DOING BUSINESS AROUND TRANSIT CORRIDORS. Presentation to 2012 APA Minnesota Conference

Transcription

1 DOING BUSINESS AROUND TRANSIT CORRIDORS Presentation to 2012 APA Minnesota Conference

2 Transitway Impacts Research Program Program Mission Partnership between: Center for Transportation Studies University of Minnesota research community Twin Cities agencies & local governments involved with fixedguideway transit development Investigate the economic, social, environmental and health impacts of transitway corridors Help educate elected officials, agency leaders and staff, and the University research community about current issues, innovations, and trends. Serve as a national model of inter-jurisdictional collaboration between government and academia. Maximize benefits to local partners by facilitating partnerships that support large-scale studies. 2

3 Research Need Major transit build-out in Twin Citiesi Overwhelmingly in developed areas Controversy in popular press Existing impacts research: Development shifts; Property values; Gentrification; etc. Little research on individual perceptions Do businesses themselves es see Benefits? Harms? Some of each? 3

4 Survey of Small Businesses Objectives Survey Sample Measure perceived transit corridor impacts Identify who gains and who loses 160 responses from 4 corridors 2 LRT, 1 BRT & 1 commuter rail 40 per corridor Cluster sampling from 4 neighborhoods each corridor Questionnaire Questionnaire covers three parts: Perceived neighborhood change Travel behavior Background demographics 4

5 Business Survey 160 Responses 16 Neighborhoods Even distribution Simple random neighborhood level Response Rate: Central Corridor 43% Hiawatha 37% Cedar Ave 27% Northstar 22% 5

6 Questionnaire Four key questions about perceptions Neighborhood better/worse Transit corridor positive/negative Past &f future Remaining questions include: Neighborhood change Employee & customer characteristics, travel behavior Business characteristics Respondent demographics, travel behavior Mix of interviews/ questionnaires 6

7 Results 7

8 Construction Concerns Most have moderate to serious concerns Especially Central Corridor Central Corridor concerns fairly even Many Cedar businesses cited uncertainty about detours 8

9 10 Neighborhood Change Past Future Past Future Past Future Past Future Much Better Somewhat Better About the Same Somewhat Worse Much Worse Key Questions Increasing polarization for Central Corridor Hiawatha optimism Suburban stasis, except Northstar future Central Corridor Hiawatha Cedar Ave Northstar 10 Hiawatha LRT a hit Central Corridor past- future divide, but- 7 Little change in negatives 6 Suburbs largely neutral Transitway Impacts 7 Strongly Positive Past Future Past Future Past Future Past Future Somewhat Positive Neutral Somewhat Negative Strongly Negative 9 Central Corridor Hiawatha Cedar Ave Northstar

10 Regression Models Significant Explanatory Variables Past Future tion Locat Busines ss Character ristics r Travel Behavior Demographic cs Neighborhood Transitway Neighborhood Transitway Central Corridor Light Rail *** Cedar Avenue Bus Rapid Transit *** ** Northstar Commuter Rail *** Airline Distance from Business to Transitway Alignment *** *** * Automobile Sales/Service Business ** ** ** *** Traditional Storefront Building ** Detached Building, with Parking Lot ** Multi-Story Office Building *** Building Owned by Business * Age of Business, in Years *** * CY 2010 Sales * *** Alternative Transportation >= 2x/wk, Respondent ** Many or Most Employees use Alternative Transportation ** * Many or Most Employees or Customers Park on the Street * Customers' use of Transitway *** ** *** Minority Respondent ** ** Many or Most Employees African-American A i *** *** Many or Most Employees Hispanic *** *** Many or Most Customers African-American * ** Many or Most Customers Immigrants ** Od Ordered dlogistic regression Explanatory variables cover: Key questions are dependent variables Location 4 models 1 for each key question Business characteristics Travel behavior Demographics 10

11 Model Predictions Future Perceptions: Automotive Businesses Strongly Positive Somewhat Positive Neutral Somewhat Negative Strongly Negative Probabilities of each dependent variable value. Manipulate one statistically significant variable. Hold others at median. Automotive businesses consistent departure from positive trend. (Not auto Auto (Not auto sales/service) sales/service sales/service) Neighborhood Transitway Auto sales/service (Reference cat's in parentheses) 11

12 Model Predictions 10 Perceptions of Transitway Impacts, by Corridor 7 Strongly Positive 6 Somewhat Positive 5 Neutral 4 Somewhat Negative 3 Strongly Negative Past: Hiawatha vs. everybody else Northstar past slightly higher prob. of positives than unfinished lines Future perceptions less controversial (Hiawatha) Central Cedar Ave Northstar (Hiawatha)Cedar Ave Corridor Past Future (Reference cat's in parentheses) 12

13 10 Past Transitway Impacts 4 Neutral Meters from Alignment Strongly Positive Somewhat Positive Somewhat Negative Strongly Negative Model Predictions Positive, but- Large increase in prob. of positives with distance from line. Similar trend, but- Positives more likely overall. Especially for businesses near line Future Transitway Impacts 4 Neutral Strongly Positive Somewhat Positive 3 Somewhat Negative Strongly Negative Meters from Alignment

14 10 Past Transitway Impacts 4 Neutral Years in Business Strongly Positive Somewhat Positive Somewhat Negative Strongly Negative Model Predictions New businesses much more likely to perceive past impacts in positive light. Self selection? Again, less controversy over future impacts than past impacts Older businesses still slightly less likely to be positive Future Transitway Impacts 4 Neutral Years in Business Strongly Positive Somewhat Positive Somewhat Negative Strongly Negative

15 Model Predictions Future Neighborhood Change Much Better 5 Somewhat Better 4 About the Same 3 Somewhat Worse Much Worse Significant difference in perceptions based on sales volume Positives much less likely, negatives more likely for smallest businesses <= $100K > $100K; <= $250K > $250K; <= $500K > $500K; <= $1M Annual Sales > $1M; <= $5M > $5M 15

16 10 Future Neighborhood Change None A Few Many Most Customers' Transitway Use Much Better Somewhat Better About the Same Somewhat Worse Much Worse Model Predictions Positive overall Still, significant increase in probabilities of positives with customers use of transitway. Hiawatha, Northstar observed Central Corridor, Cedar Ave expected Customers transitway use has dramatic effect on future impacts perceptions. Even none to a few shifts from 46% to probability of positive. Past impacts quite similar Future Transitway Impacts 7 Strongly Positive None A Few Many Most Customers' Transitway Use Somewhat Positive Neutral Somewhat Negative Strongly Negative

17 Key Conclusions 17

18 Key Conclusions Businesses are more generally positive about future than past. Significant concerns about construction impacts. Positive perceptions of future impacts out-number negatives for all corridors, but- Significant corridor-to-corridor difference in number of positives, and Number and strength of negatives. Central Corridor s vanishing middle. Some businesses may feel like they re being planned out of transitway areas. Type Size Age Racial/nativity status divisions are powerful, but complex- Why the African-American Hispanic/immigrant American difference? Underscores need for community outreach and dialogue. Belief that customers (will) ride is a major plus. 18

19 Thank you! Sponsored by the Transitway Impacts Research Program Partners and supporters Anoka County Center for Transportation Studies Center for Urban and Regional Affairs Central Corridor Funders Collaborative City of Minneapolis City of St. Paul Dakota County Federal Transit Administration Central Corridor Funders Collaborative Hennepin County Humphrey School of Public Affairs State and Local Policy Program Itasca Project Metro Transit Metropolitan Council Minnesota Dept. of Transportation Ramsey County University it Metropolitan Consortium Washington County 19

20 Research Team Principal Investigator Yingling g Fan- y g g@ Project Manager Andrew Guthrie- Surveyors Chris Berrens Matt Fyten Lewis Kuhlman Sarah Swingley Rose Teng yingling@umn.edu guth0064@umn.edu 20