CATS Long Term Transit Plan - Silver, Red Lines

[southslider]

USDOT officially announced TIGER-II grants today. None of the awards include Charlotte projects, including CATS' TIGER-II application to extend the Blue Line to 9th St.

But Atlanta and Salt Lake City were each awarded grants for their own modern streetcar projects. Maybe nearby Atlanta's longer and more modern line will put fire under Charlotte to extend and modernize quickly beyond the CTC-Presby starter line slated to use trolleys.

[kermit]

USDOT officially announced TIGER-II grants today. None of the awards include Charlotte projects, including CATS' TIGER-II application to extend the Blue Line to 9th St.

But Atlanta and Salt Lake City were each awarded grants for their own modern streetcar projects. Maybe nearby Atlanta's longer and more modern line will put fire under Charlotte to extend and modernize quickly beyond the CTC-Presby starter line slated to use trolleys.

More bad news for the red (and possibly blue) lines -- It sounds like NC gets nothing in the next round of HSR grants.

http://www.thetransp...high-speed-line

This set of applications from NC included funds for Gateway station (necessary for the red line) and the Sugar Creek and 36th st grade separations (I am unclear on how these would have impacted construction costs on the blue line extension). Gateway really needs to get built -- bringing the three (and soon four) time daily Piedmont / Carolinian service to Raleigh into downtown will make a big difference to the perception of inter and intra urban accessibility.

Perhaps the streetcar grant used up our political goodwill.

Edit: apologies for my premature whining

Edited October 28, 2010 by kermit

[New Name]

the Sugar Creek and 36th st grade separations (I am unclear on how these would have impacted construction costs on the blue line extension).

I attended a meeting with NCDOT RR Division about this project. Although they were hoping to lock down money for the bridge through Tiger II; NCDOT, NCRR and Norfolk Southern all plan to kick in money for this to happen. I suppose now, they'll have to pay for the whole thing.

The Sugar Creek bridge affects the BLE in so much as the BLE can't happen unless the Sugar Creek Bridge happens (as CATS has no plans to fund the Sugar Creek Bridge and is counting on it happening on someone else's dime) - but since the funds for the BLE don't exist either, it doesn't matter much right now. NCDOT RR is "counting" on CATS funding the 36th St bridge, but would be in a better position to step in and pony up money for 36th St. if the BLE were to never happen. Either way, I'm sick of bad news.

Edited October 26, 2010 by The Escapists

[cltbwimob]

More bad news for the red (and possibly blue) lines -- It sounds like NC gets nothing in the next round of HSR grants.

I am actually somewhat encouraged about the prospect of the Red Line getting built in a reasonable time frame. The Lake Norman Transportation committee has apparently received the support of Gene Conti on this issue. The NCDOT has assigned has assigned a "transit expert" to study both the beneits that could be derived from the line as well as alternative strategies for funding it. Also CATS has set up a Red Line Task Force to explore new methods of funding. There are multiple news sources reporting that the goal is to have the Red Line operational by 2013. If I remember correctly, one article even said that Gene Conti himself wants to have the Red Line running by 2013. I will post that article if I find it again. In the meantime here are links to two different stories on WBTV and WSOCTV.

http://www.wbtv.com/....asp?S=13319634

http://www.wsoctv.co...127/detail.html

Edited October 28, 2010 by cltbwimob

[kermit]

More bad news for the red (and possibly blue) lines -- It sounds like NC gets nothing in the next round of HSR grants.

http://www.thetransp...high-speed-line

This set of applications from NC included funds for Gateway station (necessary for the red line) and the Sugar Creek and 36th st grade separations (I am unclear on how these would have impacted construction costs on the blue line extension). Gateway really needs to get built -- bringing the three (and soon four) time daily Piedmont / Carolinian service to Raleigh into downtown will make a big difference to the perception of inter and intra urban accessibility.

Perhaps the streetcar grant used up our political goodwill.

Looks like I may have been too hasty. The official announcement is out and it looks like NC received 23 million for Gateway station and a "new bridge"

http://www.thetransportpolitic.com/2010/10/28/dot-releases-second-round-of-high-speed-rail-grants-bringing-good-news-to-california/#respond

(see the table)

Edited October 28, 2010 by kermit

[staffer]

Looks like I may have been too hasty. The official announcement is out and it looks like NC received 23 million for Gateway station and a "new bridge"

http://www.thetransp...fornia/#respond

(see the table)

national summary at

http://www.fra.dot.gov/rpd/passenger/2243.shtml

SEHSR: http://www.fra.dot.gov/rpd/downloads/Charlotte_Raleigh_Richmond_DC_FINAL_1027.pdf

Summary of Corridor Investments

Richmond – Washington, D.C.: Through FY 2010 awards, a $44.3 million grant will fund environmental studies and preliminary engineering for the

Richmond – Washington, D.C. segment of the corridor. is investment will build on prior Recovery Act awards that are supporting the construction

of a new, 11-mile high-speed rail track between Richmond and Washington, D.C. Uupgrades to this route will improve on-time performance and

lay the groundwork for future high-speed rail service in the region.

Charlotte – Raleigh: Through FY 2010 awards, a $22 million grant will help eliminate grade crossings and relocate Charlotte’s rail station to the city’s

central business district. these improvements will reduce congestion, increase transit connectivity, and enhance safety in Charlotte. these investments

build on prior Recovery Act awards that are purchasing and rehabilitating locomotives and cars, upgrading tracks, and improving station facilities.

These projects will increase top speeds to 90 miles per hour and add two additional daily round trips between North Carolina’s two largest cities,

serving three million people.

Raleigh – Richmond: Through FY 2010 awards, a $1.2 million grant will fund the completion of preliminary engineering for a new bridge over the

Appomattox River, which will remove a severe bottleneck on an extremely congested segment of the Southeast Corridor.

---

$68 million in FY 2010 awards will continue laying the groundwork for the long-term vision of the corridor, which will reach top speeds of 110

miles per hour and reduce trip time by one-third between Washington, D.C. and Richmond and between Richmond and Charlotte.

Eventually, the Southeast Corridor is expected to use Atlanta as a regional hub, with connections from Atlanta east to Charlotte, south to Macon and

Jacksonville, north to Nashville and Louisville, and west to Birmingham and New Orleans. Additionally, Virginia is planning for high-speed rail

service between Richmond and Hampton Roads, one of the fastest growing areas in the country.

detailed project description for the $22m is at page 5 of

http://www.fra.dot.gov/rpd/downloads/Summary_of_FY10_Selected_Projects_1010.pdf

Eliminate eight busy grade crossings, improve safety and reliability on the corridor, and relocate the Charlotte station

to the city’s central business district where it will connect with local transit and a transit-oriented development

community and be in close proximity to a new maintenance facility currently being constructed under the FY09 ARRA

award. Completes an incremental phase of a larger capital program that will improve capacity and reliability and

eventually lead to a fifth intercity passenger rail frequency between Raleigh and Charlotte.

[southslider]

^Very good news for the Red Line.

Just wonder now if Conti is counting this $22 million grant towards NCDOT's share of the Red Line, or he is willing to commit some actual state match to what an earlier poster hinted as a priority project for him.

Edited October 29, 2010 by southslider

[New Name]

is 22M enough for the whole thing, or will the city/state need to come up with a balance?

[New Name]

two years ago, when friends weren't sure who to vote for in the Presidential Election - I tried to sell them on Obama because of his social agenda (my striking was pro-urban, pro-transit). This was a big, big selling point for me. Almost weekly, I am reminded that Obama has keep so many of his promises and his agenda is completely in line with why I voted for him. I'm so happy that we got this guy for 4 years. I hope we get him for 4 more - but the amount that he has been able to influence over 2 years is just amazing.

[staffer]

is 22M enough for the whole thing, or will the city/state need to come up with a balance?

It is 80% fed / 20% non federal. NCDOT has already committed the match.

I believe that the $22m approved was only a portion of the state request for federal funds, so whatever the initial project list was will be pared back. I am searching for the grant application. In CLT, the funds were for reconstruction and widening of three or four bridges north of proposed Gateway station. I am not sure if it also included Sugar Creek grade separation. I think those four bridges will subsume some of the costs of the Red Lineif they wind up on the final list.

Edited October 28, 2010 by staffer

[orulz]

It is 80% fed / 20% non federal. NCDOT has already committed the match.

I believe that the $22m approved was only a portion of the state request for federal funds, so whatever the initial project list was will be pared back. I am searching for the grant application. In CLT, the funds were for reconstruction and widening of three or four bridges north of proposed Gateway station. I am not sure if it also included Sugar Creek grade separation. I think those four bridges will subsume some of the costs of the Red Lineif they wind up on the final list.

Cross-posted from the NC intercity rail thread:

So the $22 million that NC is receiving gets nowhere close to completely moving Gateway Station downtown or closing 8 grade crossings. Given that it is an 80/20 match, we're looking for a total cost of $27.5 million. Therefore, I think it will achieve the first item in the Piedmont 5th Frequency list of projects:

CRISP - Charlotte Southend Improvements - Wye at Charlotte Junction and NS mainline improvements, including third mainline.

Provides track for turning intercity and high speed trains returning north and capacity for meets and overtakes. Required to meet scheduled departures. Improves safety.

Provides connecting track for trains from Charleston Port track to new Intermodal Facility at Charlotte Airport and use of third mainline

track.

Total cost: $27,935,120 $27,935,120

This is a prerequisite for moving trains to Gateway Station, but it won't finish the job.

This will, however, allow trains to use the new maintenance facility being built near Summit Avenue, and will also eliminate backing movements on the mainline for turning trains. This might also have the side benefit of allowing the consist of the Carolinian to be lengthened. I recall hearing from one of the NCDOT train hosts that the limiting factor for the length of the Carolinian is the length of the layover track in the NS yard near Charlotte Station.

The 8 grade crossings it's talking about are probably the 8 that will be closed as a result of CRISP once it is complete. Including this announcement, four of the five closures are funded, but none of the three new grade separations are.

Donald Ross Road (Replaced by Clanton Road extension, unfunded)

Berryhill Road (Redundant crossing closed during 3rd mainline construction - newly funded)

9th Street (CSX/NS grade separation - funded by ARRA)

10th Street (CSX/NS grade separation - funded by ARRA)

N Church Street (CSX/NS grade separation - funded by ARRA)

36th Street (Unfunded)

Craighead Road (Unfunded - included with Sugar Creek grade separation)

Sugar Creek Road (Unfunded)

[tozmervo]

All the pieces slowly... very slowly coming together...

[Urbanity]

In what I take as a sign of economic reality, the CATS website seems to have dropped the West side streetcar/BRT/LRT to the airport from it's transit planning menu. It also doesn't appear on the 2030 website section. The route is still there in the old system planning map but no further information is available compared to other planned routes.

[caterpillar2]

two years ago, when friends weren't sure who to vote for in the Presidential Election - I tried to sell them on Obama because of his social agenda (my striking was pro-urban, pro-transit). This was a big, big selling point for me. Almost weekly, I am reminded that Obama has keep so many of his promises and his agenda is completely in line with why I voted for him. I'm so happy that we got this guy for 4 years. I hope we get him for 4 more - but the amount that he has been able to influence over 2 years is just amazing.

I suppose the money for rail service and "shovel ready projects" that were priority has been used to hire new teachers? What exactly has he done that is "amazing". I may have missed something.

Edited October 31, 2010 by caterpillar2

[kermit]

Its getting incredibly frustrating to watch the remainder of the world hold up Charlotte as a shining example of what LRT can do while we just continue to push back the creation of a real network due to cyclical revenue issues. So I have to ask why aren't we looking for alternative funding sources? If there really is so much construction why not use some TIF bonds? What about municipal service districts? What about just a straight up bonding out the current revenue stream? Why can't Charlotte, of all places, serve as an example of innovative transit finance as well?

So the city heard my outrage (yeah right). This year's legislative agenda includes "new long term revenue sources for transit." Whatever it is I hope they can pull it off. Transit expansion needs to happen now!

http://charmeck.org/city/charlotte/CityClerk/CouncilRelated/Documents/2010/11_08_10/2.pdf

[dubone]

It is hard to imagine voters accepting the penny sales tax any time soon, especially if there is a wave of GOP voting. I do hope they can get it done though.

My hope is that the lower receipts for the sales taxes during the recession push them to get the higher tax rate, and then once the economy booms again, both provide enough money to get the 2030 plan done.

I do wish they would stop dramatically increasing the cost of the plan by adding as many bridges as they can think of. The perfect becomes the enemy of the good in that scenario. They added the bridges to the BLE, which dramatically increased the cost, and then not surprisingly within the year have now pushed it out a decade. 2020 might as well be never, considering how well they accomplished the 2010 projects on the 2020 plan.

[49er]

I am both impatient and as big a supporter of mass transit that you'll find. However, have you looked at a receipt from a store recently? A tax hike would push us from 8.25% to 8.75%.

[southslider]

Granted, the repeal failed by an even larger margin than the original half-cent passed. But the repeal also failed, thanks to a broad coalition of support for transit, which crossed party lines and was backed by the Chamber. And most importantly, that broad support seemed largely conditioned on CATS living within that half-cent. In other words, many have assumed an implicit promise to not increase the amount dedicated to transit. Going back on this promise likely risks this coalition of broad support for transit.

[Sabaidee]

Well an alternative funding like vehicle registration fee has been thrown around before, how much would that generate? I wonder. In this political climate no new tax authority will get passed. I think CATS need to find a more creative solution than another sales tax.

[kermit]

Well an alternative funding like vehicle registration fee has been thrown around before, how much would that generate? I wonder. In this political climate no new tax authority will get passed. I think CATS need to find a more creative solution than another sales tax.

I agree with everything said above. I also feel manipulated by promises made during the repeal election (and understand the economic factors behind the revenue collapse). Having said that, in my case the desire for the rail network to be expanded _soon_ trumps my irritation at the bungling of the powers that be. However it is getting increasingly difficult to defend the transit development process here.

If the new tax can be packaged as a speeding up and expansion of transit like Fastrax in Denver (rather than a salvage mission to keep the status quo of the moribund 2030 plan) then I think it could pass a ballot initiative in 2012. Don't forget that presidential election year electorates are very different than the set of voters who turn out in midterm years. Add in rising oil prices and the increased likelyhood of increased federal gas taxes and the election cycle of 2012 may be quite favorable to transit.

Like Shawn&Zae I would also prefer a non sales tax as the new revenue source. The vehicle registration fee addon is most appealing to me but I would guess that there are around 600,000 vehicles registered in Mecklenburg. At $10 per this would only raise about $6 million per year. I think they want to raise about $40 million per year.

[tozmervo]

I also think there would be a very strong outcry about car drivers subsidizing non-car drivers. At least with the sales tax everyone is pitching in.

[HopHead]

Yea, I agree that CATS is going to have to get creative if they want to expand the blue line sooner rather than later. I don't think another half cent sales tax will fly with voters. The 8.25% sales tax is already high enough. Kermit mentioned that whatever is implemented will need to generate about $40 mill/year. Why not do something like adding $1 fee for each person that boards a plane at the CLT airport? There's what, ~30 million passengers a year that go through our airport? That would be a good way to close the gap. Not sure how feasible that is, but certainly an idea.

[tozmervo]

This isn't really 2030-specific, but CATS has a survey up asking for priorities for the next five years. Good time to give them specific ideas, needs, etc. The survey is up through November 30

http://charmeck.org/CITY/CHARLOTTE/CATS/PLANNING/CTSP/Pages/default.aspx

[kermit]

Nice recap of today's MTC meeting (how to pay for the 2030 plan) in the CBJ:

http://www.bizjourna...r-spurring.html

Edited November 18, 2010 by kermit

[tozmervo]

I'm a little anxious about what "light-rail line in a scaled-back version" means, but I am pleased that they're setting clear priorities for the plan. Flowers mentions cutting $200m from the BLE budget, and I couldn't help but think about how novel that concept seems: if you can't have the Jag, we'll still be happy with a good Honda.

It also notes stagnant growth for the bus system. I'm OK with that if they're referring to the number of bus lines, but I do hope to see the bus infrastructure (shelters, signs, bus tracking, etc) continue to improve. I think there's also a lot of room for improvement on the existing lines: more efficient stops, express service (come on 11x, North Tryon Express!), etc.