Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Notebook - Agenda - 06-21-2011, Item 8g
IF TRIANGLE REGIONAL TRANSIT PROGRAM ORANGE COUNTY TRANSIT PLAN (OCTP) TRIANGLE REGIONAL TRANSIT PROGRAM • ORANGE COUNTY TRANSIT PLAN (OCTP) TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. Introduction i. Executive Summary IL Background i. Legislation ii. Attorney Opinion 111. Plan Elements i. Durham-Orange Plan Summary Matrix ii. Bus Service Plan, Light Rail, Commuter Rail iii. Shared Benefits Analysis by Triangle J COG IV. Assumptions • V. Revenues A Expenditures VI. Financial Plans i. Orange County Financial Plan Draft ii. Durham County Financial Plan Draft VII. Approval Processes/Timetable Vill. Questions/Explanations IX. interlocal Agreement X. Appendix i. Intergovernmental Resolutions • Carrboro • Chapel Hill • Hillsborough • UNC • Mebane • ii. Common Definitions • N INTRODUCTIO In 2009, the Intermodal Transportation Bill was introduced into law giving local entities operating urban transit systems the ability to implement local option taxes including a 'h cent local option sales tax. The tax can be used to support the continued development and implementation of improved urban public transportation services. Local option sales tax revenues can be used in part for operating or capital activities to support urban transit systems and associated rural feeder systems. In the Research Triangle area the urban systems affected by this legislation are Triangle Transit, Durham Area Transit, Chapel Hill Transit and Capital Area Transit. The legislation allows a transit authority (Triangle Transit) to levy a 'h cent sales tax in Orange, Durham and Wake counties to support the development of new transit services. Prior to Triangle Transit levying the tax, County Commissioners must first approve a local transit plan and authorize a referendum on the '/ cent sales tax. Vehicle registration fees provide another potential revenue source: $3 —Triangle Transit, $7 — Counties. Triangle Regional Transit Program was developed to provide a comprehensive study of the regional transit rail opportunities and expanded regional bus service • networks. The program financial plan saves money for the implementation of light rail and develops supportive bus service plan. Triangle Regional Transit Program has two main components: • Short-term — County Bus Plans (Orange, Durham and Wake) • Long-term — Fixed Guideway Plan (light rail, commuter rail) Fixed Guideway investments are being studied through the Alternatives Analysis process led by Triangle Transit; each individual county is working on its own bus plan component. Transit plans are financially constrained. The sales tax legislation requires that the Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs), counties, and Triangle Transit approve a Regional Financial Plan. • GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF NORTH CAROLINA • SESSION 2009 SESSION LAW 2009-527 HOUSE BILL 148 AN ACT TO ESTABLISH A CONGESTION RELIEF AND INTERMODAL TRANSPORTATION 21 ST CENTURY FUND; TO PROVIDE FOR ALLOCATION OF THOSE FUNDS TO: (1) LOCAL GOVERNMENTS AND TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITIES FOR PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION PURPOSES, (2) SHORT-LINE RAILROADS, FOR ASSISTANCE IN MAINTAINING AND EXPANDING FREIGHT SERVICE STATEWIDE, (3) RAILROADS FOR INTERMODAL FACILITIES, MULTIMODAL FACILITIES, AND INLAND PORTS, (4) MAKE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS ON RAIL LINES TO ALLOW IMPROVED FREIGHT SERVICE TO THE PORTS AND MILITARY INSTALLATIONS, (5) EXPAND INTERCITY PASSENGER RAIL SERVICE; TO EXTEND LEVELS OF LOCAL TRANSIT FUNDING AUTHORIZATION TO THREE URBAN REGIONS; AND TO ALLOW OTHER LOCAL GOVERNMENTS OPTIONS FOR LOCAL TRANSIT FUNDING. The General Assembly of North Carolina enacts: FUND ESTABLISHED SECTION 1. Chapter 136 of the General Statutes is amended by adding a new Article to read: • "Article 19. "Congestion Relief and Intermodal 21Sf—Century Transportation Fund. 6 136-250 Congestion Relief and Intermodal Transuortation 21s Century Fund. There is established in the State treasu the Con estion Relief and Intermodal Transportation 21"Century Fund hereinafter referred to as the Fund. The Fund shall consist of all revenues appropriated and allocated to it Interest on earnings of the Fund shall remain within the Fund. "6 136-251. Findings of fact. The General Assembly finds that: Increased use of rail for transport of freight will reduce highway congestion as well as allow economic expansion in a way that lessens the impact on the State highway system. Public transportation in addition to a program of urban loops and toll roads, will enable North Carolina to have a balanced 21' century transportation system. As part of its initial program of internal improvements the State capitalized the North Carolina Railroad in the 1840s and invested in other railroads, and those internal improvements led to North Carolina's rapid economic development The North Carolina Railroad with a 317-mile corridor from Charlotte to Morehead Cif is still owned by the State. Improved rail facilities and restoration of abandoned rail lines can allow increased access to the North Carolina State ports and military installations located within the State. Session Law 2005-222 found that expanding and upgrading passenger, freight, commuter and short-line rail service is important to the economy of North Carolina; and provided that the State would seek to provide matching funds partly so it can leverage the maximum federal and private participation • to fund needed rail initiatives such as the restoration of the rail corridor from Wallace to Castle Hayne and a rail connection between north-south and east-west routes in the vicinity of Pembroke. I . " 1 4 8 - V - 6 Rail freight plays a vital role in economic development throughout the State Intermodal service depends on partnerships with railroads trucking • companies, seaports, and others in the transportation logistics chain North Carolina has 3.250 mainline miles of track with Class I railroads holding seventy-nine percent (79%) of the trackage rights the remainder controlled by local railroads and switching and terminal railroads The 2006 Mid-Cycle Update to the North Carolina Statewide Intermodal Transportation Plan identified seven hundred ninety-nine million dollars ($799,000,000) in freight rail needs over the next 25 years including maintenance and preservation,modernization and expansion. North Carolina's short-line railroads play key role in the State's economic development and transportation service and are needed to provide essential services to other modes of transportation and the North Carolina port s stem North Carolina agriculture is dependent upon essential service by short-line railroads. State funds are needed to maintain short-line railroads as viable contributors to economic development,-agriculture and transportation in this State in order to prevent the loss of regional rail service The Department of Transportation reported that 44,992 rail cars handled by short-lines kept 179.688 trucks off North Carolina highways Short-line railroads are essential to preserve and develop jobs in rural and small urban areas of North Carolina. Intermodal facilities and inland ports can greatly reduce freight traffic on North Carolina's highwaysystem reducing demand congestion and damage. The proposed North Carolina International Terminal will need high-capacity mtermodal access. Most of North Carolina's growth is in its urban regions According to the State Data Center, during the first decade of the 21" centga, sixty-six percent(66%)of the projected 1,270,000 growth in population is in 15 urban • counties surrounding Charlotte Raleigh and the Triad while forty percent (40%) ism just six counties: Mecklenburg Wake Durham Orange,Forsyth and Guilford. This large urban population rg owth rg eatly taxes resources Despite the visionary creation of the Highway Trust Fund by the 1989 General Assembly and the funding of urban loop highways congestion continues to worsen. Creation of a special fund to help meet urban transportation needs with alternatives such as rail transit and buses coupled with land use planning will spur and guide economic development in a more economically and environmentally sound manner. Investment in public transportation facilitates economic opportunity to the State through job creation, access to employment and residential and commercial development. Public transportation also protects the public health by decreasing air pollution and reducing carbon emissions It reduces traffic congestion, road expenditures public and private parking costs and the number of traffic accidents. Charlotte's recent success in o ening the first phase of its light rail system with ridership significantly over projections shows that North Carolinians are willing to use transportation alternatives 12 Significant local revenues are needed to match State funds so that a major portion of the expenses is borne by the localities receiving the majority of the benefits. A local option sales tax for public transportation was approved by a fifty-eight percent (58%) favorable vote in Mecklenburg County in 1998 and reaffirmed by a seventy percent (70%) favorable vote in 2007 Extending this authority to additional jurisdictions along with other revenue options, will enable localities to demonstrate local support for additional transit options. 13 Surveys have indicated broad public support for providing additional up blic . transportation options and for allowing localities to generate revenue to match State grants. '1136-252. Grants to local governments and transportation authorities Page 2 Session Law 2009-527 SL2009-0527 (g) Eligible Entities — The following entities are eligible to receive grants under this • section from the Fund for public transportation purposes which includes planning and engineering: Cities. Counties. Public transportation authorities under Article 25 of Chapter 160A of the General Statutes. Regional public transportation authorities under Article 26 of Chapter 160A of the General Statutes. Regional transportation authorities under Article 27 of Chapter 160A of the General Statutes. Requirements —A grant may be approved from the Fund only if all of the following conditions are met: ( The application is approved by all Metropolitan Planning Organizations under Article 16 of this Chapter whose jurisdiction includes any of the service area of the grant applicant. The applicant has approved a transit plan that includes the following: a. Relief of anticipated traffic congestion. b. Improvement of air quality. C. Reduction in anticipated energy consumption. d. Promotion of a pedestrian-and bike-friendly environment around and connected to transit stations. e. Promotion of mixed-use and transit-oriented developments and other land-use tools that encourage multimodal mobility. f. Coordination with the housing needs assessment and plan provided in subdivision(3)of this subsection. Promotion of access to public transportation for individuals who reside in areas with a disproportionate number of households below • the area median income. h. Coordination and planning with local education agencies to reduce transportation costs. i. Coordination with local governments with zoning jurisdiction to carry out elements of the plan. The applicant may also include plans for new public transportation services and public transportation alternatives beyond those " required by the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. § 12101, et seq.) that assist individuals with disabilities with transportation, including transportation to and from jobs and employment support services. The applicant has approved a housing needs assessment and plan, or includes with its application such assessment and plan (or assessments and plans)_approved by another unit or units of local government within its service area,that includes the following: a. A housing inventory of market rate, assisted housing units, and vacant residential parcels. b. An analysis of existing housing conditions, affordable housing needs, eeds, and housing needs for specific population groups, such as people who are elderly, are disabled have special needs, or are homeless. C. A catalogue of available resources to address housing g eeds. d. Identification of potential resources and a strategy to provide replacement housing for low-income residents displaced by transit development and to create incentives for the purpose of increasing the stock of affordable housing to at least fifteen percent (15%) within a one-half mile radius of each transit station and bus hub to be affordable to families with income less than sixth percent (60%) • of area median income. e. Goals strategies and actions to address housing needs over a five-year period. (4) The applicant has an adequate and sustainable source of funding established for its share of project costs. SL2009-0527 Session Law 2009-527 Page 3 �5) The ap lip cant agrees to submit to both the Secretary and each Metropolitan Planning Organization that approved the application a periodic update of the • implementation of both the transit plan and the housing needs assessment and plan. Each Metropolitan Planning Organization receiving such update shall afford interested parties the opportunity to comment on the update (c) Multiyear Allotments. — Grants from the Fund may be committed for a multiyear basis to stabilize the phased implementation of a plan including multiyear allotments The Secretary of Transportation, after consultation with the Board of Transportation shall approve and amend from time to time, a rolling multiyear projection of up to 15 years for allocation of funds under this section. No applicant is eligible under the 15-year plan projection for more than one-third of the total funds to be granted under this Article during that 15-year ep riod Q Cap; Matching Requirement. — A grant under this section may not exceed twenty-five percent 25%)of the cost of the project and must be matched by an equal or rg e amount of funds by the applicant. In evaluating projects qualification for federal funding shall be considered. '1136-253. Grants to other units. La,) Eligible Entities; Purposes. — State agencies and railroads are eligible to receive grants under this section from the Fund for any of the following purposes: Assistance to short-line railroads to continue and enhance rail service in the State so as to assist in economic development and access to ports and military installations. This may involve both the Rail Industrial Access Program and the Short Line Infrastructure Access Program as well as other innovative programs. Grants under this subdivision shall not exceed fifty percent (50%) of the nonfederal share and must be matched by equal or greater funding from the applicant Total grants under this subdivision may not exceed five million dollars($5,000,000)per fiscal year. �2) Assistance to any railroad in the construction of rail improvements intermodal or multimodal facilities or restorations to (i) serve ports military installations inland ports or (ii) improve rail infrastructure to reduce or • mitigate truck traffic on the highway system Grants under this subdivision shall not exceed fifty percent (50%) of the nonfederal share and must be matched by equal or greater funding from the applicant Total grants under this subdivision may not exceed ten million dollars ($10.000.000) per fiscal �3) Assistance (i)to the State ports in terminal railroad facilities and operations (ii)to improve access to military installations and(iii) to the North Carolina International Terminal. Grants under this subdivision shall not exceed fifty percent (50%) of the nonfederal share and must be matched by equal or greater funding from the applicant. Total grants under this subdivision mu not exceed ten million dollars ($10,000,000)per fiscal year. (4) Expansion of intercity passenger rail service including increased frequency_ and additional cities serviced. Routes under this subdivision must extend beyond the territorial jurisdiction of a transportation authority. Commuter Rail Service Grants.—State agencies railroads transportation authorities under Article 25 of Chapter 160A of the General Statutes regional public transportation authorities under Article 26 of Chapter 160A of the General Statutes and regional transportation authorities under Article 27 of Chapter 160A of the General Statutes are eligible to receive grants under this section from the Fund for the introduction of commuter rail service Routes under this subsection must extend beyond the territorial jurisdiction of a transportation authority. '1136-254. Grant approval. All grants made under this Article are subject to approval of the Secretary of Transportation after consultation with the Board of Transportation The Fund may be administered in conjunction with G.S. 136-44.20 and G S 136-44.36, but any funds allocated under those sections shall continue to be available as provided therein • '1136-254.1. Expenditure. No monies shall be expended from the Fund until appropriated by the General Assembly. '1136-255. Funds remain available until expended Appropriations to the Fund remain available until ex ended " Page 4 Session Law 2009-527 SL2009-0527 • PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION SALES TAX AUTHORIZED SECTION 2.(a) Section 1(a)of S.L. 1997-417 is recodified as G.S. 105-510.1. SECTION 2.(b) Article 43 of Chapter 105 of the General Statutes, as enacted by S.L. 1997-417 and amended by Section 13(f) of S.L. 2001-427, Section 74 of S.L. 2008-134, and by subsection(a)of this section,reads as rewritten: "Article 43. "Local Government Sales and Use Taxes for Public Transportation. "Part 1. General. "§ 105-505. Short title; purpose. This Article is the Local Government Public Transportation Sales Tax Act and may be cited by that name. This Article gives the eeunties bounties and transportation authorities of this State an opportunity to obtain an additional source of revenue with which to meet their needs for financing local public transportation systems. It provides them with authority to levy one half "°"^°^+ ( 204` sales and use taxes. All such taxes must be approved in a referendum. "§ 105-506. Definitions. The definitions in G.S. 105-164.3 and the following definitions apply in this Article: W Board of trustees —The ovg erning body of a transportation authority. (4)(2) Net proceeds. —Gross proceeds less the cost of administering and collecting the tax. (2)U32 Public transportation system. — Any combination of real and personal property established for purposes of public transportation. The systems may include one or more of the following: structures, improvements, buildings, equipment, vehicle parking or passenger transfer facilities, railroads and railroad rights-of-way, rights-of-way, bus services, shared-ride services, high-occupancy vehicle facilities, car-pool and vanpool programs, voucher programs, telecommunications and information systems, integrated fare . systems, and the interconnected bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure that supports public transportation, bus lanes, and busways. The term does not include, however, streets, roads, or highways except to the extent they are dedicated to public transportation vehicles or to the extent they are necessary for access to vehicle parking or passenger transfer facilities. Transportation authority. — For the purposes of Parts 3 and 3A of this Article a regional public transportation authority created pursuant to Article 26 of Chapter 160A of the General Statutes; and for the purposes of Parts 3 And 313 of this Article a regional transportation authority created pursuant to Article 27 of Chapter 160A of the General Statutes. "§ 105-506.1. Exemption of food. A tax levied under this Article does not apply to the sales price of food that is exempt from tax pursuant to G.S. 105-164.1313 or to the sales price of a bundled transaction taxable pursuant to G.S. 105-467(a)(54). "Part 2. Mecklenburg County. "§ 105-507. Limitations. A county may not levy a tax under this e-Part unless the county or at least one unit of local government in the county operates a public transportation system. In addition, a county may not levy a tax under this Af ieL—Part unless it has developed a financial plan and distributed it to each unit of local government in the county that operates a local public transportation system. The financial plan must provide for equitable allocation of the net proceeds distributed to the county in consideration of the identified needs of local public transportation systems in the county, countywide human service transportation systems, and expansion of public transportation service to unserved areas in the county. "§ 105-508. Local election on adoption of sales and use tax. (a) Resolution. —The board of commissioners of a county may direct the county board of elections to conduct an advisory referendum within the county on the question of whether a • local sales and use tax at the rate of one-half percent (1/2%) may be levied in accordance with this ale-Part. The election shall be held on a date jointly agreed upon by the boards and shall be held in accordance with the procedures of G.S. 163-287. The board of commissioners SL2009-0527 Session Law 2009-527 Page 5 shall hold a public hearing on the question at least 30 days before the date the election is to be held. • (b) Ballot Question. —The form of the question to be presented on a ballot for a special election concerning the levy of a tax authorized by this Article shall be: '[] FOR [] AGAINST One-half percent (1/2%) local sales and use taxes, in addition to the current two pereen }local sales and use taxes,to be used only for public transportation systems.' "§ 105-509. Levy and collection of sales and use tax. If the majority of those voting in a referendum held pursuant to *�-iAmele-G.S. 105-508 vote for the levy of the tax, the board of commissioners of the county may, by resolution, levy one-half percent (1/2%) local sales and use taxes in addition to any other State and local sales and use taxes levied pursuant to law. Except as provided in this AAiel�Part, the adoption, levy, collection, administration, and repeal of these additional taxes shall be in accordance with Article 39 of this Chapter. In applying the provisions of Article 39 of this Chapter to this AAielePart, references to 'this Article' mean 'Part 1 of Article 43 of Chapter 105 of the General Statutes'. "§ 105-510. Distribution and use of taxes. (a) Distribution. — The Secretary shall, on a monthly basis, allocate to each taxing county the net proceeds of the tax levied under this -le-Part by that county. If the Secretary collects taxes under this Miele-Part in a month and the taxes cannot be identified as being attributable to a particular taxing county, the Secretary shall allocate these taxes among the taxing counties, in proportion to the amount of taxes collected in each county under this Ai4ie-le Part in that month and shall include them in the monthly distribution. The Secretary shall distribute the net proceeds of the tax levied by a county on a per capita basis among the county and the units of local government in the county that operate public transportation systems. No proceeds shall be distributed to a county that does not operate a public transportation system or to a unit of local government that does not operate a public transportation system. (b) Use. —A county must allocate the net proceeds distributed to it in accordance with • its financial plan adopted pursuant to G.S. 105-507 and use the net proceeds only for financing, constructing, operating, and maintaining local public transportation systems. Any other unit of local government may use the net proceeds distributed to it under this Af iele-Part only for financing, constructing, operating, and maintaining local public transportation systems. Every unit of government shall use the net proceeds to supplement and not to supplant or replace existing funds or other resources for public transportation systems. "§ 105-510.1. Applicability. This seefiee-Part applies only to Mecklenburg County. "Part 3. Transportation Authorities. 1 105-510.5. Special districts. (q) Authority. — A transportation authority may create a special district as provided in Parts 3A and 3B of this Article A special district is subject to the provisions of this Part as well as the Part under which it was created A special district created under this Article is a local government body corporate and politic and has the power to carry out the purposes of the Part under which it is established. O Governance. — The following entity shall serve ex officio as the goveming board and be responsible for budget adoption and the operation and management of the transit services provided by the district: The board of trustees of the transportation authority, if the special district consists of multiple counties If the special district is expanded under G.S. 105-510.8(d) or G.S. 105-510.10(d) to include more than one county, then the board of trustees of the transportation authority shall become the governing board of the district beginning on the first day of the next fiscal year after expansion of the district. The county board of commissioners if the special district consists of one county. The board may contract with the transportation authority as needed • (cJ Filing Requirement. — The transportation authority creating a special district shall name it and file with the Secretary of State the documents creating the district and shall also file notice of the addition to and removal from the district of any counties or of the abolition of the special district. Page 6 Session Law 2009-527 SL2009-0527 "& 105-510.6. Limitations. • A transportation authority may not levy a tax under Part 3A or 3B of this Article unless: �1) It operates a public transportationsystem. It has developed a financial plan and distributed it to each unit of local government located within its territorial jurisdiction. The plan must be approved by the board of commissioners of each county in the district prior to the levy of the tax. If the board of commissioners of a county in a multicounty district does not adopt the plan,the transportation authority may remove that county from the district, and no tax may be levied in that county under this Part The financial plan must provide for equitable use of the net proceeds within or to benefit the special district created under Part 3A or Part 3B of this Article and consider (i) the identified needs of local public transportation systems in the district, (ii) human service transportation systems within the district and (iii)expansion of public transportation systems to underserved areas of the district. The financial plan must also be approved by all Metropolitan Planning Organizations under Article 16 of Chapter 136 of the General Statutes whose jurisdiction includes any of the area of the special district. The plan may be revised from time to time. An interlocal agreement between the transportation authority and all the counties in the special district mayequire periodic review and approval of the financial plan. The tax is approved by the voters. 1105-510.7. Distribution and use of taxes. faj Distribution — The SecretM shall, on a monthly basis, allocate to each special district the net proceeds of the tax levied under this Part within the special tax district, to be used for the benefit of that district. fUse —A special district must expend the net proceeds distributed to it in accordance with its financial plan adopted pursuant to G.S. 105-510.6 and use the net proceeds only for financing constructing operating, and maintaining public transportation systems. The special district shall use the net proceeds to supplement and not to supplant or replace existing funds or other resources for public transportation systems. "Part 3A.Regional Public Transportation Authority(Triangle). "& 105-510.8. Local election on adoption of sales and use tax — regional public transportation authority. U Special District — A regional public transportation authority may create a special district that consists of the entire area of one or more counties within its territorial jurisdiction and may levy,on behalf of the special district the tax authorized in this section. The proceeds of a tax levied under this section may be used only for the benefit of the special district and onlv for the purposes provided in this Article. If a referendum in a district fails in all the counties in the district the transportation authorityay abolish the special district. (b) Resolution — The board of trustees of the re ig o�public transportation authority may, if all of the conditions 'listed in this subsection have been met, direct the respective county board or boards of elections to conduct an advisory referendum within the special district on the question of whether a local sales and use tax at the rate of one-half percent (1/2%) may be levied within the district in accordance with this Part. The tax may not be levied without voter approval The election shall be held on a date jointly agreed ed upon by the authority, the county board or boards of commissioners and the county board or boards of elections and shall be held in accordance with the procedures of G.S. 163-287. An election to authorize the levy of a tax under this Part maybe held only on one of the following dates: i) Tuesday after the first Monday of November in the even-numbered year, the date of the general election under G.S. 163-1 (ii)the date of the primary election in the even-numbered year under G.S. 163-1(b), (iii) Tuesday after the first Monday in November of the odd-numbered year, or (iv) a date in September or October of the odd-numbered year as listed in G.S. 163-279(a)(2), (3), or(4) but only if at least one municipality in the county is holding a primary or election on that date. The • conditions are as follows: The board of trustees has obtained approval to conduct a referendum by a vote of the following: a. A majority vote of each of the county boards of commissioners within the special district if it is a multicountypecial district. SL2009-0527 Session Law 2009-527 Page 7 b. A majority of the county board of commissioners within the special district, if it is a sin lg e couM special district • A public hearing is held on the question by the board or boards of commissioners at least 30 days before the date the election is to be held Ballot Question.—The form of the question to be presented on a ballot for a special election concerning the levy of a tax authorized by this Article shall be: FOR []AGAINST One-half percent (1/2%) local sales and use taxes in addition to the current local sales and use taxes,to be used only for public transportations systems.' U Expansion. — If a special district created under this Part does not include all the counties in the territorial iurisdiction of a transportation authorijy, it mate expanded to include an additional whole county or counties by joint action of the board of trustees of the transportation authority and the board of commissioners of the county or boards of commissioners of the counties to be added with the approval of the voters in the coup, or counties to be added. The procedure for expansion of a district is the same as for the initial creation of the district, but the referendum shall be held separately within each of the counties to be added. '1105-510.9. Levy and collection of sales and use tax — regional public transportation authority. If the majority of those voting in a referendum held pursuant to G S 105-510.8 vote for the levy of the tax, the transportation authority may, by resolution levy one-half percent 1/2%j local sales and use taxes within the special district in addition to any other State and local sales and use taxes levied pursuant to law. In determining the results of the election in a multicounty district, all the counties of the district shall be considered to be one unit but also must receive a majority vote in each county except that if the referendum is passed in one or more but not all of the counties, the counties in which the referendum was not approved are removed from the special district upon certification of the election result and the county or counties that approved the referendum shall remain in the special district Except as provided in this Part the adoption, lees, collection, administration and repeal of these additional taxes shall be in accordance with Article 39 of this Chapter. In applying the provisions of Article 39 of this Chapter to this Article, references to 'this Article' mean 'Part 3A of Article 43 of Chapter 105 of the General Statutes.'Any repeal of the tax shall be done by the same procedure as its enactment under this section, and in a multicounty district a petition for repeal under G S 105-473 shall be judged by the total votes in all the counties in the district "Part 3B.Regional Transportation Authority (Triad '1105-510.10. Local election on adoption of sales and use tax — regional transportation authority. (a,2 Special District. — A regional transportation authority may create a special district that consists of the entire area of one or two counties within its territorial jurisdiction and may levy on behalf of the special district the tax authorized in this section The special district may not include counties other than Forsyth and Guilford The proceeds of a tax levied under this section may be used only for the benefit of the special district and only for the purposes provided in this Article. If a referendum in a district fails the transportation authority may abolish the special district. Lb) Resolution. — The board of trustees of the regional transportation authority may, if all of the conditions listed in this subsection have been met direct the respective counjy board or boards of elections to conduct an advisory referendum within the special district on the question of whether a local sales and use tax at the rate of one-half percent (1/2%) may be levied within the district in accordance with this Part The tax may not be levied without voter approval. The election shall be held on a date jointly agreed upon by the authority, the county board or boards of commissioners and the county board or boards of elections and shall be held in accordance with the procedures of G S 163-287 An election to authorize the levy of a tax under this Part may be held only on one of the following dates: (i) Tuesday after the first Monday of November in the even-numbered year, the date of the general election under G.S. 163-1, (ii)the date of the primary election in the even-numbered year under G S 163-1(b), (iii) • Tuesday after the first Monday in November of the odd-numbered year, or iv a date in September or October of the odd-numbered year as listed in G S 163-279(a)(2). (3) or (4) but only if at least one mumcipalrty in the county is holding a primary or election on that date The conditions are as follows: Page 8 Session Law 2009-527 SL2009-0527 �1 The board of trustees has obtained approval to conduct a referendum by vote of the following: a. A majority vote of both of the county boards of commissioners within the special district, if it is a multicountyspecial district. b. A majority of the county board of commissioners within the special district, if it is a single-county special district. A public hearing is held on the question by the board or boards of commissioners at least 30 days before the date the election is to be held. (cj Ballot Question. —The form of the question to be presented on a ballot for a special election concerning the levy of a tax authorized by this Article shall be: 7 1 FOR f I AGAINST One-half percent 1/2%) local sales and use taxes, in addition to the current local sales and use taxes to be used only for public transportations std Expansion —If a special district created under this Part does not include both of the eligible counties under subsection(a) of this section, it may be expanded to include the other cogM by joint action of the board of trustees of the transportation authority and the board of commissioners of the countyto be added with the approval of the voters in the couM to be added The procedure for expansion of the district is the same as for the initial creation of the district but the referendum shall be held separately in the county to be added. "4 105-510.11. Lew and collection of sales and use tax — regional transportation authority. If the majority of those voting in a referendum held pursuant to G.S. 105-510.10 vote for the lees of the tax the transportation authority may, by resolution levy one-half percent(1/2%) local sales and use taxes within the special district, in addition to any other State and local sales and use taxes levied pursuant to law. In determining the results of the election in a multicounty district all the counties of the district shall be considered to be one unit but also must receive a majority vote in each county except that if the referendum is passed in one but not both of the counties the county in which the referendum was not approved is removed from the special • district upon certification of the election result and the coup tt�pproved the referendum shall remain in the special district. Except as provided in this Part, the adoption, levy, collection administration and repeal of these additional taxes shall be in accordance with Article 39 of this Chapter. In applying the provisions of Article 39 of this Chapter to this Article references to 'this Article' mean 'Part 3B of Article 43 of Chapter 105 of the General Statutes'Any repeal of the tax shall be done by the same procedure as its enactment under this section and in a multicounV district a petition for repeal under G.S. 105-473 shall be judged by the total votes in all the counties in the district. "Part 4. Other Counties. "4105-510.12. Applicability. This Part applies only in counties other than Durham, Forsyth, Guilford, Mecklenburg, Orange,or Wake. "4105-510.13. Limitations. A county ma, not levy a tax under this Part unless the county or at least one unit of local government in the county operates a public transportation system. As used in this Part, operation of a public transportation system includes a contract or interlocal agreement for operation of the public transportation system by another county or municipality, or by a transportation authority created under(i) a municipal charter, or (ii) Article 25, 26, or 27 of Chapter 160A of the General Statutes. As used in this Part, operation of a public transportation system also includes a contract with a private entity for operation of the public transportation s s_„ '1105-510.14. Local election on adoption of sales and use tax. (a) Resolution —The board of commissioners of a countmy direct the county board of elections to conduct an advisory referendum within the county on the question of whether a local sales and use tax at the rate of one-quarter percent (1/4%) may be levied in accordance with this Part The election shall be held on a date jointly agreed upon by the boards and shall be held in accordance with the procedures of G.S. 163-287. An election to authorize the levy of • a tax under this Part may be held only on one of the following dates: i) Tuesday after the first Monday of November in the even-numbered year, the date of the general election under G.S. 163-1 (ii)the date of the primary election in the even-numbered year under G.S. 163-1(b), (iii) Tuesday after the first Monday in November of the odd-numbered year, or (iv) a date in SL2009-0527 Session Law 2009-527 Page 9 September or October of the odd-numbered year as listed in G S 163-279(a�(2),(3) or(4) but only if at least one mumcipali1y in the county is holding a primary or election on that date The • board of commissioners shall hold a public hearing on the question at least 30 days before the date the election is to be held. U Ballot Question.—The form of the question to be presented on a ballot for a special election concerning the levy of a tax authorized by this Article shall be: FOR j] AGAINST One-quarter percent(1/4%) local sales and use taxes in addition to the current local sales and use taxes,to be used only for public transportationsystems.' '1 105-510.15. Levy and collection of sales and use tax If the majority of those voting in a referendum held pursuant to this Part vote for the levy of the tax, the board of commissioners of the county may, by resolution levy one-quarter percent (1/4%) local sales and use taxes in addition to any other State and local sales and use taxes levied pursuant to law. Except as provided in this Part the adoption levy, collection administration, and repeal of these additional taxes shall be in accordance with Article 39 of this Chapter. In applying the provisions of Article 39 of this Chapter to this Part references to 'this Article'mean'Part 4 of Article 43 of Chapter 105 of the General Statutes.' '1105-510.16. Distribution and use of taxes (a) Distribution. — The Secretary shall on a monthly basis allocate to each taxing county the net proceeds of the tax levied under this Part by that county If the Secretary collects taxes under this Part in a month and the taxes cannot be identified as being attributable to a particular taxing county the Secretary shall allocate these taxes among the taxing counties in proportion to the amount of taxes collected in each county under this Part in that month and shall include them in the monthly distribution The Secretary shall distribute the net proceeds of the tax levied by a cog= on a per capita basis among the county and the units of local government in the county that operate a public transportation system as follows: J To the county based on the population of the county that is not in an incorporated area, and to the munigW' alities within the county based on the • population of that municipality that is located within that county To determine the population of each county and each municipalfty, the Secretary shall use the most recent annual estimate of population certified by the State Budget Officer. Notwithstanding subdivision (1) of this subsection if a municipality. to which funds are to be allocated neither operates nor contracts for the operation of a public transportation system the population of that mumcipahty shall be excluded from the calculations of subdivision (1) of this subsection. �3) Notwithstanding subdivision (1) of this subsection if a county to which funds are to be allocated neither operates nor contracts for the operation of a public transportation system the population of that county not in an incorporated area shall be excluded from the calculations of subdivision (1) of this subsection. If a county or a municipality that does not receive an allocation of funds on account of subdivision (2) or (3) of this subsection begins to operate or contract for the operation of a public transportation system that county or municipality shall begin receiving funds beginning the first day of July that is more than 30 days thereafter. ((b) Use. — A county or municipality may use funds received under this Part only for financing constructing operating and maintaining_public transportation systems Every unit of government shall use funds to supplement and not to supplant or replace existing funds or other resources for public transportationsystems." SECTION 2.(c) Section 7 of S.L. 1997-417 reads as rewritten: "Section 7. A tax levied under Article 43 of Chapter 105 of the General Statutes, as °ftaeted �,o this-aot—, Statutes does not apply to construction materials purchased to fulfill a lump sum or unit price contract entered into or awarded before the effective date of the levy or entered into • or awarded pursuant to a bid made before the effective date of the levy when the construction materials would otherwise be subject to the tax levied under Article 43 of Chapter 105 of the General Statutes." Page 10 Session Law 2009-527 SL2009-0527 SECTION 2.(d) G.S. 105-164.14(c) is amended by.adding a new subdivision to • read: "(c) Certain Governmental Entities. — A governmental entity listed in this subsection is allowed an annual refund of sales and use taxes paid by it under this Article on direct purchases of tangible personal property and services, other than electricity, telecommunications service, and ancillary service. Sales and use tax liability indirectly incurred by a governmental entity on building materials, supplies, fixtures, and equipment that become a part of or annexed to any building or structure that is owned or leased by the governmental entity and is being erected, altered, or repaired for use by the governmental entity is considered a sales or use tax liability incurred on direct purchases by the governmental entity for the purpose of this subsection. A request for a refund must be in writing and must include any information and documentation required by the Secretary. A request for a refund is due within six months after the end of the governmental entity's fiscal year. This subsection applies only to the following governmental entities: A special district created under Article 43 of this Chapter." SECTION 2.(e) G.S. 159-81(1)reads as rewritten: "The words and phrases defined in this section shall have the meanings indicated when used in this Article: (1) "Municipality" means a county, city, town, incorporated village, sanitary district, metropolitan sewerage district, metropolitan water district, county water and sewer district, water and sewer authority, hospital authority, hospital district, parking authority, special airport district, special district created under Article 43 of Chapter 105 of the General Statutes, regional public transportation authority, regional transportation authority, regional natural gas district, regional sports authority, airport authority,joint agency created pursuant to Part 1 of Article 20 of Chapter 160A of the General Statutes, a joint agency authorized by agreement between two cities to operate an airport pursuant to G.S. 63-56, and the North Carolina Turnpike Authority created pursuant to Article 6H of Chapter 136 of the General Statutes,but not any other forms of State or local government. SECTION 2.(t) G.S. 160A-460 reads as rewritten: "§ 160A-460. Definitions. The words defined in this section shall have the meanings indicated when used in this Part: (1) "Undertaking" means the joint exercise by two or more units of local government, or the contractual exercise by one unit for one or more other units, of any power, function,public enterprise, right, privilege, or immunity of local government. (2) "Unit," or "unit of local government" means a county, city, consolidated city-county, local board of education, sanitary district, facility authority created under Part 4 of this Article, special district created under Article 43 of Chapter 105 of the General Statutes, or other local political subdivision, authority,or agency of local government." SECTION 2.(g) G.S. 160A-20(h) is amended by adding a new subdivision to read: "(U4 A special district created under Article 43 of Chapter 105 of the General Statutes." SECTION 2.(h) Section 3.1 of S.L. 1997-417, as added by Section 30 of S.L. 2006-162, reads as rewritten: "SECTION 3.1. A county authorized to impose a tax under Part 2 of Article 43 of Chapter 105 of the General ct,..utes as enacted by PaA 1 of this t Statutes is considered an authority under Article 50 of Chapter 105 of the General Statutes, as enacted by Section 3 of this of this act, and the board of commissioners of that county is considered the board of trustees of the authority under Article 50. G.S. 105-554 of Article 50 does not apply to the proceeds of a tax • imposed by county considered an authority under this section. The proceeds of a tax imposed by a county considered an authority under this section must be transferred to the largest city in that county operating a public transportation system. The proceeds of a tax imposed by a county considered an authority under this section must be transferred to the largest city in that county operating a public transportation system and used only for financing, constructing, SL2009-0527 Session Law 2009-527 Page 11 operating, and maintaining a public transportation system. The proceeds may supplant existing funds allocated for a public transportation system. The term 'public transportation system' has • the same meaning as defined in G.S. Inc 506 of Af fiele ^'.G.S. 105-506." LOCAL VEHICLE REGISTRATION CHARGE ADJUSTED FOR INFLATION SECTION 3.(a) G.S. 105-561(a)reads as rewritten: "(a) Tax Authorized.—The board of trustees of an Authority may, by resolution, levy an annual license tax in accordance with this Article upon any motor vehicle with a tax situs within its territorial jurisdiction. The purpose of the tax levied under this Article is to raise revenue for capital and operating expenses of an Authority in providing public transportation systems. The rate of tax levied under this Article must be a full dollar amount, but may not exceed seven dollars ($7.00 �a year." SECTION 3.(b) Effective July 1, 2010, G.S. 105-561(a), as amended by subsection(a)of this section,reads as rewritten: "(a) Tax Authorized.—The board of trustees of an Authority may, by resolution, levy an annual license tax in accordance with this Article upon any motor vehicle with a tax situs within its territorial jurisdiction. The purpose of the tax levied under this Article is to raise revenue for capital and operating expenses of an Authority in providing public transportation systems. The rate of tax levied under this Article must be a full dollar amount, but may not exceed seven dellafs dollars ($8.00)a year." SECTION 3.(c) G.S. 105-561(d)reads as rewritten: "(d) Special Tax District.—If a regional transportation authority created under Article 27 of Chapter 160A of the General Statutes has not levied the tax under this section or has levied the tax at a rate of less than five dellaf- ($5 0 )-seven dollars ($7.001 it may create a special district that consists of the entire area of one or more counties within its territorial jurisdiction and may levy on behalf of the special district the tax authorized in this section. The rate of tax levied within the special district may not, when combined with the rate levied within the entire territorial jurisdiction of the authority; exceed seven dollars ($7.00). The regional transportation authority may not levy or increase a tax within the special district unless • the board of commissioners of each county in the special district has adopted a resolution approving the levy or increase. A special district created pursuant to this subsection is a body corporate and politic and has the power to carry out the purposes of this subsection. The board of trustees of the regional transportation authority created under Article 27 of Chapter 160A of the General Statutes shall serve, ex officio, as the governing body of a special district it creates pursuant to this subsection. The proceeds of a tax levied under this subsection may be used only for the benefit of the special district and only for the purposes provided in G.S. 105-564. Except as provided in this subsection, a tax levied under this subsection is governed by the provisions of this Article." SECTION 3.(d) Effective July 1, 2010, G.S. 105-561(d), as amended by subsection(c)of this section,reads as rewritten: "(d) Special Tax District.—If a regional transportation authority created under Article 27 of Chapter 160A of the General Statutes has not levied the tax under this section or has levied the tax at a rate of less than ight dollars ($8.00)it may create a special district that consists of the entire area of one or more counties within its territorial jurisdiction and may levy on behalf of the special district the tax authorized in this section. The rate of tax levied within the special district may not, when combined with the rate levied within the entire territorial jurisdiction of the authority; exceed i6t dollars ($8.00). The regional transportation authority may not levy or increase a tax within the special district unless the board of commissioners of each county in the special district has adopted a resolution approving the levy or increase. A special district created pursuant to this subsection is a body corporate and politic and has the power to carry out the purposes of this subsection. The board of trustees of the regional transportation authority created under Article 27 of Chapter 160A of the General Statutes shall serve, ex officio, as the governing body of a special district it creates pursuant to this • subsection. The proceeds of a tax levied under this subsection may be used only for the benefit of the special district and only for the purposes provided in G.S. 105-564. Except as provided in this subsection, a tax levied under this subsection is governed by the provisions of this Article." Page 12 Session Law 2009-527 SL2009-0527 ADDITIONAL VEHICLE REGISTRATION CHARGE AUTHORIZED • SECTION 4. Subchapter IX of Chapter 105 of the General Statutes is amended by adding a new Article to read: "Article 52. County Vehicle Registration Tax. "ti 105-557. County Vehicle Registration Tax; shared with municipalities. (a) A county is considered an authority under Article 51 of this Chapter, and the board of commissioners of that county is considered the board of trustees of the authority under Article 51 except that the maximum tax that may be levied by a county under this Article is seven dollars($7.00)per year. (b) A count/ may not leyy a tax under this Article unless the county or at least one unit of local government in the county operates a public transportation system. Lc) Any tax levied under this Article shall, after the receipt of those funds from the Division of Motor Vehicles be retained or distributed by the coon on a per capita basis as it receives those funds as follows: (1) Pro rata(i)retained by the county based on the population of the county that is not in an incorporated area and(ii)distributed to the municipalities within the county based on the population of that municipality that is located within that county To determine the population of each county and municipality, the county shall use the most recent annual estimate of population certified by the State Budget Officer. Notwithstanding subdivision (1) of this subsection, if a municipality to which funds are to be distributed does not operate a public transportation system the population of that municipality shall be excluded from the calculations of subdivision (1) of this subsection and no distribution shall be made to that municipality. Notwithstanding subdivision (1) of this subsection, if a county for which funds are to be retained does not operate a public transportation system, the • population of that county not in an incorporated area shall be excluded from the calculations of subdivision (1) of this subsection, and the coum shall not retain any funds. If a county that does not retain funds or a municipality that does not receive an allocation of funds on account of subdivision (2) or (3) of this subsection begins to operate a public transportation system that county or municipality shall begin retaining; or receiving beginning the first day of that is more than 30 days thereafter. �d) The proceeds of a tax imposed under this Article may be used by that com1y or municipality only operate a public transportation system including financing constructing operating and maintaining that public transportation system The term 'public transportation system'has the same meaning as defined in G.S. 105-506. (ej As used in this section, operation of a public transportation system includes a contract or interlocal agreement for operation of the public transportation system by another county or municipali1y, or by a transportation authority created under(i)a municipal charter, (ii) Article 25 26 or 27 of Chapter 160A of the General Statutes. As used in this section, operation of a public transportation system also includes a contract with a private entity for operation of the public transportation system. .(Q An interlocal agreement under this section may also deal with allocation of funds between a municipality and county for operation by the county of a human services public transportation system within the municipality when the municipality also operates a public transportations stem. (g) This Article is supplemental to Article 51 of this Chapter." VEHICLE REGISTRATION TAX CONFORMED TO NEW REGISTRATION SYSTEM DEADLINES SECTION 5.(a) G.S. 105-562(a)reads as rewritten: "(a) Collection. —A tax or a tax increase levied under this Article becomes effective on • the date set by the board of trustees in the resolution levying the tax or the tax increase. The effective date must be the first day of a month and may not be earlier than the first day of the fl*d-sixth calendar month after the board of trustees adopts the resolution. To the extent the tax applies to vehicles whose tax situs is in a county the entire area of which is within the SL2009-0527 Session Law 2009-527 Page 13 jurisdiction of the Authority, the Division of Motor Vehicles shall collect and administer the tax. To the extent the tax applies to vehicles whose tax situs is in a county that is only partially • within the jurisdiction of the county, the Authority shall collect and administer the tax. The Authority may contract with one or more local governments in its jurisdiction to collect the tax on its behalf. Upon receipt of the resolutions under G.S. 105-561, the Division of Motor Vehicles shall proceed to collect and administer the tax as provided in this Article. The tax is due at the same time and subject to the same restrictions as in G.S. 20-87(1), (2), (4), (5), (6), and (7) and G.S. 20-88. The Division of Motor Vehicles may adopt rules to carry out its responsibilities under this Article." SECTION 5.(b) G.S. 105-563 reads as rewritten: "§ 105-563. Modification or repeal of tag. The Board of Trustees may, by resolution, repeal the levy of the tax under this Article or decrease the amount of the tax, under the same procedures and subject to the same limitations as provided in G.S. 105-561. A tax repeal or a tax decrease becomes effective on the date set by the board of trustees in the resolution repealing or decreasing the tax. The effective date must be on the first day of a month and may not be earlier than the first day of the thif&sixth calendar month after the board of trustees adopts the resolution. Repeal or decrease of a tax levied under this Article does not affect the rights or liabilities of an Authority, a taxpayer, or another person arising before the repeal or decrease." RTP SERVICE DISTRICT AUTHORIZATION EXTENDED SECTION 6. G.S. 153A-317 reads as rewritten: "§ 153A-317. Taxes authorized; rate limitation. (a,) A e-euu county, upon recommendation of the advisory committee established pursuant to G.S. 153A-313, may levy property taxes within a research and production service district in addition to those levied throughout the county, in order to finance, provide, or maintain for the district services provided therein in addition to or to a greater extent than those financed, provided, or maintained for the entire county. In addition, a county may allocate to a • service district any other revenues whose use is not otherwise restricted by law. The proceeds of taxes only within a service district may be expended only for services provided for the district. Property subject to taxation in a newly established district or in an area annexed to an existing district is that subject to taxation by the county as of the preceding January 1. U Such additional property taxes may not be levied within any district established pursuant to this Article in excess of a rate of ten cents (10¢) on each one hundred dollars ($100.00)value of property subject to taxation. Cc) For the 12Wose of constructing maintaining or operating_public transportation as defined by G.S. 153A-149(c)(27) in addition to the additional property taxes levied under subsections (a) and (b) of this section a county upon recommendation of the advisory committee established pursuant to G.S. 153A-313 may levy additional property taxes within any service district established pursuant to this Article not in excess of a rate of ten cents (100 on each one hundred dollars ($100.00) value of property subject to taxation Such property taxes for public transportation may only be used within the service district or to provide for public transportation from the service district to other public transportation systems or to other places outside the service district including airports " EFFECTIVE DATE • Page 14 Session Law 2009-527 SL2009-0527 SECTION 7. This act is effective when it becomes law. In the General Assembly read three times and ratified this the 11th day of August, • 2009. s/ Walter H.Dalton President of the Senate s/ Joe Hackney Speaker of the House of Representatives s/ Beverly E. Perdue Governor Approved 8:45 a.m.this 27th day of August,2009 • • SL2009-0527 Session Law 2009-527 Page 15 Durham-Orange Triangle Regional Transit Program Financial Plan Draft ASSUMPTIONS (REVENUE, COSTS, TLN/IING) County DURHAM Chapel Hill Town Limit Split point for Durham-Orange Light Rail Orange Pays Gateway Area Light Rail Alignment (UNC Hos ital.to Alston Avenue) UNCD-Hill-SSE Sales Tax Growth Rate (2015 and beyond) 3.6% 3.5% Value Capture Revenue? (Annual) None None Value Capture Revenue Years NA NA Institutional Revenues? (Annual) None None Institutional Revenues Years NA NA Opening Year Light Rail 2025 2025 Opening Year Commuter Rail - 2018 ,Opening Year MLK Bus Lanes 2017 - Local Munici al Contributions Per Year $0 $0 OUTCOMES County LRT Capital Cost, Millions $2011 $330 $1,050 County LRT Annual Operating Cost,Millions $2011 $3.2 $11.30 MLK Bus Lanes Capital Cost,Millions $2011 $22 = MLK Bus Lanes Operating Cost, Millions$2011 NA _ Commuter Rail Capital Cost, Millions $2011 - $300 Commuter Rail Operating Cost,Millions $2012 - $2.57 First Year New Bus Hours 22,050 25,000 First Three Years New Bus Hours 44,100 50,000 Total New Bus Hours 50,400 77,500 All New Bus Hours Obtained By 2032 2033 Borrowing (Millions $2011) $30 $155 Debt Service Coverage Ration Tests Met? YES _ YES Cash on Hand Test Met? ($I OM Durham, $2M Orange) YES YES Fixed Guideway Dividend Hours" 30,000-45,000 15,000-37,500 Cash Balance in 2035 (Millions in$2035) $50 $95 Cash Balance in 2035 (Millions in$2011) $25 $48 • Draft Bus • Rail Investment Plan in Orange County www.dchcmp;.org The DRAFT Bus and Rail Investment Plan in Orange County consists of new local and regional bus service and a light rail connection between Chapel Hill, Duke, and Downtown Durham. La lilik hn f. �i na Bus Investment Bus provides urban, regional, and rural service with Light rail provides urban and regional service with stops between 1/10th and 1/4th mile apart. It op- stops between 1/4th and 2 miles apart. It operates erates on street with auto traffic. Capital cost for in a fixed guideway or travel lane in the street. Orange County is $41 million. Capital cost for Orange County is $330 million; to- tat capital cast is $1.4 billion. • 2012- Expanded bus service could begin • 22,050-Expanded bus hours by end of FIRST year 2012-Initial planning and engineering begins • 44,100-Expanded bus hours by the end of THIRD 202'-Opening year year -Length of corridor: 17 mi • 50,400- Expanded total bus hours by 2033 -Travel time:34 min 1 Sus °2,.500 hours -Avg. Speed: 29-30 mph Duke Medical Duke Medical Center(A) Center(B) muss 112 Mile Radius Ninth Street Cirde m Buchanan ` Walk Di¢tancu � Boulevard `yy ! ilt - LaSalle Street - Durham `1 Dillard : r Street ' Alston South Square(B) Avenue FCX F I, ACE xA�� Patterson _ Place �-South Square(A) t Gateway.+ �-•� `MLK Jr.Parkway Meadowmont Lane(A) IIF°'._.. UNC (A) Hamilton . Road(B) H. Mon Road(A) �'-Leigh Village N tu) .L= Woodmont(B) U�itrta; y on Farm Friday Center Drive(A) LRT Correa©r Road Friday Center Drive(B) Orange County Light Rail Investment Y L a O m ul > o - a) O m 3 O In X 0 to v v a) a) 1 v i � c v Y m u Q L o O � N N a) c a) +�+ � c `� O O c > n O O L O E u N _ u C a) E () m .'O Q N a) m -O u a0•' ++ O Q r-+ c c a) � y 'd a a) c I^ 4- O rn m u N rca ,yn c •19 o.. Q a) vmi •,., v 0 aJ E O E -0 v o a) O E F 4- v a) L C i Q m t ai OU O C ..O a) x � U +N.' C Q -p 'L �. �, Q m _ yr a) ra C 7 m N O O O In vi m a) u a'�-+ a) m GJ o N ❑ +� o a) c 3 u m c m E 3 v o W 'n Le) E O y c In 0) In raLo N Q N +� m rca 'n h 'c m O c u 3 GO co u CO N E - u L C a) = m 0 a) Q O O a) bA i O � *' ± aJ C m O 4- `- �O C -O v a) > m n C O — Q '� m In 4- l0 > Ll m e O t C a1 E a) � m O R N Ln O (o vi a-' c-1 N .� 111 C m c > v ° +� c c c E o E iNi1 o v •L a N N c 0 = C .� u ++ m ro U a) N i :°• L O Y C 4- O t o a) > C dO 2 O - O OA Q Q 3 v c = In C O do In V•� a u -C rn c IOii a) In f0 v • ty m y L m c H C O O L -p 0 CL o 0) E^ c E o O Q +� E X o c + N X v m cc L CL +' 0 o C E c ® u E v m c Z) i = r�'o ` m o r�'o O u M O u v v u O -0 u o > — o ® to t O v c x '� (A v = 'o CL m u 'a+ C N i C C -a In u ,4; > ,� a) ,� O 'n QJ +�+ m o L m In m u V7 ++ m (o '� L C VI L d CU En ai c c0 0 d m ++ E 'C' N m tl0 ®. 4- t ,C '^ c O L M O d� C 'O l• >- i� m Q v1 L 'O +' vui a) +L+ d ~ x on v m E Y °0 0 ; c c m vt -C a_) c a; o n a E u t, w v c v = v c n °� a) 0 C c o x > > u '° X m o i 3 = o u ! Y Q F ou CC i a u U � v m v Imo- .� 4a) i O 1° 4° v1 � rco o u � O F- E 3 • • • f�0 • • • • f�0 • • • • • 0 o 3 aL � v N 'n ao •'n i cu m c m ro Ln!n bo a) O C >` >- O O S a) > q.a m m m C 'n 5 Ln ro O v1 > t c m cr- v m D c m -0 «� +� 3 ao r3s c �` � � N v ,? � � m m cu -0 s Q UD U N C O L C m0 +' C "O In t 0 C C O N c N O Q O 0 v C 1 >'d .- - v p Ou C m v 41 — '- O L O of N m +� N 41 a� > m a) u a) 'O N U Q a) v1 O tub - 0 Q M m '�^ Q C +-+ U N T m i Q _ O X N O s ai E O �-I Q) m N Q aL-+ `L 7 Y m > 'fir Q L Q — C p v Q m p L E O O t +� O m N rat) c..r «-. Q Y m N L 40- O a) C7 O C "a L 0 m e u t a CL L O ai L i-+ O .0 a1 m 00 o t o 3 E u 0 o m E ~ 3 rco c aXi CL o v L L ++ m E d Y 0 L • bD 0 m vi E 3 v E v rho O O V' ao0i 1 o z O m o o = E o v a o v c E v v vi z o c 3 U v U Ln 3 E c v a) °) m +� ro �' -0 m o -- > mn � 3 E o0 0 OD (U 3 m o v O NN E L _ m n E C m -0 a) Q L n Q -6 >- m m c co c N c X 0 � L ; c m v so_n 3 o m o uo L bO E aa)i ~ M1• o c c `� v p o 3 O u W c T E Ep m °�' t o H i=+ O O a� N a) -4 CL '^ O- CL >, H ou 0 u c N m > C ca O _ c E E rco 4- O v s > c ->o F v M o m a3, E z a m E 3 Q " v E c c v ° m v o a Q c � ° v E m .E z o v Y u c E c �, O c c v ^ o L E O Y c L O v m >, m y E L m O Y J O t u 3 '� .� N c • •� a) O �--I � O 7 v-- �- a) O QL 'n -• m L O u Q C E o E m rn m L n ai Q 1pnU u -oa o .a c a Ym s v L a) 'n N �0 O Q) 2 4) + >- � "� � N O '6 0 L M a) 3 ai = C F• aco X m m a —aco vo i o c v o m a) N � ' > 3 r1 c a m = m •M U c ~ a) U � V C O E E C '�' T m •L O m U O i a) Zvi N y m U a) .. O''p'D �_ Q > � > a) > w U p O 'n O) OO m t > c L p c v v `o : — v M m t p Lr c -C v c > O u Q O + c v1 E L H I- N m 'n U -0 3 v �. 3 • e • • v • • • s • > • • • • t 0 c m O 3 0 2 CL Durham Bus ♦ Rail www.dchcmpo.org The O1a..3.i T Durham Bus and Rail Investment Plan consists of new local and regional bus service, commuter rail to Research Triangle Park and Wake County, and a light rail connection to Chapel Hill. All �. t 1 1Y > Bus Investment Commuter Rail Investment Bus provides urban and regional Commuter rail provides urban and Light rail provides urban and .. service with stops between 1/10th interurban service with stops between regional service with stops and 1/4th mile apart. It operates 2 and 10 miles apart. It operates in a between 1/4th and 2 miles apart. on street with auto traffic. Capital fixed guideway, completely separate It operates in a fixed guideway or cost for Durham is$47 million. from auto traffic. Capital cost for Dur- travel lane in the street. Capital ham is$300 million; total capital cost is cost for Durham is$1.05 billion; • 2012- Expanded bus service could $645 million. total capital cost is$1.4 billion. begin 25,000- Expanded bus hours by 20:12-Initial planning and 2012-Initial planning and engineering end of FIRST year engineering begins begins ® 50,000-Expanded bus hours by the 2018-Opening year 2025-Opening year end of THIRD year -Length of corridor: 37 mi -Length of corridor: 17 mi • 77,000-Expanded total bus hours -Travel time:51 min -Travel time:34 min by 2033 1 Bus 2,500 hours -Avg. Speed:44 mph -Avg..Speed: 29-30 mph Iy� sesa Duke Medical Duke Medical Durham �� �+ � } ,, Center(A) Center(B) •ffi' ,-„ 0 w >;"°' Ninth IR M Street Mile Ratl S Cir cle or Buchanan 10-Ml nine West ' € walk oarance Boulevard Durham LaSalle Street Durham i Mde� �North RTP= r Radidi us `--� Dillard Street Alston Triangle I`\ South Square(B) � Avenue \ 6 Center NCSU McCrimmon Parkway Patterson Place Downtown `South Square(A) Raleigh Gateway \� MLK Jr-Parkway Hammond Road I -\ M ont •` Rush Street Lane(A) (A) \I\ UNC (A) Hamilton Downtown Cary West Greenfield Road(B) Raleigh Parkway UNC (C) Road I(on 1 -Leigh Village N Garner UNC (D) n ��- '�--Woodmont(B) Orange Jurhain waKe County L B t n 1 sii:_� � Friday Center Drive(A) -ridor s commuter Rail Corridor �' - Mason Farm - Road Friday Center Drive(B) �,'*;x Durham County Commuter Rail Investment Durham County Light Rail Investment C N 0 N ON Lam. C Iyil "- L aJ O m m aJ `^ T X O U CD a L > a) .O U N L a) Y Q M 0 a! m L L Q C Y a C O 7 'O LQ +p+ O In N ° 0 E E CL u N ca O a u ro +�•+ 0 O CL+m-� _C Q N y pp N �' 4- O m E T O m In C m s O_ In O_ Y v •Y y •i v v U U v a s o fO o m O tl0 E C J X W a) + tat a J 2 a u U ° C E aJ X 4 U c a)C i c In (� @ N J C Y In Q. 0 Q1 m N U Y a) m E 0 N j OU J o �, U m Ln C m E J N 0 In t � U N vEi O N 7 J p •Y C m H E = o m m o U a v co C o fO O 0 w aj O_ L a) N C tto ai U E O. m L 4- 0 lD O '� `" 'n — O L m C p 'E E cu L c U O V m .E a +� c a c -Q ,-, - E °- E N p a r, O L C U r, W d m In ❑ in N a m m a) •L i � m E ° 3 O a E c o c o > aa) c a as ca L o O ba Q O Y fa a w N m .F 'L o .E a °u u c y O o In Q n a m 3 E s aA c J m y F C v "� cc tOO 0 •� L N J u -C Ct C Ian A) 'L m G In L Y u '� m > ❑ aJ Ln 0 rLo .Y°- a1 C o > C $ a) .� O OL bA C .E N K a C CL Y a t x N • - v O > O *' J 4-1 v O _ _ Y - J m a u n v �' L m 'a m c v c L `-' E m m c ° y = m m L m O m o v O E U v m L o u O a E 5 m > 0 3 m p 3 ao + = O v s •y X u M O = o Y 4- cu .E O E t _ a) c U Y X In a aJ .w N O M aj amI y W U N L {n {n U Y a) m C m N m m al a J 4- V 'n a) C Q. d O G Y Y In IE C tNO Y O ai vii j c N m n M 'n m u a) = E s f0 d r 'u o > 0 m u Y u p m aJ E J V Y a) m m C 4� +' £ U J N CC E a c Y Y rp aJ =Q -0 m x m O cu ++ E o C m U E G Y m C a) > C Y.0 vl U C +v+ > t aJ +L+ m V7 L m U C (a v- Y m C m y L W L V1 W aJ i J aJ C c E aJ J U p aJ _ o a vI -W 0 m C C10 Ca J i N Y J O E f0 u m N U a `� j of i V1 II I- O = ❑ d � _ Y E c s U a = �. V- t .E v s v .°% u v +�+ > L g ' E M p `° 3 *= t o J o c o ^ 41 i " v ,� v .N v � v vo tea; acv ox � � � > cm sX mE Uo N ..0 w m m L Y t E J X f0 O (a Y Y a) m C ° L 3 O H bD � F d m F- a1 Co aJ ❑ Y E L O 11 Y (/) ❑ (/) L m U U Y — U O O E 3 a 3 L° 3 � Y U w 3 c°po m c m = = L vi v v ro m > m O Q V O L C O 0 —WCO m -° 6 to c s L O c : a E • c L• L Y I- J N Y ■ N o Q 'a+ a) OU C uj aJ O �O O p N In 0 °A c u ( 3 Lm O o o c cLo cco Q O ° N E a). 0 n C cu 1 N M > _ L = c v m Y m +� Y 0 m •E d aJ C 3 N U O_ p N v u Y Ln m _T Q M m N w a X U N Q) m 0 N Y m a! 'E Q ri a1 W y a c ❑ O_ +-O•' " m m > a) m '+_. Q L Q C L C O >, a) O m = N U m > v o Q m s a oO cn oo '-' +- m a,CL Q v, ° L O vC7 ❑ o LN a� m v •n 0 p ` O — t > L 0 •y Q � a J u ate"' 0 U L ai 3:o s o 3 � m ❑ a ° c 3 i O aa) o N m L sy... Y Y L C 'I"I o y N y Vl cu L N L rl oo L 2 c Y E v 0 z Q C Y O U p p N 0 '' Y Q N U aai ui s E E 3U E 3 M � � E c v Y t aso 1 Y Y (yj Y m 0 a) a) J J 0 Y O m Y v L Ln u o o c m E -°p ^ a c w J z a ° m C m a� L o m v, a, N L o CL ° aa) In a aci o 0 u o .X ° o 'v � o Lu °� v In •,�, v o 3 N c U E o s on o ? E v •E m y �+• o c ° '� v D - o m v c Y E o c��a °n' c FA Q O o O Q ° CL Q CL � c E U c a, C m >. ° v " � °1 o c v u E +' v U v o �o > y Q a cu 0 0 75 c c ;r ❑ _ Q. °a C Y J v °� o v E `L° •E c o ° U c E H > c c 4- m m -p cn o T O O i N a1 `D c w Y o O > ' w cv V1 0.0 m T Y '-;� c E -O .� U E Q +••' m O 'n "B L fl_ Y a1 C m a ai O n In ° o f c o w? ° ° ,; E 3 0 '? E t" �z u p 4- L J C aj n C Y L N N C E N O v a >` ,f ,� v ° a Q O Y Ipil 3 Q m aJ w c In Y m N c O CL C Q m v .� c •++ CL O C Q bL0 H CL C _m aCi N '`' a1 m a o f =o a of a, c m O oo GD ,°.: m a) Q7 L U C ~ CO L C U E + C +-' T Y m L () l0 C U UA L OiI Q7 (U Vf N = c O F- O U o Q > j >aj ±+ a) > a) U a) Q) a1 OA Z aJ > C. `- C 7 O a1 m J t m t > t a C 'i d• In E O h a) j . . • • • • • • • • • . • s Q C m 0 u • Orange County Transit Plan—Bus Service Plan Element Draft Concept Map Year 1 Year 3 Year 4 and beyond (2035) 22,050 bus hours 44,000 bus hours 50,400 bus hours 1 # t ® Local Routes Regional Routes l Local Service Areas ACCESS Dial-A-Ride ` for residents out in the county Destinations New park-and-ride or Orange County W neighborhood transit centers .. .E �- y� a rough Mebane ` - More evening, 1-40115-501 Area Saturday and Sunday service i z 1 apel Hill a� - fh rrboro 1 3 1 6,000 more hours of bus service will be added between � Year Four and 2035. • Shared Benefits Examining Light Rail Transit Investments Near the Durham-Orange County Line May 9,2011 Goal Provide elected officials with objective information about Light Rail Transit (LRT) investment benefits and costs to inform discussions on how to pay for both bus and rail investments with any locally-controlled sales tax and vehicle fee revenues. Settl n The planned Light Rail Transit investment would closely parallel the Durham-Orange County line as it approaches Chapel Hill's Gateway station from the east near 1-40 and US 15-501 until it heads west-ward toward UNC-Chapel Hill from the Friday Center station along NC54. Half-mile "walk access zones" at the Gateway Station, Meadowmont or Hillmont Stations (which lie along alternative alignments) and the Friday Center would all be partly in both counties. Discussion Framework A Light Rail Transit (LRT) or Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) investment along the 17-mile corridor in the Triangle Transit Alternatives Analysis would provide benefits to citizens and enterprises in both • Durham and Orange Counties, especially since the most intense and transit-supportive activities are located at both ends of the line: UNC-Chapel Hill on the west and Downtown Durham and Duke University on the east. These benefits are expected to overlap most significantly in the "area of greatest mutual benefit" along the Durham-Orange County line described above. Discussions among decision-makers about the investments have centered around three elements: the different types of new revenues that might be available and their sources by location; the costs of the investment, and how these costs relate to the amount of bus service that could be provided in each county, and the benefits of the investments, and the degree to which these benefits can be attributed to citizens and enterprises in each county. New Revenues Revenues for an LRT or BRT investment could come from several new revenue sources (in addition to the existing Triangle Transit rental car tax, which will also supply funding): 1. Federal "new starts" $: 45 or 50%federal share assumed; federal $ required in finance model 2. State "intermodal bill" $: 25%state share assumed; state $ required in finance model 3. Local %2 cent sales tax: included in finance model 4. Local $7 vehicle fee increase: included in finance model 5. Triangle Transit$3 increase in vehicle fee: included in finance model 6. Local government value capture: potential source; not currently in finance model 7. Institutional contributions: potential source; not currently in finance model 8. Parking deck or lot charges: potential source; not currently in finance model 9. Rider fares: included in finance model Page 1 1 i Figure 1. Area of Greatest Mutual Benefit • The proposed Durham-Orange LRT line is 17 miles long and ,s Patterson would serve 17 stations. The Place map at left shows the area of greatest mutual benefit near the Durham-Orange County line � between the Patterson Place '► Gat wa station and Friday Center • '� t station, a distance of 5.3 miles { or about 30%of the total line. rham City— , Station-to-station distances are: Ch eLHill Future Municipal Boundary Feet Miles Patterson Place —Gateway 5,400 1.0 Gateway—Leigh Village 10,700 2.0 Leigh Village— Meadowmont 9,800 1.9 • Leigh Village— o f Hillmont 81800 1.7 u , •g Meadowmont— m , Village Friday Center 2,100 0.4 a Hillmont— o { Friday Center 3,000 0.6 Patterson Place- Friday Center via Hillmont 27,900 5.3 Patterson Place- Friday Center via Meadwomont Meadowmont 1 28,000 1 5.3 The map shows the Durham Orange County line, the Friday Red dots are station locations in eventual Durham City-Chapel Center Hillmoni[ the Triangle J COG GIS alignment Hill municipal boundary,the layer,actual locations would be two alternative LRT alignments 03 defined through the EIS process (one via a Meadowmont station and the other via a Hillmont station), station locations, protected greenspace and major roadways in the area. Revenues in the financial model are summarized on page 3;for more detail on the financial model, contact Patrick McDonough with Triangle Transit at pmcdonough @triangletransit.org. Page 12 Table 1. Revenue Assumptions and Amounts in the Financial Model($2011) Revenue Source Durham County Orange County Federal funding 50%Capital 50%Capital State funding 25%Capital 25%Capital Local %cent sales tax $490 million $ 130 million Local $7 vehicle fee $34 million $18 million Triangle Transit$3 vehicle fee $15 million $8 million Local government value capture $0 $0 Institutional contributions $0 $0 Parking deck/lot revenues $0 $0 Rider fares $51 million $11 million Triangle Transit rental car tax $28 million $14 million Light Rail Transit Costs The table below summarizes the capital costs in Year 2011 dollars associated with the stations and fixed guideway segments between the indicated stations. Table 2. LRT Capital Costs (in millions of 2011 dollars) Park& Ride spaces/ Patterson Place—Gateway Segment $ 80 bus parking bays: • Gateway Station $ 5 500 / 7 Gateway— Leigh Village Segment $ 95 -- Leigh Village Station (includes$15 million parking deck) $ 22 1,000 / 7 Leigh Village—Hillmont Segment $118 -- Hillmont Station $ 3 <200 / 0 Hillmont—Friday Center Segment $ 24 -- Leigh Village—Meadowmont Segment $108 -- Meadowmont Station $ 2 0 / 0 Meadowmont—Friday Center Segment $ 27 -- Friday Center Station $ 2/$ 13 0 / 0 Friday Center-Hamilton Segment $ 30/$ 68 -- Alston Avenue- Patterson Place (including stations) $647 1,300 to 1,600; bus Hamilton—UNC Hospital (including stations&tail track) $183 parking bays vary Total capital cost via Meadowmont (via South Square East) $ 1,410* -- Total capital cost via Hillmont(via South Square East) $ 1,380* -- Items in RED denote costs for Hillmont route. Items in BLUE denote costs for Meadowmont route *includes$171 million for maintenance yard and shop not attributed to any particular segment. Benefits This document focuses on the third element of the discussion: the benefits that would accrue • to citizens and enterprises, and especially the most direct and quantifiable benefits that can be linked to specific locations along the corridor. Page 13 Benefits Framework The most important framing issue is that the entire investment will provide benefits to both Durham and Orange County residents and enterprises including businesses and universities. Assigning benefits to particular places will always involve simplifications, and will depend at least in part on assumptions that are used. This document is designed to provide a common foundation of objective information, while acknowledging simplifications and making assumptions transparent, so that changes or alternatives can be considered and all parties to the discussions have access to the same information. It is also important to view forecasts of ridership, property value impacts and other modeling-dependent measures as approximations. Benefits A wide range of benefits could result from an LRT investment,only some of which are quantifiable and only some of which can be reasonably attributed to residents and enterprises based on their location. A full range of potential benefits is listed at the end of this document. This document focuses on three specific benefits: Ridership on the light rail system, r�operty value (and tax) benefits from the investment and congestion relief or delayed need for road investments based on the investment. Ridership on the LRT _ -r 100% Each trip has 2 trip 90% Figure 2. Trip • ends: the place 80% ends by location (traffic analysis zone, 70% or TAZ) where the 60% trip begins and the 50% u=-�Other Counties place (TAZ)where the 40% ■Durham County trip ends. To better 30% ■Orange County 20% understand who uses 10% — different segments of 0% the investment, the Gateway- Leigh Village- Leigh Village— accompanying chart Patterson Place Gateway Hillmont and table show the distribution of trip ends (either beginning or end)for the following rail segments in the vicinity of the Durham County-Orange County line. Table 3. Trip Ends by Light Rail System Segment Gateway- Leigh Village- Leigh Village— (each trip has 2 trip-ends) Patterson Place Gateway Hillmont UNC-CH zones 1,110 (9%) 1,120 (12%) 2,040 (20%) Other Orange County zones 3,390 (28%) 2,480 (26%) 2,610 (26%) Duke University zones 1,625 (13%) 1,095 (11%) 890 (9%) Other Durham County zones 5,300 (44%) 4,170 (43%) 3,495 (34%) Zones outside of Durham and Orange Counties 645 (5%) 755 (8%) 1,135 (11%) Total trip ends (trips=%2 this number): 12,070 9,620 10,170 Page 14 KEY POINTS: 1. Ridership numbers indicate that the Gateway station serves as an important boarding station for Orange County residents destined for Duke University and other Durham locations, while the Leigh Village station serves as an important boarding station for trips destined to UNC- Chapel Hill. 2. All of these segments (and likely many others) clearly benefit both counties, with the mutual benefit most pronounced on the Leigh Village —Hillmont segment, where 46%of trip ends are associated with Orange County locations, 43%are associated with Durham County locations and 11%are associated with Chatham and Wake County locations. IMPORTANT CAVEATS: 1. Ridership is for the Year 2035 and comes from the Regional Transportation Model version being used by Triangle Transit for the alternatives analysis process, known as Version 4e2. It is a modified version of the model used to develop the 2035 Long Range Transportation Plan, and differs from version 5 which will be used for the 2040 Long Range Transportation Plan. All modeling results, especially those for small segments of the transportation system, should be viewed as approximations. 2. The land use analysis of the on-going NC 54 Study suggests that more development can occur in the area examined in this analysis than is in Version 4e2 of the model. If so, it might influence the distribution of trip ends. 3. Significant future changes to parking costs and constraints at UNC-Chapel Hill compared to those assumed in the transportation model could affect ridership forecasts. More constrained parking at Duke University could also influence mode choices for residents in the study area who travel to Duke. 4. In considering benefits (including ridership) and the other components of transit investments: bus-hours of service, revenues and costs, metrics can be viewed in several ways, including in aggregate or on a per-capita basis. Currently, Durham County has almost exactly double the popuiation of Orange County(267,587 vs. 133,801 according to the 2010 Census). According to the state demographer, by 2030 Orange County is projected to have 42% of the population of Durham County. Page 1 5 Property Value and Property Tax Increases in property value (and resultant property tax revenues) associated with LRT investments have been well-documented. These increases are made up of two components: 1. Additional amounts and types of development that can occur because of the transit investment. More intense development may be both marketable and able to secure local government approval because of the greater access and mobility provided by the investment. 2. Greater per-unit value for any given type and amount of development because of the mobility and access benefits associated with the LRT investment. Several studies of LRT investments have found per-unit value premiums for properties closest to LRT stations, including single family home and condominium sales prices, apartment rental rate, office real estate value and retail real estate value. The nature of these premiums vary widely among the studies. The Gateway, Leigh Village, Meadowmont and Hillmont stations were examined to identify the potential for transit-oriented development in each jurisdiction, based on the amount of land within a half-mile radius of a station location and the amount of this station area in protected greenspace and land less likely to develop or redevelop because of its current use (for example, existing single family residential homes). These station areas are mapped and described on the next page. KEY POINTS: • 1. Property value and tax revenue benefits from station area development and redevelopment would accrue primarily to: a. Gateway Station: Chapel Hill, Orange County and Durham County. b. Leigh Village Station: Durham City and Durham County c. Hillmont Station: Chapel Hill and Durham County d. Meadowmont Station.: Durham County, Orange County, Chape! Hill, 2. In Orange County, virtually all new station area development is anticipated to be nonresidential; in Durham County, it is anticipated to be a mix of residential and nonresidential development. 3. UNC-Chape! Hiii couid aiso see a "redevelopment" benefit if the Friday Center park-ride lot is displaced by park-ride facilities associated with the Leigh Village Center or other locations. IMPORTANT CAVEATS: 1. Exact station locations, and more precisely the locations of pedestrian entrances to the stations, will affect the station walk zones and implied property value benefits associated with easy access. 2. Where stations are close together, pedestrian access zones overlap, and benefits would be divided among stations depending on ease of access. 3. Parcels "less likely to develop" were identified using the parcels and methods of the NC54 corridor study, focusing on the physical characteristics of land. Actual development and redevelopment potential involves a more complex set of issues, especially where large insti- tutional parcels are involved; for example on UNC property or at the Blue Cross Blue Shield site. Page 16 • - — The map to the left shows the %2-mile radius a 15 � , around the Gateway, "------ so, Leigh Village, Meadowmont and 0 Hillmont Stations, how these station areas align ay with current county *► boundaries and planned municipal boundaries, and the amount of land NDurham City= in each station area that apel Hill Future Municipal Boundary is in protected green space , ) or land less likely to redevelop (grey). The areas shown in white have the highest ^' ~ development potential. U U # Leigh The table on the next oi a _, page summarizes the amount of land most likely to develop or \� • redevelop in each station Meadow on area by county, dividing - the Durham County portion between parcels ' on the west side of 1-40 (accessible to LRT stations) and the east f side of 1-40 (not I accessible unless high b H I rat quality pedestrian overpasses are built). mss, =5 0=5 as Each %z mile radius circle �-- -- contains 503 total acres. Figure 3. Station area development potential (areas in that are not streets have the highest potential for development or redevelopment based on physical . characteristics) Page 1 7 Table 4. Station Area land with highest development or redevelopment potential(acreage) Station Orange Durham County Durham County Total Amount of land in County west of 1-40 east of 1-40 Y2 mile radius circle Gateway 48 63 54 165 503 acres Leigh Village 0 214 27 241 503 acres Meadowmont 43 76 0 119 503 cres Hillmont 0 130 0 130 503 , cres A comparison of assessed property values in Meadowmont to assessed values for an existing single family residential area north of Meadowmont suggests that land developed as a walkable, mixed- use development on the scale of Meadowmont would yield almost three times more property value and property tax revenue on a per-acre basis than land developed as suburban housing. Congestion Relief People traveling by car could receive benefits from the LRT if it results in fewer cars on area roads. Selected highway links on NC54 and US 15-501 were analyzed to show trip ends associated with the same 5 areas as the LRT ridership analysis: UNC-Chapel Hill, other Orange County zones, Duke University, other Durham zones and zones outside of Orange and Durham counties. Table 5 shows roadway users who might benefit due to people using the LRT investment. The version of the travel demand model used in this analysis (the one used for the 2035 Long Range Transportation Plan) did not show discernable impacts on roadway congestion from building the LRT. Table 5. Trip Ends by Roadway Segment US 15-501-West of 1-40 NC 54-W of Farrington Rd (each trip has 2 trip-ends): Number % Number UNC-CH zones 7,690 6% 27,635 17% Other zones in Orange County 52,294 39% 40,311 24% Duke University zones 4,684 3% 1 533 0% Other zones in Durham County 50,398 37% 62,737 38% Zones outside of Durham and Orange Counties 19,446 14% 34,478 21% Total trip ends(trips=Y2 this number): 134,513 100% 165,694 10051. KEY POINTS: 1. Like transit riders, roadway users are widely distributed among the two counties; significant percentages also come from Chatham and Wake Counties, especially along NC54. 2. The traffic modeling results did not show any discernable congestion differences between building the LRT and the "no-build" alternative, so benefits to road users may be slight. IMPORTANT CAVEATS: 1. Results are for the Year 2035 and come from the Regional Transportation Model version used to develop the 2035 Long Range Transportation Plan, known as v4. Results, especially those for small segments of the transportation system, should be viewed as approximations. Page 18 Other Benefits This report focused on three benefits—LRT ridership, property value and tax revenues, and conges- tion relief on parallel roadways—that are both quantifiable and "place-based," meaning the benefits can be more readily tied to particular locations. The list below shows a full range of benefits that have been attributed to Light Rail Transit Investments, including ones difficult to quantify or ascribe to specific locations. Note that development associated with an LRT investment is unlikely to result in additional sales tax revenues, although it may affect where people make some purchases. Table 6. Benefits of Rail Transit Investments Environmental Benefits ® Reduced traffic congestion ® Reduced fuel consumption ® Better air quality ® Reduced sprawl and more efficient pattern of development at the regional scale ® Conservation of open space ® Shorter trip lengths due to more compact development Economic and Fiscal Benefits • Reduced or deferred road and parking facility costs • Economic development benefits from agglomeration efficiencies and increased productivity • Increased property values • Increased property tax revenues • Ability to reuse/redevelop property currently used for parking (e.g. Friday Center lot) Fsocial Benefits • Improved social cohesion through positive interactions among people in a community • Improved fitness and health as a result of increased walking and biking to access transit • Reduced traffic accidents • improved transportation options, particularly for non-drivers • Reduced consumer transportation costs • Improved access to job opportunities for workers, increased labor market shed for employers; improved ability to retain workers concerned with transportation costs and reliability • Neighborhood revitalization and better links between workforce housing and job sites • Expanded market access for customers and clients (e.g. to LINC clinics) Note: List generated from discussion among Chapel Hill, Orange County, Durham City,Triangle Transit and Triangle J COG staff at a meeting on March 25,2011 and from the following reports: Fogarty, Nadine et al. Capturing the Value of Transit, Center for Transit-Oriented Development, November 2008; Cervero, Robert et al. Transit-Oriented Development in the United States:Experiences, Challenges, and Prospects, Report 102,Transit Cooperative Research Program, 2004; Litman,Todd, Comprehensive Evaluation of Rail Transit Benefits,Victoria Transport Policy Institute,June 2006. Page 1 9 Additional Technical Materials The following technical materials are available to provide more detail relative to the area of greatest mutual benefit and the analysis of LRT ridership, property value and tax revenue, roadway congestion, LRT system costs and revenue assumptions for transit investment scenarios: 1. Shared benefit area mapping. Large-format map showing parcel level detail of the area overlaid on aerial photos. information shown includes parcel boundaries, road rights-of-way, county line, future municipal boundary, protected green space, LRT alignment alternatives, approximate station locations, t mile radius around station locations. (contact: John Hodges- Copple at Triangle J COG) 2. Developable and Reclevelopable Land. Large format map and accompanying excel spreadsheet showing acreage of protected land, land unlikely to further develop or redevelop and land with the highest potential for development and redevelopment, by county and relationship to 1-40. Mapping shows the same layers as in #1 above and is overlaid on aerial photos. (contact: John Hodges-Copple at Triangle J COG) 3. Mixed use vs. Single Family value. Large format map and accompanying excel spreadsheet showing the comparison areas used to compare the value of mixed use (Meadowmont)vs. single family housing, and the resulting valuations for the comparison areas and on a per-acre basis. (contact: John Hodges-Copple at Triangle J COG) 4. Cost estimates by segment and station for the LRT investment alternatives. (contact Patrick McDonough at Triangle Transit) 5. Cost estimates by service type for bus investment priorities by county. (contact Patrick McDonough at Triangle Transit) 6. Revenue estimates and assumptions by county that can be applied to rail and bus investments. (contact Patrick McDonough at Triangle Transit) 7. Revenue and cost estimates and assumptions by county for a range of rail and bus investment scenarios. (contact Patrick McDonough at Triangle Transit) 8. LRT Ridership. Excel spreadsheet of link ridership in production and attraction format for segments in the area of greatest mutual benefit, summarized for trip ends by 5 aggregations of Traffic Analysis Zones (UNC-Chapel Hill TAZs, other TAZs in Orange County, Duke University TAZs, other TAZs in Durham County,TAZs in Chatham and Wake Counties). (contact Patrick McDonough at Triangle Transit) 9. Roadway travel and congestion. Excel spreadsheet of trips on selected highway links, showing trip ends for the same 5 aggregated areas as in #8 above for both an alternative with the LRT investment and a "no-build" investment. Also includes volume/capacity ratios for the segments. (contact Yanping Zhang with the DCHC MPO). 10. NC 54/1-40 Corridor Study reports. Reports include land use recommendations around Leigh Village, Hillmont and Meadowmont. (contact Leta Huntsinger at DCHC MPO) Page 1 10 ORANGE COUNTY TRANSIT PLAN (OCTP) LIST OF ASSUMPTIONS 1. Orange County will pay for the cost of light rail railway (x miles) and 2 light rail stations in Durham County (i.e. Hillmont and Gateway) and the light rail miles with Orange County. 2. There is no 'value capture' program in the financial model whereby increased property values near rail stations are apportioned to help create a future revenue stream to help pay for the cost of light rail capital and operations. 3. There is no local government independent contribution to fund the new light rail or bus program other than citizen/business sales tax receipts and vehicle registration. 4. There is no institutional contribution to the revenue side of the model (i.e. major employees or university). 5. New '/ cent sales tax revenues will be apportioned for new service. New service is considered any service not in existence when the Mobility Bill legislation went • into effect (i.e. June 2009). 6. The vehicle registration tax can be used for existing or new bus service. 7. The financial model uses 'h cent sales, vehicle registration and Triangle Transit Authority (TTA) rental car tax to fund the overall bus and rail program. 8. Chapel Hill Transit's (CHT) bus system is presently fare-free (see definition in Appendix) and any expansion to routes provided by CHT are being assumed to also be fare--free, 9. Any routes provided by TTA presently have user fees and new routes would also have user fees. These routes are typically intercounty or between local transit systems. 10. New bus routes that travel between two counties are assumed to be funded 50% each, irrespective of ridership, miles within jurisdiction, etc. 11. Orange County would pay a % share of the rail maintenance facilities to be • located in Durham County. 12. Park and ride lots or parking garages funded by the financial plan are assumed to be without a user fee. Page 1 June 13, 2011 Revenues and Expenditures' Local Revenue—estimated dollar amounts for Orange and Durham Counties. The dollar amounts reported below are the projections of revenue in 2012, expressed in 2012 dollars. Durham: 1/2-cent sales tax: $17.3 million $7 vehicle registration fee: $1.47 million $3 vehicle registration fee: $629,000 Portion of Triangle Transit Rental Car Tax: $1.15 million Orange: 1/2-cent sales tax: $5.1 million $7 vehicle registration fee: $773,000 $3 vehicle registration fee: $331,000 Portion of Triangle Transit Rental Car Tax: $560,000 For the Rail Investment Details:Explain the components that are used to • derive the total investment costs. The various components for the entire UNC Hospital to Alston Line include: • Guideway and Track Elements: $423 million • Stations, Stops and Terminals: $118 million(includes $15 million additional for Leigh Village parking deck above A3/132/C1 cost estimate) • Support Facilities: Yard, Shops, Admin Bldgs: $36 million • Site work and Special Conditions: $161 million • Systems: $121 million • Right-Of-Way, Land, Relocation Costs: $108 million • Vehicles: $66 million • Professional Services: $240 million • Unallocated Contingency: $63 million • Project Reserve: $42 million Total: $1,378 million Costs for Light Rail by Segment A. Rail investment in Orange County Location: UNC Hospital to Orange County Line • 1 From Commissioner Gordon's email to Triangle Transit dated July 3,2011.Information was provided my Patrick McDonough,Triangle Transit Senior Planner. Page 2 June 13, 2011 • Distance: 2.89 miles Cost: $223 million(stations,track and systems included, maintenance facility share NOT included) B1. Rail investment in the part of Chapel Hill located in Durham County Location: Orange County Line to Chapel Hill Town Limit(assumes Woodmont/C2 alignment) Distance: 0.52 miles Cost: $28 million(stations,track and systems included, maintenance facility share NOT included) B2. Rail investment in the part of Chapel Hill located in Durham County Location: Area approaching and departing Gateway Station near 15-501/I40 interchange Distance: 0.36 miles Cost: $45 million(stations,track and systems included, maintenance facility share NOT included) C. Rail investment in Durham County but not in Chapel Hill. Location: Orange/Durham County Line to Alston Avenue Station, Excepting B1 and B2 segments above Distance: 13.47 miles Cost: $911 million D. Other costs: Rail Operation/Maintenance Facility,Including Tail Tracks & Vehicles Location: TBD Distance: 1.6 miles of yard/shop tracks Cost: $171 million, apportioned $34 million to Orange and $137 million to Durham based on track mileage. Total capital cost: $1,378 million Percentage of Total Capital Cost, By County Plan, In the Financial Models Orange County: 24% Durham County: 76% Percentage of Total 2-County Sales Tax Revenue in 2012, By County Plan, In the Financial Models Total Sales Tax Revenue: $22.4 million($5.1 million + $17.3 million) Orange County: 23% Durham County: 77% • All commuter rail costs are paid by Durham County. None are shared with Orange. Page 3 June 13, 2011 • Combining the existing bus hours with the new bus hours proposed in the model, what will be the proportion of the bus investment and the rail investment in Orange County and in Durham County, and then the two counties combined? When combining existing bus and planned expanded bus services from 2012 to 2035, and then counting up the total investment in bus and rail in terms of dollars, here are the proportions of investment by mode in each county and combined: Orange County: 42% RAIL 56%BUS 2% DEBT Durham County: 68% RAIL 28%BUS 5% DEBT Combined Durham-Orange: 60%RAIL 36%BUS 4% DEBT Triangle Transit staff believe it is important to emphasize that Orange and Durham County, while having much in common, also have many differences in terms of geography, population size, and the goals of each transit system. The differences in the percentages reflect the policy differences in the two counties in regarding priority for transit as a proportion of community spending both looking back into the past and forward into the future. We believe that differences in percentages from county to county are not a cause for concern,but a reflection of each county's leadership seeking to reach its goals for transit in a way that is appropriate to their community. How many bus hours will be provided in Orange County and how many are provided in Durham County? The bus hours in each county plan are as follows: Orange County: 22,050 bus hours by end of year 1 of the plan 44,100 bus hours by end of year 3 of the plan 50,400 bus hours by end of the plan(2035) • Durham County: 25,000 bus hours by end of year 1 of the plan 50,000 bus hours by end of year 3 of the plan 77,500 bus hours by end of the plan(2035) Page 4 June 13,2011 B Y comparison,today Chapel Hill Transit provides 190,000, Orange Public P Transportation—3,500 and Triangle Transit—32,000 annual bus service hours in Orange County. How much does each bus hour cost? Each bus hour costs approximately$86/hour in 2012. How many buses are included and at what cost for each? The Orange County plan purchases 7 buses in 2012, another 7 buses in 2014, and then 1 bus in 2031, and 1 bus in 2032, for a total of 16 buses. Every 12 years,the plan buys a replacement bus for each previously purchased bus as the vehicle reaches the end of its useful life. (12 years for a heavy-duty bus). The cost of a full-size bus in 2012 is projected to be $396,000. • • • The DRAFT Bus and Rail Investment Plan in Orange • County The concept of the Bus and Rail Investment Plan for Orange County was supported through resolutions approved by the Chapel Hill Town Council (Resolution#2011-05-25/111),the Carrboro Board of Aldermen (Resolution#129/2010-11)and via letter from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. The DRAFT document provided for public input by the DCHC has not been reviewed by the Town of Chapel Hill,the Town of Carrboro,or The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill either individually or together as the Chapel Hill Transit Public Transit Committee. DCHC and Triangle Transit do not make representation that these bodies support this detailed document. 5/26/2011 • i • The Orange County Bus and Rail Investment Plan I. INTRODUCTION 3 II. TRANSIT STEPS LEADING UP TO THIS PLAN 4 III. PLAN ELEMENTS 5 A. PUBLIC TRANSIT PROVIDERS B. NEW BUS SERVICE C. NEW LIGHT RAIL SERVICE D. MARTIN LUTHER KING JR. BOULEVARD BUS LANES IV. MAPS 9 A. NEW BUS SERVICE B. NEW LIGHT RAIL SERVICE V. ORANGE COUNTY REVENUES 12 • A. ONE-HALF CENT SALES TAX B. $7 DOLLAR VEHICLE REGISTRATION FEE C. $3 TRIANGLE TRANSIT VEHICLE REGISTRATION FEE D. REVENUE FROM TRIANGLE TRANSIT'S RENTAL CAR TAX E. STATE GOVERNMENT FUNDING F. FEDERAL GOVERNMENT FUNDING VI. ORANGE FINANCIAL PLAN DATA 13 VII. IMPLEMENTATION AGREEMENT 14 VIII. CLOSING SUMMARY 14 IX. BUS SERVICE SPREADSHEET 15 • 5/26/2011-Page 2 i • The Orange County Bus and Rail Investment Plan I. INTRODUCTION Orange County has achieved an enviable quality of life at the end of the first decade of the 21St century. Recent accolades include its ranking as the best place to live in the South by Money magazine,the#1 housing market in the US by the Wall Street Journal and one of the best places in the nation to raise children by Business Week magazine. The Chapel Hill- Carrboro City School System is one of the best in the nation, consistently ranking at the top of the state in student test score and boasting the lowest dropout rate in the state.The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill consistently ranks among the great institutions of higher education in the nation, most recently honored by US News& World Report. But, with these successes has come a surging growth in population and demand upon our roads and highways. Since 2004,the Triangle has moved from 46th largest metro area to 40th in the US for 2009, and our vehicle demand on freeways is up by 28%over those five years. Recently,our region was named the 3rd most sprawling urban area in the country among the 83 areas studied. In its 2009 long-range(2035) report,the Durham-Chapel Hill-Carrboro Metropolitan Planning Organization (DCHC MPO) noted that the region's population would more than double over • the 25-year period. For the last two decades,the demand on our roads has grown significantly faster than our population. Even with planned highway improvements and likely additional revenues for new roads, it is clear that Orange County and the region will see declining levels of service on major roads in the next 25 years. The economic costs for our increasingly congested roads are significant. In its 2010 Annual Urban Mobility Report,the Texas Transportation Institute estimated that our region has "congestion costs" of almost one-half billion dollars a year. Recently, a May 10, 2011 study cited in Forbes magazine found that the Triangle was the urban region in the nation that is most vulnerable to rising gasoline prices. Finally, it will be difficult to impossible for many of Orange County's low to moderate income families to afford to get to new jobs and take advantage of the region's prosperity unless enhanced transportation options are created. Orange County residents and its regional neighbors are aware of the growth in clogged roads, as well as the accompanying air quality problems, negative economic impacts and the loss of the quality of life we enjoy if these transportation challenges are not met. Local citizens and elected leaders have responded to these challenges,with some assistance from state government,as described in this investment plan. • 5/26/2011-Page 13 i • II. TRANSIT PLANNING STEPS LEADING UP TO THIS PLAN Beginning in 2007, a blue-ribbon group of Triangle leaders (the Special Transit Advisory Commission, or STAC) met for over a year and in 2008 unanimously recommended a regional vision for bus and rail investments. One year later,the region's two MPOs fully incorporated the STAC recommendations into their long-range (25 year)transportation plan. In August 2009, Governor Beverly Perdue signed into law the Congestion Relief and Intermodal Transport Fund Act(HB 148), legislation that allows Orange, Durham and Wake counties to generate new revenues for public transportation. These new revenues can include a one-half cent sales tax, if approved by the public through a referendum, as well as an additional $10 in local and regional vehicle registration fees. Over the last 18 months,Triangle Transit staff have worked with municipal, Orange County, MPO and other regional transportation staff to develop a detailed, 25-year plan for new bus and rail investments designed to provide greater transportation options for residents and employers. These investments would positively impact traffic congestion and poor air quality, and support local land use policies. This plan is the culmination of that collaboration and purposes crucial public investments and services to maintain our quality of life and economic vitality in the next 25 years. • Extensive public engagement has occurred over the past year in the development of the bus and rail elements of this plan. Triangle Transit and local transportation staff members from municipalities, counties and MPOs conducted a series of 19 public workshops, at various locations throughout the Triangle, on the process and substance of the plan's development. A total of over 1,100 participants attended the meetings and they provided over 500 comments on the plan. The project web site, www.ourtransitfuture.com,was viewed by over 31,000 unique individuals with 1.4 million page hits. The web site houses all of the presentation materials and proposed plan elements. There have been dozens of meetings with citizens, local elected officials, staff and members of the region's MPOs, community stakeholders and business leaders,allowing extensive feedback on the proposed bus and rail elements of the plan. The financial and service elements of this plan are coordinated with the corresponding Durham County Bus and Rail Investment Plan. Additionally,this bus and rail investment plan builds on the existing transit services and therefore does not eliminate or reduce the current financial and service commitments. 5/26/2011-Page 14 i • III. PLAN ELEMENTS A. Public Transit Providers The Triangle has a number of public transit providers who have been involved in the development of this plan and will have responsibility to implement the recommendations of the plan once it is approved. Below is a brief description of the transit agencies: Triangle Transit is a regional transit agency serving Wake, Durham and Orange counties. Triangle Transit is responsible for the provision of regional commuter express and demand response service connecting Wake, Durham and Orange counties Chapel Hill Transit is a multijurisdictional agency formed by a partnership of the Towns of Chapel Hill, Carrboro and the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. Chapel Hill Transit is responsible for regular and express route and demand response service in the Chapel Hill, Carrboro, and University area. Chapel Hill Transit also provides regional express bus service, in cooperation with Triangle Transit to Hillsborough. Orange County Public Transit is a county agency that provides demand response service in unincorporated Orange County and operates local service in Hillsborough in cooperation with the Town of Hillsborough. • B. New Bus Service Representatives from Orange County, Chapel Hill, Carrboro, Hillsborough,The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill,and Triangle Transit have worked collaboratively to develop a comprehensive bus service improvement plan that supports the effort to improve public transit in Orange County.The group identified a range of services that would address county- wide transit service needs. Identified services were ranked and prioritized based on a set of goals and strategies. Goals include: • Improve mobility in the region • Provide geographic equity • Support improved capital facilities • Support transit supportive land use • Provide positive impact on air quality. Strategies to accomplish these goals include: • Improve connectivity • Increase frequency in peak hours • Improve weekend, night services(off peak) • • Fill in gaps in existing service 5/26/2011-Page ( 5 i • • Maintain existing services. Over the course of the plan, a new half-cent sales tax would enable delivery of a total of 50,000 additional bus hours in Orange County. By comparison, Chapel Hill Transit currently provides 190,000 annual bus hours and Orange Public Transportation provides 3,525 annual bus hours.The projects will provide benefits to all areas of the county by enhancing urban and rural transit services. Bus improvement projects were classified by type of service: • Local bus service-service operating within Orange County boundaries • Regional bus service-service operating in more than one county • Regional express service-over the road coaches operating in more than one county First Three Years following successful sales tax referendum An investment that equals about 44,000 bus service hours will be provided during the first three years. Improvements include: • Improve connectivity • New regional express service connecting Mebane, Hillsborough and Durham. • Increase frequency in peak hours • Enhanced services in the US 15/501 corridor between Durham and Chapel Hill for Chapel Hill Transit,Triangle Transit, and DATA. . • Improvements in the NC 54 corridor transit service. • Increased peak hour service on the existing Triangle Transit Route 405 between Chapel Hill and Durham. • Increased peak hour service on the in-town Hillsborough circulator. • Increased peak hour service on Triangle Transit Route 800 between Research Triangle Park and Chapel Hill and Triangle Transit Route 420 between Hillsborough and Chapel Hill. • Improve weekend, night services (off peak) • New Saturday service on the in-town Hillsborough circulator. • Expanded local Saturday service in Chapel Hill, Carrboro and UNC. • Expanded regional Saturday service on existing Triangle Transit Route 405 between Durham and Chapel Hill and Triangle Transit Route 800 between Chapel Hill and the Research Triangle Park. • New local Sunday service in Chapel Hill, Carrboro and UNC. • Expanded local evening service in Chapel Hill, Carrboro and UNC. • Fill in gaps in existing service • Enhanced rural transit service in unincorporated Orange County. • Maintain existing services. • A portion of revenues generated by the new vehicle registration fee will be used to support existing bus service. • 5/26/2011-Page 6 i • Year four and beyond following successful sales tax referendum A total investment that equals about 50,000 new bus service hours will be provided during year four of the plan implementation through the end of the program (year 2032). Improvements include: • Increase frequency in peak hours • Increased peak hour service on Pittsboro—Chapel Hill Express. • Continued increased peak hour service on the existing Triangle Transit Route 800 between Research Triangle Park and Chapel Hill. • Continued increased peak hour service in Chapel Hill, Carrboro and UNC. • Fill in gaps in existing service o Continued enhancements to rural transit service in unincorporated Orange County. C. New Light Rail Service The Orange County Bus and Rail Investment plan provides funding for a fixed guideway transit system that serves Durham and Orange counties using Light Rail technology(LRT). The 17-mile alignment extends from the University of North Carolina (UNC) Hospitals to Alston Avenue in East Durham. A total of 17 stations have been proposed including a station next to the Dean Smith Center,the Friday Center,as well as a potential station at Meadowmont in Chapel Hill. Stations in Durham include Patterson Place along US 15-501, • the South Square area,at Duke Medical Center, Ninth Street, and downtown Durham, with convenient access to nearby bus and Amtrak intercity rail connections. Due to the light rail vehicle's capabilities and the requirements of the activity centers and neighborhoods being served along the corridor, light rail station spacing is routinely between%mile and 2 miles apart. Light Rail vehicles are electrically powered and travel at speeds up to 59 mph. The total travel time for the 17-mile alignment is about 35 minutes, including stops. The vehicles are approximately 90 feet long, can operate in both directions,and can be coupled with additional cars as demand increases. Initial 2035 projections indicate that ridership will exceed about 12,000 boardings per day. These projections are subject to change as the model is refined and validated. Light rail vehicles can operate in exclusive right of way, as well as along urban streets, and characteristically serve accessible low platforms(14 inches high) at each station. The operations plan for the 17-mile alignment includes train frequencies(headways)of 10 minutes during the morning and evening peak and 20 minutes during the off-peak hours and on weekends. Fifteen vehicles will be required to operate the system on the basis of an 18-hour schedule each weekday. Several potential light rail vehicle maintenance facility locations are being evaluated. Detailed alignment and station location decisions will occur in the future when final project design is addressed. • 5/26/2011-Page 17 i • The total capital cost for the Durham and Orange Light Rail Project is approximately$1.4 billion (2011 dollars). Orange County's share is$330 million (2011 dollars). Operations and Maintenance costs are estimated at$15 million/year(2011 dollars). Orange County's share of the Operations and Maintenance costs are $3.2 million/year(2011 dollars). D. Martin Luther King Boulevard Bus Lanes This investment provides for bus-only lanes on Martin Luther King(MLK) Boulevard from Interstate 40 to Estes Drive. It will make bus travel times more reliable in peak periods. Existing buses in the MLK corridor will be re-routed to take advantage of the enhanced bus lanes. Orange County's cost for the bus lanes is anticipated to be$20 to$25 million. Since the bus lanes will be used by existing services,they do not generate any additional operational costs within the plan. IV. Maps Two maps follow. The first map (page 9) is a conceptual representation of where frequent local and regional bus service will be put into operation in the first three years following the implementation of this • plan. The second map(page 10)shows the Light Rail alignment from Downtown Durham to Chapel Hill. • 5/26/2011-Page 18 i • DRAFT orange County Bus Investment Plan 40,000 hours of bus improvements in the first three years 1 Local Routes Regional Routes Local Service Areas ACCESS Dial-A-Ride -forresidents out in the county U Destinations 0 NeW park-and-ride or Orange County O neighborhood transit centers Hillst) rough Mebane I 1-40115-501 Area More evening, Saturday and Sunday service - ell rrboro Vii 6,000 more hours of bus , service will he added between Year Four and 2035. • 5/26/2011-Page 9 i • DRAFT Durham-Orange light Rail Plan Cr Xt�, Duke Medical Duke Medical Legend: Center(A) Center(B) 4 Ninth Street 112 Mile Radius Circle or Buchanan , ,,.;, 10-Minute Walk Distance Boulevard LaSalle Street —a� Durham Dillard Street Alston South Square (B) Avenue Patterson Place ��- South Square (A) Gateway �- MLK Jr. Parkway Meadowmont Lane (A) UNC (A) Hamilton Road (B) . " UNC (C) Hamilton Leigh Village t Road (A) § 0 112 1 Mile UNC (D) Woodmont(B) Durham - Orange County -�"� Friday Center Drive (A); LRT Corridor Mason Farm Road Friday Center Drive (B) �. • 5/26/2011-Page 1 10 i • V. ORANGE COUNTY REVENUES A variety of revenue sources provide the funding for the Orange County Bus and Rail Investment Plan. Those revenues include: • A new one-half-cent sales tax in Orange County • A new$7 vehicle registration fee levied by Orange County • An increase of$3 to the existing$5 vehicle registration fee currently levied by Triangle Transit in Orange County • Revenue from Triangle Transit's rental car tax • NC State Government contributions to funding • Federal Government contributions to funding The initial proceeds for each local revenue stream for Orange County in 2012 for transit are assumed to be: • Yz-cent sales tax: $5.1 million • $7 vehicle registration fee: $770,000 • $3 vehicle registration fee increase: $330,000 • Rental car tax revenue: $560,000 Growth rates assumed for each revenue source: • • %-cent sales tax: o Growth rate from 2011 through 2014: 1.5% o Growth rate from 2015 through 2035: 3.6% • $7 vehicle registration fee: 2.0% • $3 vehicle registration fee increase: 2.0% • Rental car tax revenue: 4.0% $28 million would be borrowed over the life of the plan. This borrowing would allow for the large capital expenditures necessary during a small number of the years in the plan. Any borrowing would be from capital markets through government bonds,would require approval by the NC Local Government Commission, and would have to meet debt to revenue ratios required by the capital markets for bond issuance. Further details for each revenue source follow. A. One-half cent sales tax in Orange County A one half-cent sales tax in Orange County means that when individuals spend $10.00 on certain goods and services,an additional five cents($0.05) is added to the transaction to support the development of the Bus and Rail Investment Plan. Purchases of food, gasoline, medicine, health care and housing generally are excluded from the tax. 5/26/2011-Page 11 i • A one half-cent sales tax in Orange County is estimated to generate$5.1 million in 2012. Over the life of the plan to 2035,the sales tax is expected to generate$180 million in Year-Of- Expenditure (YOE)dollars. All of which is subject to authorization of a referendum by the Orange Board of County Commissioners and approval by the voters. B. $7 Vehicle Registration Fee in Orange County A seven dollar($7)vehicle registration fee in Orange County means that when an individual registers a new vehicle or renews the registration for an existing vehicle in Orange County, an additional $7 per year is added to the cost above the other required registration fees for that vehicle. The seven dollar fee in Orange County is expected to bring in$770,000 in 2012. Over the life of the plan to 2035,the seven dollar fee is expected to generate$23.8 million in Year-Of- Expenditure (YOE)dollars. C. $3 Vehicle Registration Fee Increase in.Orange County A three dollar($3)vehicle registration fee increase in Orange County means that when an individual registers a new vehicle or renews the registration for an existing vehicle in Orange County,an additional $3 per year is added to the cost above the other required registration fees for that vehicle.An existing$5 fee for vehicle registration supports activities of Triangle • Transit, including bus operations and long-term planning.This fee would increase to$8 after the$3 increase is implemented. The three dollar fee in Orange County is projected to generate$330,000 in 2012. Over the life of the plan to 2035,the three dollar fee is expected to generate$10.2 million in Year-Of- Expenditure (YOE)dollars. D. Revenue from Triangle Transit's Rental Car Tax Triangle Transit operations are partially funded by a five percent(5%)tax on car rentals in Wake, Durham,and Orange Counties. Under existing policy adopted by the TTA Board, 50% of the rental car tax revenues are dedicated to advancing long-range bus and rail transit. Since a significant portion of all cars rented and driven in the three counties are rented at RDU International Airport, it is difficult to determine which rentals are driven primarily in one county or another. Therefore, the 50%rental revenues dedicated to long-term transit were allocated by county according to the percentage of population in the Triangle Region,which is: Wake (68%); Durham (21.5%); Orange (10.5%). The Triangle Transit rental car tax proceeds directed to Orange County are estimated to be $560,000 in 2012. Over the life of the plan to 2035,the rental car tax is expected to generate $24 million in Year-Of-Expenditure (YOE)dollars for Orange County. • 5/26/2011-Page 112 i E. NC State Government Funding The plan includes a 25%capital cost contribution by the NC Department of Transportation (NCDOT)for both light rail and commuter rail projects in Orange County. This level of participation was established by the State in its participation in the Charlotte Blue Line light rail project in 2003. The plan assumes that NCDOT also pays for 10%of bus capital costs (replacement buses, new buses, park and ride lots, etc)consistent with its current practices. NCDOT assumed contributions to the plan total $132 million in YOE dollars from 2012 through 2035. F. Federal Government Funding The plan assumes that the Federal Government contributes 50°x6 of the capital cost for both the light rail and commuter rail projects in Orange County. This was the federal level of participation in the Charlotte Blue Line light rail project and is consistent with federal funding outcomes for most rail projects in the Federal Transit Administration's New Starts program in recent years. The plan assumes that the Federal Government also pays for 80%of bus capital costs, consistent with its current practices,and continues to provide operating appropriations • consistent with present Federal Transit Administration operating grant formulas. Assumed Federal Government contributions to the plan total $239 million in YOE dollars from 2012 through 2035. f G. Transit Fares The plan assumes fares for all operating agencies remain unchanged from the existing fare structures. H. Additional Revenue Sources This draft Bus and Rail Investment Plan does not rely on additional municipal contributions, public or private 3`d party contributions,or value added forms of revenue. VI. ORANGE FINANCIAL PLAN DATA The following is a list of the total spending for each technology and category identified in the Orange County Bus and Rail Investment Plan. • Rail Capital: $423 million ($330 million in 2011 dollars) • Rail Operations:$58 million • Bus Capital: $41 million (including MLK Bus Lanes) • Bus Operations:$127 million • • Debt:$23 million 5/26/2011-Page 113 i VII.IMPLEMENTATION AGREEMENT:ANNUAL REVIEW AND CHANGES TO THE PLAN The Orange County Bus and Rail Investment Plan details the specific elements of local and regional bus service, and Light Rail service to be added in Orange County over a twenty-three year period. Because of the long time frame for implementation of the Plan and its major capital projects,over time there will need to be changes and revisions made to the Plan. As the statutory implementation agency,Triangle Transit will work with Orange County,the DCHC Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO), and the towns of Chapel Hill, Carrboro, Hillsborough,the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and Chapel Hill Transit,the public transit provider in Orange County,to develop and execute an Implementation agreement which details the following aspects of implementation of the Plan: (a) Annual review presentations of the activities and progress made in implementation of the Plan by Triangle Transit to the County and the MPO; (b)The process for review and vote by the County,the MPO and Triangle Transit's Board of Trustees or the role of the operating agency regarding on any significant or substantial revisions to the Plan required by changes experienced in revenues received, capital costs, operating expenses, or other substantial issues affecting the Plan; (c) Recognizes and preserves the integrity of the operating agencies; • (d) Responsibility of Triangle Transit for direct disbursement of funds from the revenues received per Section V(above)to the public agency responsible for implementing the bus services set forth in the Plan; and (d) Other necessary provisions regarding implementation of this Plan as agreed to by the County,the MPO, and Triangle Transit VIII. CLOSING SUMMARY The Orange County Bus and Rail Investment Plan is the result of years of collaborative work of local elected leaders, regional stakeholders, municipal and county staff and Triangle Transit. The plan consists of a balance of bus improvements and rail investment to help accommodate the intense population growth that the region is expected to experience in the next 25 years. The proposed plan addresses the ongoing need to provide greater service options to transit riders with improved and expanded bus and rail connections. Once implemented,the residents of Orange County will be able to have greater access to jobs, shopping, and activity centers such as downtown Chapel Hill and Carrboro,the University,or the Hospital. Additionally,the plan will provide core infrastructure investment that will help support the goals and objectives of local land use plans in Orange-County and its municipalities. In particular, as evidence in communities across the country, investment in light rail has proven to be a great motivator for private companies to build transit-oriented development at • station locations along the rail corridor. This kind of more intense development generally 5/26/2011-Page 114 i • consists of a mixed-use,walkable environment that can provide a more sustainable alternative to the suburban growth pattern that exists today. All the elements listed in the Draft Orange County Bus and Rail Investment Plan are fiscally constrained. At every turn,the Plan is conservative in revenue assumptions and incoroporated additional contingencies for capital and operating expenditures. The draft plan will be shared with the general public, Carrboro Board of Aldermen, Chapel Hill Town Council,the Hillsborough Town Commissioners,the DCHC MPO and the Orange County Commission. The draft plan will be considered for approval by the DCHC MPO,the Triangle Transit Board of Trustees, and the Orange County Commission. The Orange County Commission will determine when to set a referendum date. Once a referendum passes, work can begin on implementation of the Bus and Rail Investment Plan. • • 5/26/2011-Page 115 • a) O O 0000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 w > 0 a 0000 OOOOOOO 0000 000000 R 7 r7 O M to Co CD 00 o 0 N 0000) e- r- NO 0000 Om n 000 NfMcDOrt COO) l'M �• I�I'O � OtOO 7 � � NN NNNNNMM MM �f d• d' d• tC) Q a) = E Z U 0 o 0000 0000000 00C30 000000 cm 0 0 0000 OOOOOoo 0000 000000 0 0 oo0o 0000000 0000 000000 coo0 o 0000 0000000 0000 000000 M M0) 00d' rtNNNOOtn N000O OfDr- w0to m 1- 0CnLo � c- Md' � M MN � N � CM eq 0 H3 03 A f E9 GA O 0000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0000 O O O O 0000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0000 O O O M MOON N (OWW - oW WO - )O 0 00N 0 Z 0 n viV �D c tnNM — M �t M N 2 to mC`• a as a a a -aaa -aaa ,+ t Z C w e c C r ca m N m m V � r � t t t 3 t t s w ° w w w w w z z z z z w w w w z w w w V C c 0 E °? ,id C U O. C O C Y C 4) V o N E > a N> C L a) 0 a w > 00 w O 0 0 4) E L a c_ >,coo >a0o o- c0 U a > 'a E E V) m a) '020 0 a O O V7 a) 'a 7 c 3 y 3 C C CL Im - 3 c`a0: U) w a � W d w 3 .E O O x V m o U a c to c• C '7 w c -P-1 Z a . �a)E O O N C c c 12 0 aN > V .w. m N a d' Q a) > a 30 rn a) 0 7 3 .� ++ s o > > w 4)i > > > c j U c 3 U v0 c L •�ad Ote+, ` o rn!Q w m E CwU w 0 a � m w>Q. watom w m ma 9' ? Qr m wmv > N > w > ao r ai p pc CL rn� 0 0 > W � E ° C aC c C d O � o G wQLLOJ `�° in � w wQ � CL maa mMm00E 0 Q V'v 3c Q w m Y w N w .F o W w c o� — 0) w 0 O D > Q Q O a) C E 00 x `o QU o m ` O j a) U W Z cn m 0 F a � =x O E o a ° m o o Z m 3o rn m o = o =°w 3 V o` m c c Uo m U s 3(s aCL 4)o o o 8 cZ =�R w w a - E 0 o. N� a) a) M U ' dw = = ° U V=_0 m m 0.rn � M C CL w o CL= sUP u m w y y d w oN 2 = = = = = o a)Q z c � C ° OU oQ C ° OQ 0 Q N Q °) O L . CL ca L Q M ` .Q m SU om w :3 m -0 w ! w w Qw � aw w 0 o = � v = Z Z mm a) = = = = m t _ U0 Bm f ao - UaL0v) U US JWF� - p = ^ Ld Z = m = cc ? c = c =rn �rn •- d w N a) o) w 0 m C m w 3 w C w 3 � C 0 CE c m y m m 0 m � ca F- 0 � � - 0 :3 o E CL F- F- F- - F" - F- - F- -0 0E- m ° x - O . v 0 ^ = w22 ,m 0) w 0) m2 = 2 0) a) 2 = d - 2 V N M a� F a� a) � `-° F� `�° � QO a `-�° ao mom u3i Cw � w wU0 U w C1 D � UJ � a c w w � uo O i c 0 J 0 J 0 0 N G) o 0 m O d J J a � 0 IL W F- a) a) J -i J ' Q • o LL N Q Cl) U 0 2 m zl \ \ � \ \ kk \ k o a aa £ M e edeoa Q m n ¥ oe o � 0000 2 22 -1 (L 2 22��7 w § ¥ u e m < » � � 2 tp n - 2 $ J k � k k k k� O S S S S S @ C) o R o o q e / \ k�� N c « m _ m e c 2 8 g -j " ® w \ / m \ LO W J 7 k E a)M \ d Im cma §2 $> � �5 � � > ± I 00 0) IL a 2MX - - i ' B2 § § 2w / k CL o w / ® C)o \ k \0 - i - 2 = u G ec g7 oa J �5f ƒ 0 2V kG $ 0 g \ ( CLCL S � 2 .0 CL oaema Q & 27 > 3J § § 0 | ® 2 ) o m ® •$ 2 § J f cU p o E � kc � & \ \ © W @ » § (D £ C § 0 %2 / @ � � ER v ° Lo � 4) / ƒ ? m § $ - e R / k \ 4-� � v 12 7 \ \ \ 2 0 ® 8 � CL a \ a k kk § ® a 2 E _ f c S LL � � J J J � � 2 � A 4 4 m a7 = m-Nd D k Z CL � k w z� k • The DRAFT Durham County Bus and Rail Investment Plan • • The Draft Durham County Bus and Rail Investment Plan I. INTRODUCTION 3 II. TRANSIT STEPS LEADING UP TO THIS PLAN 4 III. PLAN ELEMENTS 5 A. NEW BUS SERVICE B. NEW LIGHT RAIL SERVICE C. NEW COMMUTER RAIL SERVICE IV. MAPS 9 A. NEW BUS SERVICE B. NEW LIGHT RAIL SERVICE C. NEW COMMUTER RAIL SERVICE V. DURHAM COUNTY REVENUES 12 A. ONE-HALF CENT SALES TAX • B. $7 DOLLAR VEHICLE REGISTRATION FEE C. $3 TRIANGLE TRANSIT VEHICLE REGISTRATION FEE D. REVENUE FROM TRIANGLE TRANSIT'S RENTAL CAR TAX E. STATE GOVERNMENT FUNDING F. FEDERAL GOVERNMENT FUNDING G. BORROWING VI. DURHAM FINANCIAL PLAN DATA 14 VII. IMPLEMENTATION AGREEMENT 15 VIII. CLOSING SUMMARY 15 IX. BUS SPREADSHEETS 17 • 5/26/2011-Page 2 • The Draft Durham Bus and Rail Investment Plan I. INTRODUCTION The Durham community has achieved an enviable quality of life at the end of the first decade of the 21St century. Recent accolades include its ranking as the best mid-sized city for jobs in the US by Forbes magazine,as the#1 housing market in the US by the Wall Street Journal,as one of the top places in the world to visit in 2011 by the New York Times and the#2 "green city"for lifestyle and quality of life by Country Home magazine. The Triangle region has also enjoyed a diverse,growing economy and attractive quality of life for a number of years,topping many best places to live and best places to work lists. With these successes has come a surging growth in population and demand upon our roads and highways. Since 2004,the Triangle has moved from 46th largest metro area to 40th in the US for 2009, and our vehicle demand on freeways is up by 28%over those five years. Recently, our region was named the 3rd most sprawling urban area in the country among the 83 areas studied. In its 2009 long-range (2035) report,the Durham-Chapel Hill-Carrboro Metropolitan Planning Organization (DCHC MPO) noted that the region's population would more than double over the 25-year period. For the last two decades, the demand on our roads has grown • significantly faster than our population. Even with planned highway improvements and likely additional revenues for new roads, it is clear that Durham and the region will see declining levels of service on major roads in the next 25 years., The economic costs for our increasingly congested roads are significant. In its 2010 Mobility report,the Texas Transportation Institute estimated that our region has"congestion costs" of almost one-half billion dollars a year. A May 10, 2011 study cited in Forbes magazine found that the Triangle region was ranked "America's Biggest Gas Guzzler." Finally, it will be difficult to impossible for many of Durham's low to moderate income families to afford to get to new jobs and take advantage of the region's prosperity unless enhanced transportation options are created. Durham residents and its regional neighbors are aware of the growth in clogged roads, as well as the accompanying air quality problems, negative economic impacts and the loss of the quality of life we enjoy if these transportation challenges are not met. Local citizens and elected leaders have responded to these challenges,with some assistance from state government, as described below. • 5/26/2011-Page 3 • II. TRANSIT PLANNING STEPS LEADING UP TO THIS PLAN In 2008, a blue-ribbon group of Triangle leaders(the Special Transit Advisory Commission,or STAC) began meeting. In May 2009 the STAC unanimously recommended a regional vision for bus and rail investments. One year later,the region's two MPO's fully incorporated the STAC recommendations into their long-range(25 year)transportation plan. In August 2009,Governor Beverly Perdue signed into law the Congestion Relief and Intermodal Transport Fund Act(HB 148), legislation that allows Durham, Orange and Wake counties to generate new revenues for public transportation. These new revenues can include a one-half cent sales tax, if approved by the public through a referendum, and an additional $10 in local and regional vehicle registration fees. Over the last 18 months,Triangle Transit staff have worked with Durham, Durham County, the MPO and other regional transportation staff to develop a detailed, 25-year plan for new bus and rail investments designed to provide greater transportation options for residents and employers. This option would positively impact traffic congestion, air quality while supporting local land use policies. This plan is the culmination of that work and represents crucial public investments and services designed to maintain our quality of life and economic vitality in the next 25 years. Extensive public engagement has occurred over the past year in the development of the bus • and rail elements of this plan. Triangle Transit and local transportation staff members from the city, county and MPO conducted a series of 19 public workshops, at various locations throughout the Triangle, on the process and substance of the plan's development. A total of over 1,100 participants attended the meetings and provided over 500 comments on the plan. The project web site,www.ourtransitfuture.com,was viewed by over 31,000 individuals with 1.4 million page hits. The web site houses all of the presentation materials and proposed plan elements. There have been dozens of meetings with citizens, local elected officials, staff and members of the region's MPO's, community stakeholders and business leaders to have feedback on the proposed bus and rail elements. The financial and service elements of this plan are coordinated with the corresponding Orange County Bus and Rail Investment Plan. Additionally,this bus and rail investment plan builds on existing transit services and does not eliminate current financial and service commitments. • 5/26/2011-Page 14 III. PLAN ELEMENTS A. New Bus Service The major goals of the new and strengthened bus service in Durham County would include: • connect more residents with job opportunities in Durham and the region • connect more residents with post-secondary and vocational educational opportunities • expand bus capacity in corridors with high current bus ridership • provide better regional connections to other cities and the RDU Airport Over the 23 year life-of the plan, a total of 77,000 additional bus hours in Durham County would be added (50,000 in the first three years, 27,000 over the 20 years). Today, DATA provides 177,000 annual bus hours.This 44%increase in bus service will provide service benefits to all areas of the county as detailed below and illustrated in the map in Section IV. Over the first three years following a successful sales tax referendum,the following transit improvements will be made: First 12-18 months following successful Sales Tax referendum • Connecting more residents with jobs o New service from southwest Durham to Duke and VA Medical Centers o More frequent service to jobs at retail centers including Brier Creek, Northgate Mall, Southpoint Mall,The Village, and the vicinity of NC 54 and NC 55 o New services from rural Durham County, Mebane and Hillsborough to Duke and VA Medical Centers o More dial-a-ride trips from rural Durham County to jobs throughout the county • Connecting more residents with post-secondary and vocational educational opportunities • More dial-a-ride trips from rural Durham County to Durham Tech and job training opportunities • More frequent service to North Carolina Central University and Durham Tech • Expanding bus capacity in corridors with high current bus ridership (15 minute frequency during peak hours) o Holloway Street/Liberty Street Corridor o North Roxboro Street • Chapel Hill-Durham Boulevard (US 15-501) • Fayetteville Street • West Chapel Hill Street • Providing better regional connections to other cities and the RDU International Airport • Later Saturday Service between Downtown Durham and Downtown Chapel Hill; between Downtown Durham, RTP, and Raleigh; and, between Chapel Hill, southern Durham, RTP, and Raleigh • Sunday Service between Downtown Durham and Downtown Chapel Hill; between Downtown Durham, RTP, and Raleigh; and, between Chapel Hill, southern • Durham, RTP, and Raleigh o Seven day per week service to RDU Airport 5/26/2011-Page 15 • o More frequent express trips between Durham and Raleigh o More frequent service between Chapel Hill, southern Durham, and RTP Over the remaining 20 years of the transit investment plan, it is estimated that the sales tax will raise enough revenue to fund an additional 32,000 bus hours of service per year that will be phased in over the life of the plan. The resources will be used to continue to meet the plan's four goals as jobs and residences shift. When light rail and commuter rail services begin operation in later years of the plan, bus services will be shifted to avoid service duplication and to connect people with the rail stations. Small Capital Projects An estimated$15 million in small capital projects supporting the Durham County bus network are also included in the Durham County Bus and Rail Investment Plan. The projects should be completed in the first three to five years. They include: • Park-and-Ride lots in northern Durham County and various other locations of the city • Four new neighborhood transit centers • Three transit emphasis corridors(sidewalks,shelters, and transit signal priority) • Pedestrian accessibility and amenities improvements at the 200 most-used bus stops Please see spreadsheet at the end of the document for more specific information. • B. New Light Rail Service The Durham County Bus and Rail Investment plan provides funding for a fixed guideway transit system that serves Durham and Orange Counties using Light Rail technology(LRT). The 17-mile alignment extends from the University of North Carolina (UNC) Hospitals to Alston Avenue in East Durham. A total of 17 stations have been proposed including a station next to the Dean Smith Center,the Friday Center, as well as a potential station at Meadowmont in Chapel Hill. Stations in Durham include Patterson Place along US 15-501, the South Square area,at Duke Medical Center and VA Medical Hospital, Ninth Street and downtown Durham, with convenient access to nearby bus and Amtrak intercity rail connections. Light Rail service characteristics and the type of activity centers and neighborhoods being served along the corridor dictate light rail station spacing of between%mile and 2 miles. Light Rail vehicles are electrically powered and travel at speeds up to 55 mph. The total, end-to-end,travel time for the 17-mile alignment is about 35 minutes including stops. The vehicles are approximately 90 feet long, can operate in both directions, and can be coupled with additional cars as ridership demand increases. Initial 2035 projections indicate that ridership will exceed about 12,000 boardings per day. As with all long range projections,this estimate is subject to change as the model is refined and validated. Light rail vehicles can operate in exclusive right of way, as well as along urban streets, and • characteristically serve accessible low platform (14 inches high)stations. The operations 5/26/2011-Page 16 • plan for the 17-mile alignment includes train frequencies (headways) of every 10 minutes during the morning and evening peak and 20 minutes during the off-peak hours and on weekends. Fifteen vehicles will be required to operate the system based on an 18 hour schedule each weekday. Several potential light rail vehicle maintenance facility locations are being evaluated and are also included in the financial plan. Detailed alignment and station location decisions will occur in the future at the preliminary engineering and final design stages,within 1-4 years after a successful referendum. Durham County's share of capital cost for the Durham and Orange Light Rail Project is approximately$1,050 billion (2011 dollars). The total cost for the project is$1.4 billion ($2011). Durham County's share of operations and maintenance costs are estimated at $11.3 million/year(2011 dollars). Total operations and maintenance cost are estimated at$15 million/year. C. New Commuter Rail Service The Durham County Bus and Rail Investment Plan provides funding for a transit system that serves the Durham and Wake County using Commuter Rail technology(CRT). The 37-mile alignment extends from West Durham to Greenfield Parkway in Garner via Durham,the Research Triangle Park, Morrisville, Cary, Raleigh, and Garner. A total of 12 stations have been proposed, including locations with major bus and Amtrak intercity rail • connections available in downtown Durham, downtown Cary, and downtown Raleigh. Due to the vehicle's performance capabilities, length of the corridor,and the needs of activity centers being served, station spacing is typically between 2 miles and 10 miles for commuter rail systems.. Commuter Rail vehicles are pulled by diesel powered locomotives and travel at speeds up to 79 mph. Total, end-to-end,travel time for the 37-mile alignment is about 51 minutes including stops. The train would include a locomotive and multiple coach cars, sized according to anticipated ridership. Initial 2035 projections indicate ridership will exceed 7,000 boardings per day. This estimate is subject to change as the model is refined and validated. Commuter rail vehicles must remain in the railroad corridor(i.e. no street running). The operations plan for the alignment assumes the use of existing freight tracks where possible. In some instances, a second track will be constructed to enhance the capacity of the corridor to allow for continued increases in demand for both passenger and freight traffic in the corridor. Commuter Rail operation is recognized as an inter-urban service and operates on 20 to 30 minute train frequencies (headways), primarily during the morning and evening peak periods,with the opportunity for some limited off-peak service Given that the service is primarily oriented towards the work-week, peak-period commuting to major employment centers, no initial weekend service is planned. Fifteen vehicles and a rail maintenance facility are also included in the plan. 5/26/2011-Page 17 • Durham County's share of the capital cost for the Commuter Rail Project would be$300 million ($2011).The total capital cost for the Commuter Rail project is approximately$645 million (2011). Durham County's annual operating and maintenance costs are estimated at$2.57 million/year($2011). Total Operations and Maintenance costs are estimated at $11 million/year(2011). IV. Maps Below you will find three maps. The first map (page 9) is a conceptual representation of where frequent local and regional bus service will be put into operation in the first three years following the implementation of this plan. The second map(page 10) shows the Light Rail alignment from Downtown Durham to Chapel Hill. The third map (page 11)shows the Commuter Rail alignment from West Durham to Raleigh and Eastern Wake County. • • 5/26/2011-Page 8 DRAFT Durham County Bus Investment Plan 50,000 hours of bus improvements in the first three year Rougemont 1 ACCESS Dial-A-Ride V ` forresidents outin the county Local Routes Regional Routes ODestinations New park-and-ride or neighborhood transit centers Durham County 0 Mehanal Hillsborough • Durham Regional -".� pits! gate Mall yq The village s New Hope r. commons rolina urham Tech University Patterson Place Brier Creek UNC-Chapel MY carboro uthpoint Regional RDUAirport TranSR Center * —a 32,000 more hours of bus service will be added Year Four through 2035. Raleigh • 5/26/2011-Page 9 DRAFT Durham-Orange Light Rail Plan Legend: Duke Medical Duke Medical LRT Alignment and Center(A) Center(B) Station Location and Station Locatioonn�t 112 Mile Radius Ninth Street Circle or Buchanan Commuter Rod 10-Minute Commuter Rail Station BOUI @Nord Walk Distance LaSalle Street Durham Dillard Street .� Alston South Square (B) Avenue Patterson Place South Square (A) Gateway �-- MLK Jr. Parkway Meadowmont 1061, y Lane(A) UNC _ `'+per (A) Hamilton Road (B) UNC (C) Hamilton Leigh Village Road (A) 0 1i2 1 Mile UNC (D) Woodmont(B) Durham - Orange County .-�- Mason Farm Friday Center Drive (A) LRT Corridor �f- Road Friday Center Drive (B) , �"-_ 5/26/2011-Page 1 10 DRAFT Durham-Wake Commuter Rail Plan Durham legend. Commuter Rail Alignment and Station Location tCommuter Rail Station at LRT Station pi West Durham t 2.112 Miley North RTP ;.t Radius Circle t m riangle Metro NCSU Center McCrimmon Parkway Downtown Raleigh Hammond Road / Rush Street 1 Downtown West Greenfield Cary Raleigh Parkway `Garner Durham - Wake County o , 5 r,,ue5 Commuter Rail Corridor r� 5/26/2011-Page 11 • V. DURHAM COUNTY REVENUES A variety of revenue sources provide the funding for the Durham County Bus and Rail Investment Plan. Those revenues include: • A new one-half-cent sales tax in Durham County(referendum required) • A new$7 vehicle registration fee levied by Durham County • An increase of$3 to the existing$5 vehicle registration fee currently levied by Triangle Transit in Durham County • Revenue from Triangle Transit's rental car tax • NC State Government contributions to funding • Federal Government contributions to funding • Borrowing(to cover years of heavy construction) Further details for each revenue source follow below. A. Initial Proceeds Assumptions for Local Revenue The initial projections for each local revenue stream for Durham County(see prior section • V) in 2012 for transit are as follows: • %-cent sales tax: $17.3 million • $7 vehicle registration fee: $1.58 million • $3 vehicle registration fee increase: $677,000 • Rental Car Tax revenue (Durham): $1.0 million B. Growth Rates Assumed for Each Revenue Source • %-cent sales tax: o Growth Rate from 2011 through 2014: 1.5% o Growth Rate from 2015 through 2035: 3.5% • $7 vehicle registration fee: 2.0% • $3 vehicle registration fee increase: 2.0% • Rental Car Tax revenue: 4.0% C. One-half cent sales tax in Durham County A one-half cent sales tax in Durham County means that when individuals spend$10.00 on certain goods and services, an additional five cents ($0.05) is added to the transaction to support the development of the Bus and Rail Investment Plan. Purchases of food, gasoline, medicine, health care and housing generally are excluded from the tax. • 5/26/2011-Page 112 • A one-half cent sales tax in Durham County is estimated to generate$17.3 million. Over the life of the plan to 2035,the sales tax is expected to generate$625 million in Year-Of- Expenditure(YOE)dollars. Implementation of the Plan as described above is subject to authorization of a referendum by the Durham Board of County Commissioners and approval by the voters. D. $7 Vehicle Registration Fee in Durham County A seven dollar($7)vehicle registration fee in Durham County means that when an individual registers a new vehicle or renews the registration for an existing vehicle in Durham County,an additional$7 per year is added to the cost above the other required registration fees for that vehicle. The seven dollar fee in Durham County is expected to bring in $1.58 million in 2012. Over the life of the plan to 2035,the seven dollar fee is expected to generate$58.1 million in Year-Of-Expenditure (YOE) dollars. E. $3 Vehicle Registration Fee Increase in Durham County A three dollar($3)vehicle registration fee increase in Durham County means that when an individual registers a new vehicle or renews the registration for an existing vehicle in Durham County,an additional $3 per year is added to the cost above the other required • registration fees for that vehicle.An existing$5 fee for vehicle registration supports activities of Triangle Transit, including bus operations and long-term planning.This fee would increase to$8 after the$3 increase is implemented. The three dollar fee in Durham County is projected to generate$677,000 in 2012. Over the life of the plan to 2035,the three dollar fee is expected to generate$24.9 million in Year-Of-Expenditure (YOE) dollars. F. Revenue from Triangle Transit's Rental Car Tax Triangle Transit operations are partially funded by a five percent(5%)tax on car rentals in Wake, Durham, and Orange Counties. Under existing policy adopted by the TTA Board, 50%of these rental revenues are dedicated to advancing long-range bus and rail transit. Since a significant portion of all cars rented and driven in the three counties are rented at RDU International Airport, it is difficult to determine which rentals are driven primarily in one county or another. Therefore,the 50%rental revenues dedicated to long-term transit were allocated by county according to the percentage of population in the Triangle Region,which is:Wake(68%); Durham (21.5%); Orange (10.5%). The Triangle Transit rental car tax proceeds directed to Durham County is estimated at $1.0 million in 2012. Over the life of the plan to 2035,the rental car tax is expected to • generate $36 million in Year-Of-Expenditure(YOE)dollars for Durham County. 5/26/2011-Page 113 • G. NC State Government Funding The plan includes a 25%capital cost contribution by the NC Department of Transportation (NCDOT)for both light rail and commuter rail projects in Durham County. This level of participation was established by the State in its participation in the Charlotte Blue Line light rail project in 2003. The plan assumes that NCDOT also pays for 10%of bus capital costs (replacement buses, new buses, park and ride lots, etc)consistent with its current practices. Based on these precedents, NCDOT assumed contributions to the plan total $465 million in YOE dollars from 2012 through 2035. H. Federal Government Funding The plan projects that the US Government will contribute 50%of the capital cost for both the light rail and commuter rail projects in Durham County. This was the federal level of participation in the Charlotte Blue Line light rail project and is consistent with federal funding outcomes for most rail projects in the Federal Transit Administration's New Starts program in recent years. The plan assumes that the Federal Government also pays for 80%of bus capital costs, consistent with its current practices,and continues to provide operating appropriations consistent with present FTA operating grant formulas. Federal Government contributions • to the plan are projected to be$926 million in YOE dollars from 2012 through 2035. I. Borrowing The plan anticipates that proceeds from borrowing are$155 million over the life of the plan. This borrowing would allow for the large capital expenditures necessary during a small number of the years in the plan. Any borrowing would be from capital markets through government bonds,would require approval by the NC Local Government Commission, and would have to meet debt-to-revenue coverage ratios required by the capital markets for bond issuance. VI. DURHAM FINANCIAL PLAN DATA The following is a list of the total spending for each technology and category identified in the Durham County Bus and Rail Investment Plan. • Rail Capital:$1,669 million • Rail Ops: $283 million • Bus Capital: $47 million • Bus Ops: $151 million • Debt: $136 million • 5/26/2011-Page 114 . VII. IMPLEMENTATION AGREEMENT:ANNUAL REVIEW AND CHANGES TO THE PLAN The Durham County Bus and Rail Investment Plan details the specific elements of local and regional bus service, LRT and commuter rail service to be added in Durham County over a twenty-three year period. Because of the long time frame for implementation of the Plan and its major capital projects,overtime there will need to be changes and revisions made to the Plan. As the statutory implementation agency,Triangle Transit will work with Durham County,the DCHC Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO), and the City of Durham,the public transit provider in Durham County to develop and execute an Implementation agreement which details the following aspects of implementation of the Plan: (a) Annual review presentations of the activities and progress made in implementation of the Plan by Triangle Transit to the County and the MPO; (b) The process for review and vote by the County,the MPO and Triangle Transit's Board of Trustees on any significant or substantial revisions to the Plan required by changes experienced in revenues received, capital costs, operating expenses, or other substantial issues affecting the Plan; (c) Responsibility of Triangle Transit for direct disbursement of funds from the revenues received per Section V (above)to the public agency responsible for implementing the bus services set forth in the Plan; and (d) Other necessary provisions regarding implementation of this Plan as agreed to by the County,the MPO, and Triangle Transit. • VIII. CLOSING SUMMARY The Durham County Bus and Rail Investment Plan is the result of years of collaborative work by local elected leaders, regional stakeholders, municipal and county staff and Triangle Transit. The plan consists of a balance of bus improvements and rail investment to help accommodate the intense population growth that the region is expected to experience in the next 25 years. The proposed plan addresses the ongoing need to provide greater choice to transit riders with improved and expanded bus and rail connections. Once implemented, the residents of Durham County will be able to have greater access to jobs, shopping,and activity centers such as downtown Durham,the Universities,the Research Triangle Park, and the Raleigh-Durham International Airport. Additionally,the plan will provide core infrastructure investment that will help support the goals and objectives of Durham's local land use plans. In particular,as evidence in communities across the country, investment in light rail has proven to be a great motivator for private companies to build transit-oriented development(TOD)at station locations along the rail corridor. This kind of more intense development generally consists of a mixed-use,walkable environment that can allow a more sustainable alternative to the • suburban growth pattern that exists today,without paralyzing the suburban options. 5/26/2011-Page 115 • All of the elements listed in the Draft Durham County Bus and Rail Investment Plan are fiscally constrained. At every turn,the Plan has been conservative in revenue assumptions and through added contingencies for capital and operating expenditures. The draft plan will be shared with the general public, Durham City Council, the DCHC MPO and the Durham County Commission. The draft plan will be considered for approval by the DCHC MPO,the Triangle Transit Board of Trustees, and the Durham County Commission. The Durham County Commission will determine when to set a referendum date. Once a voter referendum passes, work can begin on implementation of the Bus and Rail Investment Plan. • • 5/26/2011-Page 1 16 • m 0000 00000 0 0000000 0 o O oOOOOO 0 W > a O O o O O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 O coo m 7 �q i7 O aoaoo MI�N1�O C7 LAl!)� cliC7M CO N InPNI�1 NO O g NA 3m O MCOO c- VWtllh 00 O00ONNNCNM M V M Co'Jd• � M 7 Z V 0 C)00 000 °0 a a 00 °0 °o °0°o °O 0 00 °o°0 0 00 °o °0 °0 °0 °0 °0 00 °0 0 0 0 c Cl 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C Ct 0 0 0 0 0 0 o O o 0 0 C 0 o w LQ 0O °o °0 c � ° oo0 00000 0 0000000 0 0 0 OOOOO1- o O NCO fO MOMMN N NLOMLo O cow I- M 000fMM MN 00 C NH 01 M N N c- N 60 fA VT to V>69 c- W N Q% N — N W M Q0 U N 69 EH Cf? •Efl to 69 ER fR 69 fA fA EA Vl 69 b9 N W U � � �� _ O o 0 O O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 O O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O 0 0 0 0 Cl Cl O ® WOO LQ .;t LQ LQ N N NwWwNOO W CO MN Lflt0 h M LQ FZ O C'7MM � M .-� < 00M r r ('7 � e- � mac- M 2 mN 'a a aaa a aaaaa a a a aaaaa a � Z c� c°3v cmi vc°ic� c°3PivC� c°� c� cmi � � � v C C C C C C C c C C C C C C C C C C C C C C .c m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m C LLt L 3 L L L t LLLL .c 3L C L 3 3Lt.0 LL L W O c C C C m c C c C c c C C c m C c c m m c C C c C c y W W W W Z W W W W W W W W W Z W W W Z Z W W W W W W +) Y co C a) E 0) 7 m V O..O m cT0 L O O. d C N 7 C Y O 7 N fD = to w m U) � w CL In m a 1 7 C m C'� O d L O N w 0 7 d' 7 C:) L Z r O C >,000 co a 00 m _C d' °yw a m� m m w w • "' -1m, 7 j 7 O U 3 w p d 7 O O O X 0 0 ° O d 7 'a (O a C_ O Lo C_O twn co C W Q E = N TM C ° � dO' °r O 7 ° ` «' Lo y j CwrC= d « N X CL,„ a - t17 m aw+ i+ 0 O O m 7 7 7 7 7 LB p E o y C aj o t Cf Y 1 p O 0 0 0 w O O �Q 7 fn Or m _ Y yX-U � xco :: � co V� U_p W O -_ rm, �m O m U a N U w f0 C N j O = o C l0 a E° y m_ o > N �j .� . o Q a m `r0m ° � 4) = aci cX'- ° oaci U -o mm E Em CL p O O X �. d E C o = —' of ° �� ww aci Ewaci aai � °w pOinoaa)) °_ 0E W o Q L m N U co yw � � ° x .65 Y a> p� m�U > i o ( c C X w r- 12 ° m ° 's ?i m E o co CL U) co CL E In 09 .28>,w~ n ` _ F- ` Qmo ~ L L Q ¢� ° 7 7 E ��aa Y FF Q � �a2m ° o3mcoF- = oN � � ? om o m �� � +~ mmv e0 0 - n E p o ` .. d'�c c L 'rn n `o Y > p ° c _ o - 0n E .o w n � _ _rn o oo Z ++ min m rno m2DW :,,Fm E mCK m3� tm �X c O �° E•� w m C1 d =VU � m � m.== L��U=_ �UC� - 0 2 c ° m5mm amm N a� E Oa o ..�S2 T o2 0 2a ° ULLF- Ct� J Z � om _ mEa EE E E m E ErE ° E mCm UY ,v ° � = t> anE m i amLt L mom ol `Ut •015E 0- C `m 2 3 � a) m m . E o m E . m Z o w E o o .5 Cou)ZU f; ZZF-UUV) 0 � 0000U) 0 OU vmi 2 w 0Z0 �WOL J Q: H .y •N .y .N.y.N.N Ol .N 07 O w f' O m EEE cEEEc c cccc � c cc c E EE c r c m m m � m m m � � '� � @ c m coA m m c m m m m N r 0 M C7 E�?`Q-�3E� UE -UE - 1 o-o�0 Uc�.0 E�` i od�.Uc�t U° -Uc4U c� rn 0 o> >V a m 000 MOOD m E 0:= E ` C 0 ` ' E 0 0 m O 0 0 -C E m m 0 m m m O O 0 0 0 0 fm �' as = Z' W �wi` uF- m 7 An W o � o C 0 .2 .2 .2.2 02 00 0 L O J J J J m N 0 m m n 0 • O W ch o L C. N U ZI 0 V = � } o • 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 00000 0 0 00 0 0 00000 cno 0 'a (D o 0 0 0 00 0 0 00000 C 0 O .. C .9 O O O c 0 0 O c 0 0 0 0 0 U to O of p� O O fQ O N co co W e} 0000 4i � U J d O M O O — N N r M N W Q 3 E/i Eg Eq 6H�Eg� r N N N M d M M M N 0 Z. 0 �+ N C p 0 O O O O a y L L L L L L L L L L L L a) 0 a) a) 0 a) 0 0 a) 0 a) 0 Q_ Q_ Q_ Q_ Q. Q_ Q. n Q. a Q.d 0 0 o O 0 0 00 0 0 00 +' O o 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 00 00 O O O O O O O O O O O M U O O O O O O O O O O O O U) uD O W M M Cl) N N N N — - M M M M tO Ul) to N N N N 61} c 61} EF} Eg UT ER E9 to dT 63, Eg 64 , O 00 0 p p z0 M L Y 0 co L z co 3 ca U O QO =_ M O >. >1 ! 7z U p 1 W 70 O Z - O w j N C C > N � C N .r v CL rL(0 0 O a) p O �X X ¢ j W S ° � U 4) 0 < O N p c d • V�H'' d p _ o O O 0 O 2 Q C 0 N .-a xE � O. Cy a)L— I 3 c :01 -0 U cc o 0 EE c V U V o o 0 rn IM ~ 3 7 y " 0 Y y 0 c0 SQ O pi Y y RI Q O Q- O C a) L 3 C O w ° 1 0 0 m � � o 4) W 0 r_ *EDC =o (° o � o R o o � = 3 c � '^SaOO m cl m L o aS - 0o E E 0 a� O m c _ _ — = o O) p)O O. GY 0 0)Q.j = M > w Q. NN N 7 O 0 fa p 7 N M O J oC U U O O R C. Q. o O 0 c z O a) O = W z 0 0 0 t o 0 C w U) of Q_C) cn nOf U = 1- N = a i m a 0 m (j) a� a J �+ C O a a; y aci °� E aci (Q ' N N N 0 O 0 0 C V 'O Ln O 2 v U 0 0 p L6 L ca tm CL N L a ns a 3 0 a� o a�Cl) 0 7 p Jo E c o o z H v 'c m Q E s ° _ o aa) (D a) aa) E M F 0 �- 0 CL U L L L c c c c Q d EL � O � .�- 0 0 O :d O 0 w 0 0 , C Q. O d O O 2 a Q� U U U U X U c w C O O O O w — W •L a) m 'N 'Vl 'VJ N Q c 0 U U 2 U c c c c y V yr O .. «. a) a) y U) Ln m m m m w L O O O C C 'W ^ M c N .-. H F-' I- V d a - > L - .c N a a a a U N OC Q Q Q. N CL w Q 0 E c E � E 3 s °c c c • d y v a a a a W $ W W E o O o L0 - 0 ` Q. 0 E o a a a a E t ca cca cca cca .N Q 'w ca U s c t - a�0i c Y Y Y Y Y C C ` C _0 CI a7 T a c 3 0 a1 w m m fa @ C C 0 O O O (D o Q C.) = d a d d 0- caHpl- w z z Zd U ■ ■ e ■ � C`• s � N .4 Piz .v CIO PLO 'P tU Poo � � o N h APPROVED 2011 BOCC MEETING CALENDAR JANUAKY I FEBRUARY MARCH • S I M T W T F S S M T W T F S S M T 4WT S � 2 3 4 5 4 5 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 6 7 9 10 12 6 7 1 12 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 13 14 16 17 18 19 13 14 8 19 16 18 19 21 22 20 21 S 22 23 25 26 20 21 5 26 23 24 26 27 28 29 27•D28 27 28 30 31 2-4th NC City/County Manager Con f 17th 5:30 SS Bd Din 7:00 Bud Wk S 8th 5:30 Adv Bd Dinn7:00 Work 5-9th NACo Leg Conf Washington DC :• 22nd Budget Work Session 24 7:00 Chapel *28th 8:00 Legislative Breakfast @ GSC 28th QPH APRIL MAY JUNE S M T I W T F S S ;D23 T F S S M T W T F S 1 2 1 5 6 7 1 3 4 3 4 e 6G 7 8 9 8 12 13 14 5 6 a 8 — 10 11 10 11 13 14 15 16 15 D'19 20 21 12 13 S 14 15 17 18 17 18 20 21 23 22 S 26 27 28 19 20 22 23 24 25 24 25 D 26 27 28 29 30 29 26 27 28 29 30 2nd Closed Session 7:00@ GSC 7th Budget Work Session t Oth 5:30 Clerk's Eval 7,06 Bd`Wk Ses 9th Budget Work Session i 9th Budget Public Hearing 14th Budget Work Session 23rd QPH 16th 1:30 PM-4:30 PM Work Sessi 24th Budget Public Hearing 24-25 NC City/Cty Mgr Summer Conf" 26th Budget Work Session Z JULY AUGUST SEPTEMBER S M T W T F S S M T W T F S S M T W T F 11 2 1 2 3 41 5 6 '2 3 3 M 5 6 7 8 9 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 4= 6 7 ,9 10 • 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 0 12 G 13 1 t 16 17 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 21 022 i 24 25 26 27 18 19 r 21 S 22 23 24 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 28 29 S30 31 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 15-19th NACo Portland Oregon nd QPH 13th Budget Work Session Work Session low +4— f 1 1 1 1 i 22nd Schools OCTOBER NOVEMBER DECEMBER S M T W T F S S M T W T F S S M T W T F S 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 2 3 5 7 8 6 7 Elc 8 9 S10 11 12 4 6 7 8 9 10 9 10 11 12 14 15 13 14 16 18 19 11 12 14 15 16 17 16 17 19 21 22 20 22 23 26 18 19 20 21 22 24 23 24 G'25 26 28 29 27 28 29 30 25 28 29 30 31 30 31 -.10th Budget Work Session bo o 27th AOG 5:30 Adv Bd Din e 2$t�t%Budget drk�Se'sslorr` `t" Dates to work around Election Dates fall on 1st Tues after 1st Mon in May&Nov 18 D Dept of Soc Services Chapel Hill Town Council Meets 2nd&4th Mon 1 Regular BOCC Meefings Southern Human Services Cent Hillsborough Town Board Meets 2nd&4th Mon 10 G Link Governement Ser Cent Carrboro Board of Aldermen Meets Every ALI 3 Dinner Meetings Tuesday except the 5th CHCSCS Board Meets 1st&3rd Thursday 2 Budget Public Heanngs - Orange County School Bd meets 1st&3rd Mon 4 Quarterly Public Hearings WMeeting days 1st Wed Planning Board o meetings same day 4th Wed TJCOG 2 School Boards al Meetings 3 Closed Sessions, • 1 Legislative Breakfast 1 Retreat 58 Total Meetings Last printed 5124/201110:55 AM • 18-MONTHS BLANK CALENDAR FOR NOTES • • June 2011 Sunday Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday 29 May 2011 30 31 1 Jun 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 1 Jul 2 • PDF Calendar by www.pdfcalendar.com July 2011 Sunday Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday • 26 Jun 2011 27 28 29 30 1 Jul 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 • 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 1 Aug 2 3 4 5 6 • PDF Calendar by mov.pdfcalendaccom August 2011 Sunday Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday 31 Jul 2011 1 Aug 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 1 Sep 2 3 PDF Calendar by www.pdfcalendar.com September 2011 Sunday Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday • 28 Aug 2011 29 30 31 1 Sep 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 • 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 1 Oct • PDF Calendar by www.pdfcalendar.com October 2011 Sunday Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday •25 Sep 2011 26 27 28 29 30 1 Oct 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 1 Nov 2 3 4 5 PDF Calendar by www.pdfcalendar.com November 2011 Sunday Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday • 30 Oct 2011 31 1 Nov 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 1 Dec 2 3 • PDF Calendar by www.pdfcalendar.com December 2011 Sunday Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday • 1.27 Nov 2011 28 29 30 1 Dec 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24. 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 PDF Calendar by www.pdfcalendar.com January 2012 Sunday Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday • 1 Jan 2012 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 • 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 1 Feb 2 3 4 • PDF Calendar by www,pdfoalendar.com February 2012 Sunday Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday • 29 Jan 2012 30 31 1 Feb 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 • 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 1 Mar 2 3 • PDF Calendar by www.pdfcalendar.com March 2012 Sunday Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday • 26 Feb 2012 27 28 29 1 Mar 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 • 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 • PDF Calendar by www.pdfcalendar.com April 2012 Sunday Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday 1 Apr 2012 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 . 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 • 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 1 May 2 3 4 5 PDF Calendar by www.pdfcalendar.com May 2012 Sunday Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday • 29 Apr 2012 30 1 May 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 • 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 1 Jun 2 • PDF Calendar by www.pdfcalendar.com June 2012 Sunday Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday • 27 May 2012 28 29 30 31 1 Sun 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 • 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 PDF Calendar by www.pdfralendar.com July 2012 Sunday Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday • 1 Jul 2012 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 • 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 1 Aug 2 3 4 • PDF Calendar by www.pdfcalendar.com August 2012 Sunday Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday • 29 Jul 2012 30 31 1 Aug 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 • 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 1 Sep PDF Calendar by www.pdfcalendar.com September 2012 Sunday Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday • 26 Aug 2012 27 28 29 30 31 1 Sep 2 3 4 5 6 7 a 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 • 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 1 Oct 2 3 4 5 6 • POF Calendar by www.pdfcalendar.com October 2012 Sunday Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday • 30 Sep 2012 1 Oct 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 • 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 1 Nov 2 3 • PDF Calendar by www.pdfcalandar.com November 2012 Sunday Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday • 28 Oct 2012 29 30 31 1 Nov 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 • 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 1 Dec • PDF Calendar by www.pdfcalendar.com ORANGE COUNTY TRANSIT PLAN (OCTP) QUESTIONS TO BE RESEARCHED AND ANSWERED SUMMER 2011 1. Background rationale for the eastern route from UNC towards Hwy 54 and then NNE along 1-40 to 15-501 instead of a more direct UNC to 15-501 route. In combination has a BRT line been examined in the Hwy 54 corridor or similar alternative analysis scenarios. 2. Please provide the various financial scenarios with reference to 2011 tax dollars or 2035 dollars or some other clearly explained footnote so the financial plan can be monitored accordingly. 3. Ensure how no financial liability would befall the county beyond stated revenue sources including debt capacity. 4. Develop what the potential of a no rail,scenario (i.e. bus and BRT) if funding is lost from federal and state sources or other decision. • 5. Would BRT be viable and economical options for the high volume corridors of Hwy 54, 15-501 and MLK to be part of a regional public transit network? 6. Would commuter rail extended from Durham to Hillsborough be an effective means to connect central Orange County to the Triangle (including airport) since the proposed program to accomplish would be to drive to Gateway park and ride, light rail to transfer Durham commuter line, commuter to TTA regional hub to transfer to airport shuttle? 7. Statutes refer to an interlocal agreement (ILA) between the Triangle Transit Authority (TTA) and counties (or county) to evaluate and amend the financial plan from time to time. The elements of a potential ILA are noted in attachment . As the attorney's opinion noted, after the BOCC vote to add the 'h cent sales tax to a referendum, absent a prior ILA, there is no formal binding ability to amend the initial financial plan to accommodate changing conditions of revenue, expenditures, timing, or new conditions whether interrelated to roads, new development or technology. Therein, the financial plan should be part of an implementing ILA and precede the • vote for transit referendum. • Draft Elements of an Interlocal Agreement Implementing County Authorized Sales Tax Revenues 1. Potential Agreement Parties Possible Options: a. Orange County-Triangle Transit Authority (Durham County-Triangle Transit Authority) b. Orange County-Durham County-Triangle Transit Authority c. Orange County-Triangle Transit Authority-Bus Service Providers (i.e. Chapel Hill Transit, Orange Public Transportation, or other) d. 1. Orange County-Triangle Transit Authority 2. Orange County-County Bus Service Providers and Financial Stakeholders 2. Governance a. The process for review and vote by the County, the MPO and Triangle Transit's Board of Trustees on any significant or substantial revisions to the Plan required by changes experienced in revenues received, capital costs, operating expenses, or other substantial issues affecting the Plan. • b. Technical advisory group 3. Financial Plan a. Triangle Transit funds disbursement to service providers b. Modification to revenue stream c. Plan implementation modification d. References to fare free service e. Annual plan review and reporting guidelines 4. Bus Service a. Route classifications b. Route performance standards 5. General Provisions a. Integrity of the goals of the original 'equitable use' of funds relating to service distribution. b. General guidelines for thresholds for level of service to ensure continued 'balance'. • The following resolution was introduced by Alderman Gist and duly seconded by Alderman Haven-O'Donnell: A RESOLUTION PROVIDING RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMIVIISSIONERS AND THE DURHAM-CHAPEL HILL-CARRBORO TRANSPORTATION ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON THE PROPOSED ORANGE COUNTY TRANSIT PLAN AND SUPPORTING A NOVEMBER 2011 REFERENDUM TO INCREASE THE COUNTY SALES TAX TO IMPLEMENT THE PLAN Resolution No. 129/2010-11 • WHEREAS,the Durham-Chapel Hill-Carrboro Metropolitan Planning Organization and Triangle Transit have proposed to construct light rail between Chapel Hill and Durham;and WHEREAS,House Bill 148,approved in 2009,provides for funding from an increase in the county sales tax and vehicle registration fee to fund the construction of the light rail system;and WHEREAS,House Bill 148 requires the development and adoption of a county transit plan to guide the use of additional sales tax and vehicle registration fees to construct and operate the light rail system and provide for bus services within Orange County;and WHEREAS,the Town has worked in conjunction with Orange County,Chapel Hill, Hillsborough,the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill,and Durham County to develop an Orange County Transit Plan which provides funding for bus services within Orange County and provides for the construction and operation of a light rail system between Chapel Hill and Durham;and WHEREAS,House Bill 148 requires the approval of the Orange County Transit Plan by the Orange County Board of Commissioners and the Durham-Chapel Hill-Carrboro Transportation Advisory Committee; and WHEREAS,implementation of the'h cent sales tax increase requires approval through a county- wide referendum;and • WHEREAS,the Town has reviewed the proposed Orange County Transit Plan and believes adoption of the Plan will provide important resources to maintain and expand public transit services within Orange County; NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED by the Carrboro Board of Aldermen that the Board of Aldermen endorses the proposed Orange County Transit Plan with the following recommendations: • An inter-local agreement be developed and approved between Orange County,Carrboro, Chapel Hill,Hillsborough and the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. • The Durham-Chapel Hill-Carrboro Metropolitan Planning Organization should include a provision requiring_an annual report from Triangle Transit on the status of the Plan.This assessment should include an update on the status of all elements of the Plan. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Board of Aldermen recommends that the Orange County Commissioners place a referendum to increase the Orange County sales tax by %2 cent to fund the Orange County Transit Plan on the November 2011 ballot. The foregoing resolution having been submitted to a vote received the following vote-and was duly adopted this 24th day of May 2011; Ayes: Dan Coleman,Sammy Slade,Mark Chilton,Joal Hall Broun,Jacquelyn Gist,Randee Haven-O'Donnell Noes: None Absent or Excused: Lydia Lavelle I,Catherine C. Wilson, Town Clerk for the Town of Carrboro do hereby certify that the foregoing is a true and accurate copy of a resolution duly adopted by the Board of Aldermen of the Town of Carrboro,NC. own Clerk 1911 • A RESOLUTION PROVIDING RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS AND THE DURHAM-CHAPEL HILL-CARRBORO TRANSPORTATION ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON THE PROPOSED ORANGE COUNTY TRANSIT PLAN(2011-05-25/R-lb) WHEREAS,the Durham-Chapel Hill-Carrboro Metropolitan Planning Organization and Triangle Transit have proposed to construct light rail between Chapel Hill and Durham; and WHEREAS,N.C. House Bill 148, approved in 2009,provides for funding from an increase in the county sales tax and vehicle registration fee to fund the construction of the light rail system; and WHEREAS, House Bill 148 requires the development and adoption of a county transit plan to guide the use of additional sales tax and vehicle registration fees to construct and operate the light rail system and provide for bus services within Orange County; and WHEREAS,the Town has worked in conjunction with Orange County, Carrboro,Hillsborough, the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and Durham County to develop an Orange County.Transit Plan which provides for the construction and operation of a light rail system between Chapel Hill and Durham and provides funding for bus services within Orange County; and WHEREAS, House Bill 148 requires the approval of the Orange County Transit Plan by the Orange County Board of Commissioners and the Durham-Chapel Hill-Carrboro Transportation Advisory Committee; and WHEREAS, implementation of the %cent sales tax increase requires approval through a county- wide referendum. NOW, THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Town Council endorses the proposed Orange County Transit Plan with the following recommendations: • An inter-local agreement be developed and approved between Orange County, Chapel Hill, Carrboro,Hillsborough and the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. The Durham-Chapel Hill-Carrboro Metropolitan Planning Organization should include a provision requiring an annual report from Triangle Transit on the status of the Plan. This assessment should include an update on the status of all elements of the Plan. This the 25th day of May, 2011. • r� FHF UNIVERSITY \� '11 CHAPEL HILL CkncDl�rNTHORP 103 SOUTH BUILDING T 919.962.1369 CAMPUS BOX 9100 F 919.962.i6 47 CHAPEL HILL.NC 27599-9100 June 7,2011 Bernadette Pelissier,Chair Orange County Commissioners 200 South Cameron Street Post Office Box 8181 Hillsborough,NC 27278 Dear Chair Pelissier: We are writing to express The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and the UNC Health Care System's support for light rail service in the Research Triangle area, in particular the Orange County Transit Plan,which provides for the construction and operation of a light rail system between Chapel Hill and Durham and an increase in local bus service. The University has long been committed to transportation demand management, including use of mass transit. We have been a partner in the Chapel Hill Transit System since its inception,and we initiated the discussions for what has become a highly successful fare-free service,which is critical to our ability to operate the University. In addition, we have developed a robust network of park-and-ride facilities,on our own and in partnership with Chapel Hill Transit,and implemented incentive programs such as ZipCar rental and emergency rides to encourage mass transit use. We included a corridor for light rail and a terminal station in our campus master plan in 1999 and, in response to requests from Triangle Transit during the current planning process,have agreed to Alternative D,as shown in the Orange County Transit Plan, as a through stop location. We appreciate the University and UNC Health Care having a seat at the table with the Orange County governing bodies during the development of the Orange County Transit Plan and look forward to its ultimate implementation. Sincerely, Holden Thorp I Liam L�Roper MD.MPH cc: Mayor Mark Kleinschmidt,Chapel Hill • Mayor Mark Chilton,Carrboro Mayor Tom Stevens,Hillsborough CHAPEL HILL TRANSIT Town of Chapel Hill • 6900 Millhouse Road Ch I Nell Chapel Hill,NC 27514-2401 rt firfosit phone(919)969-4900 fax(919)968-2840 www.townofchapdhiU.org/transit June 7, 2011 Mr. Mark Ahrendsen DCHC-MPO 101 City Hall Plaza, 4th Floor Durham, NC 27701 Dear Mark, I have been asked to communicate on behalf of the Public Transit Committee of Chapel Hill Transit regarding the Draft Orange County Bus and Rail Investment Plan.The Public Transit Committee consists of elected officials and policy representatives from Chapel Hill, Carrboro and the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill who are partners in Chapel Hill Transit. The Partners were presented with a copy of the Draft Orange County Bus and Rail Investment Plan at their regularly scheduled meeting on June 7, 2011 and asked for comment. It was • explained that the document was to be made available for public information on Wednesday June 8,as part of the DCHC public information process related to the MPO consideration of the Durham and Orange County financial plans being developed by Triangle Transit Authority. The Committee voted unanimously to share the following comments: 1. The title of the document should be changed to read, 'Bus and Rail Investment Plan in Orange County" 2. The following statement should be included on the cover of the plan in bold type: "The"concept of the Bus and Rail Investment Plan for Orange County was supported through resolutions approved by the Chapel Hill Town Council (Resolution#2011- 05-25/R1),the Carrboro Board of Aldermen (Resolution#129/2010-11) and via letter from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. The DRAFT document provided for public input by the DCHC has not been reviewed by the Town of Chapel Hill,the Town of Carrboro,or The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill either individually or together as the Chapel Hill Transit Public Transit Committee. DCHC and Triangle Transit do not make representation that these bodies support this detailed document." • The Public Transit Committee and the entities we represent look forward to the opportunity to review and comment on and jointly develop this document in a manner that allows sufficient time to give this important plan the appropriate attention. Sincerely, K.Stephen Spade Transit Director •