Comments on: Ann Arbor Parking Data: Slower September

By: Edward Vielmetti

Edward Vielmetti — Mon, 05 Nov 2012 18:54:50 +0000

There's a lot more data to be had, but it's hidden inside the private side of the public-private partnership that manages the structures. I'll note that the real-time "spaces available" feed that used to grace the Ann Arbor DDA's site is still down: [link] "Parking data is temporarily unavailable. Sorry for the inconvenience."

By: john hritz

john hritz — Mon, 05 Nov 2012 03:33:55 +0000

A very interesting report. Do we have a way to know what kind of turnover we have on the meters? It seems like street parking is still too cheap. As for charging by the hour or fraction thereof in the structures, it is counterproductive to freeing up street spots.

By: Jim Rees

Jim Rees — Mon, 05 Nov 2012 01:05:38 +0000

Sorry Dave, my intent was to criticize the City’s hidden rate increase, not your stellar reporting. Thanks for the analysis.

By: Dave Askins

Dave Askins — Sun, 04 Nov 2012 21:17:41 +0000

Jim and Tom, the change to the billing methodology you're referring to (from half-hour to hourly) was implemented in February, not just recently in September like the rates. This was reported and analyzed as a part of The Chronicle's February 2012 DDA board meeting report. It certainly could have been adduced in the current article as an additional point in support of the conclusion that this September's revenue increases were not as great what might have been projected based on inventory and rate increases – because the "effective" rate increase (due to the February billing change) from September 2011 to September 2012 was even greater that the stated increase. The billing change alone can be estimated to generate something an additional $0.5 million in annual revenue. Yet in the data I'm working with, I'm not sure I can identify the effect of that specific billing change from February 2012 to March 2012, or anywhere else. Yes, there's some evidence that March revenues per space increased compared to February at some facilities, but the same increase is apparent from February 2011 to March 2011. This is another case where a reliance primarily on financial measures for system performance limits our understanding of how the parking system works. If we routinely reviewed data on the number of hours of parking sold by facility, then we'd be able to compute a statistic: (hours of parking sold) / (hourly patrons) = (average length of stay). [My recollection is that I've seen monthly parking reports from the "olden days" that showed this stat, but a cursory search just now failed to turn any up.] I'd speculate that what we'd see from February to March in 2012 would be an average length of stay that increased, but perhaps not because patrons are actually staying longer, but because they're being billed for longer. In any case, I didn't repeat the discussion of the billing change in this article, because the basic conclusion here is well-supported even without bringing up the issue of the billing change. That conclusion is: Stable usage would have resulted in revenue increases significantly greater than 3% – so usage wasn't stable and in fact went down.

By: Vivienne Armentrout

Vivienne Armentrout — Sun, 04 Nov 2012 20:24:26 +0000

Yes, and I attended a one-hour meeting that took me back to the parking structure about 5 minutes past the hour, so I paid $2.40 for about 70 minutes. It makes one think twice.

By: Jim Rees

Jim Rees — Sun, 04 Nov 2012 19:55:37 +0000

As Tom notes, it’s a bit misleading to say “rates increased from $1.10/hour to $1.20/hour.” A 30 minute stay that used to cost $.55 is now $1.20, more than double what it was.

By: Steve Bean

Steve Bean — Sun, 04 Nov 2012 16:24:49 +0000

Watch for more 4-year lows in hourly patron numbers over the coming FY and maybe even revenues lower than ’11-’12 levels beginning in early ’13 (in spite of the rate increases).

The hourly patron numbers for surface lots and the Washington & 4th structure might be the beginning of a downtrend, primarily among shoppers/eaters. The numbers for the structures won’t drop til later after employment drops, more employees work from home, and businesses close.

Dave, can you get data for ’07-’08 and ’08-’09? That’s where the patron numbers are headed.

By: Tom Brandt

Tom Brandt — Sun, 04 Nov 2012 15:38:19 +0000

The DDA also changed the way hourly parking is charged in the structures, going from charging in 30-minute increments to charging in 1-hour increments. While not technically a rate increase, this surely resulted in higher revenues.

By: DrData

DrData — Sun, 04 Nov 2012 14:18:35 +0000

Excellent report.

I think it is a stretch to use the lack of two home football games as an explanation for a decline in parking revenues.

Many Ann Arbor folks plan their downtown weekends based on the absence/presence of home football traffic, meaning that more people might venture downtown on a non-football weekend. Second, I don’t see lots of folks trekking from downtown structures to the stadium.

Next thing, the city will start looking at cloudy days to explain away the poorer usage.