GoTriangle Touts Light Rail Project Ahead of Funding Request Deadline

As the municipal vote on whether to approve the Durham-Orange Corridor draws near, the Orange County Board of Commissioners heard from GoTriangle employees last week on the merits of light rail.

Patrick McDonough, the transit authority’s manager of planning and development, told board members that projected regional growth rates reinforce the need for the project.

“The Triangle is going to be one of the growth leaders in the United States over the next several decades,” he claimed. “We had one year in which Raleigh-Cary was the second-fastest-growing metro area in the country, and Durham-Chapel Hill also cracked the top 15.”

Making the case for the construction of over 17 miles of light rail between Durham and Chapel Hill, McDonough explained the metrics that GoTriangle used to determine the viability of the project.

“The key to this is looking at the density of jobs and housing,” he stated. “Jobs and housing density give us a very important measure about how our neighbors and our friends travel, and that is the number of trips per acre.”

During McDonough’s brief, board members were shown a chart that extrapolated the number of trips per acre at stops along the proposed rail corridor out to the year 2040.

“Downtown Durham: 209 trips an acre; Duke VA: 236; and UNC Hospital: 385 trips per acre,” listed McDonough.

He also presented the average number of anticipated trips per acre for both the Durham-Orange Light Rail Transit Project and a proposed bus rapid transit system in Chapel Hill.

“The average for the Durham-Orange Corridor is 126 trips per acre,” he noted. “North-South BRT is about 103.”

In touting the projected number of daily rail riders, which is purported to be approximately 27,000, McDonough compared the carrying capacity of train cars to local buses.

“If it’s just one car, it’s going to carry about the same number of passengers as 3-and-a-half buses,” he explained. “If you have a two-car train, it’s going to carry as many passengers as seven regular buses.”

Construction costs for rail corridor were previously reported by GoTriangle to be in the billions, but McDonough pointed to a study suggesting that the project would rapidly recoup those costs.

“The study estimated about $4.7 billion in additional economic output in the two counties each year [and] another $600 million in additional economic impacts on the state-wide level,” he relayed.

With opportunity costs in mind, Commissioner Penny Rich asked McDonough what would be lost if the board were to reject the project.

McDonough claimed that rejection would set the project back four years – a claim that may have raised the stakes in the midst of decisions to be made on the project.

According to Danny Rogers, a colleague of McDonough’s who works as a project director, GoTriangle must submit plans to the federal government in April to meet the annual funding request deadline.

“If we don’t go in April, then we may miss the [full funding grant agreement] and the whole cost of building the project would be delayed a year,” he explained.

Commissioner Earl McKee made statements echoed by other board members regarding his reluctance to support a plan that he would not have ample time to review.

“It seems to be getting the cart before the horse because we’re being asked to approve GoTriangle letting these contracts before we actually consider the revised plan,” he mused.

If GoTriangle meets the federal funding request deadline, then board members are expected to vote on the project in June as part of the recommended transit plan for the county.

Image by GoTriangle.

GoTriangle Touts Light Rail Project Ahead of Funding Request Deadline

On Air Now: 97.9 FM