CATS Long Term Transit Plan - Silver, Red Lines

[southslider]

^TOD is really just pedestrian-oriented, which is still very appropriate for all the Towns' historic, compact downtowns.

Edited November 17, 2015 by southslider

[ChessieCat]

 

16 hours ago, Third Strike said:

I think a commuter rail line to Cabarrus and Rowan is the most realistic plan. Already got two stations along the corridor, with one more planned in Harrisburg. The rail line is already owned by the NCDOT, so no shenanigans with private rail companies. The line is also in the process of being upgraded to two rails. The commuter line could also share a station with the BLE at either Old Concord Station or the Sugar Creek Station. The only major problem the project would face is the ADM interchange. Other than that, the city would need to purchase more locomotives, and Cabarrus and Rowan would have to create temporary stations in Concord, Landis, and China Grove. Hell, throw in a station in University City, along with upgrading Old Concord or Sugar Creek for commuter rail, and I think ridership would be higher than the estimates for the Red Line.

Also, for the southern extension of the BLE, it would be interesting to see if the Bissell Companies and General Growth Properties would help with funding parts of the project, at least with the stations. Everybody is aware of the horrible traffic situation on I-485, so Bissell should be pushing hard for a link to the Blue Line. And for GGP, a southern BLE would make Carolina Place the only mall connected to the line (not counting the rumored Simon mall in Uptown). Plus, the extension wouldn't be that long, and the ROW is already in place, so hopefully the overall cost should be less than $500 million (that's my armchair analysis, by the way).

The Seversville streetcar is also a no-brainer. Plus, isn't a non-profit group behind this project? Nonetheless, a short line Seversville shouldn't be too expensive. They could even use the Gomaco vehicles after Phase 2 is complete.

Even though Foxx made the announcement about a "temporary" Gateway station, you have pointed out the major problem of the NS/CSX grade separation at Graham Interlocking (ADM).  

I still believe that dubone's idea of a new Gateway station at the southeast corner of NS' Charlotte Yard where all rail lines meet (BLE, NCRR/NS, CSX, O-line, ACWR) is a better option. CATS/NCDOT can build a startion on their own land that doesn't require constant haggling with NS.  CATS will then be able to plan for Diesel Multiple Unit commuter lines to the northern and southeast suburbs and riders will be able to transfer to the BLE which they won't be able to do in 3rd ward. 

I think there'll be some grueling political battles ahead unless all stakeholders agree on a unifying project.

[SgtCampsalot]

^Yup. Though good luck putting a transit hub next to a residential neighborhood (Belmont, OP, Villa Heighs, NoDa).

[southslider]

Even if Amtrak moves to Gateway, the Red Line could still technically connect to Blue Line at 25th or Parkwood.

[tusculan]

Ok, so this might be an idiotic idea. But hey, what do I have to lose?

What if the airport line is built as an LRT and is partially serviced by express routes directly to the airport from uptown. That 6 mile trip would take around 10 -12 minutes depending on precise location. 

What if, in that time, you board people only via the last car, and in the intervening minutes during the trip, you actually go through a secure checkpoint in the middle car, and pass to the first car of the LRT. Then, when you arrive at the airport you enter into the terminal after security? If you can fit about 70 people per car, here you would be limiting capacity by 2/3 - but I think you could easily charge what....$15 per trip out to the airport, and that way it would open up a new revenue stream for Transit?

Such an idea would need to be limited - probably to those without checked bags, and for those with TSA pre-check. Nevertheless, wouldn't this be really popular?

[southslider]

Politically, transit to an airport is popular. Everyone can see themselves riding transit to an airport.

Technically, transit to an airport is expensive.  Airports are large super blocks surrounded by low density land uses. Ours doesn't even have high origin traffic.

Someday, rail may get close to the airport, but the airport will need to build the last-mile connection.

[ChessieCat]

^It could happen as long as airport taxes are used for the pre-check on the LRT.  If I'm not mistaken the FAA allows a portion of fees/taxes to be used for land-side operations.   Using the transit tax for that would be too much of a political hot potato.

[ChessieCat]

On 11/17/2015, 10:52:21, SgtCampsalot said:

^Yup. Though good luck putting a transit hub next to a residential neighborhood (Belmont, OP, Villa Heighs, NoDa).

Isn't that what ToD is all about?  OP isn't exactly NoDa yet.

 

23 hours ago, southslider said:

Even if Amtrak moves to Gateway, the Red Line could still technically connect to Blue Line at 25th or Parkwood.

Could you forsee the Red Line having a terminus adjoining the Parkwood BLE station if NS plays hardball with the grade separation/Gateway trackage?  If the northern suburbs create enough noise this could be good interim solution.  Of course the O-line would need dual-trackage up to Atando.

Edited November 18, 2015 by ChessieCat

[Deleted.]

52 minutes ago, ChessieCat said:

^It could happen as long as airport taxes are used for the pre-check on the LRT.  If I'm not mistaken the FAA allows a portion of fees/taxes to be used for land-side operations.   Using the transit tax for that would be too much of a political hot potato.

FAA does allow a portion of airport fees and taxes for land-side development. Unfortunately pre-check on LRT would never happen, to much hassle to have TSA staff away from the airport and some passengers on the LRT wouldn't clear in the time to get to the airport. 

7 hours ago, southslider said:

Politically, transit to an airport is popular. Everyone can see themselves riding transit to an airport.

Technically, transit to an airport is expensive.  Airports are large super blocks surrounded by low density land uses. Ours doesn't even have high origin traffic.

Someday, rail may get close to the airport, but the airport will need to build the last-mile connection.

CLT doesn't have high origin traffic compared to overall passenge numbers. O&D traffic from CLT is high for domestic and quite high for international, so ridership wouldn't be a problem- heck, Tuscon may have an airport line of their streetcar network. I don't see why CLT could have a streetcar/LRT to the airport within the next 10-20 years. 

 

Edited November 18, 2015 by Piedmont767
Spelling

[ChessieCat]

1 minute ago, Piedmont767 said:

FAA does allow a portion of airport fees and taxes for land-sand development. Unfortunately pre-check on LRT would never happen, to much hassle to have TSA staff away from the airport and so passengers on the LRT wouldn't clear in the time to get to the airport. 

True.  In Europe a traveler can check their luggage on a long-distance HSR ride to an airport and have the bags transfered to the airline.  But they still have to go through security at the airport.

[kermit]

I am of two minds about airport rail. Its a very small number of potential riders on a daily basis, but the availability of transit from the airport is pretty critical for economic development regardless of how cheap cabs currently are (see Mercedes in Atlanta).

FWIW, Salt Lake City has a very similar airport in terms of OD numbers and hub status (they have slightly less OD than we do) and its a similar distance from downtown. Their airport rail station sees around 1,400 boardings per day.

Is that enough to justify the expense? I can't find a table of boardings by station for the blue line.

Edited November 18, 2015 by kermit

[Deleted.]

12 minutes ago, kermit said:

I am of two minds about airport rail. Its a very small number of potential riders on a daily basis, but the availability of transit from the airport is pretty critical for economic development regardless of how cheap cabs currently are (see Mercedes in Atlanta).

FWIW, Salt Lake City has a very similar airport in terms of OD numbers (they have slightly less OD than we do) and its a similar distance from downtown. Their airport rail station sees around 1,400 boardings per day.

Is that enough to justify the expense? I can't find a table of boardings by station for the blue line.

I wonder what Sprinter passenger numbers are like. I do agree with the fact there may be low ridership, however I would ride it, but CLT is the second largest hub for the World's largest airline and is predicted to grow to almost a million operations a year by 2030 IIRC. CLT's population is also going to grow and having a link to the airport will be vital. Another point is that by the time an airport line will be built, probably by 2035, it is likely many more local people will use CLT airport: so a mass transit option for getting to the airport, other than BRT, should be a top priority. 

I like the idea of having a LRT line to Belmont and Gastonia, including the airport, I'd guess a line from Uptown to Gastonia including the airport is approx. 22 miles, so it may not be economically feasible. But having LRT to Gastonia, will probably help low ridership concerns of a dedicated airport line. 

To answer your question is it worth enough to justify the expense, I'd say yes, that it's a good idea to build it. To sum up, if you build it they will come. 

Edited November 18, 2015 by Piedmont767
Added context

[michaelef]

I actually took the Sprinter to the airport last week, from what I noticed most of the people riding it work at the airport. Most seats were taken. 

[Deleted.]

18 minutes ago, michaelef said:

I actually took the Sprinter to the airport last week, from what I noticed most of the people riding it work at the airport. Most seats were taken. 

You may even have seen me last week!  My car broke so it was my only way to get to the airport or I would have been fired! Seemed quite full, especially going to the airport but less back to Uptown. 

[Deleted.]

In the streetcar thread, I said the following: 

I would also like to see LRT to the airport, perhaps part of a longer line to Belmont/Gastonia? Or would it be too long for LRT? If you drive on I-85 is approx. 22 miles from Uptown to Gastonia; if you take US-74 and I-85 its 21.5 miles and goes past the airport.

Seeing as that doesn't have anything to do with the Gold Line, but rather with the long term plans for transit in CLT I thought I mention my thoughts on this thread. 

For the fact that I asked whether approx. 22 miles is too long for a LRT line, I found out that METRO Green Line in Minneapolis will be approx. 23 miles when fully built; the MBTA Green Line in Boston is 23 miles; Baltimore Light Rail is 30 miles; LA's Metro Blue Line is 22 miles; San Deigo's Green Line is 23.6 miles; and the BLE will bring the Blue Line to almost 20 miles. So I do think an approx. 22 miles LRT line to Gastonia with stops at the airport and in Belmont could work, on paper. 

Further up in this thread, on the next page, kermit mentioned how we need a new transit plan, and this is what I think should be included on a new transit plan, of ourse this doesn't take in to account thr money need to fund these projects. 

My 2035 Transit Plan: 

-LYNX Blue Line 2nd Extension- BL2E. An approximate 6 mile extension to the Blue Line, taking it from I-485 station to Ballantyne through Pineville. It would make the Blue Line between 25 and 26 miles long. 

-LYNX Silver Line to Matthews and Monroe. It should be LRT- BRT wouldn't attract enough riders and streetcar would be too slow. It could be streetcar/LRT mix, as Monroe becomes 7th, the vehicle could come off dedicated RoW onto in road tracks and when they intercept the Gold Line tracks on Hawthorne, the silver line could share the same tracks to Gateway. And I would not call it the Silver Line but rather Green Line and keep silver and gold for streetcar lines.

-Airport and Gastonia Line. This could be called the LYNX Purple Line and it could operate as LRT or streetcar/LRT mix to make it getting into Uptown easier. It being LRT around he airport would ensure its a reliable method for getting to CLT and having it operate to Belmont and Gastonia would increase potential low ridership of a dedicated airport line. 

-LYNX Red Line. It could potentionally work as LRT if Norfolk Southern still won't allow CATS to share the line. It would be cheaper to install LRT tracks and purchase LRT trains, it would allow for more stations closer to Uptown as well. 

-Uptown Urban Circulator streetcar, like what was originally included on the streetcar plan to help shuttle people around Uptown. It could help spur development around North Tryon. This streetcar line could be called CityLYNX Silver Line. 

So if it were up to me to design and build transit in CLT, there would be: 

-LYNX Blue Line from Ballantyne to UNCC 

-LYNX Green Line (instead of Silver Line) from Gateway to Monroe

-LYNX Red Line from Gateway to Lake Norman

-LYNX Purple Line from Gateway to Gastonia with a stop at Charlotte Douglas 

-CityLYNX Gold Line from Johnson C. Smith to Sunnyside 

-CityLYNX Silver Line from Gateway to Gateway, as an urban circulator 

[Third Strike]

^ I agree that "Silver" should be used for one of the streetcar lines. And Honestly, I'm also in favor of relabeling the Red Line. All commuter lines should use something other than colors. Maybe Lynx Train, LynxRail, or Lynx Express? The original Red Line could be called LynxRail Lake Norman Line, a commuter line to Monroe could be called LynxRail Union Line, and etc. I would also label the Southeast Corridor as Red, since it would compliment the Blue Line nicely.

[Deleted.]

26 minutes ago, Third Strike said:

^ I agree that "Silver" should be used for one of the streetcar lines. And Honestly, I'm also in favor of relabeling the Red Line. All commuter lines should use something other than colors. Maybe Lynx Train, LynxRail, or Lynx Express? The original Red Line could be called LynxRail Lake Norman Line, a commuter line to Monroe could be called LynxRail Union Line, and etc. I would also label the Southeast Corridor as Red, since it would compliment the Blue Line nicely.

Yes, I totally agree. Silver and Gold helps to differentiate LRT from streetcar, in the same way CityLYNX does. And your idea for renaming the Red Line and Southeast corridor is great! So instead of what I suggested, how about: 

-LYNX Blue Line from Ballantyne to UNCC 

-LYNX Red Line (instead of Silver Line) from Gateway to Matthews

-LYNX Green Line from Gateway to Gastonia with a stop at Charlotte Douglas 

-CityLYNX Gold Line from Johnson C. Smith to Sunnyside 

-CityLYNX Silver Line from Gateway to Gateway, as an urban circulator 

-LYNXRail/ LYNXpress/ LYNXCommuter from Gateway to Lake Norman

EDIT- I like LYNXCommuter Lake Norman Line 

Edited November 21, 2015 by Piedmont767

[southslider]

Gateway to Gateway?

[Finkle]

Gateway to Gateway would be a  loop around uptown

[southslider]

^There used to be a loop Gold Rush. It was the first to go, then the one on Tryon, leaving only the Gold Rush on Trade. Loops are indirect, circuitous, and unproductive.

[tusculan]

On 11/21/2015, 11:51:15, Piedmont767 said:

Yes, I totally agree. Silver and Gold helps to differentiate LRT from streetcar, in the same way CityLYNX does. And your idea for renaming the Red Line and Southeast corridor is great! So instead of what I suggested, how about: 

-LYNX Blue Line from Ballantyne to UNCC 

-LYNX Red Line (instead of Silver Line) from Gateway to Matthews

-LYNX Green Line from Gateway to Gastonia with a stop at Charlotte Douglas 

-CityLYNX Gold Line from Johnson C. Smith to Sunnyside 

-CityLYNX Silver Line from Gateway to Gateway, as an urban circulator 

-LYNXRail/ LYNXpress/ LYNXCommuter from Gateway to Lake Norman

EDIT- I like LYNXCommuter Lake Norman Line 

I agree with this general idea, with one exception.

The branding and the coloration need to differ to match the difference in transit mode.

Streetcars - all use metallic colors as well as CITYLynx branding. While the metallic color palette is pretty sparse, I don't really envision us having more than 8 streetcar routes anytime soon. More realistically, if there would ever be a big system, the lines could be named like the NY Subway - only indicating which uptown route they run on. If a service runs down trade - it is a Gold....if it runs down McDowell, it is a Bronze....and then they are further differentiated by number. Gold 4 runs from CTC up Freedom Dr.

LRT - normal coloration and LYNX moniker. This allows for greater visual choices, which are necessary in lines that end up in really different parts of the city. Green, Red, Blue, Purple = easy and simple.

Commuter Rail - LYNXcommuter named in reference to destination ---even more obvious naming to make you choose the right one, but also having different kinds of colors - I don't really know what....but jewel tones, maybe....something with a visual component that allows for identification on a map, but also integration on one standard map. So it could be the LYNX commuter Lake Norman - emerald line. Of course, there are other tones, as well as tints and shades to work with (I think shades would be hard, because it would make everything visually unappealing)

I realize that this latter point can be accomplished in other ways - the biggest being thickness of the lines. Nevertheless, colors are the easiest identifier.

[tozmervo]

I personally can't wait to ride the CityLYNX Copper line

[Deleted.]

28 minutes ago, tusculan said:

I agree with this general idea, with one exception.

The branding and the coloration need to differ to match the difference in transit mode

 

That's what I was going for.  

[tusculan]

5 hours ago, tozmervo said:

I personally can't wait to ride the CityLYNX Copper line

 I would want to tend toward the precious metals and the jewel tones to complement the Queen City, but most precious metals are some kind of silver color. So, I don't have a perfect solution - However,  I do think some concerted rationale would be helpful, rather than just having 20 different color routes that you have to show up and discover what the precise mode of transit is when it pulls up. I have always hated when cities do this.

I think Paris was wise with its original conception of different markers as letters and numbers placed in circles or squares (triangles should have also been used) - though I think they later messed this easy articulation up by having the Buses and Trams be labelled as Bus 1 - Bus ## and T1-T10, both in circles like the metro. However, since the development of Paris most systems have switched to colors  (though Mexico City has symbols of animals as the principle marker - which just seems crazy) and not numbers to identify routes, because it is far easier for complex systems and maps. 

So, I guess, I think it would be preferable to have the CityLYNX copper if I could know by its name that it is 1. a streetcar, 2. that heads uptown and 3. will run along McDowell, than I would to ride the LYNX light green line - a name that tells me nothing other than it is public transit, and that I should now look at a map to figure out where the heck it runs.

[SgtCampsalot]

When at the Silver Line meetings I had the idea that once the train cars reach 7th St, they can continue all the way up 7th to where it meets the Blue Line. This way, a few things could happen:

-It could potentially switch to a dedicated ROW in a median after it passes the Charlottetowne intersection (it seems plausible that there's enough spare space in that stretch), if the GP lanes were to be reduced to to one each way.

-But regardless if it couldn fit it's own ROW, it could terminate at the Blue Line. With First Ward Park and Imaginon on either side, it would be fitting to have it end there, and would be easy to allocate enough room for it since it's between two public owned pieces of land. It could be an attractive station either in the middle of the street (like thr Gold Line) or with the station curving onto the edges of the park and Imaginon.

-This could solve the problem of having to make two turns at Hawthorne and Trade with more than one train car attached at a time.

Edited November 27, 2015 by SgtCampsalot