link to page 1
Memorandum
Memorandum
To:
Ali Rajaiy
Date:
14 March 2017
From:
Harriet Priddey
Our Ref:
3124347
Copy:
Fariz Rahman, Ahmad Issa
Subject:
Northcote Safe Cycle Route - Economic Evaluation
1
Evaluation Framework
The economic evaluation has been undertaken in accordance with the NZ Transport Agency’s
Economic Evaluation Manual (EEM) using a customised version of the full procedures. The
economic analysis for the project has included the following benefits displayed in
Table 1.
Table 1: Components of economic benefits and evaluation procedure adopted
Benefit Component
Evaluation Procedure
Cycle routes cycling health and environment
Full procedure
benefits
Cycle routes cycling safety benefits
Cycle journey time benefits
Road traffic reduction benefits (decongestion)
The evaluation was peer reviewed by MWH and recommendations incorporated. The peer review
response is attached in Appendix A.
2
Assumptions
2.1
General
The following assumptions have been made in the economic analysis:
Project opening year: 2018
Construction time of 12 months
The width available before and after has been estimated at 1.5m and 3.0m respectively
Total expected cost estimate of $17,587,188
SkyPath opening year: 2019
The assumptions in the economic benefit components are further described in the following
sections.
2.2
Demand
2.2.1 Base
The cycle demand for the Project has been estimated based on the 2015 Auckland Region Manual
Cycle monitor
(North Shore Ward) report and Worksheet A20.1 from the EEM. The catchment area
and population inputs to the worksheet have been based on the previous Scheme Assessment
Beca // 14 March 2017 // Page 1
3124347 // NZ1-13282586-7 0.7
link to page 2
Memorandum
Report (which was peer reviewed). This number is deemed appropriate as the previous numbers
were derived based on the 2013 census data, which would still represent the most recent census
data available.
The worksheet estimates 255 existing cyclists. However, after reviewing cyclist counts from
Taharoto Road/Northcote Road it appears that current cycling numbers are supressed. Therefore
existing cyclists have been reduced to 193, based on assumption that half of the Taharoto
Road/Northcote Road intersection count would use the route in the project area.
As currently cyclist numbers are suppressed the number of new cyclist will be greater than the 121
calculated from the spreadsheet. Hence an increase of 183 has been chosen in order to match the
initial total of 376 (existing plus new) derived from the worksheet.
2.2.2 School Students
Instead of relying on census data only, we have allowed for new school students using the route
once improvements are completed. This was done based on the number of students on the roll for
each school which has a catchment that overlaps with the catchment for this project. More details
are shown in
Table 2.
Table 2: Breakdown of School Students Using the Route
School Name
School Roll
Assumed
Percentage of
Number of
percentage
school students
school
within
(new) likely to cycle
cyclists
catchment
with safe facilities
Northcote College
1076
15%
10.0%
16
Westlake Girls' High
2181
5%
10.0%
11
School
Northcote Intermediate
278
75%
5.0%
10
Northcote School
478
75%
2.5%
9
(Auckland)
Onepoto School
108
75%
2.5%
2
St Mary's School
424
75%
3.25%
10
(Northcote)
Takapuna Normal
602
5%
5.0%
2
Intermediate
Rosmini College
1050
10%
7.5%
8
St Joseph's Catholic
381
10%
2.5%
1
School (Takapuna)
Northcote College
1076
15%
10.0%
16
Total
69 per 5 days
49 per 7 days
2.2.3 SkyPath
The SkyPath project has recently received resource consent, and as such has been included in the
Do Minimum for the economic analysis. SkyPath will bring new cyclists to the project area. These
cyclists will also benefit from the proposed Northcote Safe Cycle Route facility improvements.
Beca // 14 March 2017 // Page 2
3124347 // NZ1-13282586-7 0.7
link to page 3 link to page 4
Memorandum
Based on the estimated numbers from a study by Angus & Associates for Auckland Council, it has
been assumed that 40% of the cyclists from SkyPath could go through the Northcote Safe Cycle
Route project area.
2.2.4 Growth Rate
For the base cycle demand growth rate, 4.0% has been chosen. This has been derived from
historical census trends (+3.8% per annum) last collected in 2013. The SkyPath growth rate has
been extrapolated from the study by Angus & Associates.
2.3
Safety Benefits
A full crash-by-crash analysis was not considered applicable due to the significant changes that
SkyPath will bring to existing conditions, by increasing the number of cyclists. Instead, the safety
benefits have been calculated using the value from the EEM of $0.05 per cyclist km. Safety benefits
for lower Queen St were not included in the EEM as only sharrows and speed calming devices were
proposed. Therefore the total route length considered was 4.2km.
2.4
Health and Environmental Benefits
2.4.1 Cycling
Health and Environmental benefits for new cycling users have been calculated using the value form
the EEM of $1.40 per cyclist km.
2.4.2 Pedestrians
There are no any significant benefits for pedestrians as new infrastructure is Copenhagen lanes,
and marked cycle lanes. Shared paths which affect pedestrians have been repurposed from
existing infrastructure.
2.5
Travel Time Benefits (Cyclists)
2.5.1 Travel Time Cost
A travel time value of $6.42 per hour has been adopted. This has been based on both the $/h
values from the 2016 EEM Table 4.1(a) and the trip generation points surrounding the project. The
values used to calculate the travel time value are displayed in
Table 3.
Table 3: Travel Time Value
Travel Purpose
At work
Commuting
Other
Split assumed
5%
50%
40%
Cost ($/h)
$21.70
$6.60
$4.25
2.5.2 Relative Attractiveness
The Relative attractiveness (RA) of 1.915 has been adopted. To obtain this value the project has
been broken into 6 similar sections. Each section has been measured and an RA has been
calculated based on the type of cycling facility present. To understand the RA for a certain facility
information from table A20.2 of the EEM has been used. For a breakdown se
e Table 4
Beca // 14 March 2017 // Page 3
3124347 // NZ1-13282586-7 0.7
link to page 4
Memorandum
Table 4: Relative Attractiveness
Section
1
2
3
4
5
6
Length
1.3
0.98
0.67
0.48
0.77
1
RA
2
1.887
1.93
2
1.95
1.7
Comments
All shared
One marked cycle
One shared path
All shared
Cycle lane
Semi-mixed
path
lane on one direction
and one marked
path
with no
use both
and a shared path
cycle lane with
parking off
directions
and cycle lane in the
limited parking
street at some
other
points
Assumptions:
Queen Street RA of 1.7 assumed as it is a shared space
Cycling lanes with partial parking along their length, RA of between 1.8 and 1.9 assumed
depending on the percentage of parking
2.5.3 Mean Speed
The cycling speed for the current situation was assumed to be 15 km/h to reflect the delays that
cyclists face when navigating the current route. The new cycling speed is assumed to be 18 km/h.
The travel time savings doesn’t assume benefits for pedestrians as their travel time will not be
affected.
2.6
Road Traffic Reduction Benefits
Road traffic reduction (decongestion) benefits have been included for new cyclists who travel during
the weekday peak periods i.e. commuters. It is assumed that 50% of new users are commuters.
The diversion rate (vehicle km removed from road per new cyclist km) is assumed to be 72.5% and
the reduction benefit $1.56 per vehicle km per year, both from the EEM.
3
Economic Analysis Results
The economic analysis results are summarised i
n Table 5
Table 5: Economic Analysis Results
Item
Cycleway
Health and environment benefits for cycling facility
$15,710,460
Travel time cost savings (cyclists)
$5,856,207
Safety benefits for cycling facility
$1,059,974
Road traffic reduction benefits
$2,941,050
Total Benefits (NPV)
$25,567,691
Total Costs* (NPV)
$16,584,736
BCR
1.5
*including remarking every 10 years at a cost of $100,000
Beca // 14 March 2017 // Page 4
3124347 // NZ1-13282586-7 0.7
Memorandum
The economic analysis carried out produces a BCR of 1.5 which would suggest a
low economic
efficiency rating under the NLTP 2015/18.
4
Sensitivity Testing
Several sensitivity tests were carried out to investigate a number of different effects. The results are
summarised in a memo responding to Peer Review comments (Northcote Safe Cycle Route –
Economic Evaluation Peer Review Response, 08/12/2016). These are attached in Appendix B.
Harriet Priddey
Systems Engineer
Direct Dial: +6493009681
Email: [email address]
Beca // 14 March 2017 // Page 5
3124347 // NZ1-13282586-7 0.7
Memorandum
Appendix A – Peer Review Response
The document “Northcote Safe Cycle Routes Economic Peer Review” (MWH, 16 November 2016)
was reviewed and the recommendations considered. Our response to each of the
recommendations is shown in the table below.
Table 6: Recommendation Responses
Reviewer’s
Response
Recommendations
C1
Provide Designs
A parallel estimate has been undertaken by an external party (Stellar
and Cost
Projects). There parallel estimate was generally aligned with our
estimates for
estimate, this is considered sufficient review.
review
C2
Provide basis for
At this stage maintenance costs are assumptions. However they are
maintenance costs small in comparison to the other costs and benefits. This also has
minimal impact on the overall BCR, when compared to other factors
that are also raised by the peer reviewer. A further sensitivity test has
been carried out to demonstrate that this has negligible effect on the
overall BCR.
C3
Confirm analysis
Analysis duration has been extended from 2056 to 2057, which
duration.
increases the total benefit by 1.5%.
Confirm
We agree that midpoint of construction should technically be year 0.5,
construction
however as noted effect is modest as error applies to both costs and
timeframes and
benefits, so no changes has been made to the evaluation.
consider preparing
a WS1.1.
C4
Provide evidence
Recently there has been a strong focus on cycling, prompted by the
supporting
Ministry of Transport’s Urban Cycleway Fund. In Auckland, the Council
increase in school
has committed $125m over three years towards cycling and walking.
cycling above
Auckland Transport is delivering a comprehensive programme of
calculated
behaviour change activities. This included training over 10,000 children
generation.
and 1,000 adults in 2015.
In this context it is not unreasonable to assume that school cycling will
increase. In addition, the actual numbers in the evaluation are fairly
conservative, ranging from 1 to 16 extra students cycling per school.
C5
Consider factoring
We agree and hence have carried out sensitivity test with no school
school cyclists by
cyclists.
3/5.2, or, consider
sensitivity test with
no cyclists.
C6
Provide evidence
We agree that the SkyPath numbers provided could be overly
of claimed extra
optimistic. We have revised them based on the review comments. We
SkyPath-
have applied 30% as the number of SkyPath users who will walk or
generated 800
cycle to access it. The review suggests 20%, however we note this is
cyclists per day
based on unconstrained parking, which is unlikely to be the case. We
have applied 75% of all walk/cycle users to be cyclists. This is based on
cycling having a catchment area approximately 3x larger than walking.
This has resulted in 165 cyclist trips per day along the Northcote route
from SkyPath, on the opening year.
C7
Confirm effect of
The SeaPath project is currently at the Investigation stage and has not
SeaPath
been granted consent. This has not been included in our economic
Beca // 14 March 2017 // Page 6
3124347 // NZ1-13282586-7 0.7
Memorandum
Reviewer’s
Response
Recommendations
assessment, but we have applied some conservatism in the analysis
with applying 40% of the 412 SkyPath cyclists going through the project
area. A sensitivity test has been carried out with only 25% of the
cyclists using the route, as may happen if the SeaPath alternative is
built.
C8
Provide evidence
Cycling counts across Auckland have recently been increasing. The
of sustained
most recent results of Auckland Transport’s monthly cycling numbers
growth relevant to
show 1.67 million cycle trips were recorded for the year of November
Northcote, or
2015 to October 2016, an increase of 8.9% on the previous 12 months.
sensitivity test at a
In addition, there is potential significant development in the area. The
lower growth rate. Northcote Strategic area was designated as a SHA in May 2014, with
potential development of approximately 700 new sites and dwellings.
In light of this, it is not considered unreasonable to use the 4% growth
rate form the survey given the lack of better data.
However, a sensitivity test at a lower growth rate has been included
below.
C9
Justify 3kph speed The speed increase is a high-level assumption.
increase
A sensitivity test has been provided below showing that this has no
material impact on BCR.
C10 Explain 10% work-
With little evidence, we have applied the assumption based on light
related cycling
vehicle composition on urban roads. However, we appreciate that this
component
could be slightly optimistic. With increasing drive from employers to
increase their sustainability input, there could be increasing work
related trips on bicycles. The Northcote route connects directly to the
Smales Farm employment precinct. Regardless, we have reduced this
work related composition trips to 5%.
This changes the overall value of time to $6.42/hour
C11 Consider $TT
Further sensitivity test included.
testing with no
work related
component.
C12 Use correct health
Agree and amended in our evaluation.
and environment
rate $1.40
C13 Consider method
Refer response on C15.
A modifications,
including growth
modelling as per
the compendium.
C14 Consider applying
Refer response on C15.
method C.
C15 Consider reducing
Agree. As per the Detailed Design Report, the cycleway can be split
simplified safety
into five sections. Four of these (1, 2, 3, 4a) have facilities expected to
benefits length.
provide the safety benefits through shared paths, Copenhagen cycle
lanes or regular cycle lanes. The last section (4b) will have speed
calming devices and “sharrow” markings, which may be less effective.
This section measures 1km, so the length of safety benefits has been
reduced to 4.2km.
C16 Consider halving
The evaluator agreed that this is a valid comment. However as noted by
the claimed
the reviewer, the net result does not change the BCR and hence
Beca // 14 March 2017 // Page 7
3124347 // NZ1-13282586-7 0.7
Memorandum
Reviewer’s
Response
Recommendations
benefit for
evaluation has been left as is.
“decongestion”
and removing the
$0.10
Environment rate
component.
Increase
commuter
component %
Appendix B – Peer Review Sensitivity Tests
Several sensitivity tests were carried out to investigate the effect of travel time values and cycling
demand on the BCR. The results are summarised below. The BCR remains within the
low economic efficiency rating range.
Note that these tests were carried out as part of the Peer Review response when the cost estimate
was slightly different to the current estimate. So the exact BCRs may have changed slightly
however this provides a reasonable indication of the potential BCR range.
Table 7: Sensitivity Test Results
Sensitivity Test
BCR
Decrease travel time value from $6.42 to $5.54 by excluding work trips
1.5
Exclude the new school cyclists
1.4
Decrease cycle trips growth rate from 4% to 2%
1.3
Average speed to remain at 15kph rather than increase to 18kph
1.5
Option maintenance costs increase by 50% to $150,000 every 10 years 1.6
Only 25% of SkyPath cyclists use Northcote Route
1.5
Beca // 14 March 2017 // Page 8
3124347 // NZ1-13282586-7 0.7
