Click to view pdf

Bus Rapid Transit for the Humboldt Bay Region

Growing challenges for Humboldt County

Humboldt County has unique transportation challenges. Important traffic routes, such as along Broadway and portions of 4^th and 5^th Streets in Eureka where Route 101 traffic follows surface streets to get through the city, operate at a substandard Level of Service “F”.[1] Other roads, particularly in areas of the unincorporated county slated for development, are expected to suffer substantial increases in congestion over the next twenty years.[2] The increase in the county’s vehicle miles traveled (VMT) outpaces population growth despite increasing fuel costs and limited economic growth.[3]

Proposed projects in Humboldt County’s 2006 Regional Transportation Plan seek to alleviate congestion. Some of these costly projects, including road widening and bypass projects,[4] are projected to only temporarily alleviate congestion[5] and will ultimately result in heavier traffic volumes.[6]^,[7] This will result in an increase in VMT. If California’s climate action plan directs the California Transportation Commission to weigh changes in VMT when awarding funding for projects, projects that increase road capacity for single occupant vehicles may fail to win funding in the future.[8] Furthermore, as greenhouse gas regulations and increasing fuel costs raise the cost of driving, increases in VMT will threaten the local economy.[9]

Modern public transportation offers solutions

A strategy that is more effective at alleviating congestion in the long term is transit improvements coupled with transit-oriented land use.[10] Permanent transit routes have the ability to work in conjunction with land use planning to create transit-oriented development: pedestrian-friendly, high-density, mixed-use development in the vicinity of high-quality fixed-route transit. This can result in large numbers of people having little need to drive to accomplish their daily tasks of work, shopping and recreation.

In our region, Bus Rapid Transit (BRT), as opposed to light rail or commuter rail, is the most plausible type of fixed-route transit because of its lower cost, flexibility and potential to be built in phases.[11] BRT is a combination of strategies that enable a bus system to provide transit service on par with rail transit systems. These strategies include: dedicated running ways, signal prioritization and queue jumps to speed service; pre-board ticket purchase and level boarding to shorten stop times; and special amenities to enhance the passenger experience, such as comfortable transit “stations” instead of simple shelters, next-bus arrival displays, and high capacity articulated vehicles. Existing BRT systems incorporate different combinations of these and other strategies.

It’s time for a pre-feasibility study on BRT in Humboldt County

There are many steps and aspects to creating a Bus Rapid Transit system. A successful system requires an approach that coordinates transit development, land use policy, parking policy and design of public spaces. This requires community stakeholders to understand the benefits and risks of the strategy and be supportive of it. Excessive compromise in the implementation of a BRT system can severely hamper its effectiveness to capture ridership. If a transit system is not frequent, fast, and does not serve the areas where people need to go, or if land use and parking policies are not conducive to transit use, the BRT system will be less effective at attracting potential riders, and therefore less effective at reducing congestion, energy use, emissions, inactivity and other negative consequences of automobile dependency.

Call for a Feasibility Study

In order to begin the process of educating stakeholders and the public on the possibilities for such a system, we propose conducting a feasibility study to:

• Identify potential locations of Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Stations, using existing and projected land use as criteria, roughly following the 101 corridor from the Arcata-Eureka Airport in McKinleyville to Fortuna.
• Identify potential BRT alignments, which connect the most viable station locations by assessing existing and potential infrastructure.
• Identify needs and opportunities for improved busway alignments, and the costs and benefits for various options. For example, would a fixed system with vehicles using only the developed busway be appropriate in specific locations? Or would a less infrastructure-intensive option be more cost-effective?
• Determine what sort of route configuration will make the most effective use of busway alignments: a network of connecting services that feed into a dense central branch (in the style of bus feeder routes that serve a light rail corridor, e.g. the EMX line in Eugene), or a system such as Brisbane’s, in which local buses feed into and use a central busway after collecting passengers in dispersed areas not served by the busway? (Appendix A)

• Develop a palette of land use policies to be used in conjunction with BRT development to enhance the system’s effectiveness.
• Develop visual representations of the possible alignments and public spaces made possible by a BRT system.
• Identify potential funding sources for developing the capital improvement project
• Identify potential funding sources and strategies for operating the system.
• Develop potential timelines and phasing for creation of the system as a new project or in a phased approach building upon or improving the existing Redwood Transit System.

Visualizing BRT for Humboldt County

Using the existing 101 Freeway infrastructure for connective segments between our four major urban areas (Figure 1) could make a high quality transit system relatively inexpensive. In some areas, bus stations in the freeway median could be an effective and inexpensive way of creating fast, efficient transit stops (Figure 2). In other areas, the route may best serve communities by traveling on surface streets. In these areas, several strategies can be employed to make sure transit service is not slowed by traffic congestion. The key to making this work effectively is to think of the bus as a light rail vehicle traveling through the streetscape. In most light rail systems, the light rail right-of-way is separated from private auto-traffic. By providing the same sort of right-of-way for buses, using dedicated lanes and signal prioritization (which makes traffic signals automatically turn green as the bus approaches), we can have a transit system on par with the best light rail systems for a fraction of the cost.

Dedicated rights-of-way come in several forms. A curb lane (Figure 3) is a dedicated right lane for the bus. This type of lane has the advantage of placing the bus on the right side of the road so

Figure 1 Extent of potential BRT system connecting the communities of McKinleyville, Arcata, Eureka, College of the Redwoods and Fortuna. Existing 101 freeway and expressway infrastructure (green) can be utilized for the vast majority of the length of the system.

Figure 2 Freeway median bus station design. This type of station ensures fast inline bus service, but has less of a positive impact on public space. This type of facility could be most useful in non-urban areas where “park-and-rides” may be appropriate. Note that a BRT system could reduce the need to widen our roads and freeways.

Figure 3 Dedicated curb lanes work well with bus stations right on the sidewalk. However, there can be conflicts with right-turning and parallel parking vehicles.

that stations can be positioned on the existing sidewalk or on constructed sidewalk “bus-bulbouts.” However, if allowed, auto use of the lane for right-turning or parallel parking can slow transit service. Median lanes (Figure 4) can provide a distinctly segregated facility and easier passing for express buses. Dedicated streets that prohibit or limit auto-access (Figure 5) offer a solution for narrow roads where a separate dedicated facility won’t fit. Dedicated streets may be the most politically challenging form of dedicated right-of-way, but could also offer the highest quality public space with little traffic noise while waiting at the station or for nearby residents and businesses.

The primary opportunity for making the transit system competitive with driving for some trips comes in Eureka where a dedicated busway would be faster than the congested Route 101. Several alignments are possible (Figure 6). The most obvious alignment is along the existing 101 corridor. Dedicated lanes on this alignment might be curb lanes along 4^th and 5^th Streets and a median facility along Broadway. The narrow section of Broadway between 4^th Street and West 15^th Street is an area where right-of-way acquisition costs could be reduced (in comparison with the proposed Broadway widening project) by employing a queue jump. This is a strategy that releases the bus from the traffic signal before the other traffic so that it can proceed first and avoid congestion forming behind it. Other possible alignments could use 3^rd Street as a dedicated or primary transit street instead of 4^th and 5^th Streets, providing a more pedestrian-friendly environment for passengers boarding and alighting, and providing better access to Old Town. A route through Henderson Center could take advantage of an already important transit stop in Eureka.[12] A route through the Balloon Tract would be a potential opportunity to create a new transit-oriented development close to the bay, Downtown and the Wharfinger Building. McKinleyville (Figure 7), Arcata (Figure 8) and Fortuna (Figure 9) also offer several options for BRT alignment. Some of the alignments follow the 101 Freeway, with freeway median bus stops, while some alignments use surface streets. The benefit of freeway alignment is speedy service. Surface street alignments place transit stations right next to services, enhancing public

Figure 4 Dedicated median lanes provide a distinctly segregated facility.

Figure 5 Dedicated streets can provide high quality public space free of traffic noise.

Figure 6 There are several potential BRT alignments for Eureka. A route could simply follow the 101 corridor using dedicated lanes, or run on streets that become dedicated to transit running through Henderson Center, which is already an important transit stop, or through the Balloon Tract, creating an opportunity for a large transit-oriented development there. Potential station locations are illustrated for an alignment through Henderson Center via F Street and Harris Street.

spaces and rider experience by providing substantial public access while minimizing the impacts of traffic and parking infrastructure on public space.

Landuse with BRT

A BRT system gains effectiveness in changing transportation patterns and enhancing urban settings when it is synchronized with land use policy. While some BRT stations may be oriented toward a “park and ride” ridership, most should be oriented toward pedestrians to improve public urban spaces. Transit-oriented land use provides an opportunity to enhance the economic development and pedestrian experience in the vicinity of each station, and add potential riders and destinations for them to reach within walking distance of each station.

One approach to the land use strategy would be to have “transit land use zones” within ½ mile of each station. Within this half-mile radius, pedestrian-friendly, high-density, mixed-use development would be encouraged. Off-street parking requirements could be made more flexible, reduced or eliminated. On-street parking would be priced at market rates using meters or parking permits. Pedestrian infrastructure like sidewalk widening, bulb-outs, benches, street trees and enhanced crosswalks would take priority in decisions over how to design the streetscape. Services such as short-term car rental could facilitate the reduction in car-ownership for residents living in this type of land use. Reductions in parking and higher densities would provide excellent opportunity for infill development that could enhance urban environments of the County.

Figure 7 A likely McKinleyville alignment would be along Central Avenue and to the Airport. Some potential stations are also illustrated.

Figure 8 Potential alignments for Arcata include the use of freeway median stations, a dedicated bus street on G Street and possibly one side of L.K. Wood Boulevard near the university. Potential stations are illustrated for an alignment along a bus-dedicated G Street and bus dedicated diagonal G Street overpass, with a freeway median station at the L.K. Wood Blvd.

Figure 9 A BRT alignment in Fortuna could use Fortuna Boulevard or 12^th Street to access main street. Potential stations are illustrated for the Fortuna Boulevard / Main Street alignment.

It would also be possible to use radii of different lengths to identify different intensities of the approach to land use. For instance, the most stringent pedestrian-oriented policies could apply with ¼ mile of each station, with more moderate policies from ¼ to ½ mile.

It is important to note that this type of focused urban development can improve the quality of urban and rural areas of the County. Reduced automobile-dependency in urban areas can improve the quality of the urban environment by reducing traffic impacts, while the more compact development made possible there can take pressure off of rural working lands.

Is This Realistic?

This project may seem like an overly-ambitious vision. Current Redwood Transit System headways average about 45 minutes, whereas 10 to 15 minutes is generally considered the minimum headway for full-fledged BRT systems. Buses do not run on Sundays, and the operating budget is at its limit.

We recognize these challenges, but it is important to remember that this type of project creates gains in efficiency that make higher bus frequency possible.[13] By combining city buses and RTS buses along a dedicated busway in Arcata or Eureka, for example, and gaining the benefits of having buses move quickly across town rather than stopping at traffic signals and stop signs, contending with congestion and dwelling at stops for long periods, 15 minute headways may be possible with today’s operating budgets on some urban segments of the busway during peak demand.[14] This project can be phased geographically starting with the most densely populated areas, but it can also be phased in terms of quality of improvements. For example, signal prioritization might be implemented before more substantial busway improvements.

As commitment gels at the state and federal level to meet carbon emissions reduction goals and to deal with increasing fuel prices, operating budgets for transit services should improve. By studying the feasibility of this project today and having a plan in place to build it, we will be in a better position to address our own challenges of the 21^st Century

Conclusion

A Bus Rapid Transit system for the Humboldt Bay area could play a substantial role in a comprehensive strategy to bring balance to our transportation system, reduce overall transportation costs, reduce dependence on imported fuel, reduce carbon emissions, improve public health, and reinvigorate public spaces so they become places to enjoy. The first step is a feasibility study to see how we can do it.

Appendix A Schematic showing two branched network approaches, one with feeder services to a central BRT system, and the other with dispersed transit corridors sharing a single dense busway corridor. Adapted from a Mission Group presentation: http://www.missiongrouponline.com/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderfiles/BRTForum2005.pdf