HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda - 05-03-2012 - 1ORANGE COUNTY
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT
Meeting Date: May 3, 2012
Action Agenda
Item No. 1
SUBJECT: Orange County Transit Plan - Current Status and Discussion
DEPARTMENT: Manager, Planning & PUBLIC HEARING: (Y/N) No
Inspections, Financial Services
and Attorney
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Durham/Orange DRAFT Cost Share
Agreement
2. Summary of Public Input
3. Triangle Transit Staff Follow-up Materials
INFORMATION CONTACT:
Frank W. Clifton, Jr., Manager, 245-2300
Craig N. Benedict, Planning Director,
245-2592
John Roberts, Attorney, 245-2318
Clarence Grier, Finance and
Administrative Services Director, 245-
2453
PURPOSE: To review and discuss the current status of the Durham/Orange DRAFT Cost
Share Agreement and public input received on the Orange County Transit Plan.
BACKGROUND: The Orange County Transit Plan (OCTP, also referred to as the Orange
County Bus and Rail Investment Plan) will describe how Orange County plans to utilize revenue
from the '/ cent sales tax, as well as other revenue sources, if approved by Orange County
voters. The Plan includes elements such as:
• Fixed guideway transit (Light Rail Transit)
o Orange County's transit partnership with Durham County
• Expanded or new bus service (local, rural and regional)
• Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd. bus lanes
• Small capital transit facilities (park and ride lots, train stations)
Orange County staff will introduce the finro items for BOCC discussion. Triangle Transit staff will
also be in attendance to provide additional assistance with questions.
For the Board's discussion:
Durham/Orange DRAFT Cost Share Agreement - Orange County and Durham County mutually
desire to support and share the costs for the Light Rail Transit (LRT) project. Attachment 1 is
provided as a draft agreement for BOCC discussion and any inclusions/deletions it may wish to
offer. Additional review and input from Durham County is also anticipated.
Public Input Received on the Oranqe Countv Transit Plan - Orange County has included a
series of public hearings and open houses to collect public comments on the Orange County
Transit Plan. Attachment 2 provides a summary of comments received to date. A summary of
comments collected at the April 30th open house will be distributed at the meeting. Written staff 2
responses will be prepared for the May 15, 2012 BOCC meeting.
For the Board's information;
Trianqle Transit Staff Follow-up Materials (Attachment 3 Multi-page) - In response to previous
questions posed by Board members, Triangle Transit Staff have provided additional material for
informational purposes. Although these additional materials are not intended for discussion
tonight, Triangle Transit staff will be available for any questions.
Next Steps:
At the May 15, 2012 BOCC meeting, the Board will consider decisions on the following items:
1. Orange County Transit Plan
2. Financial Plan [Orange County Bus and Rail Investment Plan (OCBRIP)]*, which will be
part of the preceding item 1
3. Durham/Orange Cost Share Agreement
4. Orange County/Triangle Transit Implementing Agreement
5. Do Not Levy Tax Agreement
*To address prioritization of bus routes, now with fewer bus dollars/hours; Allocation of funds for
service functions (i. e. Regional, Local, Rural); Funds used to support existing services; Core
and Enhanced plans; and schedule or timing of Plan review.
FINANCIAL IMPACT: There is no financial impact associated with this update.
RECOMMENDATION(S): The Manager recommends that the Board review and discuss. No
decisions beyond offering further guidance and/or input are requested.
~~ti~~~- ~ 3
ORANGE COUNTY, DURHAM COUNTY and RESEARCH TRIANGLE REGIONAL
PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY
INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT
COST SHARING FOR LRT RAIL PROJECT
This Interlocal Agreement ("Agreement") dated , 2012 is
entered into by and between Orange County ("Orange"), a political subdivision of the
State or North Carolina and Durham County ("Durham"), a political subdivision of the
State of North Carolina, and Research Triangle Regional Public Transportation
Authority, d/b/a Triangle Transit ("lTA"). Durham, Orange, and TTA may be referred to
individually as "Party" and collectively as "Parties".
Whereas, the Parties each desire to provide for the future transportation needs of
Durham and Orange, understanding that enhanced mobility options will support a high
quality of life, strengthen economic development, and enhance sustainability; and
Whereas, Durham and Orange mutually desire to support and share the costs for
the planning, construction, operation, and maintenance ("Costs") of a 17.3 mile
passenger rail service running from Durham to Orange along a corridor as outlined in
Attachment One, containing 16 stations, four of which are located in Orange County,
and utilizing light rail vehicles (`LRT Project"} as an important element in meeting their
future transportation needs and supporting efficient, sustainable development patterns;
and
Whereas, the Farties acknowledge that the LRT Project will be managed,
planned, constructed; maintained'and operated by the TTA according to the Bus and
Rail Investment Plans ("BRI Plans") asadopted or subsequently modified by the
Parties; and
Whereas, pursuant to NCGS 105-510 and 105-561 revenues to fund the
construction, maintenance and operation of the LRT Project will be collected and
distributed by TTA; and
Whereas the Parties have bargained to agreement on an equitable division of
responsibility to pay for the Costs of the LRT rail project.
Now therefore, in light of the mutual covenants contained herein and provided
that the LRT Project moves through planning and construction as set forth in the BRI
Plans, the Parties hereby agree as follows:
1. The total capital cost for the LRT Project through 2035 is now estimated to be
$1.378 billion dollars. Over the coming years the Parties acknowledge that
the LRT Project will move from preliminary to final design, which will result in
a more precise project description and more accurate capital costs. As a
result of this and as with any major capital project planned and constructed
Page ~ 1
4
over a number of years, the Parties understand that the estimated capitai
costs of the LRT Project may be subject to change and adjustment.
2. Subject to Section 5 herein and based upon a total capital cost estimate of
$1.378 billion for the LRT Project, Durham's share of this total shall be
$1.061.8 billion and Orange's share of this total shall be $316.2 million. This
division of responsibility for costs reflects percentage shares of 77.05% for
Durham and 22.954% for Orange.
3. Subject to Section 5 herein the Parties agree that the operations and
maintenance costs of the LRT Project will be shared and paid for by each
Party based upon the same 77.06% and 22.94% division of responsibility.
4. The Parties agree that the funds used to pay for the Costs of the LRT Project
shall come from transit sales tax revenues collecfed; by TTA pursuant to
NCGS 105-509.1 and other transit revenues which may be used for this
purpose, including but not limited to rental car taxes and vehicle registration
fees.
5. The Parties agree thaf should capital costs exceed the current estimated total
of $1.378 billion in no event shall contributions of funds by Orange exceed the
funds collected in Orange County as set out in Section 4 herein. Specifically,
should revenues generated in Orange County by the sales tax authorized in
NCGS 105-509, together with other transifi revenues set out in Section 4
herein be insufficient to meet Orange's estimated $316.2 million share of
capital costs or operational cosfs or both Orange shall not contribute
additional funds to the LRT Projecf beyond those funds.
6. The Parties agree that in the event the capital costs exceed the current
estimated total of $1.378 billion, they will discuss a response to this situation.
Such responses may include a schedule delay in one or more aspects of the
LRT Project, a reduction in the scope of the LRT Project, , a combination of
these measures, discontinuation of the LRT Project, or other reasonable
steps to mutually address the increased capital costs of the LRT Project.
7. TTA shalf allocate and pay for the respective shares of planning,
construction, operations, and maintenance costs from the revenues received
in accordance with this Agreement and the BRI Plans. TTA shall provide an
annual report on the collection, allocation, and expenditure of those funds to
the governing boards of Durham and Orange. TTA shall provide to the
governing boards of Durham and Orange copies of its annual audit reports as
those reports are related to the collection of transit revenues in Durham
County and Orange County, including funds collected pursuant to NCGS 105-
509.1.
Page ~ 2
5
8. Pursuant to NCGS 105-507.3(b) TTA shall be responsible for ensuring that no
funds generated by the sales tax authorized in NCGS 105-509 are used by
the Parties or any other recipient of these funds to supplant or replace
existing funds or other resources for public transportation systems.
9. The Parties agree that Durham and TTA shall enter into an agreement
pursuant to NCGS 105-508.1(2) ("Implementation Agreement").
10. Th Parties agree that Orange and TTA shall enter into an agreement pursuant
to NCGS 105-508.1(2) ("Implementation Agreement").
11. If, during the term of this Agreement, state and/or federal funds to be used for
the LRT Project are cancelled, terminated, withdrawn, or otherwise become
unavailable for the LRT Project the Parties agree the funds generated by the
sales tax authorized in NCGS 105-509'and any other funds collected fo[ the
LRT Project shall be allocated as provided in each Party's Implementation
Agreement. Orange and Durham shall renegotiate this Agreement if the LRT
project is modified to exclude a portion of the corridor between Gateway
Station and UNC.
12. The term of this Agreement shall be from the date first above recorded to and
including June 30, 2035. Upon its expiration'the Agreement may be renewed
upon mutual agreement of the Parties for successive three-year terms.
13. The Part~es agree to :review this Agreement and to make any needed
modifications to its terms not more than once every three years.
14. The Agreemen# may be terminated upon mutual agreement of the Parties or
by one or more of the Parties upon a material breach by any of the Parties.
15. An amendement, renewal, or termination of this Agreement must be in the
form of a written instrument noticed to the County Manager of Durham or
Orange or to the General Manager of TTA.
Page ~ 3
6
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have approved this Agreement and have
caused it to be signed by the Chair of the Orange County Board of County
Commissioners, attested to by the Clerk of the Orange County Board, and by the Chair
of the Durham County Board of County Commissioners, attested to by the Clerk of the
Durham County Board, and by the General Manager of TTA and it is effective as of the
year and day first written above.
Orange County
By:
Bernadette Pelissier, Chair
Board of County Commissioners
Durham County
By: -
Michael Page; Chair
Board of County Commissioners
Attest:
Clerk
Clerk
Research Triangle Regional Public Transporfation Authority
By:
David King, General Manager
Approved as to legal form:
Wib Gulley, General Counsel
Page ~ 4
7
Attachment 2
Summarv of Public Comments on the Oranqe Countv Transit Plan
Comments Expressed at the April 3~d Public Hearing:
• Support for the passenger rail station in Hillsborough;
• Concern that the plan disproportionately benefits some areas of the county
over others, show county population distribution;
• Requests that citizens be given more time to consider and evaluate the
plan. What process to provide input and to make changes to percentage
distribution;
• The need to improve public awareness of the plan and offer a less formal
setting for citizens to ask questions and give feedback. Add two Open
House meetings in April;
• Requests that the plan consider the elderly population in the county and
their access to transit option; and
• Concern relating to the financial aspects of the plan including, the need for
increases taxes, and the plans reliance on Federal funding;
Comments Expressed at the April 17th Public Hearing:
~ Support for the passenger rail station in Hillsborough;
• Requests to improve mobility for rural residents working in the urban areas
of Orange County
• Requests that the referendum isn't delayed until 2013
• Support for the transit plan and holding the sales tax referendum
• Expressions that buses aren't enough to handle traffic congestion and the
projected future growth; need rail
• Support for the expanded night and weekend bus service elements of the
plan
• Requests that the Commissioners consider not only what will make the
region bigger, such as light rail, but what might make it better, such as loan
guarantee programs for fuel efficient cars
• Encouragement for Commissioners to hold the referendum on the ballot
from UNC students who rely on transit to attend classes, community events
and social functions
• Appreciation that the Commissioners are taking the time to hear comments
through this hearing and the open houses
• Support for the light rail element of the plan
• Comments questioning the economic drivers of the plan and that those
outside Orange County might benefit more than those inside the County
Attachment 2 $
• Requests that the plan study the 15-501 to see who would benefit from such
an alignment
• Calls for further investigation of a"rapid bus system" instead of light rail due
to costs and that the population of the area is not large enough to support
light rail
• Assertions that data shows a trend of moving into cities rather than into the
suburbs and that this does not agree with the assumptions in the NC 54
study and the transit plan about increased traffic in the study area
• Comments questioning the relationship between the goal of the plan to
insure that transportation facilities do not negatively impact disadvantaged
populations with the recommendation that light rail be aligned adjacent to
the Cedars Health Center
• Support for the transit plan because of the need to improve air quality and
reduce dependence on cars and that everyone will benefit even if they do
not use the bus and rail system themselves
• Concerns that adequate funding be allotted to bus services and that funding
for light rail does not detract from expanded bus service
• Statements that the light rail alignment bypasses the majority of Chapel Hill
and Orange County and does not effectively serve the population
• Declaration that county residents will not utilize the new bus or rail system
• Requests that the Commissioners consider other areas of that need
improvement such as schools and highway infrastructure before supporting
an expanded transit service
Collected From the April 23`d Public Workshops/Open House Written Public
Comment Sheets:
• Responses to comment form question about "Components of the Draft plan
that interested you the most"
- Increase in CHT service
- Light Rail
- BRT
- Commuter Rail
- Hillsborough Train Station
Responses to comment form question about "Components of the Draft plan
that interested you the least"
- BRT
- Regional bus service in Hillsborough, etc (commenter noted they lived
in Chapel Hill)
9
• Responses to comment form question about "What do you feel needs
further examination"?
- BRT
- Light Rail
- Prioritization of the CHT expansion
- Pedestrian safety features of BRT
- Using existing lanes on MLK Blvd for BRT instead of adding lanes
- Cost of Hillsborough Train station
• Responses to comment form question to "share your thoughts on the
OCTP"
- Bus service are important and increased service would be
appreciated
- "Don't delay!"
- Adding service to SW Durham seems like a good idea
- Great idea to increase midday and Saturday service
- Support for expanded transit options in Orange County and the sales
tax
• Responses to comment form question to provide "Other Comments"
- Connections befinreen Chapel Hill, Hillsborough, Durham and Raleigh
are important
- Bus services even later at night
- Bicycle facilities at bus stops
- Consider overnight parking accommodations at the Hillsborough Train
Station
- Support for the Hillsborough Train Station
From the April 30th Public Workshops/Open House:
• (Summary to be distributed)
~o
Attachment 3
Draft Bus and Rail Transit Plan in Oran~e Countv•
Freauentlv Asked Questions (FAQ1
Q1: Why do we need improved transit in Orange County and the Triangle?
A1: Estimates show that the Triangle region is projected to add more than one
million people over the next couple of decades, and the state demographer
projects that close to 40,000 of these newcomers will live in Orange County by
2030.. In addition to those new residents, it is also projected that there will be
another 29,000 jobs in the county by 2030, with almost 97% of that job growth
anticipated to occur in Chapel Hill, Hillsborough, and Carrboro.
If not managed properly, this growth will put strain on our roads, neighborhoods,
and natural environment, and will degrade the quality of life we enjoy today.
Expanding mobility options in heavily traveled corridors, including more bus
service and light rail, will support local efforts to manage growth, increase
economic development opportunities, and preserve our environment, while
enhancing our quality of life.
Q2: What major elements does the plan include?
A2: The plan includes:
• Early implementation of local and regional bus service improvements in
Chapel Hill, Carrboro, Hillsborough, and in unincorporated Orange County
with connections between those communities, as well as to Durham,
Raleigh, and other points of interest.
• A local match contribution to be combined with NCDOT and federal funds
to build an intercity rail station in Hillsborough to take advantage of Amtrak
service that already runs through Orange County several times each day.
• Construction of an enhanced bus lane facility on MLK Blvd in Chapel Hill
• With state and federal financial support, the plan will add a future light rail
transit system from UNC Hospitals to East Durham, providing connections
to East 54/Glen Lennox, Meadowmont, The Friday Center, Patterson Place,
11
Draft Orange County Transit Plan FAQ
South Square, Duke University, Ninth Street, Downtown Durham, and NC
Central University.
Q3: How will the transit plan be funded?
A3: The plan will be paid for prirnarily by two proposed new revenue sources: a
%-cent sales tax increase and a$10 annual vehicle registration fee increase. To be
enacted, the plan must be approved by local elected officials and the sales tax
must be approved by a majority of Orange County voters. If implemented, the
proposed sales tax will NOT apply to food, medical supplies, gas, and utilities.
Q4: Why does the light rail line follow NC 54 and not Fordham Blvd. (US
15/501)?
A4: The region has been planning for a fixed guideway transit system between
Chapel Hill and Durham for more than a decade, and this has included a transit
corridor generally following NC 54 between the exit 273 area at I-40 and Fordham
Blvd near Glen Lennox.
The primary reason for following this alignment is that the NC 54 corridor is by a
large margin the highest demand corridor for travel to UNC-Chapel Hill. The table
below from UNC's 2010 commuting survey below demonstrates this:
Percentage of UNC Commuters to UNC by Major Corridor (Source: UNC Commuter Survey 2010)
NC54 (from I-40 MLK (North of
at exit 273) campus) 15-501 S(South of
campus) 15-501 N(Fordham
Blvd)
Car Commuters 24.5% 16.9% 16.7% 13.7%
ransit Commuters 24.5% 16.4% 15.2% 8.6%
As you can see, while the IVC 54 corridor accommodates nearly a quarter of all
UNC-bound workers, the corridor along Fordham Blvd from Glen Lennox past
University Mall and Eastgate out to exit 270 is the lowest-traffic corridor of the
top four commuting corridors.
2
12
Draft Orange County Transit Plan FAQ
In addition to this existing transportation demand, integrated planning by the
Town of Chapel Hill has led to the implementation of local land use decisions and
considerable transit investments in the NC 54 corridor (including Meadowmont
and East 54 developments and increases in Chapel Hill Transit and Triangle Transit
bus services).
Due to this planning, the NC 54 corridor to the UNC Campus and Chapel Hill is the
most heavily used market for transit services in Orange County, with more than
6,000 riders boarding buses each weekday. As the region and the area grows, the
demand for transit will increase in the NC 54 corridor, and the increased capacity
provided by light rail will enable a more cost effective long term transit solution
while greatly enhancing regional transit mobility and supporting local economic
development efforts.
Q5: Why was Light Rail Transit (LRT) chosen as the preferred alternative over
Bus Rapid Transit (BRT)?
A5: The corridor between Durham and Chapel Hill, including the segment along
NC54, is among the most heavily traveled corridors in the region and needs a high
capacity transit solution to address long term mobility needs. LRT was selected
for several reasons:
• LRT has a proven track record in North America for enhancing transit-
oriented development, whereas the performance of BRT in this area is less
established. The ability to focus growth and support increased
development around transit stations is particularly important in a fast
growing region such as ours.
• While BRT is often cheaper to build, one of the benefits of LRT is its ability
to move more people at a lower cost per passenger than BRT by linking
multiple train cars together, and over the long term this means lower costs
to operate the transit system.
• LRT offers faster and more reliable end-to-end travel times than BRT
• LRT's electric power supply reduces reliance on petroleum-based fuels.
13
Draft Orange County Transit Plan FAQ
Q6: What portion of local money is being proposed to pay for bus & rail capital
and operating costs?
A6: On April 3, 2012, a chart included on page 6 of the Orange County Board of
Commissioners meeting packet erroneously represented the cost of building light
rail in Chapel Hill as 91% of the cost of the total plan expenditures. This was
inaccurate, and a correct version of the chart is shown below:
How Orange County Dollars Are Spent in the
Draft Plan, Years 2013 to 2045
2%
10% Rail Capital
Rail Operations
a. ` Bus Operations
Ii Bus Capital
43% 1790 Debt service
Figure 1.Local Spending-Total of$839 million in Year-of-Expenditure(inflated)dollars to year 2045
Chart prepared by Triangle Transit staff
April 23, 2012
As the chart demonstrates, local spending in the plan is actually split
approximately 50:50 between bus and rail projects, with the remainder of the
project costs covering debt for bonds.
Q7: I heard that commuter rail is part of the transit plan connecting Durham
and Wake Counties. Hillsborough is located along the same railroad tracks and
is planned to have a train station in the future, so why is commuter rail not
being extended to Hillsborough as a part of the Orange County Transit Plan?
4
14
Draft Orange County Transit Plan FAQ
A7: High capacity transit investrnents like commuter rail are typically built in
corridors with higher transit demand than can be served effectively with standard
bus service. While Hillsborough currently meets the criteria for an intercity rail
station for scheduled Amtrak trains that arrive a few times per day, it does not
presently have the population or travel demand to warrant commuter rail service
that is presently warranted between Durham and Garner via Cary and Raleigh.
However, the commuter rail system between Durham and Garner is being
designed to accommodate the possibility of future extensions to the east and
west, including Hillsborough. To the extent that travel demand from the greater
Hillsborough area increases in the future to levels that suggest commuter rail is
feasible, commuter rail service could then be extended to Hillsborough at a future
date.
15
a ® a
E
(L) Z a
O W
a
LLJ
Q o z o a N
co
o O U
V ! U U N W °
N y
m �
<s' �
MLK
� B
V
to
O G g6
.Q /.
� r
� �o
.0 Z 1 H
0 CO
a Z
i
M
V) sti
fg i
16
s
C° d LO
U, y s O m +'
ZL = ® N LO Sl o c fn + N m u>
Lij
CD al CID ID
> J L N IM U tr O o `° o O R o
Om H O = O 2 6 5 2 0 $ IL O O " M tC! N
d o d L ay-+ 67 L d —y 0 C ;a+ LO Lo r 0 0 0 0 0
01 N ++ Y Y
_ .Q Q.S3 d g, L R Q L +' O y N 2 w 0 0 0 0 0
p i L f6 yL.r L t6 d L X O +L+ ® +O+ ® OO 0 0 0 0
O S U U w U U U 2 n- LL! Q G O O N Lo r N M W) r
Cl) -- ---------- ----------------- -----------------
C 3 s v
7VT/l O � V
a
-�
d. 4p V` -
EL
I
L
R
1L/ C
• p i- eC
U co i
•
-
------------ ------------------- - _- - ------------------- =-- ----- -
N
G
L �
S N
a ri
aN
m
m a
Ua
17
Orange County Enhanced Transit Plan
April 23, 2012
Bus Capital Proiects
$6 million in small capital projects by 2017 (shelters, real-time info, lease Park-Ride lots)
MLK Bus Lanes ($22 million) in 2019
Bus Hours
• 28,350 Hours by end of first 3 years
• 34,650 Hours by end of first 5 years
• 40,950 Hours by 2035
o Bus hours do not include approximately 30,000+ anticipated "Rail Dividend" hours made
available when Light Rail opens
Li~ht Rail
• UNC to Alston Ave Light Rai) Opens in 2026
Intercitv Rail
• Hillsborough Train Station Local Match by 2015
18
Orange County Core Transit Plan: Capital Projects Emphasis
April 23, 2012
Bus Capital Proiects
• $6 million in small capital projects by 2017 (shelters, real-time info, lease Park-Ride lots)
• MLK Bus Lanes ($22 million) in 2019
• Enhanced Bus Capital Project 1 for $30 million in 2023
• Enhanced Bus Capital Project 2 for $30 million in 2027
• Enhanced Bus Capital Project 3 for $30 million in 2031
Bus Hours
• 28,350 Hours by end of first 3 years
• 34,650 Hours by end of first 5 years
• 66,150 Hours by 2035
Light Rail / Commuter Rail
• None
Intercitv Rail
• Hillsborough Train Station Local Match by 2015
Orange County Core Transit Plan: Bus Hours Emphasis
Bus Capital Proiects
•$3 million in small capital projects by 2017 (shelters, real-time info, lease Park-Ride lots)
~ MLK Bus Lanes ($22 million) in 2019
Bus Hours
~ 37,800 Hours by end of first 3 years
• 53,550 Hours by end of first 5 years
• 101,000 Hours by 2035
Li~ht Rail / Commuter Rail
• None
Intercitv Rail
~ Hillsborough Train Station Local Match by 2015
19
Orange County 2010 Population Per Square Mile
Cedar Grove Little River
AA
P
I
t
Ch,ee�CS Eno
8 ® s !
c
m
Bingham
i Town Boundaries
=Orange Townships
=Chapel Hill
OCarrboro
Hillsborough
2010 Residents Per Sq. Mile
0 to 250
250 to 500
500 to 1,000
-1,000 to 2,000
-2,000 to 3,500
-3,500 to 5,000
-5,000 to 10,000
=10,000 and above
0 1.5 3 4.5
Miles