Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for October, 2011

By Liz Bloomhardt
Published October 26, 2011

Ditch your car. Take the train. Vote for transit.

On Nov. 8th, the Durham County ballot will include a half cent sales tax referendum for public transit. If passed, the money will support the implementation of the Durham County Bus and Rail Investment Plan (DCBRIP).

This is not a Duke election, but this is a referendum that will affect how people get to Duke’s campus.

The regional plan starts with expanded bus service in the first 12 to 18 months. Additional busses will be added on high-traffic routes and additional routes will be added in underserved areas.

This alone should be enough to make the referendum worth voting for by members of the Duke community. Duke Parking and Transportation (DPT) hopes it is, because the passage of this referendum will make it possible for DPT to achieve its goals of reduced single occupancy vehicles (SOV) on campus.

In addition to increased bus service, the DCBRIP also outlines the creation of satellite park-and-ride lots and neighborhood transfer stations. Neighborhood transfer stations would presumably make riding the regional busses more convenient for those riders whose trips do not necessitate going all the way into the downtown station. Park-and-ride lots similarly provide an entry point to the regional and University-based transit systems. These lots and transfer stations would be constructed over a 20-year period of development.

The bus-mode objectives comprise the most feasible part of the plan. Aside from the small infrastructure projects, the technology and skills are already in place to capitalize on the passage of the referendum.

These regional options and infrastructure are critical to the success of DPT’s objective to reduce the carbon footprint of the University transportation sector. DPT will likely continue to incentivize employees, faculty, staff and students to utilize these regional transit options and therefore ensure at least one source of demand. Provided the alternatives achieve convenience and efficiency, the need for those incentives should diminish over time.

The final two phases of the plan require substantial capital support from the federal and state governments, making them far less certain even with passage of the referendum.

The second phase of the plan calls for development of a light rail line connecting Chapel Hill at UNC to Duke and Durham. The proposed route would presumably replace the existing need for the Robertson Scholars Express Bus and the existing DATA routes that serve the 15-501 corridor.

Although the rail line does not appear to coincide with the existing 15-501 corridor, it has 17 planned stations over the course of its proposed 17-mile alignment.

I have long been at a loss over what to make of the 15-501 corridor between Duke and Chapel Hill. It has always struck me as a wasted opportunity and a great candidate for a limited-access highway. Instead, you find sprawling big-box development that necessitates gigantic intersections with absolutely no human scale and inefficient traffic flow.

The final route of any light rail that is built stands to drive future development of the corridor for decades. The proposed light rail route as depicted in the DCBRIP runs to the south of 15-501, avoiding it all together. For the duration of the viability of the existing development in that stretch, the car centric 15-501 and new light rail to the south will compete. Even if light rail is a clear win for commuters, it needs more than that to be truly viable.

The third phase of the DCBRIP calls for commuter rail service between Durham, Research Triangle Park, Morrisville, Cary, Raleigh and Garner. Although serving a sizable portion of the commuters who travel to campus on a daily basis, it is unclear that this transit mode would actually connect to campus specifically, necessitating a transfer. On the other hand, this transit mode would also serve the airport in close proximity, as well as schools in the Raleigh area.

The sales tax referendum for public transit, if passed, will be a boon for Durham and for Duke. Durham has been on a roll with successful revitalizations of several downtown areas. Regional transit will likely continue the momentum of that success. Duke likewise benefits from a healthy Durham region. It helps to attract top talent, and ensures a vibrant economy for the future workforce.

Vote for the future of transit on Nov. 8th.

Liz Bloomhardt is a fifth-year graduate student in earth and ocean sciences. Her column runs every other Thursday.

Link to original publication

Advertisements

Read Full Post »

By Liz Bloomhardt
Published October 13, 2011

Since the Board of Trustees of the University approved the Climate Action Plan in May, 2009, the annual green house gas (GHG) inventory of the University has been trending downward. The calculated 2010 emissions were 8.9 percent below the 2007 baseline. These reductions are roughly on par with the stated goals set forth in the CAP, and that document has proved to be an able guide.

Over that same time, the Sustainable Duke website has indicated some mission creep. In addition to the objectives of the CAP in reducing emissions and reaching carbon neutrality by 2024, there are now robust sections that cover campus initiatives in other areas like dining, waste, water and purchasing.

This totally makes sense.

The CAP was created as a direct response to President Richard Brodhead’s signing of the American College and University Presidents’ Climate Commitment (ACUPCC) in 2007. Sustainability, however, means more than just climate to a school’s operation, reputation, ranking and service to society.

This year, the president-appointed Campus Sustainability Committee, of which I am a member, and its many subcommittees have been directed to move beyond climate and focus some energy on the creation of a Sustainability Strategic Plan (SSP).

In addition to getting a few more points on the next Association for the Advancement of Sustainability in Higher Education (AASHE) Sustainability Tracking Assessment and Rating System (STARS) rating submission in three years, an SSP has the potential to empower unexpected change. In the same way President Brodhead told me last year the CAP led the University to end its use of coal.

In the same way the CAP measures greenhouse gas emissions and set a target for carbon neutrality, the SSP will derive its success from the identification of reliable data streams and clear, articulate goals that can be measured.

The areas into which the SSP has the power to move however, (eg. purchasing and waste) are decision areas that quickly become decentralized into Duke’s many schools, departments and buildings. This will provide a major challenge like those already being tackled in the area of personal transportation.

In addition, without the same unifying commitment from ACUPCC that led to the CAP and similarly-focused plans at schools across the country and world, the SSP must navigate a less-defined space.

Though several peer and neighboring institutions including Yale, N.C. State, Princeton and Purdue have published SSPs, they are each slightly different in their approach and scope. Duke will be the same. Instead of crafting a holistic SSP over the course of a year, like was done with the drafting of the CAP, a couple choice areas have been selected, to be followed by additional areas in later years.

This year’s primary areas of focus are: a) water and storm water and b) transportation. The secondary area is waste reduction/recycling/composting.

The first focus, water and Storm water, is a policy area that is under central administrative control and has garnered heightened interest since the severe drought of 2007. A large user education effort was made at that time, and compliance with state and local regulations will dictate storm water management requirements. This is a safe, easy category to include in the first year. It is also regionally relevant if not particularly progressive.

The second area of focus this year is transportation. This topical area seems redundant, however, as it is covered under the CAP, and a subcommittee and a working group already exist to address the stated and evolving goals and challenges.

Finally, as a secondary focus area, a new subcommittee will form to consider materials management on campus including recycling, waste and composting. Waste management—and recycling in particular—is an often-lamented underachievement on Duke’s campus. This newly formed subcommittee has an opportunity to challenge that reality, but it’s not likely to be easy. The current waste management system is of the decentralized variety and therefore rife with political and bureaucratic implications.

Not included in this year’s list of focus areas are dining and purchasing. Dining in particular is a highly relevant topic area right now with the West Union renovation and growing food awareness on campus. It’s likely that these areas will come later, I just hope the prime opportunity to start to address them specifically, and sustainability in a holistic way has not passed.

The SSP has the power to change Duke in unexpected and positive ways. Let us make sure Duke is open to the possibility.

Liz Bloomhardt is a fifth-year graduate student in mechanical engineering. Her column runs every other Thursday.

Link to original posting.

Read Full Post »