Commuter Rail Workshop Proceedings - May 27, 1998

"Commuter Rail Economic Opportunities - Lessons Learned"

presented by

Washington Association of Rail Passengers

Commuter Rail Section

The Washington Association of Rail Passengers (WashARP) sponsored this half-day workshop to assist local leaders in understanding the economic opportunities of a "new start" commuter rail system - the Sound Transit "Sounder" being implemented over the next several years in the Puget Sound region. Forty-five guests representing businesses and cities along the Sounder line participated in three round table groups. While the topic was economic opportunities, the discussion covered a multitude of subjects, all relating to successful implementation. Presenters rotated among three round table discussion groups, sharing their wealth of experience in starting, running, and promoting commuter rail service in three different systems on the west coast. They were:

Jerry Kirzner, Director of Rail for Caltrain, San Francisco Peninsula area

Adrienne Brooks-Taylor, Director of Marketing and Fares for Metrolink, Los Angeles area

Betty Laurs, Program Director for Sound Transit, formerly of San Diego's Coaster

Facilitators kept detailed notes of comments, suggestions, and ideas, as well as adding their own perspectives. Facilitators, each assisting one round table group, were:

Ned Conroy, Puget Sound Regional Council - currently lead for TOD activities.

Henry Marcus, King County DOT, TOD program - recently with Portland LRT program.

Julie Shubuya, Sound Transit Commuter Rail - Community Development Specialist.

Many thanks to all of the above for making the workshop a priority in their busy schedules, and for the knowledge and enthusiasm they shared.

The following summary was compiled from the notes of facilitators and note-takers at each table. They are presented for others to consider, and hopefully to motivate readers to take steps within their own communities to get the most out of the public investment made by a new Commuter Rail system.

General Conclusions

• Development opportunities are a "Long Term" proposition. Think 5, 10, even 20 years.
• Most riders of commuter rail are "New" to transit (up to 80%). They expect and will pay for premium services offered by rail (comfort, reliability, time utilization, safety, and speed)
• Most riders prefer to arrive by private auto. Need for parking is not to be underestimated.
• Business opportunities must serve riders needs - think in terms of what commuters combine with their home to work trip (day-care, dry cleaners, convenience food, movies, rolls/coffee, photos, etc.)
• Residential development occurs gradually around stations. Realtors and Developers can generate support for the new rail system. They should be sought out and offered incentives for promotion (free passes for their clients).
• Local shuttle buses to work sites are highly desirable to riders, providing a seamless trip to and from jobs.
• TOD (Transit Oriented Development) requires local support and leadership, a vision, and patience. Local planning should encourage mixed use, and increased density around stations.
• Marketing efforts, led by the commuter rail system, should take many diverse forms and target specific customer bases (current SOV commuters, bus and ferry riders, special event trains, cyclists, reverse commuters, theater and restaurant patrons, mid-day discretionary travelers, colleges, large work sites, housing agencies, etc.)
• Success of the service is dependent upon it's quality, comfort, speed, reliability, and safety.

While most conclusions didn't focus on economic development opportunities directly, it became clear that a synergy among a wide variety of positive actions created the desired results. Whether more riders cause more business, or vice versa, is not important. Incremental steps are supportive of each other:

Gradually building ridership and support for the service provides for the increase in demand for housing and retail activities. Likewise, this increase in activity around stations provided more awareness and use of the commuter rail system. Many purchasers of homes within two miles of stations indicate that the rail system influenced their decision to buy. Local businesses make decisions based on good market and retail analyses, and the increase in traffic and population around stations provided the needed incentives to expand.

Participants in the workshop were provided with print materials related to economic development around Commuter Rail Stations. These were gathered from a variety of sources. Special credit is given to Leroy Chadwick, Librarian for King County DOT, for locating published articles - the conclusion is that "not much" is readily available specifically on Commuter Rail station area development.

METRA (Metropolitan Transit Authority) in Chicago, through Lyle Gomm, was amazingly supportive in the quality and quantity of work previously done in this area, and for graciously providing multiple copies of those studies.

APTA (American Public Transportation Association) in New York, through Fran Hooper in the Commuter Rail Department, provided support in both print materials, and advice on participants and content.

Materials provided to workshop participants included:

• "Impact of Commuter-Rail Services in Toronto Region," Wells, ASCE, Jrnl Transp.Eng. Aug. 96.
• "Impact Assessment of the Virginia Railway Express Commuter Rail on Land Use Development Patterns," USDOT, Research and Special Programs Administration, Dec. 93.
• "Illinois Rt. 59 Commuter Rail Station Survey," Chicago Area Transportation Study, Mar. 90.
• "Impacts of the COASTER on cities in N. San Diego County," John S Dewhirst, Sno.Co. Dec. 97.
• "Estimating Suburban P&R commuter rail station commutersheds," Hart, CATS News Spr. 92
• "Transit Markets of the Future," Sandra Rosenbloom, TRB, Nat. Academy Press, Wash. DC, 1998.
• "Commuter Rail - Serving America's Emerging Suburban/Urban Economy," APTA, Sept. 1997.
• "Local Economic Impacts in Commuter Rail Station Areas," camiros ltd, METRA, Dec. 1994.
• "Land Use in Commuter Rail Station Areas," NE Illinois Plan.Com., METRA, Nov. 1991.
• "Breaking the Sound Barrier, Sounder Commuter Rail," Sound Transit, Seattle, WA, 1998.
• "King Street Station Redevelopment," Wash St. Dept of Transportation, Feb. 1998.
• "RAIL Connection," WSDOT, Mar. 1998.

Finally, credit must go to the members of the Association's Commuter Rail Section for providing time, talent, and money to make this workshop a reality. Thanks to Dennis Fait, VP-Intercity Rail, Hans Mueller-Treasurer, Rob Morrison-N.Corridor lead, Bob Whalen-S.Corridor lead, Warren Yee-Media Relations, Diane Harper- editorial support.

Specific Comments, Suggestions, and Conclusions

Specific comments made during the round table groups were sorted by these general areas:

planning, marketing, parking, service development, security, bus, other modes of travel.

The detailed notes of all groups are presented below. Reading each individual comment provides a better understanding of different viewpoints, and in the aggregate, an emerging picture of consensus.

Abbreviations used within the comments include: CR=commuter rail, LA=Los Angeles, SD=San Diego, PS=Puget Sound, SF=San Francisco, TOD=Transit Oriented Development, JV= Joint Venture.

• Planning - Decision Making
• Parking Considerations
• Marketing of the Service
• Service Quality and Implementation
• System Security Issues and Fares
• Bus and Rail Intergration
• Bicycles and Day Care Opportunities

• Land banking for future station area redevelopment has been used with success.
• Land banking for TOD by transit agencies is important for development to occur.
• City of LA provides the stations and platforms.
• Key is station location, parking, and mode of access to/from station.
• Look for trade-offs for station access. Bus/Parking/Pedestrian/Cyclists.
• SD used basic design criteria for all stations. Enhancements were at city expense.
• Station improvement plan identifies opportunities.
• "One size doesn't fit all CR systems," maturation of the system defines opportunities.
• Be ready for development when the market is ready to respond.
• Creating a synergy between rail and development can start at a symposium.
• Joint services help create a market for potential land use change.
• LA sponsored a Land Use symposium to encourage station area development.
• Land Use/Station Area Dev. is a combination of many things, requiring a long time.
• Local land use decisions determine the direction development takes.
• Relocate auto oriented development for housing around stations.
• SD used transit as the basis for redevelopment in some stations.
• Station area development must show continual progress, however gradual.
• Station development plan establishes guidelines and encourages development.
• Symposium must create inertia. Deal in realities and product. Not just plans.
• There is a direct relationship between CR service and station area development.
• TOD guidelines influence land use. New service is supportive.
• Use land use symposiums for 200 people(speakers, case studies, developers).
• SF stations about 1.5 mi. apart. Most in fully developed city centers.
• City ownership of stations is advantageous, using local and grant money.
• Local agencies must make a commitment for funding and land use changes.
• Redevelopment grants obtained by communities using CR as the focus.
• San Mateo station is a JV w/CR using leaseback ($1) for land. City built, and O&M.
• Station enhancement in SD was in partnership with locals, using match money.
• Tax incentives are an effective tool for promoting land use strategies.
• Affordable housing near stations along SF line is really tough to find.
• Incentives to promote alternatives to P&R (bike,bus, ped) to reduce auto impacts.
• Pay "low density" business's to relocate away from stations.
• SD had jurisdiction over entire line. Not so with Sounder's 3 county system.
• Keep land ownership and planning local. Support land banking.
• Local governments have to be in the lead.
• Member jurisdictions are not equally responsive.
• Use individual "city based" programs for development.
• Development around stations doesn't happen overnight. Maybe 5,10, or even 20 years.
• Development takes place over decades, not just years.
• It takes years to develop the system and station area growth. Take the long view.
• Keep a 10 year perspective. Don't judge the system on day one.
• London underground has been under construction for 160 years. Long haul.
• TOD (transit oriented development is not for start-up.
• TOD will not happen overnight. think long-term.
• TOD will occur over a long period of time.
• Existing partnerships between R.R./CR useful in promoting development opportunities.
• Partnerships should include public/public as well as public/private.
• Private sector participation is very important.
• Take each community's diversity and character into account. Locals must lead.
• Transit must "Push", but not "Lead."
• Keep pressure on elected officials to support rail.
• Puget Sound has more "process" to go through - will take extra time!
• SD had an aggressive schedule without intensive public process requirements.
• Support services tend to congregate next to one another.

• Most CR systems depend overwhelmingly on auto access to build ridership.
• Elimination of parking capacity is targeted by promoting other means of travel to stations.
• Many stations in LA are P&R lots only. No bus.
• SD had to expand some P&R's during the 1st year of operation.
• Options for parking in LA include valet (Irvine), charges (Covina for security), and free (most).
• Palo Alto parking is $5/night for adjacent restaurant during evenings.
• Parking fees are used to discourage auto use in favor of other modes.
• Parking is free at most stations in LA. Some have satellite shuttles.
• SF charges $10/day for special event parking.
• SF must charge for parking (included in pass price) to avoid conflicts with shoppers.
• SF uses modest parking charges.
• Close proximity of stations allow passengers to use other stations.
• SF requires a monthly pass for parking pass.
• Phasing of parking capacity at stations increases the potential for structured parking.
• Good parking is a must.
• Don't underestimate P&R capacity, lots were full from the beginning in SD.
• Large surface P&R lots have a negative impact on attracting development.
• Overcrowding of parking lots is a problem SF must address.
• Work with local agencies to ensure adequate parking.
• Garage vs. surface lot: look at loading factors and reality to enhance decision making.
• SF has no structured parking in their system.
• Structures rather than surface lots are preferred.

• Auto related services, (i.e., lube 'n oil, windshields, detailing) go well.
• Community colleges may offer courses as trains increase.
• Community Colleges teach classes on board in Vancouver, BC.
• Successful business' in SD were Childcare, dry cleaners, florists,7/11, video, gourmet deli.
• Coordinate special trains with event sponsors: parades, sports, prom holiday express, toys for tots.
• Partner with sports teams (Sharks offer $1 discount on Caltrain).
• SD service is timed to theater starts in evenings.
• Watch for and take advantage of community events.
• Working with housing agencies is good.
• Job centers very important. Sorrento Valley in SD had 70,000 jobs within 5 miles.
• Embrace media (tv, mags, newsprint).
• Movers and Shakers are the best locals to get the word out.
• Use tours for local businesses, employers, "movers/shakers."
• LAX airport would not allow train service for fear of losing parking revenue.
• Be positioned to take advantage of all opportunities.
• Must sell the product (commuter rail).
• Take advantage of opportunities to gain riders when they come about.
• Think what people do "to-from" work: Child care, cleaners, bike shops.
• Bringing developers into the picture early is a good tool.
• Educate business and real estate leaders in the community.
• People choose to live near CR stations. Work with Realtors, relocation services.
• Provide free tickets to Real Estate agents.
• Provide home buyer incentives. Give 10 free trips as part of each purchase.
• Real Estate agents are a great source for getting new riders.
• Take local realtors on a train tour of the area. Speak at their meetings.
• Residential around stations (new/old) will spawn businesses.
• Keep local business informed regarding changing trends.
• Need to prepare market analysis and strategies.
• Talk to and listen to Retail Market Analysts.
• Feature a specific station in new marketing efforts.
• Above all else, listen to your commuters.
• Need to do a Market Product/Conception workshop.
• Symposiums are a great tool to create enthusiasm.
• Symposiums work well to get involvement and information going.
• Attract discretionary riders through promotions.
• Convenience. Gourmet meals, dry cleaning, camera, photo, (don't interfere with locals)
• Define your marketing program. Attract who? Premium services, higher costs.
• Facilitate specific purpose opportunities. Create synergies.
• Find and target potential rail riders.
• Non-traditional groups should be targeted as potential new riders.
• SD started Friday night "happy hour" runs to border. No problems with riders.
• Target non traditional riders, bikers, reverse commuters.
• Use Targeted marketing (one messagage does not fit all).

• Mode of access for stations is mostly by private auto.
• LA system is over a 6 county area.
• Look towards what is "easiest and most convenient" for riders.
• Commuters travel up to 80 miles one way in LA.
• Friday evening service has encouraged additional entertainment activities in SD.
• Special service trains are popular. Plan for them.
• Super Bowl had 16,000 riders arrive on the trains.
• Frequent service of CR is a major draw in SF. "Not stranded" feeling.
• Joint use of stations (Amtrak and CR) promotes ridership gains for both systems.
• Multimodal/Intermodal stations important to riders (BART, Caltrain, LRT).
• Load factor in SF is 75% full cars. Keep marketing the service!
• Offer off-peak service, especially weekend service after initial start-up.
• SD surveys indicated that mid-day service was sought - now about 17% of riders.
• Amenities at stations and on-board trains promote ridership.
• CR service is very important. Price of service is tied to quality.
• Food and Drink make the trip a "social event." That's a plus.
• Quality of service is most important. Must be grade A#1.
• Ridership in SF is dependent on reliability, service frequency, and growth.
• SF "reverse commute" to Silicon Valley is growing rapidly.
• CR gets a lot of 1st time riders, even if local bus and parallel service exists.
• LA ridership always above expected numbers (8.5% fewer cars on freeways).
• Ridership in SD is higher than forecast from beginning.
• Sounder demographics similar to SD (maybe 80% new riders).
• SD line had low freight traffic, but had to deal with high Amtrak traffic.
• SD purchased track and schedule rights from railroads.
• LA service span is 5am to 8:30pm, five days a week and Saturdays on 2 of 6 lines.
• SF service span is 5am to 10pm, seven days a week.
• Concentrate on Mon-Fri service first, then mid-day and weekends.
• Start service M-F to keep cost down.
• Startup in SD was before all stations were finished.
• SF has some "kiss and ride" accommodations at stations.
• LA surveys each year using laptops.
• 1st and foremost is "on-time, clean, friendly, and uneventful."
• On time performance is very important to riders.
• SD has best on-time performance in USA. Important!
• Train trip should be "forgettable" - keep it on time, safe, fast, pleasant, reliable.
• Riders will generally NOT do more than one mode change (transfer).

• Bad publicity, by suicide on tracks, is diminished by showing press a view from cab.
• Let uniformed Officers ride free.
• Uniformed guards patrol parking lots regularly.

• Coordinate train fares and discount parking with events after 5 pm as a draw.
• Fares are integrated with the Peninsula Transit Pass.
• Must be integrated with existing transit systems.
• SD has 40-60% farebox recovery. Should start breaking even in about 7 years!
• Monthly passes down in SF because price difference small over single ticket.
• Rail pass good everywhere. They share revenue with bus by sampling.
• Regional passes good on train/bus. Coaster pass includes bus. Revenue shared.
• SF has a peninsula pass good on muni, bus and Caltrain.
• SF has a 50% farebox recovery ratio. Very good.
• SF provides inducement for low income riders to use the system.
• Pay member agencies based on sample counts and agreed upon formulas.
• Fares vary with time of day, distance, and rider (1-way SJC-SF is $5.00).

• 80% of riders in SD are "new" transit riders. Wouldn't ride a bus!
• Relocate Transit Centers to co-exist with train stations.
• SF bay area has 18 transit districts. Conflicts being resolved one by one.
• SD feeder vans tried for only 7 months with no educational effort. Failed.
• The local bus to train transfer is difficult to ensure quality meets.
• Sounder's outlook is much more favorable for feeder buses with its 4 transit agencies.
• Partner with transit agencies (track politics, timing, funding).
• Compatibility with local transit providers is important.
• Shuttles are a must for "reverse commuters" to get to job sites.
• 92% would not ride if work site shuttles were not provided.
• Caltrain took the lead in promoting shuttles w/ business, state subsidies
• Shuttle buses to stations only given 6 month trial - not nearly enough time.
• Shuttles are timed to meet the trains in SD.
• Shuttles to stations, both peak and non-peak.
• Sorrento in SD has no parking. 25 shuttle buses carry workers to jobs.

• Palo Alto has bike lockers, repair shop, and showers; also Long Beach, CA.
• Bicycles are up to 24 per car in SF.

• LA has daycare facilities at 4 of their stations.
• Usually the city takes the lead on station development. SD CR took lead on Daycare.
• Daycare centers if embraced, must be of highest quality.
• Use one provider for daycare facilities. Pick a top company.
• Few CR riders use daycare at stations at first. Slowly transition into rider use.
• Not all daycare users are commuters.

Table of Contents Send E-Mail

Web Author: Warren Y. Yee