CITY OF KANSAS CITY, MISSOURI KANSAS CITY DOWNTOWN STREETCAR TIGER DISCRETIONARY GRANTS PROGRAM ECONOMIC ANALYSIS SUPPLEMENTARY DOCUMENTATION JUNE 3, 2013

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...... 2 2. INTRODUCTION ...... 6 3. METHODOLOGICAL FRAMEWORK ...... 6 4. PROJECT OVERVIEW ...... 7 4.1 Base Case and Alternatives ...... 7 4.2 Project Cost and Schedule ...... 8 4.3 Disruptions Due to Construction ...... 9 4.4 Effects on Long-Term Outcomes ...... 9 5. GENERAL ASSUMPTIONS ...... 11 6. DEMAND PROJECTIONS ...... 11 6.1 Methodology ...... 11 6.2 Assumptions ...... 12 6.3 Demand Estimates and Projections ...... 13 7. BENEFITS MEASUREMENT, DATA AND ASSUMPTIONS ...... 13 7.1 State of Good Repair ...... 13 7.2 Economic Competitiveness ...... 15 7.3 Livability ...... 20 7.4 Environmental Sustainability...... 24 7.5 Safety ...... 26 8. SUMMARY OF FINDINGS AND BCA OUTCOMES ...... 28 9. BCA SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS ...... 29 10. SUPPLEMENTARY DATA TABLES ...... 31 10.1 Annual Estimates of Total Project Benefits and Costs ...... 32 10.2 Annual Demand Projections ...... 33 10.3 State of Good Repair: Annual Benefit Estimates ...... 34 10.4 Economic Competitiveness: Annual Benefit Estimates...... 35 10.5 Livability: Annual Benefit Estimates ...... 36 10.6 Environmental Sustainability: Annual Emissions Avoided, in Metric Tons ...... 37 10.7 Environmental Sustainability: Annual Benefit Estimates, Discounted ...... 38 10.8 Safety: Annual Benefit Estimates ...... 39

695 Atlantic Avenue, 2FL, Boston, MA 02111 Telephone: (617) 357-7763  Fax: (617) 357-7759  http://www.hdrinc.com Page | 1

1. Executive Summary The Kansas City Streetcar project is located within a narrow, two-mile long corridor running from Kansas City’s River Market on the north, through the Central Business District and the Crossroads areas to Union Station and Crown Center on the south end of the city. The 2.0 mile alignment (3.9 track-miles) would provide a modern electric streetcar serving 11 stations spaced approximately every two blocks. Completion of the project will offer a modern transit solution that fills in a gap in the city’s resurging downtown. In downtown Kansas City, there are limited linkages between activity centers. The streetcar project would improve downtown mobility options for pedestrians, bicyclists, and vehicle drivers. Pedestrians will be provided with an accelerated means for getting from one area of downtown Kansas City to another, and existing automobile drivers will be given another mode choice. Bicyclists will benefit from the reduced traffic levels, and they will be permitted to utilize the streetcar as part of their overall trip. Environmental and congestion benefits are also anticipated, as some existing automobile drivers may elect to use the streetcar instead of their personal vehicles. The Streetcar improves walkability, as well as transportation accessibility for elderly and transit- dependent populations. In addition, revitalization of underdeveloped parcels is supported, helping spur mixed-use development and anchor sustained economic growth. A summary table with the changes proposed in the project and the associated benefits is provided below.

695 Atlantic Avenue, 2FL, Boston, MA 02111 Telephone: (617) 357-7763  Fax: (617) 357-7759  http://www.hdrinc.com Page | 2

Table ES-1: Summary of Improvements and Economic Benefits Baseline & Changes to Population Summary Current Baseline / Type of Affected by Economic of Results Page Problems Alternative Impacts Impact Benefit (Mill $ 2012) Ref. Monetized value Streetcar of reduced users, bus Lack of generalized riders, connectivity travel cost for automobile between transit Reduce streetcar users users, modes number of and remaining pedestrians automobile automobile and bicyclists trips, vehicle users $10.0 10-24 Kansas City miles traveled; traffic vehicle increases Monetized value traffic decreases speed of travel of pavement travel speed, Government maintenance increases travel savings time, elevates pollution levels $0.007 13-15 Local, state, Reduce Monetized value region, and pollutant of emission national emissions reductions population Construction $0.098 24-26 of Kansas City Downtown Automobile users, Streetcar Change streetcar Monetized value number of users, bus of accident injuries and Limited riders, costs fatalities transportation pedestrians options and few and bicyclists stops in the corridor that may -$0.13 26-27 hinder growth in Value of Community in the area increase in Increase general and property values property value property (residential and owners commercial) $94.05 15-18 Create residual value of Monetized infrastructure Government residual value of after 20 years Streetcar of Streetcar operation $3.62 13-15 The period of analysis used in the estimation of benefits and costs corresponds to 23 years, consisting of 2.5 years of construction and 20 years of operation. The City of Kansas City and partners have requested $20 million in TIGER V funds; approximately 20 percent of the project’s total capital cost, to leverage significant local and private investment for the design, construction and operation of the Kansas City Downtown Streetcar. More than 70 percent of the project’s cost will be funded with local public and private funding. The TIGER Grant will be used to enhance the project and to reduce local burden associated with assessments used to finance the project.

695 Atlantic Avenue, 2FL, Boston, MA 02111 Telephone: (617) 357-7763  Fax: (617) 357-7759  http://www.hdrinc.com Page | 3

A summary of the relevant data as well as the calculations used to derive the benefits and costs of the project are shown in Table ES-2 (in dollars of 2012). Based on the Benefit Cost Analysis presented in the rest of this document, the project is expected to generate approximately $108 million in total benefits and a Benefit/Cost ratio of approximately 1.0. With a 3 percent real discount rate, the Net Present Value of the project would increase to $62.7 million, for a Benefit/Cost ratio of 1.5. In addition to the monetized benefits presented in Table ES-2, the project also generates significant benefits that are difficult to quantify, thus increasing the true overall value to society. A brief description of those Streetcar-induced benefits is provided below. Economic Competitiveness  More direct transportation access provided to the central business district’s employment centers  Tourism efforts are supported – the Streetcar is close to many of Kansas City’s major activity centers and visitor facilities  Kansas City’s efforts to refocus development and investment downtown are supported  The downtown is improved by the Streetcar, minimizing existing business departures and potentially attracting new businesses, and supporting and enhancing planned developments Livability  Transportation choices and connectivity are enhanced – the Streetcar will connect to 28 existing bus lines, the Downtown Transit Center, Amtrak’s national network, Johnson County Transit, and future potential commuter rail service  Provision of an accessible downtown transit system with level-boarding service improves mobility for the elderly and transit-dependent populations  Increased walkability and pedestrian activity is a key goal in the downtown area and is supported by the Streetcar  Connects the downtown core to park resources, which are concentrated at the ends of the downtown corridor Environmental Sustainability  Car-free travel by residents, employees, and visitors is facilitated  Efforts to reduce the amount of surface space devoted to parking are supported  Supports the re-use of vacant and under-utilized buildings and promotes appropriately scaled infill development Safety  Station area improvements, such as lighting, improved sidewalks, and other pedestrian- oriented investments, are likely to enhance the safety of these areas

695 Atlantic Avenue, 2FL, Boston, MA 02111 Telephone: (617) 357-7763  Fax: (617) 357-7759  http://www.hdrinc.com Page | 4

Table ES-2: Summary of Pertinent Data, Quantifiable Benefits and Costs

Operation & Undiscounted Calendar Total Direct Total Benefits Initial Costs Maintenance Net Benefits Discounted Net Year Beneficiaries (2012$) (2012$) Costs (2012$) (2012$) Benefits (7%) 2013 0 $0 $27,160,000 $0 -$27,160,000 -$25,383,178 2014 0 $0 $53,960,000 $0 -$53,960,000 -$47,130,754 2015 1,344,343 $3,214,301 $14,320,000 $1,365,000 -$12,470,699 -$10,179,609 2016 1,418,442 $4,269,688 $0 $2,730,000 $1,539,688 $1,175,147 2017 1,492,541 $4,952,674 $0 $2,730,000 $2,222,674 $1,585,396 2018 1,566,640 $5,709,196 $0 $2,730,000 $2,979,196 $1,985,956 2019 1,640,739 $6,545,358 $0 $2,730,000 $3,815,358 $2,376,938 2020 1,582,928 $7,387,809 $0 $2,730,000 $4,657,809 $2,711,862 2021 1,651,327 $8,405,272 $0 $2,730,000 $5,675,272 $3,088,074 2022 1,719,726 $9,527,793 $0 $2,730,000 $6,797,793 $3,456,882 2023 1,788,125 $10,765,872 $0 $2,730,000 $8,035,872 $3,819,143 2024 1,856,524 $12,142,978 $0 $2,730,000 $9,412,978 $4,180,955 2025 1,924,923 $13,667,203 $0 $2,730,000 $10,937,203 $4,540,162 2026 1,993,322 $14,611,196 $0 $2,730,000 $11,881,196 $4,609,468 2027 2,061,721 $15,621,284 $0 $2,730,000 $12,891,284 $4,674,257 2028 2,130,120 $16,702,794 $0 $2,730,000 $13,972,794 $4,735,056 2029 2,198,519 $17,956,483 $0 $2,730,000 $15,226,483 $4,822,425 2030 2,266,919 $19,384,182 $0 $2,730,000 $16,654,182 $4,929,609 2031 2,335,318 $20,750,858 $0 $2,730,000 $18,020,858 $4,985,278 2032 2,403,717 $22,223,616 $0 $2,730,000 $19,493,616 $5,040,010 2033 2,472,116 $23,650,551 $0 $2,730,000 $20,920,551 $5,055,193 2034 2,540,515 $25,229,712 $0 $2,730,000 $22,499,712 $5,086,087 2035 2,608,914 $44,603,672 $0 $1,365,000 $43,238,672 $9,122,486 TOTAL 40,997,437 $307,322,491 $95,440,000 $54,600,000 $157,282,491 -$713,154

695 Atlantic Avenue, 2FL, Boston, MA 02111 Telephone: (617) 357-7763  Fax: (617) 357-7759  http://www.hdrinc.com Page | 5

2. Introduction This document provides detailed technical information on the economic analyses conducted in support of the Grant Application for the Kansas City Downtown Streetcar project. Section 3, Methodological Framework, introduces the conceptual framework used in the Benefit-Cost Analysis (BCA). Section 4, Project Overview, provides an overview of the project, including a brief description of existing conditions and proposed alternatives; a summary of cost estimates and schedule; and a description of the types of effects that the Streetcar is expected to generate. Section 5, General Assumptions, discusses the general assumptions used in the estimation of project costs and benefits, while estimates of travel demand and traffic growth can be found in Section 6, Demand Projections. Specific data elements and assumptions pertaining to the long-term outcome selection criteria are presented in Section 7, Benefits Measurement, Data, and Assumptions, along with associated benefit estimates. Estimates of the project’s Net Present Value (NPV), its Benefit/Cost ratio (BCR) and other project evaluation metrics are introduced in Section 8, Summary of Findings and BCA Outcomes. Next, Section 9, BCA Sensitivity Analysis, provides the outcomes of the sensitivity analysis. Additional data tables are provided in Section 10, Supplementary Data Tables, including annual estimates of benefits and costs, as well as intermediate values to assist DOT in its review of the application.1 3. Methodological Framework Benefit-Cost Analysis (BCA) is a conceptual framework that quantifies in monetary terms as many of the costs and benefits of a project as possible. Benefits are broadly defined. They represent the extent to which people impacted by the project are made better-off, as measured by their own willingness-to-pay. In other words, central to BCA is the idea that people are best able to judge what is “good” for them, what improves their well-being or welfare. BCA also adopts the view that a net increase in welfare (as measured by the summation of individual welfare changes) is a good thing, even if some groups within society are made worse- off. A project or proposal would be rated positively if the benefits to some are large enough to compensate the losses of others. Finally, BCA is typically a forward-looking exercise, seeking to anticipate the welfare impacts of a project or proposal over its entire life-cycle. Future welfare changes are weighted against today’s changes through discounting, which is meant to reflect society’s general preference for the present, as well as broader inter-generational concerns. The specific methodology developed for this application was developed using the above BCA principles and is consistent with the TIGER guidelines. In particular, the methodology involves:  Establishing existing and future conditions under the build and no-build scenarios;

1 While the models and software themselves do not accompany this appendix, greater detail can be provided, including spreadsheets presenting additional interim calculations and discussions on model mechanics and coding, if requested.

695 Atlantic Avenue, 2FL, Boston, MA 02111 Telephone: (617) 357-7763  Fax: (617) 357-7759  http://www.hdrinc.com Page | 6

 Assessing benefits with respect to each of the five long-term outcomes identified in the Notice of Funding Availability (NOFA)2;  Measuring benefits in dollar terms, whenever possible, and expressing benefits and costs in a common unit of measurement;  Using DOT guidance for the valuation of travel time savings, safety benefits and reductions in air emissions, while relying on industry best practice for the valuation of other effects;  Discounting future benefits and costs with the real discount rates recommended by the DOT (7 percent, and 3 percent for sensitivity analysis); and  Conducting a sensitivity analysis to assess the impacts of changes in key estimating assumptions. 4. Project Overview The City of Kansas City, Missouri, is proposing a modern streetcar project to serve the downtown Kansas City area and enhance an effective, land-use-supportive local area transit circulator for the area. Encompassing the Central Business District of Kansas City, the alignment extends from the River Market area to the north, travels through the Central Business District and the Crossroads areas to Crown Center on the south end of the city, a length of 3.9 track- miles (2.0 route-miles). Stations will be positioned approximately every two blocks. Completion of this project will yield an attractive transit option that will more conveniently connect people and places within the downtown corridor. It will also support regional and city efforts to develop downtown Kansas City and the downtown corridor as a more attractive and successful urban center. The project will also ultimately connect with the Jackson County Commuter Rail and serve as the base for expanded streetcar service; both of these initiatives are currently in the planning stages.

4.1 Base Case and Alternatives

The Base Case, or no build alternative, assumes continuation of the existing transit service in the study area. Currently, Kansas City Area Transportation Authority (KCATA) operates 12 north-south routes between Crown Center and the Financial District. The most frequent service is provided by Main Street MAX, which primarily operates on Main Street but also provides service directly to the Convention Center, as well as east-west service through the Financial and Government Districts. Other north-south services are concentrated on Main Street, Walnut Street, and Grand Boulevard. In addition, Johnson County Transit operates bus service on various streets in the study area and provides 8 commuter routes from various origins to downtown Kansas City.

2 U.S. Federal Register, Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 20 / Tuesday, January 31, 2012 / Notices, Notice of Funding Availability for the Department of Transportation’s National Infrastructure Investments under the Full-Year Continuing Appropriations, 2012; and Request for Comments.

695 Atlantic Avenue, 2FL, Boston, MA 02111 Telephone: (617) 357-7763  Fax: (617) 357-7759  http://www.hdrinc.com Page | 7

The build alternative assumes streetcar operation from Crown Center to River Market via Pershing Road, Main Street, 5th Street, Grand Boulevard, 3rd Street, and Delaware Street. With only limited exceptions, Main Street streetcar service would operate in mixed-traffic. For the build alternative, it is assumed that the Kansas City Downtown Streetcar operates seven days a week, with service from 6:00 am to 12:00 midnight Monday through Thursday, from 6:00 am to 2:00 am on Fridays and Saturdays, and from 8:00 am to 9:00 pm on Sundays. Streetcar service would operate every 10 or 20 minutes3, with the longer of the headways from 9:00 pm to 12:00 am on Monday through Thursday, and during all hours of operation on Sunday.

4.2 Project Cost and Schedule4

The Kansas City Downtown Streetcar project is currently in the engineering and design stage, with construction expected to begin in mid-2013 and completed by May 2015 with 20 years of service to start immediately after opening. Without discounting, the capital cost for the project sums to $95.4 million, and annual operations and maintenance costs are estimated at $2.73 million. The present value of all costs, discounted at 7 percent, is about $108.6 million. Key components of capital cost include vehicle procurement, track construction, and traction power construction (sitework). These costs, shown in millions of 2012 dollars are used in the benefit- cost analysis (BCA).

Table 1: Cost Summary Table Year Construction Operation & Maintenance Total 2013 $25,383,178 $0 $25,383,178 2014 $47,130,754 $0 $47,130,754 2015 $11,689,386 $1,114,247 $12,803,632 2016 $0 $2,082,704 $2,082,704 2017 $0 $1,946,452 $1,946,452 2018 $0 $1,819,114 $1,819,114 2019 $0 $1,700,107 $1,700,107 2020 $0 $1,588,885 $1,588,885 2021 $0 $1,484,939 $1,484,939 2022 $0 $1,387,794 $1,387,794 2023 $0 $1,297,003 $1,297,003 2024 $0 $1,212,153 $1,212,153 2025 $0 $1,132,853 $1,132,853 2026 $0 $1,058,741 $1,058,741 2027 $0 $989,478 $989,478 2028 $0 $924,745 $924,745 2029 $0 $864,248 $864,248 2030 $0 $807,708 $807,708 2031 $0 $754,868 $754,868 2032 $0 $705,484 $705,484 2033 $0 $659,331 $659,331 2034 $0 $616,197 $616,197 2035 $0 $287,942 $287,942 Total Cost $84,203,317 $24,434,993 $108,638,310

3 The streetcar project team indicates that headways of 10 to 20 minutes are expected to be attainable. The sensitivity analysis presented later in the technical appendix examines a condition where the headways are longer, 11 and 22 minutes, an assumption presented in the Alternatives Analysis. 4 All cost estimates in this section are in millions of dollars of 2012, discounted to 2012 using a 7 percent real discount rate.

695 Atlantic Avenue, 2FL, Boston, MA 02111 Telephone: (617) 357-7763  Fax: (617) 357-7759  http://www.hdrinc.com Page | 8

4.3 Disruptions Due to Construction

There are not expected to be any disruption costs associated with construction of the Kansas City Streetcar. The project team believes that they will be able to maintain two lanes of traffic operation during construction along Main Street which will cause minimal, if any, impact to roadway users. No detours are anticipated, as the road will not need to be fully closed.

4.4 Effects on Long-Term Outcomes

The Project is expected to have significant impacts on the long-term outcomes of interest detailed in the TIGER V Notice of Funding Availability. The following describes the anticipated effects. State of Good Repair: The Streetcar provides a transportation option that some existing automobile drivers may choose to utilize, rather than their personal vehicles. This reduces the total vehicle miles traveled, which provides savings in lifecycle pavement maintenance costs over the next 20 years. In addition, the Streetcar generates a residual value beyond the analysis horizon due to the guideway and track elements, stations support facilities, and right-of-way that are a part of this project. Economic Competitiveness: Despite the recent economic revitalization of downtown Kansas City, significant opportunities remain to fully achieve the vision for downtown Kansas City in terms of doubling the population and being the premier location in the region for employers. A streetcar improves the downtown, potentially minimizing business departures, attracting new businesses, and helping the city achieve its efforts to refocus its development and investment downtown. It is anticipated to have a positive impact on the value of existing properties near the streetcar alignment, and this benefit is included in the quantitative analysis. In addition to the quantifiable benefit included in the analysis, there are substantial qualitative benefits to the improvements as the basis for supporting additional future development and transportation improvements. Livability: Connectivity of Kansas City neighborhoods is improved with the streetcar, providing another transportation option for residents and visitors, including low-income riders. Additionally, the streetcar offers level-boarding service, which further improves mobility for transit dependent populations and the elderly. The Streetcar better connects existing transportation options as well. Specifically, it will provide access to existing bus lines, the city’s transit center, intercity passenger rail and bus service, as well as potential commuter rail service. Streetcar riders will also be provided with improved access to local cultural centers and events, parks, and other venues. Increased walkability and pedestrian activity is a key goal in the downtown area and is supported and enhanced by the streetcar. In addition to linking activity centers and other areas in the region to Kansas City’s downtown, the streetcar, which is expected to have no fare, provides a reliable alternative and lower cost mode of transportation. Additionally, the streetcar is expected to reduce the travel time and

695 Atlantic Avenue, 2FL, Boston, MA 02111 Telephone: (617) 357-7763  Fax: (617) 357-7759  http://www.hdrinc.com Page | 9

out-of-pocket transportation costs for people who divert to the streetcar, as well as the remaining users of the other transportation modes. Environmental Sustainability: Car-free travel by residents, employees, and visitors is facilitated by the streetcar. Replacing some of the automobile trips with streetcar trips would reduce greenhouse gas emissions and air pollutants and contribute to overall environmental sustainability. The streetcar also supports efforts to reduce the amount of surface space devoted to parking, as well as the re-use of vacant and under-utilized buildings. Safety: Though not quantifiable, some of the station improvements, including lighting, may enhance safety in the streetcar corridor. The main benefit categories associated with the project are mapped into the five long-term outcome criteria set forth by the DOT in the table below.

Table 2: Expected Effects on Long Term Outcomes and Benefit Categories Long-Term Benefit Description Monetized Quantified Qualitative Outcomes Categories Pavement Reductions in pavement Maintenance maintenance costs due to Yes Yes Yes State of Good Savings changes in roadway usage Repair Value of the project after 20 Residual Value Yes Yes Yes years of use

Option value and amenity value of proposed transit Economic Community alignment, as measured in Yes Yes Yes Competitiveness Development property appreciation (net of capitalized travel cost savings)

User Cost Door-to-door travel time Savings (Travel savings to transit users and Time Savings remaining roadway users as Livability Yes Yes Yes and Vehicle well as reductions in Operating Cost monetary costs to drivers Savings) switching to public transit

Reductions in pollutants and Environmental Reductions in green house gases due to Yes Yes Yes Sustainability Air Emissions changes in private vehicle use relative to base case

Changes in property losses, Accident Safety injuries and deaths due to Yes Yes Yes Reduction modal shifts

695 Atlantic Avenue, 2FL, Boston, MA 02111 Telephone: (617) 357-7763  Fax: (617) 357-7759  http://www.hdrinc.com Page | 10

5. General Assumptions The BCA measures benefits against costs throughout a period of analysis beginning at the start of construction and including 20 years of operations. The monetized benefits and costs are estimated in 2012 dollars with future dollars discounted in compliance with TIGER requirements using a 7 percent real rate, and sensitivity testing at 3 percent.

The methodology makes several important assumptions and seeks to avoid overestimation of benefits and underestimation of costs. Specifically:

 Input prices expressed in 2012 dollars;  The period of analysis begins in 2013 and ends in 2035. It includes project development and construction years (2013-2015) and 20 years of operations (June 2015-June 2035) with residual value at the end of the operation period;  A constant 7 percent real discount rate is assumed throughout the period of analysis. A 3 percent real discount rate is used for sensitivity analysis;  Opening year demand is an input to the BCA and is assumed to be fully realized in Year 1 (no ramp-up); and  Unless specified otherwise, the results shown in this document correspond to the effects of the build alternative – construction of the Kansas City Downtown Streetcar. 6. Demand Projections The success of a transit system hinges on its ability to provide local and regional connectivity and generate welfare improvements in the long run. In quantifying the system’s lifecycle utilization, as well as its economic worthiness, the initial level of and growth in ridership must be analyzed, given other existing transportation alternatives.

6.1 Methodology

Demand projections for the project were estimated using a sketch-level direct-demand model that considered socio-economic characteristics, site conditions, transit supply variables and stop locations. A multivariate regression analysis was developed based on existing ridership data from KCATA and socioeconomic data extracted from the Mid-America Regional Council (MARC) regional travel demand model. Additionally, peer system ridership characteristics and fixed guideway credits that are associated with unmeasured variables were used to predict ridership as a function of population, employment, and hotel-motel rooms within one-quarter mile of the project alignment. Three sets of forecasts were developed – one assuming no streetcar related population growth, one that assumes moderate streetcar-related employment and population growth in the area and one that assumes high streetcar-related population and employment growth. For the purposes of this benefit-cost analysis, the projections that do not include any streetcar-related growth were used. Baseline ridership was generated assuming that the streetcar would require

695 Atlantic Avenue, 2FL, Boston, MA 02111 Telephone: (617) 357-7763  Fax: (617) 357-7759  http://www.hdrinc.com Page | 11

a fare. It has since been determined that the streetcar would be free to users. Given this reduction in fare, the ridership modeler has assumed demand elasticities of -0.3 in the short term (within 5 years) and -0.2 beyond 5 years based on the 100 percent decrease in fare. This demand elasticity increases ridership by 30 percent in the short term and 20 percent in the long term. Using this information, the baseline ridership number of 2,686 daily riders was increased 30 percent in 2015 to reflect the removal of the fare. The initial ridership forecasts are conservative and do not include event-related ridership. This is despite service design parameters that assume the proposed service will serve a large event- related market. In order to capture these riders, an additional 10 percent more streetcar users are assumed in baseline ridership for purposes of this analysis. Because the actual number of event-generated streetcar riders is uncertain, however, two ridership sensitivity tests will be conducted – one removing event-related ridership and one accounting for a twenty percent increase in base ridership due to events-related users.

6.2 Assumptions

Throughout this BCA, various benefit categories that measure the desirable long-term outcomes published by US DOT in the NOFA are quantified using outputs of the direct-demand model described previously. This information, combined with the average trip lengths of various mode and other roadway assumptions, is used to estimate the reduction in vehicle miles traveled (VMT). The VMT-generated benefits include: pavement maintenance savings; user travel time and out-of-pocket transportation cost savings; reductions in air emissions; and reduction in accidents.

Table 3: Assumptions Used in the Estimation of Demand Variable Name Unit Value Source Kansas City Streetcar Environmental Assessment Base year (2015) daily ridership Riders 3,492 Documents, adjusted for elasticity of removing fare Kansas City Streetcar Environmental Assessment Future year (2035) daily ridership Riders 6,776 Documents, adjusted for elasticity of removing fare Additional riders due to special HDR Assumption based on discussion with project % of riders 10 events team and experts in the area HDR Assumption based on direct-demand model Share of riders diverted from auto % 33 and discussion with modeler HDR Assumption based on direct-demand model Share of riders diverted from bus % 33 and discussion with modeler HDR Assumption based on direct-demand model Induced demand % 34 and discussion with modeler Annualization factor Days 350 HDR Assumption based on operations schedule

695 Atlantic Avenue, 2FL, Boston, MA 02111 Telephone: (617) 357-7763  Fax: (617) 357-7759  http://www.hdrinc.com Page | 12

6.3 Demand Estimates and Projections

The resulting projections for total daily ridership, trips diverted from auto, trips diverted from bus, and induced streetcar users are presented in the table below.

Table 4: Average Daily Demand Estimates and Projections In Project Opening 2020 2025 2030 2035

Year (2015) Total Daily Trips 3,492 4,523 5,500 6,477 6,776

Diverted from Auto 1,152 1,477 1,815 2,137 2,236

Diverted from Bus 1,152 1,477 1,815 2,137 2,236

Induced Demand 1,188 1,522 1,870 2,202 2,304

Given these projections, it is estimated that in 2016, the first full year of operation, more than 1,300 vehicle miles per day will be avoided due to the presence of the streetcar. This is calculated based on the assumption that not every user diverted from auto to streetcar drives alone – the average occupancy is 1.3 individuals per vehicle. This translates the number of diverted users into vehicle-trips. At an average trip length of 1.3 miles per day, this amounts to a total of more than 468,000 annual vehicle miles saved. 7. Benefits Measurement, Data and Assumptions This section describes the benefits that were estimated for each of the TIGER V long-term outcomes. The data and assumptions used are described, and the approach to measuring the benefits is documented.

7.1 State of Good Repair

To quantify the benefits associated with maintaining the existing transportation network in a state of good repair, the impacts on the life-cycle pavement maintenance costs and the residual value of the streetcar project at the end of the analysis horizon are quantified.

7.1.1 Methodology The difference between the annual pavement costs associated with the base case and the pavement maintenance costs for the build scenario was calculated to estimate the pavement maintenance cost savings associated with the Streetcar project. A second benefit related to a state of good repair is the sum of the residual values of the guideway and track elements, stations, support facilities, right-of-way, and the associated unallocated contingency amount.

695 Atlantic Avenue, 2FL, Boston, MA 02111 Telephone: (617) 357-7763  Fax: (617) 357-7759  http://www.hdrinc.com Page | 13

7.1.2 Assumptions To quantify the lifecycle benefits in pavement maintenance cost savings, the analysis used a per-unit savings of pavement maintenance costs of $0.0013 per vehicle-mile avoided5 and the estimated reduction in VMT. To quantify the residual value of the project, it is assumed that the residual value of guideway and track elements, stations, and support facilities are depreciated linearly and that the value of the rights-of-way is not depreciated. The residual value of the project after 20 years of operations is assumed to represent half of the Project’s life and is quantified and added at the end of the analysis horizon.

Table 5: Assumptions Used in the Estimation of State of Good Repair Benefits Variable Name Unit Value Source Per-unit savings of pavement maintenance Addendum to the 1997 Federal Highway $ 0.0013 costs per vehicle-mile avoided Cost Allocation Study Final Report HDR Assumption – two-thirds of the Average trip length Miles 1.3 one-way streetcar length Share of riders diverted from auto % 33 HDR Assumption Persons Texas Transportation Institute 2011 Average Vehicle Occupancy Per 1.3 Urban Mobility Report Vehicle

7.1.3 Benefit Estimates The opening year savings in pavement maintenance is calculated at approximately $296, and total savings in pavement maintenance for the study period is estimated to be $17,169. Results by calendar year of operation are shown in Section 10.

Table 6: Estimates of VMT Reduction and Pavement Maintenance Savings

Opening Year (2015) Over Lifecycle

VMT Avoided 221,817 13,307,338

Pavement Maintenance Savings, in 2012 Dollars $296 $17,169

Pavement Maintenance Savings, discounted at 7 percent $241 $7,149

In addition to pavement maintenance savings, the streetcar generates a residual value beyond the analysis horizon due to the guideway and track elements, stations support facilities, and right-of-way that are a part of this project. The residual value of the streetcar is estimated to be $18,343,500. This number represents half of the initial investment in guideway and track elements, stations, and support facilities and all of the right-of-way investment.

5 See Addendum to the 1997 Federal Highway Cost Allocation Study Final Report (http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/policy/hcas/addendum.htm).

695 Atlantic Avenue, 2FL, Boston, MA 02111 Telephone: (617) 357-7763  Fax: (617) 357-7759  http://www.hdrinc.com Page | 14

Table 7: Estimates of State-of-Good-Repair Benefits, in 2012 Dollars 2035

Residual Value (discounted at 7 percent) $3,869,504

7.2 Economic Competitiveness

Kansas City has experienced a recent economic revitalization of the downtown, and a streetcar is expected to build on this momentum by further improving the downtown for residents and businesses in the corridor area. Specifically, it is anticipated to have a positive impact on the value of existing properties near the streetcar alignment, and this benefit is included in the analysis.

7.2.1 Methodology Benefits are reflected in property value appreciation that is realized faster because of the streetcar than it would be in its absence. This appreciation is often referred to as a transit premium. There are five key components in estimating transit premium: property number and growth rate, property value and growth rate, and the transit premium rate. The first four are derived through historic, current, and forecast (or planned) land use and property data for the impact area. These estimates are assumed to remain unchanged with or without transit. The last component, the transit premium rate or rate of increase in value due to nearby transit, is based on estimates of transit impacts on property values for other streetcar- or light-rail- served cities and regions. Using information from a Kansas City Planning and Development Department database and ESRI ArcGIS, a radius of ¼ mile was drawn around the Kansas City Downtown Streetcar alignment to capture the properties that are contained in this area. The assessed value for these properties was then summed for commercial and residential properties. For the analysis, the assessed value and the market value are assumed to be equivalent. Property values for both types of properties are multiplied by the transit premium rates to compute the lifetime amount of value appreciation due to the Kansas City Downtown Streetcar (i.e., the transit premium). The transit premium rates vary, depending on the type of property. It is assumed to take 20 years for all premiums to be realized for any given property. This assumption is based on the average mortgage term for residential homes and is independent of the BCA’s horizon. The total benefit is then spread over the BCA horizon of 20 years and discounted. To standardize the disparate results from the various studies, premium rates found in the literature for geographically relevant and similar systems are weighted by each corresponding system’s ridership and city population. Table 8 provides the list of relevant studies and corresponding premiums reviewed for this BCA.

695 Atlantic Avenue, 2FL, Boston, MA 02111 Telephone: (617) 357-7763  Fax: (617) 357-7759  http://www.hdrinc.com Page | 15

Table 8: Transit Premium Studies Rider/ City Premium Applicable System City Ridership Population Population Ratio Residential Commercial

DART Dallas, TX 229,200 2,412,827 9.50% 12.20%

LRT- San Diego, 103,900 3,001,072 3.46% 5.10% 4.40% Downtown CA

San Diego, LRT- North 103,900 3,001,072 3.45% 71.90% CA

Los LRT Angeles, 136,400 3,849,378 3.54% 0.65%

CA

San Jose, LRT 34,400 929,936 3.70% 45% CA

St. Louis, LRT 59,000 347,181 16.99% 32% MO

LRT Metro, AZ 42,300 1,512,986 2.80% 7%

 Weinstein, Bernard and Clower, Terry (2002), “An Assessment of the DART LRT on Taxable Property Valuations and Transit Oriented Development.” Center for Economic Development and Research, University of North Texas.  Cervero R and Duncan M (2002c) “Land Value Impacts of Rail Transit Services in San Diego County.” Report prepared for the National Association of Realtor and the Urban Land Institute.  Cervero, R and Duncan, M (2002a), “Transit’ Value-added: Effects of Light and Commuter Rail Services on Commercial Land Values.” Transportation Research Record 1805, 1-18.  Weinberger, R. "Light Rail Proximity: Benefit Or Detriment in the Case of Santa Clara County, California?" Transportation Research Record 1747, (2001): 104-113.  Garrett, T., 2004. “Light-Rail Transit in America: Policy Issues and Prospects for Economic Development.” St. Louis: Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, pp.1-30.  Atkinson-Palombo, C. (2010). "Comparing the Capitalisation Benefits of Light-rail Transit and Overlay Zoning for Single-family Houses and Condos by Neighbourhood Type in Metropolitan Phoenix, Arizona". Urban Studies, Vol (47) No11. In order to allocate the benefits over time, since it is unlikely that all of the benefit would accrue immediately, it is assumed that 40 percent of the total benefit is accrued upon the completion of the streetcar project, and it takes 10 years from that point to reach the full value of the transit related property value increase. Transportation improvements provide benefits as described throughout this technical memorandum, but they also impact property values. This estimated premium is over-and- above the transportation benefits associated with the streetcar and due to improved mobility, connectivity, and other transportation related enhancements. To avoid double-counting benefits that are likely to be captured elsewhere in the analysis, only half of the property value premium is included in the overall benefits estimation. For purposes of this analysis, we assume that the baseline property values remain the same and that no new properties are developed during the study period. This assumption is conservative, because there are significant vacant properties and underutilized parking lots located near the

695 Atlantic Avenue, 2FL, Boston, MA 02111 Telephone: (617) 357-7763  Fax: (617) 357-7759  http://www.hdrinc.com Page | 16

proposed streetcar alignment that may be suitable for redevelopment. Our property value benefit likely understates the actual impact on property values surrounding the new facility. The value measured is purely an incremental change above the existing property value.

7.2.2 Assumptions Assumptions for the estimation of economic competitiveness are presented in Table 9 and include half of the transit premium due to the streetcar. Baseline property data obtained from the City of Kansas City was mapped to the study area assuming a ¼ mile buffer from the alignment using ERSI ArcGIS. The numbers of existing residential and commercial properties and their market values were then calculated from the data. The transit premium rates utilized for the Kansas City Downtown Streetcar economic development estimates are conservative, based on the current economic and real estate condition of the city, region, and nation. As described previously, transit premium rates experienced or estimated for other streetcar projects were reviewed to determine the appropriate rate to assume for the Kansas City Downtown Streetcar project.

Table 9: Assumptions Used in the Estimation of Economic Competitiveness Benefits Variable Name Unit Value Source

Kansas City Planning and Total Existing Property Value – Residential $ 168,022,994 Development Department, 2011 Kansas City Planning and Total Existing Property Value – Commercial $ 1,612,410,155 Development Department, 2011 Calculated value based on Total Lifetime Property Value Premium – Residential Percent 5 information from other studies, as presented previously Calculated value based on Total Lifetime Property Value Premium – Commercial Percent 10 information from other studies, as presented previously Starting Percentage for Premium Percent 40 HDR Assumption

Period for Full Premium Accrual Years 10 HDR Assumption

Percent of Premium Not Included in Other Benefits Percent 50 HDR Assumption

7.2.3 Benefit Estimates Over the study horizon, $94.05 million in economic competitiveness (i.e., transit premium) benefits are estimated to be generated by the streetcar project. Most of this benefit is generated by commercial development, a non-discounted total of $249.7 million. This represents approximately 95 percent of the total transit premium benefit included in the benefit-cost analysis. These values are actually conservative, as they exclude the fifty-percent increase in value that is assumed to be accounted for in the generalized-cost savings for users.

695 Atlantic Avenue, 2FL, Boston, MA 02111 Telephone: (617) 357-7763  Fax: (617) 357-7759  http://www.hdrinc.com Page | 17

Table 10: Estimates of Economic Development Benefits, in Millions of 2012 Dollars Over the Project Lifecycle In Project Opening Year In Constant Discounted at 7 Dollars Percent Residential Economic Development Benefits $149,974 $13,573,055 $4,847,958

Commercial Economic Development Benefits $2,759,571 $249,749,257 $89,204,221

Total Economic Development Benefits $2,909,545 $263,322,312 $94,052,178

7.2.4 Short Term Economic Impacts The Minnesota IMPLAN Group’s input-output model has been used to estimate the direct, indirect and induced effects of the Kansas City Downtown Streetcar project, in terms of employment, labor income and value added. Employment effects represent full-time and part-time jobs created for a full year (unless noted otherwise). Labor income consists of total employee compensation (wage and salary payments, as well as health and life insurance benefits, retirement payments and any other non-cash compensation) and proprietary income (payments received by self-employed individuals as income). Value added represents total business sales (output) minus the cost of purchasing intermediate products and is roughly equivalent to gross regional/domestic product. Estimated spending on project engineering, construction and vehicle procurement (capital expenditures) between 2013 and 2015 is used to compute short-term economic impacts. The project is expected to generate 1,463 national job-years over the construction period. It is also expected to create $116.95 million in value added, including $83.9 million in labor income. A breakdown of short-term impacts by type of effect (direct, indirect and induced) is provided in the table below.

Table 11: Direct, Indirect and Induced Impacts during Project Development Phase Spending (Millions of 2012 Direct Indirect Induced Total

Dollars) Employment* 610 362 491 1,463

Labor Income** $95.4 $34.9 $24.3 $24.7 $83.9

Value Added** $37.6 $36.9 $42.4 $116.95 Note: * Employment impacts from IMPLAN reflect total employment (full time plus part time). These estimates are for job-years. On average, the ratio of FTE to total employment is estimated at 90 percent. **Millions of 2012 Dollars.

Another method to estimate job-years from additional spending uses the Council of Economic Advisors’ (CEA) methodology as presented in a 2009 analysis6. This method assumes that for

6 Executive Office of the President, Council of Economic Advisers, “Estimates of Job Creation from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009,” Washington, D.C., May 11, 2009.

695 Atlantic Avenue, 2FL, Boston, MA 02111 Telephone: (617) 357-7763  Fax: (617) 357-7759  http://www.hdrinc.com Page | 18

every $76,923 of government spending, one job-year is created7. The following table shows the difference in job-year estimates using the IMPLAN and CEA methodologies. Note that the estimated employment impacts are lower when using CEA’s approach. Specifically, the simplified computation produces a more conservative estimate of 1,279 job- years.

Table 12: Job Year Estimates with IMPLAN and CEA Methodology Spending (Millions of 2012 Direct Indirect Induced Total

Dollars) IMPLAN * 610 362 491 1,463 $95.4 CEA ** 794 447 1,241 Note: * Employment impacts from IMPLAN should not be interpreted as full-time equivalent (FTE) as they reflect the mix of full and part time jobs that is typical for each sector. **According to CEA, for a typical government spending project, 64% of the job-years created by government spending represents direct and indirect effects of the spending, and the remaining 36% represent induced effects. A breakdown of short-term economic impacts (using IMPLAN estimates) in terms of employment (job-hours), labor income and value added is provided by quarter in the table below.

Table 13: Short-Term Impacts Resulting from Capital Expenditures Spending Direct Total Labor Income Total Value Added (Millions of 2012 Total Job- Job- (Millions of 2012 (Millions of 2012 Period Dollars)* Years** Years** Dollars) Dollars) 2013 - Q1 $1.39 21 9 $1.22 $1.70 2013 - Q2 $4.84 74 31 $4.25 $5.93 2013 - Q3 $9.28 142 59 $8.16 $11.37 2013 - Q4 $11.65 179 74 $10.24 $14.28 2014 - Q1 $9.55 146 61 $8.40 $11.70 2014 - Q2 $13.81 212 88 $12.14 $16.92 2014 - Q3 $17.54 269 112 $15.42 $21.49 2014 - Q4 $13.06 200 84 $11.48 $16.00 2015 - Q1 $9.45 145 60 $8.31 $11.58 2015 - Q2 $4.87 75 31 $4.28 $5.97 Total $95.4 1,463 610 $83.9 $116.9 Note: * includes engineering, construction, and vehicle procurement.

7 This amount corresponds to the revised number (September 2011) published in the Notice of Funding Availability.

695 Atlantic Avenue, 2FL, Boston, MA 02111 Telephone: (617) 357-7763  Fax: (617) 357-7759  http://www.hdrinc.com Page | 19

7.3 Livability

The proposed project would contribute to enhancing the livability of the city and region through improvements in the mobility of people and goods within and across the study area. In this analysis, three measures of mobility are presented: travel-time savings, out-of-pocket transportation cost savings, and low income mobility.

7.3.1 Methodology The framework used in the estimation of user benefits is based upon the theory of demand, and involves the estimation of changes in consumer surplus.

The demand for travel is an inverse relationship between the number of trips “demanded” and the generalized cost of travel, which includes both travel time and out-of-pocket costs, such as vehicle operating and parking costs for auto users, or fare payments for transit riders. That relationship is depicted in Figure 1 below. The term “consumer surplus” refers to the area between the demand curve and the actual cost of travel at any point in time. It is a measure of welfare to the extent that people who are traveling at that cost are “paying” less than the maximum they would be willing to pay; in other words, the value they are placing on a trip (as measured by their willingness-to-pay along the demand curve) is higher than what they are actually paying.

Figure 1: Framework for the Estimation of User Benefits

Generalized Travel Cost

Benefits to Existing Trip Makers Benefits to Induced Trip Makers Base Case

Cost of Travel Costs Alternative Case Cost of

Reduction Travel in Travel Demand For Trips

Existing New Number of Trips

Induced Trips

695 Atlantic Avenue, 2FL, Boston, MA 02111 Telephone: (617) 357-7763  Fax: (617) 357-7759  http://www.hdrinc.com Page | 20

The Kansas City Downtown Streetcar would reduce the general cost of travel and result in benefits to both existing and new trip-makers. Benefits to existing trip-makers are represented by the red rectangle in Figure 1. They are estimated as the difference between the generalized cost of travel in the base case and the generalized cost of travel in the build scenario times the number of existing trips. In addition, as the generalized cost of travel is being reduced, additional trips (beyond those diverted from other modes) are expected. These induced trip-makers represent a portion of all potential trip-makers who did not make a trip (or as many trips) in the no-build scenario, but are now “attracted” to the lower generalized cost allowed by the investment. User benefits resulting from new trips are depicted by the blue triangle in Figure 1. They are estimated using the “rule-of-a-half.” Please note that the change in generalized cost from no- build to build conditions only represents the change in user costs (i.e., travel time plus out-of- pocket costs). Social costs, including air emissions, accident occurrences, and congestion externalities are assumed not to affect trip making or modal decisions in this analysis. The elasticity of demand (the slope of the demand curve) is estimated based on existing knowledge about travel costs in the corridor and ridership forecasts developed by the Project Team. Generalized travel cost has two components: travel-time costs and out-of-pocket costs. Travel- time savings for travelers are dependent on their value of time (VOT) and the reduction of time spent on traveling (travel-time). Travelers who remain automobile users after the start of streetcar operation experience a reduction in travel-time as a result of less congestion. Travelers who divert from autos or buses to the streetcar may experience a reduction in travel- time depending on their origin and destination. VOT is then applied to each reduction in travel- time to estimate the reduction in travel-time costs. The generalized cost also includes out-of-pocket savings for current automobile users within the study area, measured as the savings in costs of vehicle operations. These vehicle operating costs include fuel, oil, tires, maintenance, and depreciation. The total out-of-pocket costs are calculated on a per mile basis based on a combination of average vehicle speed and unit cost estimates for each vehicle expenditure type. These per-mile costs are then translated to a per- trip cost when the average trip distance is considered. Vehicle operating costs are combined with estimated parking costs to generate the total out-of-pocket costs per automobile trip. In order to calculate the generalized cost savings, the cost of the fare is subtracted from the reduction in automobile operation out-of-pocket costs. Out-of-pocket costs for users diverted from other transit are considered and include the difference in the cost of fare for users of other transportation modes. In addition to the user cost savings, some livability benefits accrue to the low-income population of the study area who benefit from the addition of an inexpensive transportation option. The share of this benefit that is likely to benefit low-income residents of the streetcar corridor area is provided, though this benefit is not included in the total benefits of the project. To determine an appropriate share to allocate to this population, information from the Kansas City Area Transportation Authority Title VI report on the percent of low income residents in the area was utilized. A share of the total travel cost savings is assumed to benefit this population.

695 Atlantic Avenue, 2FL, Boston, MA 02111 Telephone: (617) 357-7763  Fax: (617) 357-7759  http://www.hdrinc.com Page | 21

7.3.2 Assumptions As described above, travel-time savings are projected using estimates for value of time (VOT) that are provided in the USDOT Guidance and the estimated reduction in travel-time that results from the Streetcar. USDOT provides estimates for the VOT for personal and business trips as well as time spent waiting or walking to access transit. The VOT used in this analysis is a weighted average of personal and business VOT, taking into account the share of each type of travel as reported in BTS National Household Travel Survey.

Table 14: Assumptions used in the Estimation of Travel Time Savings Variable Name Unit Value Source

Persons per Texas Transportation Institute 2011 Urban Passenger vehicle occupancy rate 1.3 vehicle Mobility Report US DOT, revised Departmental Dollars per Travel Time Cost – Personal Travel $13.05 Guidance on VTT in Economic hour Analysis, adjusted US DOT, revised Departmental Dollars per Travel Time Cost – Business Travel $24.90 Guidance on VTT in Economic hour Analysis, adjusted US DOT, revised Departmental Dollars per Time Cost – Walk access, waiting, transfer $26.80 Guidance on VTT in Economic hour Analysis, adjusted US DOT, revised Departmental Share of Personal Travel Percentage 4.6% Guidance on VTT in Economic Analysis, adjusted US DOT, revised Departmental Share of Business Travel Percentage 95.4% Guidance on VTT in Economic Analysis, adjusted Dollars per Weighted Average Travel Time Cost $13.59 HDR Calculation hour US DOT, revised Departmental Real Annual Growth Rate of Value of Time Percentage 1.6% Guidance on VTT in Economic Analysis, adjusted The reduction in travel-time is a function of both speed and distance. The speeds for all modes vary throughout the study horizon as more travelers divert to streetcars and general congestion on the roads increases. The average trip length of 1.3 miles is assumed, based on the length of the streetcar alignment, assuming that the average trip would be two-thirds of the one-way alignment. This trip length is constant for all travelers regardless of mode. Out-of-pocket costs are estimated using consumption rates for fuel, oil, tires, maintenance, and depreciation, and are a function of vehicle speed.8 Unit costs are then applied to these consumption rates to calculate out-of-pocket costs. The table below lists these unit costs along with other out-of-pocket costs, such as parking and streetcar fares, and trip length assumptions.

8 Fuel consumption rates are calculated based on the volume-to-capacity ratio, automobile type, and roadway type based on empirical relationships developed in the “Technical Memorandum for National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP) Project 7-12”; Texas Transportation Institute, The Texas A&M University System, College Station, Texas, January 1990. Rates are used for constant and excess speed based on the volume-to-capacity ratio.

695 Atlantic Avenue, 2FL, Boston, MA 02111 Telephone: (617) 357-7763  Fax: (617) 357-7759  http://www.hdrinc.com Page | 22

Table 15: Assumptions Used in the Estimation of Out-of-Pocket Travel Cost Savings Variable Name Unit Value Source HDR Assumption – 2/3 of one-way streetcar Average Trip Length Miles 1.3 length AAA Fuel Gauge Report for Kansas City, Fuel * $ per gallon $3.66 Missouri, May 30, 2013 USDOT, FHWA HERS-ST for medium/large Oil $ per liter $9.76 autos USDOT, FHWA HERS-ST for medium/large Tires $ per 4 tires $243.824 autos USDOT, FHWA HERS-ST for medium/large Maintenance $ per 1000 mi $133.14 autos Avg. depreciable USDOT, FHWA HERS-ST for medium/large Depreciation $18,434 cost per vehicle autos One-half of the average parking rate in the Parking $ per trip $1.85 study area, extracted from County data Bus Fare $ per trip $1.50 KCATA Streetcar Fare $ per trip $0.00 Kansas City Downtown Streetcar Note: * the fuel cost estimate used in this BCA includes all applicable taxes but does not include any external costs, such as those considered by NHTSA in its regulatory impact analysis of corporate average fuel economy standards. Fuel prices increase annually based on projected real growth rates from the Annual Energy Outlook in 2011.

7.3.3 Benefit Estimates Travel-time costs, combined with out-of-pocket costs, comprise the general trip cost for each traveler. The table below lists the estimated general travel cost per mile for automobiles, bus, and the streetcar for the opening and final years of analysis. In the event that the generalized out of pocket cost was negative, the benefit was zeroed out. This was done because a person would choose to ride the streetcar only if it makes them better off. An induced rider would not choose to ride the streetcar if they were experiencing a dis-benefit by doing so. The benefits to users who would not have traveled if the streetcar had not been built are estimated as the difference between the travel cost for them to take the streetcar and the cost of the cheapest transportation mode in the base case. Results by calendar year for the generalized cost of travel are shown in Section 10.

Table 16: Estimates of Travel Time and Out-of-Pocket Cost Savings, in Millions of 2012 Dollars Opening Year Cost Per Trip Final Year Cost Per Trip Auto (Base Case) $5.34 $6.84 Time $3.03 $4.28 Out of Pocket $2.31 $2.56 Auto (Alternative) $5.34 $6.78 Time $3.03 $4.23 Out of Pocket $2.31 $2.54 Bus $7.07 $9.03 Time $5.57 $7.53 Out of Pocket (Fare) $1.50 $1.50 Streetcar $5.10 $6.90 Time $5.10 $6.90 Out of Pocket (Fare) $0.00 $0.00

695 Atlantic Avenue, 2FL, Boston, MA 02111 Telephone: (617) 357-7763  Fax: (617) 357-7759  http://www.hdrinc.com Page | 23

The table below lists the savings calculated for remaining roadway users, for streetcar riders diverted from other modes, and for induced streetcar users. These discounted lifecycle transportation cost savings are estimated to total $10.0 million. The majority of the benefits, $5.7 million, are benefits to riders induced to ride the streetcar. The benefits to users diverted from bus are estimated to be $3.0 million and benefits to remaining roadway users are estimated at $0.98 million. Because low-income users benefit from the existence of an alternative transit mode, the share of the generalized cost of travel savings accruing to this population was calculated based on the percentage of the low-income population in the area – 10.9 percent. It is expected that these benefits have a discounted value of $1.1 million over the study period. Please note that these benefits are provided as information only. They were not included in the total benefits estimates used to derive the net present value and benefit-cost ratio presented later in this technical appendix.

Table 17: Generalized Cost of Travel Savings by Mode, in 2012 Dollars

Opening Year, Over the Project Lifecycle (2015) in Constant In Constant Discounted at 7 Beneficiaries Dollars Dollars Percent Remaining Roadway Users $1,896 $3,411,928 $980,840 Diverted from Autos $52,030 $519,040 $350,417 Diverted from Bus $103,910 $7,497,629 $2,960,013 Economic Value to Induced Riders $224,933 $14,145,358 $5,738,287 Total Generalized Travel Cost Savings $382,769 $25,573,955 $10,029,558

7.4 Environmental Sustainability

The Kansas City Downtown Streetcar project generates positive environmental impacts by reducing local and regional dependency on automobiles. For this streetcar project, two categories of environmental sustainability benefits are considered: reductions in greenhouse gas emissions and decreases in air pollutant emissions. Greenhouse gas emissions are measured in carbon dioxide (CO2) equivalents, and air pollutants include volatile organic compounds (VOC), carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen oxide (NOx), sulfur dioxide (SO2) and fine particulate matter (PM2.5).

7.4.1 Methodology Reduction in emission volumes are dependent upon the reduction in vehicle-miles resulting from diversion to the streetcar. The emission rates used in this BCA are obtained from Motor Vehicle Emission Simulator (MOVES) - a tool provided by the Environmental Protection Agency, based on type of vehicle, roadway, and average speed. Per-unit emission costs are applied to the emission reduction volumes due to the reduction in VMT caused by modal shifts to the streetcar. Emissions from streetcar operations are assumed negligible.

7.4.2 Assumptions There are five types of emissions measured in this analysis: carbon monoxide (CO), volatile organic compounds (VOC), nitrogen oxide (NOx), fine particulate matter (PM 2.5), sulfur dioxide

695 Atlantic Avenue, 2FL, Boston, MA 02111 Telephone: (617) 357-7763  Fax: (617) 357-7759  http://www.hdrinc.com Page | 24

(SO2), and carbon dioxide (CO2). Emission rates from the MOVES model are assumed for automobiles at speeds of 35 miles per hour. Per-unit cost of each of these emissions is shown in Table 18.

Table 18: Assumptions Used in the Estimation of Environmental Sustainability Benefits Variable Name Unit Value * Source $ per metric Victoria Transport Policy Institute, Air Carbon Monoxide (CO) $0 ton Pollution Costs Spreadsheet Final Regulatory Impact Analysis Corporate average Fuel Economy for MY Volatile Organic Compound (VOC) $ per long ton $1,440 2012-MY2016 Passenger Cars and Light Trucks Final Regulatory Impact Analysis Corporate average Fuel Economy for MY Nitrogen Oxides (NOx) $ per long ton $5,870 2012-MY2016 Passenger Cars and Light Trucks Final Regulatory Impact Analysis Corporate average Fuel Economy for MY Fine Particulate Matter (PM2.5) $ per long ton $321,120 2012-MY2016 Passenger Cars and Light Trucks Final Regulatory Impact Analysis Corporate average Fuel Economy for MY Sulfur Dioxide (SO2) $ per long ton $34,330 2012-MY2016 Passenger Cars and Light Trucks Social Cost of Carbon for Regulatory $ per metric Carbon Dioxide (CO2) $26.4 Impact Analysis Under Executive Order ton 12866 (February 2010), Value for 2015* Note: * Converted from source into 2012 Dollars. Also note that emissions rates vary annually based on the MOVES model, and the cost of Carbon Dioxide changes annually.

7.4.3 Benefit Estimates While emissions savings do not account for a large share of benefits, only $156,273 over the life-cycle of the project before discounting, the reduction in greenhouse gases is an important environmental benefit that should not be understated. Table 19 presents the net expected emissions reductions by type in metric tons due to the addition of the streetcar, and Table 20 details the estimated emissions reduction savings by compound. When discounted at 7 percent, total emissions related benefits are $98,093.

Table 19: Emissions Reductions, in Metric Tons Pollutant Opening Year Tons Reduced Lifecycle Tons Reduced Carbon Monoxide (CO) 0.52 10.06 Nitrogen Oxides (NOx) 0.05 1.15 Particulate Matter (PM) 0.00 0.01 Sulfur Dioxide (SO2) 0.00 0.06 Volatile Organic Compound (VOC) 0.01 0.25 Carbon Dioxide (CO2) 75.28 3,940.80

695 Atlantic Avenue, 2FL, Boston, MA 02111 Telephone: (617) 357-7763  Fax: (617) 357-7759  http://www.hdrinc.com Page | 25

Table 20: Estimates of Environmental Sustainability Benefits, in 2012 Dollars

In Project Over the Project Lifecycle Opening Year In Constant Discounted at 7 (2015) Dollars Percent Carb on Monoxide (CO) emissions reduction savings $0 $0 $0 Nitrogen Oxides (NOx) emissions reduction savings $289 $6,650 $3,131 Particulate Matter (PM) emissions reduction savings $73 $4,159 $1,672 Sulfur Dioxide (SO2) emissions reduction savings $38 $2,114 $857 Volatile Organic Compound (VOC) emissions reduction savings $13 $349 $158 Carbon Dioxide (CO2) emissions reduction savings* $1,984 $143,002 $92,274 Total Emission Reduction Savings $2,397 $156,273 $98,093 *Note that carbon emissions are always discounted at 3%

7.5 Safety

The addition of the streetcar to the roadway in the “build” scenario will lead to changes in the probability of accidents on the roadway network.

7.5.1 Methodology Changes in accident costs, like other variable costs, are dependent on changes in VMT. The changes in vehicles on the road are combined estimations of per-mile accident rates for fatal, injury, and property damage only (PDO) accidents. Safety benefits are calculated as the difference between the total cost of accidents under the build scenario and the no build scenario. To account for the growth in real income, the value of a statistical life is increased annually by 1.07 percent. The rates of each type of accident per 100 million vehicle miles vary for automobiles and the streetcar. The rates for automobiles are applied to the reduction in vehicle miles and the rates for streetcar are applied to the increase in streetcar miles.

7.5.2 Assumptions The assumptions used in the estimation of safety benefits are summarized in Table 21.

695 Atlantic Avenue, 2FL, Boston, MA 02111 Telephone: (617) 357-7763  Fax: (617) 357-7759  http://www.hdrinc.com Page | 26

Table 21: Assumptions used in the Estimation of Safety Benefits Variable Name Unit Value Source Per 100 2009 BTS Motor Vehicle Safety Data Table Fatal Accidents – Auto 1.109 Million VMT 2-17, updated July 2012, values for 2010 Per 100 2009 BTS Motor Vehicle Safety Data Table Injury Accidents – Auto 75.48 Million VMT 2-17, updated July 2012, values for 2010 Property Damage Only Accidents - Per 100 2009 BTS Motor Vehicle Safety Data Table 182.68 Auto Million VMT 2-17, updated July 2012, values for 2010 Per 100 2008 BTS Motor Vehicle Safety Data Table Fatal Accident s- Streetcar 16.7 Million VMT 2-33 (Updated 2010) Per 100 2008 BTS Motor Vehicle Safety Data Table Injury Accidents – Streetcar 320.2 Million VMT 2-33 (Updated 2010) Property Damage Only Accidents - Per 100 2008 BTS Motor Vehicle Safety Data Table 225.0 Streetcar Million VMT 2-33 (Updated 2010) US DOT, Guidance on Treatment of the Economic Value of a Statistical Life in U.S. Cost of Fatal Accident $ 9,100,000 Department of Transportation Analyses (2013 ) US DOT, Guidance on Treatment of the Economic Value of a Statistical Life in U.S. Cost of Injury Accident $ 105,576 Department of Transportation Analyses (2013) US DOT, Guidance on Treatment of the Economic Value of a Statistical Life in U.S. Growth in the Real Income % 1.07 Department of Transportation Analyses (2013) Cost of Property Damage Only $ 3,376 US DOT recommendations Accident

7.5.3 Benefit Estimates In the analysis, the estimated, non-discounted VMT savings for automobiles is $2.8 million over the study horizon and the additional safety cost of streetcar operation is $2.9 million over the study horizon. This results in a discounted net additional safety cost of $0.09 million over the study horizon of 20 years. The results are presented in Table 22 below.

Table 22: Estimates of Safety Benefits, in Millions of 2012 Dollars Opening Year (2015) Lifecycle

Auto VMT Avoided 221,817 12,876,867

Additional Streetcar VMT 64,220 1,348,620

Net Accident Cost Savings, in 2012 Dollars -$80,706 -$90,717

Net Accident Cost Savings, discounted at 7 percent -$65,880 -$131,326

695 Atlantic Avenue, 2FL, Boston, MA 02111 Telephone: (617) 357-7763  Fax: (617) 357-7759  http://www.hdrinc.com Page | 27

8. Summary of Findings and BCA Outcomes The tables below summarize the BCA findings. Annual costs and benefits are computed over the lifecycle of the project, 20 years. As stated earlier, construction is expected to be completed by mid-2015. Benefits accrue during the full operation of the project. Considering all monetized benefits and costs, the estimated internal rate of return of the project is 6.9 percent. With a 7 percent real discount rate, the $95 million investment would result in approximately $108 million in total benefits and a Benefit/Cost ratio of approximately 1.0. With a 3 percent real discount rate, the Net Present Value of the project would increase to $63 million, for a Benefit/Cost ratio of 1.5.

Table 23: Overall Results of the Benefit Cost Analysis in Millions of 2012 Dollars unless Specified Otherwise

Project Evaluation Metric 7% Discount Rate 3% Discount Rate

Total Discounted Benefits $107.93 $191.04

Total Discounted Costs $108.64 $128.06

Net Present Value -$0.71 $62.98

Benefit / Cost Ratio 1.0 1.5

Internal Rate of Return (%) 7%

Table 24: Benefit Estimates by Long-Term Outcome for the Full Alignment

Long-Term 7% Discount Outcomes Benefit Categories Rate 3% Discount Rate State of Good Pavement Maintenance Savings $7,149 $11,491 Repair Residual Value $3,869,504 $9,294,500 Economic Community Development $94,052,178 $165,102,821 Competitiveness User Cost Savings (Travel Time Savings Livability $10,029,558 $16,652,296 and Vehicle Operating Cost Savings)

Environmental Reduction in Air Emissions $98,093 $101,331 Sustainability

Safety Accident Reduction ($131,326) ($122,587)

Total Benefit Estimates $107,925,156 $191,039,852

695 Atlantic Avenue, 2FL, Boston, MA 02111 Telephone: (617) 357-7763  Fax: (617) 357-7759  http://www.hdrinc.com Page | 28

9. BCA Sensitivity Analysis The BCA outcomes presented in the previous sections rely on a large number of assumptions and long-term projections. all of which are subject to considerable uncertainty. The primary purpose of the sensitivity analysis is to help identify the variables and model parameters whose variations have the greatest impact on the BCA outcomes: the “critical variables.” The sensitivity analysis can also be used to:  Evaluate the impact of changes in individual critical variables – how much the final results would vary with reasonable departures from the “preferred” or most likely value for the variable; and  Assess the robustness of the BCA and evaluate, in particular, whether the conclusions reached under the “preferred” set of input values are significantly altered by reasonable departures from those values. The outcomes of the quantitative analysis for the Kansas City Streetcar Project using a 7 percent discount rate are summarized in the table below. The table provides the percentage changes in project NPV associated with variations in variables or parameters (listed in row), as indicated in the column headers. As shown in the table, reduced capital costs have a positive impact on the benefit-cost ratio. For example, a capital cost reduction of 25 percent results in an NPV of $22.7 million and a new BCR of 1.2. Reducing the economic development benefit by half results in an NPV of -$46.8 and a BCR of 0.6. Other variables are adjusted as part of the sensitivity testing and their impact is shown in Table 25.

695 Atlantic Avenue, 2FL, Boston, MA 02111 Telephone: (617) 357-7763  Fax: (617) 357-7759  http://www.hdrinc.com Page | 29

Table 25: Quantitative Assessment of Sensitivity, Summary New Parameters Change in Parameter Value New B/C Ratio NPV

No increase Due to Special Events -$1.73 0.98 Changes in Ridership 20% Increase Due to Special Events $0.29 1.00

Increase in Headway 11 and 22 Minutes -$3.31 0.97

25% of Full Appreciation Value -$71.25 0.34

Economic Development 50% of Full Appreciation Value -$47.74 0.56 Benefits

75% of Full Appreciation Value -$24.23 0.78

30% Reduction in Recommended Value $1.37 1.01 Value of Time 20% Increase in Recommended Value -$0.08 1.00

50% Reduction in the Number of Accidents -$0.65 0.99 Safety (Accident Rates) 25% Increase in the Number of Accidents -$0.75 0.99

45% Reduction in Value -$0.64 0.99 Safety (Value of Statistical Life) 45% Increase in Value -$0.79 0.99

EIA Low Case Scenario (-38%) -$1.03 0.99 Fuel Costs EIA High Case Scenario (+45%) -$0.21 1.00

25% Reduction $20.34 1.23 Capital Cost Estimate 25% Increase -$21.76 0.83

25% Reduction $5.40 1.05 Annual O&M Cost Estimate 25% Increase -$6.82 0.94

695 Atlantic Avenue, 2FL, Boston, MA 02111 Telephone: (617) 357-7763  Fax: (617) 357-7759  http://www.hdrinc.com Page | 30

10. Supplementary Data Tables This section breaks down all benefits associated with the five long-term outcome criteria (State of Good Repair, Economic Competiveness, Livability, Sustainability, and Safety) in annual form for the Kansas City Downtown Streetcar. Supplementary data tables are also provided for some specific benefit categories. For example, tables providing estimates of annual emission reductions (in tons) are provided under Environmental Sustainability.

695 Atlantic Avenue, 2FL, Boston, MA 02111 Telephone: (617) 357-7763  Fax: (617) 357-7759  http://www.hdrinc.com Page | 31

10.1 Annual Estimates of Total Project Benefits and Costs

Calendar Project Total Benefits Total Costs Undiscounted Benefits Discounted Net Discounted Net Year Year ($2012) ($2012) ($2012) Benefits at 7% Benefits at 3% 2013 1 $0 $27,160,000 ($27,160,000) ($25,383,178) ($26,368,932) 2014 2 $0 $53,960,000 ($53,960,000) ($47,130,754) ($50,862,475) 2015 3 $3,214,301 $15,685,000 ($12,470,699) ($10,179,609) ($11,412,456) 2016 4 $4,269,688 $2,730,000 $1,539,688 $1,175,147 $1,367,993 2017 5 $4,952,674 $2,730,000 $2,222,674 $1,585,396 $1,917,298 2018 6 $5,709,196 $2,730,000 $2,979,196 $1,985,956 $2,495,030 2019 7 $6,545,358 $2,730,000 $3,815,358 $2,376,938 $3,102,235 2020 8 $7,387,809 $2,730,000 $4,657,809 $2,711,862 $3,676,917 2021 9 $8,405,272 $2,730,000 $5,675,272 $3,088,074 $4,349,623 2022 10 $9,527,793 $2,730,000 $6,797,793 $3,456,882 $5,058,197 2023 11 $10,765,872 $2,730,000 $8,035,872 $3,819,143 $5,805,285 2024 12 $12,142,978 $2,730,000 $9,412,978 $4,180,955 $6,602,073 2025 13 $13,667,203 $2,730,000 $10,937,203 $4,540,162 $7,447,703 2026 14 $14,611,196 $2,730,000 $11,881,196 $4,609,468 $7,854,870 2027 15 $15,621,284 $2,730,000 $12,891,284 $4,674,257 $8,274,425 2028 16 $16,702,794 $2,730,000 $13,972,794 $4,735,056 $8,707,383 2029 17 $17,956,483 $2,730,000 $15,226,483 $4,822,425 $9,212,273 2030 18 $19,384,182 $2,730,000 $16,654,182 $4,929,609 $9,782,577 2031 19 $20,750,858 $2,730,000 $18,020,858 $4,985,278 $10,277,043 2032 20 $22,223,616 $2,730,000 $19,493,616 $5,040,010 $10,793,142 2033 21 $23,650,551 $2,730,000 $20,920,551 $5,055,193 $11,245,827 2034 22 $25,229,712 $2,730,000 $22,499,712 $5,086,087 $11,742,431 2035 23 $44,603,672 $1,365,000 $43,238,672 $9,122,486 $21,908,678 Total $307,322,491 $150,040,000 $157,282,491 ($713,154) $62,977,140

695 Atlantic Avenue, 2FL, Boston, MA 02111 Telephone: (617) 357-7763  Fax: (617) 357-7759  http://www.hdrinc.com Page | 32

10.2 Annual Demand Projections

Additional Special Projected Events Total Year Ridership Ridership Ridership 2015 1,222,130 122,213 1,344,343 2016 1,279,611 127,961 1,407,572 2017 1,337,091 133,709 1,470,800 2018 1,394,572 139,457 1,534,029 2019 1,452,052 145,205 1,597,257 2020 1,509,533 150,953 1,660,486 2021 1,567,013 156,701 1,723,714 2022 1,624,494 162,449 1,786,943 2023 1,681,974 168,197 1,850,171 2024 1,739,455 173,945 1,913,400 2025 1,796,935 179,694 1,976,629 2026 1,854,416 185,442 2,039,857 2027 1,911,896 191,190 2,103,086 2028 1,969,377 196,938 2,166,314 2029 2,026,857 202,686 2,229,543 2030 2,084,338 208,434 2,292,771 2031 2,141,818 214,182 2,356,000 2032 2,199,299 219,930 2,419,228 2033 2,256,779 225,678 2,482,457 2034 2,314,260 231,426 2,545,685 2035 2,371,740 237,174 2,608,914 Total 37,735,635 3,773,564 41,509,199

695 Atlantic Avenue, 2FL, Boston, MA 02111 Telephone: (617) 357-7763  Fax: (617) 357-7759  http://www.hdrinc.com Page | 33

10.3 State of Good Repair: Annual Benefit Estimates

Pavement Pavement Maintenance Maintenance Calendar Annual VMT Savings, Non- Savings, Year Avoided Discounted Discounted at 7%

2015 221,817 $295.75 $241.42 2016 468,086 $624.10 $476.12 2017 492,539 $656.70 $468.22 2018 516,991 $689.30 $459.31 2019 541,444 $721.91 $449.57 2020 522,366 $696.47 $405.35 2021 544,938 $726.56 $395.20 2022 567,509 $756.66 $384.65 2023 590,081 $786.75 $373.78 2024 612,653 $816.85 $362.69 2025 635,225 $846.94 $351.45 2026 657,796 $877.04 $340.13 2027 680,368 $907.13 $328.79 2028 702,940 $937.23 $317.47 2029 725,511 $967.32 $306.23 2030 748,083 $997.42 $295.10 2031 770,655 $1,027.51 $284.12 2032 793,227 $1,057.61 $273.31 2033 815,798 $1,087.70 $262.69 2034 838,370 $1,117.80 $252.30 2035 860,942 $573.95 $121.07 Total 13,307,338 $17,168.71 $7,148.97

695 Atlantic Avenue, 2FL, Boston, MA 02111 Telephone: (617) 357-7763  Fax: (617) 357-7759  http://www.hdrinc.com Page | 34

10.4 Economic Competitiveness: Annual Benefit Estimates

Calendar Total Discounted Benefits at 7% Year Residential Commercial Total 2015 $122,423 $2,252,632 $2,375,055 2016 $137,114 $2,522,948 $2,660,062 2017 $151,805 $2,793,263 $2,945,068 2018 $166,496 $3,063,579 $3,230,075 2019 $181,186 $3,333,895 $3,515,081 2020 $195,877 $3,604,211 $3,800,088 2021 $210,568 $3,874,527 $4,085,095 2022 $225,259 $4,144,843 $4,370,101 2023 $239,949 $4,415,158 $4,655,108 2024 $254,640 $4,685,474 $4,940,114 2025 $269,331 $4,955,790 $5,225,121 2026 $269,331 $4,955,790 $5,225,121 2027 $269,331 $4,955,790 $5,225,121 2028 $269,331 $4,955,790 $5,225,121 2029 $269,331 $4,955,790 $5,225,121 2030 $269,331 $4,955,790 $5,225,121 2031 $269,331 $4,955,790 $5,225,121 2032 $269,331 $4,955,790 $5,225,121 2033 $269,331 $4,955,790 $5,225,121 2034 $269,331 $4,955,790 $5,225,121 2035 $269,331 $4,955,790 $5,225,121 Total $4,847,958 $89,204,221 $94,052,178

695 Atlantic Avenue, 2FL, Boston, MA 02111 Telephone: (617) 357-7763  Fax: (617) 357-7759  http://www.hdrinc.com Page | 35

10.5 Livability: Annual Benefit Estimates

Non-Discounted Discounted at 7% Annual User Cost Annual User Annual User Cost Total Annual User Cost Total Annual User Cost Annual User Cost Savings Benefits Cost Savings Savings Benefits Savings Benefits, Non- Savings Benefits, Savings Benefits Remaining Auto Benefits to Remaining Auto Calendar Year Discounted Discounted to Streetcar Users Users Streetcar Users Users 2015 $382,769 $312,454 $380,873 $1,896 $310,906 $1,548 2016 $810,876 $618,614 $800,678 $10,198 $610,834 $7,780 2017 $845,396 $602,756 $833,418 $11,978 $594,216 $8,540 2018 $880,317 $586,593 $865,827 $14,490 $576,937 $9,655 2019 $914,585 $569,558 $897,693 $16,893 $559,038 $10,520 2020 $876,569 $510,171 $857,674 $18,895 $499,174 $10,997 2021 $908,368 $494,092 $885,608 $22,760 $481,712 $12,380 2022 $939,744 $477,718 $912,597 $27,147 $463,918 $13,800 2023 $971,269 $461,443 $938,189 $33,080 $445,727 $15,716 2024 $1,015,631 $450,952 $975,038 $40,593 $432,928 $18,024 2025 $1,069,076 $443,628 $1,019,283 $49,793 $422,966 $20,662 2026 $1,126,429 $436,849 $1,064,256 $62,172 $412,737 $24,112 2027 $1,188,049 $430,604 $1,109,976 $78,073 $402,306 $28,297 2028 $1,254,951 $425,095 $1,156,458 $98,493 $391,732 $33,363 2029 $1,423,280 $450,574 $1,203,720 $219,560 $381,067 $69,507 2030 $1,689,897 $499,979 $1,251,779 $438,117 $370,356 $129,623 2031 $1,814,497 $501,724 $1,300,653 $513,844 $359,642 $142,082 2032 $1,958,499 $506,113 $1,350,361 $608,138 $348,959 $157,154 2033 $1,963,985 $474,328 $1,400,921 $563,065 $338,341 $135,987 2034 $2,005,218 $452,604 $1,452,351 $552,867 $327,815 $124,789 2035 $1,534,548 $323,708 $1,504,672 $29,875 $317,406 $6,302 Total $25,573,955 $10,029,558 $22,162,027 $3,411,928 $9,048,717 $980,840

695 Atlantic Avenue, 2FL, Boston, MA 02111 Telephone: (617) 357-7763  Fax: (617) 357-7759  http://www.hdrinc.com Page | 36

10.6 Environmental Sustainability: Annual Emissions Avoided, in Metric Tons

Calendar Carbon Monoxide Nitrogen Oxides Particulate Matter Sulfur Dioxide Volatile Organic Compounds Carbon Dioxide Year (CO) (NOx) (PM) (SO2) (VOC) (CO2) 2015 0.52 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.01 75.28 2016 0.98 0.09 0.00 0.00 0.02 155.73 2017 0.91 0.08 0.00 0.00 0.02 160.58 2018 0.83 0.07 0.00 0.00 0.01 165.10 2019 0.77 0.06 0.00 0.00 0.01 170.15 2020 0.65 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.01 161.50 2021 0.58 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.01 165.71 2022 0.54 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.01 170.54 2023 0.50 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.01 175.22 2024 0.45 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.01 179.73 2025 0.42 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.01 184.85 2026 0.38 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.01 189.87 2027 0.35 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.01 194.78 2028 0.33 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.01 200.36 2029 0.30 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.01 205.88 2030 0.28 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.01 211.34 2031 0.27 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.01 217.30 2032 0.26 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.01 223.24 2033 0.24 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.01 229.14 2034 0.26 0.06 0.00 0.00 0.01 263.05 2035 0.24 0.06 0.00 0.00 0.01 241.46 Total 10.06 1.15 0.01 0.06 0.25 3,940.80

695 Atlantic Avenue, 2FL, Boston, MA 02111 Telephone: (617) 357-7763  Fax: (617) 357-7759  http://www.hdrinc.com Page | 37

10.7 Environmental Sustainability: Annual Benefit Estimates, Discounted

Carbon Monoxide Nitrogen Oxides Particulate Matter Sulfur Dioxide Volatile Organic Carbon Dioxide Calendar Year (CO)* (NOx) (PM) (SO2) Compounds (VOC) (CO2)* 2015 $0 $236 $60 $31 $11 $1,816 2016 $0 $400 $115 $60 $18 $3,723 2017 $0 $330 $109 $57 $15 $3,804 2018 $0 $261 $104 $55 $12 $3,874 2019 $0 $228 $100 $53 $11 $3,952 2020 $0 $181 $89 $47 $9 $3,713 2021 $0 $153 $86 $45 $8 $3,797 2022 $0 $140 $83 $44 $7 $3,878 2023 $0 $127 $81 $42 $7 $3,967 2024 $0 $115 $78 $40 $6 $4,034 2025 $0 $109 $76 $38 $6 $4,126 2026 $0 $103 $74 $37 $6 $4,198 2027 $0 $96 $71 $35 $5 $4,278 2028 $0 $92 $69 $34 $5 $4,355 2029 $0 $88 $67 $33 $5 $4,428 2030 $0 $85 $65 $31 $5 $4,509 2031 $0 $81 $63 $30 $5 $4,583 2032 $0 $78 $60 $29 $5 $4,667 2033 $0 $75 $58 $28 $4 $4,733 2034 $0 $117 $138 $74 $6 $13,402 2035 $0 $35 $27 $13 $2 $2,439 Total $0 $3,131 $1,672 $857 $158 $92,274 *Note that Carbon emissions are discounted at 3%.

695 Atlantic Avenue, 2FL, Boston, MA 02111 Telephone: (617) 357-7763  Fax: (617) 357-7759  http://www.hdrinc.com Page | 38

10.8 Safety: Annual Benefit Estimates

Annual Auto Annual Incremental Annual Incremental Annual Auto VMT Annual Streetcar Accident Cost Annual Streetcar Accident Costs, Non- Accident Costs, Calendar Year Avoided Mileage Savings Accident Costs Discounted Discounted

2015 221,817 64,220 $42,764 $123,470 -$80,706 -$65,880 2016 468,086 64,220 $91,208 $124,786 -$33,578 -$25,616 2017 492,539 64,220 $97,000 $126,116 -$29,116 -$20,759 2018 516,991 64,220 $102,905 $127,460 -$24,555 -$16,362 2019 541,444 64,220 $108,925 $128,818 -$19,894 -$12,389 2020 522,366 64,220 $106,211 $130,192 -$23,980 -$13,957 2021 544,938 64,220 $111,986 $131,579 -$19,593 -$10,657 2022 567,509 64,220 $117,873 $132,982 -$15,109 -$7,681 2023 590,081 64,220 $123,872 $134,400 -$10,527 -$5,001 2024 612,653 64,220 $129,987 $135,833 -$5,846 -$2,596 2025 635,225 64,220 $136,218 $137,281 -$1,063 -$441 2026 657,796 64,220 $142,568 $138,745 $3,823 $1,483 2027 680,368 64,220 $149,038 $140,224 $8,814 $3,194 2028 702,940 64,220 $155,630 $141,719 $13,911 $4,712 2029 725,511 64,220 $162,346 $143,230 $19,115 $6,051 2030 748,083 64,220 $169,188 $144,758 $24,430 $7,228 2031 770,655 64,220 $176,157 $146,301 $29,856 $8,255 2032 793,227 64,220 $183,257 $147,861 $35,396 $9,147 2033 815,798 64,220 $190,488 $149,438 $41,050 $9,914 2034 838,370 64,220 $197,853 $151,032 $46,821 $10,568 2035 860,942 64,220 $102,677 $152,643 -$49,966 -$10,540 Total 13,307,338 1,348,620 $2,798,150 $2,888,867 -$90,717 -$131,326

695 Atlantic Avenue, 2FL, Boston, MA 02111 Telephone: (617) 357-7763  Fax: (617) 357-7759  http://www.hdrinc.com Page | 39