HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda - 04-19-2005-9bORANGE COUNTY
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT
Meeting Date: April 19, 2005
Action Agenda
Item No. q-~j
SUBJECT: Resolution on Participation in the Proposed Regional Transportation
Development Plan (RTDP)
DEPARTMENT: County Manager
PUBLIC HEARING: (Y/N) No
ATTACHMENT(S):
A. Resolution
B. Draft RTDP
C, Summary of Triangle CTIPs
D, Minutes
INFORMATION CONTACT:
Moses Garey, Chair, BOCC
John Link, County Manager, ext. 2300
Gwen Harvey, Assistant County
Manager, ext. 2307
Karen Lincoln, Transportation Planner,
ext. 2594
AI Terry, Orange Public Transportation,
ext. 2002
TELEPHONE NUMBERS:
Hillsborough 732-8181
Chapel Hill 968-4501
Durham 688-7331
Mebane 336-227-2031
PURPOSE: To consider participation in a study, filly funded by the North Carolina Department
of Transportation (NCDOT), tc prepare a Regional Community Transportation Development
Plan (RTDP) that will examine opportunities to better coordinate and possibly consolidate
community transportation programs such as Orange Public Transportation (OPT) across the
three counties -Durham, Orange, and Wake,
BACKGROUND: The Triangle County Board Chairs met on March 22, 2005 and received a
presentation from Miriam Perry, Director, Public Transportation Division of NCDOT, and
Sanford Cross, Triangle .l staff support to the Rural Planning Organization (RPO), on
community transportation systems in the Triangle counties and a proposed "transportation
services study". NCDOT is interested in regionalization of community transportation systems
like Orange Public Transportation (OPT) -the countywide, traditionally human service agency-
ariented systems that are separate from the urban systems such as Durham Area Transit
Authority (DATA) in Durham or Capital Area Transit (CAT) in Raleigh. According to NCDOT,
with separate systems, unused funds from any community system revert to the State, but a
regional system could result in savings that stay within a region. The proposed study would
build on the previous Community Transportation Improvement Plan (CTIP) for each county.
(Note: The Orange County CTIP conducted by Wilbur Smith and Associates found OPT be one
of the mare efficient community transportation systems in the state, CTIP findings have also
helped advance collaboration with Triangle Transit Authority (TTA) in the development of a
proposed new Hillsborough-Chapel Hill route to be operated by OPT).
The timeframe for the Regicnal Transportation Development Plan is estimated to be from 10-12
months beyond the first organizational meeting with the consultant, with emphasis upon having
actionable findings available to the three counties in sufficient time for decisions that might
impact FY06-07 budgets,
County Board Chairs endorsed the study, but all agreed that any recommendations
would have to face the scrutiny of each Board of Commissioners, community, and
respective transportation system stakeholders before any outcomes were initiated.
Attached is a resolution agreeing to participate along with Durham and Wake Counties in the
proposed CTDP. Also attached are copies of the "Draft Regional Transportation Development
Plan -General Scope of Work", a summary of the Triangle County's CTIPs, and the minutes to
the Triangle Chair's discussion of this item.
FINANCIAL IMPACT: The cost of the study is to be fiilly funded by NCDOT,
RECOMMENDATION(S): The Manager recommends that the Board adapt the resolution
agreeing to participate in the proposed Regional Transportation Development Plan,
ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
RESOLUTION ON
TRIANGLE REGION COMMUNITY TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT PLAN
WHEREAS, Cammunity transportation systems are expected to provide safe,
efficient and effective transportation services, with as little
duplication as possible; and
WHEREAS, The North Carolina Department of Transportation is committed to
working with the counties of Durham, Orange and Wake to
improve the efficiency and effectiveness of their community
transportation systems and to help provide increased mobility
options for access to employment, education, medical and
general transportation; and
WHEREAS, The North Carolina Department of Transportation will pay for the
cast of a consultant to complete a Triangle Region Community
Transportation Development Plan; and
WHEREAS, The purpose of the Triangle Regicn Cammunity Transportation
Development Plan is to identify opportunities for regionalizing
services among the community transportaticn systems in
Durham, Orange and Wake Counties and with urban and
regicnal paratransit systems in the Triangle; and
WHEREAS, Orange County will provide the staff resources and support as
needed to participate in the development of the Triangle Region
Cammunity Transportation Development Plan; and
WHEREAS, Orange County will consider recommendations in the Triangle
Region Community Transportation Development Plan when
making fixture decisions concerning its community transportation
system; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Orange County Board of
Commissioners the Orange County wishes to participate in the
development of the Triangle Region Community Transportation
Development Plan with the counties of Durham and Wake.
Adopted this the 19th day of April 2Q05,
Moses Carey, .)r. Chair
Orange Ccunty, Board of Commissioners
Donna Baker
Clerk to the Board
D~,a~r
REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION
DEVELOPMENT PLAN (RTDP)
General Scope of Work
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION
PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION DIVISION
COMMUNITY TRANSPORTATION SECTION
NOVEMBER 2004
L.~
Introduction
Along with community transportation systems' maturation and NCDOT Public Transportation
Division (PTD) policy changes over the years, state planning guidelines must adapt to reflect
these changes. The PTD, based upon the research conducted by the Institute for Transportation
Reseazch and Education, Public Transportation Group, at North Carolina State University which
culminated in a final report, Reeionalizin~ Public Transportation Services, dated October 25,
2002, has determined that in most instances, regionalizing single-county, community
transportation systems can improve the efficiency and effectiveness of nrral public transportation
systems. Regional travel has been increasing over the past couple of decades as a result of
increased trip demand to regional medical facilities and employment transportation.
From the late seventies to the eazly nineties, PTD utilized the Transportation Development Plan
(TDP) process at the coursty level. With increased regional travel trends, the state must now look
at improved coordination, and where feasible, consolidation of community transportation
systems at the regional level. To investigate the potential for such improved coordination, PTD
has developed a new Regional Transportation Development Plan (RTDP) scope ofwork. The
new RTDP incorporates and merges critical elements of all of the past planning processes:
Transportation Development Plan (TDP), Community Transportation Services Plan (CTSP) and
the Community Transportation Improvement Plan (CTIl'), into the new RTDP scope ofwork.
For example, for a three county study area, each of the community transportation systems will
have a CTIP completed and a regional feasibility study will be prepared for the entire three
county azea. Cusent regional systems will continue to utilize the Community Transportation
Improvement Plan (CTIP) studies and recommendations. In some azeas, contiguous counties
maybe studied for inclusion with the existing regional system.
North Carolina has proven to many states azound the country that human service agencies could
rise above the turf issues to develop community transportation systems that shazed human and
capital resources to improve the overall safety, efficiency and effectiveness of service delivery
while eliminating duplication of effort. North Cazolina is recognized as a national leader in
meeting the coordination challenge. Nevertheless, many of the same issues of responsibility and
authority among agencies thaYa+ere encountered and resolved in the former TDP process with
human service agencies consolidating transportation maybe of concern with this new approach
at the community transportation system level. Some of these issues, such as standazdization of
adrninistrative and operational policies and procedures, system rates, reporting, maintenance and
organizational structwe, will also have to be addressed in the new regional approach,
The following planning process will research the existing approaches taken by all individual
transit systems in specific regions, document the results of this approach and identify
opportunities where coordination and/or consolidation of system service delivery into regional
networks can improve the mobility of the citizens of this state. The goal of this planning
approach is to have all authorized officials representing community transit systems within a
specified geographic region sign a Regional Memorandum of Understanding (RMOU) that
5
egional Transportation Development Plan (RTDP)
SCOPE OF WORK OUTLINE
The following work plan identifies minimum project requirements and consultant
responsibilities. Consultants are encouraged to view these tasks as minimum project
guidelines and to develop each task and product in an innovative manner.
First Meeting: The consultant will meet with the Regional Transportation Development
Plan Steering Committee to present their approach to the planning study and solicit input
from committee on concerns and issues that will need to be addressed. NCDOT/PTD and
RPOs will assist local systems in forming this committee.
TASKS:
I. Analyze Each System's Current Approach Including Services, Functions and
Positions: Summarize service area as defined in system information brochure or bus
schedule, customer service and mazketing, advertising, human resource management,
financial management, cost allocation, source and amount of transit funds, service levels,
location/condition/value/remaining useful life of equipment and facilities, existing
service contracts, and operations findings resulting from the review of the current CTIl'
and other system documents/information. Results must also include a surnrnary report
detailing interview results with key stakeholders: county managers, county
commissioners, community transportation directors, Chamber of Commerce
representatives and transit users, transportation advisory/governing board chairs, etc. The
PTD will provide available reports and information to the consultant far each system
included in the study.
II. Investigation of Opportunities for Regional Service Coordination/Consolidation,
including but not limited to:
A. Service centers such as regional medical centers, shopping centers, social service
centers
B. Levels of mobility options for families that have no personal vehicles or too few
vehicles for family member needs
C.. Non-emergency medical transportation
D. Employment pattems
E. Housing patterns
F. Existing demand response transportation
C. Rail/aviation/intercity bus, and where applicable ferry connections
H. Urban transit connections/coordination
I. Available private transportation services, such as taxis
J Examination of travel patterns based on census data
Third Meetine: Consultant will present information included in Tech Memo #2 and
facilitate discussion to finalize level of participation among local providers.
IV. Determination of Regional Participation: Letters of Intent to actively participate in
regional system will be solicited. Transition and Implementation Plan (Phase II
based on number of systems that intend to participate in regional system).
A. Development of capital and facilities plan to accommodate system administration and
operations..
B. Identification of staff needs and development of job descriptions for regional staff
(ex: Regional Transit Director, Finance Officer, Human Resource Manager,
Operations Manager, etc.)..
C. Develop employee wages and benefit plan.
D, Development and adoption of new Regional Transportation Advisory Board by-laws.
E. Development of'mission, goals and objectives of regional system.
F. Standazdizing regional fully allocated billing rate and faze policy.
G. Development of a public education campaign to ensure a smooth transition from
several existing systems to a single entity. The consultant will provide options on
regional system name based on input from the steering committee
H. Identification of technology needs,
I. Finalize system service design, addressing regional route structure and schedule and
types of'service system will provide.
J. Determine professional service contracts needed by system.
V. Determine Projected Expenses and Revenues for Regional System Based on
Standardized Regional Fully Allocated Rate.
VI. Five-year Capital, Administrative and Operating Budgets (including local match
requirements completed for' systems participating in regional system and separate five-
year projections for non-participating systems).
VII. Timeline for Implementation of Regional System.
A meeting will be held at this point with elected officials, transportation system directors
and advisory board representatives to discuss the final draft recommendations and obtain
input.
Community forums within the participating counties will beheld to explain changes in how
transportation services will be delivered and to receive input from the community.
PRINCIPLES FOR ESTABLISHING ADEQUATE AND RELIABLE FUNDING OF
TRANSPORTATION IN THE TRIANGLE AND THROUGHOUT THE STATE
FRAMEWORK
The North Carolina State Transportation Plan, adopted by the NCDOT in September 2004,
identifies $84 billion in statewide needs over 25 years, with $55 billion in anticipated revenues,
leaving a funding gap approaching $.30 billion dollars. The plan's centerpiece is a $55 billion
Recommended Investment Scenario that would focus on maintaining and modernizing the
existing system, with more limited new construction targeted to roads and transit networks with
the highest use and serving statewide mobility. At the same time, the equity formula may result
in a 2006-2012 Iransportation Improvement Program that shifts about $300 million in funding
that was expected in the region to other azeas.
The Triangle Regional Transportation Sb°ategy -sponsored by the Mayors of Cary, Chapel Hill,
Durham and Raleigh, and by the private-sector Regional Transportation Alliance -identified
general, order-of-magnitude transportation needs in Wake, Durham and Orange Counties. First
developed in 2000, the most recent estimate is that the region faces a funding gap of about $8
billion over the next 25 vears for a ranee of roadway and transit projects; if spread evenly over
the 25 years, this gap would average $320 million per yeaz. The strategy did not specify
projects, priorities, or the timing of projects, nor address needs in other Triangle counties.
The Capital Area MPO (CAMPO) and the Durham-Chapel Hill-Cazrboro (DCHC) MPO adopted
20.30 Long Range Transportation Plans in September 2004. The total 25-year cost for the
combined plans is $14.0 billion ($6.1 billion for DCHC and $7.9 billion for CAMPO). Together,
the two plans assume $2 billion in new revenue over and above existing sources, a regionwide
average approaching $100 million year if beginning around 2010 and extending at the same level
to 2030.
The Regional Transportation Alliance (R.TA), the mayors of the four largest cities, and the
Regional Transportation Strategy Group (composed of representatives of the RTA, the mayors,
county commissioners and other interested professionals) have discussed various alternative
revemies for the past few years. The evolving discussion has centered on a local option revenue
source that would be applied at the county level, requiring a leadership role on the part of County
Commissioners who would ultimately be responsible for instituting any revenue sources..
Although several different combinations of revenue sources have been discussed, most of the
focus has centered on a general sales tax, a sales tax specific to motor fuel, a vehicle registration
fee, transportation impact fees and/or toll roads..
Status of Community Transportation Improvement Plans
Durham; Orange and Wake Counties
Overview
A Community Transportation Service Plan (CTIP) is a prerequisite for funding under the
federal and state public transportation grant programs administered by the North Cazolina
Department of Transportation, Public Transportation Division (NCDOT, PTD), The plan
is to be updated every five years. The CTIP is intended to serve the following purposes.
• To evaluate community transit systems current approaches to all facets of
management and operations;
• To evaluate the results of the current organizational direction;
• To identify organizational strengths and to tazget opportunities for improvement on
processes and results that affect all key stakeholders -including customers,
employees, granting agencies and the public; and
• Tc assist the NCDOT, PTD in aligning and maximizing available resaru'ces
(employee development/training, administrative, operating and capital funding) to
facilitate each system's continuous improvement process.
The overall goal of the CTIP is to ensure that all community transportation systems in
North Carolina are continuously improving in all aspects of organizational and
operational effectiveness in order to reach and maintain a level of service excellence.
Durham County CTIP
Durham County Access (DCA) provides human service and general public transportation
services in Durham County, DCA utilizes a fleet of 16 vehicles to provide transportation
to 4 human service agencies. The system provided 51,530 trips in FY04.. DCA is part of
the Durham County government structure. Operation of transportation services is
contracted out to a private transportation provider, Laidlaw Transit Services, with DCA
providing oversight of the program. The contractor also provides ADA pazatransit
services in the City of Durham in conjunction with the Durham Area Transit Authority
(DATA) fixed route service. The Durham County CTIP was updated ur 2002 by Urbitran
Associates, Inc, The plan provided the following recommendations for improvement.
Investigate development of a centralized agency contrrol whereby DCA would control
the budgets and service planning for the human service agencies contracting with
DCA for service versus the billing and accountability issues being addressed between
the individual agencies and Laidlaw. Agencies would be billed through DCA rather
than directly from Laidlaw, and payment to the operator would be in one consolidated
payment.
The Transportation Advisory Boazd (TAB) should address the mission of DCA and
formalize this with measurable benchn:arlcs for performance.
DCA and the TAB should develop a format for an annual report to be provided to
Durham County.
3/18/2005
• Develop a service structure to accommodate rural general public service. 9
Develop passersger° and agency surveys to be administered twice each year to address
system performance.
• Prepare a rider°,s guide with specific rules and regulations for riders.
• Increase outreach and marketing efforts to provide greater understanding of the
transit system and how it can benefit the rider.
• Update job descriptions for Director and Administrative positions at DCA to reflect
job expectations and provide guidance for improvement,
Orange County CTIP
The Orange County Public Transportation Service (OPT) provides transportation services
to agency clients and general public passengers residing in the rural areas of Orange
County. OPT utilizes a fleet of 23 vehicles to provide transportation for 6 agencies. The
system provided 113,198 passenger trips in FY04. Chapel Hill Transit (CHT) serves the
urbanized areas of Chapel Hill and Carrboro. The OPT system is a division of the
Orange County Department on Aging (DOA), A Transportation Services Boazd (TSB)
provides input to the OPT's Supervisor. The TSB reflects a recent reorganization of the
old Transportation Advisory Board (TAB). The plan provided the following
recommendations for improvement.
• OPT participates in the regional transit pass program with CAT, DATA, and TTA
and should continue its participation, but monitor usage on an annual basis.
• OPT is listed on the gotriangle.org website, but is not included in the trip planning
software, The supervisor should coordinate with TTA officials to add the Orange
Express into the trip planning softwaze.
• The TSB has a newly adopted set of by-laws that should be monitored for its
effectiveness.
• Develop a formal mazketing plan that documents outreach efforts and recommended
cycle for publicity efforts and customer surveys.
• Conduct an annual survey of service quality, unmet needs, etc. for contracting human
service agencies, human service riders, and general public riders.
• OPT and TTA aze negotiating the potential for TTA to assume financial responsibility
for the existing Orange Express route. These negotiations should continue and OPT
should periodically evaluate the potential ways to meet TTA's farebox recovery
requirements. This evaluation should consider both TTA and OPT operation of the
route,
• TTA recently discontinued service to Duke, but interest in the community remains
high. The OPT Supervisor has identified a conceptual replacement route. Assuming
TTA funding is secured for the Orange Express, the OPT Supervisor should finalize
plans for the east/west route, including the connections to DATA routes.
• Service hours aze inadequate for second-shift workers and evening activities. OPT
should investigate the potential ridership levels and hours of need. Service could
potentially be offered by using a taxi service or other vendor.
3/18/2005
• Demand-response transportation is not coordinated between Orange County and ~(/
Chapel Hill; riders that cross the boundary can fall through the cracks. OPT should
provide the E-Z Rider service for Chapel Hill Transit, and bill CHT for the portion of
the trip within Chapel Hi1UCarrboro.
• Fixed-route frequency is inadequate, Hourly frequency should be provided during
peak times; and timed to connect with CHT service,
• Time for shopping is inadequate, OPT should lengthen the dwell time on the
shopping trips.
• OPT does not use the CCTransit website, A website for use by community
transportation systems, hospitals/clinics, human service agencies and the general
public to coordinate and facilitate out-of-county non-emergency Medicaid
transportation trips. Begin entering cross-county trip information into website as a
way to coordinate with surrounding counties,
• OPT should continue the initial discussions regarding operating CHT's pazatransit
services.
• OPT does a commendable job mazketing its current services, but the image remains
that of a human service provider. With an expanded OPT role in general public
service, OPT should adopt a new image, OPT Administration is currently accepting
quotes for the development of a new logo and vehicle appearance.
• OPT uses a combination of mileage and hourly rates to bill agencies. Some agencies
are only billed on a mileage basis while others are billed on hourly and mileage bases,
A unified approach to setting the agency rates should be adopted, The rates should be
set to recover the costs of operation..
• OPT currently resides as a division of Department on Aging.. OPT's role has grown
since this arrangement was established and a higher profile for transportation is
needed. OPT's function should move to a new department level in Orange County
government, reporting to the Assistant County Manager over the human service
agencies.
Wake County CTIP
The primary provider of transportation services in non-metropolitan Wake County is
the Wake Coordinated Transportation Service (WCTS). In addition to the coordinated
services provided by WCTS, other transportation providers offer services within the
county, WCTS is organized as a section of Human Services Department of Wake
County government (WCHS). Two basic levels of service are provided by WCTS.
The human service transportation is provided for clients of the subscribing human
service agencies. The TRACS service provides general public transportation to all
members of the community, not just those receiving specified services.
WCTS offers general public service through three demand-response service zones,
The system utilizes a fleet of 45 vehicles to provide transportation to 7 human service
agencies. WCTA provided 119,420 passenger trips in FY04. The general public
service operates under the emerging "brand name" of TRACS (Transportation and
Rural Access). This service is relatively new; the Eastern Zone began service in
3/18/2005
November 2001, the Northern Zone began in February 2003, and the Southem Zone /I
began in February 2004,
WCTS does not operate transportation services directly; rather it contracts with a
private provider, MV Transportation, as the primary vendor, Wake County provides
the vehicles, maintenance, fueling, and reservation services, while MV Transportation
supplies the operators, service supervision, and vehicle scheduling. MV
Transportation is held responsible for following the maintenance requirements which
is done under contract with Wake County's Fleet Operations.
MV's services aze primarily demand-response in nature, with fluctuations from day-
to-day depending upon demand, As with most similar operators in North Carolina,
some subscription, or recurring, trips have been organized into semi-fixed routes, MV
has 16 such routes serving dialysis patients and the Resources for Seniors. There aze 8
dialysis routes, 6 senior routes, and 2 nutrition routes.
In the past three yeazs, WCTS has added two secondary vendors for the provision of
the general public, TRACS service. These secondary vendors are responsible far a
maximum amount of service within their respective zones, They may also assist with
the human service transportation within their zone as a supplement to the primary
vendor, Sights Unlimited operates the TRACS service within the Northern and
Eastern Zones, while Tri-Area Transportation operates the service in the Southern
Zone.
The consultant has completed the final draft of the updated Community Transportation
Improvement Plan and has presented the fallowing recommendations to the
Transportation Director. The Transportation Advisory $oard has not reviewed the
draft document and is therefore unawaze of these recommendations. A meeting will
be scheduled with the consultant, NCDOT, WCTS management and the
Transportation Advisory Boazd to review each reconunendationprior to finalizing the
plan, The draft plan provided the following recommendations for improvement.
• Hire new Senior Accounting Technician and reassign billing responsibilities;
• Relocate WCTS staff to the same azea at Swinburne Street.
• Eliminate lunchtime closing of telephone lines at Transportation Service Center
• Extend TSC hours to 7:00 AM to 6:00 PM through staggered staff hours;
• Bring all trip reservations in-house vs, with the primary operator
• Post all cross-county trips into the CCTransit website,
• Adjust billing rates to agencies to reflect adjusted rates in cost allocation plan
• Calculate revised agency billings based upon passenger hour basis to aid in agency
budgeting;
• Consolidate reports for primary vendor and secondary vendors showing total riders
by ridership category and reporting all vehicles owned by WCTS;
• Document peak vehicle usage for all vendors;
3!18/2005
la
• Discuss with CAT officials the potential for taking over a portion of the ART
service.
• Open MV Transportation service to general public riders one day per week in each
zone on day not served by secondary vendors;
• Reallocate Saturday hours of secondary vendors to additional weekday;
• Begin discussions with TTA and other providers on joining the regional pass
program and establishing a UPass operation;
• Begin documentation of ridership and service within urbanized and non-urbanized
areas.
• Work with the County webmaster to create a WCTS webpage and establish links
with other providers;
• Post TRACS service zone map on webpage;
• Identify meeting and event opportunities to publicize TRACS service in smaller
towns;
• Prepare RPP for logo preparation for upcoming fiscal year;
• Implement regular vehicle acquisition program;
• Purchase four' fireboxes to accompany new vans purchased for secondary vendors.
3/18/2005
13
Summary
Triangle County Board Chairs Meeting
The Triangle County Board Chairs met on Tuesday March 22. As the attached agenda
material indicates, the primary discussion item focused an the potential Regional
Community Transportation Development Plan. Specifically, Miriam Perry, NCDOT and
Sanford Cross discussed a study that would examine opportunities to better streamline,
coordinate and possibly consolidate community transportation programs such as OPT
across the three counties of Durham, Wake and Orange. The study will be funded by
DOT and coordinated by Triangle 7 COG if approved by all boards.
An agenda item fox' BOCC discussion and action will be included at one of our upcoming
BOCC meetings since time is critical if we want to consider the results of the study
dining our 2005 budget deliberations.
The County Board Chair endorsed the study but all agreed that any recommendations
would have to face the scrutiny of each Boazd of Commissioners, Community and
respective Transportation System Stakeholders before any outcomes were initiated. As a
side note -OPT was by far the most efficient community transportation system in the
three counties.
ly
Triangle County Board Chairs Meeting
February 8, 2005, 12 noon-2:00 p.m..
Triangle J Council of Governments Conference Room
Meeting Sumrnary
Attendance: Moses Carey, Ellen Reckhow, Joe Bryan, David Cooke, Mike Ruffin, John Link, Miriam
Perry, Charles Glover, Sanford Crass, John Hodges-Copple.
Ellen Reckhow chaired the meeting and welcomed the participants.
Regionalization of Transportation Services
Sanford Cross reviewed the milestones and current status of the urban bus system consolidation project
involving the Triangle Transit Authority and the bus systems in Cary, Chapel Hill, Durham, Raleigh
and at the universities. Raleigh, Durham and TTA are proceeding with consolidation planning;
decisions by Raleigh and Durham aze anticipated shortly. Cary is reconsidering its demand-responsive
system and may consider its relationship to other systems later. Chapel Hill will maintain its fare-free
system independently at this time, but has been monitoring the discussions. The NCSU Wolfline
system also continues to monitor the discussions. The Duke system has decided to retain its
independent status. Mr. Cross noted that the time frame for' the urban system consolidation study
precluded consideration of the county-based human service agency-oriented systems, but that interest
has been expressed throughout the process in eventually looking at opportunities to better coordinate
among the county systems and between the county systems and the urban systems, especially with the
Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) requirements for the urban, fixed-route systems.
Miriam Perry, Director of the Public Transportation Division (PTD) of NCDOT and Chazles Glover,
Assistant Director for Community Transportation, discussed NCDOT's interests in regionalization of
Community Transportation Systems, the countywide, human service agency-oriented systems that are
sepazate from the urban systems. Summary handouts on the status of community transportation
systems, including management, operating and financial characteristics, were distributed and aze
available from TJCOG. Each system has a transportation system plan; Durham's was last updated in
2002, Orange County Public Transportation's (OCPT) in Fa112004 and Wake's is currently being
updated.
Ms. Perry noted that Regional Community Transportation Systems (CTS), defined as systems serving
more than one county and that provide both general public and human service agency contract service,
tend to have greater efficiencies, as measured by cost per passenger. NCDOT PTD currently allocates
$528,000 annually to the three Triangle systems ($128,000 to Durham, $98,000 to Orange and
$302,000 to Wake) based on a formula. Ms. Perry noted that with sepazate systems, unused funds
from any system revert to the state, but that a regional system can result in the funds staying within the
region..
Ms. Reckhow asked if providing more general public service, as in Orange County, leads to better cost
efficiencies. Ms. Perry responded that both increasing general public service and close coordination
with urban fixed-route systems can improve cost-efficiency.
>'s
Mr. Glover stressed the benefits of regionalizing community transportation systems, e.g, in providing
cross-county transportation to medical facilities and in utilizing common technologies.. NCDOT is
encouraging counties to,jointly study what opportunities there maybe inmulti-county regions.
NCDOT will provide 100% funding for studies to examine regionalization and will also prepare a
detailed implementation plan for any counties that wish to proceed toward regionalization after the
study. He noted that the Unifour Region has finished an initial study and that three of the four counties
(excluding Alexander County) are now working with NCDOT on the implementation plan. Ms Perry
noted that many county concerns about regionalization are similar in nature to the concerns voiced by
individual human service agencies ,years ago when the countywide systems were established..
Mr Link asked if there was any requirement for counties to proceed beyond the initial study or any
penalty if they did not do so. Mr. Glover responded that there are no requirements or penalties. Mr.
Caz'ey asked about the governance models that led to the existing seven regional systems that currently
exist. Mr. Glover responded that most grew out of an existing regional organization, e g a multi-
countyhealth agency or a COG. The organizational characteristics differ from system to system;
typically an interlocal agreement sets the conditions, e.g, one county operating the service and an
adjacent county contracting for service. Mr. Ruffin asked if any of the NC metropolitan areas have
done this, e.g. the Triad or Charlotte. Ms. Perry answered that in Fayetteville, the urban transit system
(FAST) also provides the community service [reporter's note: but apparently no multi-county urban
examples, so far]. Mr. Cooke asked if the challenge is to look at multi-county CTS, or'to combine
CTS with urban systems within a single county. Ms. Perry felt that there maybe opportunities under
either scenario or a hybrid involving both multi-county and fixed route/agency transportation
combinations, especially if some major Triangle urban systems consolidate. Mr. Link asked how TTA
routing decisions relate to CTS service and regionalization, noting the planning for a new Chapel Hill
to Hillsborough route. Mr. Glover noted that the recent OCPT plan called for OCPT to provide the
paratransit component of the new service.
The participants discussed specifics about a regionalization study for the Triangle. The participants
agreed that a study was worthwhile and the timing was fortuitous, with the experience of the urban bus
consolidation study, the transition of OCPT to include general public service, and rising concerns
about agency costs under the current system. Ms. Reclchow asked if'the TTA would be included in any
regionalization study. Ms. Perry responded that it would.. Ms. Reckhow asked how such a study
involves stakeholders. Ms Perry responded that each CTS has an advisory board that represents the
agencies and clients, typically appointed by the Boards of Commissioners. Mr. Cazey asked about the
time frame for a study. Ms. Perry responded that from first meeting to completion of the plan might
take ] 0 to 12 months; the participants encouraged a more condensed time frame that might permit
decisions for FY06-07. Mr. Ruffin asked if there were any incentives for regionalization. Ms. Perry
responded that beginning in FY06, NCDOT wilt provide federal funding to regional systems that
provide general public service. The participants discussed the appropriate geographic scale for a
regional system and concluded that the study should initially focus on the three core counties, while
leaving morn for potential expansion to other areas over time based on interest and transportation ties.
Action Item: For the next meeting, T.1COG staff will work with NCDOT PTD staff to bring back a
proposal for a Triangle Region Community Transportation Systems Study that includes study tasi<s,
timeline, participants, and roles and responsibilities. The proposal should cover the three core cowities
and involve the Triangle Transit Authority. It should address both the potential for multi-county CIS
options and linking CTS human service agency-oriented and general public transportation with urban
fixed route systems. The proposal should include a synopsis of'existing county transportation plans.
16'
Transportation Funding
John Hodges-Copple supplied a handout which summarized funding issues related to the Regional
Transportation Strategy, 2030 Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) Long Range Transportation
Plans, and revenue sources that have been discussed over the past few years to meet transportation
funding needs in the Triangle (copies of the handout are available from TJCOG). He also passed out
an article on recent funding issues in North Carolina related to the equity formula which is likely to
result in less funding for the Triangle than has been expected. Ellen Reckhow noted that NCDOT
made a presentation to the TTA boazd on the statewide transportation plan which identified $84 billion
in statewide needs and $SS billion in anticipated revenue to meet the needs. She indicated that the
statewide plan would focus state priorities on such issues as maintenance of the existing system and the
highest-order roads, continuing the concern in the region that crucial secondary roads will not receive
needed funding..
Joe Bryan reported that the Wake County Board took action on the funding issue, stating its intent that
any levy of abroad-based tax such as a general sales tax should allow caunties to use the proceeds for
any purpose.. He remarked that any broad-based taxes should address Quality-of--Life Infrastructure,
with mobility, schools and parks/open space being top capital needs, Ellen Reckhow noted that she
has advocated a similar position, that any increase in a general sales tax should go to schools as well as
transportation. Mr. Bryan reported that he met with leaders of the Wake County legislative delegation,
Ms. Weiss and Mr. Stevens, and that they thought local leaders should have low expectations for
legislative action to increase local options.. Ms. Reckhow indicated that she has had similazly
disappointing feedback from members of the Durham delegation.
Mr. Link said he was concerned about jumping into a local option funding issue without a better
understanding of the expectations of who fmances what between the state and local communities,
especially as counties have not had a direct role in transportation funding and projects since the
Depression. He would like to see some connectivity between local and state action on funding, feazing
that the state may not hold up its end of the bargain, but transfer more money out of the region.
Mr. Bryan suggested three principles related to local option funding for transportation, if to be levied at
the county level: 1. Any broad-based revenue source, such as an increase in the general sales tax,
should be allowed to be used to address the full spectrum of Infrastructure for Quality-of--life for which
counties are responsible. 2. Any new local option funding needs to be part of an explicit state/local
-partnership to improve mobility in the region; local increased support can not be met with state
decreased support. 3. The business community needs to be the cleaz leaders in advocating for the
change, notjust playing a supportive or neutral role. Ms. Reckhow sought clarification that the wider
use of new revenues for infrastructure applied to any broad-based revenues, but that any
transportation-oriented revenue streams, such as fuel taxes or vehicle license fees, could be targeted to
transportation. Mr. Bryan concurred.
Sanford Cross noted that the Urban Mobility Study Commission has been extended to May and will
meet in February, where funding will be discussed.
Action Item: TJCOG will draft a letter far signature by the three county commission chairs outlining
the concerns of the commissioners over funding, focusing on the three principles ofbroader use of
general revenue streams for infrastructure, atrue state/local partnership to address mobility, and
business community leadership. The draft will be circulated to the three chairs and their managers and,
i7
Triangle Region Community Transportation Development Plan
For over twenty years, the North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) has
supported the creation of community transportation systems to coordinate local
transportation needs and provide human service agencies and the general public with
safe, efficient and effective transportation services.. NCDOT supported the creation of
Durham County Access, Orange County Public Transportation and Wake Coordinated
Transportation Services. Each year, NCDOT provides administrative, capital and
operating funds to meet the needs of these Triangle systems as well as an additional
eighty -two community transportation systems across the state..
The North Cazolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) supports efforts among
community transportation, urban and regional bus systems to look at ways to improve the
overall safety, efficiency and effectiveness of public transportation service, while
eliminating duplication of effort. During the past several years, NCDOT has provided
support and financial assistance far several Triangle projects, including the prepazation of
the Triangle Region Transit Consolidation/Impleznentation Plan, a plan to provide a
seamless transit system in the Triangle.
Tn October 2002, the Institute for Transportation Reseazch and Education (TYRE) at North
Carolina State University completed a report titled Regionalizing Public Transportation
Services for NCDOT's Public Transportation Division. The report looked at community
transportation systems in North Carolina and other parts of the country, identified
opportunities and concerns related to regionalizing services and provided
recommendations. Consistent with the report, the NCDOT is encouraging community
transportation systems to identify counties in the same geographic azea and consider
opportunities for regionalizing services.
On February 8, 2005, Ms. Miriam Perry, Public Transportation Director, and Mr. Chazles
Glover, Assistant Director for Community Transportation, for NCDOT, met with
Commissioner Ellen Reckhow, Durham County Board Chair, Commissioner Moses
Carey, Orange County Boazd Chair and Commissioner .loe Bryan, Wake County Boazd
Chair. The purpose of the meeting was to provide Ms. Perry and Mr, Glover with the -
opportunity to share information on regional initiatives underway in other azeas and
discuss ideas for working with community transportation systems in the Triangle. As
part of the discussion, Ms. Perry offered to support 100% of the cost to prepaze a
Regional Transportation Development Plan (RTDP) for Durham, Orange and Wake
counties, if the County Board Chairs were interested in participating. Ms. Perry
explained that, using consultants already under contract, NCDOT would work with local
elected officials, community transportation system directors, county managers or
appointees, representatives of other transportation systems, governing board chairs,
RPO/MPO representatives, economic development organizations and others, as
appropriate, to develop the RTDP. Additional information on the RTDP is attached.
IS
WHEREAS, community transportation systems are expected to provide safe, efficient
and effective transportation services, with as little duplication as possible; and
WHEREAS, the North Carolina Department of Transportation is committed to working
with the counties of Durham, Orange and Wake to improve the efficiency and
effectiveness of their community transportation systems and to help provide increased
mobility options for access to employment, education, medical and general
transportation; and
WHEREAS, the North Carolina Department of Transportation will pay for the cost of a
consultant to complete a Triangle Region Community Transportation Development Plan;
and
WHEREAS, the purpose of the Triangle Region Community Transportation
Development Plan is to identify opportunities for regionalizing services among the
community transportation systems in Durham, Orange and Wake counties and with urban
and regional pazatransit systems in the Triangle; and
WHEREAS, (Durham, Orange or Walce) county will provide the staff resources and
support needed to participate in the development of the Triangle Region Community
Transportation Development Plan; and
WHEREAS, (Durham, Orange or Wake) county will consider recommendations in the
Triangle Region Community Transportation Development Plan when making future
decisions concerning its community transportation system; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the (Durham, Orange or Wake) County
Board of Commissioners that (Durham, Orange or Wake) county wishes to participate in
the development of the Triangle Region Community Transportation Development Plan
with the counties of (Durham, Orange and/or Wake),
Adopted this day of 2005
Signatures _