Triangle Regional Transit

[monsoon]

It isn't. Not the actual cost, anyway. Monorails often come out as being supposedly more expensive because it's unique - there's not a lot of competition out there, and everything is custom. For instance, there are really only a few companies that make straddle-beam monorail vehicles, and they aren't in the US, so would need to build US factories just for those vehicles. Keep in mind that there is nothing really to base price upon.

The big problem in the US is that we really have no good examples. Ultimately it's the demo line in Seattle, Disney's, which are plagued by problems de to them being considered more rides than transportation, and the Las Vegas line, which has a whole slew of problems. The seattle system was actually going to be a comparative bargain if you based it purely on build costs, considering the crossings it had to make. It was only the financial finangling which really shot that price way up.

[orulz]

As UrbanNaturalist was pointing out, monorails are a (sometimes) less expensive alternative to a subway. They are MASSIVELY more expensive than an at-grade transit system in just about any situation, unless we're talking about an extremely dense urban area (take 3 blocks on either side of Fayetteville Street and stretch it out like that for two or three miles.)

If you build an elevated monorail from Raleigh to Durham, and the supports are placed 50 feet apart, you'd have to dig & pour foundations for 3,000 of the things. THREE THOUSAND. That's orders of magnitude more expensive than just getting a few backhoes and bulldozers and pushing some dirt around. And for TTA, much of the blasting, grading, and filling work that would need to be done has already been done, 150 years ago when the North Carolina Railroad was built.

Just try and find one family who would fight havng a monorail in their back yard any less than they'd fight a conventional rail system. The level of intrusion on their privacy and on the environment around their home, and the loss in property value, would be essentially the same.

The topic of monorails for the Triangle come up from time to time. (see thread). I hold that no matter how many times the subject comes up,

Monorail. Just. Doesn't. Make. Sense.

[sax184]

Monorail. Just. Doesn't. Make. Sense.

[ncwebguy]

There used to be a monorail at Carowinds in Charlotte, but that was taken down.

NCSU was considering monorail to connect "traditional" and Centennial campuses, under Western Blvd. and over Mission Valley. That was over ten years ago. I think the corridor has been preserved, but they are no closer now than they were in the early 90s.

Cost wise, it seems the pecking order is underground/subway > raised beam > traditional, at grade rail.

With the "piecemeal" development patterns in the Triangle, would it be possible to have a "hybrid" monorail-at grade rail system? In the heavier devloped areas where rail does not currently exist -- malls/shopping centers, universities, etc. where installing new rail would be difficult/impossible, the system could be raised, but more like a monorail, not the elevated trains in Chicago. For areas like Cary, Morrisville, rurual Durham County, North Raleigh/North Wake, East Wake/Easttrans, etc. where space allows (and where rail is already in place) the system can be at-grade, with RR-like signaled crossings.

Raised to non-raised transitions would be gradual, but with regenerative braking, some of the energy expended on the way "up" could be recaptured on the way "down" (approx 30%).

Being partially at-grade would require a lot fewer than the 3,000 segments of a "pure" monorail, and require fewer costly eleveated platforms, etc. Trains could pass each other at-grade, so supports would only have to support the weight of one train, not two.

The system could be built for less in the existing rail corridor, but would not be tied to the corridor. It would be as easy (if not easier) to expand than "heavy rail."'

Unfortunately, politics and money trump everything else. As the I-40 repaving project demonstrates, teaching NC DOT any new tricks is costly, if not impossible. TTA received as much/more political support from PA than NC. They wanted the jobs created by the DMU vehicle assembly plant that other systems (NJ Transit?) could also purchase.

[architect77]

Thanks everyone, many valid points made. I guess I was envisioning some sort of "bullet train" that hugged a steel rail which could fly over any obstacle and follow whatever path desired. A little too futuristic perhaps. But wouldn't it be cool to be driving down I-40 and have an elevated super fast train following along side.

I guess what made me ask about an elevated line is the thought of all the work clearing trees, dealing with existing roads, ravines, etc.

Remember a few years ago talk of some train that levitated above a "track" using magnets? Whatever became of that idea? That would be wicked.

A monorail as we know them would not be the right choice for a 30 mile line, not by any means. It's a shame though that an elevated rail line couldn't be developed featuring very light weight cars (maybe composite -787 Dreamliner anyone?). Someone mentioned the all of the reinforced concrete that would be required earlier, and while I agree, a substantial steel tube can remain rigid for decent lengths also, and its supports, whether they be steel or concrete, could include a lunging arch in each direction thus supporting the rail at its furthest point from a support. kinda like an arching bridge across a ravine or river. But I digress.

[sax184]

Thanks everyone, many valid points made. I guess I was envisioning some sort of "bullet train" that hugged a steel rail which could fly over any obstacle and follow whatever path desired. A little too futuristic perhaps. But wouldn't it be cool to be driving down I-40 and have an elevated super fast train following along side.

I guess what made me ask about an elevated line is the thought of all the work clearing trees, dealing with existing roads, ravines, etc.

Remember a few years ago talk of some train that levitated above a "track" using magnets? Whatever became of that idea? That would be wicked.

A monorail as we know them would not be the right choice for a 30 mile line, not by any means. It's a shame though that an elevated rail line couldn't be developed featuring very light weight cars (maybe composite -787 Dreamliner anyone?). Someone mentioned the all of the reinforced concrete that would be required earlier, and while I agree, a substantial steel tube can remain rigid for decent lengths also, and its supports, whether they be steel or concrete, could include a lunging arch in each direction thus supporting the rail at its furthest point from a support. kinda like an arching bridge across a ravine or river. But I digress.

[dmccall]

...traditional rail applications that work very well in other places...

[sax184]

I've yet to see a city with rail that doesn't have car congestion.

[monsoon]

The reason there is traffic congestion where there is successful transit is because cities have given up on trying to build highways to solve congestion. It's been proven again and again that you can't pave your way out of traffic problems. For example. I worked for a short while in the Triangle in 1990 shortly after I-40 opened between Durham and Raleigh. In those days it was a 4 lane highway and the traffic was tolerable. I came back again in 1995 and there were pretty significant backups. So this highway had an effective life of about 1/2 decade. The NCDOT then undertook a very expensive campaign to expand it to 8 lanes. What has happened to the traffic there now that this expansion is complete? I can't help to think of the future dollars what will continued to be poured into this road chasing after a fruitless goal of trying to accomidate car traffic.

Yes the triangle is attempting to follow Atlanta, but it isn't in transit. It's in highway building. I take note that I-85 through ATL is being expanded to 23 lanes. I don't think this is a good plan for the triangle and anyone that uses that city as an example should take a drive through there. Transit in Atlanta never met its potential because there was never the complementary planning and land use policies put in place to take advantage of MARTA. With that said, Marta trains do have an average daily ridership somewhere around 250,000 which isn't bad for a two line system. DC's Metro, which is basically the same age as ATL's Marta is an example of a new transit system that has transformed that city.

[plus2]

That highway vs. transit math leaves out other factors. In the long run there are the nearly incalculable environmental costs and health care savings from mass transit. But I think more importantly, the increases in standard of living and property taxes near the train stations. Highways will also increase property tax revenue, but I don't think that would come close to matching the positive financial impact on the region by the implementation of regional rail.

[ChiefJoJo]

Transit in Atlanta never met its potential because there was never the complementary planning and land use policies put in place to take advantage of MARTA.

[mattm]

As far as I-540 vs RR ROW costs, you also have to take into account the routes chosen. I-540 ROW is mostly rural and undeveloped at the time it is acquired, and is fairly low cost per unit area. However, the area required is quite large.

RR ROW is mostly urban and already developed at the time it is acquired, so it's fairly high cost per unit area. However, the area required is much less.

I remember seeing an aerial photo of the Highwoods TTA station area at one time. The TTA area was overlaid in a different color (space required for track, platform, and parking lot). The area required was tiny compared to a nearby I-440 exchange, although both things were providing similar functions (provide access to a transportation asset).

Also one has to keep in mind the development encouraged by outer loop highways and mass transit rail projects. Highways encourage greenfield development, sprawl, loss of farmland, urban donuts, etc. Rail projects encourage brownfield development, urban life, conservation, etc.

[dmccall]

One thing I haven't stated, and should, is that I am definitely in favor of some rail project in this area. I know that what I've posted sounds like roads, roads, roads. I love the potential impact that two downtown stations could have on dt development.

I just think we can do better than the TTA's proposal. I think an $800K project that serves, at generous estimates, 1.5% of the population is a lot, a whole lot to pay. Most other technologies have fallen in price. It's just frustrating that tried and true trains and other concepts have not.

Our big problem here is that people want to go from point A to point D. Building a line from B to C doesn't provide an alternative that people want to ride. The main reason people mention the lack of an airport stop is that is the ONLY scenario in which almost 99% of the people see themselves riding the line.

This is much more Atlanta than y'all are giving it credit. I understand your supposition about Atlanta's park-and-ride 1960's philosophy vs. our build pop pods around stops. However Atlanta's big parking lots could easily be developed into pop pods (like Lindbergh) if demand existed. So after 10 years of trying desperately to sell Lindbergh to the people, the off-line Atlantic Station arose and people by the hundreds of thousands moved out to the burbs. It's like trying to stop a burst water main by bailing with a Dixie cup.

The other aspect that expansion of our line will be incredibly difficult. Nobody wants to go to Hillsborough. They want to go to malls. They want to go to events, their office building, their hotel. You think acceptance of phase I is hard, try selling all of these Raleigh neighborhoods on the idea of plunking down a 50ft wide noisy WALL through their neighborhood. It will be as successful as that downtown expressway that was going through Oakwood in the 60's. Plunking this thing down through the industrial, least populated parts of town is why 1% of the population will even consider riding it.

We need transportation to be dictated by our natural actions. The converse will always be the most expensive way to move very few people around.

[sax184]

Most other technologies have fallen in price. It's just frustrating that tried and true trains and other concepts have not.

Maybe in computer parts, but not in public infrastructure. Whether you build monorail or maglev or TTA Phase I, or freeways, for that matter, you're going to build guideways and stations primarily using concrete and steel. Both commodities have soared in price because of the development boom in China and India. China currently sucks up 75% of the world's steel production today, or something like it. It's amazing.

I also think your argument is interesting because it deals directly with the big question of political acceptability. That said, the problem I see for the region is that that which appears most politically acceptable to TTA skeptics may in fact, be a less useful system for the region.

Here's what you said:

Our big problem here is that people want to go from point A to point D. Building a line from B to C doesn't provide an alternative that people want to ride. The main reason people mention the lack of an airport stop is that is the ONLY scenario in which almost 99% of the people see themselves riding the line.

And here's what I'm hearing: (I hasten to add that I am not projecting anything in the paragraph below as your experiences, or views as an individual)

Our big problem here is that THE BIG GROUP OF PEOPLE IN THE TRIANGLE WHO HAVE NEVER USED TRANSIT FOR DAILY NEEDS OR HOLD STIGMAS ABOUT TRANSIT AND THE PEOPLE WHO USE IT want to go from THEIR HOME OR A NEARBY PARK-AND-RIDE LOT to PLACES THEY VISIT 4-20 TIMES EACH YEAR. Building a line TO PLACES THEY GO EVERY DAY doesn't provide an alternative that THIS GROUP CAN ENVISION THEMSELVES USING. The main reason THIS GROUP mentions the lack of an airport stop is that is the ONLY scenario in which THIS GROUP PAYS FOR PARKING or, this is the ONLY transit usage scenario that THIS GROUP HAS EXPERIENCED ELSEWHERE, and therefore DO NOT INSTINCTIVELY RULE OUT riding the line.

Even if we run a line directly from anywhere and everywhere to RDU, more people will still drive to RDU instead of take transit because there is so much parking. For the same reason, most people are still going to drive to Triangle Town Center even if we put a train station there.

However Atlanta's big parking lots could easily be developed into pop pods (like Lindbergh) if demand existed.

Not the case. The land use planning environment has to make things like Atlantic Station easy and conventional suburban development difficult to do around transit. Only in the last 5 or so years has Atlanta made any commitment to station area development.

We need transportation to be dictated by our natural actions. The converse will always be the most expensive way to move very few people around.

If transportation really worked like this, I-540 never would have been built. The natural action would have been thousands of homes popping up in N Raleigh, and then putting in a freeway in response to the growth. This isn't what happened. The city designated a place for a high-speed road into RTP, put regulations in place to encourage certain types of development, and BOOM! Houses came up out of the ground in the form that best fills up a highway. (suburban, low-rise, heavily residential, single use, with strip retail)

The same happens with rail transit when the land uses and urban form (high-density, vertically mixed use, walkable) are allowed and encouraged by ordinance to flourish adjacent to stations. People tired of long commutes and road rage who like walkable neighborhoods will move there, and in significant numbers.

I obviously disagree strongly with dmcall's transit prescriptions, but I think the nature of our disagreement frames the linchpin of transit going forward. Do we build a system that appeases skeptics, even if it is less effective (and potentially more expensive- try running rail to most malls in the region!) than the system that TTA designed the first time out of the box? Do we start by building the most politically acceptable thing first, even if it is small, and then build the most effective things later? Or do we focus on where the heaviest usage of the system will be, and try to serve that demand?

[ncwebguy]

A RR corridor with high density and transit oriented design accomodates a larger growth in population per acre than a 540 exitville like the proposed 5401 at 540 and 401 (link to N&O).

540 style development is cheaper to build, but that cost ignores the required upgrades along connecting streets. Expansion costs are not accounted for until they are needed, which is always too late. It is similar to the concrete vs. asphalt costs for building a roadway. Concrete costs more up front, but requires less in maintenance costs (if properly installed) and lasts longer. Asphalt is cheap to get started, but costs more to maintain. Total cost of operations is higher for asphalt, but NC DOT uses it because it is cheaper short term and gives them a chance to hand out mainteance and widening contracts down the road (pun intended).

This vicious cycle is why "temporary toll" roads like NJ's Turnpike and Garden State Parkway are still collecting tolls.

The future is hard to predict, so the "path of least resistance" should be to use the rails already in place. No one can complain "they put a train right through my neighborhood" using TTA's phase I (and some of phase II). Shopping center owners built on land nowhere near rail lines, so they can't complain about a lack of rail service. Construction close to train tracks is already in progress in Raleigh -- Quorum, Bloomsbury, 222 Glenwood, West at North -- and planned in Durahm -- Metro Center/Davis Drive, performing arts center, 9th Street, etc.

[urbanvb]

Jams to get thicker on U.S. 401

Raleigh planners see traffic woes getting worse before road projects are complete

RALEIGH - Traffic along U.S. 401 will only get worse in the next five years, according to city transportation planners and developers of a massive project near the road.

Growth along the corridor in northern Wake County -- fueled by available land and the opening of Interstate 540 -- has pushed more people onto the road, a main connector between neighborhoods in Wake and Franklin counties and Raleigh.

[vitaviatic]

Howdy, gang.

I see a lot of familiar names here, so a lot of you are familiar with some of my past posts at the Skyscaper City forum. After an invitation to do so, I decided to throw my hat into the ring here as well.

A lot of my previous submissions have been pasted here already (thank you tjoad and Chief Jo Jo! -- it saved me some time). Just a quick advisory that I will get around to posting these projects and more onto a website to which I will provide a link. Suffice it to say here that I have been a little delayed in doing this, as I had promised. Two trips to Salt Lake, the holidays, and now two !@$%^&! blizzards in a row have kind of set us back a bit. (We're in Denver.) But it will get done.

(By the way, it should be noted that during the two Denver blizzards -- the first one 2 ft. +, and the second one now aiming for higher -- RTD's light rail system never shut down, and was at least able to run a weekend schedule even when the roads and the airport were paralyzed. And that was mainly inhibited by the suburban operators' ability to get to work. Selling point, ya think?)

We're also working on something of interest in Wilmington. We've started a dialog with local officials there, and at present we are thinking a May or June rollout. I will provide details on that as I can, but for now we are busy trying to get the package together. However, I may solicit ideas from forum members on possible improvements for that once we get the basics into place. (There is evidently quite a bit of talent lurking around in here!) It is a much smaller project in scope (thus far easier to start), but what it can do is prove out some of the concepts under discussion here -- mainly that transit options can not only be feasible, but desirable in heretofore carbound North Carolina cities.

I enjoy working North Carolina projects not only because of my heritage (Raleigh native) but for the economic dynamics in place there. There is some awesome potential there, but some structure is definitely needed. Unfortunately (well, maybe not so unfortunately!) the lay of the land in the Triangle and the state has changed to the point that while I can graft concepts onto the place, there are many specifics that only a local can be privy to. And for that we definitely need help.

Thanks, folks. More to come!

[architect77]

Some of my thoughts about the rail issue in the Triangle:

NC's and the Triangle's popularity can largely be attributed to its suburban atmosphere and natural beauty. Therefore some degree of sprawl will always define the area.

Everyone realizes that rail isn't the perfect fit for the Triangle today. I think area leaders want to bolster the region's progressive reputation, but also they see the advantages in establishing an infrastructure before its too late. What seems like an incredible waste of millions today for a tiny ridership could be heralded 20 years from now as the smartest decision ever made.

I-540 is an example of NC's intelligent planning for the future. Why? Look at how vital the Beltline is to Raleigh. Heavily developed on both sides, it gets people to a lot of places efficiently and quickly. With sprawl and development pushing outward by the day, the early construction of I-540 will create another highly efficient and convenient means for getting around the area. An example of not thinking ahead is Atlanta. Its northern suburbs which comprise 2-3 million people have only 1 option for east-west travel which is I-285. Atlanta is doomed in a way because it has no other options to move millions of cars other than its existing freeway diagram. Recently a consulting firm suggested to Atlanta that it consider building 10 and 15 mile long underground tunnels/freeways as alternates for the downtown connector.

That said, I agree that I-540 will promote sprawl around its periphery and that it should definitely be the last loop for the area. Love 'em or hate 'em, loops are beneficial in getting you to any part of the city without stopping thus less pollution.

It will be interesting to follow the realization of many concepts debated in this forum in Charlotte. Plagued with traffic on a disastrous collection of poorly planned roads, Charlotte will soon have the rail running straight to the very high density downtown. Could it become the envy of other cities?

[monsoon]

Welcome to the forum vitaviatic. You have found the right place as there are a number of people here that are directly involved in transit (at all levels) in North Carolina.

[Transplant]

Does anyone know what the guideline is used to determine Mass transit needs?

What population would dictate the need for bus service, Light rail, commuter rail, etc?

Is there a number of jobs in an area that also corresponds to this?

I know the idea with the TTA's Rail Line was to use it as a backbone system, and to eventually build around the stations. How far off were the numbers?

[ChiefJoJo]

Here's a link to the FTA's "New Starts" guidance if you care to read it... essentially for a new fixed rapid-transit project (not buses) to achieve federal funding, you have to show that the ridership will be high enough in the forecasted design year (2030) to justify building the system over just continuing to have a bus system. It's a way to analyze the user benefit of the system. If projected ridership is too low, then the system will not be funded by the FTA under current rules (FTA could always change the rules with a new administration in Washington).

Once seriously scrutinized by the FTA, TTA's ridership numbers were shown to be too low to achieve federal funding, although they were given more time to submit a new application with revised ridership projections, TTA decided to scrap their application plans in late August, as they thought it would be better to stop and save face rather than have the feds officially tell them NO (which BTW hasn't ever technically happened).

[vitaviatic]

OK gang...

As promised, our numbers for all of the projects that we touched on in the SSC forum, many of which were reprinted here, have been posted to our internet site. Here is the link:

Thin Air Group, LLC

Click on the paper dart to enter the site. At the welcome page click on the link on the sidebar named "RDU Transit Project Portfolio". Our initial turnkey service projections are there as well as Centrium (the TOD replacement for Central Prison) and one other proposal that we have not yet mentioned heretofore -- the World Technology Exposition (or TEXPO). The latter, as the name implies, is a year-long (or close to it) technology fair that would be set to initiate Dix Hill Park once the Dix Psychiatric facility closes. The revenues from the TEXPO would fund the entire park acquisition for the city of Raleigh (if the necessary critical mass were achieved), and provide the same kind of OPM (other people's money, for the anacronym challenged) infusion into TTA's rail project that the 2002 Winter Olympics did for Salt Lake (but fortunately with a more spread out visitor population). Of note is our explanation as to how World's Fairs have played a huge role in the development of some of America's premier parks.

Some disclaimers here.

First, we did punch out some rudimentary, basic numbers for a "turnkey" train operation. This is NOT to tell TTA how to run the show. They already have these numbers, of course, and probably much more thorough ones at that. The problem that most people have with transit funding is that we are all shown huge numbers, but never given a basis by which to gauge if the working figures are high or low based on the income stream. This takes a lot of the "Greek letter mystery" out of the process, and gives a layman's breakdown of things. That is all we were trying to do. Unlike the fabulously well-paid Parsons, Brinckerhoff... we are not armed with 4GB ridership models... ...in order to satisfy the sentinels of the federal treasury. In fact, our desire is to see that entire level of largesse disappear altogether! The point that we have tried to make is that transit ridership reflects the dynamics of the real estate market, and to that end is next to impossible to gauge. To demonstrate, look at how many downtown Raleigh condo and office towers are coming online that were announced within the last year. Those projects alone invalidate the model numbers generated two to three years ago, and presented by Parsons. If the Centrium itself came online, the high-priced Parsons numbers would simply be rendered as garbage, as the entire commuting dynamics of downtown Raleigh would change (especially if the Centrium included a supermarket and some eclectic shopping).

Second, the Centrium numbers provided here are crude. There are no conceptual drawings (we aren't developers or architects, therefore are in no need of a super-duper CAD program), just numbers, and the general idea along with merits and benefits of the Centrium project as we see them. I'm sure some developers check into these blogs now and then. Feel free to check them and critique them. In fact, they're yours for the taking. We did these simply as a demonstration of what can be done with the Central Prison site, how critical a piece it is to the transit puzzle, and also to show just what a dead weight the prison really is on downtown Raleigh. By the way, we budgeted land acquisition for the prison site at $100 million on our spreadsheet. For 2006, the Wake County Assessor's Office appraised the prison on the books at around $70 million. The income numbers for the Centrium (intentionally conservative) run over $300 million over ten years, including condo sales, retail, and office. Total sales around $128 million a year. Sales and property taxes coming in at around $12 million a year. Do the math now, and tell me the state wouldn't be interested in selling.

I am available for feedback, and not only open to, but requesting suggestions. Our role in this whole thing is speculative. We may try to help organize a turnkey proposal for TTA, maybe not. I myself am a Raleigh native, as has been mentioned before, and this is as much of a citizen activist movement as anything. I get as tired as anybody watching the floundering of bureaucracy over mission inflation. A basic system is not hard to come by, or expensive, considering that the rail corridor already exists, and is already in use for passenger service!!

Laying down a bunt at the beginning of the inning makes it much easier to score later on with a couple of base hits. There is absolutely no need to swing for the fences from the very beginning.

[ChiefJoJo]

All I can say is WOW! I've only just skimmed the ideas you've come up with and I'm blown away at the possibilities. I'm going to need some more time to digest all of these ideas. I love how you synergized/leveraged the transit possibilties, Central Prison TOD, Dix Park, Conv Center, and the current condo boom downtown. If you really think about it, this is an amazing time in Raleigh/Triangle's history. There is SO MUCH going on right now and in the next 2-3 years that we can leverage if our leadership can just embrace the possibilities of the future.

EDIT: How ironic is it--given the ideas posted above--that Central Prison's potential for redevelopment has already been discussed in this forum.

[orulz]

Just noticed from this article that Raleigh has taken the next step in their 5-year plan for bus service. They now have one route (1 - Capital Blvd) that runs every half hour at mid-day! Hurrah! Now if they could just improve the service on their two-dozen or so other routes to match...

[monsoon]

I am available for feedback, and not only open to, but requesting suggestions. .....