Triangle Regional Transit

[monsoon]

So what exactly did STAC accomplish?

• They took a failed project, revived it, and added new even less cost effective projects that more than effectively double the cost (in present terms) and amazingly give them all equal priority.

• They said there needs to be more local tax to support it and suggested a 1/2 cent tax like Charlotte.

Was there anything else? We came to the tax conclusion years ago at UrbanPlanet so it amazes me it took all this effort to make the same statement.

What seems to be missing here are any recommendations that I can see about the political realities of getting the Durham and Wake country governments to not only agree to the 5 cent tax, but to also petition the NC Legislature to allow them to place such a measure on the ballots, how this money will be split up (given that more of it will be generated in Wake) and who controls it. It would seem to me that STAC's plan is DOA without a blueprint for getting this done.

When they came to Charlotte, why did they not ask why the North CR line there is in trouble? It's because Iredell county will not put up the local tax money to fund it's section, and the towns north of Charlotte are balking at the additional taxes being asked of them to help pay for the thing. The original assumptions made that these places would just fall in line and pony up the money did not come true. I will go back to what I said earlier. These "blue ribbon panels/commissions" never come up with recommendations that see the light of day and I would expect that what STAC has proposed will end up meeting the same fate.

Again, I think that given the huge costs of setting up a system, that Wake county alone needs to focus on building transit within the city to build up Raleigh. I just don't seem them agreeing to send a lot of their local tax money to Durham to build a LRT there.

Comments?

[vitaviatic]

I can't believe that I am even reading about a 2020 start date. This to me indicates a continuation of the same problematic, "goldplating" mindset that tanked TTA's plans to start with. Overplanning seems to be the catchword here. No, transit isn't a simple process, but most of the hangups that most other systems experience during startup is related to routing of infrastructure and the logistics therein. As I have said before though, the Triangle essentially does not have that problem in that the basic infrastructure already exists for an NCRR-based "starter system" that would serve the spine of the Triangle. It seems ludicrous to me that this STAC is proposing bookended but unconnected lines, in three different counties, which does nothing to solve one of the Triangle's fundamental problems -- interconnectivity and cross-jurisdictional seat supply. No transit system that is proposed there is going to work unless those problems are solved. Now, having said that, I'll reiterate that I would be all for that if they could pull it off, and get something, anything going. IMHO though, that approach is even more doomed to falter than the TTA original.

I now resubmit one of my previous ideas, then I'm calling it quits because frankly this is painful to watch. This is the simplest and least risky possibility yet. (I know that Triangle politicians are highly risk-averse.)

Have TTA, NCRR, NCDOT, the counties, Raleigh, Durham, Chapel Hill, Lizard Lick -- whoever -- solicit bids for a contracted, five-year turnkey service. Amtrak would be a logical provider. Veolia (or, the artist formerly known as Connex) is already a familiar name there. Herzog maybe. Bombardier. Colorado Railcar. They all can do it. Equipment, operational personnel, maintenance all included. They all already own the necessary equipment. Geez, the State evens owns a few pieces of equipment that can be short-leased for the proving service. Just put it on the tracks and run it. See what happens. If it flops, then you've proved that Triangle residents are much smaller-minded than we all thought, can't wean themselves from cars, and later non-plans can be made from that. And in this way, you've spent a lot less money to find that out. If it does work (and I think it will) then subsequent plans will be mandated by the public, and therefore fast-tracked and embellished, backed by concrete numbers. South Florida's Tri-Rail was embarked upon by FDOT as a relief for I-95 construction back in the late 80s. As you can see, it became quite permanent.

A good number of us will surely be dead by 2020, and I for one would like to see something happen before then. Combined with a top notch publicity and familiarization program for an area that largely knows little about transit, a living, breathing train running down the tracks will be your best insurance for funding success.

LA's Metrolink, New Mexico's RailRunner and others that were superimposed over freight corridors have started from creation to operations in much, much smaller timeframes than 12 years. I'm sure that concessions would have to be made with NCRR to run livery on their tracks, with schedule adjustments and so forth with Norfolk and CSX, but it isn't a Gordian knot by any means.

The evolving problem here is that when you start providing "local solutions" such as a Raleigh to Wake Forest train, or a Durham to Chapel Hill train, with a quasi-governmental authority such as TTA, without any interconnectivity built-in (other than the tenuous routing of buses) you woo unto you a turf war as has already been evidenced here ("why should Wake County pay for a Durham to Chapel Hill light rail?" for instance). When the service is transjurisdictional from the start, these questions go away over time. To wit, Draper, Utah has no qualms about putting funding into the pot for LRT service extensions to West Valley or commuter service to Ogden from Salt Lake because it serves everybody.

Transit is the ultimate communal enterprise, and as such only comes to fruition in places that see themselves as connected. Some cities will never see themselves that way. Detroit, Cincinnati, Orlando, and Phoenix (although PHX has built an LRT) are some of my examples. The Triangle shouldn't be that way, since neither Raleigh, Durham, Chapel Hill, Cary, or any other burg in your prospering region would be worth a bucket of warm spit without the others. By and large they function as one place, and as such they need to be tied together as efficiently as possible.

Weighed against the total metropolitan tax base, through whatever financing scheme you choose, the funding for an "experimental" operation comes out to the equivalent of a Ulysses Grant note out of Rod Brind'Amour's salary. Better to find out now whether it's workable or not, or even if you want it or not, by spending a little now. Test drive the *bleep*ing thing for crying out loud.

[orulz]

This is a 2020 plan, not a 2020 start date. These are the three segments that they want to have operational by 2020.

In addition, there is a separate proposal being studied by NCRR for Burlington-Goldsboro commuter service. NCRR's study will identify what improvements to the physical plant will be required to support 18 daily commuter trains (9 in each direction).

CRR is working to identifI would speculate that they are undertaking this study at the request of David King, TTA's GM. The plan would include 4 trains each way per rush hour period, plus one each way at midday.) Read more about it here. The missing component of this study is where the money will come from to implement its results.

[Gard]

Again, I think that given the huge costs of setting up a system, that Wake county alone needs to focus on building transit within the city to build up Raleigh. I just don't seem them agreeing to send a lot of their local tax money to Durham to build a LRT there.

Comments?

[ChiefJoJo]

The STAC was charged with taking a "fresh look" at regional transit needs, and it's their job to produce a plan that the region thinks is compelling enough to support. Others can decide for themselves if it is worth supporting. If the STAC can make the case to the MPOs, counties, and cities, then it shouldn't be difficult to sell it to the legislature, since they would only be granting the authorization of a referendum... then it's up to the voters.

Is there anything new? Yes. I believe the STAC adopted some version of this 2035 plan. Major bus expansion (express, enhanced), streetcars, and shared track commuter rail... a fairly comprehensive system, but these may come after 2020 though, but definitely by 2035.

It's conveniently generic to say Raleigh should build it's own system... where? What corridor? What technology? I think V is overreacting to the plan (NCRR is studying shared track CRail), but one area we do agree is the regional vision. It's got to be regional, or it falls apart. I understand everyone has their opinion on which plan is best, but consider the STAC spent countless hours studying everything put in front of them, and they are smart folks and leaders in our communities. Maybe it's not a mistake that they adopted most of the 'old plan'? Apparently, those who have studied the issue extensively feel like this is the best way forward on a technical and political basis, and if you favor improved transit options in the Triangle, at some point you might just have to trust that the work they've done is worth supporting.

Maybe we should wait for a public release of the report to judge the final product of their work.

FYI, the N&O has a rather positive editorial on the STAC's plan. If you really want to weigh-in, I suggest you write an op-ed in the N&O.

EDIT: I think this is the 2020 Plan the STAC recommends:

[vitaviatic]

I maintain that this stretched out timeframe is a disaster. I do understand that 2020 is not the build date, but even as an "operational date" you will see some of the mushrooming cost problems of the original TTA program recurring, and to an even worse degree. You are now entering a period of heavy competition in the steel and concrete markets by surging Asian and Arab countries as well as the ongoing "Katrina effect". A project tagged at $1.5B today is more than likely going to be in the $4B range (not including financing and carrying costs) by the time anything of structure gets placed. Especially in the case of light rail, the maddening logistics and planning delays of it alone (mostly in utility relocations for negative return vaults and the like) will drive the costs up on a curve likely steeper than any funding device you put into place.

My advice to get a simpler operation into service ASAP is not so much the desire to push out a slapdash service, but to shoehorn the Triangle's transit system into a position where it can position itself for funding, where it can justify to the public that the expense is worth it, and thus put into motion a sounder financing mechanism to build a better and more durable system. CATS did a good job of convincing the Mecklenburg voters that LRT was viable and good, which the Triangle still has not (even though Charlotte seems to be doing some of that job for them). But remember that CATS got in before the door slammed almost completely shut on Fed-funding. The rules are way different now, and time is of the essence. Any more screwing around with this and it won't get done.

I realize that NCRR has taken the ball, and is studying the matter of regional trains. I guess what I am saying is that it would be prudent to get this type of a basic service into place, and wait on all of these elaborate (and expensive plans) just long enough to see what organically develops around such a regional system. And unlike TTA's previous grand plans to double, triple, quadruple-track the NCRR corridor, NCRR can get by with a basic short-turn of present Amtrak routes, which should elminate the need for EIS work and such, as it would be merely covered as an extension of pre-existing use, and utilize the trackage as it is now. It would be presumed that CAT, DATA, CHT, and the rest would adapt their service to such an operation, and thus you would set into motion the kinds of variables that you just cannot see without that corridor functional. If you issue volumes of planning directives now, it may just end up that you plan for things that never materialize and/or don't plan for things that do.

Even with a basic, skeletal system in place, it will give you enough data on travel patterns, development patterns, and the like that you can glean a much better idea of what you need to actually do 12 years down the road. All you have now is charts and blueprints, which I can pretty much attest to from experience, will end up being laughably off-target even in 5 years.

The heart of my point is that you're going to spend a small fortune to plan a system anyway. I think it more efficient (and far, far, far better from a public relations standpoint) to pay for a startup fleet, run a basic schedule, pay some train crews, and actually move some people in the process, and just see the way things work, than to pay a bunch of transit swammis with their crystal balls to predict the unpredictable, and produce absolutely nothing in the process except for reams of paper! This has been done before, playing by the old rules, and this more than anything, is what absolutely sours the taxpaying public on this whole thing.

Forget Fed-funding. It's the crack-cocaine of the transit industry. It costs far more to get it in the end than it is actually worth by the time you comply with all of the silly, overreaching rules and requirements. Kick Parsons to the curb, get some trains out there, and go Run Eight on the thing!

Lesson: You can't plan a tree. You can only plant a seed and watch it grow. And the result that way is usually far better than what you would have planned anyway.

[monsoon]

......

Lesson: You can't plan a tree. You can only plant a seed and watch it grow. And the result that way is usually far better than what you would have planned anyway.

[vitaviatic]

Bob Geary's blog coverage of the STAC:

To reach $2 billion in potential capital funding, TTA General Manager David King said, the region

[ctl]

A lot of potentially urban land has been paved over and turned into suburban parking lots in the name of security and competition. Companies can still have their secured campus *and* make money by selling off or developing the excess land for development. Durham county should be encouraging this, as it has the potential to increase its propety tax base... For years, RTP employers have been served by TTA's shuttles, but maybe they need to start paying their way and provide for their own, a la the rental car shuttles at the airport.

[Jones_]

One, I believe you'll find there are restrictive covenants on RTP land that effectively prevent high-density development; the companies who own the land aren't free to subdivide their parcels. Two, the RTP companies aren't likely to spend much out of their own pockets to facilitate mass transit. After all, they aren't having any problems attracting applicants; and to the extent that their employees don't want to commute every day, most RTP companies will let their knowledge-based workers telecommute from home. In the high-tech sector, telecommuting has become a reasonable alternative to both mass transit and single-occupancy car commutes. Telecommuting costs the employers practically nothing; in fact, it reduces the demand for office space.

What I see beginning to happen is the "un-RTP'ing" of the Triangle. As long as RTP retains its campus character, there are a finite number of parcels remaining to be developed. Look ahead 20 years, and RTP could be built-out. Triangle developers sense the profit opportunity in locating large corporate employers away from RTP... in downtown locales. Thus mass transit becomes not only viable, but necessary.

[monsoon]

..... By the time Billie Sue buys her loaf of bread (and as food is taxed in NC by my recollection, the sales tax becomes all the more repugnant) she has already payed a federal income tax, a state income tax, FICA, and the rest of the alphabet soup on that money as income. Now she gets to pay another tax on it as an expenditure.......

[vitaviatic]

When "Billie Sue" (I've never met anyone in the South with that name) buys her bread, she will not have to pay the 1/2% transit tax on it. Food is exempt from the tax. Food that is sold for home preparation is also not subject to the 4.5% state sales tax rate.

[monsoon]

.... If the argument held that 1/2 of the workforce commuted even 1/2 the time, then why would IBM even bother to maintain facilities such as RTP? Why couldn't they just set up a virtual campus in Poughkeepsie and be done with all of the headaches of building maintenance, property taxes, and the like? So yes, it might diminish daily traffic counts by a small percentage, but it doesn't delete the traffic problem altogether.......

[cthayes75]

The reason that sprawl continues to get worse is due to the continued bad planning that puts people in suburban locales in places totally dependant upon the automobile.

[monsoon]

..

Sprawl gets worse because of abundance of cheap land and people's desire to have land.

[Subway Scoundrel]

They have done just that in many cities including their once 8000+ person facility in Charlotte. IMO the reason they maintain the RTP is due to the tax advantages provided by the park, and more importantly much of the space there has been converted to hosting farms that are maintained by telecommuters and less desirable, offshore work in India.

The reason that sprawl continues to get worse is due to the continued bad planning that puts people in suburban locales in places totally dependant upon the automobile. This is where STAC and others have gotten it backwards in RDU. Their plans assume that if you build a transit line the good development will follow. This is wrong. You have to enforce the good development first so that a transit line can be justified. There is a big difference in the approaches and one that still seems to be missed in RDU.

[orulz]

I'm not entirely sure, but I think the RTP tax "advantage" goes like this. RTP is in a part of Durham and Wake counties that is specially set aside so that it can never be annexed by any municipality. The DOT maintains all the roads, and they are provided "city-like" services such as water and sewer without having to pay any city property taxes beyond those levied by the counties.

Somebody who knows or has done research on this subject might want to step in and clarify...

[monsoon]

^Didn't IBM build a huge monument to corporate excess in NY called Sommers with the idea of physically putting executives in one place which ended up failing?

In any case, I was not suggesting they will move out of RTP but if they have put 1/2 of their employees there out of offices and into telecommuting environments then a lot of vehicles have been taken off the road. Even if they do come in for a short while I would think this would occur outside of commuting times which is when the roads are most stressed.

The bottom line is that corporations can and are doing a lot to get people out of the traditional 9-5 office environment and this is often an overlooked method to solving transit problems. For the past 12 years the TTA has been trying to address this very issue and as I keep saying many times, it takes more than just building a railroad to solve transit and sprawl problems.

[Jones_]

I can verify that Durham County pays to operate the WWTP.

[ncwebguy]

IBM has donated land on its campus for a rail stop, debunking RTP companies aren't likely to spend much out of their own pockets to facilitate mass transit and being able to subdivide property. Also, Cisco, EPA, and other RTP companies have lobbied the state for transportation (widened I-40, NC 540) and transit (TTA shuttles, some advocacy for better options).

Ending the outdated, 50s model of campuses and the covenants that come with them is the next step, at least in the rail corridor if not the whole park. As others have pointed out, Centennial Campus, Carolina North, and biotech centers at the NCSU Vet schoo, Kannapolis, and the Triad will eat away at the future relevance of RTI the Research Triangle Park. RTP land is not cheap now, but it was cheap when RTP was created, which in turn made acres of surface parking economically viable vs. parking structures or improving mass transit from the park to the then-thriving downtowns of the 1950s. The land adjacent to RTP wasn't ready for the ensuing population influx, so workers were forced to move to where housing was available and close to major roads that could support their commute.

Raleigh is updating its comprehensive plan over the next year, which will provide an opportunity to get TOD projects near potential rail stations. Better planning doesn't show up on the "reams of paper" wasted in Triangle regional transit up to this point. And potential projects have already been lost -- Park Centro has devloved into Davis Park, and devlopment plans for sections of downtown Raleigh and Durham near potential rail sites are on hold until a transit plan with actual support is presented.

"Telecommuting" is a buzz word businesses use to entice and retain employees, and to make themselves look technologically advanced and efficient. If someone works from home once a week, they count as a telecommuter, but are still contributing to traffic four of five work days a week. The "benefits" of telecommuting are dependent on the indivual vs. team nature of the job involved, and if the individual can get work done in the less structured enviorment of home.

I would like to see virtual offices spring up in downtowns, transit terminals or in/near shopping centers to get people in a work environment but not have to make the trip to the office, regardless of where that office is. If members of a software team work better at a coffee shop than a cube farm or have more productive meetings at a sandwich shop than a conference room, let them.

Also, from TTA's March route/schedule update, it says "TTA has postponed a decision on the relocation of its bus transfer center." Does anyone know where they were looking at moving it to? There have been some rennovations to the rest of the complex in front of the Raddison, so maybe they were hoping to get the bus traffic moved elsewhere? Also, the night Chapel Hill to Raleigh service stops at the transfer station, which is good since service to Raleigh ended a little after 6 on the old schedule.

[orulz]

They were going to move the transfer station to a property just down Slater Road from the Sheraton Imperial. The reason they are (were?) moving is (was?) that their landlords want(ed?) to free up the building TTA is using for redevelopment.

Chances are, the landlords have either changed their schedule and will not kick TTA out yet, or will change their plans entirely and not kick TTA out at all.

[ChiefJoJo]

Former state DOT Secretary Sam Hunt proposed an urban congestion relief fund for Charlotte, Triad and Triangle regions, as well as funds for other rail improvements.

The fund would provide a total of $1.909 billion to finance rail, port and public transportation projects over the next 12 years:

-- $1.621 billion to cover up to 25 percent of capital costs for urban transit projects in the Triangle, Charlotte and Triad areas, with each region limited to 33 percent of the total

-- $80 million in state aid for rail access to the state ports

-- $80 million for Class 1 freight railroads

-- $58 million for short-line freight railroads

-- $20 million for statewide bus grants to local governments

-- $20 million to expand intercity passenger train service

Hunt's proposed legislation would give the three major urban areas two identical options for new or expanded taxes to help pay the local share of urban transit needs:

-- a half-cent sales tax, now in effect in Mecklenburg County

-- a vehicle registration fee, now levied in the Triangle, with the legal limit to be raised to $7 from the current $5.

In Wake, Durham and Orange counties, the local sales tax hike would require approval by voters, county commissioners and the Triangle Transit Authority. If two or three counties held their referendums at the same time, the combined votes in all counties would determine the outcome.

Wake and Durham voters combined their numbers in a similar way in the early 1980s, when they approved bonds for a second airport runway.

The urban grants could provide the state's share for a total of $6.5 billion in transit projects by 2020. Hunt said that would provide the state's part of pending or proposed rail and bus improvements in the three urban areas.

Keep in mind this is a proposal from a subcommittee chair (although someone of stature), and would still have to be supported by the overall committee and then be approved by the legislature, which convenes in May. Nevertheless, it's good to see a somewhat forward-thinking proposal instead of the same old, same old.

[cthayes75]

To call this a "congestion relief fund" is on the surface disingenuous and many (myself included) consider it an outright lie.

Transit will not reduce congestion. The most aggressive estimates say that transit will take 3% of the cars off the road. A negligable gain that will be recouped in 2-3 years with our current growth rates.

This so-called "21st Century Transportatin Committee" is not serious about truly reforming transportation. They are basically a front organization for those who want to push mass transit on NC whatever the costs.

[orulz]

I agree with you that calling it "congestion relief" is wrong. The name should be changed because, as you point out, transit will provide no relief whatsoever to congestion.

However, I disagree wholeheartedly that it's not worthwhile. It's not like if we took this money and put it towards roads we could magically build ourselves out of congestion, either. I'm a big believer in induced demand: build more & bigger roads in urban areas, and it will change peoples' commuting patterns so they live further from work and drive more every day. Takes a couple years to catch up, but it always does, but in the end we wind up with bad traffic again, plus more sprawling development.

Call it the "urban transportation altermatives fund" or "urban transportation diversification fund" and I'm all for it.

[staffer]

I agree with you that calling it "congestion relief" is wrong. The name should be changed because, as you point out, transit will provide no relief whatsoever to congestion.

However, I disagree wholeheartedly that it's not worthwhile. It's not like if we took this money and put it towards roads we could magically build ourselves out of congestion, either. I'm a big believer in induced demand: build more & bigger roads in urban areas, and it will change peoples' commuting patterns so they live further from work and drive more every day. Takes a couple years to catch up, but it always does, but in the end we wind up with bad traffic again, plus more sprawling development.

Call it the "urban transportation altermatives fund" or "urban transportation diversification fund" and I'm all for it.