Lights, Camera,Advocacy!

Silverspot TheaterFebruary 22, 2017

“…we have a huge screen, let’s take advantage of it…”

2

Advice I Was Given For Today

If light rail was a good

idea five years ago, it’s

probably still a good idea

now. I think people are asking – “is it still a

good idea?”

3

4 Data Source: TJCOG, Nov 2016

Lessons from Seattle-Tacoma and Minneapolis-St Paul

• Multiple transit providers• Several modes of transit open• The right “transit tool” differs from one

corridor to another

5

Minneapolis-St. Paul Metro: 3.5 million people

Light Rail

Commuter Rail

Bus Rapid Transit

Bus

6

How They Decided Which Mode Goes Where: Travel Markets

Key To Travel Markets: Density of Jobs and Housing

7

Jobs + Housing Density >>>

Key Data Measure:Trips Per Acre

Mode Profile: Bus Rapid Transit

Operating Characteristics:• Operates mostly in dedicated bus lanes

• Stop spacing: every ½ mile to every 1 mile

• Articulated buses for busway-only service, 40-ft bus for buses that use part of busway

• Avg speed at rush hour: ~14 mph in recent USA installations

Where It Works:• Major roadways and urban arterials within bus-only lanes, with

limited travel in mixed traffic. 60-foot articulated buses do not fit on neighborhood streets and some collector streets.

• Demand for service every 10 to 30 minutes at rush hour

• Trip intensities of 20 – 75 trips/acre

8

Mode Profile: Light Rail Transit

Operating Characteristics:• Operates on dedicated tracks out of traffic,

limited lane sharing with buses/first responder vehicles

• Stop spacing: every ½ mile to every 2 miles

• 90-foot cars that can be joined together in trains

• Avg speed at rush hour: ~21 mph in recent USA installations

Where It Works:• Dedicated tracks in separate right-of-way or rail-only segment

of major roadways.

• Demand for service every 5 to 15 minutes at rush hour

• Trip intensities of 50 – 100+ trips/acre

9

Measuring Trips Per Acre in Durham and Orange Counties

10

Key To Travel Markets: Trip Intensity Map of Triangle (TJCOG)

• Trips Per Acre by Location

11 Data Source: DCHC-MPO, CAMPO, TJCOGMap by GoTriangle

D-O LRT Corridor Trips Per Acre, 2040Gateway: 98

Patterson Place: 104

NCCU: 160

Ninth St: 181

Downtown Durham: 209

Duke/VA: 236

Woodmont: 70

UNC Hospital: 385

MLK/South Square: 187

12

North Hills, Raleigh- Projected 2040 Trip Intensity: 75 trips/acre

13

Durham-Orange LRT will have 11 stations with 100+ trips/acre in 2040

Data Source: TJCOG

The Major Trip Generators in the Durham-Orange Corridor Are Strongly Related to Each

Other

14

Transit Onboard Survey, Durham & Orange Counties, 2014

15

More than 50 trips between two Locations

Data Source: 2014 Transit Onboard Survey, RSG, Inc.

The reasons the Durham-Orange corridor is the largest transit market in the Triangle

16

Key Durham & Orange Decisions That Made the D-O LRT Corridor

• 1789 – UNC founded

• 1855 – NC Railroad begins operation Greensboro-Goldsboro

• 1892 – Duke University moves to Durham from Trinity, NC

• 1910 – NCCU founded

• 1974 – Jordan Lake completed, limiting access to Chapel Hill from East, pushing future traffic towards NC 54

• 1982 – UNC and Duke Hospital designated Level 1 Trauma Centers. Only 6 such centers in North Carolina, but 2 along D-O LRT corridor

• 1980s – Orange County & municipalities adopt Rural Buffer; Durham creates Rural Tier

• 1988 – Interstate 40 built, limiting “crossing” points between Durham & Chapel Hill

17

18 18

Why BRT Was a Good Fit for Wake County, and LRT Was a Good Fit for Durham-Orange

19

Project Average Trips Per Acre- All Station ZonesDurham-Orange LRT 126.1

North-South BRT 103.3Wake BRT (All lines) 68

Project Average Trips Per Acre-Remove Downtowns/CollegesDurham-Orange LRT 53.4

North-South BRT 34Wake BRT (All lines) 35.4

20

Transit Usage by Metro Area

20

Indianapolis, INSacramento, CA

Nashville,TNKansas City, MO-KS

Urban WakeTampa-St. Petersburg, FL

Virginia Beach, VACharlotte, NC-SC

Salt Lake City, UTCleveland, OH

Austin, TXMinneapolis-St. Paul, MN

Denver-Aurora, COPortland, OR-WA

Durham-OrangeSeattle, WA

0 20 40 60

6.7

9.7

9.7

10.9

11.2

11.9

12.2

18.3

20.8

22.6

25.1

30.3

32.3

35.7

41.0

43.3

Annual ridership per urban resident

Source: 2012 National Transit Database for 2011. Ferry ser-vices excluded. Unlinked pas-senger trips.

LRT and BRT rarely provide a similar type of service.

“BRT” is a term used for many things.

21

“BRT” – Guangzhou, China “BRT” – Seattle, WA

Travel Speeds of Light Rail and BRT in the USA, Projects Built or Added to Since 2000

BRT LRTAverage Length 8.8 miles 18.5 miles

Average Speed 13.9 mph 21.3 mph

Why Is Speed Important?“In a large, continuing study of upward mobility based at Harvard, commuting time has emerged as the single strongest factor in the odds of escaping poverty. The longer an average commute in a given county, the worse the chances of low-income families there moving up the ladder.” – “Transportation Emerges as Crucial to Escaping Poverty,” New York Times, May 7, 2015

(see BRT/LRT Performance characteristics handout)

22 Data: Transit agency timetables and websites

LRT Vehicle Capacity: ~180 passengers per carStandard Bus Capacity: ~50 passengers per bus

Operating Costs of Bus & Light Rail

24

What We’ve Learned Since 2011 AA

25

• GoPass use increased LRT ridership forecast. GoPass makes transit feel free

• If BRT had been chosen, ridership would have risen for BRT, too

• Lower bus capacity + Higher BRT ridership =– More buses/higher operating cost – Introduces new, significant traffic impacts

• Then, A Tough Choice: – BRT in mixed traffic – slower, less reliable service– Spending more on capital cost to add up to 40 bridges

• LRT remains a better fit for high-demand corridor

Economic Development & Rail

26

Bethesda, MD:$600 million on ~2 acres

Gateway Station, Chapel Hill:25 acres in Orange County 1100 feet from light rail platform

Orange County Transit Plan Status Update

27

28

Original Orange County Plan• Orange County

• 35,300 revenue hour expansion of bus service & associated buses in first 5 years

• Durham-Orange Light Rail Project• $7 Million in bus capital project

improvements• North-South BRT Project in Chapel

Hill• Hillsborough Train Station

29

Implementation StatusOrange County

• Nearly 25,000 revenue hours of bus service have been implemented (including amount spent on existing service)

• Durham-Orange Light Rail Project – GoTriangle has completed Project Development Phase and received EIS and Record of Decision; FTA authorization to enter Engineering phase is pending

• Bus capital project improvements have been defined but not implemented

• North-South BRT Project - Chapel Hill has completed an Alternatives Analysis and received FTA authorization to enter Project Development phase

• Hillsborough Train Station – NCDOT has included State funding in STIP and taken responsibility for Environmental Study

Plan Update ScheduleFebruary – Early April • Fully vet proposed changes• Enhance Financial Model capability to answer questions• Discuss/negotiate cross-county cost-share agreement

Mid-April – Release Draft Plans including presentation to all Boards

Mid-April – Late May • Public comment period

June• Present Final Recommended Plan Updates for Board

consideration

11

Extra Slides from Orange BOCC

32

33

Bus transfer accessWork trip to Duke

1. Take rerouted Chapel Hill Transit Route T from Northwoods to Gateway Station

2. Take D-O LRT to Duke Hospital

Projected Economic Impact of D-O LRT• Add $4.7 Billion in economic output in

Durham and Orange Counties each year

• Add $600 Million in additional economic impact statewide

• Estimated 750 of direct construction related jobs, + over 1,000 indirect construction related jobs

• Add $175 Million in new tax revenue (per year) due to economic impacts

34 *Development Planning & Financing Group (DPFG), 2015

BRT and LRT both offer environmental benefits.

LRT benefits demonstrate increasing efficiency with greater use, just like operating cost.

35

Emissions Benefits Facilitated By Compact, Focused Growth

• More walking means fewer short vehicle trips, fewer cold starts trips

• Each 1% of short-trip mileage reduced typically reduces air emissions by 2-3%.

36 Todd Littman, Victoria Transport Policy Institute

Mixed-Use Developments Reduce Traffic

• Mixed use generates far less traffic than single - use suburban development

• Experiences of 6 large - scale US Suburban Mixed Use Developments:– 30% Internal Capture– On average, 15% of external trips

by foot, bike, transit•• Thus “45% of trips put no strain on

external road network”

37 R. Ewing, R. Cervero, et al. 2011. Traffic Generated by Mixed-Use Developments. Journal of Urban Planning and Development;.

Franklin Street:

1997: 19,000 cars/day

2015: 14,000 cars/day

Emissions of Transit Modes Per Passenger Mile

Data: USDOT, 201038

Public Health Benefits Facilitated By Rail

Before –and-after surveys of Charlotte, North Carolina LRT passengers found:

• Body Mass Index (BMI) declined an average of 1.18 kg/m2 compared to non-LRT users in the same area over a 12-18 month period, equivalent to a loss of 6.45 lbs for a person who is 5'5.

• LRT users were also 81% less likely to become obese over time. .

39 MacDonald, et al. 2010

Review: 2011 AA Document vs Dec 2016 FEIS/ROD to NCCU

40

15,350

148,000System-wide trips:

Mode Profile: Conventional Bus

Operating Characteristics:• Operates in mixed traffic with cars

• Stop spacing: every ¼ mile to every ½ mile

• Typically 40-foot bus

• Avg speed at rush hour: 6-12 mph, depending on traffic conditions

Where It Works:• All major roadways, arterials, collector streets, and some

neighborhood streets

• Demand for service every 20 to 60 minutes at rush hour

• Trip intensities of 10 – 35 trips/acre

41

Mode Profile: Commuter Rail

Operating Characteristics:• Shares tracks with freight, Amtrak trains

• Stop spacing: every 2 miles to 5 miles

• Typically 3 or more coach cars hauled by diesel locomotive

• Avg speed at rush hour: 25-40 mph

Where It Works:• Only mainline railroad corridors

• Demand for service every 20 to 60 minutes at rush hour, limited or no off-peak or weekend service

• Serving long-haul trips for large regular workday employment market to dense job center in city CBD

42

Policy Choices

FARES– Chapel Hill Transit: $0– GoDurham: $1.00– GoRaleigh: $1.25– GoCary: $1.50

43

Transit Service Hours By Metro Area

Indianapolis, INNashville,TNUrban Wake

Kansas City, MO-KSSacramento, CA

Tampa-St. Petersburg, FLVirginia Beach, VA

Charlotte, NC-SCCleveland, OH

Austin, TXSalt Lake City, UT

Minneapolis-St. Paul, MNPortland, OR-WA

Denver-Aurora, CODurham-Orange

Seattle, WA

0.0 1.6

Transit service revenue hours per urban resident

Bus service All other transit services

Source: 2012 Na-tional Transit Data-base for 2011. Ferry services ex-cluded.

2x hours ofUrban Wake

3x hours ofUrban Wake

0.78 1.17

44

Recent Transit Ridership• Durham-Orange: ~72,000 boardings per day (Chapel Hill

Transit, GoDurham, Duke Transit, GoTriangle Durham/Orange routes)

• Wake County: ~38,000 boardings per day (GoRaleigh, GoCary, NCSU Wolfline, GoTriangle Wake routes)

• Durham and Orange have roughly half the population of Wake County, but generate nearly double the transit ridership

45

Summary• Durham-Orange corridor is already a large, robust

transit market, in a high-growth metropolitan area. • LRT can provide capacity to meet current & future

demand in a way BRT cannot• LRT supports the compact growth & economic

development strategies of Durham/Orange that preserve farms/forests, reduce emissions

• LRT will provide faster service and more opportunity/social mobility than BRT over 17 miles

• LRT will provide lower cost per passenger trip

46

Key Take-aways

• Durham & Orange counties have built a large transit market responding to their compact growth choices and job centers

• Wake County is investing to catch up to Durham-Orange, using a plan and technologies that complements their more suburban growth choices

• Different transit technology choices can match transit markets in the different counties, and still become a fully integrated system

47