CATS Long Term Transit Plan - Silver, Red Lines

[TCLT]

16 hours ago, kermit said:

Interline with Gold? 

New connection using Carson? 

P&N underpass at the stadium?

Street running on 6th or 10th?

Taking lanes from the Belk? (there are plenty!)

 

Isn’t the terminus gonna be at Gateway Station? 
 

And since cost will now be an even larger barrier, not sure how any other options are doable. Running the silver line past CGS either means building elevated track to take it along the current proposed routing to graham and 11th or completely rebuilding the gold line to accommodate light rail vehicles interlining. Neither seems feasible. Going to Carson means missing CGS and any connections to gold and red lines. The other options you mention haven’t even been studied and seem to pose even greater challenges. 

[kermit]

21 hours ago, TCLT said:

Isn’t the terminus gonna be at Gateway Station? 
 

And since cost will now be an even larger barrier, not sure how any other options are doable. Running the silver line past CGS either means building elevated track to take it along the current proposed routing to graham and 11th or completely rebuilding the gold line to accommodate light rail vehicles interlining. Neither seems feasible. Going to Carson means missing CGS and any connections to gold and red lines. The other options you mention haven’t even been studied and seem to pose even greater challenges. 

I am really just spitballing. But since the eastern keg of the Silver Line has been cancelled this is an opportunity to reduce some of the bad parts of the original plan in Uptown (with the Blue Line integration being the worst part). Some partially formed thoughts about potential improvements come to mind:

• interlining w the Gold Line feels like the most efficient (cost wise) route through uptown. Lets make Trade a transit mall! (The utilities have already been moved, that is one of the highest cost line items)
• Would street running in Uptown be a bad thing for a one-legged Silver Line? I think speed in uptown doesn’t matter much if the line is not covering 20 miles.
• Turning the Silver Line in Uptown would be most efficiently done with a loop — this would be a good opportunity to improve uptown circulation (Brooklyn Village, N Davidson, 8th?)
• The Eastland leg of the Gold Line seems to still be part of the discussion — why not just make that the eastern leg of the Silver Line?
• Does the Silver need to terminate (or even reach) Gateway Station? Substantially improved Gold Line service would be much more cost effective (and the Silver could then interface w Blue Line at Carson). This is rhetorical, I do think the Silver should go to Gateway, but not terminate there)

like I said, just spitballing, but the full-length Silver Line featured some really awful design choices Uptown. Lets fix those if we are not going to run the Silver Line through.

 

Edited June 4 by kermit

[TCLT]

1 hour ago, kermit said:

I am really just spitballing. But since the eastern keg of the Silver Line has been cancelled this is an opportunity to reduce some of the bad parts of the original plan in Uptown (with the Blue Line integration being the worst part). Some partially formed thoughts about potential improvements come to mind:

• interlining w the Gold Line feels like the most efficient (cost wise) route through uptown. Lets make Trade a transit mall!
• Would street running in Uptown be a bad thing for a one-legged Silver Line? Speed doesn’t matter much in Uptown if it does not need to cover 20 miles.
• Turning the Silver Line in Uptown would be most efficiently done with a loop — this would be a good opportunity to improve uptown circulation
• The Eastland leg of the Gold Line seems to still be part of the discussion — why not just make that the Silver Line?
• Does the Silver need to terminate (or even reach) Gateway Station? Substantially improved Gold Line service would be much more cost effective (and the Silver could then interface w Blue Line at Carson

like I said, just spitballing, but the full-length Silver Line featured some really awful design choices Uptown. Lets fix those if we are not going to run the Silver Line through.

 

These are great ideas…for somewhere not Charlotte. They just seem impractical given the likely budget constraints and city culture/leadership. It’s almost impossible that there’ll be enough money for red+gold extension+blue extension+half silver. Let alone reworking significant portions of uptown infrastructure to accommodate these ideas. Plus, given the complete lack of political will shown thus far to make road sacrifices for transit (cough gold line cough), I can’t imagine there’s any appetite to further disrupt uptown streets, regardless of cost. And realistically there’s zero chance of eliminating car traffic on any uptown streets. Also having to redo portions of the gold line so soon after building them seems like a political nonstarter when trying to sell a tax increase.

On top of everything else, I think there are powerful interests (McColl, UNCC, the county) who were making plans based on economic development the silver line routing would’ve brought to the north side of uptown. Not sure they’d get on board with a reworking of an eastern silver line stub now but who knows. 

And regarding CGS, I think connecting the airport leg there is far far more useful than connecting at Carson. A smooth rail link between the airport and outer towns is, imo, more likely to be used than an incredibly inefficient connection for neighborhoods on the blue line that are a 10-15 minute car ride from the airport. I believe that pretty much anyone who’d take a blue-silver ride to the airport will still take a blue-gold-silver ride.

[JRCLT]

On 6/2/2024 at 5:52 PM, southslider said:

If there isn't a Silver Line to Matthews, how will Silver Line from the Airport even connect with Blue Line?

Phasing doesn’t have to be exactly like what was proposed… it could start anywhere and end anywhere. Phasing is only there to ease the construction of large capital intensive projects. So  a change in the phasing is not impossible and doesn't have to mean it never goes to Matthews in the future... and does not mean that what the phasing they've chosen is the only way to do it. Gateway could be the terminus but you could easily make bojangles coliseum the terminus with a terminus at the airport as well. It's really all on what it is that the line is envisioned to achieve and the cost than can be poured into one phase.

[TCLT]

2 minutes ago, JRCLT said:

Phasing doesn’t have to be exactly like what was proposed… it could start anywhere and end anywhere. Phasing is only there to ease the construction of large capital intensive projects. So  a change in the phasing is not impossible and doesn't have to mean it never goes to Matthews in the future... and does not mean that what the phasing they've chosen is the only way to do it. Gateway could be the terminus but you could easily make bojangles coliseum the terminus with a terminus at the airport as well. It's really all on what it is that the line is envisioned to achieve and the cost than can be poured into one phase.

Sigh. We’re talking about a plan that based on current estimates would optimistically would see revenue service at the end of the 2030s. “In the future” is a generation or three away at this point. Any phase that might come “in the future” is not even worth discussing.

[kermit]

In terms of money available for rail I’ll make some very sloppy and uninformed estimates:

The current 1/2 cent tax was used to pay out approximately:

• 25% of the $500 million (ish) cost of the South Line (around 2006) — $125 million
• 25% of the $1 billion cost of the BLE — $250 million
• No transit sales tax revenue was used for the Gold Line, that was 50% city and 50%  federal funds (not sales tax).

After this  $375 million capital expenditure from the original transit sales tax CATS said they had no more revenue available for rail capital projects. Thus the need for the new tax.

The proposed 40% of a one cent incremental new tax creates less potential revenue for rail than the current 1/2 tax that is unrestricted. 

The state has made clear they are no longer willing to make the 25% contribution for rail they did for the Blue Line. Although, since the Red Line technically gets to Iredell County the state may be willing to substantially contribute more than they would for a Mecklenburg only project. 

Ignoring construction cost inflation (and sales tax revenue growth):  The proposed 40% rail share of the new tax would cover approximately 50% of a $750 million Red Line (that won’t be enough by itself). I really don’t see the proposed sales tax (with cap for rail)   building much more than the Red Line.

We can talk all day long about the Silver Line in various forms, I doubt this tax proposal buys us any of it (let alone the BLE-E).  I think we need to be spending our energy calling out the new funding plan as inadequate — we are being gaslighted.

Edited June 10 by kermit

[carolinaboy]

Could $650,000,000 build the Silver line from the airport to Gateway then from Gateway to where it can meet the Blue line? If so, don't give $650,000,000 to Tepper, forget about commuter rail for the time being and build that portion of the Silver line. In my ill-informed mind a silver line to the airport from the blue line would be more useful/used than the Red line. Not arguing any particular point just trying to think of affordable/practical alternatives for transit and use of public money.

[CLT2014]

33 minutes ago, carolinaboy said:

Could $650,000,000 build the Silver line from the airport to Gateway then from Gateway to where it can meet the Blue line? If so, don't give $650,000,000 to Tepper, forget about commuter rail for the time being and build that portion of the Silver line. In my ill-informed mind a silver line to the airport from the blue line would be more useful/used than the Red line. Not arguing any particular point just trying to think of affordable/practical alternatives for transit and use of public money.

The whole game of funding sources. The stadium upgrades are funded from the tourism / hospitality tax on rental cars, hotel rooms, prepared food, et... which needs to be used for tourism related purposes like the Convention Center, Stadium upgrades, museums, et... but not public transport. North Carolina Restaurant and Lodging Association has sent a letter to Charlotte that if they even think of diverting the funds, they'll go straight to the legislature to request a complete repeal of the tourism taxes applicable to their industry in Mecklenburg.  

Edited June 4 by CLT2014

[RANYC]

29 minutes ago, carolinaboy said:

Could $650,000,000 build the Silver line from the airport to Gateway then from Gateway to where it can meet the Blue line? If so, don't give $650,000,000 to Tepper, forget about commuter rail for the time being and build that portion of the Silver line. In my ill-informed mind a silver line to the airport from the blue line would be more useful/used than the Red line. Not arguing any particular point just trying to think of affordable/practical alternatives for transit and use of public money.

The money for the stadium is coming from the tourism fund.  The resources in that fund come from hotel taxes and taxes on restaurant meals, levied in anticipation of things like stadium, arena, convention center modernizations, etc.  Those resources cannot be used for transit or transportation projects, but rather on tourism venues.

[carolinaboy]

7 minutes ago, RANYC said:

The money for the stadium is coming from the tourism fund.  The resources in that fund come from hotel taxes and taxes on restaurant meals, levied in anticipation of things like stadium, arena, convention center modernizations, etc.  Those resources cannot be used for transit or transportation projects, but rather on tourism venues.

Roger. Is there a similar tax that can be levied on hotels/meals/car rentals, etc. that can be specifically for transportation improvements?

[kermit]

16 minutes ago, carolinaboy said:

Roger. Is there a similar tax that can be levied on hotels/meals/car rentals, etc. that can be specifically for transportation improvements?

Go Triangle gets about $7 million per year from a 5% rental car tax imposed in Wake, Durham and Orange counties. They get a similar amount from a vehicle registration tax in the same counties. 

https://gotriangle.org/sites/default/files/2024-05/20230419.pdf

The Mecklenburg 1% prepared food (and drink) tax generates about $44 million per year. It is currently allocated to tourism infrastructure.

https://www.qcnews.com/news/u-s/north-carolina/mecklenburg-county/n-c-officials-extend-meck-county-incentive/amp/
 

It would not generate enough money to radically change transit funding but it would be appropriate to tax alcohol (and eventually) weed sales and allocate that money to transit.

Portland Oregon uses a payroll tax to fund Max (based on place of work, not residence).

The NYC congestion fee revenue will flow straight to the MTA. (Fee begins this month I think)

IMO a significant carbon tax is the appropriate way to fund transit at a reasonable level. (This is the primary funding mechanism for California HSR)

 

 

Edited June 4 by kermit

[RANYC]

12 minutes ago, carolinaboy said:

Roger. Is there a similar tax that can be levied on hotels/meals/car rentals, etc. that can be specifically for transportation improvements?

Theoretically there could be although I imagine the city would need to get the hospitality industry on board with such a levy.  People use transportation to travel to employment centers and to shop so not sure all the funding should fall to the tourism fund.  

[carolinaboy]

14 minutes ago, kermit said:

Go Triangle gets about $7 million per year from a 5% rental car tax imposed in Wake, Durham and Orange counties. They get a similar amount from a vehicle registration tax in the same counties. 

https://gotriangle.org/sites/default/files/2024-05/20230419.pdf

The Mecklenburg 1% prepared food (and drink) tax generates about $44 million per year. It is currently allocated to tourism infrastructure.

https://www.qcnews.com/news/u-s/north-carolina/mecklenburg-county/n-c-officials-extend-meck-county-incentive/amp/
 

It would not generate enough money to radically change transit funding but it would be appropriate to tax alcohol (and eventually) weed sales and allocate that money to transit.

Portland Oregon uses a payroll tax to fund Max (based on place of work, not residence).

The NYC congestion fee revenue will flow straight to the MTA. (Fee begins this month I think)

IMO a significant carbon tax is the appropriate way to fund transit at a reasonable level. (This is the primary funding mechanism for California HSR)

 

 

What is a carbon tax?

[kermit]

5 minutes ago, carolinaboy said:

What is a carbon tax?

A tax on carbon emissions. Can be part of gas tax, industrial permit fees, etc.

Carbon taxes are generally accompanied with rebate checks to low income groups (depending on structure this can still encourage reductions in driving) 

They have one in Canada, it has become a significant political liability for Treadeau.

Edited June 4 by kermit

[carolinaboy]

2 minutes ago, kermit said:

A tax on carbon emissions. Can be part of gas tax, industrial permit fees, etc.

Is that a tax that is currently required/collected or is this a potential new tax money source? Forgive the simple questions I am just trying to learn.

[kermit]

20 minutes ago, carolinaboy said:

Is that a tax that is currently required/collected or is this a potential new tax money source? Forgive the simple questions I am just trying to learn.

Does not exist in NC. I  not even sure if it has been implemented in CA yet. 

Will never happen in the current NC political environment. 

Edited June 4 by kermit

[TheMightyBK]

When I fly into a town for tourism, I typically use trains because they tend to have stops at or nearby tourist attractions.  

[RANYC]

20 minutes ago, kermit said:

Does not exist in NC. I  not even sure if it has been implemented in CA yet. 

Very few states have any sort of carbon aware taxation schemes, and I am confident that North Carolina won’t even be in the first 35 states to create such a framework should it start to gain traction here in the US.  

Also, Charlotte streets are garbage in a ton of places in city limits, with dense areas built alongside country-style roads lacking even basics like curbsides let alone other speed moderating or speed-reducing mechanisms such as medians or bump-outs.  As soon as you turn off a boulevard like Wilkinson, you’re soon on a street that looks pretty third-world in some cases.  Not saying we need road widening or roads to nowhere, but we need a massive amount of street modernization to have a street system befitting a major city, both in design and functionality.  Now that transit plan dollars will go to streets in much greater proportion, I hope we can weigh in on planning to get an urban streets design framework that elevates the mobility experience for pedestrians and motorists and cyclists who are far away from the silver line and other lines.

Edited June 4 by RANYC

[nakers2]

This whole situation is just exceedingly frustrating. What gets me is that the comment section on nearly every growth/development related story laments the lack of parking in {insert dense inner city neighborhood here] and more recently the talk has turned towards the increase in the cost of parking in these same areas. I said it years ago, Charlotte had/has two paths, one was to build transit for the future, and the other was to let the future build our transit, and we have chosen the latter option. We will continue to choke in car oriented development until economic forces push the hands of leadership into investing in the transit we need, and by then it will cost a lot more. 

[southslider]

Everyone is focused on the 40% going to rail transit and what it buys as 50% match for New Starts grants  But what about the 20% going to bus?  A lot more BRT than just Matthews may be possible and still leverage Small Starts. For example, any Independence BRT could branch to both Albemarle Rd and Matthews for a lot less than Silver Line.

Edited June 5 by southslider

[atlrvr]

And NYC congestion zone tax is dead.

https://nypost.com/2024/06/05/us-news/gov-kathy-hochul-considering-delaying-congestion-pricing-report/

[LKN704]

7 hours ago, atlrvr said:

And NYC congestion zone tax is dead.

https://nypost.com/2024/06/05/us-news/gov-kathy-hochul-considering-delaying-congestion-pricing-report/

Textbook case example of more rural/suburban areas holding urban areas in the United States hostage. This is a purely political move to attempt to keep D seats in suburban districts and/or Upstate. I know folks in freaking Buffalo who have never been to the city (nor plan on visiting) but they have been up in arms about the congestion zone as if it impacted them personally. 

Quote

Hochul said Wednesday the state had already set aside funding for the MTA in case congestion pricing was held up by the courts.

"We remain fully committed to advancing all the improvements New Yorkers have been promised," she said, including track and signal repairs, security cameras and the extension of the Second Avenue subway line.

Lmao - we will see about this. 

[Nathan2]

On 6/4/2024 at 11:16 AM, RANYC said:

The money for the stadium is coming from the tourism fund.  The resources in that fund come from hotel taxes and taxes on restaurant meals, levied in anticipation of things like stadium, arena, convention center modernizations, etc.  Those resources cannot be used for transit or transportation projects, but rather on tourism venues.

The city needs to lobby the state. Transit = Tourism. Would anyone ever imagine traveling to any of the big US or world cities if they had no form of transit? 

[CLT2014]

2 hours ago, Nathan2 said:

The city needs to lobby the state. Transit = Tourism. Would anyone ever imagine traveling to any of the big US or world cities if they had no form of transit? 

The state literally doesn't want Charlotte to use a transit tax for public transit... so jumping to a tourism tax for public transit is going to be a stretch for them. 

Edited June 10 by CLT2014

[kayman]

On 6/3/2024 at 10:19 AM, TCLT said:

Isn’t the terminus gonna be at Gateway Station? 
 

And since cost will now be an even larger barrier, not sure how any other options are doable. Running the silver line past CGS either means building elevated track to take it along the current proposed routing to graham and 11th or completely rebuilding the gold line to accommodate light rail vehicles interlining. Neither seems feasible. Going to Carson means missing CGS and any connections to gold and red lines. The other options you mention haven’t even been studied and seem to pose even greater challenges. 

Yes, the Gateway Station will be the Red Line terminus.  Some type of inhabitable structure with the Red Line, Amtrak, (possibly Greyhound) would be constructed if the referendum is passed while the private developer gets their "ish" together.

Stay tuned to the "what" will happen with the Silver Line. I am not at liberty to say what might happen because of my role, but something will be announced if the transit sales tax referendum is passed for the public vote by the NCGA. 

Edited June 11 by kayman