SUMMARY MINUTES OF A LOCAL TRANSIT PARTNERS MEETING
FRIDAY CENTER, CHAPEL HILL, NC
WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 7, 2005
Chapel Hill Mayor Pro Tem Edith Wiggins called the meeting to order at 7:06 p.m.
Local Transit Partners panel members present were Town of Chapel Hill Mayor Kevin Foy, Chapel Hill Council Members Mark Kleinschmidt, Sally Greene, Jim Ward, Ed Harrison, Bill Strom, Cam Hill and Dorothy Verkerk; Town of Carrboro Aldermen Joel Broun, Mark Chilton, Jacquelyn Gist, and Diana McDuffee; and University of North Carolina representatives, Nancy Suttenfield, Carolyn Efland, and Derek Poarch.
Mayor Pro Tem Wiggins thanked the attendees noting that planning for transit was very important. She said that during a visit to Ottawa, Canada, members of the Chapel Hill Town Council had been impressed with the city’s transit plan. Mayor Pro Tem Wiggins said the Council at a Planning Retreat had discussed asking Mr. Bonsall to prepare a Long Range Transit Plan discussion paper for the Chapel Hill, Carrboro, and University of North Carolina area.
She said Mr. Bonsall, Director and General Manager of the bus system in Ottawa, had been invited to present the plan to the Public Transit Committee.
Mr. Bonsall noted that the discussion paper was intended to be a guide to set up a scope of things to consider prior to the three transit partners developing a Long Range Transportation Plan.
Mr. Bonsall said the reason the partners needed a plan was because transportation problems would only get worse. He said the typical first response was to build more roads, which only perpetuated the problem. Then, he added, rapid transit comes up and that only captures a minor part of the population. He said that cycle would become a circle.
Mr. Bonsall said a Long Range Transportation Plan’s key components should include formulated goals with reasonable objectives; an affordable and practical system concept including alignments, station locations and a preferred technology; a well-defined implementation strategy; clear links to the regional transit system; and supportive land use and urban design policies.
Mr. Bonsall said factors to consider included high existing transit ridership; new areas developing outside the downtown area unlikely to replicate the situation; automobile drivers who would use the system only if transit was frequent; reliable and fast transit where long-term parking was limited; and early implementation to keep pace with the development.
Mr. Bonsall said that what that meant was that the area needed to look at some form of higher order transit system and a financially feasible system that would attract the necessary capital funding support in the near term and be sustainable operationally. He noted that key components the area would need to identify included the following:
Mr. Bonsall said the case study was conducted in Ottawa, Canada in the mid-1970s, with transit mode shares being the target. He said by adopting policy mode share targets for transit in key corridors where there was a reasonable chance of them being achieved, a more focused and ultimately more successful transit strategy could be pursued. He added that the targets provided a focus for short and medium term transportation and land use decisions and investments and a feedback mechanism with which to monitor and track progress.
Mr. Bonsall said the targets must be reasonable and achievable both theoretically and in practice. He said it was recommended that the Long Range Transit Plan be founded on the same sort of transit mode share objectives and methodology as were used to develop the Ottawa Transitway system. He said that in this study the targets set in the 1970s for the turn of the century were met and in many cases exceeded by the early 1990s.
Mr. Bonsall said as part of the alignment identification process the Chapel Hill area should look at the following items:
Mr. Bonsall said technology options included light rail and bus ways. He said new issues guided by bus rapid transit (BRT) alignment included narrower rights-of-way, lower environmental impact, self enforcing and precision docking. He noted that BRT offered the option of buses with boarding on both sides.
He said capital outlay for at-grade construction ran from about $3.5 million for BRT to $16.5 million for light rail transit (LRT), while grade-separated construction would cost from $25 million for BRT to $40 million for LRT.
Mr. Bonsall said that BRT was cheaper to build and operate, could be built in pieces, and provided a higher level of service. In Ottawa by 1981, he said, BRT had made a significant impact, and by 1991 the objective target had been met.
The next steps in the process, Mr. Bonsall said, were to have the three entities come to a consensus on the Long Range Transit Plan scope as per the discussion paper. He added that they would then need to determine the study level of effort, noting that level of participation would have an enormous effect. Mr. Bonsall said then they could build in decision points and control budgets, and then seek Metropolitan Planning Organization, State and federal support. Finally, they would develop study terms of reference, he added.
Council Member Verkerk said it would be an intriguing future for all three entities.
Mayor Foy asked how Ottawa, with a population between 70,000 and 80,000, was comparable with Chapel Hill. Mr. Bonsall said that Chapel Hill could use the same planning approach and it would be just as legitimate.
Carrboro Alderman Gist said the discussion had been about fiscal issues. She pointed out that area traffic was an issue with everyone taking their youngsters to school, and not using school buses. She added that more than 10,000 people drove less than three miles to work. Alderman Gist said that policy changes could have a big impact, especially if the schools and the University made it difficult to park for those who live three miles or less from work. She said that would incredibly cut down on the traffic and parking problems.
Mr. Bonsall said he agreed, noting that the federal government had been persuaded to establish flexible work hours, but the changes had come about after transit changes were made.
Chapel Hill Council Member Kleinschmidt said there were many single-occupancy vehicles on the area’s borders.
Mr. Bonsall cautioned the group not to let that become an excuse not to do anything. He said they needed to get the show on the road.
Council Member Kleinschmidt asked how they could assess what they have and integrate that.
Mr. Bonsall said the area had been very successful, noting fare free bus service.
Alderman McDuffee said she believed this area was very different from Ottawa. She said they had to fit into regional plans that they did not control. She asked how this would impact regional commuting. Mr. Bonsall said that light rail and bus rapid transit could travel in the same space or right of way.
Alderman McDuffee said they were dependent on regional transit. Mr. Bonsall noted that this area had two bus systems.
Alderman Broun questioned decisions based on land use due to the significant amount of undeveloped areas. If they were looking at confined areas served by transit today, would the methodology change, she asked. Mr. Bonsall replied that the land use should come first. He added that the whole process should be driven by what they wanted the area to look like 25 to 30 years from now.
Alderman Broun asked about the funding stream. Mr. Bonsall said in Ottawas the Province had funded up to 75 percent of the project, with 25 percent of the local funding coming from property tax.
Council Member Harrison asked Mr. Bonsall what he had seen in Chapel Hill that would give them guidance. Mr. Bonsall said he was not familiar enough with the area to answer that question. However, Mr. Bonsall added that Chapel Hill had already proven it could solve a portion of the problem. He said that he was optimistic that they could accomplish this.
Council Member Strom noted that land use was important, and questioned how Ottawa had maintained its rural buffer. Mr. Bonsall said that had been accomplished through utility buffers.
Council Member Strom said that Chapel Hill had a tremendous amount going for it and that the Town had information indicating that it was going to grow dramatically. He said they could put the infrastructure in place to keep the community sustainable and they wanted to take the next step. He asked how they could develop these concepts into a plan.
Alderman Broun said the micro economy and affordability of the community had to be taken into consideration. Before they could decide what they could spend, she said, they needed to determine what they wanted to see in 25 to 30 years.
Mr. Bonsall said the efficiencies that Ottawa had gained, and the savings, far exceeded the cost of its system.
There was a brief discussion concerning right of way and set back requirements for bus rapid transit.
Council Member Verkerk said there was also the fear of riding buses and the attitude about public transit to take into consideration.
Mr. Bonsall said that the area had already demonstrated with its fare free bus service that it could succeed.
Chapel Hill Transportation Board Member Gary Barnes asked how the buses could be financed. Mr. Bonsall said the buses could be financed through borrowed funds, out of capital funds, or they could be leased.
Mr. Barnes also had questions about ridership. Mr. Bonsall said the plan itself was a selling feature for developers. He also noted that 90 percent of the ridership would be within one quarter of a mile of the stations.
Chapel Hill Transportation Board Member Rudy Juliano said the area needed to think about a small feeder system for the main system. Mr. Bonsall agreed.
Carrboro Transportation Advisory Board Member Heidi Perry questioned advertising the system. Mr. Bonsall said the best advertisement was to have buses moving around the area.
Ms. Perry also asked how success would be measured, adding there was no way to know the number of persons riding the buses. Mr. Bonsall said there were all sorts of technologies available.
Ms. Perry suggested that the University have flexible parking three days a week, then mass transportation on the other days.
Mr. Will Raymond, candidate for Chapel Hill Town Council, noted that the Long Range Plan was necessary, adding that there were three town centers – the University, Chapel Hill, and Carrboro. He also noted that there was Chapel Hill North, Eastgate, Southern Village, Meadowmont, Pittsboro, Hillsborough and Durham. He said the current system could get people from the centers to the outer reaches. But how would the system get them from the hub to the center, he asked.
Mr. Bonsall said travel on spokes was always easier. He said that regular bus service traveling the streets circumferential comes to the center. He added that you have to have volume for this to work.
Matt Deese asked what the likelihood was of keeping the system fare free. Mr. Bonsall said a higher order transit system could be built easier to operate other bus services. He said the cost effect of not building more roads had to be taken into consideration.
Council Member Strom said it was too early to tell but it was the tradition in the community to keep it free.
Mayor Foy said there was federal money to widen I-40, and plenty for transit, the question was how they were going to spend it.
Mr. Deese asked if it was going to be light rail or bus rapid transit. Carolyn Elfland, Transit Committee Member, said a study would determine that.
Ellen Perry asked how many disabled persons rode the buses. Mr. Bonsall said Ottawa had a program to make all buses handicap accessible. Ms. Perry added that in Chapel Hill there were 1,400 people who needed handicapped accessible transportation.
Council Member Ward asked about the characteristics of users. Mr. Bonsall said that 60 percent occurred in the three-hour morning and three-hour evening peaks. He said the commuters were the most significant ridership.
In closing, Mr. Bonsall cautioned the Transit Partners not to wait until all areas were built up before developing the Long Range Transit Plan. He said that transit influenced existing and future development. He added that the University was an excellent place to serve by transit because students live over a larger area.
Council Member Verkerk said she was proud that all three entities had worked together.
The meeting was adjourned at 9:47 p.m.