METRO MAGAZINE
August 2008. Raleigh, NC
The Longest-Running Game
in Town
Special Transportation Advisory Committee Recommends New Rail/Transit Plan for Triangle
By John Suddath
Transportation planning is becoming the longest-running game in town. The Transit 2001 Commission submitted its report in February 1997. The Triangle Transit Authority published its proposal for 16 rail stations in January 1997. And nothing has been built yet. Aside from the usual suspects of money and politics, the inaction primarily is the result of the large number of players involved and the numerous uncoordinated plans that each has developed. Recently, the Special Transit Advisory Commission (STAC) issued a report that once again offers a grand plan for a regional multimodal system, but are politicians and the public ready to accept such a costly proposal?
Here are the principal players in the game:
• The Capital Area Metropolitan Planning Organization — sets transportation funding priorities for Wake and parts of Johnson, Franklin and Harnett counties.
• The Durham-Chapel Hill-Carrboro Metropolitan Planning Organization — sets transportation funding priorities for Durham and parts of Orange and Chatham counties.
• Triangle Transit — The Triangle’s regional transit service provider, currently operating local and express bus service and van pools.
• Regional Transportation Alliance — Regional business leadership group focused on mobility issues affecting the Triangle, supported by 22 chambers of commerce and over 100 companies.
• North Carolina Department of Transportation, Public Transit Division — The division does not provide any direct services but is involved in planning and setting priorities for transit funding across the state.
• Triangle J Council of Governments — A voluntary organization of municipal and county government that provides planning, mapping, Web page design and administrative services.
• Institute for Transportation Research and Education (ITRE) — An inter-institutional research center administered by NC State University in Raleigh. ITRE conducts research, transportation workforce training programs and technical assistance.
• Special Transit Advisory Commission — A 29-member panel appointed in 2007 by the two MPOs to study transit needs and to submit recommendations.
There also are some other groups not directly related to public transit that are currently studying transportation issues:
• North Carolina Railroad — An independent state agency that owns the railroad rights-of-way from Morehead City to Charlotte and leases trackage to freight and passenger operators. It is conducting an engineering feasibility study of adding commuter rail services in the Triangle.
• 21st Century Transportation Committee — This group was established by the 2007 General Assembly to study a broad range of transportation issues, including infrastructure, funding, organization of state agencies, local options available, and setting goals and priorities for the state.
• NC Go! — A statewide advocacy group that is working to expand Highway Trust Fund flexibility and to end the annual transfers from the Highway Trust Fund to the General Fund.
The six other transit service agencies in the Triangle (in addition to Triangle Transit) are part of the MPO’s Transportation Advisory Committee and Technical Coordinating Committee. They are preparing three plans: a) the Annual Unified Planning Work Program, b) an update to the Long Range Transportation Plan that is being extended from 2030 to 2035, c) and the Transportation Improvement Program that is the actual authorization and funding document approved by the NC Department of Transportation.
If you’re not confused enough by now, consider all of the politicians, political action committees, lobbyists and think tanks that are either doing studies or promoting some special interest and you begin to see the complexity of the game and the interaction of the players when there are no rules except for what the bureaucracy dictates.
And The Difference Is
To cut to the chase, what’s the difference in the new STAC recommendations and those of the failed TTA proposals? First, the STAC is a much broader-based constituency that brings in more people at a higher level. A large part of its meetings for the past year have been spent in thrashing out differences of opinions and interests and trying to reach some consensus. Although the basic TTA proposal of heavy rail — from Durant Road in Raleigh to the Multimodal Center in Durham — still remains, using the same corridors. A light rail system has been added from Durham to Chapel Hill following Erwin Road and US 15-501. A much higher priority has been given to expanding and improving bus services in the existing seven transit providers as the first step in providing basic local public transit. That will expand to areas that currently do not have any service, such as Wake Forest and Fuquay-Varina.
The key planning tool is a series of four detailed maps showing the 18 corridors (routes) for connector service (local bus), express bus, rail and the overall regional view including all services. Over time these maps have been marked up like a fourth-grade geography class and serve as a short-hand for the locations and the types and levels of service recommended. This is where the devil is in the details. Some are addressed in the appendices that include a section of answers to 16 frequently asked questions, and a section with a financial model and a proposal for funding the entire series of projects for the next 25 years.
The total cost of the rail portion is estimated to be $2.27 billion in 2007 dollars to be completed in five stages. One of the big problems in projecting costs that far out is the rising cost of land and construction materials. The cheaper version would have been to build the system 20 years ago rather than looking 25 years ahead, obviously not an option anymore.
Players and Referees
So where is the opposing team in all this? The highway lobby likes to portray that spending on public transit detracts from the money available for new highway construction and maintenance. The facts are, at least as far the Feds are concerned, they are from separate funds. The new NC Turnpike Authority also is looking for some seed money to jump-start its two new projects in the Triangle that may conflict with the demands for an increase in the sales tax. One of these will be the construction of the southwestern loop of Interstate 540, which itself is controversial since the northern loop is free. Even though most of its funding will come from bonds, it still will need some up-front money. No one seems to know what the proposed southern loop of I-540 may cost, or where it may specifically go.
The field is full of referees in this game. The first call goes to the two MPOs who will vote up or down on the specific STAC recommendations. The STAC formally presented its final report and recommendations to a joint meeting of the two MPOs on May 21. The Transportation Advisory Committees of those two organizations will meet monthly starting in June and throughout the summer to review the STAC recommendations and determine which to incorporate into its long-range plans. The meetings are open to the public who will have the opportunity to voice their comments on these recommendations. The deadline for LRTP plans is November 2008. The second call goes to the Public Transit Division of the NC Department of Public Transportation, which may or may not agree with the MPO’s plans.
Since the STAC is only projecting for 10 percent federal funds over the lifetime of the projects, the Federal Transit Administration probably will be less of a player (or a blocker) than in the previous proposals. Then there is a whole series of sequential “plans” from all of these entities ranging from annual budget appropriations to multi-year goals that go in effect over a period of years. At least everyone finally seems to be working from the same playbook and agrees that the Triangle needs a “regional” system and not just a hodge-podge of local entities each with its own turf to protect. Judging from the meetings I have attended in recent months, there seems to be more of a genuine feeling of cooperation and less of competition than before. Maybe the Triangle is finally growing up, both literally and politically.
Let The Games Begin
So what is the schedule for the “fall season” of these games? First, the 21st Century Transportation Committee is due to present its report/plan/proposal in December 2008, which will have far more broader-reaching effects both politically and in terms of total dollars statewide. It is studying highway and bridge construction and funding, as well as public transit. The STAC study is limited only to public transit in the Triangle as assigned by the MPOs. The 21st Century Committee presented some of its recommendations to the short session of the North Carolina General Assembly (primarily a bond issue), but the major action will not occur until the 2009 session. Whoever is elected to begin terms in 2009, both at the state and federal level, also will have a significant impact on what priorities are given to transportation needs and to the Triangle specifically.
So what are the proposals of the STAC plan? They are:
• An enhanced region-wide bus network that adds new routes and improved service on existing routes based on the Mayors’ 2006 Bus Expansion Plan.
• Circulators — a term that STAC uses to describe frequent local bus or trolley service in high-density areas (this is the most vague part of the proposals). Local city bus companies would provide this service.
• Rail service that includes heavy rail from Durant Road in North Raleigh to downtown Durham with light rail between downtown Durham and South Chapel Hill. The North Carolina Railroad is investigating the engineering feasibility of operating commuter rail on its rights-of-way, but it would not operate nor fund such service.
• Financing the cost of these proposals over the extended period would be through the continued tax on car rentals; a $10 increase in vehicle registration fees; a one-half cent increase in the local sales tax; a one-time $600 million bond issue; a contribution of federal funds to 10 percent of the total cost; a contribution of state funds to 15 percent of the total costs; and a small revenue stream from fare box fees. The systems would have to be fully built before they started producing much in terms of revenue. (See the two charts of assumed revenues and projected costs.)
People may agree or disagree with certain elements of the STAC proposals, but many public officials from all of the communities in the region invested a year of serious study in reaching a consensus and coming up with these recommendations. The public will have the opportunity to express their concerns to their Metropolitan Planning Organizations at its regular meetings. Stay tuned to see if the proposals finally materialize into action. To read the complete report, including maps and appendices, go to: www.transitblueprint .org/stac.shtml.