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.

3 C H A P T E R 1 1.1 Report Objectives and Outline Objective There are several possible reasons to follow up after trans- portation projects are completed to see their actual results and impacts (i.e., “ex post” analysis). These reasons span five broad classes: 1. To inform public policy discussion by developing enhanced rules of thumb (better expectations) regarding the range of impacts likely to result from various types of projects; 2. To provide insight for planners (lessons learned) regard- ing factors and processes that affect project outcomes and that need to be considered in project development and implementation; 3. To validate analysis methods by determining the accuracy of current analysis methods used to predict costs and/or benefits and to enable improvement in future prediction methods; 4. To confirm investment justifications by determining the extent to which a program or policy is achieving intended effects and, hence, is worthy of continued funding and operation; and 5. To assemble data for subsequent statistical analysis and mar- ket research on the relationships of transportation invest- ment, land development, and economic development. While there is existing data on changes over time in vehic- ular traffic and transit ridership that can be linked to indi- vidual transportation projects, there is far less information available that documents the economic impacts from land development responses to individual transportation projects. So while all of the above justifications can apply for following up on transportation and travel impacts of completed proj- ects, they are equally (or perhaps more) needed to under- stand the broader economic and land development impacts of projects. The lack of consistent information on the economic development impacts of transportation is not limited to transit. There is a general shortage of valid before-and-after economic impact studies regarding transport investments. When such studies are done, impact data are rarely collected consistently—even when done for a specific mode and even when applied to impacts that are less complex than economic development. Thus, there is a clear need for more post-project impact studies, organized in a consistent manner and accessible via a searchable database. This study represents an initial step toward development of case studies to portray the actual, observed economic impacts of transit projects. It examines issues arising in the develop- ment of transit impact case studies, and it illustrates how case studies can be conducted. The emphasis here is on providing planning and policy insights (the first two of the above-listed five reasons for conducting ex post analysis). Such a tool can be used to support project screening and sketch level plan- ning, to support early stage public discussions (by tempering unrealistically optimistic or pessimistic expectations), and to help define supporting strategies to bolster desired economic development outcomes. Overview This report summarizes the findings of TCRP Project H-50, a research effort to develop a prototype for a national database of case studies pertaining to the economic and land develop- ment impacts of transit projects. This effort included (a) identi- fication of potentially applicable case studies; (b) development of protocols for data collection and impact measurement; (c) a searchable database design for maintaining records and reporting on findings; and (d) pilot implementation—which consisted of completing seven case studies and making them accessible via a web-based user interface. The overall system design for transit project case studies that was refined and implemented for this study was specifically designed to follow Background and Objectives

4the general standard of a previously developed format for highway project case studies, although it has been specifically adapted here to be applicable for transit projects. This report is organized into five chapters with three appen- dices. Chapter 1 covers the project background and objectives. Chapter 2 describes the process that was used in this study to identify and select applicable case studies. Chapter 3 describes the web-based database containing case study information and the system for reporting economic impact results. Chapter 4 provides guidance on how to develop additional case studies and how to use the information for planning and policy analy- sis. Chapter 5 discusses issues and follow-on research regard- ing the development of a more complete system of transit impact case studies. There are also three appendices: a “data- base dictionary” of information content, information about further training materials on the web, and detailed informa- tion assembled for the individual case studies. 1.2 Building on a Prior History of Case Study Analysis In the United States, documentation of economic impacts from built transportation investments goes back to the Erie Canal, which opened in 1820 to connect agricultural regions in the Ohio Valley to East Coast population centers. Follow-up observations showed a twenty-fold drop in the price of wheat in urban markets, followed by a massive movement of popu- lation and economic activity to the Ohio Valley (New York State Archives, 2014). Case Studies for Highway Projects Starting in the 1990s, there was a flurry of systematic activ- ity to document the economic impacts of individual road projects. This included pre/post studies of bypass projects in Wisconsin, Kansas, Iowa, Washington State, Texas, North Carolina, and others (these studies are reviewed in California Bypass Study [System Metrics Group, 2016]). The Appalachian Regional Commission also funded development of nearly 200 case studies on the actual observed impacts of road and other infrastructure projects as part of an effort to show outcomes of its Public Works program (Brandow, 2000; Brandow/ Bizminer, 2007). FHWA also funded a further series of case studies of major highway investments (FHWA, 2004) and issued a guide to use of empirical information to document the economic impact of past highway investments (EDR Group and Cambridge Systematics, 2001). Some local and state agencies have also funded case studies of past project experiences to help them with public involve- ment and planning processes for planned new projects. For instance, when it was considering a new highway interchange, the Pennsylvania Turnpike Commission funded a set of case studies of the economic impacts of other new highway inter- changes around the United States (Wray et al., 2000). Simi- larly, when Roanoke, Virginia, was considering the alignment of a new highway that could run through or around the city, it funded case studies of economic impacts in new highways along the outskirts and through the center of other cities (EDR Group, 2000). Case Studies for Transit Projects More recently, a series of research reports has been com- pleted that provide pre/post case study data regarding the impact of individual transit projects including line, corridor, and station area investments. In general, these reports have focused on demonstrating that transit projects can and do affect surrounding land use, land development, and job growth, although impacts differ across case studies depending on the nature of the specific project and its settings. These include case studies of station area development (Vincent and Jerram, 2008); rail transit corridors (Hook et al., 2013); fixed guideway transit (Chatman et al., 2014); and BRT impacts (Nelson and Ganning, 2015). There have also been statistical studies of the relationship between transportation investment and economic growth, but that line of research—while important for showing the value of transportation funding—does not provide the local details that arise from case studies of individual projects. TPICS and EconWorks While all of the preceding case study efforts contribute to the body of knowledge concerning economic and land devel- opment impacts of transportation, they have varied in the depth and breadth of their coverage, spanning different types of projects, different periods of impact measurement, differ- ent impact measures, and different forms of reporting. There has been a clear need to develop a more consistent national database of case studies that can cover broader types of proj- ects, broader settings, and broader forms of resulting impacts. In response to that and other research needs, in 2005, the U.S. Congress authorized the Second Strategic High- way Research Program (SHRP 2) to fund a variety of applied research efforts. Those efforts included the development of a national database of case studies to show the extent to which economic impacts occur as a result of highway investments. The research objectives of SHRP 2 Project C03 were stated as follows (SHRP 2, 2007): 1. To provide a resource to help determine the net changes in the economic systems of an area impacted by a transpor- tation capacity investment; the resource should include,

5 in an economic context, impacts on land use, land value, and the environment; 2. To provide data and results from enough structured cases that project planners in the future can use the cases to demonstrate by analogy the likely impacts of a proposed project or group of projects (plan); and 3. To demonstrate how this fits into collaborative decision- making for capacity expansion. The result of SHRP 2 Project C03 was a collection of 100 case studies of highway-related projects, offered via a search- able web-based database and accompanied by a research report that summarized statistical analysis of the case study outcomes (EDR Group et al., 2012). The case study system, called “Transportation Project Impact Case Studies” (TPICS), was managed by TRB. It can be viewed at www.tpics.us (Inter- net Explorer is the preferred browser). In 2014, TCRP approved funding of a pilot effort to extend the TPICS case study concept from highway-oriented projects (as required by SHRP 2) to also cover transit projects. This report describes the findings from that pilot effort (TCRP Project H-50). This product is referred to as “TPICS for Tran- sit” to distinguish it from the original SHRP 2 product. It can be viewed at https://transit.tpics.us (Internet Explorer is the preferred browser). Meanwhile, the SHRP 2 program ended in 2015, and the original TPICS for highways was transitioned from TRB to sponsorship by FHWA and AASHTO, which updated the look of the TPICS visual interface and rebranded it as “Econ- Works Case Studies.” The change does not in any way affect the applicability of this study’s results concerning the oppor- tunity to extend the highway case study database to also cover transit projects. The new interface can be viewed at https:// planningtools.transportation.org/13/econworks.html. The TPICS/EconWorks database of highway-oriented case studies, as well as the new transit case studies developed for this TCRP project, share a common set of intended uses, which focus on improving transportation planning and associated public discussion of transportation plans. This corresponds to Categories 1 and 2 of the five reasons for case studies that were cited on the first page of this section. The intention is to improve project planning and discussion in three ways: 1. To enable planners to establish the range of likely impacts associated with various types of projects in different set- tings. This can be particularly useful for early stage con- cept planning. 2. To enable transportation agency staff to cite real world examples at public meetings, helping to limit unreason- ably optimistic hopes or overly pessimistic fears about proposed projects. 3. To enable better project designs, plans, and implemen- tation processes by pointing out factors that have been found to accentuate or mitigate positive and negative impacts. The TPICS/EconWorks database system was also designed to enable export of all data so that it can be eventually used for further research once there are enough case observations to support such analysis. This corresponds to Categories 3, 4, and 5 of the five motivations for case studies. 1.3 TCRP Study Report This report presents results of the TCRP Project H-50. It describes the pilot design and framework for a national database of case studies that measure the observed, actual land development impacts and associated economic impacts of public transit investments (not construction or transit operations and maintenance impacts). It was based on the assumption that transit cases can be developed in a man- ner consistent with the pioneering database that was suc- cessfully established for highway projects under SHRP 2 as TPICS (and which is now being continued as Econ- Works). In this proposal, we refer to the transit extension as “TPICS-Transit.” This project was established to provide three meaningful outcomes: 1. To extend the breadth and use of the TPICS web tool frame- work to cover transit. It addressed this goal by developing a database and user interface that copies the existing TPICS framework but modifies it as required to apply to public transportation investments. This final report notes the type of changes made and ways that the TPICS structure can be more broadly applied. 2. To advance the measurement of permanent economic impacts associated with public transit. It addressed this goal by pro- viding a common framework for measuring impacts associ- ated with completed transit projects—building an initial set of pilot case studies that use this framework—by develop- ing a database that can include many more transit cases in the future and by identifying the type of effort needed to continue that effort beyond this project. 3. To advance the broader process of ex post analysis. It addressed this goal by extracting lessons learned regarding how data assembly and measurement methods may differ between expansion of services (such as public transportation) and facilities (such as highways). The report also notes chal- lenges and opportunities for using case study databases of this type for future planning and research applications.

6Readers of this report (and particularly its final chapter) will note that it also includes discussion of the many current data limitations affecting existing transit case studies as well as potentials for broader use that may become possible in the future. That is an important point—that the develop- ment of ex post case studies and a national database of case study information is still in its infancy, and there is a need for ongoing support to keep this case study data- base alive and eventually expand its capabilities and uses. Thus, in the long run, this report and its case study exam- ples should be seen as a way to inform discussion and to demonstrate what economic analysis case studies can and cannot do. It should be clear to readers that the current database of case studies is not a statistically controlled data set, but rather a collection of examples selected to support both planning and project review processes by illuminating the way that project features, their spatial settings, and their broader implementa- tion contexts all interact to affect economic and land develop- ment outcomes.