The Impact Of Access Management On Business Vitality Along Corridors

Presented at the 38th Annual TRB Workshop on Transportation Law

Seattle, Washington July 20, 1999

Presentation Outline

Recap previous business vitality researchProvide background on the Iowa Access

Management Research and Awareness Project

Summarize research methods usedSummarize key research resultsDiscuss conclusions

Previous Research Findings

The majority of businesses do not experience sales losses as a result of access management changes and restrictions

Access management projects are extremely effective in terms of improving safety and traffic flow

Most losses that do occur are temporary and are recovered from within one to two years

Automobile-oriented businesses are the most vulnerable to changes and restrictions in access

Projects involving medians are the most controversial among business owners

Motorists overwhelmingly support access management projects

Iowa Project Background

Funded through the Iowa Highway Research Board, Iowa Department of Transportation and Federal Highway Administration

Guided by a Task Force made up of federal government, state government, local government, and private sector members

Conducted by a multidisciplinary team from two universities

Project Goals

Review existing national research and current Iowa access management practices

Leverage previous research where possibleDocument Iowa-specific data on safety,

operational, and business vitality impacts of access management projects using an in-depth case study approach

Educate key stakeholders using a variety of media by employing the Iowa results

Case Study Selection

50 possible case studies were nominated by transportation engineers and planners throughout Iowa

Criteria for selection included geographic coverage of Iowa and coverage of different types of access management issues and project types

Five business vitality case studies were selected by the Task Force to reflect a variety of communities and project types; four more case studies were analyzed in a second round

Nine total business vitality case studies

Iowa Case Study Locations

Iowa Case Study Locations

Methodology And Data

Retail sales tax data from the Iowa Department of Revenue and Finance, R.L. Polk city directories, and other secondary data sources

Opinion surveys of business owners and managers, motorists/business customers, and public officials conducted by the School of Business at the University of Northern Iowa

Sampling rates for business owners/managers were higher than those for other groups (motorists and public officials)

Original Case Study Communities

Community Highway Route Street Name CommunityPopulation*

Ames US 69 S. Duff Ave. 47,198

Ankeny** US 69 N. Ankeny Blvd. 21,485

Clive** Not applicable NW 86th St. 9,073

Fairfield US 34 W. Burlington Ave. 9,768

Spencer US 71 S. Grand Ave. 11,066

* Based on 1990 Census or latest special census.

** Community is a suburb in a metropolitan area.

Second Round Case Study Communities

Community Highway Route

Street Name Community Population*

Bettendorf** US 67 State St. 31,015Coralville** US 6 US Highway 6 11,789Des Moines IA 5 Army Post Rd./SW 9th St. 193,422West Des Moines** IA 28 63rd St./1st Ave. 40,380

* Based on 1990 Census or latest special census.

** Community is a suburb in a metropolitan area.

First Round Project Characteristics

Community ProjectType

Length(Miles)

YearCompleted

TrafficBeforeProject(AADT)*

TrafficAfter

Project(AADT)*

Ames Two-way leftturn lane

0.5 1994 20,500 21,800

Ankeny Raisedmedian

1.0 1993 12,000 16,300

Clive Raisedmedian

0.6 1991 26,000 28,000

Fairfield Drivewayconsolidation

0.6 1992 16,800 15,800

Spencer Two-way leftturn lane

0.6 1992 14,800 17,600

*AADT is the daily traffic volume estimated for an averageday during the year.

Second Round Project Characteristics

*AADT is the daily traffic volume estimated for an averageday during the year.

Community Project Type Length (Miles)

Year Completed

Traffic Before Project (AADT)*

Traffic After

Project (AADT)*

Bettendorf Two-way left turn lane

1.5 1996 18,600 21,800

Coralville Two-way left turn lane

0.7 1994 29,500 29,000

Des Moines Medians at intersections

2.0 Various 23,000 23,800

West Des Moines Raised median 0.9 1991 18,700 18,500

First Round Community Retailing Characteristics

Case Study Five Year SalesGrowth

Five YearChange In

Retail Firms

1996 RetailTrade “PullFactor”*

Ames +8.8% +2.1% 1.14

Ankeny +57.2% +22.7% 1.06

Clive +346.2% +171.0% 1.71

Fairfield +7.0% +10.4% 1.16

Spencer +5.5% +3.4% 1.57

* A pull factor at or near 1.0 indicates the community is primarily serving its own residents; a larger figure indicates it is also serving outsiders.

Second Round Community Retailing Characteristics

* A pull factor at or near 1.0 indicates the community is primarily serving its own residents; a larger figure indicates it is also serving outsiders.

Case Study Five Year Sales Growth

Five Year Change In Retail Firms

1996 Retail Trade "Pull Factor"*

Bettendorf +24.9% +11.1% 1.04Coralville +33.6% +35.9% 1.62Des Moines +24.2% -3.2% 2.39West Des Moines +53.2% +21.7% 1.97

Five Year ComparativeBusiness Survival Rates

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70A

me

s

An

ke

ny

Cli

ve

Fa

irfi

eld

Sp

en

ce

r

Sta

tew

ide

Community

Corridor

Note: Based on a five year period bracketing project completion. For corridors, business name changes or moves are counted as failures. First round projects only.

Case Study Corridor Sales Tax Revenue Growth

Retail Trade Growth Trends, 1990s

0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500

Ames

Ankeny

Clive

Fairfield

Spencer

Bettendorf

Coralville

Des Moines

West Des Moines

Average

Average, Without Clive

Cas

e S

tud

ies

Index, 1990=100

Corridor Index Community Index

Same Businesses Sales After Project Completion

Source: Opinion survey of business owners and managers.

Reported Sales Trend Post-Project

6%

45%

20%

29%

Decrease Same Increase Uncertain/No response

Businesses Reporting A Loss Of Sales After Project Completion

Nine of 162 businesses surveyed (6%) reported sales losses; these were: Two gasoline stations (both Des Moines--MAI) Two real estate offices (Ankeny--Median and Coralville--TWLTL) A convenience store (Bettendorf--TWLTL) A supermarket (Ankeny--Median) A tanning salon (Clive--Median) A music store (Coralville--TWLTL) A fast food restaurant (Coralville--TWLTL)

Five of these were “auto-oriented” businesses Five of these involved medians while four involved

TWLTLs

Businesses Reporting Customer Complaints About Highway Access

After Project Completion

Businesses Reporting Customer Complaints

28%

72%

Complaints reported No complaints

Businesses Reporting Customer Access Complaints, By Type

Customer Access Complaints By Business Type

28%

19%

4%6%

43%

Restaurant/fast foodAuto service/sales/gas stationHotel/motelInsurance/real estateOther business type

Overall Support For Access Management Projects

Community Project Type

Motorists Business Owners

Ames TWLTL 96% 91%Ankeny Median 100% 100%Clive Median 92% 70%Fairfield Driveway 100% 88%Spencer TWLTL 100% 100%Bettendorf TWLTL 100% 92%Coralville TWLTL 95% 96%Des Moines MAI 8% 60%West Des Moines Median 93% 78%Nine Case Average 87% 86%

Clive Notes

Clive: the only community where business survival rate was far lower in the corridor than in the community at large (may reflect businesses moving elsewhere in the community or new competition nearby)

Only one Clive business reported a sales decline, but half reported customer complaints about access

Clive experienced a major retail boom during the project period; the 86th St. corridor was already built-out, so the boom occurred elsewhere in Clive

Clive corridor was the third fastest growing; Clive community outpaced other communities by at least three to one

Des Moines and Ames Notes

Des Moines: much of project is old and it appears to have been too limited in scope and impact to gain much motorist notice or support

Businesses near intersections that were restricted by medians on the Des Moines project appear to feel they were placed at a disadvantage versus other businesses that retained unrestricted access

Des Moines is a stable market but is losing retail market share to communities like Clive and West Des Moines

Ames: project is recent and there has been a retail “boom” along it in past year (Target, Staples, movie theatres, largest restaurant in region)

Key Conclusions

Business failure rates in study corridors were at or below the statewide average of 10% per year and generally were lower in corridors than their surrounding communities

Average project corridor outpaced its surrounding community in terms of retail sales growth by about 20%

About 65 percent of businesses reported stable or increased sales after project completion and 75 percent reported no customer complaints about access to their business

Some individual businesses (6%) did report sales declines and customer complaints about access (28%)

About half of customer complaints about access come from “auto-oriented” businesses

Access management projects are usually supported by a great majority of motorists; business support varies more

Acknowledgements

Dr. Paul Chao, Dr. Pola Gupta, and graduate students, Department of Marketing, University of Northern Iowa

Dr. Tom Sanchez, Department of Community and Regional Planning, Iowa State University

Dr. Ken Stone and Scott Baumler, Economics Department, Iowa State University

Kathy Harpole and Rich Jacobs, Iowa Department of Revenue and Finance

Iowa Access Management Task Force Tom Welch and Ian MacGillivray, Engineering Division, Iowa

Department of Transportation

Contact

David J. PlazakCenter for Transportation Research and Education,

ISU Research Park, Ames, IA 50010-8615

Telephone: (515) 294-8103Fax: (515) 294-0467E-mail: dplazak@iastate.eduURL: http://www.ctre.iastate.edu/access