Triangle Regional Transit

[DanRNC]

This may be of interest to some people on here.

Link

[monsoon]

This may be of interest to some people on here.

Link

[DanRNC]

You know the downer about this, is they want $35 for people to participate. Getting the public involved with transit is difficult enough without throwing that barrier up.

[ncwebguy]

The website for the "alliance",

http://www.letsgetmoving.org/, appears to not want the public's input or support.

It is only chambers of commerce and businesses, not us "common folk." And it appears to lean toward road solutions, not transit ones.

Companies like Cisco and IBM are the ones that can supply economic pressure to get rail moving quicker. So far they seem to favor solutions like telecommuting over mass transit.

[monsoon]

Companies like Cisco and IBM are the ones that can supply economic pressure to get rail moving quicker. So far they seem to favor solutions like telecommuting over mass transit.

[orulz]

Just a random thought. I wonder whether (somehow) linking TTA's planned rail project with PART's project would help it garner greater public support. PART's line is supposed to eventually extend from Burlington to Clemmons, while TTAs' goes from North Raleigh to Durham, though very preliminary study has been conducted for an extension to Hillsborough. If the project were treated as a combination of intercity and communter rail, and a link through Orange and Alamance counties proposed, would it be any more likely to get funding? Or would the expense (probably $2.5 billion or more for the whole line) for a linkage through two sparsely-populated counties make it completely infeasible? I wonder what ridership numbers would be like.

[danclever]

Just a random thought. I wonder whether (somehow) linking TTA's planned rail project with PART's project would help it garner greater public support. PART's line is supposed to eventually extend from Burlington to Clemmons, while TTAs' goes from North Raleigh to Durham, though very preliminary study has been conducted for an extension to Hillsborough. If the project were treated as a combination of intercity and communter rail, and a link through Orange and Alamance counties proposed, would it be any more likely to get funding? Or would the expense (probably $2.5 billion or more for the whole line) for a linkage through two sparsely-populated counties make it completely infeasible? I wonder what ridership numbers would be like.

[orulz]

Don't forget Easttrans (east of Triangle commuter rail).

Problem with linking with PART- wouldn't it then overlap with the planned Southeast High Speed Rail project, which is going to link the Triangle and Triad anyway?

[Creasy336]

linking TTA and PART is a great idea, the potential TOD in Alamance,Eastern Guilford, and Orange County could be huge. In the near future I-85/40 will be a parking lot from I-840 in Guilford County to the Triangle. As said before SEHSR could be the express service, plus the system itself could have a few "express trains" during rush hour. If this were to happen it would change the state of North Carolina forever and seperate us from alot of our southeast counterparts in a positive way.

[former-ga-girl]

PART Connections Express already provides express shuttle service that takes residents of the Triad to hospitals in Durham and Chapel Hill. Each trip originates in Winston-Salem and makes stops en route in Guilford and Alamance counties to collect riders. In the near future, providing a transit line to and from the Triad to the Triangle will be beneficial.

[sax184]

Just a random thought. I wonder whether (somehow) linking TTA's planned rail project with PART's project would help it garner greater public support. PART's line is supposed to eventually extend from Burlington to Clemmons, while TTAs' goes from North Raleigh to Durham, though very preliminary study has been conducted for an extension to Hillsborough. If the project were treated as a combination of intercity and communter rail, and a link through Orange and Alamance counties proposed, would it be any more likely to get funding? Or would the expense (probably $2.5 billion or more for the whole line) for a linkage through two sparsely-populated counties make it completely infeasible? I wonder what ridership numbers would be like.

[orulz]

If you look at some of the SEHSR documents, I think the freights have said they will demand completely separate tracks for any train operating above 90 mph. This means that passenger trains running in the 110-125 mph range and fast intermodal freights running at 100 will need their own special track in areas where they are not stopping to board/unload passengers.

[thewhister]

That's more a strength than a problem.

Firstly, it hasn't been decided if all, some, or no HSR trains will go through Winston-Salem yet. But assuming they do...

This hypothetical TTA/PART transit line would provide very frequent (every 30 minutes?) local service. Trains on this line would stop everywhere (Kernersville, Elon College, Hillsborough, Duke Medical, etc.) but would take about three hours to make a trip from Raleigh to Winston-Salem, by virtue of the number of stops. Some trains out of the Triad could also diverge south to Chapel Hill after Hillsborough. The HSR line would provide the express service, trains running every 1-3 hours during the day and stopping only at the major downtown hubs (Raleigh, Durham, Greensboro, Winston-Salem, and sometimes Burlington/Cary) getting from Raleigh to Winston-Salem in well under two hours. Think complementary service, not competition!

I believe there's already a nacent market for this kind around here. There are more people who live in Burlington or Greensboro and commute to the Triangle than you might think.

I would like see the NCDOT Rail Division, or perhaps even the North Carolina Railroad Company itself, morph into a transit agency along the lines of NJT that crosses regional boundaries and operates with a degree of autonomy from the highway-centric DOT. I don't think there's any impetus towards such broad-reaching interregional cooperation here in NC just yet, though - particularly not when it comes to transit.

[sax184]

I got the impression reading those documents that while Norfolk-Southern was taking a hard-line stance on trains greater than 90mph, there may be some room for negotiation since 1. NCRR owns the tracks, and 2. NS's statement is not in line with FRA regulations. It is possible that Norfolk Southern was just trying to give themselves room to get more concessions for added capacity and improvements in order to allow faster trains.

But for the moment let's say that N-S really won't allow faster trains on tracks used by freight. Could the tracks built and owned by TTA/PART be built to a standard that will allow 110mph express passenger trains to share them with the local services, with sufficient crossovers and passing tracks to prevent scheduling conflicts? I believe TTA is alreadly planning on having cab signals and ATC, which are two big FRA requirements for 110mph (Class 6) operation. This would circumvent the requirement of equipping every locomotive on Norfolk-Southern's roster with cab signals and ATC hardware. At one point TTA was also planning on using concrete ties, which would provide the additional stability needed for high speed tilting trains around curves. And by bringing freight trains out of the picture, the track could be constructed with greater cant (or superelevation, or banking) to allow for still higher speed around curves.

The track sharing part would be a piece of cake with Japanese-style scheduling precision, but in the US, it would be tricky. Taking freight out of the picture would help, but it would probably still be difficult without a huge amount of excess capacity.

[ncwebguy]

With TTA shuttle routes synched with train arrivals, I don't think it would be a 20 minute bus ride from the Triangle Metro Center to most work centers in RTP.

When I lived in New Jersey, I noticed NJ Transit's trains is a combination of buses feeding rail combined with more park and ride stations as you get further from NYC. The PART/TTA combination wouldn't be that far fetched -- there are several vanpools from G'boro to RTP already. Many people are willing to take a little longer in exchange for not having to do all the driving every day.

A PART/TTA/EastTrans system could let people "live where they want" and still have access to transit. TOD around stations in Burlington, Mebane, Hillsborough, Clayton, etc. could move those areas toward density and away from the current "pave the old tobacco farm" mentality.

[urbanaturalist]

With TTA shuttle routes synched with train arrivals, I don't think it would be a 20 minute bus ride from the Triangle Metro Center to most work centers in RTP.

When I lived in New Jersey, I noticed NJ Transit's trains is a combination of buses feeding rail combined with more park and ride stations as you get further from NYC. The PART/TTA combination wouldn't be that far fetched -- there are several vanpools from G'boro to RTP already. Many people are willing to take a little longer in exchange for not having to do all the driving every day.

A PART/TTA/EastTrans system could let people "live where they want" and still have access to transit. TOD around stations in Burlington, Mebane, Hillsborough, Clayton, etc. could move those areas toward density and away from the current "pave the old tobacco farm" mentality.

[ChiefJoJo]

To add to the smart growth and transit discussion, I think that in most cases around TTA, PART or EASTRANS stations, we should be building TOD only as much as is possible, and perhaps some park&ride lots on only the more remote suburban stops. This is the path that CATS has taken in Charlotte and it has paid HUGE dividends in land use planning in those areas. Even in areas where parking was initially planned (S LRT Scaleybark I think), developers are pushing for more TOD.

When you get down to it, land use is really the key to transit planning. Building transit allows increased density right next to the stations so that a community can better preserve environmentally sensitive lands from suburban sprawl-type development and preserve more open space. Communities are more walkable, have cleaner air, cleaner water, less traffic, and in general are more liveable.

[ncwebguy]

So I agree if people, want a house cheaper in Wilson or Clayton. Great. Fine. But those cities and counties shouldn't be leapfrog destinations from the clutches of smart growth development and zoning.

[danclever]

Saw this story on the News 14 Carolina site

http://rdu.news14.com/content/top%5Fstorie....asp?ArID=94984

The article mentions TTA's presentation to Raleigh City Council and a public meeting next Wednesday to discuss transit.

[ChiefJoJo]

Here's the WRAL article on the meeting.

[monsoon]

Here's the WRAL article on the meeting.

[ChiefJoJo]

There is a very important meeting of both MPOs in the region, CAMPO (Wake Co area) and DCHC (Durham Chapel Hill area), and TTA coming up next week on Wednesday Nov 29th. Essentially they will be deciding what the focus and guiding principles will be for the new transit plan will be in the coming year, as well as deciding what the priorities will be for a legislative strategy to change funding options in NC, such as local sales taxes, real estate transfer fees, impact fees, etc.

Here is the meeting agenda.

Congressional Room, NC Biotechnology Center

15 T.W. Alexander Drive

November 29, 2006

9:00 am

Here's a map.

[DanRNC]

^ Is this open to the public?

[ChiefJoJo]

^ Is this open to the public?

[tjoad]

http://www.wral.com/news/10416697/detail.html

Here's a story about the TTA possibly letting some other commission take over the regional rail project. It will be interesting to see what happens at tomorrow's meeting.