Chapter 9 â€“ Public Transportation System

Chapter 9 – Public Transportation System

Transit System Overview

For many long-time Richmond residents, fond memories include the electric streetcars that traveled along Broad Street and other corridors to provide public transportation in Richmond. Although ownership of the streetcar system changed hands on multiple occasions, the streetcars operated continuously until 1949 when buses replaced the last electric streetcars. When the old track system was removed and replaced with bus service, the end of an era occurred in Richmond. Since that time, more and more Richmond area residents have relied on private automobiles for the majority of their trips, and public transportation services shifted to filling the needs of the area’s transportation dependent. Today, the Richmond area has a public transit network that is limited by funding and jurisdictional support for such services. Incorporated in 1973, the Greater Richmond Transit Company (GRTC) is the sole fixed route bus service provider in the Richmond area. Although AMTRAK offers intercity rail service to the public, with several routes boarding and alighting in the Richmond area, GRTC’s fixed route bus service remains the principal mass transit option for travel within the Richmond metropolitan area. GRTC is a non-profit public service corporation, owned equally by the City of Richmond and Chesterfield County and governed by a Board of Directors. GRTC currently uses a bus fleet of 169 buses to operate 34 regular local and express routes, a lunchtime express loop in downtown Richmond, an express route to Fredericksburg and 3 Virginia Commonwealth University (VCU) routes. In addition to the fixed route system, GRTC oversees RideFinders, the region’s transportation demand management agency, supports the Capital Region Taxicab Advisory Board (CRTAB), contracts with outside agencies to provide Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) services for the region’s elderly and disabled population, and oversees C-VAN, a welfare-to-work transportation service provided in cooperation with local social service agencies. GRTC’s bus route structure can largely be classified as a hub-and-spoke system, where service converges on a central downtown area – near Richmond City Hall and the VCU medical campus -- and then fans out into the surrounding neighborhoods. Additionally, GRTC operates 10 express routes to Henrico and Chesterfield counties. These express routes provide direct service from the surrounding residential areas in the outlying counties to downtown Richmond with few stops in between. All buses operated by GRTC are equipped with wheelchair lifts, and GRTC is in the process of increasing the number of low-floor buses in its fleet. In combination with drivers specifically trained to help disabled and senior riders, the GRTC system is accessible for mobility impaired customers. For riders who are unable to use fixed-route service, GRTC offers paratransit service through the CARE program. CARE provides curb-to-curb service for eligible riders. Eligibility for the program is dictated by the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). More information on the CARE service is described in a following section.

Chapter 9 9-1 Public Transportation System

9-2 Chapter 9 Public Transportation System

GRTC operates a highly efficient bus system, but one which does not provide extensive service coverage in the suburban areas surrounding the downtown core of the region. (See the following discussion of the most recent comprehensive operations analysis of the GRTC bus system). The Richmond Area MPO (RAMPO), with the assistance of the Virginia Department of Rail and Public Transportation (VDRPT), in 2007 embarked on a study effort to determine the feasibility of a future regional mass transit system for the Richmond area, and to produce a plan of action for development and implementation of such a system over a 25 year horizon. This project, termed the Richmond Regional Mass Transit Study, combined with the most recent GRTC operations analysis, provides a short term, medium term, and long term guide for expanding and improving mass transit service in the region. The technical aspects of both of these studies are discussed in detail in the following sections. Existing GRTC bus routes are described in Figure 9-1 and are shown graphically on Map 9-1.

Figure 9-1: Existing GRTC Bus Routes 1/2 – Church Hill/Monument/Patterson Downtown, Broad St., 21st St. & Marshall,

Chimborazo, Oakwood, R St., Sheppard, Monument, Briel, St. Mary’s Hospital, Patterson, Three Chopt, Regency Square

3/4 – Robinson/Fairmount Downtown, Broad St., 22nd St., Fairfield Court area, Whitcomb Court area, Mechanicsville Tpk., Robinson St., South Meadow, Maymont Park, Cary St., Idlewood Ave., Douglasdale Rd. (U.R.Stadium)

6 – Broad St./Main St. Downtown, Broad St., Grace, 8th St., Main, Willow Lawn, Williamsburg Rd., Montrose Heights, Darbytown

7 – Seven Pines Downtown, Broad St., Nine Mile Rd., Fairfield Commons, Seven Pines/Highland Springs area, Williamsburg Rd., Airport area

10 – Riverview/Jefferson Downtown, Broad St., Jefferson Ave., M St., Creighton Ct., Richmond Community Hospital, Harrison St., Idlewood Ave., Colorado Ave., Riverview area

11 – Laurel/17th Street Downtown, Broad St., Laurel St., Oregon Hill area, Main St., 18th St., Oliver Hill Court Building, Mosby Court area

13 – Main Street/Church Hill Downtown, Broad St., Main St., Cary St., 25th St., Marshall St., Oakwood Ave., Briel St., Westmoreland, Grove, Commonwealth Ave., River Road Shopping Center

16 – Westhampton Downtown, Grove Ave., University of Richmond 18 – Henrico Shuttle Willow Lawn Shopping Center, West Broad St.,

Henrico Government Center, Parham Road, Staples Mill Road

19 – Pemberton Rd. Broad St., at 10th St., west to Pemberton Road 20 – Northside – Dill Rd./Willow Lawn Dill Rd., Pollock St., W. Broad St., Willow Lawn

Shopping Center 22 – Hermitage/Oak Grove Downtown, Broad St., Lombardy, Brook, Harrison, 14th

St., Azalea Mall 23 – Glenside/Parham Express Downtown to Glenside Dr. / Staples Mill Rd. Park-N-

Ride lot, Parham Rd. / Fordson Rd. Park-N-Ride lot

24 – Lakeside Downtown, Broad St., Boulevard, Westwood, Hamilton, Hermitage, Westbrook, Crestwood

25 – Glenside/Parham/Gaskins Express Downtown to Glenside Dr. / Staples Mill Rd. Park-N-Ride lot, Parham Rd. / Fordson Rd. Park-N-Ride lot, Gaskins Rd. / Mayland Dr. Park-N-Ride lot

26 – Parham Rd. Express Parham Rd. / Fordson Rd. Park-N-Ride lot to downtown

27 – Glenside Express Glenside Dr. / Staples Mill Rd. Park-N-Ride lot to downtown

28 – Fair Oaks Express Millers Ln. Park-N-Ride lot to downtown 29 – Gaskins Express Gaskins Rd. / Mayland Dr. Park-N-Ride lot to

downtown 32 – Ginter Park Downtown, North Ave., Laburnum Ave., Fendall Ave.,

Ginter Park / Washington Park area 34 – Highland Park Downtown, Fourth Ave., First Ave., Meadowbridge

Rd., Highland St. 37 – Chamberlayne Downtown, Chamberlayne Ave., Brook Rd., former

Azalea Mall site 56 – S. Laburnum 7th St., 9th St., Broad St., 35th St., Glenwood, Darbytown

Rd., S. Laburnum Ave., Richmond International Airport

61 – Broad Rock Shuttle Broad Rock, Southside Plaza, Westover Hills, Crutchfield, Forest Hill Ave. (Midlothian K-Mart on Sundays only)

62/63 – Hull St./Midlothian Downtown at 7th & Broad, Hull St., Midlothian and Broad Rock corridors

64 – Stony Point Express Old Gun Rd., Duryea Dr., Forest Hill Ave., Huguenot High School to downtown

65 – Stony Point Fashion Park/VCU Health System (Express)

Downtown, VCU Health System at Stony Point, Stony Point Fashion Park

66 – Beaufont Express Beaufont Mall, Midlothian Tpk., German School Rd., Forest Hill Ave. to downtown

67 – Chippenham Chippenham Mall, Warwick Rd., Clarkson Rd., Southwood, Hull St., Bainbridge St., Commerce Rd., downtown

70/71 – Forest Hill Downtown, Lee Bridge, Semmes Ave., Forest Hill Ave., Wal-Mart, Huguenot High School, Jahnke Rd., Chippenham Hospital, Carnation St., Midlothian Tpk., K-Mart, Stony Point Shopping Ctr.

72/73 – Ruffin Rd. / Ampthill Route 72: Downtown, Manchester Bridge, Jefferson Davis Hwy, Ruffin Rd., Commerce Rd., Philip Morris, Maxxim Medical. Route 73: Downtown, Manchester Bridge, Jefferson Davis Hwy, Dupont/Ampthill area, Food Lion

74 – Oak Grove Downtown, Belvidere, Broad, Marshall, Commerce, Hull, Lynhaven, Brady

81 – Chesterfield Plaza Express Chesterfield Plaza/Koger Center Blvd. Park-N-Ride lot at Lowe’s to downtown

82 – Winterpock Lowe’s / Commonwealth 20 Express

Winterpock Rd./Hull St. Park-N-Ride at Lowe’s to Commonwealth 20 to downtown

91 – Laburnum Connector Willow Lawn, W. Broad St., Westwood Ave., Laburnum Ave., Williamsburg Rd., Millers Ln.



92 – Central Gardens Nine Mile Rd., Gordon’s Lane, Creighton Rd., Phaup St., Cool Ln., Mechanicsville Tpk., Bloom Ln., Apollo Rd., Carneal St., Beck Dr., Cleary Rd., Hartman St., Watts Ln., Mechanicsville Tpk., Laburnum Ave, Austin Ave., Byron St., Howard Rd., Harvie Rd, Reynolds Rd., Watts Ln, Sandy Ln., Harvie Rd., Laburnum Ave, Nine Mile Rd.

93 – Azalea Connector Brook & Westwood, Brook Rd., Chamberlayne Ave, Chamberlayne Rd., Azalea Ave., Pony Farm Dr., Wilkinson Rd.

95 – Richmond/Petersburg Express Tabb St. and Union St. Park-N-Ride lots to downtown 96 – Richmond/Fredericksburg Express Brook and Parham to VRE, Rt. 208 Park-N-Ride lot to

Downtown Richmond

Chapter 9 9-5


Public Transportation System


Paratransit Service GRTC’s Community Assisted Ride Enterprise (CARE) service is a curb-to-curb service available to eligible customers in the system’s fixed-route service area. Operated on a contract basis by First Transit, the service area includes the City of Richmond and Henrico County. To be eligible for service, an application must be submitted to GRTC’s Customer Service Department. Customers are approved based on eligibility requirements established by the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and receive an identification card and program information. Tickets for CARE service are sold in books of six for $13.50 or $2.25 per ticket and can be purchased at various retail stores throughout the region and at RideFinders. Each ticket is good for a one-way trip. Standing reservations may be made for customers who travel between the same origin and destination at the same time at least four days a week. This allows customers whose trips occur on a regular basis to avoid making individual phone reservations for each trip. Customers may not change origins/destinations or time of travel for standing reservations. Cancellations require a minimum two-hour advance notice. Demand response trips are defined as those that occur three days per week or less, and require travel from varied origins and destinations. Reservations for each trip must be made in advance at least one day before the trip. Reservations are accepted between 8:00 A.M. and 4:30 P.M. Cancellations must be made at least two hours in advance of the arranged pick-up time. CARE service operates on weekdays and weekends between the hours of 5:30 A.M. and 12:30 A.M. CARE service is available on major holidays. The overall level of service in the City of Richmond and Henrico County is adequate in both coverage and availability. Current regional demand for CARE paratransit services are being met, however, demand is expected to increase in the future as the senior population increases faster on a percentage basis than total population. In addition, the general regional population is also expected to grow rapidly which also may result in increased demand for CARE’s services. Public Transportation Services in Rural Areas Regional rural transportation planning is a part of a new process being undertaken through a grant to the Richmond Regional Planning District Commission (RRPDC) from the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT). Rural transportation planning for the RRPDC is carried out by its Planning and Information Systems Division staff. The staff works closely with the RRPDC’s Urban Transportation Division staff which is responsible for transportation planning within the MPO study area. The first phase of this effort has been completed with a report that provides maps and data for those rural areas in the Richmond region that are outside of the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) study area. Eastern portions of New Kent and Charles City counties and the western portions of Goochland and Powhatan counties make up the rural study areas in this report. For the first phase of the planning process, the RRPDC established a Rural Technical Advisory Committee (Rural TAC) to review elements of the plan, to verify content, to develop goals and objectives, and to approve a public participation process. The future

phases of the regional rural long-range transportation planning, Phases II – IV, have been designed by VDOT and are currently underway. An excerpt from the Phase I report, shown below, provides a brief overview of the availability of public transportation services in the more rural portions of the region: Transit Services in Rural Study Area by County: Charles City County Transit – On-demand bus service for destinations in Charles City and New Kent counties is provided by Bay Transit and available to the general public from Monday to Friday from 6:00 AM to 6:00 PM. Goochland County Transit – There are no transit services available to the general public. New Kent County Transit – On-demand bus service for destinations in Charles City and New Kent counties is provided by Bay Transit and available to the general public from Monday to Friday from 6:00 AM to 6:00 PM. Powhatan County Transit – There are no transit services available to the general public. Other Rural Area Transportation Services In addition to public transit services, there are other transportation services that are available to commuters in rural areas. For example, Ridefinders, a division of GRTC Transit System, assists commuters, including those living in the rural study area, to find carpools. Commuters in the eastern rural study area who are traveling to jobs in Hampton Roads may use a similar service called Traffix. There also are services not available to the general public, but are provided to persons who qualify for paratransit services based on age, income, or disability. A report prepared by RRPDC in 2006, Public Transportation for the Elderly, Disabled, and Low-Income: Phase I—Needs Assessment Report has information on transit providers including transportation to medical appointments and for low-income persons for the entire Richmond region. A statewide process to improve coordination of transportation for special populations is underway, beginning in 2007, under the leadership of the Virginia Department of Rail and Public Transportation (VDRPT). The development of a Coordinated Human Services Mobility plan is currently proposed to include the MPO and non-MPO study area of the region as providers have not historically made distinctions across MPO boundaries in providing services to low-income, disabled, and elderly populations.



Fixed Route Bus System Analysis GRTC contracted with the consulting firm of Vanasse Hangen Brustlin (VHB), Inc. to conduct the most recent comprehensive operations analysis (COA) of the transit system. The final report, dated March 3, 2008 provides a detailed review of the current transit system, and includes recommendations for service changes based on a range of data collected and analyzed as part of the study. To understand the overall character of the fixed route bus system operated by GRTC it is perhaps best to compare and contrast the system with those operated in comparable U.S. cities. The 2008 COA includes a comparison of such “peer” cities, where eleven different transit agencies were selected for analysis using data contained in the National Transit Database (NTD) reports. As previously noted, GRTC service is highly efficient when compared to its peers, although its service area and population within that service area are well below the average for the peer cities. As noted in the report, the rankings show GRTC’s service is structured to optimize revenue received. In measures of financial efficiency, cost effectiveness, and revenue generation, GRTC excelled among its peers. A principal reason for these high rankings is that the fixed route bus system is very much oriented toward peak period service; relatively fewer miles and hours are being put on each bus, with many buses simply not being in use during non-peak times. This peak period orientation results in excess capacity in GRTC’s fleet, and as a result, the COA report suggests that a continued reliance on full-sized coaches 40 feet in length is not warranted and that a mix including smaller buses would be more appropriate. It is clear that, because GRTC receives limited funding for its services, it therefore operates under constraints that necessitate the most efficient use of those funds. A conclusion may be drawn that GRTC’s high rankings in cost effectiveness, financial efficiency, and revenue generation comes at the sacrifice of providing more service at non-peak times. The configuration of GRTC’s service area also plays an important role in maintaining its admirable financial ranking. In general, service is concentrated in those areas where households and residents are characterized as being in need of transit based on demographics. “Transit-dependent” factors include: living below the poverty line, having a mobility limitation, being aged 65 or older, and having either no, or only one vehicle available. Persons falling into these categories may have difficulty accessing major destinations – such as medical facilities, government offices, employment centers, and shopping areas – without adequate transit service. People and households with transit-dependent characteristics are heavily concentrated within the geographic limits of the City of Richmond, so it is no great surprise that on-board surveys conducted as part of the COA reveal that 86 percent of current GRTC riders live within the City limits. Transit-dependent characteristics also correlate with ethnicity, and the survey revealed that 72 percent of GRTC riders identify themselves as African-American. There seems to be a preponderance of females that use the current bus system (approximately 55 percent are female); thus, based on these and several other factors, the COA profiles the “typical” GRTC bus rider:

• Is female • Is African-American • Lives in the City of Richmond • Is between 25 and 44 years old • Has a valid driver’s license • Lives in a household with:

o No working cars o Two working adults o Annual income of $25,000 to $49,999

• Walks one block to both bus and final destination • Uses the same GRTC route 5 days or more per week

COA Recommendations The existing GRTC transit system is successful at attracting a certain type of resident as noted previously, and is most successful in serving commute trips made between work and home. The hub-and-spoke design collects people from defined areas within the region, brings them downtown and back again. The COA notes that GRTC should continue to improve service catering to commuters, but should make further efforts to attract “choice” commuters (i.e., commuters with a choice to use personal automobiles) in the outlying counties. Toward these ends, the COA recommends various modifications to existing bus routes based on an extensive performance analysis that includes an examination of load factors, compliance with adopted service standards, and an evaluation of service adequacy. Generally, the types of specific recommended improvements include:

• Routing changes • Scheduling improvements • Service span extensions • Improvements to public information

Implementation of the specific COA recommendations over the next several years will improve the existing service by streamlining operations and making the system more user-friendly. In particular, GRTC will begin to direct its operations and maintenance from a new, state-of-the-art maintenance/administrative facility within the next year or so. The new facility will relieve the crowded, cramped and outdated working conditions characteristic of GRTC’s current “bus barn” located in the downtown area of the City. With regard to attracting new, suburban choice riders, the COA presents several recommendations. Along with suggestions for new park-n-ride lots, for instance in Ashland and near the airport, the COA emphasizes the continuing need for one or more downtown transfer centers. The transfer center concept has a number of benefits; among these are reducing the congestion along Broad Street in the downtown area, offering multi-modal linkages between bus, rail and other forms of public transportation, and providing an enhanced amenity for passengers. An efficient downtown shuttle/circulator service is an integral part of the transfer center concept. Overall, the development of the transfer center concept will facilitate the addition of Chapter 9 9-9 Public Transportation System


more commuter express buses from strategic locations in the outlying suburban areas; for example, the recommended new express bus service from the Mechanicsville area in Hanover. As noted in the COA report, however, a careful analysis is required to help ensure that the capacity of the transfer center is not overloaded during peak times when high numbers of local and express buses would be arriving. Another major recommendation for enhancing commuter bus service is the concept of a Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) line implemented along portions of the Broad Street corridor – the corridor with the highest ridership in the area. BRT is a relatively new concept that seeks to provide some of the benefits of a traditional rail-based rapid transit system with a high quality bus service. The elements of BRT appropriate for Richmond include: bus branding, specialized vehicles, limited stop service, real-time next bus arrival information, high frequency service and possibly some form of bus prioritization (signal priority or dedicated bus lanes). The proposal contained in the COA report recommends an initial implementation of BRT along Broad Street, 17th Street and Main Street between Willow Lawn and Rocketts Landing. This is a distance of 7.3 miles, and the concept shows 15 proposed stops along the route, generally spaced about 0.5 miles apart. Implementation of the new transit development concepts from the COA – the bus transfer facility and the BRT service – requires GRTC to follow a detailed process that complies with local development codes while meeting the requirements of federal and state agencies. The COA outlines an implementation plan for each of these concepts. For both of these concepts, it is anticipated that grant funds from the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) will be essential. Compliance with the procedures for obtaining FTA funding (coupled with state matching funds) means that either or both of these concepts will take several years to achieve. The Richmond Regional Mass Transit Study The Richmond Regional Mass Transit Study (RMTS) is a joint effort of the RAMPO and the Virginia Department of Rail and Public Transportation (VDRPT) to conduct a technical analysis of mass transit options for the Richmond region. Consulting services were employed to develop the research, with the firm of HNTB being the lead consultant hired for the effort. This study has a 2031 planning horizon and has been conducted in coordination with the most recent GRTC Comprehensive Operations Analysis (COA) discussed in the previous section of this chapter. Although, as of this writing, the final report has not been completed, the study makes a number of recommendations for future transit services in the major travel corridors in the region. A special MPO Advisory Committee has overseen the development of the study, and public input has been received as the study has progressed. Begun in early 2007, the RMTS is a comprehensive research effort focusing on mid- and long-term options for improving mass transit services in the region. It therefore is an extension of the COA which studied short-term improvements to the existing system. Using socio-economic projections of population, households, employment and other data approved by the MPO, the consultants have estimated the demand for, and cost feasibility of implementing new transit services over the next 25 years. Because the intent of the study is to develop a regional vision for public transportation, the RMTS study area extends beyond the

MPO study area boundaries to encompass the entire region, including the rural areas of Charles City, Goochland, New Kent and Powhatan counties. All surface transportation modes were considered as part of the RMTS: local and express bus service, car and vanpool programs, ADA/specialized transportation services, bus rapid transit, street car/trolley, light rail and commuter rail being the primary options. The RMTS evaluates land use development patterns and regulations in the region, and makes recommendations for supportive land uses appropriate to enhancing public transportation services. In addition, recommendations are contained in the RMTS for institutional arrangements which could provide for on-going funding programs to meet capital and operating needs. Overall, the RMTS represents a plan of action for development and implementation of regional mass transit services over the next 25 years, with consideration given to prioritizing the implementation of such a system. Because the source of funding for the recommended future mass transit services is as yet unknown, specific services recommended by the study do not appear among the list of financially constrained projects shown in Part 4 of this LRTP. A general overview, however, follows: Overview of RMTS Development and Findings: The study team held public meetings for the Richmond Regional Mass Transit Study on November 8, 2007 and April 2, 2008. The meetings were well-attended, and the public was invited to complete comment forms for input at key points in the process. Additionally, a series of meetings were sponsored by the Richmond Chamber of Commerce in the City and in three of the surrounding counties - Chesterfield, Hanover and Henrico. At each of these meetings the study concepts and issues were presented to representatives of the business community who provided input on the provision of transit service in the region. The public comments and other input received indicate that there is a broad clear consensus that additional transit service is needed as a key component of the continued growth of the region. The RMTS identifies nine key travel corridors in the region that are not adequately served by public transportation. Recommendations for transit service are made for each of these corridors using a variety of modes as appropriate for the levels of projected development and potential demand. Modes of service that are recommended included limited stop bus, express bus, bus rapid transit, light rail and commuter rail. For each corridor, recommendations are provided on appropriate frequencies and hours of service, and operating and capital costs have been estimated. The expansion of local bus service in nine additional corridors and the expansion of demand responsive transit services for the transportation disadvantaged to cover the entire region are also proposed and cost estimates are provided for this additional service. The study report concludes with tiered recommendations for medium term and long term transit service improvements.

Chapter 9 9-11

Based on projected growth patterns and prior studies of opportunities for transit service expansion, a three-tiered approach to expanding transit was identified. The following suggested priority ordering is proposed for the Richmond region:

Public Transportation System


• Tier I – Includes those corridors and modal alternatives for which existing

development patterns of and the size of the travel market indicate that there is a current demand for the proposed service. These improvements are feasible for implementation by the mid-term target date of 2016.

• Tier II – Includes corridors and modal alternatives which will be effective investments by 2031 given the current projections for population and employment.

• Tier III – Includes investments in corridors and modal alternatives which will not be effective investments prior to 2031 unless there are substantial changes in patterns of growth that are projected for the region.

Figure 9-2: Corridor/Modal Alternatives by Tier

Tier Corridor/Local Route Mode

Airport Limited Stop Bus

Broad Street Bus Rapid Transit (Phase I)

I-95 North Commuter Bus

I-95 South Commuter Bus

I-64 East Commuter Bus

Midlothian Commuter Bus

Mechanicsville Commuter Bus

Route 1 North Local Bus

Route 1 South Local Bus

Route 5 Local Bus

Tier I

Hull Street Local Bus Local Bus

I-64 West Commuter Bus

Powhatan Commuter Bus

Broad St Bus Rapid Transit (Phase II)

Broad St Feeder Buses (8 routes)

Chesterfield Local Buses (2 routes)

Mechanicsville Local Buses (3 routes)

Midlothian Local Bus

Tier II

Route 288 Local Bus

Broad Street Light Rail Transit

Midlothian Commuter Rail

I-95 North Commuter Rail Tier III

Airport Light Rail Transit


Map 9-2: Tier I Service Diagram


Map 9-3: Tier II Service Diagram


Map 9-4: Tier III Service Diagram


Implementation of the recommended services carries with it capital costs for needed equipment as well as operating subsidies. Capital Costs: Figure 9-3 provides a summary of projected capital costs based on a proposed initial service plan (i.e. route, frequency, and span of service) for Tier I, Tier II, and Tier III recommendations. Capital costs could increase if more frequent service is required to satisfy demand. Tier I recommendations would cost approximately $52 million in 2006 dollars. Capital costs increase to nearly $680 million to implement Tier II, and nearly $1,600 million to implement Tier III. As Figure 9-3 shows, several of the bus services that provide service in Tier I and Tier II are eliminated in Tier III in favor of fixed-guideway services. For example, commuter bus service to Ashland (I-95 North corridor) and Midlothian, as well as the Broad Street BRT and the Airport Limited Stop bus services are replaced with light rail and commuter rail services.


Figure 9-3: Projected Capital Costs (in millions of 2006 dollars) Corridor/Local Route Tier I Tier II Tier III

Airport Limited Stop Bus $1.8 $1.8 --

Broad Street BRT $26.3 $54.4 --

I-95 North Commuter Bus $2.9 $2.9 --

I-95 South Commuter Bus $2.4 $2.4 $2.4

I-64 East Commuter Bus $3.9 $3.9 $3.9

Midlothian Commuter Bus $3.9 $3.9 --

Mechanicsville Commuter Bus $3.9 $3.9 $3.9

Route 1 North Local Bus $2.1 $2.1 $2.1

Route 1 South Local Bus $2.1 $2.1 $2.1

Route 5 Local Bus $1.3 $1.3 $1.3

Hull Street Local Bus $1.3 $1.3 $1.3

I-64 West Commuter Bus -- $3.9 $3.9

Powhatan Commuter Bus -- $2.9 $3.9

Broad St Feeder Buses (8 routes) -- $7.6 $7.6

Chesterfield Local Buses (2 routes) -- $8.4 $8.4

Mechanicsville Local Buses (3 routes) -- $3.4 $3.4

Midlothian Local Bus -- $1.7 $1.7

Route 288 Crosstown Local Bus -- $4.6 $4.6

Broad Street Light Rail -- -- $973.0

Midlothian Commuter Rail -- $80.0 $80.0

Ashland Commuter Rail -- $91.0 $91.0

Airport Light Rail -- $395.0 $395.0

Total $52.0 $678.5 $1,589.5 Operating Costs: Figure 9-4 provides a summary of operating costs based on a proposed initial service plan (i.e. route, frequency, and span of service) for Tier I, Tier II, and Tier III recommendations. This includes the cost of existing services. Operating costs would increase if more frequent service is required to satisfy demand. Tier I recommendations would cost approximately $43.6 million per year. Operating costs increase to $63.4 million for Tier II and $90.0 million for Tier III. As Figure 9-4 shows, several of the bus services that provide service in Tier I and


Tier II are eliminated in Tier III in favor of fixed-guideway services. For example, commuter bus service to Ashland (I-95 North corridor) and Midlothian, as well as the Broad Street BRT and the Airport Limited Stop bus services are replaced with light rail and commuter rail services. Figure 9-4:Projected Operating Costs (in millions of 2006 dollars)

Corridor/Local Route Tier I Tier II Tier III

Existing Service $31.0 $31.0 $31.0 Airport Limited Stop Bus $0.7 $0.7 -- Broad Street BRT $3.0 $4.9 -- I-95 North Commuter Bus $0.4 $0.4 -- I-95 South Express Bus $1.6 $1.6 $1.6 I-64 East Commuter Bus $0.5 $0.5 $0.5 Midlothian Commuter Bus $0.3 $0.3 -- Mechanicsville Commuter Bus $0.1 $0.1 $0.1 Route 1 North Local Bus $1.6 $1.6 $1.6 Route 1 South Local Bus $2.0 $2.0 $2.0 Route 5 Local Bus $1.2 $1.2 $1.2 Hull Street Road $1.2 $1.2 $1.2 I-64 West Commuter Bus -- $0.5 $0.5 Powhatan Commuter Bus -- $0.6 $0.6 Broad St Feeder Buses (8 routes) -- $5.3 $5.3 Chesterfield Local Buses (2 routes) -- $5.4 $5.4 Mechanicsville Local Buses (3 routes) -- $3.0 $3.0 Midlothian Local Bus -- $1.6 $1.6 Route 288 Crosstown Local Bus -- $1.6 $1.6 Broad Street Light Rail -- -- $20.7 Midlothian Commuter Rail -- -- $2.0 Ashland Commuter Rail -- -- $2.5 Airport Light Rail -- -- $7.6 Total $43.6 $63.4 $90.0


Figure 9-5 shows the funding gap between operating costs and the projected amount of non-local operating funds that will be available to the Richmond region in 2016 and 2031. This represents the minimum level of regional operating funds needed if all of the routes are implemented. In reality, federal and state funding programs require a local match. To implement Tier I recommendations the projected operating gap is $18.6 million and increases to $34.3 million to implement Tier II. The projected operating gap for Tier III depends on the implementation year, but is estimated to be less than $60.9 million. These figures include the cost of complimentary paratransit services, which adds between $0.3 million and $1.2 million to projected operating costs. Figure 9-5: Projected Annual Operating Funds Gap (in millions of 2006 dollars) Tier I Tier II Tier III

Projected Operating Costs $43.6 $63.4 $90.0

Projected Operating Funds (non-local sources) $25.0 $29.1 >$29.1

Projected Funding Gap (local share) $18.6 $34.3 <$60.9 The analysis shows that absent more rapid growth in state and federal transit funding than has occurred since 1996, local funding would need to be an ever increasing portion of operating funds. Realization of this funding level would require either that local governments devote larger amounts to transit from general revenues or that mechanisms be established to generate additional funding sources in the Richmond region. Institutional Recommendations The Richmond Regional Mass Transit Study recommends that the following actions be taken on a regional level for the expansion of public transportation services in the region:

• Create a regional transit authority • Establish a secure dedicated regional source of funding • Encourage transit supportive land use

– Higher residential, employment and commercial densities – Mixed use development – Short blocks, grid patterns and reduced setback requirements

• Provide transit supportive services – Improve pedestrian and bicycle facilities – Expand Employer supported transit pass programs – Expand emergency ride home program to cover the entire Richmond region

• Expand demand responsive service for elderly and disabled persons to the entire region


Conclusions The Regional Mass Transit Study fulfills the mission of providing a technical analysis of the most feasible means to expand transit services in the region during the next 25 years and create a truly regional mass transit system. The key components of such a system are:

• A reliance on bus services for public mobility; • A continuation of the “spoke and hub” orientation, with most service designed to carry

travelers back and forth from the downtown core area; • Incremental expansion of local bus service in higher density areas coupled with

express services focused on park ‘n ride lots in suburban locations; • Expansion and coordination of demand responsive transportation to serve the

increasing population of elderly and disabled; • Creation of a new institutional structure to administer the system and generate reliable

funding; • Encouraging higher density housing and employment centers, and providing transit

supportive design features (e.g., sidewalks). Implementation of the recommendations hinges on legislative action at the state level to establish an effective institutional structure, as well as local government actions to create more transit-friendly development patterns. Intercity Passenger Rail The Richmond region is located at the juncture of two of the nation’s most important rail corridors. It is located at the southern end of Amtrak’s Northeast Corridor (NEC) which runs from Boston to Newport News via New York, Philadelphia, Baltimore, Washington D.C., and Richmond. Within Virginia, the NEC service comprises 184 miles, and includes stops at Alexandria, Franconia/Springfield, Woodbridge, Quantico, Fredericksburg, Ashland, Richmond (Staples Mill Road/Greendale Station and Main Street Station), Williamsburg and Newport News. A total of 27 southbound and 28 northbound trips are made each week along this corridor. The Richmond region is also located at the northern end of the Southeast High Speed Rail (SEHSR) Corridor; one of the five original national corridors designated under the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (ISTEA) which authorized a program of high-speed rail corridors nationwide. The SEHSR corridor was first designated by the U.S. Department of Transportation in 1992, and ran from Washington D.C. to Charlotte, North Carolina (NC) via Richmond and Raleigh, NC. Its original designation was extended to include South Carolina, Georgia and Florida. The SEHSR corridor has also been extended to include a link between Richmond and Hampton Roads. Richmond area residents are served by two primary north-south routes operated by Amtrak:

• New York-Washington-Raleigh-Jacksonville (Silver Meteor/Silver Star/Palmetto service) – This Amtrak route includes 175 miles in Virginia, with stops at Alexandria, Quantico, Fredericksburg, Richmond, and Petersburg. Three southbound and three


northbound trains operate each day along this route, resulting in 21 weekly northbound and 21 weekly southbound trips.

• New York-Washington-Raleigh-Charlotte (Carolinian service) – The Carolinian

service traverses 175 miles in Virginia, with stops in Alexandria, Quantico, Fredericksburg, Richmond, and Petersburg. One train trip is made daily in the northbound and southbound directions.

As noted in the Virginia State Rail Plan published by the Virginia Department of Rail and Public Transportation (VDRPT), total Amtrak ridership in Virginia has been relatively flat, falling within the range of 800,000 to 950,000 riders per year between 1993 and 2002. Four stations (Staples Mill , Lorton, Newport News, and Alexandria) account for around 75 percent of Amtrak boardings and alightings in Virginia. Many believe that Amtrak’s inability to grow its ridership – especially in higher density corridors such as Richmond-Washington, D.C., and Hampton Roads-Richmond – is because of issues of reliability, service speed, and service availability. If rail performance can be improved on these routes, then substantial ridership increases are possible. Towards this end, several initiatives (studies, projects and services) are underway to enhance passenger rail service for intercity travel. A summary of these initiatives is provided below. In-depth information on these passenger rail initiatives (plus others within the Commonwealth of Virginia), along with continuous updates and status reports, is available from VDRPT’s website -- www.drpt.virginia.gov. Mid-Atlantic Rail Operations Study On a broad scale, Virginia partnered with the states of Maryland, Delaware, Pennsylvania, and New Jersey, along with the I-95 Corridor Coalition and three railroads (Amtrak, NS, and CSX) to conduct the Mid-Atlantic Rail Operations Study (MAROps). MAROps examined the operational efficiency and capacity of the rail lines parallel to I-95 and I-81, to identify strategies to increase the efficiency and attractiveness of rail (for both passengers and freight) and reduce pressure on I-95, I-81, and other major multistate highway corridors. MAROps has recommended a 20-year, $6.2 billion ($1.3 billion in Virginia) public-private investment program to implement 71 “chokepoint” elimination projects in five states. Southeast High-Speed Rail Corridor and Richmond to Hampton Roads Passenger Rail As noted previously, the Southeast High-Speed Rail Corridor (SEHSR) would extend high-speed rail service south from Washington, D.C., to Richmond, Virginia, and on to Raleigh and Charlotte, North Carolina. Within Virginia, the SEHSR program proposes improvements in three different corridor segments – Washington, D.C. to Richmond; Richmond to Petersburg; and Petersburg to the North Carolina state line. Benefits of extending high-speed rail are likely to include: faster, more reliable service; increased ridership and diversion from automobile; and reduced highway impacts. In 1996, VDRPT successfully petitioned the U.S. DOT to designate an extension of the SEHSR corridor from Richmond to Hampton Roads. VDRPT has been studying two possible


alternatives for this service. One option is to provide service on the CSX line that parallels I-64 down the peninsula, which currently accommodates Amtrak service to Williamsburg and Newport News. The second option is for trains to travel south from Richmond to Petersburg, and then connect to the NS line that parallels U.S. Route 460 and terminates in Norfolk. Feasibility studies of higher speed rail service have been completed for both lines. The I-64 Major Investment Study, which was completed by VDOT in 1999, includes recommendations for double tracking the entire rail corridor, increasing the maximum train speed to 110 mph, and increasing the frequency to eight round trips per day. In 2002, a feasibility study of high-speed rail service in the Route 460 rail corridor was completed, and similar recommendations for implementing high-speed rail service were made. Bristol to Richmond and Washington, D.C. (TransDominion Express) Several reports have been prepared evaluating the potential of operating rail passenger service between Bristol to Richmond and Washington, D.C. The proposed service, known as the “TransDominion Express” (TDX), would link Southwestern Virginia to Richmond via Lynchburg, and link Southwestern Virginia to Washington, D.C. via Lynchburg and Charlottesville. Such a service would provide improved transportation connectivity, passenger choice, and economic development opportunity. Main Street Station Initiative The continuing effort to renovate and upgrade Richmond’s historic Main Street Station is an important element in providing high-speed passenger rail with direct service to downtown Richmond. In addition to the restoration of the station edifice, this initiative shares some of the track infrastructure needs outlined in the MAROps study. Limited passenger rail service returned to Main Street Station in Fall, 2003. Significant future investment will be needed, however, for this facility to function as a true multimodal center. GRTC Richmond/Fredericksburg Express Richmond area residents have available public transit (express bus) service that provides daily trips, Monday thru Friday, between Richmond and Fredericksburg. The express bus service provides a connection to access the existing commuter rail service between Fredericksburg and Washington, D.C. (Washington area commuter rail service is operated by Virginia Railway Express (VRE)). The Richmond/Fredericksburg express bus service is provided under contract to GRTC, with the vehicles being “tour” buses offering plush seating, overhead storage, Wi-Fi access and a bathroom on board. Two morning, and two evening trips are provided, accessing the Rte. 208 park and ride lot adjacent to the VRE train station in Fredericksburg. At this time, there are approximately 60 riders per day using the Richmond/Fredericksburg Express service. Intercity Passenger Rail Summary The 109th U.S. Congress in 2005 created the National Surface Transportation Policy and Revenue Study Commission to provide a national surface transportation vision, including policy and funding recommendations to preserve and enhance the surface transportation system of the United States for the next 50 years. To provide the Commission with


recommendations for implementing a national intercity passenger rail system, the Passenger Rail Working Group (PRWG), comprised of intercity passenger rail experts and transportation professionals was established. As noted in its December 2007 report “Vision for the future: U.S. Intercity Passenger Rail Network Through 2050,” the efforts to improve intercity passenger rail are manifold. As the report states:

The expansion of intercity passenger rail would improve the nation’s transportation system by reducing congestion on other modes and offering mobility options to travelers. It would also address important national goals related to climate change and energy use. National data indicate that passenger rail is more energy efficient than air and auto transport and that its expansion will reduce CO2 emissions, which contribute to global warming. Among the benefits analyzed in this report, the PRWG notes that intercity passenger rail can:

• relieve highway and airway congestion; • improve public safety and air quality; • reduce fuel consumption per passenger mile, potentially reducing the

nation’s dependence on imported oil; • help mitigate the negative impacts of short or prolonged energy supply

disruptions and energy price increases; • provide land use and travel pattern changes that could improve air and

water quality, as well as aesthetic appeal; • provide mobility and economic development opportunities to smaller

communities with little or no other access to public transport; • assure a redundant transportation mode for use in emergency situations;

and • provide a mobility option for individuals who do not drive or fly.”

It is therefore apparent that intercity passenger rail has numerous unrealized benefits for the Richmond area. The RAMPO will continue to coordinate with VDRPT and others to help ensure that practical investments are made to improve intercity passenger rail services.


Chapter 9 â€“ Public Transportation System

Documents

Transcript of Chapter 9 â€“ Public Transportation System