Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

GoTriangle Update on DOLRT Project


Published on

Presentation by Patrick McDonough, Manager of Planning and Transit-Oriented Development at GoTriangle at Lights, Camera, Advocacy! on Feb. 22, 2017

Published in: Business
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

GoTriangle Update on DOLRT Project

  1. 1. Lights, Camera, Advocacy! Silverspot Theater February 22, 2017
  2. 2. “…we have a huge screen, let’s take advantage of it…” 2 Advice I Was Given For Today
  3. 3. 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. 4. 4 Data Source: TJCOG, Nov 2016
  5. 5. 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
  6. 6. 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
  7. 7. Key To Travel Markets: Density of Jobs and Housing 7 Jobs + Housing Density >>> Key Data Measure: Trips Per Acre
  8. 8. 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
  9. 9. 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
  10. 10. Measuring Trips Per Acre in Durham and Orange Counties 10
  11. 11. Key To Travel Markets: Trip Intensity Map of Triangle (TJCOG) • Trips Per Acre by Location 11 Data Source: DCHC-MPO, CAMPO, TJCOG Map by GoTriangle
  12. 12. D-O LRT Corridor Trips Per Acre, 2040 Gateway: 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
  13. 13. 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
  14. 14. The Major Trip Generators in the Durham-Orange Corridor Are Strongly Related to Each Other 14
  15. 15. Transit Onboard Survey, Durham & Orange Counties, 2014 15 More than 50 trips between two Locations Data Source: 2014 Transit Onboard Survey, RSG, Inc.
  16. 16. The reasons the Durham- Orange corridor is the largest transit market in the Triangle 16
  17. 17. 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. 18 18
  19. 19. 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 Zones Durham-Orange LRT 126.1 North-South BRT 103.3 Wake BRT (All lines) 68 Project Average Trips Per Acre-Remove Downtowns/Colleges Durham-Orange LRT 53.4 North-South BRT 34 Wake BRT (All lines) 35.4
  20. 20. 20 Transit Usage by Metro Area 20 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 0 20 40 60 Indianapolis, IN Sacramento, CA Nashville,TN Kansas City, MO-KS Urban Wake Tampa-St. Petersburg, FL Virginia Beach, VA Charlotte, NC-SC Salt Lake City, UT Cleveland, OH Austin, TX Minneapolis-St. Paul, MN Denver-Aurora, CO Portland, OR-WA Durham-Orange Seattle, WA Annual ridership per urban resident Source: 2012 National Transit Database for 2011. Ferry services excluded. Unlinked passenger trips.
  21. 21. 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
  22. 22. Travel Speeds of Light Rail and BRT in the USA, Projects Built or Added to Since 2000 BRT LRT Average 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
  23. 23. LRT Vehicle Capacity: ~180 passengers per car Standard Bus Capacity: ~50 passengers per bus
  24. 24. Operating Costs of Bus & Light Rail 24
  25. 25. 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
  26. 26. 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
  27. 27. Orange County Transit Plan Status Update 27
  28. 28. 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. 29. 29 Implementation Status Orange 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
  30. 30. Plan Update Schedule February – 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
  31. 31. Extra Slides from Orange BOCC 32
  32. 32. 33 Bus transfer access Work trip to Duke 1. Take rerouted Chapel Hill Transit Route T from Northwoods to Gateway Station 2. Take D-O LRT to Duke Hospital
  33. 33. 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
  34. 34. BRT and LRT both offer environmental benefits. LRT benefits demonstrate increasing efficiency with greater use, just like operating cost. 35
  35. 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
  36. 36. 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
  37. 37. Emissions of Transit Modes Per Passenger Mile Data: USDOT, 201038
  38. 38. 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
  39. 39. Review: 2011 AA Document vs Dec 2016 FEIS/ROD to NCCU 40 15,350 148,000System-wide trips:
  40. 40. 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
  41. 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
  42. 42. Policy Choices FARES – Chapel Hill Transit: $0 – GoDurham: $1.00 – GoRaleigh: $1.25 – GoCary: $1.50 43
  43. 43. Transit Service Hours By Metro Area 0.0 1.6 Indianapolis, IN Nashville,TN Urban Wake Kansas City, MO-KS Sacramento, CA Tampa-St. Petersburg, FL Virginia Beach, VA Charlotte, NC-SC Cleveland, OH Austin, TX Salt Lake City, UT Minneapolis-St. Paul, MN Portland, OR-WA Denver-Aurora, CO Durham-Orange Seattle, WA Transit service revenue hours per urban resident Bus service All other transit services Source: 2012 National Transit Database for 2011. Ferry services excluded. 2x hours of Urban Wake 3x hours of Urban Wake 0.78 1.17 44
  44. 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
  45. 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
  46. 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