Economic Analysis Branch April 20,

2015 Active Transportation Program -Guidelines adopted by the California Transportation Commission in March -The ATP Guidelines describe the policy, standards, criteria and procedures for the development, adoption and management of the Active Transportation Program -Under Section 18 of the Guidelines, Scoring Criteria – Cost Effectiveness (pg. 14) -“Caltrans has developed a first generation benefit/cost model for infrastructure and non-infrastructure active transportation projects in order to improve information available to decision makers at the state and MPO level. Applicants must use the benefit/cost model for active transportation projects developed by Caltrans when responding to this criterion (a link to the model is posted on the Commission’s website under Programs/ATP). Applicants are encouraged to provide feedback on instructions, ease of use, inputs, etc. This input will be useful in determining future revisions of the model.” 2

Active Transportation Benefits Non-Infrastructure Benefits Infrastructure Benefits Factors involved in converting people to become active transportation users Bicycle Infrastructure Benefits Pedestrian Infrastructure Benefits Promotional Effort Perception Duration Age Mobility Health Safety Recreational ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PROJECT BENEFITS Gas and Emissions ATP B/C Tool Overview 3

Instructions 4

Infrastructure Input Page 5

Project Name: NON-INFRASTRUCTURE Project Location: Outreach ( SR2S)- (Box 2A) Outreach (Non SR2S)- (Box 2B) Participants (School Enrollment) Participants Current Active Trans Walker/Bicyclist Users 0 Percentage of Current Active Trans Walkers/Bicyclists Project Cost ATP Requested Funds Duration of Outreach (months) Outreach to new users 0 0 Perception (must be marked with an "x")- (Box 2C) Promotional Effort (must be marked with an "x")- (Box 2D) Outreach is Hands-on (self-efficacy) Effort Targets 5 E's or 5 P's Overcome Barriers (e.g., dist, time, etc.) Knowledgable Staff/Educator Eliminates Hazards/Threats (speed, crime, etc.) Partnership/Volunteers Connected or Addresses Connectivity Challenges Creates Community Ownership/Relationship Creating Value in Using Active Transportation Part of Bigger Effort (e.g., political support) Age (must be marked with an "x")- (Box 2E) Duration (must be marked with an "x")- (Box 2F) Younger than 10 One Day One Month One Year Multiple Years 55+ Continuous Effort Projected New Active Trans Riders Longitudinal New Users 0 0 CRASH DATA - (Box 2G) Last 5 Yrs Annual Assumption: Fatal Crashes 0Benefits only accrue for five years, unless the project Injury Crashes 0is ongoing. PDO 0 Non-Infrastructure Input Page 6

Results Page 20 Year Invest Summary Analysis Total Costs$0.00 Net Present Cost$0.00 Total Benefits$0.00 Net Present Benefit $0.00 Benefit-Cost Ratio Year Itemized Savings Mobility$0.00 Health$0.00 Recreational$0.00 Gas & Emissions$0.00 Safety$0.00 Funds Requested$0.00 Net Present Cost of Funds Requested$0.00 Benefit Cost Ratio#DIV/0! 7

ATP Benefits Mobility Benefits Class I, Class II, and Class III Health Savings $146 annual per person Safety Benefits Fatality, Injury, and Property Damage Only (PDO) VMT Reduction Gas and Emission Savings Recreational 8

Study/AgencyPer Capita Cost Savings ($) Washington DOH19 Garrett et al.57 South Carolina DOH78 Georgia Department of Human Resources79 Colditz92 Minnesota DOH>100 Goetz et al.172 Pronk et al.176 Pratt330 Michigan Fitness Foundation1,175 Estimated Annual Per Capita Cost Savings (direct and/or indirect) of physical activity Source: NCHRP 552, Appendix G. 9

Parameters Value of Time Based on DOT’s Value of Time Guidance Gas Prices Based on average fuel price (November 2013-November 2014) – Energy Information Administration (EIA) Discount Rate 4% assumed, based from Cal/B-C model Rate of Growth 2% population growth ( ) Catchment Area (CA Household Travel Survey- average length of trip) 3 miles for biking.5 for walking 10

SRTS Infrastructure Assumptions 180 school days 2 miles distance to school = 1 hour walk ( 1 mile- composite for bike and walk distance back and forth to school) Value of time for adults was used for child as well since did not quantify time of parents chauffeuring their kids to school. Safety benefits are assumed to be the same as non- SRTS infrastructure projects. 11

Non-Infrastructure Assumptions 1 mile driven is ~ 0.05 gal ~ 1 lb of CO2 based on US average 20mpg. Users travel 13,000 vehicle miles per year Users divert half of their miles traveled each year. Gasoline price per gallon is $3.41 (incl. tax) Carbon price is $25 per ton (updated $2014 value) 12

Types of Projects Non-SRTS Infrastructure SRTS Infrastructure Non-STRS Non-Infrastructure SRTS Infrastructure Combination of Infrastructure & Non-Infrastructure Combination of SRTS and Non-SRTS Non- Infrastructure Combination of Non-SRTS and SRTS Infrastructure 13

Infrastructure Example Adding Class II Bike Lanes Existing Users Forecasted Users (Without and With Project) AADT (parallel road) if project is new facility Project Costs Total Infrastructure Project Costs Total ATP Requested Funds Crash Data Safety Countermeasures 14

Screenshot of Bike II Lane Completed 15

Results 16

Non-Infrastructure Example Safe Routes to School Evaluation/Education Project School Enrollment Active Transportation Walkers/Bicyclists Current ATP Users Project Costs ATP Requested Funds Duration of Outreach Crash Data 17

Screenshot of NI Example 18

Results 19

Sources NCHRP 552 Rails to Trails Conservancy Transport Analysis Guidance Local Roadway Safety: A manual for CA's Local Road Owners Caltrans. April Academic Journals (Journal of Planning Literature, etc.) TIGER Grant Projects (UW Burke-Gilman Trail, LA River Bike Path, HDR’s Atlanta BeltLine Community Connector) 20

Economic Analysis Branch ATP Website Website: 21

Contacts Lead Economist (Primary Investigator): Rose Agacer-Solis Phone Number: (916) Staff Economist (Non-Infrastructure Investigator): Ryan Ong Phone Number: (916) Economic Analysis Branch Manager: Barry Padilla Phone Number: (916)