tusculan

The deaths of people killed by Communism in the 20th century : estimated 100 million https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_killings_under_Communist_regimes Kermit, so you don't have any proof? Other than CNN. how many Jewish people did Breitbart employ while Bannon was there? how many of Trump's kids are Jewish? Sebastian Gorka, who writes about the challenge of political Islamism in the West is anti-Jewish?

Wow. I didn't know that. Which ones? Can you provide any handy links so I could see who these people are?

Bordeaux has done this with some of their streets. The streetcars run either in the grassy median, or occasionally as the inner lane, but for the heart of downtown it runs in the middle of a large pedestrian plaza (with limited hours for local vehicle traffic) They have also re-purposed 2 cross streets as pedestrian or bike only (again with exceptions for early morning local freight etc), thus giving a whole transit mall effect. This is also what is being done in downtown Minneapolis right now - a plaza with restaurants flanking the sides opening to a pedestrian mall with the streetcar lanes in the center. It is supposed to be up and running by October, and I am excited to see how well it works. Inasmuch as I think streetcars to be truly successful should maximize the amount of time they have independent ROW (like Minneapolis), I am all for the pedestrian mall with streetcars on it.

As I have seen in various cities - Without independent ROW, signal priorities, and reliable scheduling, there isn't a big enough sell for consumers to favor streetcars over other transit options. Sure the ride is smoother..sure its more ADA compliant.... but what makes public transit worthwhile for the average person is only the following: Can I get where I want to go quicker and with less hassle than driving at a given time?

If they don't need to make the trip, then they found a way not to make the trip. Why is this bad? Why should we build infrastructure for mere convenience?

Kermit, you might be right about speed as it applies to the uptown segment. But I am guessing that there is some definable distance or zone whereby the speed will certainly play a factor - as will the stop location, for presumably you will have less frequent stops the less dense the community is. I will certainly agree that within uptown - frequency and keeping to a schedule matter almost as much as the route. No one wants to sit outside in a suit in July waiting for the streetcar to finally appear.

Ok - better route. Sure. The argument in the text seems to be that the streetcar is performing so badly that it must be a cataclysm of different factors. Route, management, maintenance, speed, too many stops, too slow, and no independent ROW. Can we determine which of these actually matter though by way of a comparison to other streetcar systems? Does anyone know of a way to compare them, so that one can evaluate which of these is most important? Let's say a perfect score is 100 - if route matters the most, and the route is bad, then the highest grade you can get is a 65 - barely passable if everything else is spot on... In my estimation, Route (including number of stops) = 35%, management (including integration with devices and other transit) = 15%, maintenance/reliability =25%, speed (irrespective of ROW) 20%, all other factors 5%. Does that seem reasonable?

The following is from Streetsblog. What are the lessons here? Unable to assemble new funding from the state to significantly improve the rapid transit system, the city of Atlanta chose to focus on a cheaper-to-implement streetcar line. The route opened in December 2014 after a year of delays and an almost $30 million cost increase, from $72 million to $98 million. The hope was that the streetcar would attract 2,000 daily passengers, but it’s only moving about 700 riders a day as of the latest reporting. It has also faced considerable maintenance problems that have led state and federal officials to question its management. The fact that the city runs the line, rather than an experienced transit agency like MARTA, probably doesn’t help. But there are fundamental flaws in the project that no maintenance or operational expertise is likely to overcome. The streetcar travels only 1.3 miles, from downtown to the Martin Luther King, Jr. Center, so it’s only useful for a limited variety of trips. It stops too frequently — six times over the course of its very short route — slowing service. And because the trains operate in lanes shared with cars, they average less than 10 mph on a good day; often, they get stuck at signals and behind cars, leading to delays and a high degree of unreliability. Everyone I spoke with for this series agreed the street car line is not a model for future investment. No one wants to spend millions of dollars on projects that don’t work.

I think everyone understands that this phase 1 is a joke. Poor equipment, slow vehicles, infrequent scheduling, lack of integration and technology, and poor layout. Basically the only thing it has right is location. Phase 2 will certainly help with the vehicle speed and more reliable equipment. But the integration with the Blue Line and the technology really need upgrades. And the scheduling absolutely has to be fixed. The biggest draw to light rail/ streetcars over bus is dependability and frequency. If, through incompetence, this doesn't get fixed then the streetcar will be an abject failure. There should be cars travelling this route every 5 or 10 minutes on the dot in each direction.

Just because you are a libertarian does not mean, I hope anyway, that we are reduced to living in a hovel. There can be legitimate uses of public funds that have a tangible if only indirect public benefit.

The biggest drawback that I see from this location is the need to reroute the traffic from N. College. But this doesn't seem insurmountable as there are simply the two lanes of traffic that are heading onto 277. I think as S. College springs from S. Tryon, the best solution would just be to fold those lanes of traffic onto 9th and then onto Tryon around the west side of any proposed stadium. This traffic deviation might even be nice as it allows the Blue Line ext and the Charlotte Rail Trail to be the 'front' of the stadium.

Having long delays between transit modes is a concern. If you have to wait longer than 5 or so minutes, people will be far less likely to use it, especially outdoor or above ground stops. However, it is fundamentally easier to add more trains than to remove them. In 20 years, our concern will not be that the trains don't come often enough, but how to have greater capacity. If I am not mistaken, the current schedule during peak times for blue line trains is every 15 minutes. If scheduled correctly then, the wait at a junction station like Stonewall would be 7.5 minutes for a transfer at current scheduling frequency. This is indeed a problem. I see three solutions. 1) simply increase frequency to at least a train every 10 minutes to cut service time. The obvious downside to this is that it would either meaning running emptier trains, or running multiple kinds of services, like express or local, which I am not sure the infrastructure can accommodate. 2.) This is a little bold. But what if in construction of the silver line there is a rail connector to the blue line directly, or via the gold line? Is there a way to re-route certain Silver Line trains elsewhere in Uptown that would lessen the need for a wait now. But in the future wouldn't be used? If I recall correctly, the streetcars can be used on the LRV routes but not vice versa because of weight and turning radii. But might there be a mixed solution for now? 3) Simply coordinate the Gold line (hahaha) with the silver and the blue by using signal priority systems. If you could do this, then you could time all three lines in relation to one another - so yes it would be a 7 minute wait for the Blue line, but only if you didn't want to wait the 2 minutes for the Gold line and come into uptown from the East. Does that make sense?

I am completely in agreement with this. Any junction of the two major axes of transit that doesn't take place a) actually in uptown and b) with a line that only skirts uptown is pointless. Who is going to ride from Matthews, ride along the belk freeway, switch to the blue line after circling to SouthEnd to finally go into uptown, but only ride 2-3 stops? IF the route is along Stonewall- people can easily walk anywhere along the south side of uptown - from Trade down to the Belk Freeway. The blue line sharing route is a solution in the same way that two car trains was a solution. Its short sighted. Sure maybe capacity works now - but no vision for future use. What if there is a spur to Mint Hill - will that also be using this alignment? Moreover, with the possible exception of the 12th St. alignment, the Stonewall alignment is the easiest to get out to the airport. You can either head out west on Morehead or along the NCRR corridor. Frankly, I fail to see how this is not far and away the best option.

All sorts of systems do overlapping routes. See the NY Subway- where they track 'services' not 'lines' like most subway or metro systems. I think the only downside is that people get used to using the colors to denote lines, and then they have difficulty transitioning.....Wait, what am i riding? the Silver-Orange-Blue train? Do I need to get off to transfer? I don't think there is a difficulty in technology, just in nomenclature. Ultimately, we would need to stop using things like the Blue Line to refer to the route, but only the infrastructure, and instead Alpha-numeric or symbol names which aren't going to be as limited. The alternative is to run different lines....Blue, Green etc, but then change the designation of the train on the route....express, local, etc. And one could include with these special service names...the Derita Flyer...covers this service.

I think Route 4, which mostly follows the old outline of the City from 1970, should have an inter-median light rail. Could connect to the Derita station whenever the Red Line gets moving...the Sugar Creek BLE station....Gold Line at Central....Silver Line at Eastway....then jog south to South Park for the other Cats Bus hub, then back to meet the Blue Line Woodlawn station and then out to the airport/airport station. In fact, if it only stopped at these 8 or even 10 locations plus had signal priority by being in the median, this could be far quicker than driving in traffic to go around the middle of the city.

I think that the silver line should not try to parallel the Brookshire freeway either on 11th or 12th, as that would be a mess to redesign all of that. I think that there are only 2 proposals that really make sense - Option 1: go to the south side of uptown via Charlottetown, and then head west on Stonewall. Stonewall is a wide street that could handle a 32 ft right of way down the middle of it, it is not as busy (foot traffic wise) as other crosstown streets immediately north, and it already has an interchange with the Lynx Blue Line. I like the idea stated above that a possible option in this corridor is to move the line to the south toward the Belk freeway after Caldwell, push Hill St. further south and link up with the tracks by the Observer that ultimately run around the south stands of Bank of America Stadium. I like this idea mostly because it provides a way out of the west end of uptown, though the tracks would probably be diverted so that they don't head north along the NCRR up to Gateway, but rather south or west near Morehead. If that option isn't used, then getting the Silver Line out of uptown becomes a bit trickier....since you don't want to head north up Graham, you either need to cut south through a parking lot to turn onto Mint, cut south in a rather tight window around the west side of Bank of America Stadium, or head west through the old outlet for the P & N by the Panthers practice field. These alignments are all desirable in my estimate, especially as they provide an easy stop for Panther games, and an easy outlet out of uptown to head west to the airport. However, its a bit of an awkward alignment especially as regards transfers to the Gold Line - only happening outside of uptown in Elizabeth --and no connection to transit centers -either the CTC or the new Gateway station. Option 2 that I suggest is for the use of the 7th street corridor from Charlottetown to the NCRR. In First ward, a sizable amount of this corridor is next to parking lots, so there is allowance for growth either of businesses or ROW additions. It would then cross the Blue Line and head toward Tryon St. after Tryon, however, 7th street becomes only 2 lanes of traffic, and eventually stops in 4th ward at the park. I would advocate closing 7th street in 4th ward to automobile traffic, and have solely the silver line along a pedestrian corridor. After reaching Smith St., the track could turn southward and run parallel the NCRR to Gateway, where it would also meet with the Gold Line. The advantage of this corridor is better connecting service to the Gold line and Gateway, better service to more of uptown's museums, it involves the construction of a pedestrian corridor, and it makes for a denser swath of uptown that is served by rail transit. The walk from Trade St. to 7th is only a couple of minutes, and by increasing the density of the transit in uptown, you provide a guide for development and for people to visit uptown.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/08/nyregion/torontos-transit-advice-for-new-york-give-streetcars-their-own-lanes.html?_r=0 This Times article is rather unsurprising. "Streetcars need dedicated ROW because they are quicker..." This seems patently obvious but also entirely unhelpful. Not really discussed are ancillary issues to dedicated ROW such as difficulties with signaling and to some extent carving up the city more rather than facilitating a more ambulatory environment. Does anyone know of actual research that has been done on the benefits and limitations of full ROW with independent signalling, vs limited ROW with signal pre-emption, vs mixed traffic (or mixed traffic with signal pre-emption)? Surely, there is data out there with the growing number of systems - or extensive systems like Toronto. I certainly don't think a system needs to be all or nothing, and I do wonder about the phase 3 section of Central and whether its density and traffic patterns demand a different type of answer than on Trade at Johnson and Wales. It seems to me that once a certain percentage of the people using the route are using it as a transit route and not for neighborhood stops, then the streetcar service ought to transition as well. Again, I don't know what the numbers are - but I don't think that very many people who would ride on a line that goes from South Park to Uptown would be interested in mixed traffic service, for instance. Does anyone know of a source for this info? And can anyone propose some corridor criteria that would justify the different kinds of service?

Two thoughts. If Gateway is really going to be built following one of these models - then it seems it will only serve four platforms, at most. So what this means is that realistically, there has to be a new station configuration built on the north side of uptown. 4 platforms can really probably only handle about 12 -16 trains an hour. That may sound like a lot, and I'm sure it will work for 20/40 years even with commuter lines. But don't think that this is any long-term solution. Secondly, as to the line to Raleigh for inter-connectivity, I know it increases traffic to go through Greensboro, but again, the long-term solution is different, I think than the short-term. In the long run, a path from Raleigh to Charlotte that goes south to Sanford and then West will be much easier to build at the specifications needed for higher speed traffic. It also would shave off between 30-50 miles of distance. Unfortunately, we need both the practical short-term solutions, as well as the long-term vision to go ahead and buy the land and the trackage necessary. Good luck with that.

Made me chuckle. I realize you were in a rush...but I think what they want is to elicit feedback, and not illicit feedback.

I think that since our streetcar is serving two functions, there ought to be a two tiered fare system. Urban circulator from Johnson and Wales to cpcc is free. After that, 5 cents per stop. This keeps it cheap enough that no one will really be upset by it, but introduces the concept that outside of uptown, it is to be used as transit, and not as a free alternative to walking a block or two. Even if phase three is built, this would result it costing $1 from Rosa parks to uptown, and $1.50 from Eastland. I think the idea that you pay a flat rate of $1.50 per ride regardless of where you go would have a deleterious effect to people who live near central. As they would have to pay the same to go four stops as 20. At that point, why not just drive?

A little story on starter streetcar lines in other cities, and problematic ridership levels: http://usa.streetsblog.org/2016/05/12/reminder-just-laying-track-is-no-guarantee-riders-will-come/

Tokyo is 2.5x as densely populated as New York....NO THANK YOU! yikes

There were literally tens of places to go. And hundreds of parking spots. Who doesn't like that ratio?

Oh, good to know. It didn't say anything about that in the Observer piece. I was only basing my info on the Brookville websited, that markets the lack of electrical connection on the Dallas streetcar.

Thanks, Nolan. I don't think the Brookville is a good enough option. All the boarding is in the middle only, then you have to go up a step to get to the seating areas. Horrible flow! Plus it simply looks like a poor man's Siemens' in my opinion. Its also the slowest ...with a top speed of 45. Maybe this isn't a big issue on the Central route, but hopefully in building a whole network we can get at least 50. I only see two advantages with the Brookville - its made in the US, and it has batteries that would allow it to cross Tryon without having to put the catenary there. I think it would be better to look at Stadler to see if they have corrected the problems from Munich and London, and maybe we can get a good price since they have yet to break into the North American market...and then go with them or Siemens.