects were different by nature but a comparison of the projects demonstrates the following results:

    Lot C-9 (Bid Project)

    Parking lot C-8 was a project to create a parking area between existing lot C-8 and lot C-9.

    • Permeable asphalt lot built on rock base.
    • Project initiated March 2010, Completed January 2012
    • 2 new lights
    • No planting islands
    • No demolition of existing parking lot
    • 1 connecting walk
    • No curbs
    • Paint stripes
    • Sewer line

     

    70 spaces

    Duration of project 22 Months

    Surface life expectancy 20 years

    Total Final Cost $483,413

    Cost per space $6,906

     

    Lot E-15 West (Design and Build In House by F&S)

     

    • Concrete surface
    • Project initiated May 2012, Completed August 2012
    • Large areas of demolition, removals including curbs, planting islands and old pavement
    • Rebuild rock base
    • Re-wire/new underground service for lights.
    • 2 large concrete planting islands
    • Replacement and expansion of concrete connecting walks
    • Replace large central drive with new concrete drive
    • Remove and rebuild concrete east entrance
    • Paint stripe
    • 4 sewers rebuilt
    • Landscaping in planters and around perimeter

    150 spaces

    Duration of project 4 months

    Surface life expectancy 50+ years

    Total Final Cost $198,720

    Cost per space $1,325

     

Subscribe to