Triangle Regional Transit

[sax184]

I agree with your opinion of the 15/501 corridor. Not exactly transit friendly.

I have always kind of thought that the Chapel Hill -> RTP Metro Center -> RDU (also known as the I-40/NC54 corridor) would be more promising as a "phase 2" than the 15/501 corridor. Going east from Chapel Hill, it hits the following locations:

UNC (extension to Carolina North?)

UNC Hospital / Kenan Stadium

Dean Dome

"East 54"

Meadowmont

Southpoint

54/55 intersection

Triangle Metro Center

Imperial Center

RDU Airport

All of these areas either are pretty pedestrian friendly, are planned to become pedestrian friendly, or could easily become so. In addition, this line would connect CH directly to Raleigh, and the entire transit system to RDU. I envision this line as electric LRT though I suppose diesel LRT would work, too, if it makes the connection to Carolina North easier.

[orulz]

The only case I would prefer diesel LRT would be if Norfolk Southern refused a time-separated use agreement on the State University Railroad spur if they had to run under catenary. Are there any potential liability / safety issues related to running diesel-powered freight equipment under LRT electric lines? Issues like this might also be avoided by de-energizing the wires during off hours.

Thinking about it more, I agree with transitman that punching a transit line through the Cameron-McCauley neighborhood is a political nightmare waiting to happen. In addition, the closest you would get to Franklin Street is about 1/3 mile, which is walkable but longer than would be desirable. A dedicated right-of-way between UNC and Carrboro would be nice, but given the constraints doesn't make sense. If money were no object, then a tunnel covering the 1.5 miles between UNC Hospital to Carrboro would be great, but it ain't gonna happen any time this century.

[ChiefJoJo]

Yes, truly nice corridors into a very transit-friendly place. But, that transit-friendly place is surrounded by transit-hostile development (or no development) as you head out each of those corridors. The 15-501 study found that ridership was poor for all modes studied, which is not surprising when you consider how pedestrian-hostile the 15-501 corridor is. BRT or BMT came out as the preferred modes because they had the lowest capital cost (there was a quite rail-hostile contingent in Chapel Hill politics at the time also). The Carrboro rail line is great in that it gets to the future North Campus, but beyond that it only connects to the rest of the world in a very roundabout fashion.

[sax184]

If I had my choice, I think that if there's anywhere that in-street running for LRT makes sense, it's Chapel Hill/Carrboro. When you look at the Manning Drive to Franklin section of S Columbia street, it's in some ways a busway already. We might as well make the conversion complete, make that road transit only and 2 way, and then provide some alternate routes for car traffic in the area. Then you link activity centers in Downtown Chapel Hill and Downtown Carrboro. Then run new tracks up to Carolina North.

Alternatively, you could put a East-West/North-South high-frequency streetcar network across Chapel Hill/Carrboro, and do DMU service to downtown Carrboro and put the terminus behind the Carr Mill Harris Teeter. Sure, there are transfers, but this might be the best way to avoid the political wickets and some of the higher costs of making one mode fit city streets and the rail corridor.

[vitaviatic]

The crazy in the rafters again.

The electric/diesel power of LRT getting to Carolina North is not so much the issue as it is the weight of the LRT vehicles and their crashworthiness next to a freight rail line due to FRA regulations. I think the grade of NC 86 airport road may be challenging to vehicles of LRT weight (though not necessarily even lighter streetcars) so if you were trying to avoid the political nightmare of the Cameron-McCauley neighborhood, you would run LRT up Columbia, down Franklin/Main to downtown Carrboro to the rail spur, and then up to Carolina North. You might have to set up time separation where freight rail only operates 12 Am to 6 AM. Luckily, the traffic on this line could probably be covered in that window, a few days each week.

[JDC]

It really is the difference between riding in a cab and a limousine.

[vitaviatic]

^^Well, if you can find a Greyhound you can plug in your laptop or buy a cocktail on, let me know. Who needs trains if you can have that? But yeah, something like that.

[tjoad]

Bus riders lose to red tape

In North Carolina, bus shelters are also a state issue because many urban thoroughfares are state-maintained. DOT doesn't allow advertising on the right of way -- an effort to regulate billboards along the highways.

DOT says it has multiple questions about allowing the advertising at bus stops. Would they impede driver vision? Is there enough room for benches or shelters? Would the shelters encourage muggings? How would people react to more advertising? Would it weaken DOT's legal position on regulating billboards? Should the state get a cut of any money paid by the company? Would it jeopardize federal highway funding?

[ncwebguy]

I read the ads on bus shelters story on Sunday and forgot to look for a link to post here.

The billboard industry has put in all kinds of weird rules that the city and/or county has to reimburse billboard owners to take them down, and recent stories about how much tree clearing they can do to preserve their line of sight.

I do agree that the shelters won't work everywhere, but they should be allowed where they can be.

It is ironic that the State DOT seems to be extorting a cut of the action from the city of Ralegih while at the same time isn't maintaing its roads within city limits. The road bonds passed a couple of years ago were to fix the same state owned/maintained roads that DOT is claiming the shelters will be in "their" right of way.

Maybe the city and DOT can work out a compromise to allow these shelters in exchange for the state getting "credit" for a small part of ad revenue to be put toward the city's road improvment of state owned roads.

[vitaviatic]

I-95 is a prime example of "billboard regulation"...

The shelter ads here in Denver are 6' high and 3' wide. Hardly a traffic hazard. And there is no way they can make an argument that this would "shoehorn" the way for OA providers to throw up full billboards all over the roadway, any more than say the city permitting limited-sized business signage breaks the dam for companies to create neon monstrosities in front of their own businesses. If it is indeed the state's property, they can do what they want with it. Period. Including putting bus shelters w/ ads on it, without having to cave on three-story billboards.

And encouraging muggings??? I'd say to prevent that, cut down all of the fully-bloomed bougainvilla bushes and willow trees in private yards. Actually, the opposite happens with shelters. Since an occasional driver of a car, all drivers of buses, most cyclists, and some bus riders look at the ads, they also tend to notice the people standing by them -- much more so than they would someone walking or standing by, say, a car dealership. Hence, it adds to the safety of a rider standing at a shelter.

I've stated it here before that transit has no natural political allies in the moneyed classes, although that isn't to say that people with money won't use transit. This will take a grass roots groundswell before anything gets done. And be prepared for surprises. The only moneymaking enterprise that I've personally witnessed to be shot down by neo-cons was transit-related. Simply because they don't like it. Policies like this are usually perpetrated by "strawhat" politicians, whose doily-shifting wives don't care for the aesthetics of public transit (if and when they go to town).

(Sweeping generalization. I'm sorry. But s#!t like this makes me madder than hell guys.)

Having said all of that, what precludes the city of Raleigh for making a deal for shelters along, say, Millbrook Rd.? Raleigh Blvd.? Wade Ave., St Mary's St., or Oberlin Rd.? I know NC has a peculiar, seemingly all-pervasive road system, but if the city is maintaining it, why is it not their perrogative to institute an expense recovery system as well as a package of ammenities for transit riders and pedestrians? I think the city is being lame at best in its pursuit (if there really is one) of transit improvement. The transit public there needs to get organized and start throwing bricks at both of these glass houses. This is sheer stupidity.

Let me end this rather acid commentary with this. I think that citizens of Raleigh (and all of Wake County) should start conveying this message to all local politicians, including one Russell Allen. Maybe a note or two to the Chamber of Commerce.

Let's say I were to get off a plane at RDU with a colleague, rent a car, and drive around for three or four days seeing opulent, manicured manses all through the city, listen to all of the boasting of how successful and "technologically groundbreaking" the Triangle is and all of that. On the way back to the airport we spot a poor woman soaked in sweat, roasting in the midday sun, on an overturned shopping cart, for a once an hour bus on one of the busiest thoroughfares in a fairly large state. Then guess what. We're gonna turn to each other and say, "What a bunch of jackasses. A wealthy area like this, and they can't even give people a place to sit for a lousy bus?"

Those kinds of things might not mean much to your garden-variety sociopath (in fact, s/he might even be entertained and amused by it) -- you know, the type wanting to set up a sweatshop business. But it does mean quite a lot to people from places like California, New York, Illinois...places where your venture capital still comes from. On the whole they tend to treat their own with quite a bit more dignity. This is just cheap, and mean-spirited.

I know, I know. I'm largely preaching to the choir here. Again, my apologies fellow bloggers. Maybe I oughtta quit reading this stuff. Suggestions?

[ChiefJoJo]

Frankly, this situation is a pure embarrassment, and another black eye for NCDOT, that they would seek to block bus shelter advertising on what are essentially city streets (not technically, but functionally). V, I totally agree with your assessment and unfortunately, our state is painfully slow in realizing these things.

[pdxheel]

Good article in the N&O regarding I-540 and growth. The underlying message...I-540 will lead to more growth and more congestion. We really need good public transportation in the region. Already we are on a pace to out-sprawl Atlanta.

I-540 and Sprawl

[DB78]

It's reading articles like this that make me hope the southern arc of I-540 never gets built at all or takes like a decade longer than expected to get built. All the more reason we don't need tolls.

[ChiefJoJo]

The Special Transit Advisory Commission (STAC) met yesterday and began to discuss what a transit plan might look like. They asked staff to generate some rail-based scenarios for them to comment on. The following is a copy of those scenarios (another camera phone pic). They are only for discussion purposes at this point, but I can easily see an adopted plan looking like some combination of these options.

The light blue lines (Scenario 1) represent nearly all the corridors in the study area... it's a 'let's build everything' vision. Obviously, it connects nearly every corner of the area, but it also would cost a fortune to build. The dark blue lines (Scenario 2) represent a mid-range option that includes most of #1, but excludes the farthest flung rural/suburban lines (Fuquay, Selma, N. Durham, Burlington, Hillsborough). The red lines (Scenario 3) are probably the most viable lines that could be built within a reasonable horizon year (2035?) assuming some significant local funding stream. It eliminates the Apex-Durham, Zebulon-E Raleigh, and Franklinton-NE Raleigh. What's left is TTA's Phase 1, 2, and 3, and some circulatory routes (black lines) in each of the downtowns and RTP/RDU. FYI, I did note that the Phase 3 line from Durham to Chapel Hill was shown going through town on what looked like the NC 86 one-way pair that cuts through by Carolina Inn towards Columbia St--and not through the Cameron-McCauley neighborhood.

The STAC members asked lots of questions and seemed confused over how to proceed. Several commented the transit goals need to be clear to measure the effectiveness of the alternatives; others said that the plan needs to be regional; still others questioned whether bus options were being considered. I must say that the bus question seems to have been left unaddressed at this point, and the general feeling was there's a long way to go towards coming up with a plan, but they only have 3 more meetings. It's also clear to see that among the members, there are some fairly divergent viewpoints and there is definitely not a clear way forward at this point. It will be interesting to see how they are able to generate consensus.

[DB78]

Chief, you mentioned the year 2035 as a reasonable timeline year. Can you imagine what just Raleigh itself will look like, let alone surrounding towns will look like by then?? The furthest projections I've seen for Raleigh's population WITHOUT annexation are to the year 2025. I think it's a very safe bet to say that Raleigh city will have a good 700,000 people in its 114 square miles by 2035. More of course with likely annexations. Raleigh has probably a good 5-8 years left of accelerating growth before the growth becomes more steady, depending on school construction. We'll be right at 400,000 for 2010 and closer to 525,000 by 2020.

Cary would probably be 250,000 or more if the NIMBYism fades at all. These rinky dink towns (knightdale, apex, fuquay, wake forest) will be closer to 100,000 each by then. Some more.

I would hope it won't take until that point before we have any rail service. At that point we may as well be talking about a subway system or an L system like Chicago's.

[DPK]

I would hope it won't take until that point before we have any rail service. At that point we may as well be talking about a subway system or an L system like Chicago's.

[rooster8]

So essentially we're looking at the same line that has already been denied federal funding?

I'll be really shocked if there are trains by 2030 the way things look now.

[mattm]

No, this isn't quite what was proposed earlier. This would leverage existing rail lines using commuter trains consisting of DMUs. The far-flung lines would have fewer runs using low-platform boarding. The runs would continue on through the mainline (probably would have to add one or two tracks to that at least) and stop at high-platform stations. Headways would be much shorter there.

It is felt (by many) that one reason that the TTA phase I project failed is that it left too many people out. This is the beginning of a comprehensive plan that, although more expensive, would have regional buy-in (i.e. a dedicated revenue stream of sufficient size).

[rooster8]

OK. I really hope they can put something great together. Without an improved transit system, this area is going to have a terrible quality of life before too long.

[DB78]

OK. I really hope they can put something great together. Without an improved transit system, this area is going to have a terrible quality of life before too long.

[ChiefJoJo]

Here is Bob Geary's take on the STAC and transit planning in the latest Indy.

Streetcars in downtown & east Durham and along Franklin/Main St in CH/Car? Yeah, that makes sense to me. I think the RTP and Raleigh streetcar lines are much too extensive in scope. Streetcars along Hillsborough and New Bern Ave? Definitely... connect Raleigh's most urban arterial street, the MTC transit hub, right through Fayetteville St, and a lower income route for transit dependent riders in SE Raleigh. It's hard to envision streetcars on Millbrook/NewHope Rd, but it does go near the RBC Center! I'd rather see a connection to Crabtree & North Hills somehow.

Streetcars in RTP??? Yeah, a transit connection to RDU is great, but I think it's a waste of time to develop something that it primarily used as an urban circulator in a ultra-suburban area. Perhaps these suburban areas would be rezoned with a transit overlay and redeveloped in anticipation of future service--maybe that would be the goal.

I don't think the Apex to Durham transit line makes much sense... just connect Apex to DT Cary and then use the TTA line back up to RTP and Durham. Just looking at that corridor makes it look redundant to me.

I know they are trying to adress the issues that it doesn't go to where people are, but I think it could be refined a lot more.

[JDC]

I think that's a bit too of a defeated attitude as of yet. I know others have pointed this out from time to time, yet I'll reiterate it. We think traffic is bad here in the Triangle because we deal with it every day, when many cities would kill to have our traffic problems. Spend 48 hours in the DC metropolitan area and you will be kissing the ground when you get back to Raleigh. Traffic is worsening for virtually every metropolitan area in the US, except much of the Northeast where the only traffic jams are caused by the mass exodus of people heading down South and out West.

[thewhister]

I was fortunate to be home earlier than usual and saw a blip on WRAL regarding transit in Raleigh. It is slanted negativley as a losing enterprise that the city flips the bill for.

WRAL Downtown Growth Could Help Raleigh's Bus System

Also for those of you interested in what is going on at the STAC meeting there was an interesting animation that was shown to the group.

Trips per acre in the region

The STAC website is updated also with data from the last meeting posted.

[JDC]

I was fortunate to be home earlier than usual and saw a blip on WRAL regarding transit in Raleigh. It is slanted negativley as a losing enterprise that the city flips the bill for.

WRAL Downtown Growth Could Help Raleigh's Bus System

[vitaviatic]

Here is a link out of Salt Lake...

UTA~Commuter Rail North

Of particular note here, look into the "History" link on this page. Prelim studies on this project began in 1997. It was adopted by the MPO in 2001.

UTA~Commuter Rail North_Fact Sheet PDF

Salt Lake to Ogden is about 35 miles by timetable, quite a bit farther than DTR to DTD. As you can see from the fact sheet, 38 miles of new track were constructed in a corridor that is much, much, much busier than the NCRR (I "died" on that run trying to make it between Roper Yard in SLC to Ogden UP half a dozen times in the six months I worked there -- 12 hours, gang!). There are technical issues galore in this area, including that of water tables, since it runs parallel to, and near the Great Salt Lake shoreline. Soil aklalinity, you name it. Nevertheless, it will open in the spring of 2008 -- a timeline of 7 years since MPO approval, and essentially 5 in the planning/design phase. Salt Lake and Ogden are two separate metro areas. That bridge was built and crossed too. Under state auspices. Quite impressive for an area with a combined metropolitan population equal to or less than the Triangle.

Now to the Triangle. For basic service, very little construction is needed (save for platforms and pax access to the ROW). The service already exists in the form of state-sponsored Amtrak intercity service, with three usable stations already in place. Thus EIS and regulatory paperwork requirements are minimal, in that this would essentially be an extension of prevailing use. And yet we keep seeing copious volumes of "new studies" for a 20-year project, all the while precious seed money (that could already have bought several passenger consists) keeps getting wasted. The implementation of transit, such as it is drawn out for the Triangle, could not be any simpler. But yet it is dying on the vine.

The most effective way for a politician of clout to kill a project that s/he does not like, without incurring the full wrath of those who support it, is to appoint a "blue ribbon committee" to study that thing to death. By the time any consensus gets reached, enough money has already been spent on it (to no avail) that the public sours of the idea and dismisses it as a waste. This is a trick that machine bosses with names such as Daley, Moses, and Samuels employed ad nauseum. At some point, somebody with some leadership skills is going to have to break out the brass knuckles, and shove this concept through the mob.

I understand the political handicaps that the Triangle faces (particularly Raleigh, existing as it does as more or less a ward of the state). You have a system of transport completely dominated at the state level of a predominately (but decreasingly so) rural state. You have no provision for ballot initiatives, or any kind of democratic infusion to the republican structure of government (notice the small caps, polywags -- not talking about parties here). If you did, this conversation would be about how to expand and improve rail, not how to build it. The cities are mandated to have infamously ineffective and corrupt council/manager forms of government, where an unelected official runs the show, and the council that appoints him or her is loathe to rein in the demigod for fear of "looking bad". Yes friends, the deck is stacked.

Yet Charlotte has gotten it done under the same playing conditions and rules. It not only can be done, it has been done. An old school buddy of mine from Raleigh, who now lives in Charlotte, once told me when I asked why he moved there, said "Raleigh is the 'Can't Do City', and I couldn't take it anymore." While I think that is a bit extreme and unfair, I do remember a defeatist attitude hovering over the place in my early years there during the Jesse Helms Age (and this isn't aimed at you guys, dear bloggers -- it's about the population as a whole). Don't succumb to that, please. Somebody needs to blast through all of this crap, and get this done. All of you reading this know that commuter rail will get done. None of the current political players will carry the ball, so which of you will step to the plate?

By the way, Utah as a whole is a much more conservative political environment than North Carolina. True that Salt Lake City itself, much like Durham, Chapel Hill, and to a lesser degree Raleigh and Cary, is a moderate to liberal island surrounded by solid "red state" politics. But also note that the vast majority of the rail mileage being constructed by UTA, both on commuter and light rail, is being done so in very conservative suburban areas. The difference in Utah is that, given the Mormon influence, as politically conservative as it is, the state is very much tilted to providing for the public good. This is something that really has been sparingly tapped into, if at all in NC. Instead of paring down to cut costs in the case of TTA, it needs to get more inclusive, thus bigger in scale, in order to provide the most benefit to the most people. I can't stress the fact enough. A regional commuter system would be of even greater benefit to Down Easters, and provide more benefit and opportunity to them than it would to Triangle residents, who by and large are pretty much where they need to be already. Remember this. Traffic is an inconvenience. Distance and cost is an opportunity killer. Taking a 60-minute, $4 train ride each way to a $12 an hour job makes sense if one can stay in a low-cost housing area such as a Goldsboro. Driving an hour to two hours in traffic, paying $12 each way for gas, wear and tear on the car and body, for a $12 an hour job does not. Transit not only tends to bring development into nodes, but it also, on a regional level, tends to become an economic equalizer among have and have-not regions.

In the process of taking the lead in all this, tell your local politicos that the Triangle is falling behind, and fast. This is becoming a competitive economic issue. All of the major Western metro areas either already have, or have under construction, fixed-guideway transit projects. Most of them were already planned out and filed during the Clinton Administration, which means that they had a better than average chance of substantial funding. With a wartime federal budget, the Triangle finds itself at a distinct disadvantage for fedfunds, therefore more creative state- and local-based initiatives will be required. (Fortunately, the Triangle really doesn't need that much for a basic service.) Albuquerque and Salt Lake both built commuter systems overlaid upon freight rails. Both are smaller than the Triangle. Tucson doesn't have light rail in place yet, but since it essentially runs over the existing streetcar line, and the plan is already voter approved to my understanding, that one is pretty much in the bag as well. Tucson is smaller than the Triangle. The California cities that don't have urban systems in place (Fresno, Bakersfield, Stockton) all have extensive commuter rail service (The Amtrak/San Joaquins, Altamont Commuter) that more or less serve as transit along the axis of the rail corridor itself, and extensive bus connections to LA & SF that do the same. The one glaring failure out West (Las Vegas) did so because it was a private venture, built on the cheap, way overpriced, and designed to serve only a few casino properties. Even that one is being rethought.

The argument is that CEOs don't give a d@mn about transit when they scout for new locales. Obviously not for their own part, if they can take the corporate limo to work and write the thing off. But any CEO worth his or her salt isn't stupid, either. They realize that a nominal perk such as offering discounted transit passes to employees, for use on an effective transit system, even if only say half subsidized (the subsidies of which are written off anyway), puts money back into the employee's pocket from gas and parking savings, makes the employee's commuting day a little nicer (most of the time), and attracts more qualified workers. If more sausage and poultry plants is what you want there, then by all means forget transit. If you want leading edge industry, the Triangle needs to start acting like it knows how to operate like a full-service metropolis. Call it a loss leader if you want, but if some sort of non-highway based form of transport is not implemented there, and soon, by the time many others and I get proven right RDU will already have lost a competitive edge, be wallowing in a Phoenix-like carbound hell with no options, and be scrambling to slap something together in desperation -- not a good way to do things.

(Sprawl-child extraordinaire, even Phoenix threw in the towel and took on light rail. Even though metro Phoenix still continues to grow, the fact is that for every two people that move in, at least one person flees the area out of exasperation from traffic, noise, dirt, and crime (I know. I was one of them.) And this creates social instability to the point that it becomes reflected in the extraordinary crime rate, and yesterday's fru-fru subdivisions become tomorrow's slums as people run farther and farther out -- Phoenix extends d@mn near to Flagstaff now -- to escape the carnage.)

This will be one of my last contris here. (Oh, stop it. I can here the jeering applause from here.) I will post the DTR tax numbers as soon as they get finished, and I'm also still trying to gather up some figures on the fuel-cell locomotives on the Intercity blog. Meanwhile, the numbers that I have previously linked to on our website will be available for a few more months (the end of the year), then our site will undergo a major overhaul, after which they won't be. If anybody here wants to indeed chase the Holy Grail, and needs any of those spreadsheets, I'll be happy to send them along as a file.

Just send me a message.