GUIDELINES FOR BENEFIT- COST ANALYSIS OF BICYCLE FACILITIES: REFINING METHODS FOR ESTIMATING THE EFFECT OF BICYCLE INFRASTRUCTURE ON USE AND PROPERTY VALUES Project 06-07 June 2007 Midwest Regional University Transportation Center College of Engineering Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering University of Wisconsin, Madison Prepared by: Gavin Poindexter, with the assistance of Kevin J. Krizek, Gary Barnes, and Kristen Thompson; Humphrey Institute of Public Affairs, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN Principal Investigator: Kevin J. Krizek; Associate Professor, Urban and Regional Planning and Civil Engineering, Humphrey Institute of Public Affairs, University of Minnesota, Technical Report Documentation Page 1. Report No. 2. Government Accession No. 3. Recipient’s Catalog No. MRUTC 06-07 CFDA 20.701 4. Title and Subtitle 5. Report Date June 2007 Optimization of Transportation Investment: Guidelines for Benefit-Cost Analysis of Bicycle Facilities: Refining methods for estimating the effect of bicycle infrastructure on use and property values 6. Performing Organization Code 7. Author/s Gavin Poindexter, Kevin J. Krizek, Gary Barnes, Kristen Thompson 8. Performing Organization Report No. 9. Performing Organization Name and Address 10. Work Unit No. (TRAIS) Midwest Regional University Transportation Center University of Wisconsin-Madison 11. Contract or Grant No. 1415 Engineering Drive, Madison, WI 53706 997B570 12. Sponsoring Organization Name and Address 13. Type of Report and Period Covered U.S. Department of Transportation Final Report [7/1/05 – 6/30/07] Research and Innovative Technology Administration 1200 New Jersey Ave., SE 14. Sponsoring Agency Code Washington, D.C. 20590 15. Supplementary Notes Project completed for the Midwest Regional University Transportation Center. 16. Abstract Following the passage of the Intermodal Surface Transportation Equity Act (ISTEA) in 1991, many communities began building and/or expanding their bicycle networks. With the increase in investment in bicycle facilities comes a need to measure the impact of the investments. This report expands on how these measurements can be done through case studies based in the Twin Cities. It is a compilation of studies related to estimating the effects of bicycle infrastructure on the community around the infrastructure and is a continuation of previous work that was included in the National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP) Report 552 Guidelines for Analysis of Investments in Bicycle Facilities. The work is divided into four main parts: (1) the relationship between bicycle facilities and rates of bicycling, (2) the impact of establishing bicycle facilities on residential property values, (3) the effect of building a bicycle facility on the number of bicycle crashes in the area, and (4) the impact of the Midtown Greenway on the surrounding community. In addition, the report also describes the use and refinement of a online tool for Benefit-Cost Analysis of Bicycle Facilities. The tool was created as part of the NCHRP project, and was recently used as part of graduate planning and civil engineering course. Included in this report is the findings of the research, and feedback from the students regarding the on-line tool. The on-line tool can be found at http://www.bicyclinginfo.org/bikecost/. 17. Key Words 18. Distribution Statement Bicycle No restrictions. This report is available through the Transportation Research Bicycle Infrastructure Information Services of the National Transportation Library. Bicycle Safety Bicycling rates 19. Security Classification (of this report) 20. Security Classification (of this page) 21. No. Of Pages 22. Price Unclassified Unclassified 57 -0- Form DOT F 1700.7 (8-72) Reproduction of form and completed page is authorized. DISCLAIMER This research was funded by the Midwest Regional University Transportation Center. The contents of this report reflect the views of the authors, who are responsible for the facts and the accuracy of the information presented herein. This document is disseminated under the sponsorship of the Department of Transportation, University Transportation Centers Program, in the interest of information exchange. The U.S. Government assumes no liability for the contents or use thereof. The contents do not necessarily reflect the official views of the Midwest Regional University Transportation Center, the University of Wisconsin, the Wisconsin Department of Transportation, or the USDOT’s RITA at the time of publication. The United States Government assumes no liability for its contents or use thereof. This report does not constitute a standard, specification, or regulation. The United States Government does not endorse products or manufacturers. Trade and manufacturers names appear in this report only because they are considered essential to the object of the document. The Humphrey Institute of Public Affairs at the University of Minnesota is hospitable to a diversity of opinions and aspirations. The Humphrey Institute itself does not take a position on issues of public policy. The University of Minnesota is an equal opportunity educator and employer. Table of Contents Executive Summary............................................................................................................ v 1. Introduction..................................................................................................................... 1 2. Rates of Bicycling & Relationship to Facilities.............................................................. 3 2.1 Longitudinal Analysis............................................................................................... 3 2.1.1 Describing New Facilities.................................................................................. 4 On-Street Bicycle Lanes ......................................................................................... 5 Off-Street Bicycle Paths ......................................................................................... 5 University Area Facilities ....................................................................................... 6 Other Facilities........................................................................................................ 6 2.1.2 Research Strategy............................................................................................... 7 Buffering................................................................................................................. 7 Measuring bicycle commuting................................................................................ 7 Calculating Bicycle Mode Share and Statistical Significance................................ 8 2.1.3 Analysis and Results.......................................................................................... 9 Overall Bicycle Mode Share................................................................................... 9 Individual Facility Buffers.................................................................................... 10 River Crossings..................................................................................................... 10 Major Destinations................................................................................................ 11 Demographic and Economic Factors.................................................................... 12 2.1.4 Conclusions...................................................................................................... 13 2.2 Cross-sectional Analysis......................................................................................... 14 2.2.1 Literature review.............................................................................................. 15 2.2.2 Approach.......................................................................................................... 17 2.2.3 Analysis............................................................................................................ 21 2.2.4 Conclusions...................................................................................................... 27 Limits to methodology.......................................................................................... 28 Application............................................................................................................ 29 3. Effect of Bicycle Facilities on Housing Prices ............................................................. 31 3.1 Methodology........................................................................................................... 32 Selected facilities ...................................................................................................... 32 Selection of treatment areas.................................................................................. 33 Selection of control areas...................................................................................... 33 Parcel data............................................................................................................. 35 Linking property data to the tracts........................................................................ 36 3.2 Results..................................................................................................................... 36 3.3 Conclusions............................................................................................................. 37 4. Safety & Relationship to Facilities ..............................................................................