Presented to HRTPO Board by Robert B. Case, PhD, PE March 17, 2016 - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Presented to HRTPO Board by Robert B. Case, PhD, PE March 17, 2016

A report by Rob Case, James Clary, Rob Jaques, Theresa Jones, David Pritchard, and Seth Schipinski

Agenda Item #9

guide.alibab.com usa.streetsblog.org doingindy.com snipview.com

2

Monon Rail-Trail in Indianapolis

Economic Development

Google maps Google maps

3

Google maps

4

Hampton Roads

3.0% 0.5% 96.5%

Mode of Transportation to Work, Hampton Roads, 2014 (Census)

Walk Bike Other

Actual Persons using Active Transportation to Work

Census, 2009‐2013

Rail-trails

faster, safer, more pleasant

Study Focus

rail-trails: inactive rail right-of-ways

Focus

5

Walking and biking:

Healthy, enjoyable, affordable

Why don’t more people walk & bike?

slower, more dangerous, less comfortable

to help local government improve the existing bike/walk (“active transportation”) network in Hampton Roads in a cost-effective way, by:

6

Purpose

locating inactive rail right-of-ways analyzing the costs and benefits of converting them to multi-use trails

Candidate Rail-Trails

7

Note: Any path(s) in the Norfolk-Southern right-

• f-way must conform with LRT plans, e.g.

constructing station access paths for LRT.

Effectiveness of Candidate Rail-Trails

• 1. Estimating impact on usage of active transportation
• 2. Estimating rail-trail impact on real estate values
• 3. Estimating cost of candidate rail-trails

Quantitative Analysis

8

9

• 1. HRTPO Active Trans usage model

Based on actual behavior of persons “near to” vs. “far from” 6 trails in 14 counties Findings

 Low income persons are more likely to use active trans to work.  Rail-trails appear to positively impact the usage of active trans by low income and medium-high income workers living near.

10

Active Trans Usage Forecast

Note: Any path(s) in the Norfolk-Southern right-

• f-way must conform with LRT plans, e.g.

constructing station access paths for LRT.

Based on studies of existing trails:

Austin:

9% increase in value of residences adjacent to rail-trail (low)

Indianapolis:

14% increase in value of residences within 0.5 mile (high)

11

• 2. Impact on Home Values

12

Potential Impact on Home Values

$2,000,000 $1,000,000 $4,000,000 $5,000,000 $0 $2,000,000 $5,000,000 $12,000,000 $700,000 $1,000,000 $500,000 $4,000,000 $1,000,000 $800,000 $0 $2,000,000 $4,000,000 $6,000,000 $8,000,000 $10,000,000 $12,000,000 $14,000,000 9% increase in value of adjacent residential properties (based on Austin)

13

Cost of Candidates-

excluding ROW and bridges

based on per-mile cost estimates of sections of Capital Trail

Name Length (miles) Total Cost Atlantic & Danville 2.96 $2,000,000 Bayville 0.85 $400,000 Bruce Road 2.24 $1,000,000 Churchland 4.25 $2,000,000 Churchland High 0.95 $500,000 Courthouse 1.52 $800,000 Larkspur 1.22 $600,000 Norfolk Southern VB 10.55 $5,000,000 Penniman 3.21 $2,000,000 Seaboard (Ph. 3) 6.34 $3,000,000 Southern 10.53 $5,000,000 Tyre Neck 3.41 $2,000,000 Virginian- East 11.20 $6,000,000 Virginian- West 16.59 $9,000,000

Qualitative Analysis: “Public Facilities”

14

“Churchland” Candidate Rail-Trail

15

“Churchland” Candidate Rail-Trail

Qualitative Analysis: “Demographics and Networks”

VDOT Tidewater Bicycle Assoc. Elizabeth River Trail Comm. HRT Cities Citizen

• Va. Bicycling Federation

Comments Received

16

Next Fiscal Year (starting 1 July 2016)

 Hampton Roads Active Transportation Plan

Next TTAC Meeting (6 April 2016)

 Capital Trail Extension ad hoc subcommittee (Peninsula)

Next Steps

17

Under Agenda Item #17, “Consent Items”

 Approve the final report (#17E)

Recommended Action

18