Triangle Regional Transit

[ChiefJoJo]

A couple of notes on transit in the triangle...

First, here's an interesting plan showing the proposed TTA Phase II corridor (2MB) between Durham and Chapel Hill. That alignment looks strange to me, and I wonder how much thought went into it (stations, alignments, etc). The "line" doesn't run down 15-501 in that part of the plan, and misses NC54 too. I believe the main focuses were trying to capture the BCBS building on 15/501 and Meadowmont.

Also, if you want to know more details about what's work is going into the development of the transit vision in the Triangle, click here.

[vitaviatic]

If you can think of a way of doing this without significantly raising the costs of the line beyond it's unfundable amounts now then please present it...As I first mentioned with this RBC idea is the only way that you are going to be able to cost justify a station at that arena is only if that station can be used for something else.

[Transplant]

vitaviatic, I like you plan. I'm on board.

[ChiefJoJo]

That is actually a little bit higher than RTP which stands at around 40K now but projections have that number increasing to 45-50K in the next 10 years. It would be interesting to see the nodes of employment concentration in the Triangle. Offhand Duke has 30K students/employees and UNC has probably around 35K. NCSU has about 40K faculty/postdocs/students but don't know about staff numbers.

[DanRNC]

Also the numbers at Carolina North are ringing in at around 10K.

[ChiefJoJo]

Play the TTA design game... you are asked Q's about how to improve service given finite resources. It'll be interesting to see the results. I chose real time arrival info, better stops (shelter/signs), and biodiesel buses.

BTW, TTA is doing the game in the Urban Design Center on Wed 11am-1pm in DTR.

[ChiefJoJo]

Article on TTA's struggles with bus reliability problems despite growing demand.

Commuters are pushing for more frequent runs on crowded TTA express buses that connect Raleigh with Durham and Chapel Hill. Local mayors are clamoring for new routes for workers and students from Pittsboro, Wake Forest, Clayton and other outlying towns.

...

On a couple of hot afternoons last August, TTA's standing-room-only express bus from Raleigh to Chapel Hill broke down on Interstate 40.

"One time it took a very long time for them to come to get us," recalled Joal Hall Broun, who works in the N.C. Secretary of State's office. "The other time it was fairly quickly."

Roy G. Campbell of Carrboro, a fellow TTA commuter who works at the N.C. Museum of Natural Sciences in Raleigh, said the I-40 breakdowns left some riders unwilling to trust the transit agency.

"They felt it was not dependable," Campbell said. "It was undermining their confidence in the system."

...

TTA shelved its $810 million rail project last year after the Federal Transit Administration doubted it would serve enough riders to warrant the cost. Triangle planners, elected officials and residents will update the region's transit priorities this year. TTA may be asked to revive its rail project or to develop new plans in other corridors.

Meanwhile, Triangle bus agencies report steady ridership gains. TTA's passenger count grew by 17 percent in the first nine months of 2006. Citing the increased demand, Triangle mayors have asked TTA and city transit agencies to make recommendations for expanded regional bus service.

I rode the TTA Ral-CH express and it didn't have AC and broke down at the Eubanks Rd Park & Ride. I understand what they are saying about confidence in the system. Luckily, we waited for a CTran bus to take us down to DT CH. This really shows the need for a transit fee or tax to support the system. There just isn't enough money to do what we need. I believe they are looking at improvements to the existing system (see my previous post) and additional bus service, with $5, 10 & 15M annual options.

[ncwebguy]

The only TTA break down that I've been part luckily happened at the RTP transfer station. They never replaced the bus -- riders like myself caught the next one a half hour later. There have been a few near stalls, with only the drives accustomed to the tempermental buses saving us from having to wait. Air Conditioning is a hit or miss proposition, as buses are not tied to specific routes.

(Edit) The undermining of my confidence in the system comes with getting stuck in I-40 traffic. In my car, I can take back roads or another route. But on a TTA bus, we have to stick it out and deal with delays throughout the system. A train would bypass those problems, but for some reason that is rarely used as a selling point for rail.

It was good to see TTA step up from short to full sized buses a few years ago. I hope TTA, DATA, CAT, etc. will pool resources to collectively purchase buses to bring the cost per vehicle down, but there does not seem to be much movement in that direction lately either.

[orulz]

I've never been on a TTA bus that actually broke down. I had a bus that died before I boarded it at RTP (the bus had to be swapped - took about 15 minutes) and once I was on a bus that was stuck in 2nd gear. I've rode the bus hundreds of times and this is the extent of my misfortunes.

I have heard though that the Thomas buses are indeed holding up poorly, to say nothing of the El Dorado shuttles. Neither vehicle was intended for full-scale transit service, much less the high-mileage regional use for which TTA has been using them.

Hopefully with their next order, they get buses from a major manufacturer with a more proven track record.

[ChiefJoJo]

Cherokee Partners have performed a study in Charlotte that would use a TIF to fill the funding gap in the CATS North Corridor project.

This is the type of funding situation that Cherokee may attempt to implement to help implement the TTA line.

[vitaviatic]

We have just mapped out examples for "Stage 1" special tax districts for implementing transit in downtown Raleigh. The idea behind this is that only the areas that would derive a tangible and direct financial benefit from the transit corridor would be assessed an extra mil levy in order to help pay for the startup and operation of the system. Much like existing special districts that pay for enhanced street maintenance, security, artwork, etc., this overlay district would bring the new and unique element of mass transit to downtown and other high-density areas that, in our opinion, would not only level the playing field with suburban malls and office parks, but give downtown an outright advantage in creating a more vibrant atmosphere due to the much increased, very simplified, and more or less cost-equalized transportation supply to these focus areas.

The primary "transit influence zones" (TIZs), outlined in blue on the maps, would be the mandatory ones that would be required in order to attain and maintain the service. The secondary and tertiary TIZs would be of a more voluntary nature, with a lessened mil levy that would be aimed mainly at funding circulator activity to and from the stations themselves. The primary TIZs are designed to be predominantly commercial and institutional areas which could more easily assume the burden of payment (with federal and state tax write-offs available for such added property taxes). Any residential properties that fell within the PTIZs could be assessed a more modest mil rate that would be commensurate with, or less than, the added value of the residences themselves. In addition, some other kind of offsets and incentives would likely need to be offered as well, such as reduced parking facility requirements for commercial properties (perhaps a 25% reduction over normal, within the TIZ).

These mapped areas, utilizing Wake County's iMaps service, are meant to be suggestive only. In reality, a very thorough parcel by parcel breakdown would need to be done (and probably some cherrypicking of properties for inclusion to ease approval) in order to figure out just what kind of income could be expected, and what mil levies would be appropriate.

These are Stage 1 TIZs only. Naturally, this type of zoning would occur up and down the corridor from North Raleigh, into Cary, RTP, and Durham, and could perhaps be extended out to other suburban areas that would be included in expanded service such as Eastrans or other ventures.

TAG~TTA Transit Influence Zones (Downtown)

TAG~TTA Transit Influence Zone (NCSU)

TAG~TTA Transit Influence Zone (Fairgrounds)

The irregular nature of the secondary and tertiary TIZs shown are explained by the fact that they were drawn to represent areas that could be served with fast and frequent circulator service, something requiring direct and simple street connections, a feature that might become problematic in the NCSU area due to the fragmented grid of the Main Campus. Note that the Fairgrounds area assumes stepped up zoning densities north of the ROW. Many existing properties in the area we feel will experience profound economic pressures to upgrade -- e.g. the old Polk Youth Center property (a given), NCHP Troop C, the National Guard Armory, along with the NCSU Experimental Farm and Schenck Forest along Reedy Creek Rd.

It isn't necessarily our hope that these properties succumb to growth pressures. We merely acknowledge the critical mass of development is already there in order to push these types of low-density institutional and agricultural uses out of the area. If any or all of these properties do enter redevelopment, not to mention the industrial properties surrounding the Fairgrounds Station itself, the entire Fairgrounds orbital becomes a virtual blank slate that could incorporate the type of urban design that many lament went by the wayside with Brier Creek and other more centralized (RTP/Airport area) projects.

We've worked out some faux numbers that we will share at a later submission. They are sufficient to finance rolling stock, some level of maintenance, but not the improvement and operation of the NCRR right-of-way itself. As we suggested earlier, since the state has a vested interest and obligation in the NCRR, it would be the most efficient approach to have the state design/build all of the improvements needed for whatever variety of operations they require (i.e., freight, intercity, transit, high-speed rail, etc.) In this manner, the funds that were promised to the original, aborted TTA project could remain in state control, as well as the operation of the NCRR corridor itself, and thus serve many masters. Again, the goal here is to get a very basic system up and running, and to prove out the market -- something that no amount of market surveys, demographic modeling, or mere lip service can do.

[ChiefJoJo]

We have just mapped out examples for "Stage 1" special tax districts for implementing transit in downtown Raleigh. The idea behind this is that only the areas that would derive a tangible and direct financial benefit from the transit corridor would be assessed an extra mil levy in order to help pay for the startup and operation of the system. Much like existing special districts that pay for enhanced street maintenance, security, artwork, etc., this overlay district would bring the new and unique element of mass transit to downtown and other high-density areas that, in our opinion, would not only level the playing field with suburban malls and office parks, but give downtown an outright advantage in creating a more vibrant atmosphere due to the much increased, very simplified, and more or less cost-equalized transportation supply to these focus areas.

[Cary NC]

So it is a done deal between Cherokee and TTA.

http://www.newsobserver.com/102/story/550377.html

[ChiefJoJo]

Great news! That's so funny that I had been thinking about it today and low and behold, it's complete! I'm sure vitaviatic knows how valuable this partnership could potentially become for TTA. For Raleigh folks, it means we'd probably be seeing a development proposal at the old Dillon Supply bldgs in teh Warehouse District.

FYI: link to Cherokee.

Latest TTA release on the Transit Blueprint... we should have a new REGIONAL transit plan by late 2007.

revised article today on Cherokee deal:

"We are simply launching the ship today, and we'll see whether it sails or not," King said. "A lot depends on the [local planning] process. A lot will depend on the market and the continued growth."

Norris said it was too soon to predict which of the TTA rail sites would be developed first. Downtown Raleigh is undergoing massive renewal.

Cherokee could be competing with itself in downtown Raleigh. The company is expected to partner with Cary developer Hamilton Merritt in the redevelopment of 3.6 acres on the block bounded by Wilmington, Blount, Martin and Davie streets. Plans there could include a skyscraper with offices, condominiums, apartments, shops, restaurants or hotel rooms.

"For transit to work, we do need the public-private partnership potential that this is intended to offer," [Wake Commissioner Joe] Bryan said. "We need a way for the community to capture some of the value that is generated when we make this investment in infrastructure."

It would behoove Cherokee and TTA to get started as soon as possible, said Brian Reece, managing partner of Karnes Research, a Raleigh company that tracks commercial real estate trends.

"There's a window of opportunity now within the next six to eight months," Reece said. Beyond that, "we don't know what the demand would be."

Reece added, "Getting a TTA site up and running would be great exposure for the future of the TTA."

[DanRNC]

TTA ridership was up 12.2% in 2006-more than 4 times the national average.

[Gard]

TTA ridership was up 12.2% in 2006-more than 4 times the national average.

[tjoad]

Study on Raleigh-Durham's traffic forecast

For Raleigh, Hartgen's (UNC-Charlotte professor) comments are:

He claims the state does not need new funds to address the problems. Instead, he advocates that state and local planners reduce the growth of congestion by shifting dollars from transit to road improvements.

Hartgen

[ChiefJoJo]

^ Yeah, I don't think there exists a sensible widening plan for most of the major freeways in this area, save I-40 in Cary. Any additional I-40 widening project would be in the $100Ms, and if you look at the I-540 extension to Western Wake, that pricetag is $905M, certainly not a sensible sum of money. I'm floored he can claim that "the state does not need new funds to address the problems." I can tell you that is flatly not true. We are already in a deep hole and it's getting worse by the day (look at the school system) trying to keep up with growth.

I'm not going to waste my time looking at their report, but it's hard to imagine a scenario for the Triangle in 20+ years without a robust local infrastructure funding option, increased transit choices along with an increased level of sustainable growth in this region. If we don't achieve that, I won't be around to experience the alternative.

[DanRNC]

I find it interesting that their plans for alleviating traffic congestion are very vague considering they are the ones slicing and dicing every mass transit plan. Its also interesting that the Locke Foundation always uses this one mouthpiece (Hartgen) for their transit/transportation agenda. He seems like a self-appointed expert and I use "self-appointed" very emphatically.

[ChiefJoJo]

So it is a done deal between Cherokee and TTA.

http://www.newsobserver.com/102/story/550377.html

[ncwebguy]

Not sure what else to say about the Cherokee deal that I haven't said already here. A public/private initiative will reduce federal spending, shift the risk to the private sector and (hopefully) spur TOD around station sites. If the FTA still won't support the plan, it is doomed.

I've been hoping for more announcements from TTA and/or Cherokee as to which stations/areas they will start developing, how they plan to intergrate into the proposed multi-modal downtown Raleigh station, etc.

Also, why was the John Locke/Pope Foundation "study" newsworthy??? It says things everyone already knows -- traffic will get worse if the population increases and the road infrasturcture stays the same. Duh! In other news, water is wet and the sun rises in the east and sets in the west.

The proposed solution -- cut mass transit spending and send that to building more roads -- isn't well explained. None of the stories on the report have given any details on exactly how much is currently being spent on mass transit and/or what will be spent in the future.

Even worse, it completly ignores the benefits of mass transit -- the reduced number of vehicles, trips and pollution used by mass transit riders, the reduced amount of space that would otherwise be dedicated to parking, and other benefits. Just because the report "conveniently" ignores them doesn't mean the media should too. Instead, they just type up a summary, get a couple of quotes, and call it "reporting". Pathetic.

Somehow, the increased construction costs of buidling mass transit infrasturcture (regional rail) is a reason *not* to do it, but the increased construction costs of building roads is a reason to do it now with voodoo economic models like tolls.

[DanRNC]

Its amazing that a year or so ago, traffic supposedly wasn't that bad in the Triangle according to the same critics. Maybe someone from the Locke Foundation finally got stuck in I-40 traffic. I remember people scoffing at the idea that a trip from Durham to Raleigh may take a couple of hours during peak rush hour traffic-guess what, we are approaching those traveling times. It took my friend's wife almost 2 hours to get from the exit for Southpoint in Durham to Wake Tech in Garner. I do like on their report the image of the 60s era muscle car that burned leaded fuel and got about 2 miles to a gallon. I think it really illustrates where these people's heads are at-about 40 years behind the time.

[ChiefJoJo]

I've been hoping for more announcements from TTA and/or Cherokee as to which stations/areas they will start developing, how they plan to intergrate into the proposed multi-modal downtown Raleigh station, etc.

[vitaviatic]

Not sure what else to say about the Cherokee deal that I haven't said already here. A public/private initiative will reduce federal spending, shift the risk to the private sector and (hopefully) spur TOD around station sites. If the FTA still won't support the plan, it is doomed.

I disagree with the last sentence. Quite emphatically, actually.

It really depends on what the eventual goal is, and how it is approached. Trying to immediately impose a system of the scale that TTA cooked up in the beginning was somewhat akin to an eight-year-old trying to sink a jumpshot from NBA three-point range on a ten-foot rim. With the relatively neophyte status of TTA and the entire region with mass transit to begin with, and the extreme reliance of fed funding on what was basically a crapshoot of a model, this was a self-defeating venture.

Forgive me for beating this drum over and over again. Start simple and expand. In fact, the more you can reduce federal involvement of any kind in the original system, the higher levels of fed assistance the Triangle will reap in the future when it actually starts producing mass transit ridership numbers and presenting them to the FTA. The process is very similar to, say, a 401(k) plan where the employee tosses in 3% and the employer will match that 3%. The trick here is that the region has to create something to get paid for in order to start getting paid. There is no reason that a system could not be installed next year, simply as a localized extension of existing Amtrak service, between Raleigh, Cary, and Durham. The remaining stations could be infilled on a prioritized basis. The worried keep forgetting -- the State of North Carolina owns the right-of-way! That, in and of itself, is two-thirds of the battle won right there.

Local funds could easily and comfortably finance up to $40 million in rolling stock -- engines, coaches, and what not. Once the basic service is implemented and guaranteed, the TODs will start going up. Then, if the tax fortresses that we talked about earlier are set up around the TODs and high-density commercial districts (the downtowns), the symbiosis will begin. The TODs will generate tax money for improvements and expansion of the system. The system will then expand at the capacity that it can from local and state funding. More TODs will then come online. Ridership will hit critical mass, then TTA or whoever the operator is can go to the FTA and say, "Look here are the numbers. No BS, 45GB models of what we think will happen. Real numbers. Now we want our share of the pie, just like Buffalo got, just like Sacramento got, just like St. Louis got, just like Portland got, and all of these other metros of similar size. Oh, and by the way, we've already invested into and built the basic system. Now pony up!" It's formulaic. Unless they are denying everybody transit funding at the time, there is no politically safe way for an administration to deny existing formulae and refuse that kind of request. And if they do refuse, up goes your middle finger, because you don't really need it. It would certainly be a slower developmental process w/o fed funding, but not impossible at all. The only somewhat tricky part of it is how to fund day-to-day operations, but that too, is a solvable equation.

Engines, coaches, a couple of sidings on the ROW between Raleigh and Durham, basic station platforms, a maintenance facility, plus modest signal upgrades. That's about all you need to add the service. (Actually for local Raleigh-to- Fairgrounds, Raleigh-to-Millbrook, or Durham-to-RTP service, one consist could probably turn the same segment back and forth, and still keep a 15-minute headway (30 minutes round-trip), negating the need for extensive signalling or siding improvements. State pays for the track upgrades (after all, it's their property), and the local transit overlay district pays for the service itself. And there is no reason the same couldn't be done up and down the entire NCRR corridor from Charlotte through Greensboro, the Triangle, and on to Goldsboro and Kinston with similar structuring. An almost bulletproof argument can be made that state investment in an already existing infrastructure (the NCRR) yields way more "bang for the buck" than new freeways starting at the prelim EIS and the first shovel full of dirt.

Federal funding is expensive. It is no secret in the transit world that megaconsultants like Bechtel and Parsons, Brinckerhoff are the politically connected gatekeepers to the vault of the FTA. They have to be paid for any project to even get looked at by the Feds. Look at how much money has been spent already on rather dubious projects for the sake of helping Dumbo fly. If the new plan of attack becomes locally focused, and even pretends the FTA didn't even exist, the more likely that the project will keep its focus on the main goal -- getting passenger #1 up and down the rails on a mass transit service. That first passenger will get the Triangle 50% higher on the rung of fed funding than now.

It comes down to something like this. You need a car. You can come up with, oh, about $7,000 cash. Do you "settle" for a $10,000 Kia, or do you keep salivating over the $120,000 Maseratti? They both have air conditioning. You can put the best stereos in either one. Hell, you can even wi-fi the thing if you care to. Either one will get you around and to where you need to go. Now, would you rather "settle" for humble but entirely functional, or take on a quarter million in debt from Luigi the Loanshark just to impress the neighbors?

BART came about because the Muni had already been operating in San Francisco since the turn of the 20th century. New York's IRT came about because of the New York Central and the extensive ferry system in place around Manhattan. Chicago's El evolved because the Windy City was the center of the railroading universe. Every lavish, jawdropping transit system in the world had humble beginnings, and a genesis from which it sprang. Washington, DC's Metro is the only modern system that was basically imposed lock, stock, and barrel in its entirety from the outset. Yeah, it's good to be the Nation's Capital!

There's also the much underestimated aspect of civic chestbeating that could take place if Triangle leaders could stand in front of an APTA conference, and say, "Yeah, we built the bloody thing ourselves." Nobody has ever been able to say that before! Movers and shakers tend to admire that kind of moxie, and that of itself would be a great selling point to entrepreneurs and potential corporate residents for more sticks and bricks -- and money into the transit till.

[CitizenWill]

Thought the Cherokee/TTA private/public deal amounted to another poor economic development gambit - a bit of a giveaway.

On vitaviatic's post, I'm surprised that bus rapid transit (BRT) continues to get short shrift. TTA already knows how to manage bus fleets, has the infrastructure to maintain existing and new rolling stock. Seems prudent and less fiscally risky at this point to stick with their core competency.

I went to a Chapel Hill transit forum last year where a BRT expert from Ottawa indicated the existing TTA corridors could be upgraded/built for a modest sum - a mere fraction of the rail option - though I know that's been contested by various LRT advocates (LightRailNow for instance, which makes some very good points - http://www.lightrailnow.org/ ). And, however one feels about the current deal, the BRT option preserves the intent behing the Cherokee/TTA partnership.

Have you guys on UrbanPlanet already discussed and discarded BRT as an option? I'd like to read the pros and cons of BRT from folks plugged in at the local level.