Economic Impact Case Study Tool for Transit (2016)

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

T R A N S I T C O O P E R A T I V E R E S E A R C H P R O G R A M TCRP REPORT 186 TRANSPORTAT ION RESEARCH BOARD WASHINGTON, D.C. 2016 www.TRB.org Research sponsored by the Federal Transit Administration in cooperation with the Transit Development Corporation Subject Area Public Transit Economic Impact Case Study Tool for Transit Economic Development Research Group, Inc. Boston, MA w i th Compass Transportation and Technology, Inc. Potomac, MD

TCRP REPORT 186 Project H-50 ISSN 1073-4872 ISBN 978-0-309-37552-8 © 2016 National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. COPYRIGHT INFORMATION Authors herein are responsible for the authenticity of their materials and for obtaining written permissions from publishers or persons who own the copyright to any previously published or copyrighted material used herein. Cooperative Research Programs (CRP) grants permission to reproduce material in this publication for classroom and not-for-profit purposes. Permission is given with the understanding that none of the material will be used to imply TRB, AASHTO, FAA, FHWA, FMCSA, FRA, FTA, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Research and Technology, PHMSA, or TDC endorsement of a particular product, method, or practice. It is expected that those reproducing the material in this document for educational and not-for-profit uses will give appropriate acknowledgment of the source of any reprinted or reproduced material. For other uses of the material, request permission from CRP. NOTICE The report was reviewed by the technical panel and accepted for publication according to procedures established and overseen by the Transportation Research Board and approved by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. The opinions and conclusions expressed or implied in this report are those of the researchers who performed the research and are not necessarily those of the Transportation Research Board; the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine; or the program sponsors. The Transportation Research Board; the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine; and the sponsors of the Transit Cooperative Research Program do not endorse products or manufacturers. Trade or manufacturers’ names appear herein solely because they are considered essential to the object of the report. TRANSIT COOPERATIVE RESEARCH PROGRAM The nation’s growth and the need to meet mobility, environmental, and energy objectives place demands on public transit systems. Cur- rent systems, some of which are old and in need of upgrading, must expand service area, increase service frequency, and improve efficiency to serve these demands. Research is necessary to solve operating prob- lems, adapt appropriate new technologies from other industries, and introduce innovations into the transit industry. The Transit Coopera- tive Research Program (TCRP) serves as one of the principal means by which the transit industry can develop innovative near-term solutions to meet demands placed on it. The need for TCRP was originally identified in TRB Special Report 213—Research for Public Transit: New Directions, published in 1987 and based on a study sponsored by the Urban Mass Transportation Administration—now the Federal Transit Administration (FTA). A report by the American Public Transportation Association (APTA), Transportation 2000, also recognized the need for local, problem- solving research. TCRP, modeled after the successful National Coop- erative Highway Research Program (NCHRP), undertakes research and other technical activities in response to the needs of transit ser- vice providers. The scope of TCRP includes various transit research fields including planning, service configuration, equipment, facilities, operations, human resources, maintenance, policy, and administrative practices. TCRP was established under FTA sponsorship in July 1992. Proposed by the U.S. Department of Transportation, TCRP was authorized as part of the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (ISTEA). On May 13, 1992, a memorandum agreement outlining TCRP operating procedures was executed by the three cooperating organi- zations: FTA; the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine, acting through the Transportation Research Board (TRB); and the Transit Development Corporation, Inc. (TDC), a nonprofit educational and research organization established by APTA. TDC is responsible for forming the independent governing board, designated as the TCRP Oversight and Project Selection (TOPS) Committee. Research problem statements for TCRP are solicited periodically but may be submitted to TRB by anyone at any time. It is the responsibility of the TOPS Committee to formulate the research program by identi- fying the highest priority projects. As part of the evaluation, the TOPS Committee defines funding levels and expected products. Once selected, each project is assigned to an expert panel appointed by TRB. The panels prepare project statements (requests for propos- als), select contractors, and provide technical guidance and counsel throughout the life of the project. The process for developing research problem statements and selecting research agencies has been used by TRB in managing cooperative research programs since 1962. As in other TRB activities, TCRP project panels serve voluntarily without compensation. Because research cannot have the desired effect if products fail to reach the intended audience, special emphasis is placed on disseminat- ing TCRP results to the intended users of the research: transit agen- cies, service providers, and suppliers. TRB provides a series of research reports, syntheses of transit practice, and other supporting material developed by TCRP research. APTA will arrange for workshops, train- ing aids, field visits, and other activities to ensure that results are imple- mented by urban and rural transit industry practitioners. TCRP provides a forum where transit agencies can cooperatively address common operational problems. TCRP results support and complement other ongoing transit research and training programs. Published reports of the TRANSIT COOPERATIVE RESEARCH PROGRAM are available from Transportation Research Board Business Office 500 Fifth Street, NW Washington, DC 20001 and can be ordered through the Internet by going to http://www.national-academies.org and then searching for TRB

The National Academy of Sciences was established in 1863 by an Act of Congress, signed by President Lincoln, as a private, non- governmental institution to advise the nation on issues related to science and technology. Members are elected by their peers for outstanding contributions to research. Dr. Marcia McNutt is president. The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964 under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences to bring the practices of engineering to advising the nation. Members are elected by their peers for extraordinary contributions to engineering. Dr. C. D. Mote, Jr., is president. The National Academy of Medicine (formerly the Institute of Medicine) was established in 1970 under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences to advise the nation on medical and health issues. Members are elected by their peers for distinguished contributions to medicine and health. Dr. Victor J. Dzau is president. The three Academies work together as the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine to provide independent, objective analysis and advice to the nation and conduct other activities to solve complex problems and inform public policy decisions. The Academies also encourage education and research, recognize outstanding contributions to knowledge, and increase public understanding in matters of science, engineering, and medicine. Learn more about the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine at www.national-academies.org. The Transportation Research Board is one of seven major programs of the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. The mission of the Transportation Research Board is to increase the benefits that transportation contributes to society by providing leadership in transportation innovation and progress through research and information exchange, conducted within a setting that is objective, interdisciplinary, and multimodal. The Board’s varied committees, task forces, and panels annually engage about 7,000 engineers, scientists, and other transportation researchers and practitioners from the public and private sectors and academia, all of whom contribute their expertise in the public interest. The program is supported by state transportation departments, federal agencies including the component administrations of the U.S. Department of Transportation, and other organizations and individuals interested in the development of transportation. Learn more about the Transportation Research Board at www.TRB.org.

C O O P E R A T I V E R E S E A R C H P R O G R A M S AUTHOR ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The research report herein was performed under TCRP Project H-50. Economic Development Research Group, Inc. was the prime contractor for this study, supported by Compass Transportation and Technology, Inc. This report is the product of a collaborative effort of researchers, including Economic Development Research Group, Inc.—Glen Weisbrod (Principal Investigator), Lisa Petraglia (Co-Principal Investigator), Adam Blair, Kyle Schroeckenthaler, Susan Moses, Adam Winston, Awadagin Faulkner, and Michael Rodriguez, plus David Blochstein and Steven Kamin who developed the web tool; and Compass Transportation and Technology, Inc.—Richard Mudge. CRP STAFF FOR TCRP REPORT 186 Christopher W. Jenks, Director, Cooperative Research Programs Dianne S. Schwager, Senior Program Officer Daniel J. Magnolia, Senior Program Assistant Eileen P. Delaney, Director of Publications Andrea Briere, Editor TCRP PROJECT H-50 PANEL Field of Policy and Planning Randell H. Iwasaki, Contra Costa Transportation Authority, Walnut Creek, CA (Chair) Greg Bischak, CDFI Fund, Washington, DC Daniel G. Chatman, University of California, Berkeley, Berkeley, CA Robert Dunphy, Arlington, VA Frank Gallivan, ICF International, San Francisco, CA Eric W. Hesse, Tri-County Metropolitan Transportation District, Portland, OR Victor Kamhi, Ventura County (CA) Transportation Commission, Ventura, CA Joseph L. Schofer, Northwestern University, Evanston, IL Peggy Tadej, Northern Virginia Regional Commission, Fairfax, VA Stan Wall, Washington, DC Kermit W. Wies, Chicago, IL Stefan M. Natzke, FHWA Liaison James Ryan, FTA Liaison Rich Denbow, Association of Metropolitan Planning Organizations Liaison Darnell Grisby, APTA Liaison Matthew Hardy, AASHTO Liaison Stephen J. Andrle, TRB Liaison

F O R E W O R D TCRP Report 186: Economic Impact Case Study Tool for Transit presents the results of a project aimed at creating the prototype for a searchable (web-based) database of public tran- sit investment projects and their associated (transit-driven) economic and land development outcomes. This information is intended to inform future planning efforts for transit-related projects and to support better multi-modal planning. The purpose of this system is to provide transportation planners with a consistent base of data on actual, documented economic and land development impacts of completed transit-related investments, along with a narrative describing the form of impact and factors that affected it. This TCRP project builds upon a pioneering database established for highway projects under SHRP 2 (Strategic Highway Research Program 2), which was funded by Congress and administered by TRB. The initial project was called TPICS—Transportation Project Impact Case Studies—reflecting a general database structure and design intended to be expandable to apply for all modes. This TCRP project modified and extended TPICS to be directly applicable for public transportation case studies and developed pilot case studies to illustrate how it can work for public transit. The report covers the design and development of the case study database and web tool and includes a set of seven prototype case studies. The web tool and prototype cases can be found at http://transit.tpics.us. The report examines issues concerning (a) the types of transit projects that are most applicable for case studies, (b) how economic impacts of transit projects can be measured and reported, and (c) how findings on transit projects may be interpreted. Differences between transit case studies and highway case studies are also discussed. Finally, the content of the prototype case studies is included in the report, along with discussion of how a more complete national database and web tool might be implemented and used. The conclusion of this study highlights four key findings: 1. It is possible to develop a system of case studies to document the local economic impact of transit projects, paralleling a broader system previously developed for highways. Although the current transit case study database is limited to a small initial set of pilot cases, additional case studies could be developed in the future. 2. Any ex post analysis involves inherent challenges, largely because of the need to allow for sufficient time to observe post-project effects and the need to rely on interviews with transit planners and local economic development staff to gauge the magnitude, timing, and causal factors of ensuing investment and job growth. By Dianne S. Schwager Staff Officer Transportation Research Board

3. Many potential dimensions of further analysis could be pursued in the future to expand the selection of project types, project motivations, and project locations—all of which could be compatible with a future transit impact case study database. 4. A broader set of high-quality case studies will be required for transit planners to truly gain sufficient insight to improve future project planning and development. A preliminary analysis of the pilot cases also showed that local economic develop- ment impacts were most evident in areas where there is a supportive business commu- nity, zoning flexibility, a growing regional economy, and good transportation network connectivity.

C O N T E N T S 1 Summary 3 Chapter 1 Background and Objectives 3 1.1 Report Objectives and Outline 4 1.2 Building on a Prior History of Case Study Analysis 5 1.3 TCRP Study Report 7 Chapter 2 Case Study Selection and Compilation 7 2.1 Identification and Selection Process 10 2.2 Types of Projects Covered 11 2.3 Classification of Project Settings 12 2.4 Information Collection Process 14 2.5 Case Study Results 17 Chapter 3 Web Tool Development 17 3.1 Case Search Screening and Selection 18 3.2 Case Study Results Reporting 25 Chapter 4 Guidance for Web Tool Use 25 4.1 Guide to Using the System to Aid Planning and Policy 27 4.2 Guide for Collection of Additional Projects 31 Chapter 5 Conclusions and Follow-On Research 31 5.1 Overall Conclusions 31 5.2 Selection of Cases 32 5.3 Screening Criteria Issues 34 5.4 Case Study Content Issues 35 5.5 Impact Measurement Issues 36 5.6 Recommendations for Follow-On Research 38 References 39 Appendix A Database Dictionary 46 Appendix B Case Study Training 48 Appendix C Case Study Material