Poirier Bikes and Business 2017

College of Environmental Design University of California, Berkeley
Are Bicycles Good for Business?

A San Francisco Examination in Three Case Studies
Joseph A. Poirier
Department of City + Regional Planning
May 2017
Are Bicycles Good for Business? A San Francisco Examination in Three Case Studies
Table of Contents
Executive Summary 3
Literature Review 6
Methods 9
Analysis 19
Discussion & Conclusions 30
References 34
Joseph A. Poirier is a transportation planning researcher at the Center for Community Innovation at the
University of California, Berkeley. He holds an MCP from UC Berkeley and an AB in Sociology from Harvard
College. He can be reached at jpoirier20 [a t] berkeley.edu.
This project was completed as a Professional Report requirement for the degree of Master of City Planning at
the Department of City + Regional Planning in UC Berkeleys College of Environmental Design.
Thanks to Karen Chapple, Dan Chatman, Patty Frontiera, Rebecca Sanders, and Miriam Zuk for guiding this
research, reviewing paper drafts, offering technical assistance, and providing valuable feedback.
Executive Summary
This research uses secondary sales and employment data from selected case study neighborhoods in San
Francisco, California, examining the effect that the introduction of bicycle infrastructure had on businesses
along three distinct commercial corridors. The paper measures the change over time of business success
metrics from two years before to two years after the introduction of bicycle infrastructure.
Following a literature review of research on the economic impact of bicycle infrastructure, this paper out-
lines the methodology and data sources used for the analysis. Businesses in the case study regions are
divided into those that directly abutted the bicycle lane intervention and those that existed in the same
census block group but did not abut the bicycle lane intervention. The same businesses are then subset into
two categories: all establishments and local-serving establishments; thereby examining the relationship
between bicycle infrastructure projects and business success at different types of establishments.
A change over time analysis was then conducted and the performance of businesses that abutted the bicy-
cle lane intervention was compared with the businesses that did not abut the bicycle lane intervention. The
significant findings of this research are four-fold:
Bicycle lanes likely do not have the catastrophic negative effect on business that some merchants claim.
In two case study neighborhoods, sales per local-serving establishment increased markedly after the
intervention, suggesting that bicycle lanes can have a positive effect on local-serving businesses.
It is not likely that bicycle lanes will increase sales for all businesses. Put more simply, a blanket bicycle
lanes are good for all businesses statement is likely untrue.
Local-serving and all business establishments likely experience bicycle lane interventions very different-
ly. There is some evidence to suggest that local-serving businesses benefit more than all businesses.
For practitioners, these results highlight the importance of understanding the makeup of business stake-
holders that are expected to be affected by a bicycle lane intervention. Care should be taken by planners
and the community to consider who should benefit from bicycle lane interventions and who can reasonably
stand to be negatively affected.
The advantages of this research are the density of business establishments in case study neighborhoods, the
use of hard secondary data (as opposed to customer or merchant surveys), and the robust control region.
Weaknesses of this research include a lack of parking data, survival bias, cyclist route preference assump-
tions, and self-selection problems.
Poirier 3
Introduction
Problem Statement:
As cities across the United States struggle to reduce transportation-related greenhouse gas emissions, they
are developing the active transportation modes of cycling and walking as key implements within their
toolbox of emission-reduction strategies. Cycling holds particular promise in this regard, given that approx-
imately 90% of all U.S. trips between one and three miles are made by automobiles an eminently bikable
distance (Carr, Dunsiger & Marcus 2010, from FHA, National Household Travel Survey, FH Administration, ed.
2001: Washington, D.C .).
The additional societal benefits of cycling include increased physical activity and positive public health
outcomes (Fishman, Schepers & Kamphuis 2015; Gtschi, Garrard & Giles-Corti 2016; Pucher et al. 2010),
reduced pollution, lower cost to the traveler, and reduced demand on road space, freeing up right-of-way for
alternative uses (de Nazelle et al. 2011).
A preponderance of research suggests that the availability of bicycle infrastructure (particularly bicycle
lanes) is positively associated with bicycle mode share (e.g., Dill & Carr 2003; Buehler & Pucher 2012). Dill and
Carr have even put a number to municipal capability in this regard: They found that for a given geography,
every added bicycle lane-mile per square mile (in a typical U.S. city with population over 250,000) is associat-
ed with a 1% increase in bicycle mode share for commuting (2003, p. 121). Further, research reviewing stated
preference surveys has found that both people who bicycle and people who do not bicycle feel safer in and
prefer bicycle lanes versus riding with traffic (Akar & Kelly Clifton 2009; Antonakos 1994; Fishman et al. 2015;
Landis, Vattikuti & Brannick 1997; Sanders & Cooper 2013; Sener, Eluru & Bhat 2009).
The introduction of bicycle lanes in many communities, however, is often met with resistance from area
residents1 and local merchants, who object for a number of reasons. Merchants in busy commercial corridors
express particular unease with their potential loss of business, reasoning that loss of parking spaces, added
difficulty loading and unloading freight, and increased congestion caused by bicycle lanes will mean fewer
customers and reduced sales (Boone 2014; Curry 2016; Mirk 2012; Jaffe 2015; Peterson 2010; Bialick 2015;
Del Signore 2010).
As communities across the United States expand planning efforts and invest in building bicycle infrastruc-
ture, both risks and opportunities for business owners in these transitioning corridors grow. At the same
time, opportunities for collecting and analyzing bicycle infrastructure-related business establishment data
have become greater, given new technologies and increased interest in understanding the economic effects
and associations of bicycles.
Pushback from merchants during the planning and implementation processes of bicycle lanes in commer-
cial corridors is a significant problem that can delay or even lead to the cancellation of bicycle lane proj-
ects that would otherwise help municipalities address public health, environmental, and traffic congestion
concerns. This research paper uses secondary data from San Francisco, California to address these concerns
and tease out real-life associations between bicycle lanes and business success.
1
Residents often object based upon fears of gentrification. The relationship between gentrification, displacement, and provision
of bicycle infrastructure is an important and under-researched topic. The subject deserves additional attention but is not ad-
dressed in this paper.
Poirier 4
Relevance to Practice:
Despite the often charged and politically-volatile planning process that precedes (and sometimes follows)
bicycle infrastructure implementation, very little is known about the actual, quantifiable effects on business
establishments that can be expected from the introduction of bicycle infrastructure in a commercial corri-
dor. Local planning authorities, therefore, are often put in the difficult position of flying blind by implement-
ing bicycle infrastructure in commercial neighborhoods with little to no contextualizing research. Despite
an abundance of transport cycling mode choice, safety, and design research that has been conducted over
the past few decades, there has been little quantitative exploration of cyclings effects on local commercial
establishments particularly effects on directly abutting establishment sales.
This lack of research regarding the economic impacts of bicycle infrastructure, combined with plethoric
quantities of research on the positive public health and environmental effects of bicycle infrastructure,
leads to an intense political pressure to construct bicycle lanes and equally intense political pushback from
local commercial interests. Delays caused by this pushback can cost hard-earned taxpayer dollars, occupy
valuable government employee time, and withhold potentially beneficial infrastructure projects from com-
munities. The delays can inject uncertainty into the local business marketplace, thereby stifling investment
or business performance. This research aims to fill these problematic knowledge gaps by investigating one
major question in the San Francisco context:
Are cycling facilities associated with improved or reduced sales for nearby business establishments,
specifically local-serving businesses?
This research project helps to fill the aforementioned void in knowledge, particularly in San Francisco. It
could influence decision-making at the municipal and regional levels, thereby more responsibly guiding
investment in cycling infrastructure and complete streets design. By providing substantial concrete evi-
dence on the relationships between bicycle infrastructure and business establishment success, it will help to
reduce uncertainty and volatility in the planning process.
Poirier 5
Literature Review
There are few studies of how cycling and/or cycling infrastructure affect economic outcomes for business
establishments. This literature review summarizes the existing work, illustrating research needs and pointing
out current shortcomings in planning literatures understanding of the issue.
In perhaps the best-known paper on the economic impacts of bicycle infrastructure, an intercept sur-
vey-based examination of various travel mode users in Portland, Oregon showed that, on average, cyclists
spent more at certain business types and patronized them more often (Clifton et al. 2012). This research has
been widely celebrated and implemented as a policy tool in bicycle advocacy circles (Maus 2010; Campbell
2015; 2014; Szczepanski 2013).
Similar survey-based research was carried out in Vancouver, British Columbia after the installation of sep-
arated bikeways, finding that local business sales and profit declined. The paper also concluded that the
moderate negative impact of the lanes will diminish over time as long as mitigation strategies take effect
(Vancouver Separated Bicycle Lane Business Impact Study 2011, p. iii). The primary difference between
the Portland and Vancouver studies is the establishments at which data were collected: in Portland, only
high-turnover sit-down restaurants, 24-hour convenience stores, and drinking places were surveyed; in
Vancouver, all grade-level establishments on a bicycle lane intervention corridor were surveyed (not all
responded). Although both business operators and customers are prone to reporting error, it is important to
consider the difference in conclusions drawn from the two survey methods.
Other survey-based research on shopper mode choice and spending habits has been conducted in the
United States. In 2008, the San Francisco County Transportation Authority conducted a shopper survey on
the Columbus Avenue corridor, finding that those who bicycle, ride in a taxi, or use other modes of trans-
portation spent more in the corridor than those who drove or those who took transit (Columbus Avenue
Neighborhood Transportation Study 2010, pp. 57). In New York Citys East Village neighborhood, a 2012
survey study concluded that the total aggregate spending of bicyclists in the neighborhood was more than
drivers, bus riders, taxi users, and select bus service riders (East Village Shoppers Study: A Snapshot of Trav-
el and Spending Patterns of Residents and Visitors in the East Village, n.d., p. 9). The same survey also found
that cyclists had the highest per capita spending in the neighborhood (Ibid., p. 10). This high level of cyclist
spending was attributed partially to the fact that cyclists visited local businesses more often and also to the
addition of protected bicycle lanes on First and Second Avenues (Ibid., pp. 14-15).
In a 2008 survey-based examination of cycling- and car-borne customers at inner Melbourne, Australia
shopping strips, Lee argued that if public auto parking spaces in commercial areas were reallocated to cyclist
parking, 3.6 times the current retail spend could be achieved in the area, and that this would be especial-
ly advantageous for cafs, restaurants, and clothing retailers. Lee's argument was based upon a customer
survey conducted in Melbourne which estimated auto and cyclist spending behavior. Lee then multiplied
the average reported cyclist spend by the number of cyclists that could park in a single auto parking space
(2008, p. 39). Next, the author compared the multiplied cyclist spend product to the average spend of an
auto driver occupying the same amount of space, producing the 3.6 times value of cyclists (Ibid., p. 39). This
line of reasoning, while perfectly logical, is fraught with assumption and context-specific dependencies. For
example, Lee assumes that there is an unlimited number of cyclists waiting in the wings to take the place of
auto users and also that the mixture of local businesses would remain unchanged with the loss of auto park-
ing. Further, the papers geographic context is highly specific inner suburban Melbourne has a particular
Poirier 6
built environment, climate, and demographic mix, making it difficult to generalize results as applicable to
other communities (a problem with any small-geography study of this kind) (Ibid., p. 8).
Dual survey-based studies performed on the Bloor Street corridor in Toronto found that overall, merchants
and shoppers alike supported the addition of bicycle lanes to the right-of-way and that those arriving by
bicycle, transit, and foot were likely to spend more in the commercial district than those arriving by auto
(Sztabinski 2009; Forkes and Lea 2010). Survey results from the 2009 research revealed that 75% of mer-
chants thought a bike lane or widened sidewalk would improve or have no effect on business, and patrons
preferred a bike lane to widened sidewalks at a ratio of almost four to one (Sztabinski, p. 23). The 2009
analysis roundly concluded that merchants in this area are unlikely to be negatively affected by reallocat-
ing on-street parking space to a bicycle lane. On the contrary, this change will likely increase commercial
activity (Ibid., p. 1). In 2010, a similar survey-based analysis conducted in the area found that more than
half of merchants believed reducing parking and adding a bike lane would increase or have no impact on
their number of customers (Forkes & Lea, p. 6). The same study found that The majority of people surveyed
(58%) preferred to see street use reallocated for widened sidewalks or a bike lane, even if on-street parking
were reduced by 50% (Ibid.). These two analyses as with most of the research cited in this literature review
do not cite sales tax receipts or other business sales data, however, and measure only the perception of
merchants and customers, not hard sales data or measures of productivity.
Other, non-survey-based research projects have tackled the question of cyclings economic impact. Cor-
tright, in 2007, produced a white paper arguing that Portland, Oregon residents save $1.5 billion annually
because of their shorter average commute distances. Cortright posits that because transportation expenses
have a much lower local multiplier effect than money not spent on transportation, Portlands investment in
lower-cost transport modes (such as cycling) produces a greater residual multiplier effect in the local econ-
omy than, say, single-occupancy vehicle driving (2007). This paper represents a novel argument in cycling
economic impact research and deserves to be considered more frequently.
A 2003 interview-based study examined bicycle lanes that were added to San Franciscos Mission District,
uncovering strong merchant support for the lanes, including the belief amongst 65% of interviewees that
bicycle lanes have had positive impacts on sales and their business overall (Drennan). It is important to note
that industrial and office business types were not included in their interviews. This research will be returned
to in the analysis section of this paper as the same Valencia Street bicycle lane is a case study site selected for
examination in this paper.
Some research on the economic impacts of cycling does use sales-based secondary data. A 2012 New York
City Department of Transportation (DOT) publication claimed increases in retail sales of up to 49% along
new protected bicycle lanes on Ninth Avenue from 23rd to 31st streets in Manhattan, compared to increases
of three percent borough-wide (Measuring the Streets: New Metrics for 21st Century Streets, p. 4). Similarly,
a 2017 Oakland DOT planning document using sales tax receipt data stated that retail sales in the Telegraph
corridor had increased nine percent year-over-year after a protected bicycle lane intervention (Fine & Carta-
gena 2017). However, in neither DOT study were the bicycle lane corridors compared to control corridors or
nearby areas; and the underlying data are not publicly available for re-analysis.
A taxable retail sales-based analysis of two bicycle lane interventions in Seattle, Washington included dual
control regions for each of the two study areas, showing no negative sales impact on businesses resulting
from either bicycle lane intervention (Rowe 2013). The study suggested the possibility of a wildly successful
economic impact produced by a climbing lane installed on NE 65th Street, which removed 12 parking spots
Poirier 7
and was correlated with a 400% increase in sales in the district (Ibid., p. 2). Rowe 2013 used a more sound
and transparent methodology than both the NYC and Oakland DOT reports (Measuring the Streets: New
Metrics for 21st Century Streets 2012; Fine & Cartagena 2017), with more appropriate control regions and
greater discussion of the results.
Other academic studies and news reports have documented business dissatisfaction with bicycle infrastruc-
ture projects, focusing on the fact that parking spaces are often removed, or freight access is limited, when
bicycle lanes are implemented (Pagliara & Biggiero 2014; Curry 2016; Boone 2014). However, much of the
evidence in these papers is anecdotally-based and relies mostly on perceptions of change (just as Drennan
2003, Sztabinski 2009, and Forkes & Lea, 2010 do), demonstrating the clear need for more sales and business
performance-based research.
A number of grey literature items have re-circulated the aforementioned original research on the relation-
ship between bicycle infrastructure and nearby business outcomes, thereby artificially inflating the number
of sources of information that bicycle advocates, city planners, and other pro-bicycle infrastructure actors
are able to wield in attempts to convince business owners that bicycle lanes increase sales (Tolley 2011;
Flusche 2012; Andersen & Hall 2014; Flusche 2009; Szczepanski 2013; Arancibia 2017). Although extra-eco-
nomic effects of added bicycle infrastructure may alone justify such infrastructures construction, the extent
to which reports and papers have recycled and generalized the findings of a few corridor-level research
endeavors is viewed as somewhat disingenuous by this author.
Although there is a slew of research showing the economic impacts of tourism cycling (Cook et al. 2014;
Meletiou et al. 2005; Grabow, Whited & Hahn 2010; J. M. Bowker, Bergstrom & Gill 2007; Economic Impact
Analysis of Orange County Trails 2011; J. Bowker et al. 2004; Kaliszewski 2011, for example), almost none
of it helps policymakers or academics understand what the expected impacts of bicycle lane infrastructure
projects are for small businesspeople in an urban context. This is a clear and necessary research need and
one that this project readily addresses, albeit in a San Francisco context.
Poirier 8
Methods
This analysis uses longitudinal firm-level data from the National Establishment Time-Series (NETS) dataset,
constructed from Dun & Bradstreet data, to track establishment sales over time on three corridors in which
bicycle lanes were recently implemented in San Francisco, California: Columbus Avenue, Polk Street, and
Valencia Street (National Establishment Time-Series (NETS) Database 2016).
The three aforementioned bicycle lane intervention case study sites were selected based on data availability,
nearby business establishment density, date of bicycle lane implementation, and bicycle lane intervention
type.
To be eligible for selection, corridors must have experienced a bike lane intervention (defined as a major
redesign of a right-of-way that significantly improves the ease of cycling) within a time period covered by
the NETS database. This temporal criteria required NETS data to be available for two years before and after
the bike lane intervention. The pool of available cases was therefore limited because the NETS data available
to me covered 1990 to 2013 (ruling out bicycle lanes implemented before 1992 or after 2011). Many of the
more recent Bay Area bike lane interventions, such as the Telegraph Avenue protected bike lanes in Oakland
and Puerto Suello Hill Path in San Rafael, were ineligible for selection due to the lack of NETS data.
I used online news articles, blog postings, and Google Earth Pro version 7.1.5 to identify bicycle lane inter-
vention sites that satisfied the above criteria. Google Earth Pros historical satellite imagery was especially
helpful, as bicycle lane changes at intervals as precise as one-month were discernable.
After intervention sites that met the suitable temporal and infrastructure implementation requirements
were selected, basic descriptive statistics were executed to identify sites with a suitable number of establish-
ments for analysis. The City of Berkeley Bicycle Boulevard program, which was largely implemented in 2002-
2003, was ruled out because there were no business establishments abutting the bicycle boulevards that
existed for two years before and two years after the intervention (City of Berkeley 2016). Oaklands Second
Street Class III bicycle lane in Jack London Square, which was painted in 2011, was similarly ruled out.
Final Study Areas:
Three study areas were thus identified for the analysis: Columbus Avenue, Polk Street, and Valencia Street
corridors in San Francisco. All three of the corridors received a bicycle lane intervention and had a significant
number of business establishments present for two years before and after the intervention. Descriptions of
the study areas, along with photographs and contextualizing maps, are presented in the pages following.
Poirier 9
Study Area 1: Columbus Avenue

Columbus Avenue is a major four-lane thoroughfare from the Fishermans Wharf neighborhood to the Finan-
cial District of San Francisco. Both of these neighborhoods are popular with tourists and are densely popu-
lated with residences and business establishments. There are parking lanes on both sides of the roadway.
In 2005, Columbus Avenue was re-striped and painted to include sharrows on the roadway. The intervention
stretched from North Point Street in the Fishermans Wharf neighborhood, south to Washington Street in the
Financial District. There were 143 permanent establishments on this stretch of Columbus Avenue from 2003
to 2007.
Figure 1: Columbus Avenue, Before & After 2005 Intervention
Source: Google Earth Pro 7.1

Tables 2-3: Columbus Avenue Business Establishment & Resident Demographics
Columbus Avenue Business Establishments* Columbus Avenue Demographics**
Census Block Groups 12 Population Density (per sq. mi.) 27,109
Abutting Establishments 143 Median Household Income $36,591
Non-Abutting Establishments 1,225 Percent Renter-Occupied Units 90%
Total Establishments 1,368 Percent Family Households 38%
Local-Serving Establishments 299 Percent White 31%
Abutting Local-Serving Establishments 27 Percent Non-Hispanic Black 2%
Percent of Establishments that are Local-Serv- Percent Hispanic or Latino 4%
22%
ing in Study Area (Abutting & Non-Abutting) Percent Asian 62%
Percent of Establishments that are Local-Serv- Percent College Educated or
19% 32%
ing on Intervention Street (Abutting Only) Greater
Figure 4: Columbus Avenue Abutting Establishments, May 2008
* All figures for 2003 and are from NETS.

** All data are from 2000 decennial census, via
Social Explorer Tables(SE), Census 2000, U.S.
Census Bureau and Social Explorer.
Adjusted for inflation to match value in 2013

(CPI: 1.398). Source: Google Maps, Street View Historical Imagery
Poirier 10
Figure 5: Columbus Avenue Study Area
t Street
North Poin
Hyde Stre
Co
lum
bu
sA
et
Stockton Str
ve
nue
et e
Mason Str
eet
Vallejo Str
eet
Legend n Street
Washingto
Business Establishment
Bicycle Lane Intervention to Street

Sacramen
Study Area
Poirier 11
Study Area 2: Polk Street

Polk Street is a two-lane main commercial north-south corridor in San Francisco, connecting the Ghirardelli
Square area of the city with Market Street. There is one lane of parking on either side of the roadway. Using
Google Earth Pro, I found that sharrows and painted bicycle lanes were added in 2004 to the right-of-way
between Post and Union Streets, transforming the street into a Class II/III bicycleway. There were 212 perma-
nent establishments on this stretch of Polk Street from 2002 to 2006.
Figure 6: Polk Street, Before & After 2004 Intervention
Source: Google Earth Pro 7.1
Tables 7-8: Polk Street Business Establishment & Resident Demographics

Polk Street Business Establishments* Polk Street Demographics**
Abutting Establishments 212 Median Household Income
$53,493
Non-Abutting Establishments 645 Percent Renter-Occupied Units 92%
Total Establishments 857 Percent Family Households 46%
24%
18% 45%
Figure 9: Polk Street Abutting Establishments, May 2008


Poirier 12
Figure 10: Polk Street Study Area
eet
Green Str
Polk Stree
Van Ness
t
Avenue
Jones Stre
et
Street
California
Legend
t
Post Stree Business Establishment
Bicycle Lane Intervention
Study Area
Poirier 13
Study Area 3: Valencia Street

Valencia Street is a bustling commercial corridor in the Mission District of San Francisco. The intervention
here turned a road with two traffic lanes in either direction into a thoroughfare with one traffic lane in
either direction, one bicycle lane in either direction, and one turning lane in the middle of the street (Dren-
nan 2003, p. 4). This study area is of particular value in evaluating this papers methodology, as an inter-
view-based economic impact analysis (Drennan 2003) and a one-year traffic impact analysis (Sallaberry
2000) have been conducted for this same bicycle lane intervention.
Figure 11: Valencia Street, Before & After 1999 Intervention
Source: (Valencia Street Before & After 2015)

Tables 12-13: Valencia Street Business Establishment & Resident Demographics
Valencia Street Business Establishments* Valencia Street Demographics**
Abutting Establishments 224 Median Household Income $65,044
Non-Abutting Establishments 955 Percent Renter-Occupied Units 85%
Total Establishments 1,179 Percent Family Households 54%
13%
33% 41%
Figure 14: Valencia Street Abutting Establishments, November 2007


Poirier 14
Figure 15: Valencia Street Study Area
Valencia Street
et
tre
tS
ke
ar
M
16th Street
Dolores Street
South Van Ness Avenue

21st Street
Mission Street
Cesar Chavez Street
Legend
Business Establishment
Bicycle Lane Intervention
Study Area
Poirier 15
Establishment Selection:
Next, I analyzed change over time of nearby business establishment performance at the block group level
in the three selected case study areas using two major categories of establishment: all establishments and
local-serving establishments. For each establishment type, the change over time analysis was conducted for
abutting and non-abutting addresses.
Abutting establishments, or establishments facing the street that saw the intervention, were identified by
address in the NETS database. All establishments with the intervention streets name in their mailing address
were flagged with a dummy indicator as abutting the target street (e.g., all establishment mailing addresses
that included the word Valencia were flagged as abutting the street that saw the intervention). All other es-
tablishments (those not flagged as abutting) were denoted using the same dummy variable as non-abutters.
To more appropriately explore if establishment types played a meaningful intervening role in the analysis, I
sub-classified the establishments, using NAICS codes, into a local-serving group. The methodology used to
classify the establishments into these two categories is derived from two previous studies (Plowman 2014;
Meltzer & Schuetz 2012) and is modified to include business establishments that might reasonably be pa-
tronized by cyclists (i.e. furniture or appliance stores were not included, as cyclists are not likely to purchase
couches or washing machines during bicycle trips). Plowman adapted his method of restricting research to
subsets of NAICS categories from previous work (Koebel 2014; Chapple 2009) and individually selected NA-
ICS deemed local-serving in nature (2014, pp. 6-7). Meltzer and Schuetz identified four industry categories
they believed were local-serving in nature and also used two-digit NAICS prefixes to isolate retail (NAICS 44-
45) and food service and hospitality (NAICS 72) (2012, p. 76). I found both of these definitions of local-serv-
ing too limiting and not inclusive enough of businesses that could reasonably serve nearby customers via
bicycle. Footwear and leather goods stores (NAICS 81143-), for example, were included in neither the Meltzer
and Schuetz or the Plowman articles, despite the ease with which a shoebox can be carried on a bicycle and
the local-serving nature of the business (2012; 2014). NAICS codes included in my analysis are in Table 16.
Change Over Time Analysis:
After identifying the study areas and relevant establishment types, two outcome metrics were identified for
each category of establishment: sales per establishment and sales per employee. Although sales per estab-
lishment may solely represent the size or sales volume of the establishment and have little bearing on the
establishments success, it is included as a general measure and one with which sales per employee (a better
measure of productivity) can be compared and contrasted.
First, all dollar figures were Consumer Price Index (CPI-U) adjusted to 2013 United States dollars. Then, for
each study areas block group, establishment density, average employee per establishment counts, average
sales per establishment counts, and average sales per employee counts were calculated for all abutting and
non-abutting establishments and abutting and non-abutting local-serving establishments.
In the afore- and after-mentioned averages, establishments with one or fewer employees and/or earning
annual revenue of more than $50,000,000 were excluded from any annual calculation they may have been
involved in, as they were considered outliers (either small, household part-time incorporations, or very large
companies). This follows in the footsteps of other responsible use of NETS data (Chapple & Jacobus 2009, p.
56). In the Valencia Street study area, this excluded 308 establishments; in the Columbus Avenue study area
it excluded 397 establishments; and in the Polk Street study area it excluded 221 establishments. Table 17
details the number of establishments dropped from each study area.
Poirier 16
Table 16: Local-Serving NAICS-Based Classification

NAICS NAICS
Description Description
Code Code
443142 Electronics stores 4512- Book stores and news dealers
44413- Hardware stores Book stores
445- Food and beverage stores News dealers and newsstands
Supermarkets and other grocery (except
4521- Department stores
convenience) stores
Convenience stores 4531- Florists
Meat markets 4532- Office supplies, stationary, and gift stores
Fish and seafood markets Office supplies and stationary stores
Fruit and vegetable markets Gift, novelty, and souvenir stores
Baked goods stores 4533- Used merchandise stores
Confectionary and nut stores 45391- Pet and pet supply stores
All other specialty food stores 453991 Tobacco stores
Beer, wine, and liquor stores 453998 All other miscellaneous store retailers
446- Health and personal care stores 522120 Savings institutions
Pharmacies and drug stores 52213- Credit unions
Cosmetics, beauty supplies, and perfume
52219- Other depository credit intermediation
stores
Optical goods stores 522291 Consumer lending
Food (health) supplement stores 722330 Mobile food services
All other health and personal care stores 7224- Drinking places (alcoholic beverages)
448- Clothing and clothing accessories stores 7225- Restaurant and other eating places
Men's clothing stores Full-service restaurants
Women's clothing stores Limited-service restaurants
Children and infants' clothing stores Cafeterias, grill buffets, and buffets
Family clothing stores Snack and nonalcoholic beverage bars
Communication equipment repair and mainte-
Clothing accessories stores 811213
nance
Other clothing stores 81143- Footwear and leather goods repair
Shoe stores 81211- Hair, nail, and skin care services
Jewelry stores Beauty salons
Luggage and leather goods stores Nail salons
Sporting goods, hobby, and musical in-
4511- 81231- Coin-operated laundries and drycleaners
strument stores
Drycleaning and laundry services (except coin-op-
Sporting goods stores 81232-
erated)
Hobby, toy, and game stores 81292- Photofinishing
Sewing, needlework, and piece goods
stores
Poirier 17
Table 17: Establishments Dropped from Analysis

Valencia Columbus Polk
Establishments w/ <= One Employee 297 383 219
Percent of All Establishments 20% 22% 20%
Establishments w/ > $50,000,000 Annual Revenue 11 15 3
Percent of All Establishments 1% 1% 0%
*Total Establishments Dropped 308 397 221
Percent of All Establishments Dropped 21% 22% 21%
* There is some overlap in these establishments, so row Total is not a columnar sum.
Further, only establishments that were present for the complete five-year period were included, thereby en-
suring that the measurements captured change in performance for businesses that existed before the bike
lane intervention, and were not capturing the effects of new businesses moving into the study area. There
are drawbacks to this analytical tactic, however, which are explored in the discussion section of this paper.
After isolating the required business establishments, I mean averaged their change in outcome metrics
across all of the study area block groups, weighting using a frequency weighting of number of establish-
ments. These final, average change-over-time statistics for each study area were output from Stata 13.1 for
further analysis and chart-making in Excel 2016.
After computing the change over time statistics for the three study areas and their establishment types, the
change over time in the abutting establishments was compared to the change over time for the non-abut-
ting establishments in the same study area. These numbers were developed as absolute dollar or employee
count differences and as differences in percentages of change. The difference in percentage change figures
are generally more meaningful measures as they account for the variation in average establishment sales at
the beginning of the study period, whereas absolute dollar difference figures do not.2
2
For example: An absolute dollar increase of $10,000 in a neighborhood where the average annual sales are $1,000,000 reflects
only a small improvement in sales (1% growth). A $10,000 absolute dollar increase in a neighborhood where average annual sales
are $100,000 would represent a far more significant growth in sales (10% growth). For this reason, examining percentage growth is
a better metric than absolute growth.
Poirier 18
Analysis
All Establishments:
Here, I review the change over time of all establishments in each study area. The year of the bicycle lane
intervention is noted on each graph, and a line is drawn to represent the sales over time for establishments
abutting the bicycle lane and establishments not abutting the bicycle lane. A higher-level geographic con-
trol region the city and county of San Francisco3 is included.
Detailed tables are presented after each set of graphs to provide a more precise account of the change over
time and to complement the visual interpretation of the line charts with numerical analysis.
Figure 18: Valencia Street Average Annual Sales per Establishment, All Establishments
$1,500,000
Intervention Year
$1,250,000
$1,000,000
$750,000
$500,000
1997 1998 1999 2000 2001
Non-Abutting Establishments Abutting Establishments San Francisco
Figure 19: Valencia Street Average Annual Sales per Employee, All Establishments
$140,000
$135,000
Intervention Year
$130,000
$125,000
$120,000
$115,000
$110,000
$105,000
$100,000
$95,000
1997 1998 1999 2000 2001
3
Like the abutting and non-abutting establishments, the establishments included in the city and county of San Francisco control
region are permanent (in place for all five study period years) and exclude establishments making more than $50,000,000 per year
or employing one or fewer workers.
Poirier 19
In the Valencia Street case study area, sales for abutting versus non-abutting establishments largely track
one another over time, with a slight dip in the abutting establishments per establishment figures for the
year after implementation of the new bicycle lane configuration. This can perhaps be attributed to the
introduction of the bicycle lanes, as the new traffic patterns or reduced auto traffic could have resulted in
reduced sales for abutting business establishments.
Sales per employee show a distinct drop for all establishments after the implementation of the bicycle lanes
on Valencia Street. The drop tracks evenly across both abutting and non-abutting establishments, as well as
across the city of San Francisco, suggesting the cause is almost certainly not the bicycle lane intervention, as
the entire municipality experienced the same downward trend.
Table 20, below, illustrates the same information presented in the above graphs, now with absolute dollar
value changes and percentage changes for both abutting and non-abutting establishments. The Difference
in Abutting Establishment Performance row at the bottom of each table is most instructive, as it compares
the performance of abutting establishments relative to non-abutting establishments for both metrics.
Table 20: Valencia Street Change Over Time Statistics, All Establishments
Sales per Employee Sales per Establishment
Non-Abutting Abutting Non-Abutting Abutting
Establishments Establishments Establishments Establishments
n = 955 n= 224 n = 955 n = 224
1997 $106,918.88 $98,604.99 $686,959.06 $650,600.75
1998 $109,133.61 $103,444.20 $703,771.31 $689,238.06
1999 $113,244.53 $107,176.60 $730,840.25 $703,222.38
2000 $110,713.34 $103,814.84 $726,363.00 $680,285.69
2001 $108,398.30 $100,899.24 $724,195.25 $697,098.81
Dollar Change +$1,479.41 +$2,294.25 +$37,236.19 +$46,498.06
Percentage Change +1.38% +2.33% 5.42% +7.15%
Difference in Abutting Establishment
+0.94% +1.73%
Performance
Looking at the difference in percentage improvement of abutting establishments versus non-abutting

establishments in Table 20 shows that for both sales metrics, abutting establishments performed better
than their non-abutting peers. The small margins, however, call into question the robustness of these find-
ings, as the introduction of only some error could reverse the direction of the performance differences. The
local-serving establishments (shown later in Figure 29) in the Valencia Street study area show a more robust
and defensible change over time.
Poirier 20
Figure 21: Columbus Avenue Average Annual Sales per Establishment, All Establishments
$1,450,000
Intervention Year
$1,350,000
$1,250,000
$1,150,000
$1,050,000
$950,000
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
Figure 22: Columbus Avenue Average Annual Sales per Employee, All Establishments
$150,000
Intervention Year
$125,000
$100,000
$75,000
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
Sales per establishment and employee in the Columbus Avenue study area began declining before the in-
troduction of the sharrows and continued to do so after the markings were completed. Sales per employee
track closely across both abutting and non-abutting establishments, as well as for all of San Francisco. Sales
per establishment dropped off for abutting establishments, while non-abutting establishments and San
Francisco declined at a less extreme rate. This suggests that the bicycle lane intervention may have had a
negative impact on the overall sales of abutting establishments.
Sales per employee at abutting establishments, however, do show a somewhat better performance over
time (albeit still a decline) than at non-abutting and San Francisco establishments, suggesting abutting es-
tablishments were somewhat more resilient to the economic downturn than were all establishments in San
Francisco and in the non-abutting sub-group.
Poirier 21
Table 23: Columbus Avenue Change Over Time Statistics, All Establishments
n = 1,225 n= 143 n = 1,225 n = 143
2003 $133,608.38 $95,414.26 $1,383,224.88 $1,345,524.75
2004 $129,269.96 $90,277.31 $1,363,173.75 $1,268,486.13
2005 $121,209.05 $81,849.54 $1,259,597.25 $1,155,592.63
2006 $115,435.88 $80,273.99 $1,246,147.38 $1,125,856.63
2007 $110,116.24 $78,721.84 $1,204,870.63 $968,788.94
Dollar Change -$23,492.13 -$16,692.42 -$178,354.25 -$376,735.81
Percentage Change -17.58% -17.49% -12.89% -28.00%
+0.09% -15.11%
Performance
Table 23, above, provides a more precise examination of the trends in the Columbus Avenue study area. For
all establishments, we see that the ever-so-slight advantage in sales per employee for abutting establish-
ments is only +.09%, a figure that is too small to be considered a reliable positive indicator. Sales per estab-
lishment performance over time for abutting businesses is distinctly worse than non-abutting establishment
performance, however, again suggesting that the bicycle lane intervention may have had a distinct negative
impact on corridor-adjacent businesses.
Figure 24: Polk Street Average Annual Sales per Establishment, All Establishments
$1,300,000
Intervention Year
$1,200,000
$1,100,000
$1,000,000
$900,000
$800,000
$700,000
$600,000
$500,000
$400,000
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
Poirier 22
Figure 25: Polk Street Average Annual Sales per Employee, All Establishments
$130,000
Intervention Year
$120,000
$110,000
$100,000
$90,000
$80,000
$70,000
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
Sales per establishment and employee were notably higher for establishments not abutting the Polk Street
right-of-way. In both the per-establishment and per-employee graphs, however, sales for abutting and
non-abutting establishments track one another consistently, suggesting that the bicycle intervention may
not have had a major economic effect on the corridor. The Polk Street area (both non-abutting and abut-
ting establishments) does, however, perform somewhat better over time than the city of San Francisco as a
whole.
Table 26: Polk Street Change Over Time Statistics, All Establishments
n = 645 n= 212 n = 645 n = 212
2002 $108,264.27 $81,775.49 $863,262.69 $456,160.91
2003 $106,270.01 $80,847.56 $857,550.88 $454,247.69
2004 $105,085.45 $80,628.68 $821,089.38 $445,983.31
2005 $103,614.84 $75,543.16 $851,697.50 $432,528.13
2006 $97,571.52 $72,865.38 $818,750.06 $406,339.53
Dollar Change -$10,692.76 -$8,910.11 -$44,512.63 -$49,821.38
-1.02% -5.77%
Performance
The Polk Street change over time figures for all establishments show abutting establishments as underper-
forming their non-abutting analogs, with a more robust finding in the sales per establishment metric cate-
gory (5.77% lower than non-abutting establishments). The consistency across both metrics suggests that, at
least for all establishments, abutting establishments may have actually underperformed non-abutting estab-
lishments in the study area block groups. This provides some evidence that the bicycle lane intervention
harmed business establishment performance for abutting establishments on the Polk Street corridor.
Poirier 23
Local-Serving Establishments:
This portion of the analysis examines sales over time for business establishments classified as local-serving.
The definition of a local-serving establishment was executed based on NAICS codes assigned to each estab-
lishment in the study area. The specific NAICS codes used in the definition can be seen in Table 16.
Figure 27: Valencia Street Average Annual Sales per Establishment, Local-Serving Establishments
$1,100,000
Intervention Year
$1,000,000
$900,000
$800,000
$700,000
$600,000
$500,000
$400,000
1997 1998 1999 2000 2001
Figure 28: Valencia Street Average Annual Sales per Employee, Local-Serving Establishments
$130,000
Intervention Year
$125,000
$120,000
$115,000
$110,000
$105,000
$100,000
$95,000
1997 1998 1999 2000 2001
Examining the local-serving establishments on the Valencia Street corridor paints a very different picture
than does looking at the sales performance of all establishments. Average annual sales at abutting establish-
ments seem to spike after the bicycle lane intervention on Valencia Street, whereas non-abutting and San
Francisco establishments see a decline in sales. This cannot be directly attributed to the bicycle lane project
but it certainly corroborates merchant accounts that the bicycle lane intervention had a positive impact on
sales (Drennan 2003).
Sales per employee decline after the bicycle lane intervention for abutting, non-abutting, and all San Fran-
cisco establishments but over the five-year period, abutting establishments are able to maintain a small
growth in percentage of sales per employee, whereas non-abutting establishments and all San Francisco
Poirier 24
establishments see a loss in sales per employee, suggesting that the bicycle lane did not have a more del-
eterious effect than the neighborhoods general downward trend. In fact, it may corroborate the sales per
establishments indication that the bicycle lane intervention stemmed some of the losses experienced by
the neighborhood and city.
Table 29: Valencia Street Change Over Time Statistics, Local-Serving Establishments
n = 78 n= 73 n = 78 n = 73
1997 $105,208.60 $96,596.98 $484,996.69 $494,098.38
1998 $104,240.78 $100,493.15 $459,009.22 $519,213.59
1999 $106,176.93 $102,473.74 $476,443.84 $532,039.56
2000 $105,087.21 $100,216.79 $484,456.06 $517,739.13
2001 $103,488.13 $98,337.82 $470,281.31 $668,511.13
Dollar Change -$1,720.47 +$1,740.84 -$14,715.38 +$174,412.75
Percentage Change -1.64% +1.80% -3.03% +35.30%
+3.44% +38.33%
Performance
The change over time figures shown in Table 29, above, demonstrate this with more clarity: Local-serv-
ing establishments that abut the bicycle lane intervention improved their sales per establishment 38.33%
greater than non-abutting establishments. A somewhat less robust result is shown for the sales per employ-
ee metric, with abutting establishments showing a 3.44% advantage over non-abutting establishments.
The 38.33% difference is the most extreme positive result produced by this study, however, suggesting that
business establishments abutting Valencia Street may have seen a tremendous benefit from the bicycle lane
intervention.
The stark difference between the sales per employee and sales per establishment metrics (one might expect
them to be more closely related in magnitude) could potentially be the result of error in the employee count
figures reported in NETS data, although the five-year study period reduces the likelihood of this being the
case. The difference may also represent an increase in overall sales for abutting establishments but a follow-
ing difficulty of these establishments to convert these increased sales into increased productivity, as they
struggle to make sense of newfound increased costs associated with higher volumes of sales and services
(greater staffing hours, increased utilities, greater inventory demands, etc.).
Poirier 25
Figure 30: Columbus Avenue Average Annual Sales per Establishment, Local-Serving Establishments
$900,000
Intervention Year
$800,000
$700,000
$600,000
$500,000
$400,000
$300,000
$200,000
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
Figure 31: Columbus Avenue Average Annual Sales per Employee, Local-Serving Establishments
$120,000
Intervention Year
$95,000
$70,000
$45,000
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
Columbus Avenue local-serving abutting establishment sales per employee tracked the downward trend
of non-abutting local-serving establishments and the city of San Francisco closely, while sales per estab-
lishment figures showed some resilience to the neighborhood and citys overall negative trend, remaining
roughly flat for abutting establishments. This suggests the potential for some mitigative effects of the bicy-
cle lane intervention when it comes to local-serving businesses.
Poirier 26
Table 32: Columbus Avenue Change Over Time Statistics, Local-Serving Establishments
n = 272 n= 27 n = 272 n = 27
2003 $117,405.98 $61,859.09 $660,333.13 $265,583.78
2004 $113,760.60 $60,539.34 $638,818.38 $266,602.31
2005 $105,670.61 $57,346.11 $571,390.50 $254,816.05
2006 $103,358.46 $51,152.71 $575,806.44 $243,586.63
2007 $97,172.30 $48,672.54 $540,639.56 $233,010.31
Dollar Change -$20,233.69 -$13,186.56 -$119,693.56 -$32,573.47
-4.08% +5.86%
Performance
Table 32, above, shows that local-serving establishments achieved an opposite change over time result from
all establishments (Table 23). Sales per employee at abutting establishments changed for the worse relative
to non-abutting establishments, and sales per establishment figures show abutting establishments with a
5.86% advantage over non-abutting establishments. This contradicts the All Establishment results (Table 23),
suggesting that local-serving businesses experience bicycle lane interventions differently than all business-
es.
Figure 33: Polk Street Average Annual Sales per Establishment, Local-Serving Establishments
$850,000
$800,000
$750,000
Intervention Year
$700,000
$650,000
$600,000
$550,000
$500,000
$450,000
$400,000
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
Poirier 27
Figure 34: Polk Street Average Annual Sales per Employee, Local-Serving Establishments
$120,000
Intervention Year
$110,000
$100,000
$90,000
$80,000
$70,000
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
The two sales metrics for Polk Street track one another very closely for abutting and non-abutting establish-
ments through the intervention year, when the declining sales per employee and establishment for both
areas plummet (with the noticeable exception of abutting business sales per establishment, which remained
relatively flat). The establishments abutting the re-striped Polk Street bicycle lane saw their sales per employ-
ee decline at a less extreme rate than the non-abutting establishments, suggesting that perhaps the bicycle
lane intervention prevented some losses. It is also possible, however, that the central corridor nature of Polk
Street (and not the bicycle lane intervention) is responsible for this increased decline in sales.
Table 35: Polk Street Change Over Time Statistics, Local-Serving Establishments
n = 168 n= 39 n = 168 n = 39
1997 $114,863.31 $89,952.60 $578,292.69 $449,833.50
1998 $114,385.20 $89,558.02 $592,946.81 $459,343.16
1999 $111,080.72 $86,148.89 $563,804.44 $445,287.69
2000 $96,448.84 $78,933.73 $437,558.84 $456,261.47
2001 $92,225.94 $76,122.70 $439,645.53 $438,986.31
Dollar Change -$22,637.38 -$13,829.90 -$138,647.16 -$10,847.19
+4.33% +21.56%
Performance
Poirier 28
Table 35 again shows that the local-serving change over time sales metrics present a very different story
from the all establishment changes over time (Table 26). Local-serving abutting establishments vastly out-
performed their non-abutting counterparts in sales per establishment and in sales per employee (although
to a lesser degree). This difference further highlights the variation between performance of all establish-
ments and local-serving establishments, demonstrating that different establishments likely experience
disruption or change to the built business environment differently.
Poirier 29
Discussion & Conclusions

The results and implications of this exercise are inherently limited by the geographic, cultural, climatic, and
other peculiarities of the study areas in which the analyses are conducted. More simply put, every transpor-
tation corridor is different and there can be no expected uniform result of a bicycle lane intervention. This
analysis can, however, supply evidence-based information to decision-makers looking to compare upcom-
ing projects to past projects and estimate likely effects of future bicycle lane interventions.
The overall analysis shows a few distinct effects of bicycle lane interventions on nearby business establish-
ment sales. For one, the all establishment analyses show varied effects (see table 36, below) on business
performance. The low positive figures for Valencia Street and Columbus Avenue sales per employee, in par-
ticular, mean that a small amount of error could flip the results directionally. These findings suggest that it is
unlikely that a blanket bicycle lanes are good for all business statement is accurate.
Table 36: All Abutting Establishment Performance Over Five-Year Period vs. All Non-Abutting
Establishments
Sales per Establishment Sales per Employee
Valencia Street +1.73% +0.94%
Columbus Avenue -15.11% +0.09%
Polk Street -5.77% -1.02%
Local-serving establishments, on the other hand, did show an overall positive relationship between bicycle
lane intervention and establishment performance for the three cases investigated here (see Table 37, below).
The sales per establishment metric, in particular, operates strongly in favor of a suggestion that bicycle lane
interventions are good for local-serving businesses. Sales per employee a better measure of a business
productivity does not show nearly as strong an advantage for local-serving abutting establishments over
local-serving non-abutting establishments. This could be due to the difficulty smaller, local-serving business-
es face in right-sizing their operations to manage increased sales.
Table 37: Abutting Local-Serving Establishment Performance Over Five-Year Period vs. Non-Abutting
Local-Serving Establishments
Sales per Local-Serving Establishment Sales per Local-Serving Employee
Valencia Street +38.33% +3.44%
Columbus Avenue +5.86 -4.08%
Polk Street +21.56% +4.33%
The results of this study corroborate some of what has been seen in previous economic impact studies of
bicycle lane interventions. Drennans 2003 interview-based study of the Valencia Street bicycle lane inter-
vention, for example, showed that 65% of nearby merchants believed the bicycle lane intervention had a
positive effect on business (p. 7). Figures 36 and 37, above, show that this is also borne out in NETS data for
abutting establishments, strengthening Drennans argument that this particular bicycle lane intervention
resulted in positive outcomes for local business (2003).
The notion that some bicycle lane interventions may have had overall negative impacts on abutting estab-
Poirier 30
lishments is supported somewhat by the all establishments sales metrics seen in Figure 36, where the Polk
Street figures are negative and the Valencia Street figures are only slightly positive. All establishments abut-
ting the Columbus Avenue intervention also showed a considerable relative decline in sales per establish-
ment, as did local-serving establishments sales per employee. The decline in sales per establishment for all
establishments in the Columbus Avenue study area is the most extreme negative result of this study.
These results match with the mixed results of past survey-based economic impact analyses of bicycle lane
interventions, whereby some research has shown a positive (or likely positive) effect of bicycle lanes (Sz-
tabinski 2009; Forkes & Lea 2010; Drennan 2003; Clifton et al. 2012; Measuring the Streets: New Metrics for
21st Century Streets 2012, Fine & Cartagena 2017) and one has shown negative effects (Vancouver Separat-
ed Bicycle Lane Business Impact Study 2011). It should be noted, however, that negative effects of bicycle
lane interventions suggested by this research are largely not extreme.
The advantage of the analysis carried out in this paper is that NETS data provides a more objective look
at the relationship between bicycle lane interventions and business success than, say, survey- or inter-
view-based analyses, which largely measure and report perception, not real effect. The use of dual control
regions (non-abutting establishments and San Francisco at large) is a significant methodological improve-
ment over the two municipal DOT publications that purported economic benefits of bicycle lane interven-
tion (Measuring the Streets: New Metrics for 21st Century Streets 2012; Fine & Cartagena 2017).
Additional research is needed to determine whether the taxable sales index used by Rowe 2013 is a more
meaningful metric than the NETS data used in this analysis. This could be accomplished by using NETS and
sales tax receipts to examine the change over time in the same study area, thereby comparing the two met-
rics. That being said, the two most robust sales data-based analyses of bicycle lane interventions (Rowe 2013
and this analysis) have strongly suggested that bicycle lane interventions do not have profound negative
impacts and may have significant positive impacts in certain contexts.
Methodological Shortcomings:
There are a number of significant shortcomings with this methodology. For one, bicycle lane interventions
are not arbitrary actions undertaken by municipal bureaucracies. They are often contextualized within a
changing social, cultural, or political landscape, meaning that assigning changes in productivity or revenues
to bicycle lane interventions is nearly impossible using this type of analysis. A business district seeing im-
proved foot traffic or facing gentrification pressures may lobby for the addition of a bicycle lane, or a bicycle
lane intervention may arrive at a similar time as other neighborhood demographic changes. In short, there is
a self-selection problem here: Bicycle lanes may be more likely to be constructed in neighborhoods that are
seeing (or are expected to see) a certain type of economic growth. By comparing abutting establishments
to non-abutting establishments within the study area block groups, much of this greater neighborhood
change can be accounted for but not all.
Another of this analysis flaws is the absence of parking data. A chief complaint of merchants abutting a bi-
cycle lane intervention right-of-way is that the reduction in parking will reduce their customer base (Boone
2014; Mirk 2012; Jaffe 2015; Peterson 2010; Boone 2014; Bialick 2015; Del Signore 2010). This paper does very
little to research this concern as such, except to proxy a bicycle lane intervention for the loss or increased dif-
ficulty of customer parking. That being said, even this assumption is tenuous. Future research should aggres-
sively seek out parking data and look to incorporate that into subsequent analyses.
Using addresses to locate establishments as abutting and non-abutting can also cause issues, as mailing
Poirier 31
addresses and storefront entrances are not always intuitively correlated. Corner establishments, in particular,
may be over- or underrepresented in the abutting establishments category. In the Valencia Street case study,
for example, establishments located at the corner of Valencia Street and 19th Street while certainly abutting
the bicycle lane may not be listed on Valencia Street in the NETS database. Further, establishments located
one or two storefronts from a bicycle lane may be functionally as accessible as directly abutting storefronts
but they were excluded from this analysis.
NETS employment data is known to have flaws and is recommended to be transformed to three-year aver-
ages for more robust analysis (Neumark, Zhang & Wall 2005, p. 15). This would have been a preferred meth-
od for the three case study regions at hand but was deemed infeasible because of the already small number
of establishments produced by the two-year before-and-after constraint. I deemed it appropriate to trade
the larger sample size for a slightly increased margin of error, particularly given the five-year study period.
By analyzing only establishments that existed for the five-year study period, I introduced survival bias and
likely overrepresented businesses that may have been predisposed to succeed under the conditions of bicy-
cle lanes. Businesses that may have suffered great revenue losses or found the freight loading situation crip-
plingly difficult, for example, could have left the study area or gone out of business. Neither of these phe-
nomena can be captured by this analysis. Similarly, the analysis may underreport businesses that opened or
moved to the area because of the presence of a bicycle lane. If two bicycle repair shops and a caf moved
to the study area during the intervention year because of the newfound proximity to target customers, for
example, that behavior would not have been captured by this analysis.
Finally, this paper makes the major assumption that businesses that directly abut the bicycle lane will see
the greatest benefit, while businesses a half-block or block away from the bicycle lane will not. While there is
certainly solid logic behind the assumption, it is easy to imagine a cycling trip that continues an additional
50-100 feet after leaving a bicycle lane or path, with little impedance borne by the traveler.
Conclusions:
Despite the error that is likely produced by inaccuracies in NETS data, temporal selection bias, establishment
survival bias, NAICS classification bias, and other assumptions, I argue that the following are reasonable
findings and recommendations:
By only one metric, in one study area, did the bicycle lane intervention have a profound negative im-
pact on establishment sales. Bicycle lanes do not seem to have the catastrophic negative effect on
business that some merchants claim.
For the Valencia Street and Polk Street bicycle lane interventions, sales per local-serving establishment
increased markedly after the intervention, suggesting that bicycle lanes can have a positive effect on
local-serving businesses.
If these three cases were to be representative, it is not true to claim that bicycle lanes will increase sales
for all businesses. Put more simply, a blanket bicycle lanes are good for all businesses statement is
likely untrue.
Local-serving and all business establishments likely experience bicycle lane interventions differently.
Care should be taken by planners and the community to consider who should benefit from bicycle lane
interventions. This research suggests that local-serving businesses benefit more than all businesses.
Poirier 32
The latter is one of the most important results of this study and one that would not have been
possible without the detail available within the NETS dataset. Comparisons of all establishment sales to
local-serving establishment sales in the three study areas produced significant differences, sometimes in
both directionality and magnitude. By re-defining local-serving with different NAICS codes, or by selecting a
different business subset of interest (say, caf and restaurant business only), the results would likely change,
along with the subsequent policy and stakeholder implications. Nonetheless, it is important for practitioners
and policymakers to consider how the introduction of bicycle lanes may affect different types of businesses
in different ways.
Future Research Recommendations:
This research reviewed a Class II/III lane/shared street scenario, a Class II lane case study, and a Class III
shared street configuration. Multiple case studies of each Class should be carried out, ideally in areas of
similar demographic and built environment characteristics. This would allow for more targeted evi-
dence and recommendations regarding the economic impacts of each type of bicycle lane intervention.
Future research should use additional control areas, including higher-level geography neighborhood
controls and adjacent corridor controls. This would allow researchers to better understand how much
sales are affected by macro-level changes and how much they are affected by the bicycle lane interven-
tions.
Parking is an important piece of this puzzle that has not been studied beyond the customer and mer-
chant survey level. Future research should be sure to include parking data that helps to explain the
economic impact associations of parking loss that occur as a part of bicycle lane interventions.
Poirier 33
References
Akar, G., and Kelly Clifton. 2009. Influence on Individual Perceptions and Bicycle Infrastructure on
Decision to Bike. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board 2140:
16572. doi:10.3141/2140-18.
Andersen, Michael, and Mary Lauran Hall. 2014. Protected Bike Lanes Mean Business. People for Bikes,
Alliance for Biking & Walking. http://www.bikewalkalliance.org/resources/reports/protected-bike-
lanes-mean-business.
Antonakos, C. 1994. Environmental and Travel Preferences of Cyclist. Transportation Research Record
1438: 2533.
Arancibia, Daniel. 2017. Cycling Economics: Economic Impacts of Bike Lanes. Toronto, Canada. Accessed
April 10. http://www.torontocycling.org/uploads/1/3/1/3/13138411/cycling_economies_eglinton_
final.pdf.
Bialick, Aaron. 2015. SFMTA Cuts Block of Polk Bike Lane Fought By Visionless Mayors Optometrist.
StreetsBlog SF. February 26. http://sf.streetsblog.org/2015/02/26/sfmta-cuts-block-of-polk-bike-lane-
fought-by-visionless-mayors-optometrist/.
Boone, Andrew. 2014. San Jose Merchants Object to Parking Removal for Bike Lanes on Park Ave |
Streetsblog San Francisco. StreetsBlog SF. August 19. http://sf.streetsblog.org/2014/08/19/san-jose-
merchants-object-to-parking-removal-for-bike-lanes-on-park-ave/.
Bowker, J., J. Bergstrom, J. Gill, and U. Lemanski. 2004. The Washington & Old Dominion Trail: An
Assessment of User Demographics, Preferences, and Economics. Headwaters Economics. https://
headwaterseconomics.org/trail/21-washington-and-old-dominion-trail/.
Bowker, J.M., John C. Bergstrom, and Joshua Gill. 2007. Estimating the Economic Value and Impacts of
Recreational Trails: A Case Study of the Virginia Creeper Rail Trail. Tourism Economics 13 (2): 24160.
doi:10.5367/000000007780823203.
Buehler, Ralph, and John Pucher. 2012. Cycling to Work in 90 Large American Cities: New Evidence on the
Role of Bike Paths and Lanes. Transportation 39: 40932.
Campbell, Dave. 2015. People Mean Business. Bike East Bay. July 25. https://bikeeastbay.org/people-
mean-business.
Carr, Lucas J., Shira I. Dunsiger, and Bess H. Marcus. 2010. Validation of Walk Score for Estimating Access to
Walkable Amenities. British Journal of Sports Medicine. doi:10.1136/bjsm.2009.069609.
Chapple, Karen. 2009. Analysis of Commercial Trends, Mission and 24th Streets. Unpublished Report.
Center for Community Innovation, UC Berkeley.
Chapple, Karen, and Rick Jacobus. 2009. Retail Trade as a Route to Neighborhood Revitalization. In Urban
and Regional Policy and Its Effects, II:1968. Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institutions Press.
City of Berkeley. 2016. Bicycle Boulevard History - City of Berkeley, CA. Accessed May 4. https://www.
cityofberkeley.info/Public_Works/Transportation/Bicycle_Boulevard_History.aspx.
Poirier 34
Clifton, Kelly, Kristina Currans, Christopher Muhs, Chloe Ritter, Sara Morrissey, and Collin Roughton. 2012.
Consumer Behavior and Travel Choices: A Focus on Cyclists and Pedestrians. 92nd Annual Meeting of
the Transportation Research Board. Washington, D.C.: Transportation Research Board.
Columbus Avenue Neighborhood Transportation Study. 2010. San Francisco, CA: San Francisco County
Transportation Authority. http://www.sfcta.org/sites/default/files/content/Planning/ColumbusAvenue/
FinalReport/SFCTA%20Columbus%20Ave%20Final%20Report_lo_res.pdf.
Cook, Thomas J., Sarah Worth OBrien, Kristy N. Jackson, Sarah Searcy, and Daniel J. Findley. 2014.
Behavioral Effects of Completing A Critical Link in the American Tobacco Trail. Raleigh, NC: Institute
for Transportation Research and Education, North Carolina State University. https://itre.ncsu.edu/wp-
content/uploads/2016/03/American-Tobacco-Trail-FinalReport-ITR-2014.pdf.
Cortright, Joe. 2007. Portlands Green Dividend. CEOs for Cities.
Curry, Melanie. 2016. Oaklands New Parking Protected Bike Lanes Are Challenging to Some | Streetsblog
San Francisco. StreetsBlog SF. May 4. http://sf.streetsblog.org/2016/05/04/oaklands-new-parking-
protected-bike-lanes-are-challenging-to-some/.
Del Signore, John. 2010. Two Anti-Bike Lane Protests Aim to Eradicate Bike Lanes. The Gothamist.
October 24. http://gothamist.com/2010/10/14/two_anti-bike_lane_protests_aim_to.php.
Dill, Jennifer, and Theresa Carr. 2003. Bicycle Commuting and Facilities in Major U.S. Cities: If You Build
Them, Commuters Will Use Them. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation
Research Board 1828 (January): 11623. doi:10.3141/1828-14.
Drennan, Emily. 2003. Economic Effects of Traffic Calming on Urban Small Businesses. San Francisco, CA.
East Village Shoppers Study: A Snapshot of Travel and Spending Patterns of Residents and Visitors in the
East Village. n.d. New York City, NY: Transportation Alternatives.
Economic Impact Analysis of Orange County Trails. 2011. East Central Florida Regional Planning Council.
https://www.dep.state.fl.us/gwt/economic/PDF/Orange_County_Trail_Report_final_May2011.pdf.
Fine, Sarah, and Nick Cartagena. 2017. Telegraph Avenue Progress Report. Progress Report. Oakland, CA:
City of Oakland Department of Transportation. http://www2.oaklandnet.com/oakca1/groups/pwa/
documents/report/oak062598.pdf.
Fishman, Elliot, Paul Schepers, and Carlijn Barbara Maria Kamphuis. 2015. Dutch Cycling: Quantifying the
Health and Related Economic Benefits. American Journal of Public Health 105 (8): e1315. doi:10.2105/
AJPH.2015.302724.
Fishman, Elliot, S. Washington, N. Haworth, and A. Watson. 2015. Factors Influencing Bike Share
Membership: An Analysis of Melbourne and Brisbane. Transportation Research Part A 71: 1730.
Flusche, Darren. 2009. The Economic Benefits of Bicycle Infrastructure Investments. League of American
Bicyclists. http://www.advocacyadvance.org/docs/economic_benefits_bicycle_infrastructure_report.
pdf.
. 2012. Bicycling Means Business: The Economic Benefits of Bicycle Infrastructure. League of
Poirier 35
American Bicyclists & Alliance for Biking & Walking.

Forkes, Jennifer, and Nancy Smith Lea. 2010. Bike Lanes, On-Street Parking & Business: Year 2 Report: A
Study of Bloor Street in Torontos Bloor West Village. Toronto: Clean Air Partnership.
Gtschi, Thomas, Jan Garrard, and Billie Giles-Corti. 2016. Cycling as a Part of Daily Life: A Review of
Health Perspectives. Transport Reviews 36 (1): 4571. doi:10.1080/01441647.2015.1057877.
Grabow, Maggie, Melissa Whited, and Micah Hahn. 2010. Valuing Bicyclings Economic and Health
Impacts in Wisconsin. Nelson Institute for Environmental Studies University of Wisconsin School
of Medicine and Public Health, November 4. ftp://ftp2.dot.state.mn.us/pub/outbound/transit/
NonMotorized%20Transportation%20Research%20Committee/Grabow_11.04.10presentation.pdf.
Jaffe, Eric. 2015. Here We Go Again With Retailers Hating Bike Lanes. Citylab. October 7. http://www.
citylab.com/commute/2015/10/here-we-go-again-with-retailers-hating-bike-lanes/409372/.
Kaliszewski, Nadia. 2011. Jackson Hole Trails Project Economic Impact Study. Laramie, Wyoming:
University of Wyoming. https://headwaterseconomics.org/wp-content/uploads/Trail_Study_16-
jackson-hole-trail-project.pdf.
Koebel, C. Theodore. 2014. Analyzing Neighborhood Retail and Service Change in Six Cities. Technical
Report. Virginia Center for Housing Research. https://vtechworks.lib.vt.edu/handle/10919/48643.
Landis, Bruce, Venkat Vattikuti, and Michael Brannick. 1997. Real-Time Human Perceptions: Toward a
Bicycle Level of Service. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board
1578 (January): 11926. doi:10.3141/1578-15.
Lee, Allison. 2008. What Is the Economic Contribution of Cyclists Compared to Car Drivers in Inner
Suburban Melbournes Shopping Strips? Masters of Urban Planning Thesis, Melbourne, Australia: The
University of Melbourne.
Maus, Jonathan. 2010. Study Shows Biking Customers Spend More. BikePortland.org. July 6. https://
bikeportland.org/2012/07/06/study-shows-biking-customers-spend-more-74357.
Max. 2014. Bicycles Are Business: What Research Says About Bicyclings Economic Benefits. Bicycle
Coalition Blog. July 23. http://bicyclecoalition.org/facts-biking-improves-business/#sthash.Q66Bjqpo.
dpbs.
Measuring the Streets: New Metrics for 21st Century Streets. 2012. New York City Department of
Transportation.
Meletiou, Mary, Judson Lawrie, Thomas Cook, Sarah OBrien, and John Guenther. 2005. Economic
Impact of Investments in Bicycle Facilities: Case Study of North Carolinas Northern Outer Banks.
Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board 1939 (January): 1521.
doi:10.3141/1939-02.
Meltzer, Rachel, and Jenny Schuetz. 2012. Bodegas or Bagel Shops? Neighborhood Differences
in Retail and Household Services. Economic Development Quarterly 26 (1): 7394.
doi:10.1177/0891242411430328.
Poirier 36
Mirk, Sarah. 2012. Businesses Protest Planned Downtown Bike Lane. Portland Mercury. June 6. http://
blogtown.portlandmercury.com/BlogtownPDX/archives/2012/06/06/businesses-protest-planned-
downtown-bike-lane.
National Establishment Time-Series (NETS) Database September 2016. Kauffman Compendium on
Entrepreneurship and Innovation Data. http://www.kauffman.org/~/media/kauffman_org/microsites/
sotf/data_sources/NETS_data_overview.pdf.
Nazelle, Audrey de, Mark J. Nieuwenhuijsen, Josep M. Ant, Michael Brauer, David Briggs, Charlotte Braun-
Fahrlander, Nick Cavill, et al. 2011. Improving Health through Policies That Promote Active Travel: A
Review of Evidence to Support Integrated Health Impact Assessment. Environment International 37
(4): 76677. doi:10.1016/j.envint.2011.02.003.
Neumark, David, Junfu Zhang, and Brandon Wall. 2005. Business Establishment Dynamics and
Employment Growth. 05-02. Entrepreneurship Seminar Series. Hudson Institute Center for
Employment Policy. http://ssrn.com/abstract=909249.
Pagliara, F., and L. Biggiero. 2014. A Survey on Impacts of Bike-Oriented Policies on Residents and
Economic Activities. WIT Transactions on Ecology and the Environment 191. doi:10.2495/SC140631.
Peterson, Hayley. 2010. Merchants Protest New Downtown Bike Lanes. Washington Examiner,
October 27. http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/merchants-protest-new-downtown-bike-lanes/
article/108847.
Plowman, Jonathan. 2014. What Happens to Retail When Neighborhoods Gentrify? Evidence from
California Metro Areas. Professional Report, Berkeley, CA: University of California, Berkeley.
Pucher, John, Ralph Buehler, D.R. Bassett, and et al. 2010. Walking and Cycling to Health: A Comparative
Analysis of City, State, and International Data. American Journal of Public Health 100: 198692.
doi:10.2105/AJPH.2009.189324.
Rowe, Kyle. 2013. Bikenomics: Measuring the Economic Impact of Bicycle Facilities on Neighborhood
Business Districts. Seattle, Washington: University of Washington.
Sallaberry, Michael. 2000. Valencia Street Bike Lanes: A One Year Evaluation. San Francisco, CA: The
Department of Parking & Traffic. http://industrializedcyclist.com/Valencia_bikelanes.pdf.
Sanders, R.L., and J.F. Cooper. 2013. Do All Roadway Users Want the Same Things? Results from
Roadway Design Survey of San Francisco Bay Area Pedestrians, Drivers, Bicyclists, and Transit Users.
Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board 2393: 15563.
doi:10.3141/2393-18.
Sener, I.N., N. Eluru, and Chandra R. Bhat. 2009. An Analysis of Bicycle Route Choice Preferences in Texas,
US. Transportation 36 (5): 51139. doi:10.1007/s11116-009-9201-4.
Szczepanski, Carolyn. 2013. How Bicycles Bring Business. Momentum Mag. April 10. https://
momentummag.com/how-bicycles-bring-business/.
Sztabinski, Fred. 2009. Bike Lanes, On-Street Parking and Business: A Study of Bloor Street in Torontos
Annex Neighbourhood. Toronto: Clean Air Partnership.
Poirier 37
Tolley, Rodney. 2011. Good for Busine$$: The Benefits of Making Streets More Walking and Cycling
Friendly. National Heart Foundation of Australia.
Valencia Street Before & After. 2015. Western City Magazine. http://www.westerncity.com/Western-City/
February-2015/Road-Diets-Make-Streets-Leaner-Safer-and-More-Efficient/.
Vancouver Separated Bike Lane Business Impact Study. 2011. Business Impact Study. Vancouver, BC:
Stantec Consulting Ltd.
Poirier 38

Poirier Bikes and Business 2017

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Poirier Bikes and Business 2017

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

College of Environmental Design University of California, Berkeley

Are Bicycles Good for Business?

Study Area 1: Columbus Avenue

Source: Google Earth Pro 7.1

* All figures for 2003 and are from NETS.

Adjusted for inflation to match value in 2013

Figure 5: Columbus Avenue Study Area

Bicycle Lane Intervention to Street

Study Area 2: Polk Street

Source: Google Earth Pro 7.1

Tables 7-8: Polk Street Business Establishment & Resident Demographics

Figure 9: Polk Street Abutting Establishments, May 2008

* All figures for 2003 and are from NETS.

Adjusted for inflation to match value in 2013

Figure 10: Polk Street Study Area

Bicycle Lane Intervention

Study Area 3: Valencia Street

Source: (Valencia Street Before & After 2015)

* All figures for 2003 and are from NETS.

Adjusted for inflation to match value in 2013

Figure 15: Valencia Street Study Area

South Van Ness Avenue

Cesar Chavez Street

Bicycle Lane Intervention

Table 16: Local-Serving NAICS-Based Classification

Table 17: Establishments Dropped from Analysis

Looking at the difference in percentage improvement of abutting establishments versus non-abutting

Non-Abutting Establishments Abutting Establishments San Francisco

Non-Abutting Establishments Abutting Establishments San Francisco

Non-Abutting Establishments Abutting Establishments San Francisco

Non-Abutting Establishments Abutting Establishments San Francisco

Discussion & Conclusions

American Bicyclists & Alliance for Biking & Walking.

Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen