Free Parking at T Stations?

Would allowing free parking at all Park and Ride MBTA Stations (Subway, Light Rail, and Commuter Rail) result in an increase in ridership? I think it would because people who drive to work likely already have to pay for some kind of parking in or near their workplace, and they may not want to pay twice to use the train, first for parking, and second for the ride itself. If the MBTA were to subsidize free parking at stations like GO Transit does, it could attract a decent amount of park and ride passengers, which already make up a significant amount of MBTA riders. I also believe the mode that would benefit the most from this is the Commuter Rail, due to how it serves low density suburbs that are really only served well by park and ride stations, if the parking were to become free in those stations, along with the new all day schedules, more suburbanites may choose to take the train instead of drive, and a good increase in ridership could be the result. Thoughts?

Knowing the Mbta, that’s never going to happen unless there is a political push to do so.

Parking is a breaking point for some people. I think reducing and or eliminating fees would increase ridership. There are other problems though. My station of choice is North Billerica. Well North Billerica is run by the LRTA and I know that the RTA's own many stations around Mass, how do you convince them to play along?
Targeted rates I would agree with Say free outside 495, Low cost between 495 and 128, Higher cost 128 to end of many of the subway lines, Pay through your teeth for parking inside that.

As Red Wing noted some of the Commuter Rail parking lots are not MBTA controlled. Additionally, several of said parking lots were already full pre-COVID even with the parking fee. I don't think it would make a difference on the Commuter Rail side unless there were some underutilized lots.

You'd really have to evaluate lot utilization to determine if free parking was worthwhile.

MBR: There is a lot of variables concerning parking at rail transit stations...

It depends on the jurisdiction that the parking facility is in and how much use a given lot has on each workday...
Example - Do you have a "magnet station" attracting riders from a significant area or lots that never fill up and
have perhaps ample available spaces for more patrons to park?

I agree with the thought that a busy CR station such as Route 128 has more demand and can charge a higher
parking fee than a further away station with more limited peak hour train service can...

An example that I am aware of is SEPTA Regional Rail (Philadelphia area) has suspended parking lot fees at
SEPTA-controlled parking lots since March-April 2020 (when "The Problem" began) and will continue to do
so until June 2022 - the exceptions are PPA (Philadelphia Parking Authority within the City of Philadelphia)
operated facilities which have continuously charged fees and enforced fines for non-payment...

Free parking - as easy as it may sound - can be somewhat complicated depending on who and where the
option is offered...MACTRAXX

West Concord used to have a free, dirt parking lot. The T paved it and started charging. I'd rather park in dirt than have to pay. Auburndale has about 10 parking spots. Used to be free, now they charge. For 10 parking spots! This for the station on the Worcester Line closest to I-95!

Most T parking lots for the Rabid-Transit stations fill up. Perhaps they should increase the parking costs until there are empty spots or the price is high enough that they can build additional parking. On the New Haven Line, CTDOT has/had daily parking and monthly parking permits. They controlled the number of monthly permits available to allow enough parking for daily drivers.

Remember that the MBTA and RTAs are all subdivisions of MassDOT's Rail and Transit division. If Beacon Hill wants it to be so, so it will be.

As long as station parking + train fare is less than the cost of parking downtown then I think it's fine. I don't like the potential of incentivizing people to drive to the station when they could potentially get there in other more sustainable ways whether that's walking, biking, or taking a local bus.

As we move towards more electric passenger vehicles, I am all for revisiting the old "suburban collector station with garage" model. I for example drive to my transit stop but on all electric, I consider it quite sustainable and it saves me a lot of time at a reasonable cost. I started doing this after they recalibrated the systemwide parking rates a few years back.

danib62 wrote: ↑Tue Feb 15, 2022 2:12 pm As long as station parking + train fare is less than the cost of parking downtown then I think it's fine. I don't like the potential of incentivizing people to drive to the station when they could potentially get there in other more sustainable ways whether that's walking, biking, or taking a local bus.

It's better they drive to a CR station as opposed to driving into town - that's still a win for improving carbon footprint. Not everybody wants to walk/bike/bus to the station or lives in an area where that's feasible. The price difference has to be enough to sway the time/money argument too for some people too, simply being cheaper by a few dollars isn't always enough to sway more financially comfortable commuters who value their time more.

For many years, my employer has reimbursed 50% of parking at MBTA lots as an employee benefits Last year, that increased to 100%. In addition to a providing a substantial subsidy of the MBTA monthly pass, this is a terrific incentive to commute by CR, rather than drive into the city. Not only is it good for the environment, butmit reduces my employer's need to have on-site parking available. (If I need to drive in for any reason, I can pay a per-day rate at my employer's parking garage.)

So I pay just tens of dollars per month to commute, rather than hundreds of dollars. And I get to ride the train Win-Win.

Adjusting the pricing to reflect the usage of certain stations, particularly rapid transit versus commuter rail is important. Many (but probably not all) CR stations should probably have very low or free parking in order to generate more usage, while in a post-pandemic world most of the rapid transit stations should definitely keep charges (and in some cases, relatively high charges). Encouraging someone (regardless of what powers their personal auto) to get on commuter rail close to home, versus driving 15-40 miles to an Alewife, Wellington, Braintree, or Riverside has important consequences for the region. Not the least of those is freeing up space around rapid transit stations for more housing development, which both creates more T riders than park and ride lots, but also helps address the region's critical housing shortage. This is hopefully happening soon at Riverside but could happen at many other stations, too.

Have the travel speeds improved on the D Line? The one hour ride from Riverside to Park is not conducive to getting people to switch to the Green Line.

You guys crack me up.... When gas is $4+ a gallon, I seriously doubt having to pay $1-3 for parking is going to be the deciding point on commuting vs. driving.

Parking lots are not free. Someone has to pay the lighting and snow removal bills, and do the upkeep. That couple hundred a day adds up, and at least where I live, the parking lots belong to the towns, not the railroad or transit agency. Absent a revenue stream, that non-revenue producing land will eventually get sold off for development, and everyone loses.

Free parking at lots that already always fill up is silly. (I got a mental picture of free parking at Forest Hills.) Free or very cheap parking at outlying lots or lots that never fill up, or on days that a particular lot never fills up, might make sense, although, as eolsen says, someone has to pay for the paving and the plowing or at least the not using that land for something else. Using fare revenue or general fund revenue to build great big free parking lots would be a bad plan; better zone that land for apartments instead, and get some customers living right next door. I kind of like the idea of setting parking fees just high enough that there is almost always at least one space open, especially in the city, where land is expensive, distances are shortish, and parking at the T stop is kind of a luxury (although driving to Forest Hills and parking there is also a pain ).