Phase II Summary Report Appendix - CCOG · Phase II Summary Report Appendix ... 2015 MSA Pop....

Phase II Summary Report Appendix

Sample meeting agenda

Sample questions sheet

Sample feedback form

Phase II PowerPoint presentation

Phase II meetings attendee list

Group discussion notes from each meeting (in the order that the meetings occurred): o Gaston County o Lincoln County o Iredell County o North Mecklenburg County o South Carolina o Union County o South Mecklenburg County o Make‐up Meeting #1 o Make‐up Meeting #2 o Cabarrus County

METROPOLITAN TRANSIT COMMISSION CENTRALINA COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS

Phase II County Meetings August 24 – October 5, 2017 ∙ 2 Hours Each

Cabarrus, Gaston, Iredell, Lincoln, Mecklenburg (North and South), and Union counties, South Carolina Rock Hill‐Fort Mill Area Transportation Study (RFATS)

area (portions of Lancaster and York Counties)

Agenda

Time Agenda Item Who

15 minutes Welcome and Introductions All

20 minutes The State of Transit CCOG and CATS Staff

10 minutes What We Heard During RTES Phase I CCOG Staff

70 minutes Group Engagement All

5 minutes Wrap Up and Next Steps All

1

Phase II County Meetings August 24 – October 5, 2017 ∙ 2 Hours Each

When prompted, please review the following questions and write down your answers and/or prioritize all that apply. This sheet will be taken up at the end of the meeting. Please write legibly!

1) What did you find most interesting about what you just heard (Background and Phase I results)? 2) Is there anything that you didn’t hear that you thought you would? What’s missing? 3) Thinking of the growth‐related challenges that we will face, how important is the efficient movement of

people to our success? Why? 4) How should transit support our region’s future prosperity?

2

5) What role should transit play in your county’s future competitiveness?

6) Smartphone Polling‐‐Regarding a “regional, system‐wide focus,” prioritize the following issues as they

apply to your county (with your first choice being the most important):

Cross‐county commuting (jobs, culture, entertainment, etc.)

Need for existing mobility/transit system coordination

Need to communicate development projects having multi‐jurisdictional impacts

Holistic transportation choices that support economic and social mobility across county lines (political boundaries not always applicable for transportation)

Better understand models for cross‐county collaboration and coordination

Other:

7) Smartphone Polling‐‐With respect to what should be identified through the development of a Regional Transit Plan, prioritize the following in terms of importance to your county (with your first choice being the most important):

Current mobility options/systems/assets

Land use and social/economic mobility vision

Mobility Options and Connections (other than light rail)

Transit Destinations, Transit Lines, Transit Mode

Funding Options, Barriers, and Peer Region Review

Administrative Structure Options and Peer Region Review

Regional Commuter Rail Options (using Amtrak line or other)

Other:

3

8) Smartphone Polling‐‐On a scale of 1 to 5 (5 being the most), how important is transit supportive messaging for the following groups.

Employers and other private sector interests

Non‐transit riders

Residents with jobs in another jurisdiction

Destination based transit riders (e.g., entertainment, leisure, etc.)

Seniors and others with limited mobility

Residents with limited access to a car

Other:

9) What will your county/community be able to do because of a Regional Transit Plan that you are not able to

do now?

10) Is there consensus on continuing the regional transit discussion?

4

11) Smartphone Polling‐‐Of the following items, prioritize what you want to get out of the Transit Summit (with your first choice being the most important).

High level, expert presentations

A regional transit work plan and timeline for next steps

Additional details on how my county’s needs could be met through a regional transit plan

Sense for support from federal and state agencies for a regional transit plan

Announcement of funding partners (potential and secured)

MPO, NCDOT, SCDOT involvement

Other:

12) Who should definitely be invited/present at the Transit Summit?

****************************************

Name: ___________________________________________________________________________

What jurisdiction or organization do you represent? _____________________________________

Contact Information: _______________________________________________________________

Phase II County Meetings · Feedback Form

Please take a few minutes to provide your feedback.

Rating Strongly

Agree Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly Disagree

1) The meeting was useful and accomplished what I expected.

2) There was enough time to develop and discuss ideas.

3) The venue was suitable.

4) The meeting time was appropriate.

5) Of the information provided, what topic(s) did you find most useful?

6) Were there any topics not covered that you would like more information about?

7) Please share any suggestions you might have for improving the meeting.

If you would like someone to follow‐up with you, please mark the box:

Name: ___________________________________ Phone: _____________________________ Email: ___________________________

1

Regional Transit Engagement SeriesMETROPOLITAN TRANSIT COMMISSION CENTRALINA COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS

Welcome and Introductions

2

Agenda Background and Context

o Who is Involved?

o Why Now?

What is the Regional Transit Engagement Series?

Bridging CATS Current Efforts with Long Term Transit Goals

Group Engagement ‐ Local Knowledge

Next Steps

What is the MTC?

3

Background and ContextBackground and Context

Top Priorities for the CONNECT Region

Parks & Open Space

More Transportation Choices

Support Our Communities

Support Local Farms

Cost of Providing Services

Improved Water Quality

Improved Air Quality

Work Closer to Home

More Housing Choices

Cost of My Commute

4

Where Should We Invest in Transit?

CONNECT Transit

5

Regional TransitPlan

Context for Transit Engagement

Timeline for Regional Transit Planning Efforts

2012 – 2013 – 2014 - 2015

2006 2007

Aug2015

April2016

Aug2016

Nov2016

Jan 1999

Nov1998

Jul1998 2002

Jan2015

6

In‐Commuters to Mecklenburg County2016

Our economy is regional.

WHYNOW?

Source: Longitudinal Employment and Housing Dynamics, 2014

Coordination is essential and takes long‐term effort.

WHYNOW?

7

Region Outpacing NC Growth

Growth in Urban Metros

Senior Tsunami

Millennials

We are growing.

WHYNOW?

Regions2015 MSA

Pop.Estimate

Miles of trackNumber of

LinesNumber of Stations

Daily Ridership Type

Denver, CO Region 2.81 M57.4 7 54

106,000LRT

29.0 2 9 CRT

Dallas, TX Region 7.10 M 93.0 4 64 99,000 LRT

Portland, OR Region 2.38 M 60.0 5 97 121,000 LRT

Sacramento, CA Region 2.27 M 37.5 2 48 50,000 LRT

Phoenix, AZ Region 4.57 M 26.3 1 35 47,000 LRT

Seattle, WA Region 3.73 M 20.3 2 21 69,000 LRT

Charlotte Region 2.42 M 18.9 (2018) 1 26 34,000 LRT

Regional Transit ComparisonWHYNOW?

8

How Will Results Be Used? Strengthen Regional Partnerships Inform CATS 2030 Plan Aid Local Planning Efforts Inform Future MTPs Uncover Near‐Term Strategies Gauge Interest in Planning Across

County Lines Determine Region’s Next Steps

Geography

9

Local, State, Federal Elected Officials and Staff, Economic Development Organizations, Institutions, Private Sector,

Phase I Participants

Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar

Phase I Engagement

Managers, Transit Directors, Transportation

Planners, Planning Directors

MTC Update

Regional Transit Summit

Cabarrus

Gaston

Iredell

Lincoln

Meck. (N)

Meck. (S)

Union

RFATS

Cabarrus

Gaston

Iredell

Lincoln

Mecklenburg (N)

Mecklenburg (S)

Union

RFATS

Centralina COG MTC Partnership

Partner Updates

Phase II Engagement

Public Survey

MTCCall to Action

Relationship to Other Projects

• Economic growth and competitiveness

• Transportation and land use coordination

• Transportation choice, multi‐modal options, and the importance of mobility

10

More than rail

2030 Transit System Plan StatusOperating• LYNX Blue Line Light Rail • Sprinter Airport Enhanced Bus • CityLYNX Gold Line Phase 1

Under Construction• LYNX Blue Line Extension• CityLYNX Gold Line Phase 2

Under Design• Charlotte Gateway Station

Under Study• North and West Corridor• LYNX Silver Line• System Integration

Unfunded• North Corridor/West Corridor LPA• CityLYNX Gold Line Extensions • LYNX Silver Line

11

• 9.3 miles, 11 stations • 4 park and ride facilities • Approximately 3,100 parking spaces• Accommodates 3-car trains• 25,000+ daily riders• Improvements to North Tryon St.• Connects UNC Charlotte campuses• 22 minute commute from Uptown to UNC

Charlotte• Initial peak period service 7.5 minute frequency• Connecting bus services• Revenue service by March 2018

LYNX Blue Line Extension (BLE)Project Overview

University City BlvdJW Clay Blvd / UNC-Charlotte

UNC-Charlotte Main

12

Live Testing has begunon the LYNX BLE Alignment

CityLYNX Phase 2

• Construction underway• New vehicles with Phase 2

13

• MTC adopted LYNX Silver Line light rail staff recommendation as the Locally Preferred Alternative in November 2016

• 13-15 miles long

• 13 stations with 8-10 park and ride locations

• As part of recommendation Uptown alignments will be include in a system integration study.

LYNX Silver Line

Update to the System Plan

Southeast Corridor (Silver Line)MTC adopted Light rail to Matthews as LPA in November 2016Need to determine Center City access

North Corridor (Red Line)LPA has been commuter rail on NS O-LineUse of Norfolk Southern O-Line corridor problematicIn addition to O-Line, the study will consider rail on other alignments

West (Airport) Corridor Current LPA StreetcarPlan to study Light Rail and potential alignmentsServing Airport is a mustCan Proposed River District be served?

Center City Integration StudyDetermine how best to integrate three corridors into downtown with existing Blue Line and Gold Line Streetcar

Update to the System Plan

14

Phase I EngagementWhat Did We Learn?

Regional Transit Engagement By the Numbers

8

2CRAFT Meetings

Communities and Agencies Represented41

Counties

Presentation to 44

Materials to 200CCOG Conference Attendees72 LG Managers

& Planners

CCOG Board Members (Elected)

1 Trip to Denver, CO3,128 Miles

Presentation to 33Regional Managers and Mayors

Regional Transit Service Providers12

15

Regional Transit – Phase I Findings

Regional, System‐wide Focus

Desire for Developing a Regional Transit Plan to Identify: Mobility Options and Connections (other than light rail)




Regional Commuter Rail Options

Regional Transit –Phase I Findings

Existing, Regional Transit Resource Guide

Transit Supportive Messaging Needed

Expressed Need for Additional Data Tipping point for riding transit Desire to pay for transit

http://bit.ly/RegionalTransit

16

Let’s Hear From Youo In a moment we will ask you to use your mobile device to participate

in some polling questions

o For now, you can simply open a browser on your phone and type in

the following address: www.pollev.com/centralinao We will start with a practice round to be sure

everything is working.

o No phone or limited data plan? Simply record

responses on the question sheet w/ packet

What did you find most interesting about what you just heard (background and phase I results)?

17

Is there anything that you didn’t hear, that you thought you would? What’s missing?

Thinking of the growth‐related challenges that we will face, how important is the efficient movement of people to our success? Why?

18

How should transit support our region’s future prosperity?

What role should transit play in your county’s future competitiveness?

19

PollEverywhere Instructions1. Visit www.pollev.com/centralina2. Wait for poll to appear3. Submit response

20

Here are some potential concepts to consider if we develop a shared vision for transit across jurisdictions based on what we heard during Phase I…

22

What will your county/community be able to do because of a Regional Transit Plan that you are not able to do now?

Is there consensus on continuing the regional transit discussion?

23

Who is missing? Who should definitely be invited and/or present at the Transit Summit?

24

What’s Next

Public Survey –Go Live Date

Phase II Summary to MTC

Coordination with MPOs and other Partners

Regional Transit Summit –Next Best Steps

What’s Next?

Continue the Regional Transit DiscussionGoal: Examine support for regional transit plan through focus groups with elected and economic development officials and stakeholders in each county.

Take the Public PulseGoal: Through market research, gather public opinion and attitudes on transit, transit type, destinations, potential use, funding mechanisms supported, etc.

Prepare for the Regional Transit PlanGoal: Define a plan scope that meets the needs of individual counties and identify funding for the plan.

25

Phase II Meeting Schedule County Meeting Date Time Location Venue & Address

1 Gaston August 249:00 am –11:00 am

GastoniaGastonia Conference Center145 S. Marietta Street

2 Lincoln August 259:00 am –11:00 am

LincolntonJames W. Warren Citizens Center Commissioners Room – 3rd Floor115 W. Main Street

3 Iredell August 289:00 am –11:00 am

MooresvilleCharles Mack Citizen Center Moore Room 215 N. Main Street

4North Mecklenburg

August 282:00 pm –4:00 pm

DavidsonDavidson College Presbyterian Church Congregation House218 Concord Road

5South Carolina

August 299:00 am –11:00 am

Rock HillManchester Meadows Conference Room – 2nd Floor 337 E. Mt. Gallant Road

6 Cabarrus September 119:00 am –11:00 am

ConcordCabarrus County Government Center Multi‐Purpose Room65 Church Street South

7 Union September 13 9:00 am –11:00 am

MonroeOld Armory Community Center500 S. Johnson Street

8South Mecklenburg

September 13 2:00 pm –4:00 pm

Matthews Matthews Town Hall Council Chambers232 Matthews Station Street

9 Make‐Up Meeting September 229:00 am –11:00 am

CharlotteCentralina COG OfficesCatawba Room9815 David Taylor Drive

http://bit.ly/RegionalTransit

RTES Phase II Attendee List

1

Gaston County – August 24, 2017 – Gastonia Conference Center

Name Organization Title

Shelley DeHart Belmont Planning Director

Alex Robinson Belmont Senior Planner

Earl Mathers Gaston County County Manager

David L. Williams Gaston County Director of Planning & Dev Srvcs

Juan Garcia Gaston County Planner

Willie King, Jr. Gaston County Planner

Kristy Crisp Gastonia Business Service Manager

Julio Paredes Gaston Cleveland Lincoln MPO Transportation Planner

Danny Jackson Mount Holly City Manage

Brian DuPont Mount Holly Planner

James Estes Thom Tillis, US Senate Regional Representative

Lincoln County – August 25, 2017 – James W. Warren Citizens Center in Lincolnton


Andrew Bryant Lincoln County Planning Director

Kathryn Saine Lincoln County Senior Services Director

Susan McCracken Lincoln County Dept of Social Services Director

Thomas Mitchell Lincoln County Dept of Social Services Economic Services Program Mgr

Cliff Brumfield Lincoln Econ Dev Association Executive Director

Kara Brown Lincoln Econ Dev Association Account Services Manager

Steve Zickefoose Lincolnton City Manager

Laura Elam Lincolnton Planning Director

Kristal Ford Transportation Lincoln County Transportation Manager

Bill Beam Lincoln County Chairman

Richard Permenter Lincoln County Commissioner


2

Iredell County – August 28, 2017 – Charles Mack Citizen Center in Mooresville


Bradley Johnson ICATS Transportation Director

Tommy Bowles Iredell County Vice Chairman

Jeff McNeely Iredell County Commissioner

Matthew Todd Iredell County Planning Director

Bill Thunberg Lake Norman Transp. Commission Executive Director

Miles Atkins Mooresville Mayor

Terrell Blackmon Mooresville Comm & Economic Development

Bobby Compton Mooresville Commissioner

Lisa Qualls Mooresville Commissioner

Sherry Ashley Statesville Assistant Planning Director

Paul Bryant Troutman Councilmember

Erika Martin Troutman Planning Director

Leslie Mozingo Strategics Principal

Vickie Sawyer

North Mecklenburg County – August 28, 2017 – Davidson College Presbyterian Church


Phanalphie Rhue Alma Adams, US House of Representatives District Director

Erin Gillespie Charlotte Center City Partners Planning and Dev Associate

Keith Kelly Charlotte Chamber of Commerce VP, Local and Regional Govt

Wayne Herron Cornelius Planning Director

Michael Militich Cornelius Councilmember

Chuck Travis Cornelius Mayor

Jason Burdette Davidson Planning Director

Travis Johnson Davidson Senior Planner

John Woods Davidson Mayor

John Aneralla Huntersville Mayor

Bill Coxe Huntersville Transportation Planner

Sushil Nepal Huntersville Principal Planner

Peter Zeiler Mecklenburg County Economic Development Director


3

South Carolina – August 29, 2017 – Manchester Meadows in Rock Hill


Kara Drane Catawba Regional COG Senior Planner

Paul Spokas JLL

Amy Massey Kimley‐Horn

Steve Willis Lancaster County County Administrator

Leah Gaskin Lash Group

Sara Nomellini LPL Financial

Kathy Lee Ashwell LPL Financial

Christopher Herrmann RFATS Transportation Planning Assistant

David Hooper RFATS Administrator

Scott Sebert RFATS

Clifton Goolsby Rock Hill Transportation Manager

Tabitha Engle Shutterfly

David Branham South Carolina DOT Commissioner

Wes Climer South Carolina Senate Senator

Susan Britt Tega Cay Planning & Development Manager

Steve Allen York County

Allison Love York County Open Space Planner

Audra Miller York County Planning and Dev Director

Jason Flora York County Economic Development

Marc Howie York County Co‐op


4

Union County – September 13, 2017 – Old Armory Community Center in Monroe


Phil Thomas Fairview Mayor

Adam Recchia Foursquare ITP Senior Transportation Planner

Rox H. Burhans Indian Trail Planning Director

Todd Huntsinger Indian Trail Engineering Project Manager

Frank Deese Marshville Mayor

Scott Howard Marshville Town Manager

Larry Faison Monroe City Manager

Bobby Kilgore Monroe Mayor

Mark Brody NC House of Representatives Union & Anson Counties – District 55 NC Representative

Mary Ross Ross & Associates Principal

Erinn Nichols Stallings Interim Town Manager

Chris Easterly Stallings Town Engineer

Kevin Parker Stallings Associate Engineer

Lynda Paxton Stallings Councilmember

David Scholl Stallings Councilmember

Bjorn Hansen Union County Transportation Planner

Frank Aikmus Union County Board of Commissioners Chairman

Richard Helms Union County Board of Commissioners Vice Chairman

Jackie Morgan Union County Health Department Div Mgr Public Health Operations

Tim Jones Waxhaw Planner II

Marlon Watson Waxhaw Director of Transportation

Nish Trivedi Waxhaw Planner II/Transportation Planner

Bill Deter Weddington Mayor

Michael Smith Weddington Councilmember

Patrick Niland Wingate Town Manager


5

South Mecklenburg County – September 13, 2017 – Matthews Town Hall


Josh Ward Richard Burr, US Senate Regional Representative

Gregory Phipps Charlotte Councilmember

Andy Grzymski Charlotte Dept of Transportation

John Galles Greater Charlotte Biz Principal

Hazen Blodgett Matthews Town Manager

Kathi Ingrish Matthews Planning Director

Chris Melton Matthews Councilmember

Jeff Miller Matthews Councilmember

CJ O’Neill Matthews Public Works Director

Susan Habina‐Woolard Matthews Town Engineer

John Urban Matthews Councilmember

Lou Abernathy Matthews TAC

Pat Cotham Mecklenburg County Commissioner

Peter Zeiler Mecklenburg County Economic Development Director

Mary Belk NC House of Representatives Mecklenburg County – District 88 NC Representative

Jack Edwards Pineville Mayor

Brandon Hackney Pineville Planner

Christopher McDonough Pineville Councilmember

Bob Becker Robert Pittenger, US House of Representatives District Director

Phase II Make‐Up Meeting #1 – September 22, 2017 – Centralina COG in Charlotte


Vi Lyles Charlotte Councilmember

Julio Paredes GCLMPO Transportation Planner

Teresa Campo Monroe Community Development Coordinator

Beverly Earle NC House of Representatives Mecklenburg County – District 101 NC Representative

Chris Hutter Novant Health Sr. Director of Professional and Support Services


6

Phase II Make‐Up Meeting #2 – October 2, 2017 – Centralina COG in Charlotte


Tim Gibbs Charlotte DOT Transportation Planner III

Bob Cook Charlotte Regional Transportation Planning Organization Secretary

Scott Neisler Kings Mountain Mayor

Kim Moore Mecklenburg Transportation System Senior Social Services Manager

Dana Stoogenke Rocky River Rural Planning Organization Director

Cabarrus County – October 5, 2017 – Cabarrus County Government Center in Concord


Mike Downs Cabarrus County County Manager

Franklin Barnes Cabarrus County Planner

Phillip Collins Cabarrus County Planner

Lynn Shue Cabarrus County Commissioner

Bob Bushey Cabarrus County Transportation Srvcs Director

LJ Weslowski CK Rider Transit Manager

Andy Christy CK Rider Planner

Al Brown Concord Councilmember

Brian Hiatt Concord City Manager

Lloyd Payne Concord Assistant City Manager

Georgia Lozier Richard Hudson, US House of Representatives Regional Staff

Tucker Osborne Richard Hudson, US House of Representatives Regional Representative

Zac Gordon Kannapolis Planning Director

Darrell Hinnant Kannapolis Mayor

Irene Sacks Kannapolis Director of Econ & Comm Dev

1

Phase II County Meetings – Gaston County August 24, 2017 ∙ 9:00 am – 11:00 am ∙ Gastonia Conference Center


1) What did you find most interesting about what you just heard (Background and Phase I results)?

MTC Ex‐officio membership‐learning more about that. Representation vs. voting/non‐voting status‐understand that structure better.

Hearing discussion about light rail west and how to stay involved in that conversation. There is interest in cooperating in connection efforts‐keep momentum growing.

2) Is there anything that you didn’t hear that you thought you would? What’s missing?

Density‐would like to see more comparison.

Are there other places within the region that are similar to Gaston County and also regions to look to outside of our region?

Environmental impacts of expanding transit and benefits

Understand perceived detriments to transit and how to address o Education needed

Is there more detail about BLE regarding park and ride, etc. 3) Thinking of the growth‐related challenges that we will face, how important is the efficient movement of

people to our success? Why?

“It’s important.” Public/customer service is key and critical. Efficiency and educating public on how to use system.

o Paradigm shift o Density considerations/controlling sprawl

Culture‐change would be needed‐paradigm shift, again

Transit is key in Gaston Country for economic development purposes o Continued conversation and coordination about this issue is critical o Efficient movement of people is important

4) How should transit support our region’s future prosperity?

Parking for light rail is important.

Regional economic generator‐airport and transit, too.

Jobs and economy are top!

Inter‐connectivity and interstate coordination‐how will that work out? (admin/jurisdictional)

Planning locations and major employment centers‐with transit expansion (geography)

Transit should be part of larger network‐for multiple reasons‐economic development; entertainment

Prosperity‐related to growth but for all people. Affordable options are needed.

Need equitable, bi‐state regional focus o If it’s good for here, then it’s good for the region o No community is an island.

Need to further define prosperity

The how is important ‐if we’re going to work as a region‐it needs to be obvious! (road conditions, etc.)

2


It’s a service that is offered. About its implementation‐ to be comprehensive at county level‐need high‐level service (in the county)

Attracting and retaining talent‐be prepared with transit options (not car dependent)

Facilities are important. Make them inviting, interesting, etc.

Transit facilities as mixed use, places of interest.








Other:









Other:

8) Smartphone Polling‐‐On a scale of 1 to 5 (5 being the most), how important is transit supportive

messaging for the following groups.







Other:

3

9) What will your county/community be able to do because of a Regional Transit Plan that you are not able to do now?

Market opportunities for jobs, etc. inside and outside Gaston County. o “Because of regional transit plan, I can take ________ opportunity.” o Having plan in place may help change mindsets of residents, employers, elected

Broaden regional vision. More integrated vision, among jurisdictions; topic areas

10) Is there consensus on continuing the regional transit discussion? Yes.








Other:


Private sector

Universities/schools/community colleges o Young minds to get involved o Destinations; traffic generators

Response options Percentage

Invisibility 5 63%

Mind reading 3 38%

Responses

Gaston county

The State

Gaston County

Belmont

Belmont

Gaston County

City of Gastonia

Mount Holly


Cross-county commuting (jobs, culture, entertainment, etc.)

7 30%

Need for existing mobility/transit system coordination 3 13%

Need to communicate projects having multi-jurisdictional impacts

5 22%

Holistic transportation choices that support economic and social mobility (political boundaries not always applicable for transportation)

5 22%

Better understand models for cross-county collaboration 3 13%

Other? 0 0%

If you had a superpower, which ability would you prefer?

What jurisdiction do you represent?

Regarding a "Regional, System-wide Focus," prioritize the following issues as they apply to your

county (with your first choice being the most important):

RTES Phase II EngagementCurrent run (last updated Aug 24, 2017 11:11am)

11Polls

10Participants

11Average responses

78%

Average engagement

Count

80%

Engagement

8Responses

80%

Engagement

8Responses

Count

80%

Engagement

23Responses


Current mobility options/systems/assets 0 0%

Land use and social/economic mobility vision 4 17%

Mobility Options and Connections (other than light rail) 5 21%

Transit Destinations, Transit Lines, Transit Mode 4 17%

Funding Options, Barriers, and Peer Region Review 6 25%

Administrative Structure Options and Peer Region Review 0 0%

Regional Commuter Rail Options 4 17%

Other? 1 4%


1 0 0%

2 0 0%

3 1 13%

4 3 38%

5 4 50%


1 0 0%

2 0 0%

3 7 88%

4 1 13%

5 0 0%


1 0 0%

2 0 0%

3 0 0%

4 2 25%

5 6 75%

With respect to what should be identified through the Development of a Regional Transit Plan,

prioritize the following in terms of importance to your county (with your first choice being the most

important):

On a scale of 1 to 5 (5 being the most), how important is transit supportive messaging for

Employers?

On a scale of 1 to 5 (5 being the most), how important is transit supportive messaging for Non-

transit riders?

On a scale of 1 to 5 (5 being the most), how important is transit supportive messaging for residents

with jobs in another jurisdiction?

Count

80%

Engagement

24Responses

Count

80%

Engagement

8Responses

Count

80%

Engagement

8Responses

Count

80%

Engagement

8Responses


1 0 0%

2 0 0%

3 0 0%

4 5 63%

5 3 38%


1 0 0%

2 0 0%

3 1 13%

4 4 50%

5 3 38%


1 0 0%

2 0 0%

3 0 0%

4 3 38%

5 5 63%

Response options Rank


1st

Work plan and timeline for next steps 2nd

MPO, NCDOT, SCDOT involvement 3rd


4th

High level, expert presentations 5th

Announcement of funding partners (potential and secured) 6th

Other__________________ 7th


destination based transit riders (entertainment, leisure, etc.)?

On a scale of 1 to 5 (5 being the most), how important is transit supportive messaging for seniors

and others with limited mobility?


with limited access to a car?

Of the following items, prioritize what you want to get out of the Transit Summit (with your first

choice being the most important):

Count

80%

Engagement

8Responses

Count

80%

Engagement

8Responses

Count

80%

Engagement

8Responses

60%

Engagement

6Responses

1

Phase II County Meetings – Lincoln County August 25, 2017 ∙ 9:00 am – 11:00 am ∙ James W. Warren Citizens Center



Existing rail lines ‐ how can we access and use them?

Representation on MTC ‐ how did that come about?

Geography ‐‐ East and West Lincoln have different needs.

Individuals have different transit/mobility needs. o Life necessities (e.g., doctor visits, etc.)


Customer service. Focus on needs of people.

Relationship between transit planning and MPO, NCDOT o What is it? o Is there a system in place?

3) Thinking of the growth‐related challenges that we will face, how important is the efficient movement of


Jobs and mobility of workforce. Needs of millennials/younger and seniors‐needs are expected

Employment through lens of generation and where you are in life: o Family structure/life station o Industry opportunity/jobs

Lifestyle change‐rural/rural‐urban, raising mobility and job opportunities o Paradigm shift regarding transit/mobility

Transit decision now impact land use decisions now and beyond o Investment in transit will save asphalt investment o This (transit) is a growth‐related opportunity

If you build it…they will come.

Economic opportunities – how and have a plan in place. Elected officials and other leaders must keep an economic plan in mind.

Tipping point concept: not near it yet. o Movement of people within Lincoln County is more the issue. o Residential development in western Lincoln? Open space is valued. o Carrying capacity issue – population density‐hard to mesh with money/cost o But must plan for the future


People could be more efficiently moved with investment in transit. o Having regional support for transit requires mindset change.

Generational issue – transit means different things for different age groups

“You’ve got to get off the roads.”

2

Missed opportunities regarding business (re) location‐people organizations are looking for options, including mobility. Attract and retain.


Receptiveness to transit options will shape how Lincoln grows. It is all about people, jobs, and services efficiencies.

Ease of accessing transit – important to consider. o Particularly for seniors – accessibility, considerations o Need well‐placed access points and people’s needs

Consider access related to services (doctors’ offices, etc.)

Prosperity for all residents








Other:









Other:

3








Other:

9) What will your county/community be able to do because of a Regional Transit Plan that you are not able to

do now?

Building a transit center in Lincoln(ton) – thinking about a hub in Lincoln County. Need a plan for a hub like this – keep in mind other places that people go for jobs.

Good to have regional vision and plan – it’s a start, but in actuality may be different.









Other:


Money holders

ELBA

Chamber


Invisibility 7 88%

Mind reading 1 13%

Responses

Lincoln County

county

Lincoln County

City of Lincolnton

Lincoln County

County

County

Lincoln County



1st

Cross-county commuting (jobs, culture, entertainment, etc.) 2nd

Better understand models for cross-county collaboration 3rd

Need for existing mobility/transit system coordination 4th

Need to communicate projects having multi-jurisdictional impacts 5th

Other? 6th





RTES Phase II Engagement-LincolnCurrent run (last updated Aug 25, 2017 3:20pm)

11Polls

9Participants

8Average responses

92%

Average engagement

Count

89%

Engagement

8Responses

89%

Engagement

8Responses

100%

Engagement

9Responses


Land use and social/economic mobility vision 1st

Funding Options, Barriers, and Peer Region Review 2nd

Transit Destinations, Transit Lines, Transit Mode 3rd

Current mobility options/systems/assets 4th

Mobility Options and Connections (other than light rail) 5th

Regional Commuter Rail Options 6th

Administrative Structure Options and Peer Region Review 7th

Other? 8th


1 0 0%

2 0 0%

3 3 33%

4 5 56%

5 1 11%


1 1 11%

2 1 11%

3 4 44%

4 3 33%

5 0 0%


1 0 0%

2 2 22%

3 1 11%

4 1 11%

5 5 56%



important):


Employers?

On a scale of 1 to 5 (5 being the most), how important is transit supportive messaging for Non-

transit riders?


with jobs in another jurisdiction?

89%

Engagement

8Responses

Count

100%

Engagement

9Responses

Count

100%

Engagement

9Responses

Count

100%

Engagement

9Responses


1 0 0%

2 1 11%

3 2 22%

4 6 67%

5 0 0%


1 0 0%

2 0 0%

3 2 22%

4 0 0%

5 7 78%


1 0 0%

2 0 0%

3 1 11%

4 1 11%

5 7 78%



1st


2nd


Work plan and timeline for next steps 4th



Other__________________ 7th


destination based transit riders (entertainment, leisure, etc.)?

On a scale of 1 to 5 (5 being the most), how important is transit supportive messaging for seniors

and others with limited mobility?


with limited access to a car?



Count

100%

Engagement

9Responses

Count

100%

Engagement

9Responses

Count

100%

Engagement

9Responses

44%

Engagement

4Responses

1

Phase II County Meetings – Iredell County August 28, 2017 ∙ 9:00 am – 11:00 am ∙ Charles Mack Citizen Center



Similarities: transit as community and economic development driver across the region.

A lot of competing interests for same funding.

Disappointed to see Redline stopping short of Troutman and Statesville. Growth is heading north rapidly.

Number of commuters traveling from Iredell to Mecklenburg (14,000 seems low).

How does SC figure in? Coordination between state/federal representatives across NC/SC‐is needed!

Considerations around resource distribution/allocation in MPOs (weighted voting, etc.). 2) Is there anything that you didn’t hear that you thought you would? What’s missing?

Robust growth – would like to hear more on that.

Iredell County is in CRTPO, but in a different NCDOT division. Regional vs. divisional, perhaps not getting an accurate read.

3) Thinking of the growth‐related challenges that we will face, how important is the efficient movement of


Movement of people from home to work and work to home is critical ‐‐ also shopping.

Efficient movement of people #1 priority. It’s about improving quality of life and economics.

Good transportation options are linked to economic development and residential/commercial development. Beware of lost opportunities.

Focus on bringing people north out of Charlotte. o Planning for connectivity between east and west is also needed.

Coordinating between county and municipalities (e.g. fixing lighting in municipal counties purview). Local government working more efficiently to solve problems.

“This issue is vital.” About movement of people and product/freight. 14,000 seems low regarding people leaving Iredell for work.

o Moving people within county is critical too. 4) How should transit support our region’s future prosperity?

Attracting business/many look at transit system as big factor for moving business into the area. o Beware of lost opportunities regarding business.

Great transit system as regional asset. o We can all claim and use regional attractions (lakes, parks, trails, shopping)

All about growth, quality of life, tourism, improving all of the above.

2


Educating public on what’s available regarding transit. Making clear the transit and land use connection.

Mooresville/Lake Norman area is already competing with Rock Hill, upstate SC and Cabarrus o Would transit increase competition within region? o Would transit be helpful for region vs. other region competition?








Other:









Other:








Other:

3


Shared decision making among jurisdictions – understanding and development of a functional system.

Right of Way protection – coordinating between jurisdictions.

Figure out alignments to get going.

Got to have plan to apply for federal funds; understand where/where not to develop.

Community needs to understand who they are and what they want.

Having a plan = preparation and holding/protecting land. Staying ahead of the growth curve.

10) Is there consensus on continuing the regional transit discussion? Yes. Need to continue to build off CONNECT (urgency!)

land available is a real issue

showing up together matters regarding applying for funding/communicating with other elected officials and federal staffers at the summit

Where does the money come from?

What are peer regions doing?








Other:



Invisibility 2 29%

Mind reading 5 71%

Responses

Town of Mooresville

Town of Mooresville

Troutman

ICATS

Town of Mooresville

Statesville

Town of Troutman

Iredel Co



1st


Need for existing mobility/transit system coordination 3rd


Better understand models for cross-county collaboration 4th

Other? 6th





RTES Phase II Engagement-IredellCurrent run (last updated Sep 1, 2017 2:12pm)

5Polls

9Participants

8Average responses

91%

Average engagement

Count

78%

Engagement

7Responses

89%

Engagement

8Responses

100%

Engagement

9Responses


Current mobility options/systems/assets 1st

Land use and social/economic mobility vision 2nd

Funding Options, Barriers, and Peer Region Review 3rd


Transit Destinations, Transit Lines, Transit Mode 5th



Other? 8th


Employers 1st

Residents with jobs in another jurisdiction 2nd

Residents with limited access to a car 3rd

Seniors and others with limited mobility 4th

Destination based transit riders (entertainment, leisure, etc.) 5th

Non-transit riders 6th

Other? 7th



important):

When thinking of transit supportive messaging for the following audiences, prioritize the following

in terms of importance relative to your county (with your first choice being the most important):

100%

Engagement

9Responses

89%

Engagement

8Responses

1

Phase II County Meetings – Mecklenburg County August 28, 2017 ∙ 2:00 pm – 4:00 pm ∙ Davidson College Presbyterian Church Congregation

House



This is a regional look at transit and surrounding areas are interested.

During Phase I communities asked about it and were interested in all kinds of transit.


“See the dream” – must get beyond Mecklenburg County.

Trip to Denver, Colorado helped to see what is possible. Makes concept less abstract.

Having other regions to look at – sets stage for what we’re talking about. Denver is one example. 3) Thinking of the growth‐related challenges that we will face, how important is the efficient movement of


It’s important because people will go elsewhere.

Autonomous Connected Vehicle (ACV) technology has/will have a big impact on movement of people. o Safety/reliability are key o If we weren’t so reliant on single occupancy vehicles, other opportunities/options could open

up in other places

How to message about buses ‐‐ make bus‐riding more attractive.

Work to dispel stigma around transit.

Do not need a roads‐only approach. Need to figure out how to get people from home to where they can catch transit.

o This requires micro‐level discussion o First mile/last mile considerations

Question is about efficient movement. Jobs, quality of life, entertainment, etc. o What’s most efficient way to get into Charlotte? o Look more at transit corridor.

Efficient movement is related to transit options, frequency, and a positive riding experience (wi‐fi, comfortable, etc.)

Efficient movement of people = economic mobility/growth


Work on corridors – transit and economic.

Transit as backbone of infrastructure.

System must work for all. Equitable. Not just into Charlotte. To all downtowns.

Robust transit options help to retain and attract talent.

The full transit experience is important

Restraints on development have to do with traffic constraints. Better transit = prosperity.

Transit needs to make sense: money, time, safety.

Small fee, frequent use.

2

Transit system also has a land use implication (transit oriented development)/development patterns. 5) What role should transit play in your county’s future competitiveness?

It provides choice! o For companies to place job center

o For people to get around

Transit from destinations to uptown Charlotte would be major – can have the best of both worlds –

small town living with big city job.

Lack of choice could mean “choking” from a real estate standpoint – people do not want to buy north

of Charlotte because of traffic

The “all about roads” mindset must change for progress to happen.

Need to have long term vision/maybe spend a little more to get more/better.

Look at tax base increase in SouthEnd and what’s been avoiding in construction/infrastructure cost.

o Economic impact

o Cost avoidance

Greatest challenge is mitigating congestion. More efficient transit options are the answer.

Transit is becoming more of a public conversation.

Transit needs to work around the clock – move people from house, 1st job, 2nd job, etc.

Transit needs to work for all people.








Other:









Other: “peer region” review‐not clear; “Administrative sounds too procedural‐clarify

3








Other: Parking issue in center city Charlotte‐offering parking options is critical. Transit as part of parking equation. Communication is key. If you get transit system right‐people will ride it!

9) What will your county/community be able to do because of a Regional Transit Plan that you are not able

to do now?

We’ll have a plan, so that’s a good start. o Need to implement plan! o Towards economic mobility

Timeline/forecasting.

Update land use policies to include/consider/align with development and transit









Other: make sure next steps are actionable. A pilot program?


Elected officials

Every MPO member

Federal transportation representatives

FTA, etc.

State and federal legislatures

Large employers

Recognized community leaders (e.g. Hugh McColl)


Invisibility 6 60%

Mind reading 4 40%

Responses

Mecklenburg County

Huntersville The Great

Center City Charlotte

Mecklenburg County

Davidson

The DAV

Cornelius

Cornelius

Huntersville

Davidson



1st

Need to communicate projects having multi-jurisdictional impacts 2nd


Cross-county commuting (jobs, culture, entertainment, etc.) 4th


Other? 6th





RTES Phase II Engagement-N MeckCurrent run (last updated Sep 1, 2017 2:09pm)

6Polls

11Participants

10Average responses

86%

Average engagement

Count

91%

Engagement

10Responses

91%

Engagement

10Responses

82%

Engagement

9Responses


Land use and social/economic mobility vision 1st

Transit Destinations, Transit Lines, Transit Mode 2nd

Funding Options, Barriers, and Peer Region Review 3rd





Other? 8th


Employers 1st

Destination based transit riders (entertainment, leisure, etc.) 2nd




Residents with jobs in another jurisdiction 6th

Other? 7th


Work plan and timeline for next steps 1st

High level, expert presentations 2nd


3rd



5th


Other__________________ 7th



important):





91%

Engagement

10Responses

82%

Engagement

9Responses

82%

Engagement

9Responses

1

Phase II County Meetings – South Carolina August 29, 2017 ∙ 9:00 am – 11:00 am ∙ Manchester Meadows Conference Room



Comparison to other regions/bi‐state regions (e.g., St. Louis/Kansas City)

Out of area employment demand‐beyond individual jurisdictions 2) Is there anything that you didn’t hear that you thought you would? What’s missing?

Statutes related to state line considerations.

Policy barriers

Opportunity costs – air quality (funding, non‐attainment)

Transit corridors to alleviate congestion and ability to build our way out

Path and Right of Way

Lag time between approval/construction/operational

Lack of incentives to move people to transit (e.g., gas price)

Tipping point 3) Thinking of the growth‐related challenges that we will face, how important is the efficient movement of


Attract and retain employees – transportation needs to be efficient, flexible, predictable

People are number one asset

Service industry is fastest growing

Do not want to become a place where people do not want to visit or live because of traffic

“Too cool for buses” stigma

Sustainable business growth

Time consumed in traffic impacts mental health and environment

Employment centers become less attractive because of travel time – leap frog development

Regional competitiveness

Building roads/fix roads behind and underfunded

Quality of life and impact that travel and congestion costs have on quality of life

Infrastructure has not kept up with growth.

Reason people come here and need to maintain and support those reason(s)

Diversity of options – transportation modes

Economic development – hidden costs for not having access

Access and service to people‐benefit to non‐drivers

2


Money earned and where the money is spent

Funding spent on what (housing, transportation, entertainment)

Hub(s) and spoke or transit lines

Integrated funding support for transit o Regional o Remove federal barriers o State (NC & SC) policy barriers

Local funding support 5) What role should transit play in your county’s future competitiveness?

Market accessibility for workers

Access to housing (affordable to all workers)

Access to job centers and reverse commute

Private sector and public sector partnership to identify and develop routes and transportation

Transit blurs state lines‐to create a metropolis

Cannot be a silo services.








Other:









Other:

3








Other:


to do now?

Better forecast if can physically grow business‐worker access/cost

Transit Right of Way can dictate/impact development growth

Marketability and attract new businesses

Shared vision and success with collaboration

Communication tool‐investments/predictability

10) Is there consensus on continuing the regional transit discussion?








Other:



Invisibility 4 31%

Mind reading 9 69%

Responses

Rock Hill

York county utility

York

York County Economic development

York County

Business

RFATS

York County

York County

York County

Lancaster County

York

County



1st

Need for existing mobility/transit system coordination 2nd

Cross-county commuting (jobs, culture, entertainment, etc.) 3rd



Other? 6th





RTES Phase II Engagement-SouthCarolinaCurrent run (last updated Aug 29, 2017 11:06am)

6Polls

16Participants

13Average responses

82%

Average engagement

Count

81%

Engagement

13Responses

81%

Engagement

13Responses

88%

Engagement

14Responses


Funding Options, Barriers, and Peer Region Review 1st


Regional Commuter Rail Options 3rd


Land use and social/economic mobility vision 5th



Other? 8th


Residents with jobs in another jurisdiction 1st

Employers 2nd





Other? 7th



1st


Announcement of funding partners (potential and secured) 3rd

MPO, NCDOT, SCDOT involvement 4th


5th


Other__________________ 7th



important):





75%

Engagement

12Responses

81%

Engagement

13Responses

88%

Engagement

14Responses

1

Phase II County Meetings – Union County September 13, 2017 ∙ 9:00 am – 11:00 am ∙ Old Armory Community Center



Understanding specifics regarding funding, especially related to sales tax‐different between counties.


More information on the Silver Line (e.g., the Silver Line coming into Union County and location of end point/terminus in Union County)

Possibility of using existing lines – can we use them or not?

Hwy 16 corridor – what are transit options?

What would funding arrangements be like for new lines? Similar to two current light rail lines?

What do residents think about expanding transit? o Would general population support it? Perhaps yes, just needs to be documented.

Ridership between Monroe to Charlotte (Express Bus).

Data on tax in areas around light rail stations.

Light rail does not pay for itself. Need more information on this.

From human services standpoint: transportation always comes up as a main need and a lack of connectivity.

Capital and operating expenses. What’s the cost and what are you going to get for it?

Have we surveyed the Monroe to/from Charlotte riders? 3) Thinking of the growth‐related challenges that we will face, how important is the efficient movement of


Transit needs to be part of growth (with roads) in suburban areas. Efficiency is key.

Express buses won’t fix congestion issues in/through Union County (and Mecklenburg)

Plan right now takes too much time! Laborious process.

Define what “efficient” means. What you can do for the least amount of money. Move about community at free will. Efficiently moving people and/or using funds efficiently?

“We can’t pave our way out of congestion” – we need light rail.

Changing funding model for transportation.

How do autonomous connected vehicles (ACV) impact transit in the future?

Moving people from cars to mass transit will take a force – cost or otherwise. Mode depends on need.

Transit from home to Charlotte or Ballantyne and transit within county – two issues.

Economic development related to transit (incentive for businesses)

Emergency management and transit

Funding is always the issue. Need cost/benefit for transit vs roads, etc. Cost of doing nothing. Long term vs. short term.

Fixed route service may not be so helpful for Union County. However, a demand service would be something to grow/enhance for seniors, veterans, and other groups.

2

Traffic is a deterrent to people moving in‐from a real estate perspective. Efficient movement matters! Regarding home sales and attracting tax base


Jobs and quality of life – transportation addresses both.

Influx of people moving into the area – approaching tipping point.

People interested in walkable communities/neighborhoods that transit supports. 5) What role should transit play in your county’s future competitiveness?

Always going to lag behind in transportation/roads o Union County is desirable o Because of lag, avoid putting money into transit – on something that may not work.

Freight element – transit to serve many.

What are the intangible/indirectly related benefits of light rail (e.g., South End & NoDa in Charlotte)








Other:









Other: Surprise that admin ranked next to last (7th)

3








Other: Surprised that non‐transit riders aren’t at top of the list


to do now?

The ability to attract business/employees

Better ideas/knowledge of land use planning‐ability to use space better

10) Is there consensus on continuing the regional transit discussion? Yes, keep discussion going.








Other: High level presentations: Charlotte Regional Partnership, on different funding models, cost/benefit analysis breakdown


Tax payer alliance

Chambers of Commerce

State senators/Reps

HOA/neighborhood group reps

Higher education reps

Chris Plate’

Large employers/hospital system *Regarding survey‐having a statistically significant survey will matter at a county level.


Invisibility 7 47%

Mind reading 8 53%

Responses

Union County Real Estate

Town of Indian Trail

Union/Anson counties

Town of Indian Trail

County

Fairview

Marshville

Waxhaw

Waxhaw

Stallings

Stallings

Stallings

Wingate

Monroe

Stallings

Union county

Stallings



RTES Phase II Engagement-UnionCurrent run (last updated Sep 28, 2017 2:38pm)

6Polls

23Participants

14Average responses

59%

Average engagement

Count

65%

Engagement

15Responses

74%

Engagement

17Responses


Need for existing mobility/transit system coordination 1st

Need to communicate projects having multi-jurisdictional impacts 2nd


3rd

Cross-county commuting (jobs, culture, entertainment, etc.) 4th


Other? 6th




Current mobility options/systems/assets 3rd

Land use and social/economic mobility vision 4th




Other? 8th


Residents with jobs in another jurisdiction 1st

Destination based transit riders (entertainment, leisure, etc.) 2nd

Employers 3rd


Residents with limited access to a car 5th


Other? 7th



1st

High level, expert presentations 2nd



4th



Other__________________ 7th





important):





65%

Engagement

15Responses

61%

Engagement

14Responses

43%

Engagement

10Responses

48%

Engagement

11Responses

1

Phase II County Meetings – South Mecklenburg County September 13, 2017 ∙ 2:00 pm – 4:00 pm ∙ Matthews Town Hall



Advantage in places like SouthEnd (in Charlotte) is significant from an economic development standpoint.

Light rail – “Build it, they will come.”

Question about the expectation of growth numbers. o Seeing the reality of future growth ‐‐ moving population of Minneapolis area to Charlotte may

have an impact towards urgency. o Where are growth projections built into commuter numbers? o Even when you build it, will always be behind.

Planning agencies (local) may not address issues on a regional, inter‐county basis. Silo‐ing vs. broader thinking.


Connecting municipalities and higher education institutions

Thinking beyond a 20‐year plan.

Connection between transit and NCDOT – other modes is missing. System integration is needed.

Autonomous connected vehicles (ACVs) – system disruption. 3) Thinking of the growth‐related challenges that we will face, how important is the efficient movement of


ACVs – disruption in travel patterns. o Does everyone need to live in the city? What about growing/expanding in surrounding towns. o Need to be purposeful with movement in and out of the city and development patterns.

This is an economics issues (efficiency – time is money) o Productivity – if you’re in car driving you’re not working!

Proactive solutions are better than reactive solutions – make a plan!

Benefit of getting on train or bus – must sell the idea to get people out of cars.

Message benefits to different age groups/different modes.

Disconnect with state transportation agencies and how things get done.

Buses not running long enough. Not making it in time for trains. Help is needed for service industry workers who rely on riding transit.

Interconnectivity within county, to airport and other destinations

Combatting congestion – efficiency is very important.

ACVs/telecommuting – what will the future look like?

Amazon HQ2 RFP – lists transit options as part of criteria. Transit/movement of people is prioritized.

Predictable movement/travel, over time. Transit vs. cars

2


Place‐making encroaching on road‐widening. Transit oriented development (ToD) needs to be balanced with future growth

Transit needs to support heavy industry/freight movement/business sector/hospitality sector (beach/mountains/games)

Transit supporting economic development (instead of residential)

Could have transit stations be hub for an urban density development (ToD) – services/home/work

Cycle of business comes/need transit 5) What role should transit play in your county’s future competitiveness?

If you have transit options, you’re more competitive (e.g., Amazon HQ2 RFP)

Connect rural areas with business centers where jobs are located – socio‐economic considerations

Need to be proactive, not reactive

o Other regionals have suffered because of lack of regional cooperation

o Critical to do this regionally ‐‐ problems do not stop/start at county/state lines

o It’s a regional issue.








Other:









Other: Land use piece has already been addressed via CONNECT. Confirm if needed ‐‐ but don’t redo.

.

3








Other: Don’t forget about Uber with regard to destination question. Seems like non‐transit riders should be top priority. Seems like destination‐based should be higher.


to do now?

Have a more coordinated approach to moving people, etc.

Plan is first step, then funding, then Right of Way

Major multi‐family residential developments are coming. With growth comes traffic and congestion. How do we get people out without cars?

Move people, move infrastructure, move business, move traffic and on and on…

Austin, Texas example – if you don’t plan, you will have a problem.

10) Is there consensus on continuing the regional transit discussion? Yes. Need to bring in NCDOT or, call it “regional mobility discussion.”








Other: expert speakers


Identification of best practices of peer cities (e.g., Denver, Colorado)

NCDOT/SCDOT

Board members and staff

NC General Assembly transportation committee/leadership

Railroad organizations


Invi sibility 6 55%

Mind reading 5 45%

Responses

Charlotte

Matthews

Greater Charlotte Region

Pineville

US Senate

Matthews

City of Charlotte

Matthews

Multi

Charlotte

Matthews



1st


Need for existing mobility/transit system coordination 2nd



Other? 6th





RTES Phase II Engagement-SouthMeckCurrent run (last updated Sep 28, 2017 2:41pm)

6Polls

15Participants

11Average responses

72%

Average engagement

Count

73%

Engagement

11Responses

73%

Engagement

11Responses

80%

Engagement

12Responses


Transit Destinations, Transit Lines, Transit Mode 1st

Funding Options, Barriers, and Peer Region Review 2nd

Land use and social/economic mobility vision 3rd





Other? 8th


Employers 1st


Non-transit riders 3rd




Other? 7th


MPO, NCDOT, SCDOT involvement 1st


2nd

Work plan and timeline for next steps 3rd



4th


Other__________________ 7th



important):





60%

Engagement

9Responses

73%

Engagement

11Responses

73%

Engagement

11Responses

1

Phase II County Meetings – Make‐Up Meeting #1 September 22, 2017 ∙ 9:00 am – 11:00 am ∙ Centralina COG Offices Catawba Room



Evaluate alternatives, including existing modes, etc.

Funding for full system not there. Creates piecemeal approach, conflict among geographies.

What stigmas/mindsets may impact what types of transit will get used, valued?

Freight needs/expectations are a real issue regarding competition for space vs. transit.

Demographics changing – greater acceptance and interest in transit‐upgrades needed. Consider frequency, experience for end user.

Union County has the largest number of commuters and relative lack of connectivity. 2) Is there anything that you didn’t hear that you thought you would? What’s missing?

Toll roads – opportunity? Challenge? Distraction? Impact of Charlotte weighted vote.

Rail stakeholders need to be at the table.

More info from other regions. Costs, coordination, lessons learned.

Reality check about timeliness/expediting projects.

Impacts to commutes during construction should not be underestimated.

Ensure any resulting option is flexible but has staying power to allow long term predictability.

Be sure there is ground up support. 3) Thinking of the growth‐related challenges that we will face, how important is the efficient movement of people to

our success? Why?

Options are important.

Perceptions of commutes/movement matter.

Roads outpaced by growth.

Connections are beneficial, attract more people to our region.

Medical trips – intra‐county focus needed. 4) How should transit support our region’s future prosperity?

Now is time to interrelate transit plans without local government, roads, etc. those before more conflicts occur.

Cross‐jurisdictional coordination can generate greater funds, benefits to many communities.

We need to remember our importance to goods movement and economic development (both of which can be supported by transit).

Valued as a safe place, good weather, etc.

How do we keep people moving? Access to health care? 5) What role should transit play in your county’s future competitiveness?

We thrive together (locally and regionally).

Growth can be held up if transportation lags.

Transit can support work force housing, better mix, more choices for housing, reduce transportation costs.

2

6) Smartphone Polling‐‐Regarding a “regional, system‐wide focus,” prioritize the following issues as they apply to your







Other:









Other:

8) Smartphone Polling‐‐On a scale of 1 to 5 (5 being the most), how important is transit supportive messaging for the

following groups.







Other: “local input, local needs” Messaging: address getting to work, etc. Especially those without access to cars. Have a voice: access to expertise. better “window to the future.” Crosses jurisdictions. Better manage local development.

9) What will your county/community be able to do because of a Regional Transit Plan that you are not able to do

now?

Communicate projects with multi‐jurisdictional impact(s)

Funding

Economic development with transit forecasted


3








Other: Public private partnerships.


Representatives from railroad companies

Potential riders

Existing riders

Large employers

Peer regions, successes (Denver) experience

River District stakeholders

Planners, community development

Economic development

donors!

1

Phase II County Meetings – Make‐Up Meeting #2 October 2, 2017 ∙ 9:00 am – 11:00 am ∙ Centralina COG Offices Catawba Room



Coordination with real estate important.

More information on the survey

Senior retirees are not commuting – they have money for private transportation. o Coordination with senior land uses. o Some seniors move here – then need transit.

Use existing rail for commuter traffic – need double track in some areas. o Connecting Charlotte/CLT Airport/King’s Mountain: Get ahead of growth o Corridor study for regional commuter service pending money from NCDOT

Moving people is a major factor in global competitiveness. Amazon HQ2.

Economics pushing cultural changes – NCDOT catching up.

Workforce issues – need people to be able to move around for jobs.

Need access to major medical.

Economic mobility requires access/mobility. 2) Is there anything that you didn’t hear that you thought you would? What’s missing?

Lessons learned from Express Service – needs may have changed.

Takeaways from other investment studies – what’s out there?

How do autonomous and connected vehicles (ACVs) impact this?

is an outer belt highway an option? Other road investments and how impacts transit?

3) Thinking of the growth‐related challenges that we will face, how important is the efficient movement of people to our success? Why?

Mobility choice, economic choice. Choice of where to work.

Land prices rise in Uptown Charlotte – want choice to live around region.

Light rail seems more attractive – more efficient, reliable than the bus. 4) How should transit support our region’s future prosperity?

Now is time to interrelate transit plans without local governments, roads, etc. those before more conflicts occur

Cross‐jurisdictional coordination can generate greater funds, benefits to many communities

Remember our importance to goods movement and economic development

Valued as a safe place, good weather, etc.


West Stanly interest in mobility – but do not have all information regarding mobility service and costs.

Travel time reliability very important.

Moving workforce around.

Highway and transit planning behind in this region. Should be proactive instead

Need a shared vision.

Best companies/employers want transit.

2








Other:









Other:


following groups.







Other:

9) What will your county/community be able to do because of a Regional Transit Plan that you are not able to do

now?

Help prioritize projects

Need near‐term wins/actionable items to keep momentum

Save time and money with plan‐coordination

Will help build coalition for common issues‐mayor meetings build relationships

Speaker of House from King’s Mountain‐build relationships politically‐open communication

10) Is there consensus on continuing the regional transit discussion? Yes, if we don’t we’re in trouble. Go to Denver to plan how we get this done or Bring Denver in to hear from them.

3








Other:


Economic development officials

All elected officials

Private sector – large employers

Advocacy groups (e.g., Sustain Charlotte)

Hospitals

After summit ‐‐ What’s in it for me?

1

Phase II County Meetings – Cabarrus County October 5, 2017 ∙ 9:00 am – 11:00 am ∙ Cabarrus County Government Center



Current paradigm – Charlotte as transportation hub. Cross‐regional/cross‐county is significant too. Must have car to make cross‐county trips.

Urgency! Must plan and buy rights of way now! This is imperative.

Need more connectivity – but who pays for it, short and long term?

How can state/federal level legislative action be catalyzed? Need new ways to educate and influence legislation/legislators.

Managing message around value of transit for people that may not use it. How will transit benefit rural residents?

Change paradigm of transit for “those people” to transit as a community asset. Value of transit for lots of audiences


Table of cities/transit slide – need column for population density.

Need public education/awareness about preferences for transit. Build off CONNECT Our Future public engagement – what people value.

Another value of transit is productivity (work and ride).

Better for safety.

What’s operational/governance structure of regional transit?

3) Thinking of the growth‐related challenges that we will face, how important is the efficient movement of people to our success? Why?

Challenges and importance are there, but importance outweighs challenges aspect.

Must move people for positive growth and prosperity.

Generational paradigm shifts regarding getting around and related expectations.

More efficient movement can open doors to opportunity. If abstain from developing more transit options – what happens? Stagnation. Education is needed about ramifications.


Need a more proactive approach (see Amazon HQ2 RFP example). Think ahead and be ready.

Everyone needs to contribute – but ‘What’s in it for me?’ needs to be clear. Shared success among municipalities.

Leaders from across jurisdictions need to make a unified statement in favor of regional transit and increased transit options.

Poverty exists. Transit is the bridge to livable wage jobs to help get out of poverty. Transit can be part of social and cultural impacts.

Tourism industry. Transit can help with visitors’ experience getting around.

Related to the airport – experience getting around can be improved.

2


Cannot wait until you need it. Must plan and do.

Regional authority driven by vision and policy is needed – take out of politics.

It is essential for the county to stay competitive.

Be mindful of land use and development and purchasing right of way. Don’t wait!








Other:









Other: Yes, funding is key. But need to plan first. Sticker shock=paralysis of action. Flip it – go with vision and plan, then talk money. Talking money first squashes vision. Issue is that another choice exists: car/truck/auto. “The choke is coming.” This is where we’re headed. Bad vision vs. a ‘good’ vision. Plan/vision, then governance structure (likely tied to funding).


following groups.







Other: Non‐transit riders will stop this movement – very important to success is getting non‐supporters on board. Employers are critical‐see Amazon HQ2 example.

Companies paying attention to transit choice and congestion, as impacts productivity. Employees need to get to work.

Need business community to speak for this issue to (state legislators) and influence.

3


Predictability around getting around.

May be eligible for more/different funding.

Accessible to people that would normally not have access to transit and opportunity is good regarding federal grants.

Reinforced need for a regional plan

Establish right of way early. Establish corridor. Establish/plan amenities.

Change way roads vs. transit are framed. It’s about mobility!

10) Is there consensus on continuing the regional transit discussion? Yes








Other: Large organizations need to be on the same page‐unified front.


Business community

Largest employers

NCDOT/SCDOT

Business ‘titans’ that can testify about transit and competition

CBB

Chamber

Elected officials (state and local)

Federal update on transit at summit

Denver or Salt Lake City CEO/ED as speaker


Invi sibility 4 57%

Mind reading 3 43%

Responses

Kannapolis

Canarrus

Cities of Concord and Kannapolis

Concord

Concord Kannapolis Area Transit

Cabarrus

Kannapolis

Concord

Kannapolis

Concord



1st





Other? 6th





RTES Phase II Engagement-CabarrusCurrent run (last updated Oct 9, 2017 3:29pm)

6Polls

11Participants

7Average responses

61%

Average engagement

Count

64%

Engagement

7Responses

91%

Engagement

10Responses

64%

Engagement

7Responses



Mobility Options and Connections (other than light rail) 2nd

Land use and social/economic mobility vision 3rd

Transit Destinations, Transit Lines, Transit Mode 3rd




Other? 8th


Employers 1st


Destination based transit riders (entertainment, leisure, etc.) 3rd




Other? 7th



1st


Announcement of funding partners (potential and secured) 3rd



5th


Other__________________ 6th



important):





55%

Engagement

6Responses

45%

Engagement

5Responses

45%

Engagement

5Responses

Phase II Summary Report Appendix - CCOG · Phase II Summary Report Appendix ... 2015 MSA Pop....

Documents

Transcript of Phase II Summary Report Appendix - CCOG · Phase II Summary Report Appendix ... 2015 MSA Pop....