Light Rail System, TTA - Triangle Transit Authority
IT'S TIME TO STOP THE RUNAWAY TRAIN
When is the proper time to stop a runaway train? Anybody with just a little common sense would say, "before it wrecks."
For ten years the Triangle Transit Authority has been pursuing a light rail system and has already spent $13 million on preliminary engineering and environmental study, etc. Additionally, they have already committed to pay the NC Railroad $15 million to use 27 miles of rail corridor. Now they are gloating (in Saturday's N & O article) over "approval" to spend $57 million more in federal money that they do not have and are not assured of ever getting. The "train" is running at full speed on a project that has already seen projected cost skyrocket enormously.
Beside the huge cost for something that grows ever increasingly worse for the taxpayers, the TTA was wrongly given the powers of eminent domain by the Legislature (against my opposition and vote) and are about to start the forced taking of properties along the route to establish passenger stations.
Now is the time for citizens to rise up in force and say "halt" to a system that will end up costing taxpayers billions, and will do nothing to get people where they want to go, reduce traffic congestion, or improve the environment. There is ample evidence from studies already done and from experiences with existing systems not to mention the strong evidence that few people will use such a system . that this will be the biggest white elephant the area has ever known and will become a huge sinkhole gulping up massive tax dollars that are badly needed for other essential services.
I have carefully examined documents of highly qualified researchers who have studied such rail systems exhaustively. The TTA has access to many studies and knows the shortcomings and exorbitant costs of building light rail in areas where it is not feasible. But they are dead set on a light rail for the Triangle because "other places have them and its prestige so we've got to have one."
Tom Rubin, a leading researcher of such systems, points out that no light rail system carries more than half a freeway lane of traffic even when operating at full capacity. Another researcher, James Chandler, who has exhaustively studied the Austin system and others, points out that we are in "an era of numbers juggling as Transit agencies in major cities are allowing huge numbers (ridership) to mask questionable feasibilities in their efforts to win public support for new light rail."
Chandler points out that a projected ridership of 40,000 a day, for instance, seems to indicate an awful lot of cars taken off the roadways. But, he asks, what is the factual information. He found in his research that 53% of light rail riders are commuters within a city. He enters that into a formula used to study the Austin projected light rail and finds that in a projected annual ridership of over 4 million passengers only 1515 people out of that more than 4 million projected actually divert from their autos to ride the rail. Space here does not permit to go through the formula, but it is available along with vast amounts of other information for those interested. What the formula proves is that a different product is to be found within "ridership" numbers than what the actual effect is in diverting passengers from autos to rail. Ridership accounting is not nearly just as it may seem.
Chandler's study of light rail in numerous cities found that peak hour traffic relief was nil. For example, in Los Angeles where there were 31,800 boardings a day the peak hour autos eliminated was just 123; in Baltimore with 45,500 daily boardings the peak hour relief in number of autos displaced was 177. A similar pattern was found in at least 10 systems studied in various large cities.
Translated for what's being proposed here in the Triangle we can say that if the trains carried a full load of 2000 on every trip all day the relief in traffic would only be equal to less than half a lane of traffic on I-40 for one hour's time . that's only half a lane of one lane of the multiple lanes of I-40 through the triangle. An HOV lane for high occupancy vehicles would do far more to relieve traffic congestion.
The MARTA system in Atlanta averages 80 riders on 12 trains an hour (960 people per hour) less than half of whom chose to leave their cars and ride the rail. If these 960 passengers are spread over 4 lanes they would account for 100 cars per lane . a drop in the bucket toward reducing traffic congestion. The MARTA system, unlike that proposed for the Triangle, at least takes people to and from points where there is a need (airport to downtown , downtown to the ballpark, for example.) The Triangle proposal is not nearly as accommodating.
Reduction of air pollution is also an element being used by TTA to push light rail. Studies show that light rail increases auto exhaust pollution due to the large numbers stopping to wait for trains to accept and discharge passengers. The ozone problem would receive no relief.
Preventing urban sprawl is another of the arguments. Recent zoning cases have provided sizable evidence that high density in-fill is not an acceptable choice for property owners in the area's well established neighborhoods nor would it satisfy the desire for a little open air in one's neighborhood wherever there is the so called sprawl. If you've traveled anywhere in Wake County lately you can easily observe that there are nice new subdivisions either in place or being developed on all available tracts of land. Why? Because that's what people want ... not high density living where space is just too limited. So in-fill? No, not in our backyards is the clearly expressed answer.
So the goals, helping traffic congestion, preventing urban sprawl, getting people where they want to go in a timely manner, etc. just will be complete failure in the rail system proposed.
For about a year now, our Taxpayers Association members have been asked to observe any TTA bus they see and count the riders. Ninety nine percent of those observed are transporting less than 5 passengers. It has been calculated, based on our observations and on the figures provided by TTA, that every rider could be furnished a new automobile and gasoline to operate it for less than the cost of operating the buses. No question that the bus system could be operated with greater efficiency and without a whole lot of effort. For one thing almost nobody knows where to board them, what the routes are, and anything at all about the schedules (pick up/discharge points and times of same). A good public relations program could explain those questions and might gain a few more riders.
Rubber tired transit vehicles at least are capable of getting people where they need to go and are not limited to wherever rails can disrupt neighborhoods and traffic. A concept that we understand is being mentioned a little . coordinating and combining all the bus systems throughout the triangle . sounds like a solution that has merit. It certainly deserves a chance before billions are spent on light rail that is doomed for failure.
When someone raised the question recently at a TTA meeting , when would the rail start being self supporting, the response was "You don't expect it to be profitable do you?"
So why do we need light rail? We don't if it's not going to work. It's just a prestige thing . the other areas have one so we've got have it too.
As taxpayers we'd all better be demanding that it be de-railed now before it wrecks our tax resources as the biggest sinkhole ever to arise. Our tax resources are much more needed on assuring essential services that are valuable to all our citizens.
If you do not want your federal, state, and yes local tax dollars, to continue to be wasted on this huge boondoggle we'd all better be making our voices heard now by voicing our concerns to our legislators in Washington and here at home asking that the funding be stopped. Turning the funding faucet off at both federal and state level is the only way to prevent the wreckage of the runaway train.
As an aside, one of the many offensive effects of the TTA light rail proposal would be eliminating a valuable recycling process. One of the many sites about to be grabbed up by the TTA for a passenger station is the pulp wood receiving and loading operation across from the fairgrounds. That single operation is responsible for diverting over one million tons of debris from the area's landfills each year . a huge step toward solving a pollution problem. Where would they go? There would be no place. The rail system would take priority. It's not really about reducing pollution after all.
J. Russell Capps, President
January 13, 2003
Background on the Regional Rail Project
What is the Regional Transit Plan and how does it affect the Regional Rail Transit Project?
As a result of several years of planning, TTA and the Triangle Region's two Metropolitan Planning Organizations adopted the Regional Transit Plan in the mid-1990.s. This plan includes regional rail service, expanded bus service, shuttles, park-and-ride facilities and enhanced transit access for pedestrians and bicycles. Click here to view the Regional Transit Plan map.
The initial project is a Regional Rail Transit System supported by shuttle and local bus service. This service, planned to be operational by 2009, will use self-propelled, bi-directional, diesel rail cars operating within the existing railroad rights-of-way that connect Durham, Research Triangle Park (RTP), Cary, and Raleigh. The costs for construction are approximately $689 million (2005 dollars). This service is expected to carry about 10,285 daily riders by 2025.
Other elements of the plan include enhancing and expanding regional bus service, adding express service to existing routes and new service in the region's smaller communities. In addition, shuttle or feeder bus systems are being planned to connect people to future rail stations. Existing local bus services also will be coordinated to serve the rail stations.
Operations
The Regional Rail Transit System will be approximately 28 miles, linking Durham, Research Triangle Park, Cary and Raleigh (System Map). A series of 12 stations will provide riders access to housing, shopping and businesses, as well as connections to transit services, which link the entire Triangle. The trains will operate on new tracks in the existing North Carolina Railroad and CSX Railroad rights-of-way.
The TTA Board decided to construct a dedicated two-track system which can support more trains and provide more service. Initially, the service will run every 15 minutes in peak hours and every 30 minutes in off-peak hours and on weekends. In the future, headways are expected to increase to 10 minutes during the peak hours and 20 minutes during the off-peak and weekends. The service will begin with approximately 18 hours a day, 7 days a week. The trains will average 34 miles per hour (includes station stop time). This can be compared to typical bus service that averages 10 to 15 miles per hour (with stops and associated traffic).
Riders will access the Regional Rail service initially through the 12 stations that are planned along the route. Many of the stations will have park-and-ride lots. The stations will be accessible to pedestrians, bicycles and wheelchairs. Local, regional and university transit service will provide access to the stations.
Vehicles
The Regional Rail Transit System will use Diesel Multiple Unit (DMU) vehicles. Fourteen single units will be used initially. (Click here to view images of the proposed TTA rail vehicle).
What is a Diesel Multiple Unit?
A Diesel Multiple Unit is a diesel-powered, self-propelled rail vehicle. Because DMUs are propelled by several small diesel engines with automatic transmissions, they do not need to be pushed/pulled by a locomotive. The small diesel engines are similar to the ones used in buses or semi-trucks, and are therefore much quieter than the freight trains operating in the same corridor.
The DMUs have one train operator, no other personnel are needed. Several DMUs can easily and quickly be coupled together to make a longer train if a higher passenger capacity is needed for morning or afternoon peak hours or during special events.
Why is TTA using DMU's and not a light rail vehicle? What is the difference?
A light rail vehicle is powered by motors that get electricity through overhead wires, called the catenary. DMUs are powered by diesel motors, which make them independent from the catenary. DMUs are not susceptible to power outages and the construction costs for a DMU system are significantly less since the costs of the catenary and the necessary sub-stations are substantial.
What about the emissions that a DMU creates?
The diesel engines used for TTA's DMUs will meet all federal and state emission requirements. New technologies have made these engines very efficient and much more environmentally friendly than in previous years. A DMU does not use much more fuel than buses but moves many more people at a higher average speed. There are currently no fuel alternatives available to replace diesel without severely increasing costs and maintenance and, in some cases, safety.
If you have questions about the vehicles, contact Thomas Janssen, Project Manager for Systems, (919) 485-7427, or tjanssen@rideTTA.org.
Bus and Shuttle Connections
The development of a Regional Rail Transit System will require modification to the existing network of bus services. Schedules and routes of the bus services will be coordinated with the Regional Rail Transit System. Bus service, bus network planning and service implementation must be actively coordinated to provide a seamless regional service. TTA.s roles will include planning and implementing service expansions and facilitating the integration of service planning and operations with other transit providers in the region. These include Durham Area Transit Authority (DATA), Capital Area Transit (CAT), Duke Transit, NC State Wolfline, and Orange Public Transportation (OPT).
Service Planning
As part of the current stage of project development, TTA, along with other transit providers in the region, has developed conceptual bus service networks for the purpose of forecasting transit ridership and estimating operating costs. TTA's Board of Trustees and affected local governments in the region are committed to providing these levels of service. These conceptual plans are designed to:
- Provide feeder service to Regional Rail Transit System stations;
- Avoid duplicate or redundant service along the rail corridor;
- Adjust the bus route capacities to better fit the new demand; and
- Provide information to be used in station planning and design, including bus stop/bay capacities and station site provisions for facilitating transfers.
Prior to the start-up of the Regional Rail Transit System in the Triangle, some additional planning will be completed so Triangle residents will experience a truly seamless transit network. TTA and the other transit agencies will:
- Develop specific route and schedule changes for bus services;
- Include funds for the services in their local budgets;
- Adjust bus fleets and staff to appropriate levels; and
- Coordinate these and other related activities.
Interagency Coordination
In addition to the work of the individual agencies, an intergovernmental team will be established. This team will evaluate the multimodal -- rail transit, bus transit, vanpool, bicycle, pedestrian and automobile -- requirements within the service areas of the Regional Rail Transit System and coordinate changes to transit services. This could include changes to bus routes, bus stops, schedules, bus fleet, fare structures, marketing and other areas of operations. If local government bodies approve consolidation of TTA, CAT, and DATA, we will also look for opportunities to extend services beyond existing boundaries to improve connections and create more efficient service.
Essential to the development of a seamless regional multimodal transit system is the integration of fare systems among the various transit providers. TTA, DATA, CAT, and other agencies have cooperated to install advanced electronic fareboxes that allow for:
- Integrated fare collection (use of single, regional .swipe. passes for bus and rail);
- New, more convenient pass types (e.g., day passes, 31-day passes);
- Simplified transfer policies; and,
- New interagency, multimodal methods of data gathering, accounting, and revenue attribution.
A region-wide marketing and public information strategy also will be developed cooperatively with other transit providers to emphasize the seamless nature of the multimodal system.
If you have questions about bus planning, contact Patrick McDonough, Transit Service Planner, at (919) 485-7455 or pmcdonough@rideTTA.org.
Stations
The Regional Rail Transit System stations will provide easy and convenient access to neighborhoods, entertainment, shopping and employment and provide transfers between regional rail vehicles, buses and other modes of travel. Stations will be equipped with passenger amenities and ticket vending machines, all of which will be universally accessible. Stations also will have park-and-ride facilities of varying sizes.
Of the 12 stations, there will be three in Durham, two in Research Triangle Park, two in Cary and five in Raleigh.
How were the potential station sites chosen?
During the Triangle Fixed Guideway Study (see Project Overview for details about that study), 16 candidate locations were identified for the initial Regional Rail Stations. The candidate locations were selected primarily because they are close to existing activity centers, and the surrounding areas have the potential to support future growth at higher densities.
Through the Station Area Development project, using engineering and other technical studies, the candidate locations for the Regional Rail Transit Stations were further examined and refined by a Technical Team consisting of state and local government partners and key stakeholders. Most stations began with several potential sites potential alternative sites for each of the 16 stations were identified and options for special generator stations, like NCSU, focused on one primary location that might be subject to some minor refinements. Through a review of each site, those that were unable to support the physical elements and operational requirements of regional rail transit were eliminated from further consideration.
TTA and its consultants prepared sketch conceptual plans for the alternative station sites. Through an initial screening process, the alternative sites were reviewed on the basis of environmental impact potential; design issues; development and redevelopment potential; nature and population of service area; cost; traffic circulation; bus, pedestrian, wheelchair, bicycle access and other concerns. The initial evaluation included meetings with the technical team, as well as two rounds of community meetings with key stakeholders and the public. The sites that emerged from this process represent the best alternative station locations for the 12 initial and four future Regional Rail Transit System stations. These locations were then studied through the draft environmental process.
How were the final station locations picked?
The Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) included a comparison of the features and potential impacts of each of the possible station locations. This information was presented to the public in a series of stakeholder meetings in October 2000. The final decision on station locations was based on the findings of the draft and final environmental impact statements, comments from the stakeholder meetings, information from the local governments and input received in the environmental review process. The TTA Board of Trustees selected the majority of the station sites in fall 2001.
If you have questions about station planning, contact Juanita Shearer-Swink, Project Manager, at (919) 485-7412 or jshearerswink@rideTTA.org.
Future Expansion
Future expansions of the Regional Rail Transit System include the addition of stations in Durham and Raleigh. Connections to the RDU Airport and Chapel Hill may also be considered in future extensions of the Regional Rail Transit System. There are no existing rail corridors that directly link these areas to the Regional Rail Transit System, so planning, design and ultimate construction are more complex.
Durham
A future station located between Duke Medical Center and the VA Hospital will connect riders to the Medical Center, the university, and adjacent employment and housing centers.
Raleigh
Three future station locations have been planned for areas generally north of the Government Center station:
- The Highwoods station will be located just north of the Beltline. Through shuttle connections at the adjacent park-and-ride lot, riders will have access to Raleigh Community Hospital and the Highwoods employment center.
- The New Hope Church Road station also will include a park-and-ride. Shuttle service from this location will provide connections to residential and office areas along Old Wake Forest and Falls of Neuse Roads.
- The Spring Forest station.s proximity to Capital Boulevard will provide residents of northern Wake County with an alternative to rush hour traffic as they commute to and from work. Residential communities, including townhouses, apartments and single family neighborhoods, are located adjacent to this station.
Chapel Hill
A study was conducted to determine the most appropriate transit service between Chapel Hill and Durham. The study was jointly sponsored by the North Carolina Department of Transportation, the City of Durham, the Town of Chapel Hill and TTA. The most likely alternative for connecting Chapel Hill and Durham could include a dedicated busway and buses operating in mixed traffic. The town and the university will determine the exact location of the transit corridor within the UNC campus.
RDU Airport
Initially, the Raleigh-Durham International Airport (RDU) will be connected to the Regional Rail Transit System through shuttle buses from the Triangle Metro Center Station. In fall 2000, the RDU Authority participated in a study with TTA to evaluate options for linking the airport to the Regional Rail Transit System in the future. The study concluded that connecting the airport to the Regional Rail Transit System was initially not feasible. After the 12-station, 28-mile project is operating, TTA and the RDU Airport Authority will decide whether to re-evaluate the situation.
Click here to view the Executive Summary of the Airport Rail Link Study.
Outlying Cities
Bus and vanpool services are currently being expanded to serve the smaller towns and communities in Wake, Durham and Orange counties. As ridership grows and funding becomes available, regional rail service could be extended where rail corridors exist and an operating agreement with the railroads can be negotiated. Possible future destinations for long-term rail transit extensions include:
- Apex
- Knightdale
- Carrboro
- North Durham
- Garner
- Wake Forest
- Fuquay-Varina
- Wendell
- Hillsborough
- Zebulon
How was the Regional Transit Plan developed?
Triangle Transit Authority (TTA) secured a grant from the Federal Transit Administration to study long-range regional public transportation for the three-county Triangle region (Durham, Orange, and Wake counties). This alternatives analysis, called the Triangle Fixed Guideway Study, was completed in 1992.
The primary goal of the study was to develop consensus within the region concerning the desirability, feasibility and location of a fixed guideway transit system. This study examined regional economic growth opportunities and identified potential locations for growth, corridors that could connect these growth areas and changes in land use that would need to take place to support transit.
During the first two phases of the study, TTA applied current policies and trends to examine the amount and kinds of growth expected to shape the region in the future. Based on the analysis, TTA found that the Triangle region is likely to experience problems that will affect its livability and mobility, including a loss of community identity and open spaces, less efficient and high-cost transit services, increasing highway congestion and a lack of alternative transportation choices.
During Phase III of the study, TTA examined alternatives to this future scenario that addressed the problems identified. These included various transit technologies, major activity centers and selected corridors that connect the activity centers.
After evaluating three transportation and land-use alternatives and receiving feedback from land use and transportation professionals, elected officials and the public, TTA developed a fourth alternative that combined preferred elements of each of the three alternatives. This "composite" alternative was further refined and developed into Preliminary Recommendations for a Regional Transit Plan, adopted by the Triangle Transit Authority Board of Trustees on February 22, 1995.
The Preliminary Recommendations were shared with the local governments in Durham, Orange and Wake counties, area universities, employers, business and community interest groups and other organizations. TTA also held public hearings to gather additional input. The revised document, Recommendations for a Regional Transit Plan, was adopted by the TTA Board of Trustees on October 25, 1995, and subsequently incorporated into the region.s two long-range transportation plans. This document guides regional transit planning efforts today.