Tag Archives: technology

Outreach and Media Relations, Parking & Mobility Article, Research, Resources, Sustainability, Technology, Transportation & Mobility

Eyes on the Trends

June 1, 2019 Rachel Yoka Leave a comment

By Brian Shaw, CAPP

AS MOBILITY PROFESSIONALS, we have to try to stay aware of trends in our industry. Most of us were caught off guard with the advent of transportation network companies (TNCs) such as Uber and Lyft and the impact they have had on curb space, traditional taxis, car-sharing, transit usage, parking demand, and traffic. What could be coming next that will affect our profession and industry? I will attempt to make some predictions, and I will be interested to see how right or wrong I am in the coming years.

Electrification of Transit Fleets

Batteries continue to get better. Consistent range, performance, and safety have made moving bus transit to an electric platform feasible, viable, and cost-effective. China has led the way in this trend, and North American transit properties, universities, and airports have begun to transition their bus fleets to electric. Bus manufacturers have emerged who specialize in electric buses while also collaborating with traditional bus companies on conversions.

EV Charging?

Many of us have installed electric-vehicle (EV) charging stations in our facilities. This may be due to a code requirement or as a way to attract EV owners to park in our facilities. But the range for EVs has dramatically improved; some EVs can go 100, 200, or more miles on a charge. Is EV charging still needed at worksites as battery range improves? Should EV charging be done at home, and should EV charging be free? Should fast or slow chargers be the option?

Transportation Network Companies

Is the growing use of Lyft and Uber a prelude to how life will be with autonomous vehicles (AVs)? Will we own cars in the future and need to park them? How should our facilities be designed and what features do they need if the vehicles can park themselves? For now, it may be prudent to develop staging areas for TNCs.

Pickup/Drop-off Curb Space

Given the increasing use of TNCs and the likely future advent of autonomous vehicles, our built environments will need to develop new design standards and operational use criteria to make the best use of limited curb space. Perhaps when parking demand declines, the curb space issue will be addressed by having fewer curbs in use for parking. At least for the foreseeable future, curb use and availability will remain a challenge.

Technology Instead of Travel

In more urban and suburban areas, this could lead to a growing need for short-term loading zones to accommodate delivery activities. Commuters may commute less or to various remote locations to facilitate remote working/working from home, reducing demand for monthly permits and parking and increasing need for daily permits. Meetings may take place online with improving video conferencing, reducing mid-day trips and parking demand. Why go to the theater if you can see the next Oscar winner from home? If your dinner can be easily delivered from your favorite restaurant, why go out? This trend should reduce retail parking demand, but it will increase demand for curb and loading areas, particularly in urban settings.

Microtransit

Will microtransit services reduce parking demand? Are they shifting trips from transit or using a personal bike? Are these inducing travel by making it easier and faster to travel short distances? Dockless electric scooters are making inroads in some cities and are becoming more regulated. Perhaps converting or adding dockless device parking where bike parking is located is prudent. It remains to be seen if these microtransit services will be profitable and worth incorporating into planning processes. When mobility-as-a-service becomes possible, microtransit should have a place in travel planning and seamless paying.

LPR and Gateless Parking

Can parking garages and lots be operated with license plate recognition (LPR)-based payment and enforcement exclusively?

Have we seen the end of parking meters, pay stations, and gate arms? Can parking be factored into emerging mobility-as-a-service solutions via LPR? When parking facilities become staging areas for TNCs and/or autonomous vehicles, automated vehicle detection and payments will be needed. While vehicles could be equipped with a device like an E-ZPass, all vehicles have a license plate that is valid everywhere. Perhaps LPR

becomes a way for AVs to pay for parking/staging/charging at a parking facility. If that is the case, will gates and pay stations be necessary? Until cash is gone and humans no longer drive and park, parking equipment should continue to be useful. However, the day is coming when barrier-free, LPR-based parking payment and enforcement will be the norm.

Amplification of Transportation

Is it possible to crack the challenge of real-time ride-sharing—trip, location, and time? Is this service best accomplished with TNCs and ride-matching apps versus dedicated vehicles and routes? When AVs can carry larger passenger loads, perhaps services such as Chariot and RidePal will be economically viable. Until then, daily ride-matching apps seem to have found a viable place. Combining daily ride-matching with LPR-based parking management should allow use of preferred carpool parking and sharing commuting costs for daily carpools. Transit agencies have begun considering using TNCs to provide on-demand transportation, particularly for lightly used routes or during off-peak service hours. Arguably, TNCs can be a more cost-effective way to provide needed transportation when ridership loads are low.

Adaptive Reuse

Under what conditions does it make sense to pay the extra upfront costs for adaptive reuse (see p. 36 of the May 2019 issue for more)? Depending on the location of the facility, age, design, and ownership, it may or may not make financial sense to build a parking facility to accommodate an autonomous vehicle future. Can the property be redeveloped? If so, perhaps when parking demand declines to the point where a garage is no longer needed, it may be best to redevelop the property.

A growing aspect of our roles as parking and mobility professionals is to stay aware and informed of these and other trends and advances in our profession. In some cases, our best approach is to wait and see how the trend plays out.

Read the article here.

BRIAN SHAW, CAPP, is executive director of parking and transportation at Stanford University, and co-chair of the IPMI Sustainability Committee. He can be reached at bshaw2@stanford.edu

IPMI Blog, Resources

Mobility: Miami’s Best Practices

May 2, 2019 Kim Fernandez Leave a comment

By Alejandra “Alex” Argudin, CAPP

Mobility is the key component of a city’s transportation infrastructure. Mobility and livability go hand-in-hand in improving a community’s quality of life.

As parking and mobility professionals, we need to be nimble, adaptable, and proactive to address the evolving mobility needs of the community in a dynamic urban environment. We cannot accomplish this objective without the rapid adoption and deployment of technological solutions.

At the Miami Parking Authority (MPA), we continuously support mobility and improved livability by making Miami a smarter city. MPA and the City of Miami are trailblazing mobility and livability as pioneers and national leaders, via the following initiatives:

No. 1 parking entity in the U.S. by volume of PayByPhone transactions.
MPA public-private partnership (P3) supporting the construction of workforce housing by connecting it directly to the MPA’s G1 Courthouse Garage just a few steps away from the Miami Central Rail Station.
Piloting in-ground sensor technology to generate real-time data to guide parkers to available spaces.
Implementing and incorporating a robust art-in-public places program throughout the City of Miami and in MPA facilities.
Micro-mobility (bike and scooter stations) strategically located at MPA facilities and throughout the city’s primary commercial districts and neighborhoods.

MPA’s mission is to be at the intersection of parking, mobility, livability, economic development, affordable housing, creative placemaking, and community. These principles reflect our core values, are our keystones, and are incorporated in each project and everything we do.

Embracing technology, innovation, and change has enabled the MPA to be acknowledged as a forward-thinking national and global leader in our industry. While accomplishing our objectives, we have never forgotten that our primary mission is to serve the public.

Alejandra “Alex” Argudin, CAPP, is chief operations officer of the Miami Parking Authority.

Parking & Mobility Article, Resources, Transportation & Mobility

Parking Spotlight: Mobility and Societal Considerations: What’s Happening?

April 1, 2019 Rachel Yoka Leave a comment

By Eric Haggett

I WAS THINKING ABOUT HOW CONVENIENT IT IS to be able to request an Uber, Lyft, or Via at any time from my smartphone—even at 4 a.m. to catch the first flight of the day out of Chicago’s O’Hare airport. Then I thought about how much fun it was to be able to pick up an electric scooter lying in the sand at Venice Beach, Calif., download an app on my phone, and zip off along the 2.5-mile oceanfront path to Santa Monica Pier, passing a suited 20-something scooting the other direction, presumably on his way to work. Eventually, my thoughts strayed to the cost of these on-demand mobility options and how little thought I gave to paying that cost, whether for a work-related trip to the airport or for a quick scoot down the beach while on vacation.

Fortunately, I have the luxury of considering these costs only briefly in my decision-making, but what about people who must agonize over every penny they spend? Or what about people with physical limitations? Are these new mobility options even an option for them?

More questions came to mind:

While there are real and potential benefits to society of increasing mobility options, how do we ensure that these benefits are available to everyone?
Do we care if these options are not available to some groups?
If the trend in society is toward mobility-as-a-service, what happens to the segment of society that can’t afford those services or are not physically capable of using them? Will this be yet another way in which the “haves” separate themselves from the “have-nots”?

Transportation Network Companies
Transportation network companies (TNCs) provide a transportation alternative to those of us (like me) who choose not to own a car and for whom public transportation is not always a viable option. Additionally, research conducted by Anne Brown, presented in her dissertation “Ridehail Revolution: Ride-hail Travel and Equity in Los Angeles” (2018), suggests that “hailing shared rides was common in low-income neighborhoods” as well, and “ridehailing provides auto-mobility in neighborhoods where many lack reliable access to cars.”

For the lowest income individuals who perhaps cannot afford a smartphone, ride-hailing or renting a shared scooter are not mobility options.

Whether serving someone who chooses not to own a car or someone who cannot afford to own a car, TNCs serve a need. However, what happens when market forces dictate that the cost of each ride with a TNC must increase?

According to Uber’s financial results, the company lost $2.8 billion in 2016, $2.2 billion in 2017, and $1.8 billion in 2018. On top of that, New York, N.Y., recently became the first city to require that drivers working for ride-hailing companies be paid a minimum wage. A representative of New York City’s Taxi and Limousine Commission stated that this increase would raise the average driver’s earnings by $10,000 a year.

Put into context, for the approximately 80,000 drivers in New York City working for a TNC, this would translate into an additional $800 million in wages or, put another way, $800 million in additional fares for ride-hail users. You could see how this New York rule change might make its way into the rules governing TNCs across the U.S. and the world. To become profitable it seems TNCs will have to raise the cost of their rides, making them a less viable mobility option for low-income people.

The Smartphone Factor

All of this assumes that people have access to a smartphone with the ability to download and use ride-hailing apps. According to the Pew Research Center, while only 5 percent of adults in the U.S. do not own a cellphone, 23 percent do not own a smartphone—about 58 million people. Of the adults in the U.S. making less than $30,000 per year, 92 percent own a cellphone, but only 67 percent own a smartphone; this compares to 98 percent cellphone ownership and 93 percent smartphone ownership for those making over $75,000 per year. For the lowest income individuals who perhaps cannot afford a smartphone, ride-hailing or renting a shared scooter are not mobility options.

The Population with Disabilities

People with disabilities have even less access to ride-hailing services, let alone micro-mobility options such as shared scooters or shared bikes. A report by New York Lawyers for the Public Interest says that “Uber, Lyft, and other ride-hailing services are virtually ‘useless’ for people with disabilities because of the relative lack of vehicles equipped to handle wheelchairs and motorized scooters.” The report also says “when riders summoned wheelchair-accessible vehicles from Uber and Lyft—the only ride-hailing companies to offer such a service—the wait time was more than four times longer than for regular service.” When it comes to micro-mobility options, certain segments of the population will not be able to use these services due to their physical limitations, let alone the cost of these mobility options.

On top of the equipment issues reducing the usefulness of ride-sharing and micro-mobility to people with disabilities, the cost of these services is another important factor. According to the 2017 Disability Statistics Annual Report produced by the Rehabilitation and Training Research Center on Disability Statistics and Demographics, “the median earnings of people with disabilities ages 16 and over in the U.S. was $22,047, about two-thirds of the median earnings of people without disabilities, $32,479.” Additionally, according to the same report, the percentage of people with disabilities who were in poverty was 20.9 percent in 2016, versus 13.1 percent for people without disabilities. These statistics indicate that not only are people with disabilities unlikely to be able to take advantage of advancements in new mobility options due to equipment issues, they are also less likely to be able to afford the costs associated with these services.

The Big Picture

In today’s world, where more and more people are feeling marginalized, both the private companies developing mobility technology and services and the public agencies responsible for governing their use need to consider not only the positive impacts of these new mobility options but also their potential to leave a significant portion of the population behind.

Read the article here.

ERIC HAGGETT is senior associate with DESMAN. He can be reached at ehaggett@desman.com.

Parking & Mobility Article, Resources, Transportation & Mobility

THE GREEN STANDARD: Software Makes Modernization Achievable

April 1, 2019 Rachel Yoka Leave a comment

By Christopher Perry and Kevin Woznicki

THE CONTINUING GROWTH OF CITIES IS ESCALATING THE NEED for mobility in urban areas, and heavy vehicle traffic calls for smarter parking and mobility systems. To address this, cities are being outfitted with cameras for multiple uses, such as closed-circuit television (CCTV) security, license plate recognition (LPR)-based parking enforcement, frictionless parking, smart traffic management, road tolling, and access control. The camera infrastructure is already in place, and now the need is shifting toward hardware and platform-independent analytics, data collection, and parking management systems based on LPR and other vehicle identification technologies.

There are multiple reasons for upgrading traffic systems is accelerated and at significantly less cost. and parking services with the use of smart software. Moreover, the underlying neural network technology Software solutions provide a cost-effective alter-allows a virtually endless number of uses for soft-native to make use of existing hardware with added ware-based video analytics and LPR technology. benefits that include complete scalability and full interoperability with other systems. When software Typical Implementation is the backbone of these platforms, the development Let us review an example for a typical implementation systems, and business intelligence management company to operate CCTV systems within garages, using a software suite to manage the access and revenue control aspects of the facility. Cameras are used to monitor entry and exit lanes; they can also be used to provide footage of the license plates and vehicles. To automate the entry and exit process, implementing LPR technology is a plausible choice. Unfortunately, adding LPR-specific cameras is often cost prohibitive.

The ideal solution is integrating LPR software into the parking software that works with all the existing infrastructure, including cameras and the barrier. Because a camera provides video footage of traffic, the setup allows additional analytical software to provide LPR data as well as other options (make and model recognition, for example). This additional information has many uses. While it is an interesting source of additional data in a shopping mall when trying to get a picture of the audience, it can also be used as a supplement for LPR data. By supplementing LPR data with vehicle make and model, the vehicle fingerprint becomes more accurate and decreases the margin of error for entry/ exit decisions.

The benefits? Quick deployment, easy setup, a modernized operation, and additional data for the cost of the software instead of an expensive investment in new infrastructure.

Traffic Management

Video analytics technology applied in the case of vehicle brand and model recognition has uses in the traffic management sector as well. Starting from vehicle counting through traffic-incident detection to creating reference data for law enforcement, it covers several relevant functions while using existing surveillance equipment. Sweeping crowded road sections for traffic jams and immediately signaling the traffic management system to propose alternate routes or automated monitoring of dangerous crossroads 24/7 for traffic rule violations are all ready to be implemented.

When traffic analytic solutions are paired with law-enforcement systems, the result is a more encompassing and efficient solution that can offer multiple green benefits. There is no magic here: A video analytics system is capable of using existing camera infrastructure to provide authorities with all relevant reference data pertaining to traffic violations, traffic patterns, and traffic volume, thereby increasing the overall utility of the system.

These are only a few of the scenarios that can potentially be covered by video analytics software. We are still very early in the implementation of artificial intelligence-powered video analytics software into actual parking and traffic applications, but one thing is certain: Technology exists that has the potential to greatly accelerate the automation of parking and mobility systems and smartening of our cities.

Read the article here.

CHRISTOPHER PERRY and KEVIN WOZNICKI are co-founders of ParkTrans Solutions. Perry can be reached at christopher.perry@parktranssolutions.com and Woznicki can be reached at kevin.woznicki@parktranssolutions.com.

Parking & Mobility Article, Resources, Transportation & Mobility

MOBILITY & TECH: Techno-centric Thinking

April 1, 2019 Rachel Yoka Leave a comment

By Melissa Yates, CAPP

SIMPLY PUT, IN 2019 PARKING AND MOBILITY program leaders will need to become even more “techno-centric,” or educated, regarding options offered by industry vendors as they relate to technology and data. To satisfy customer demand for parking, mobility, and access options in any system, industry leaders will need to understand the variety of supporting technologies and data, how they function, and how to match them in a complementary way to effect programmatic success. If not, program leaders will run the risk of quickly becoming a legacy program with a failed service model.

Matching program offerings is often the first. Taking a chance on a dynamic new vendor can be hurdle to overcome, with integration directly follow-extremely rewarding, not to mention temping, or a ing. As much as the newest technology sounds like huge risk for program managers. The carrot is most the answer to a multi-faceted problem of parking, obviously a variety of promised data that is ardently access, and data demand, the real question to ask sought after to help easily identify and make pro-is, “Will this company still be around in the near grammatic decisions from, such as dynamic price future?” Do they have a service track record in the setting to balance access needs during business industry, however brief, and are they willing to work peaks, as well as how to best use the limited curb-with other vendors to achieve a cohesive integration? side more effectively.

As quickly as technology and digital offerings are rushing forward to assist in program management, the customer must be able to easily use and understand the benefit. Staff must also be brought along with the vision and able to adapt even more quickly with their buy-in and ongoing support of the new digital business model.

Shifting to New Platforms
As the industry shifts from heavy investments in physical program infrastructure such as gates, signage, wayfinding, and pay stations to more digital and application-based platforms, it’s important to keep the vision of basic services germane to all parking programs running smoothly: efficient enforcement, infrastructure upkeep, and parking product sales. As the trusted ambassadors of access parking programs, our core work is to ensure that other departments, services, and businesses can be successful through best practices in access and mobility management.

What data are truly desired?
Will the data identify who is using resources, when, and how often?
Does this technology meet these needs, along with the triple-benefit rule (customer satisfaction, staff efficiencies, and assistance with program leadership decision-making)?

There are a multitude of technology platform offerings in the industry today. Having a clear vision of the information sets desired to make data-driven decisions is important, while being supported by solid program basics of parking access and mobility is critical to success. Established vendors are already adapting to a more app-driven digital platform and have identified a subset of industry metrics most requested and shifted to meet the need. Mining their experience and track record is key. The essentials of how they have shown up in the past is a nice starting place before joining with them, linked arm in arm, into the digital future of new offerings.

A continued model of success, showing commitment to contributing to a strong digital program with ease of integration, is important. Finally, before too many dollars are spent, find out who’s willing to play in the pilot sandbox, and if sampling the product has the vendor pulling up to the table, or looking for a different program to work with.

Read the article here.

MELISSA YATES, CAPP, is access and parking manager for the City of Boulder, Colo. She can be reached at yatesm@bouldercolorado.gov.

THE PARKING PROFESSIONAL | APRIL 2019 | PARKING-MOBILITY.ORG 13

IPMI Webinar: Your Most Important Resources: Are They Being Nurtured or Left to Wither Away?

Leave a comment

Live Online Webcast: $35.00 for IPMI Members, $85.00 for Non-Members

Description: What do you consider the most valuable asset in your organization? Do you properly invest in that asset? Is it performing at an optimal level? Do you recognize the exposure to your organization if that asset is no longer there? If you answered no to any of these questions, you need to attend this session and recognize the importance of your staff’s knowledge and well-being.

Objectives:

Identify the facets of your business that require effective and knowledgeable staff members.
Identify gaps in that knowledge.
Create and implement a plan, through training and mentoring to address those gaps.

Presenters:

Tom Wunk, CAPP, is vice president of PARCS solutions for T2 Systems and has been in the parking control industry since 1973. He is a CAPP and a graduate of the State University of New York system. He has developed and provided training presentations for IPMI, ASIS, and the AAAE. He is a member of IPMI’s Technology Committee and the IPMI Education Development Committee, the Smart Card Alliance, and the EMV Migration Forum.

Arnold (Gabe) Mendez, CAPP, has been with ASU’s Parking and Transit Services since June 2008. He serves as assistant director of strategic support, and provides support and leadership in the areas of strategic planning, parking technology applications, reporting, and involvement with department initiatives including campus access master planning. He is an active member of the ASU PM Network leadership team and IPMI’s Education Development Committee and Conference Program Task Force.

Irma Henderson, CAPP, MBA, serves the University of California Riverside campus community of approximately 23,000 students and 7,500 employees. She received her master’s of business administration degree with an emphasis in organizational leadership and change from Pepperdine University and bachelor’s degree from the University of California, Irvine. She co-chairs IPMI’s Sustainability Committee and is a current member of several local groups advocating, supporting, and encouraging mobility in Western Riverside County.

IPMI Webinar: To Email, Text or Meet? That is the Perpetual Question!

Leave a comment

Cost: On-Demand Webinar Fee: $35.00 for IPMI Members, $85.00 for Non-Members

Description: Communication is tricky and finding the most effective media (email, phone, text, smoke signal) to share your messages is a constant challenge. Adding to the complexity is the ultimate project delivery method: design build, design bid build, construction manager at risk.

In this discussion, we will define and learn the communication strategies for each major delivery project method.

Objectives:

Learn different project delivery methods.
Learn communication nuances for each project delivery method.
Learn project communication protocols.

Presenter:

Jeremy Rocha, PE, is a parking consultant with WGI with more than 20 years of experience in parking, project management, engineering and planning. His focus at WGI is planning and project management. He has led multiple projects as design team project manager nationwide. As a representative of the parking industry, he is committed to making parking friendly and understandable.

IPMI Webinar: Shared Mobility and Technologies’ Effects on Parking Design and Curbside Management

Leave a comment

Cost: On-Demand Webinar Fee: $35.00 for IPMI Members, $85.00 for Non-Members

Description: The explosion in shared mobility and potential for autonomous vehicles is affecting parking design and curbside management. Parking planners and transportation engineers are shifting from the standard design approach to curbside and parking facility design. This presentation will provide an overview of shared mobility resources and technology and explore how they are impacting parking demand and parking design both on- and off-street.

Objectives:

Identify what should be considered when planning and designing parking and curbside space.
Learn strategies to plan for changes to parking needs using technology and best practices.
Determine how curbside space and parking facilities need to be designed to support the variety of mobility needs and changes in parking demand.

Presenters:

David Taxman, PE, is a parking and transportation engineer at Kimley-Horn. He has been a passionate advocate for reform in parking planning practices, spearheading efforts to include transportation demand management (TDM) and mobility best practices. He has led parking studies for municipalities, universities, hospitals, and other institutions. His expertise in parking planning includes supply/demand studies, operations/management, financial feasibility, parking policy, technology, shared parking, privatization, and functional design.

Brett Wood, CAPP, PE, is a parking and transportation consultant at Kimley-Horn, where he leads the firm’s parking planning group through innovative and industry leading projects throughout North America. He has extensive experience in parking demand management, creation, and management of innovative parking programs, including design of mobility and parking systems and strategic parking planning for downtown areas and universities.

IPMI On-Demand Webinar: How to Cater Excellent Customer Experience on a Multi-building Property by Maximizing Shuttle Routes

Leave a comment

Cost: On-Demand Webinar Fee: $35.00 for IPMI Members, $85.00 for Non-Members

Description: We wanted to identify and correct inefficiencies present in the medical center’s shuttle system to provide the best ridership experience for users. Our goal was to have a wait time for any shuttle at any stop of 15 minutes or less. Using industrial engineering’s operation research optimization methodology, we aimed to achieve the stated goal by eliminating bottlenecks and maximizing route sequences.

Objectives:

Learn how this center used optimization methodology to be within the 15-minute wait time goal.
Understand how they modeled the shuttle system with the Traveling Salesman Problem (TSP).
Learn how they tested a heuristic algorithm to efficiently solve the problem.

Presenters:

George Richardson is the manager for Transportation and Parking Services at the University of Florida Health. He’s been in this role for the last three years. Prior, he worked for SP+ in New Orleans, La. In addition, he has 10 years’ experience with parking and transportation services in university systems.

Roque Perez-Velez, PE, CSSBB, MEng, is Project Manager at UF Health, where he previously worked as coordinator of management engineering services, operational effectiveness, and director of management engineering consulting services. He is also adjunct faculty of the Industrial and Systems Engineering Department at the University of Florida. He is a Professional Engineer (PE) and Certified Six Sigma Black Belt (CSSBB). He holds bachelor’s and master’s degrees in industrial engineering.

Publications, Resources

The Parking Professional: Contracts Nothing Lasts Forever

February 1, 2019 Rachel Yoka Leave a comment

Why and how owners should issue regular RFPs for parking operations services.

By Will Rhodin

REMEMBER THAT OLD CLICHÉ that nothing lasts forever? Well, that can definitely be true when it comes to a parking management relationship. As tempting as it may be to sign that one-page “same terms and conditions” renewal agreement with the parking operator when the operating term is coming to an end, that may not be the best option. Sure, the parking management company may seem to be doing a good job, but doesn’t it make sense to see if the market has changed since you hired your operator?

The approaching end of a management agreement or lease term presents an opportunity to make sure ownership is achieving its desired goals for the parking facility. There are many issues to be assessed, from financial results to service, facility performance, image, and safety, none of which should be given short shrift. How does ownership know if the operator is really doing the best job that can be done, especially if the operation has been on cruise control for a while?

The best way to get to the bottom of this important question is to issue a request for proposals (RFP), laying a framework for qualified operators to present their best case as to why their organization is best to meet or exceed ownership’s needs. You may find out that there’s someone out there who could do a better job. Or perhaps the process will inspire your current operator to up their game.

Laying Out the RFP

An RFP process establishes an even playing field on which operators are given an opportunity to compete for the property owner’s business. Ownership’s priorities are detailed in the RFP, addressing key matters such as:

Agreement structure: What type of arrangement works best for the owner and the individual parking facilities? The RFP could call for a straight management contract, a lease, a concession, or a hybrid approach combining two or more approaches.
Quality of service expectations: Is the property a class A office building, requiring first-class services to be provided by all onsite providers? Are there established standards that must be met by the operator (minimal delays at the exits, shuttles arriving on a mandated schedule, measurable customer satisfaction)? The RFP should clearly state these requirements in a way so the proposer can plan its response accordingly.
Operating plan: What are the operator’s plans for helping the owner meet its financial or service-related goals for the parking facilities? Perhaps a valet component can be added or the facility can be automated to increase vehicle throughput while reducing costs.
Innovation and technology: The parking world has become extremely technology-centric. The RFP should provide an opportunity for prospects to demonstrate their experience and expertise in utilizing the latest parking technologies. It should also require them to offer recommendations for how technology can best be applied to the facility or facilities they are proposing to operate.
Management fee and operating costs: The RFP response often includes a financial proposal component, specifying base and/or incentive management fees, revenue budgets, plus payroll and other operating cost budgets. Lease or concession proposals typically require the proposer to commit to a base rent and/or a payment based on a percentage of revenue, perhaps above a threshold.
Revenue generation ideas: Parking facilities are often a source of measurable revenue for an owner. If that’s the case, the RFP should require that proposer to submit well-thought-out plans for enhancing revenue. For example, perhaps the rates are not comparable to the market, or there is a full floor available in the garage with no prospect of filling such spaces with internal demand generators, requiring the operator to look to external sources to find revenue.
Marketing plans: The parking operator is responsible for optimizing the parking facility or facilities. The RFP provides an opportunity for each prospective operator to lay out its marketing plan.
Disadvantaged Business Entity (DBE) programs: Many municipal parking opportunities, such as city-controlled parking systems or airports, establish DBE programs to create opportunities for small businesses. The RFP may specify DBE participation requirements.
Sustainability: Sustainability is an essential element of parking. Prospective operators should be required to provide recommendations for making parking operations greener, such as by the installation of electric-vehicle charging stations.
Capital investment: The RFP may require the proposer to provide funding (reimbursable or otherwise) for much-needed capital improvements to the parking facilities.
Base rent and percent rent: The RFP should specify the owner’s requirements for base and/or percentage rent payments, in the case of a lease or concession opportunity.

Expert Advice

Property owners sometimes prefer to hire a third-party parking consultant to coordinate the RFP process, including preparing the RFP draft, working with ownership to establish and communicate key milestones (RFP response due dates, onsite pre-proposal meetings, question and answer timelines, etc.), and quarterbacking the process from start to finish. A parking operator RFP package should include a draft management agreement or lease document, allowing the proposing operator to evaluate potential contract terms and prepare its company’s response accordingly.

An RFP forms Excel template can be provided for the operator to complete, ensuring that all of the parking companies are proposing based on the same expense line items and key price categories, such as management fees, payroll, and liability insurance costs. Finally, an evaluation matrix is provided to let operators know what the key rating factors will be, such as price, qualifications, references, management plan, proposed onsite manager, and local or regional support. This gives the operator the opportunity to structure a proposal that is consistent with the owner’s expectations.

This process can provide property ownership an unvarnished list of parking operators that exhibit a level of quality, experience, and capability consistent with the owner’s expectations. RFPs may then be sent directly to those recommended operators, weeding out the companies that may lack ownership’s required qualities in the process. RFPs are often posted publicly in the case of many municipal or other government proposals, however, and thus that initial screening process must wait until responses are received and reviewed.

Ultimately, the RFP package is issued, and the clock starts ticking. Onsite operator walk-throughs occur, questions are answered, and electronic and/or hard copies of operator proposals arrive, just in the nick of time!

The next step is to dig into the responses and see how each proposal stacks up against the other. The consultant enters the operators’ financial offers into a comparison spreadsheet, checks references, and prepares a summary document, detailing salient points of each proposal. A short list is then developed if multiple companies submit proposals, and operators who make the cut are brought in for in-person interviews.

With comparisons complete, operator interviews concluded, and proposals evaluated on an apples-to-apples basis, ownership can then move forward with a new operating agreement, confident in the results of a well-informed and well-executed RFP process.

Read the article here.

WILL RHODIN is a consultant with Walker Consultants. He can be reached at wrhodin@walkerconsultants.com.

30 THE PARKING PROFESSIONAL | FEBRUARY 2019 | PARKING-MOBILITY.ORG