Métodos Basados en Elementos Finitos Elásticos.

Park-and-Ride Lots

If current policies continue, Chapel Hill Transit will need to invest in more park-and-ride lots in the future. The lots encourage people to use mass tran- sit instead of driving automobiles into the town center. The success of the park-and-ride system depends on the scarcity and pricing of parking downtown and at the University.

Several park-and-ride facilities, such as the P Lot, PR Lot, and Eubanks Rd. Lot, exist north of down- town Chapel Hill. The University’s PR Lot is re- served for long-term storage of student vehicles. As discussed earlier in this chapter, the University an- ticipates that commuter parking at the P Lot will decrease significantly. The Town-operated Eubanks Rd. lot may need to be expanded as P Lot parkers are displaced.

Along U.S. 15-501 south of Chapel Hill, two park- and-ride lots served the dispersed commuting population from Chatham County as of Fall 2005. One Town lot, the Southern Village Park-and-Ride Lot, and one University lot, in northern Chatham County, existed in this corridor.

The one major corridor into town which has lacked a park-and-ride facility is U.S. 15-501 north of Chapel Hill. Discussions by Town, University, and transit officials have envisioned a facility in the area of Sage Rd. As of Fall 2005, the University has been in talks with the Chapel Hill Bible Church to

lease part of their existing lot. Also, in Fall 2005, the Town of Chapel Hill received funding to begin identifying suitable sites for a Town-operated lot in this corridor, which stretches from East Franklin St. in Chapel Hill to Garrett Rd. in Durham. If lots in this corridor could accommodate the volume of commuters arriving in the corridor, the existing park-and-ride lots along eastern NC 54 would have excess capacity in 2010 (see Table 3.1).

Some University-owned lots are assigned to em- ployees without regard to the employee’s commut- ing corridor, meaning that cross-town traffic may actually increase if this practice continues into the future. For example, the PH or Hedrick Lot draws UNC Hospitals employees from all directions, not just from NC 54 East. This effect diminishes the value of park-and-ride as a way to reduce conges- tion.

The location of the park-and-ride facilities has a large impact on their utilization and convenience for commuters. With no public park-and-ride facil-

ity on 15-501 North, the NC 54 Lot overflows, and some commuters may drive across town to find lots that are not full. Some transit riders also use shopping center and apartment com- munity parking lots as informal park-and-ride services.

Combined, two unique aspects of Chapel Transit, its fare-free nature and its extensive park-and-ride system, make an interesting im- plication. Because a significant chunk of fund- ing comes from the University, its employees and students help pay for the system. And be- cause local ad valorem property taxes are ear- marked for transit, those who own property in Chapel Hill and Carrboro also contribute reve- nue. Passengers who do not own property in either town and are not affiliated with the Uni- versity get truly free rides (ignoring state and Corridor _Demand* Future Fall 2005 _{Supply Needed} Spaces

15-501 North and Erwin Rd. 1,404 0 1,404 15-501 South 686 400** 286 NC 54 East 1,190 1,433 -243 NC 54 West and Jones Ferry Rd. 717 540 177 NC 86 North 754 718 36 TOTALS 4,751 3,091 1,660

*Includes current demand plus 2,763 more employees and commuting students and 261 new users resulting from University-defined “natural growth” through 2010.

** This corridor now also includes the Chatham park-and-ride lot, mak- ing the total supply of spaces greater than the demand.

Table 3.1. Estimated demand for park-and-ride service, 2010.

that riders will be from out-of-town. From the per- spective of area business owners, this may be desir- able, because these riders may spend money in town. However, their transit trips are funded by property owners, University students, and Univer- sity employees. Into the future, this may become a significant burden on the funding partners.

As park-and-ride lots become more crowded over the planning period, the transit partners should consider charging market prices for parking at pe- ripheral Town-owned lots. Because University lots require permits ensuring that parkers are affiliated with the University, only Town lots should be priced. Alternatively, all lots might instead accept University permits in lieu of payment. This strategy would have a second positive outcome: it would reduce the number of people who live near fixed- route transit service yet drive to park-and-ride lots rather than boarding their neighborhood buses. Without market pricing of park-and-ride lots, neighborhood bus service to areas past those lots is likely to be unsuccessful. Many residents will drive to a park-and-ride lot to get faster, more frequent service than can be provided on neighborhood routes.

Parking Pricing

Parking policies are important outside park-and- ride lots as well. The high level of ridership carried by Chapel Hill Transit is directly related to the availability and pricing of parking at the University and in downtown Chapel Hill. Some passengers do not have cars available to them. Others have cars but choose to ride the bus for convenience or envi- ronmental reasons. Far more riders have vehicles available but choose the bus instead because con-

Parking can be a dangerous topic. Businesses often clamor for as much free parking as possible, and residents may complain when parking is perceived to be unavailable. Applying market pricing to park- ing in high-demand areas can solve the availability problem and reduce traffic, but it is only viable when there is an alternative to driving. Chapel Hill Transit must provide that alternative in the form of increasingly more attractive transit options. If tran- sit services are to improve in secondary nodes such as Meadowmont and downtown Carrboro, the price of parking at such locations may need to be leveraged as it is in downtown Chapel Hill.

Also, the hours of parking pricing should coincide with the hours of high-quality bus service. If eve- ning parking becomes a problem, pricing should be implemented for those times, and evening transit service should be improved. Only when parking is free and not filled to capacity can bus service be provided at the minimal acceptable service levels, which should correspond to adopted service stan- dards.

Passenger Information System

Chapel Hill Transit anticipates implementing a real- time passenger information system near the begin- ning of FY 2006-07. This system will consist of automatic vehicle location devices on all buses and variable message signs at 13 bus stops. The signs will inform passengers of the arrival times and routes of the next buses to arrive; this information will also be available to passengers online.

By improving the convenience of riding the bus, the passenger information system will likely in- crease ridership somewhat, placing additional de- mands on the bus system. The automatic vehicle

location technology should also help to evaluate on-time performance and other issues related to operations (see Chapter 2).

Future Development Patterns

With the exception of the large Horace Williams Tract, Chapel Hill is largely built-out, and Carrboro is quickly exhausting the buildable land within its municipal limits and planning area. In Chapel Hill, decisions have also been made to limit the geo- graphic extent of the Town and to conserve numer- ous close-in neighborhoods of primarily single- family housing. However, both towns also continue to push for affordable housing, which means that more dwelling units must be added, along with sup- porting businesses. As a result, the future develop- ment pattern of the service area is likely to be one of higher density in certain strategic areas.

The Town of Chapel Hill has begun the process of identifying opportunity areas for intensification. These are locations that would be suitable for addi- tional development and that would serve as rela- tively dense, mixed-use nodes of activity outside the downtown area. Most of the intensification areas are currently shopping centers with large amounts of surface parking, which could be redeveloped with housing, retail, and office uses. One key to the success of this initiative will be high-quality transit service linking the activity centers, enabling their residents to have lower-than-typical rates of auto ownership. The relationship goes both ways, how- ever: without increased density, high-quality transit service would be impractical and inefficient.

Intensification areas are not likely to be redevel- oped during the planning period for this plan, but the process of identifying them and planning for them will continue. Because of the link between transit and land use, it will be crucial for representa-

tives of Chapel Hill Transit to play a role in this planning process.