Economic Impact Study Appendices

Transcription

The Economic and Societal Impact
of Hampton Roads Transit:
Technical Appendices
Prepared for:
Hampton Roads Transit
509 East 18th Street, Building 4, Norfolk, VA 23504
Prepared by:
Economic Development Research Group, Inc.
155 Federal Street, Suite 600, Boston, MA 02110
June 23, 2016
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Appendices ........................................................................................................................................ 2
Interviews and Roundtable Discussion Participants ........................................................................ 2
Roundtable Discussion Guides ......................................................................................................... 4
Investment Scenario Assumptions & Methods ............................................................................. 10
Detailed Analysis Task Workflows ................................................................................................. 21
The Economic and Societal Impact of Hampton Roads Transit: Technical Appendices
1
APPENDICES
INTERVIEWS AND ROUNDTABLE DISCUSSION PARTICIPANTS
Regional Organizations:
 Hampton Department of Economic Development
 Virginia Beach Vision
 Downtown Norfolk Council
 City of Newport News
 City of Virginia Beach Strategic Growth Areas
 City of Newport News Department of Development
 Greater Peninsula Chamber of Commerce
 City of Norfolk Marketing Department
 Visit Norfolk
 Central Business District Association (VB)
 Hampton Roads Planning District Commission
 Greater Williamsburg Chamber and Tourism Alliance
 Coliseum Central Business Improvement District
Companies & Institutions:
Placemaking:
 Grow (Downtown Norfolk)
 Amanda Hoffler Properties
 CBRE/Hampton Roads
 Clark Nexsen
 Divaris Real Estate
 Pembroke Commercial Realty
 Poole, Brook, Plumley, PC
 Ripley Heatwole Companies
 Town Center Suites
 Marathon Development
 Drucker & Falke Real Estate
 Peninsula Town Center
 Kotarides Property Management
Call Centers:
 Faneuil, Inc.
 Ibex Global
Shipbuilding and Repair:
 Huntington Ingalls (Newport News Shipbuilding)
Health Care:
 Riverside Medical Group
2





Hampton Roads Community Health Center
Portsmouth Naval Hospital
Sentara Healthcare
Chesapeake Regional Medical Center
Children’s Hospital of the King’s Daughter
Education:
 Norfolk State University
 Tidewater Community College
 Old Dominion University
 Eastern Virginia Medical School
 Thomas Nelson Community College
 Christopher Newport University
Tourism:
 Gold Key/PHR
 Days Inn at the Beach
 Breakers Resort Inn
 Greater Williamsburg Chamber & Tourism Alliance
 Visit Norfolk
3
ROUNDTABLE DISCUSSION GUIDES
The following content was distributed to research participants ahead of roundtable discussions and used
as a basis for conversation.
Transit and Place Making in Virginia Beach Town Center
Purpose of
Roundtable:
This roundtable will bring together key players in the Town Center area, including
developers, realtors, businesses and workers. We will discuss the importance of transit
service to the area, and how current shortcomings in service hinder growth and business
attraction in Town Center. The discussion will consider the importance of transit for
attracting workers, residents and visitors to Town Center. We will discuss proposed transit
improvements and how these improvements can benefit the area. The results of the case
study will be used by HRT at public forums to present findings about transit’s role in the
Hampton Roads economy. We are particularly interested in specific anecdotes that show
how employees or clients use transit.
Key Topics to Discuss
 Town Center as a regional activity center
o Characteristics that bring people to Town Center
 Recent and future projected development trends
 Business mix
 Types of development that contribute to the success of Town Center as a destination and
live/work/play environment
 Importance of transit to supporting Town Center as an activity center
 Importance of transit in supporting continued growth of Town Center
 The role of transit in Town Center – why is transit important
 Transit improvements needed to support Town Center
 Transit users – who and why
 Town Center without transit
 Square feet of development by type
 Dollars of investment by type
 Number of jobs in Town Center and Pembroke Strategic Growth Area
 Concrete examples of how transit supports Town Center
Questions to be Explored
1. What is the appeal of Town Center as a live-work-play environment? How important is Town
Center to the regional economy?
2. How important is clustering of activities to this area? Does clustering have business
efficiency/cost reduction benefits?
3. What characteristics of the area hinder business attraction and new development?
4. How has Town Center expanded over the past decade? How will Town Center expand over the
next decade? What factors have contributed to this growth?
5. Are there target industries/business sectors that Town Center hopes to attract? What are these
and why are they targeted?
6. What demographics are the new residential developments aiming to attract and why?
4
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
What is the role of transit in supporting the continued vitality and growth of Town Center?
Is parking readily available? Free? Would this change with improved transit?
Who rides transit to/from Town Center and why?
What target transit riders are most important to the vitality of Town Center?
How important is transit in attracting workers to Town Center? Residents? Visitors?
How can transit be improved to support Town Center?
What types of people are being attracted to housing in Town Center? Millennials? Retirees?
Other? What role does transit play in attracting these residents?
Is transit used in marketing to potential tenants and residents? How?
Would developers choose other locations in the Hampton Roads metro area if proposed transit
improvements are not forthcoming? Where? Would these locations impose greater impacts on
the transportation system? Would dollars instead be invested outside the region? What other
regions compete for these investment dollars with the Hampton Roads region?
What role will LRT play in the economic growth of Town Center?
What role does transit play in the success of major events held in Town Center (e.g., holiday
festivals)?
What anecdotes can you share about the importance of transit to the vitality and growth of
Town Center? This might include a business that expressly noted transit as key to its location
decision, an employee who couldn’t get to work due to lack of transit service, etc. Anecdotes
will be used to provide richness to our case study write-ups and presentations.
Transit and the Health Care Sector
Purpose of
Roundtable:
This roundtable will bring together key representatives of the health care industry in the
region, including representatives of major hospitals and representatives of community
health centers. We will discuss how transit supports the industry through labor force
access, patient access, and access to medical training programs in the region. We will
explore how proposed enhancements to the existing system might benefit the industry,
and identify current shortcomings in service that hinder the health care industry. The
results of the case study will be used by HRT at public forums to present findings about
transit’s role in the Hampton Roads economy. We are particularly interested in specific
anecdotes that show how employees or clients use transit.
 Importance of health care sector to region
o Local
o Region
o Other
 Transportation needs of the sector
o Employees
 Skill level
 Wage level
o Patients
 Bus
 Paratransit
o Visitors
5







o Students
o Other
Roll of transit in accessing labor
Roll of transit in patient access
Transit service needs of industry
What works
Needed improvements
Transit availability and competitive position
Concrete examples of how transit supports the health care sector
1. What population do you serve?
2. Is there a benefit to your industry in clustering, i.e., several health care providers locating in
relatively close proximity to one another? If so, does transit play a role in enabling this colocation?
3. How important is transit access to your clientele? To your workforce?
4. What percentage of your clients/workforce take transit to your place of business? What
categories of workers use transit? Do they have other transportation options?
5. What would happen without transit service? How would these people access your services?
6. What transit enhancements would best serve your clients and workforce? What current transit
service issues face your clients/workforce (e.g., frequency, night/weekend service, reliability)?
7. How do the location of existing transit stations affect how much clients and workers use transit
to access your facility?
8. Do students from area colleges and universities use transit to access internships or other work
opportunities at your organization?
9. Do you attract patients from outside the region who need to stay overnight in the region? Do
any of these clients use transit to access your facility?
10. Do your clients use paratransit (on-demand services) to access your facility? How important is
this service? What improvements would best support your business?
11. Is transit an issue for attracting workforce? Have you encountered instances where employees
want to live close to work, shopping and services so they don’t need a car (or need only one car
for a family)?
12. Is the aging population seeking transit options for accessing your facility? What issues does this
population raise?
13. Is transit important for connecting health care training centers (e.g., community colleges with
nursing programs) with your facility?
14. Can you provide any anecdotes about how transit has successfully served your clients or
workforce?
Transit and the Education Sector
Purpose of
Roundtable:
This roundtable will bring together key representatives of the higher education sector in
the region, including representatives of colleges, universities and community colleges. We
will discuss how transit supports the sector through labor force access, student access, and
visitor access. We will explore how proposed enhancements to the existing system might
benefit the sector, and identify current shortcomings in service that hinder the industry.
6
The results of the case study will be used by HRT at public forums to present findings about
transit’s role in the Hampton Roads economy. We are particularly interested in specific
anecdotes that show how employees or students use transit.
 Importance of education sector to region
 Transportation needs of the education sector
o Employees
 Skill level
 Wage level
o Students
o Visitors
o Other
 Roll of transit in accessing labor
 Roll of transit in student access
 Transportation needs of sector
o Vehicle access and parking
o Transit service needs of industry
 What works
 Needed improvements
 Transit availability and competitive position
 Concrete examples of how transit supports the education sector
1. What percentage of your students live on campus?
2. Of those that live on campus, what percentage have cars? Do those without cars rely on transit?
What types of trips do they make using transit?
3. What percentage (number) of your commuting students use transit to get to school? Would
these students be able to attend school without transit?
4. What percentage of your staff and faculty use transit to get to work? What types of workers use
transit? Do these workers have other transportation options?
5. Do you offer GoPasses to students? Employees? Who uses these passes?
6. Do you provide courses that support specific local industries? What types of industries? Do
students that take these classes use transit to get to classes or to commute between your
campus and worksites? What percentage use transit?
7. What percentage of your students remain in the Hampton Roads region upon completion of
their course work? Are there particular local industries that retain these college graduates?
Does transit play a role in the attractiveness of the region for retention of students?
8. Do you market transit access to students? Employees? Other visitors?
9. How does current transit service benefit your institution? Can you identify gaps in the existing
service that inhibit your ability to attract students or staff?
10. What future transit enhancements would benefit your institution?
11. Can you provide any specific anecdotes about how transit has been used by your students or
staff?
7
Transit and the Hospitality Industry
Purpose of
Roundtable:
This roundtable will bring together key representatives of the hospitality industry in the
region. We will discuss how transit supports the industry through labor force access, and
how visitors to the region use the system. We will explore how proposed enhancements
to the existing system might benefit the industry, and identify current shortcomings in
service that hinder the hospitality industry. The results of the case study will be used by
HRT at public forums to present findings about transit’s role in the Hampton Roads
economy. We are particularly interested in specific anecdotes that show how employees
or clients use transit.
 Importance of hospitality industry to region
 Transportation needs of industry
o Employees
o Guests
o Other
 Roll of transit in accessing labor
 Transportation needs of sector
o Vehicle access and parking
o Transit service needs of industry
 What works
 Needed improvements
 Transit availability and competitive position
 Concrete examples of how transit supports the hospitality industry
1. How important is transit for accessing your workforce?
2. What percentage of your workers takes transit to work?
3. What is the wage level of these workers? What types of jobs do they hold?
4. Do your transit-riding employees have other transportation options?
5. How well does current transit service match the transportation needs of your employees?
Consider service characteristics such as frequency, location of transit stops, reliability, weekend
and evening service providing options for different shifts.
6. Does current transit service affect employee retention (positively or negatively)?
7. Do you experience any issues with employee retention that can be attributed to transit service?
Please elaborate.
8. Do your clients use transit to travel within the region? If so, for what purpose? Do you
anticipate that transit will be more important to visitors in the future? What category of visitor
and why?
9. What regions do you compete with for attracting visitors? How competitive is the Hampton
Roads region and why? How do you anticipate this competitive position changing in the future?
Will transit availability play a role?
10. How would reductions in transit availability affect your business?
11. What types of transit improvements would best support your business?
8
12. Do you offer GoPasses to your employees? What percentage use them? Do you charge the
employees for the passes?
13. Can you provide any specific anecdotes about how transit has been important to your
employees or clientele?
9
INVESTMENT SCENARIO ASSUMPTIONS & METHODS
A note about the alternate scenarios being modeled. The following is a theoretical exercise to try to help
inform readers as to what might be the potential economic impacts of conducting the states
improvements. The projects being modeled are meant to communicate the potential transportation
cost savings to users due to decreased travel times from more efficient routing with less time spent
waiting, as well as faster travel times. This cost savings to users manifests itself as savings to both
households and businesses as they share the facilities and are able to pass on their cost savings in the
form of additional spending, or freed up investment that can go towards the expansion of industry
activity. As part of the effort to capture the impact of these improvement projects, very basic capital
expenditure estimates were included involving the construction, and operations/management
expenditures going into the improvements so as to provide a more complete picture. These numbers
are meant to elicit further discussion more than to provide concrete justification of impacts, especially
given the ongoing nature of studies which could provide better modeling insight into the impact on the
region.
Ridership Estimates
Estimates of Ridership were a key component of how estimating a projects potential impact. All Else the
same, the more riders affected by an improvement, the greater the magnitude of travel efficiency
improvements stemming from the project. These estimates of ridership were pulled from several
different sources and adapted as necessary in cases where the necessary units were not available, or
better information was present thanks to the help of the HRT staff. The following table summarizes
where or how the impacted ridership estimates were sourced, so that we may focus on the scenarios
which were not lifted from existing documentation. These ridership estimates represent potential riders
who are already traveling within the system, and assume zero induced traffic.
Model
Number
Description
1
Annual Ridership
Impacted
Ridership
Year
Source
2,837,895
2034
Draft EIS
2
Newtown to Town Center
NewTown Rd to Oceanfront
(Via Laskin)
5,085,325
2034
Draft EIS
3
Naval Station Norfolk
4,956,319
2034
4
Connect Hampton Roads
2,800,000
2013
Norfolk
Provided by HRT
Staff
Location
Chapter 3
Figure
Chapter 3
Figure
Derived
For purposes of looking at how the impact over time change, it is expected that the ridership changes at
a compound annual growth rate of .46% per year – which follows the Moody’s predicted change in
population for the region. It is worth noting that models 1 and 2, which were explicitly sourced from the
information contained in the draft EIS involved ridership which was not inclusive of special events for
the purpose of being comparable to the other models (which did not include potential external tourism
based ridership). Because these numbers were straight harvested from the document, we will instead
10
focus on the individual models which involved some manipulation of ridership estimates to get them
into a useable model.
Naval Station Norfolk Service Expansion
Ridership modeling for the Naval Station Norfolk Expansion was derived from the naval Station Norfolk
Transit Extension Study1 (May 2015) as the combination of Western and Eastern B alignments shown
below, with estimated average weekday opening ridership following.
1
http://gohrt.com/nsntes/
11
It was assumed that the alignments were additive, giving an average weekday ridership figure of 8,700
riders. This was annualized by using the TIDE ridership figures (shown below)
Norfolk Tide Ridership Info (For Annualization
Factors)
Tide Ridership Stats
Ratio to Weekday
Avg. Weekday
4828
1
Avg. Saturday
4346
0.9001657
Avg. Sunday
1449
0.3001243
Using the formula to arrive at an annualized figure of:
Weekday Riders +
Saturday Riders
+
Sunday Riders
(8700 * 52 * 5) + (8700 * .9001657 * 52) + (8700 * .3001243 * 52) = 2,805,011 Riders / Year
This estimated ridership figure did not include the impact on the rest of the system (newtown) so at
HRTPO’s request, the portion of ridership involving LRT alternatives ridership from EVMC - Newtown
Road ridership estimates from Scenario1 was included in the impacted ridership estimates, giving a 2034
affected ridership estimate of 4,956,319 riders.
Connect Hampton Roads Extension
To date, there has been no completed study regarding the potential ridership impacts of Bus Rapid
Transit on the Peninsula or other components of the emerging Connect Hampton Roads initiative – as
such, the staff at HRT were kind enough to provide an estimate which we could use for impacted riders
which was estimated at 2.8 million affected riders for the purpose of conducting a qualitative analysis.
Ridership – Ranges
In order to give an idea as to the sensitivity of the projects to their captive ridership assumptions, the
prior discussed ridership assumptions were converted into ranges by estimating an upper and lower
bound (with the base ridership amounts being treated as the average affected population). As part of
deriving the upper and lower bounds of the ranges, we took annual ridership data from the TIDE
spanning from fiscal years 2012 to 2015 and created the bounds by pivoting the minimum and
maximum values off of the average annual shown below.
12
Annual
Ridership
1,530,543
1,781,345
1,531,606
1,394,640
Year
FY12
FY13
FY14
FY15
Avg 1,559,534
Max 1,781,345
Min 1,394,640
Giving us a range of +14.2% and – 10.6%, these bounds when applied to the base ridership numbers give
us the following sensitivity ranges to be used in our modeling efforts.
Scenario Ridership (2034)
Original
Lower Bound
Upper
Bound
Scenario 1: LRT Town Center
2,837,895
2,537,078
3,240,876
Scenario 2: LRT Oceanfront (Laskin Road)
5,085,325
4,546,281
5,807,441
Scenario 3: LRT - Naval Station Norfolk (Scen 3)
4,956,319
4,430,949
5,660,116
2,503,200
3,197,600
Scenario 4: BRT – Peninsula
2,800,000
Estimation of Trip-Making Purposes
Just as not all trips made by riders affect the economy the same way, so too do the purposes that drive
them vary. To have an idea as to how the riders interface with the economy from the perspective of the
purpose of their travels, it is important to be able to model the reason behind their trip making
activities. Making use of HRT’s 2014 O-D Survey from the previous task involving classifying the impacts
of transit we classified trip purposes from the data according to the following scheme:
13
O-D Survey Trip Purpose
Classification
Home Based Other
Personal
Home Based School2
Personal
Home Based Shopping
Personal
Home Based Work
Commute
Non-Home Based Other
Personal
Non-Home Based Work
Business
Linked HRT Passenger Trips by Purpose
Personal
Business
Commute
44%
52%
4%
Source: EDR Group Analysis of HRT O-D Survey Data
Using Census’ LEHD3 On the map tool we used a half mile buffer around the improvement scenarios to
conduct an analysis of the number of residents and workers and used them as proxies to create a
dynamic approximation as to the nature of the trip making purposes surrounding each scenario. The
principle was that higher proportion of workers relative to residents would translate into greater rates
of commuting activity along the corridor. The results of this exercise are shown below4.
2
Home based school trips were classified as Personal trips, instead of ‘Commute’ trips because they do not fundamentally add
value to the economy. For the case of an impact analysis they would be overestimated in terms of their direct significance were
we to classify them any other way.
3 Longitudinal Employment Housing Database
4 Business purpose was held constant because there were no plausible datasources which could be used to model potential
variation.
14
Mode Purpose Split
Scenarios
Scenario 4: BRT - Peninsula
Business
Commute
Personal
4%
4%
4%
4%
67%
56%
56%
45%
28%
40%
40%
52%
Base Ridership Modes
This table represents the split of modes that riders currently on the system who will divert to the project
scenarios improvement are traveling on. This was estimated using a tabulation of users encapsulated in
the HRT 2014 O-D database based on the total number of their transfers. If a user did not experience
any transfers then they were expected to be traveling by car, otherwise they were classified as, prior to
the improvement, riding via bus. There was no available data that could be used to drive any deeper
analysis in modes of regional access by project, so this assumption was held constant across each of the
four modeled scenarios.
Scenarios
Base Ridership
Assumptions
% Car
% Bus
42%
42%
42%
42%
58%
58%
58%
58%
Alternative mode access to Transit Improvement
The following table summarizes for diverting passengers who are switching modes to use the improved
segments in each scenario, the proportion of modes they are using to gain access5. Between this table
and the prior one (involving base distribution of ridership) we are implicitly modeling the improvement
scenarios as cases where a rider diverts off a lesser efficient mode of travel, and instead transfers/
drives/ walks to the new station or service to ride the rest of the way to their destination.
5
It is assumed that a constant 20% of travel distance is reserved for modes of access to the transit improvement, with the
remaining 80% as traveling on transit to destination.
15
Project Modal Diversion
Scenarios
Transfer
Park and Ride
Walk
19%
65%
19%
19%
24%
12%
24%
24%
57%
24%
57%
57%
The modal diversion assumptions were adapted straight from the Draft Economic Impact Statement
Report by using weighted averages of ridership by station (table 3.2-3) combined with the mode of
access (3.2-4, shown below) to come up with percentages for the first two modeled scenarios (LRT to
Town Center, and LRT Oceanfront). After consulting with the HRTPO staff, it was decided for the
remaining two scenarios to hold them to the town center assumptions based on the staff’s familiarity
with the alternatives.
Additional Assumptions Used in the Modeled Scenarios
Average Speed of vehicles modeled
With respect to bus and car speed assumptions by mode purpose, these were estimated from a
combination of the 2014 O-D survey and time and distance skims for the travel demand model.
16
BRT/Bus
Car
LRT
Walk
business
12.5
20.0
25.0
5.0
commute
12.5
22.0
25.0
5.0
personal
12.5
20.0
25.0
5.0
In the case of LRT speeds, this was an assumed constant that was derived from a stated average speed
of 30 miles per hour in the Connect Hampton Roads Executive Summary document. To represent the
potential effects of congestion, this speed was reduced by 5 miles per hour to give us our working
assumption.
Average User Trip Length
The average user’s trip length was estimated by trip purpose using a combination of the 2014 O-D
Survey in tandem with Virginia’s travel demand model. The following estimates are shown below:
miles/trip
business
6.0
commute
7.0
personal
6.0
Modeled Construction and Operations + Maintenance Costs
Capital, and Operations/Management related expenditures were also included into the modeled
scenarios to capture their effects on the region. The following table summarizes the construction and
O&M costs in 2016 dollars as modeled for each improvement project. An adjustment to convert the
capital outlays into constant 2016 dollars was necessary using the CPI.
Construction (2016-2030) (2016$)
Scenarios
Capital
285.2
1,100.9
2,198.3
1,758.6
Annual O&M
10.38
20.96
13.2
8.8
17
The first two scenarios from the VBTES study were derived using table 2.1-3B in the Draft EIS document
to piece together the combined O&M costs between the LRT service portion, and the marginal increase
in operating costs for the bus routes engaged as feeder services. Because the feeder service only gave
total operating cost for all bus service, and its local share, a separate calculation was necessary to
convert the figures to a total O&M cost.
18
19
Local marginal Cost of Extra Bus Service / (Local Share all Bus / Total Share all Bus) = Total Cost of
additional bus service.
So in the case of Newtown Road:
3.1$M / (7.1$M / 18.6$M) = 8.12$M
To this we add the 2.2$M Operating Cost of LRT, giving us a grand total of 10.32$M in 2014 dollars.
For the 3rd and 4th model involving Norfolk and BRT on the Peninsula, costs were estimated by HRT staff
based on prior work with the following rationale:

Peninsula possible construction cost $45M per mile (based on VBTES cost of $65 per mile to
oceanfront) * length of ~42 miles yields approximately $2B in capital cost
o

A further $10M in annual O&M costs is assumed using a simplified rule of thumb that it
might cost 1/3 of LRT service
Norfolk possible construction cost $125M per mile (based on an extrapolation of Virginia Beach
cost per mile of ~$100m in 2018 dollars) * length of ~20 miles yields a rough estimate of $2.5
Billion in capital expenditures
o
A further $15M in annual O&M costs is assumed based on extrapolating from the $2.2M
for Virginia Beach (at 3.4 Miles)
20
DETAILED ANALYSIS TASK WORKFLOWS
Table 1 Annual Stimulus Impact of Transit Spending
21
Table 2 Annual Value and Impact of Transit Use by Workforce
22
Table 3 Annual Value of Market Participation (Consumer Spending) Associated with Transit
23
Table 4 Performance Benefit & Impact of Transit
24

Economic Impact Study Appendices

Transcription

Similar documents

Froggy Drawing handout2 - Mid Mon Valley Transit Authority

Fastfrate Roadfrate SS.indd

june 4 : fado irish pub

Pharr District Regional Characteristics and Inventory

PATransit Port Authority of Allegheny County DR500C Talking Bus

NYS Transportatn Equity Network

WURTA Update August 2014 Where did June go? Well, let`s get to it

Cimarron Transit WorkRide

PDF.

Wednesday, March 20 6 to 8 p.m. Centerra Mirage Elementary