EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The South Campus and Health Sciences District (the District) is a combination of the South Campus area and the Health Sciences area.  The approximate boundaries established for the District and these areas by The Ohio State University (OSU) are illustrated in MAP 1:  District Boundaries, found in Section I of this report.  The District is located between the academic core of the University and the residential and commercial areas south and east of the main campus.  While the Health Sciences portion is dense and congested due to intense land use, high employment, and concentrated patients and visitors, the South Campus area is just beginning to develop to its full potential.

The Ohio State University (OSU) selected the Consultant Team of CHANCE Management Advisors, Inc., Gorove/Slade Associates, Inc. and Timothy Haahs & Associates, Inc. to address transportation and parking issues for the South Campus and Health Sciences District (the District).  OSU requested this study based on recommendations contained in the Transportation and Parking Plan (T&P Plan), as well as recommenda­tions found in the South Campus District Plan (SCDP) that was part of the Campus Master Plan. 

Within the District, diverse parking customers co-exist.  During this project, the Consultant Team has met with as many of these customer groups as possible.  The groups include Health Sciences administrators and deans, faculty members and Senate leaders, student leaders, and employees who voiced the needs of Health Sciences patients, physicians, staff, University faculty, staff, students and visitors, as well as community representatives including Campus Partners and City officials.  A table of all interviews conducted is provided in APPENDIX A, found at the end of the document.  These interviews identified a number of key issues and goals for parking in the District:

• replacement of faculty and staff parking that will be displaced for construction or expansion of other buildings on South Campus or on the southern part of Central Campus,
• improved patient and visitor parking for the Health Sciences Center;
• improved wayfinding and sign systems to assist those coming to the OSU campus, especially with the State Route 315 ramps changing access to and from the campus on the west side;
• additional short-term parking for the increasing number of physicians who come and go during the day between OSU and other Health Sciences facilities;
• changes in parking rates to reflect differences in staff and student access for garage parking, as well as consideration for the fact that the availability of proximate parking may be reduced while rates are increasing;
• increased short-term parking for faculty, staff, and students who may have parking assigned elsewhere but who need to be on South Campus or Central Campus occasionally; and
• improved pedestrian ways and reduction of pedestrian/vehicle conflict areas.

Taking into account these goals and issues, as well as the previously completed South Campus District Plan (SCDP) and the Transportation and Parking Plan (T&P Plan), the Consultant Team evaluated the findings of the T&P Plan that 1,500 net new spaces were necessary in the District to meet parking demand.  The permit and allocation system for the District were reviewed, and the Consultant Team also examined the potential of alternative transportation to mitigate parking demand.  Based on a review of the developments identified since the T&P Plan and on current occupancy data, the Consultant Team determined that 1,500 net new spaces is the minimum number necessary to maintain existing levels of service for OSU’s parking customers.  In other words, constructing 1,500 net new parking spaces is necessary to replace spaces lost to construction and increase in demand, but will not meet the parking shortage associated with additional development and unspecified parking demand expected in the District in the future.  Uncertainties over the extent and timing of future construction preclude a more finite analysis of future parking adequacy, but it is recommended a process be initiated to continuously measure parking supply, demand, and access, and evaluate these factors against the level of service OSU desires to provide its customers. 

The Consultant Team evaluated potential garage sites for providing new parking spaces.  Sites from the SCDP and the T&P Plan were assessed, as well as other sites considered by the Consultant Team to be appropriate for meeting the parking needs stressed by the campus population.  New construction projects identified since both plans were completed added unexpected limitations to the available sites. The Team identified the following sites as those most desirable to meet the variety of needs outlined:

• the Surface Lot south of Garage E (11^th Avenue Garage);
• the Cunz Hall Surface Lot; and
• the Rhodes Hall Surface Lot, as a mixed-use project sensitive to the entrance issues of the Health Sciences area and the Hospital.
  
  

This document presents the pros and cons of these sites, as well as the reasons that other sites suggested in previous plans were rejected.  Preliminary functional layouts for the sites selected, including estimated spaces and the cost per space to construct, are included in this report.  In addition, issues with traffic congestion, circulation, and the SR 315 ramps as they affect parking are explored. 

The Consultant Team emphasizes in this report the urgent need for the University to move forward quickly to reserve sites for parking construction.  Many new buildings are being constructed and others are proposed for the academic campus and the Health Sciences area.  The perceived inadequacy of the patient parking supply, difficulty of vehicular circulation, and inconvenient pedestrian access were identified as key competitive issues for the Health Sciences area.  Unless these conditions are improved, the Health Sciences Center cannot compete with nearby hospitals and will continue to lose patients, degrade its competitive position in healthcare, and ultimately see severe financial effects from these outcomes.  If sites are not established for the construction of parking garages, the University will not only experience severe parking shortages, it will be unable to do anything effective to relieve the situation. 

Approved and proposed building projects are all proceeding independently.  Because of budget constraints for each project, and competing priorities, there is no cohesive approach to understanding the cumulative effects of the projects on parking, traffic, and access throughout the campus.  Further, there is no strategy for resolving and funding the problems that clearly will result.  For many years, the assumption has been that continued construction of buildings and support functions could proceed without the effects on parking and access being resolved before the projects were approved.  The perception has been that the campus is so large that difficulties with parking could be mitigated one place or another.  That flexibility no longer exists.  Extensive land on West Campus for more remote parking no longer exists.  And soon adequate sites for garages will no longer exist.  Analysis of the parking, traffic, and access effects must be completed and solutions determined and agreed upon for implementation.  This process must occur before the projects are approved if the University is to avoid serious problems that will affect daily campus life and diminish the competitive position of the Health Sciences Center.

This report presents some short-term recommendations to address customer concerns, and these are contained in Section III.  However, implementation of many of these recommendations will require some decisions by OSU at a later date about relative parking priority of different customer groups, as well as other parking policies.  Since the short-term recommendations deal largely with reallocation of scarce parking resources, it will be impossible to please everyone affected.  Further, construction of garage parking takes approximately two years from start to finish, and until the new parking is built there will continue to be a parking shortage on campus. 

In the long-term, new garage construction will be necessary to maintain existing levels of service and respond to customer needs.  Solving the parking, traffic, and access problems that face the University will be expensive.  The Master Plan recommended the change from surface parking to garages, and also noted that this would be an expensive process.  Surface parking spaces that are displaced by buildings must be replaced in structured garages at roughly eight to ten times the cost per parking space.  Operating and maintenance functions add to the ongoing expenses. 

Rapid escalations in construction costs in the last several years mean that the total costs of garage construction will exceed those projected in the T&P Plan.  General construction costs have increased at a higher rate than anticipated in any of the previous plans.  Further, garage construction costs on the OSU campus are high due to quality standards, the necessity to pay prevailing wages, and OSU processes that overlay Master Plan and project management considerations on every project. 

Construction cost escalation is one of several factors that created the need to revisit the projections in the T&P Plan.  The new building or landscape construction projects identified in this report have displaced or may displace surface parking spaces without funding replacement parking in structures, creating additional financial strain on T&P.  Further, since the number of parking spaces constructed in the District will need to be greater than 1,500 to yield 1,500 net spaces (because garage sites are surface parking sites at present), the associated debt service and operating costs will increase accordingly.

While rate increases are anticipated to provide most of the revenue associated with the parking program, the University is considering a contribution to parking costs on an annual basis.  This contribution would be applied toward replacing parking lost to construction, which must be replaced in garages.  The funds would come from state and central university funds used to support new construction.  Details of this plan can be found at the RPIA website at www.rpia.ohio-state.edu.  If this plan is not implemented, parking rates must increase in order to pay for additional parking construction or the University must build less parking and adapt its policies concerning the availability of parking on campus. 

OSU faces difficult choices on the priorities and construction phasing of new garages.  The facts are that construction costs have increased more than anticipated, surface parking spaces have been displaced, parking demand is increasing, and the University must decide how it is going to proceed.  Four possible scenarios are presented in Section VI with their pros and cons.  They are as follows:

• Scenario One:  construct the Lane Avenue and Rhodes Hall garages as quickly as possible, postponing the Cunz Hall and 10^th Avenue garages until funding is available.
  
• Scenario Two:  construct the Rhodes Hall and Cunz Hall garages as quickly as possible, postponing Lane Avenue and 10^th Avenue until funding is available – estimated 2006.
  
• Scenario Three:  construct the Lane Avenue, Rhodes Hall, and Cunz Hall garages as quickly as possible, postponing the 10^th Avenue garage until funding is available.
  
• Scenario Four:  construct all four garages.

Each of the scenarios requires rate increases at or above the rates approved in the T&P Plan.  It is likely that permit prices would have to be increased beyond the currently expected rates.  The projected rates in the scenarios vary based upon the revenue needed to support the garages staged in each scenario, as well as whether the University Contribution would be made. 

After reviewing these scenarios, the Consultant Team has come to the conclusion that Scenario Two is in the best interest of the University if there is no University Contribution to T&P annually.  The construction of the Rhodes Hall Garage will meet the needs of the Health Sciences Center, free spaces in other facilities for faculty, staff, and students, and provide improved services for patients and visitors.  The construction of Cunz Hall Garage will replace spaces lost to construction and add capacity for the South Campus and adjacent areas.  It also allows T&P to build cash reserves before beginning construction on the Lane Avenue Garage, which will be a larger project and therefore more costly than the other garages described in this report.  While planning for the Lane Avenue Garage is further along than planning for the garages in this study, neither design nor construction has begun.

Rates for the major permit classes would be as follows:

Scenario Two (Build Rhodes Hall and Cunz Hall Garages as quickly as possible, postpone Lane and 10^th Avenue Garages until funding is available – estimated 2006)

Rates with Gradual Declining Percentage (No University Contribution)

If there is a University Contribution to T&P annually, the Consultant Team recommends that Scenario Three be pursued.  With the University Contribution, it appears that no additional rate increases beyond what were proposed in the T&P Plan will be necessary for the years covered by the Plan.  Scenario Three allows T&P to meet some needs in the South Campus and would continue the present course of action on the Lane Avenue Garage.  Three garages may be constructed with anticipated rate increases and a modest five percent increase after FY 2002-2003.  Then, after construction of the Rhodes Hall, Cunz Hall, and Lane Avenue Garages is completed, T&P can reevaluate its projected budgets and determine what, if any, additional rate increases will be necessary to construct the 10th Avenue Garage.

Scenario Three rates with the University Contribution would be as follows:

Scenario Three (Build Lane Avenue, Rhodes Hall, and Cunz Hall Garages as quickly as possible, postpone 10^th Avenue Garage until funding is available – estimated 2006)

Rates With University Contribution

Regardless of the construction phasing option selected, it is imperative that the University reserve the sites mentioned in this report for parking structures because the rapid pace of development on campus may absorb these sites before garages can be constructed.   The University’s ability to site parking is limited, and without the specified sites the needs of the campus and Health Sciences cannot be met.  Continued facility construction on campus also increases the significant need to analyze, plan, address, and monitor the cumulative effects of parking, traffic, and access related to new developments.

| To the Table of Contents | Forward to Section I>