Charlotte Center City Streetcar Network

[illustration82]

I definitely think that the silver line should be light rail and not streetcar.  I fear if they make it streetcar along Monroe Rd, many people wouldn't ride because of how slow it would be.

 Also, I thought that modern tram cars were already decided on for phase II, why does this article make it seem like they may still be up for debate?  Perhaps I may be misunderstanding the  article, but I hope the longer modern day tram are a sure thing for he Gold line phase II.  

And streetcar to the airport (with its on right-of- way) is definitely a good idea.  We need that sooner than later in my opinion.  

PS... here is another news report about the new streetcar/light rail study...

http://www.wsoctv.com/news/news/local/charlotte-studies-possibility-new-rail-lines/nm9Wm/

[DEnd]

ill, Ain't no decision final until it's paid for. 

I agree with the airport in it's own right-of-way, but I'd rather have the silver line first.  Unless the airport line comes with a line out to Shelby with 15 minute frequency, then I want the airport line first for my own selfish reasons. 

[HopHead]

But can't a light rail car run on the street car tracks and travel at varying speeds when it's in uptown and then towards the airport? I swear I've seen that before.

[js4life]

^^ LRT can run on the same tracks as the streetcar & vice versa. With the upgrades in the LRT/Tram technology it's possible to have custom made cars that could mix in traffic & run in dedicated space outside of Uptown

[15895]

So in other words, since everyone supports light rail, it seems like they may be thinking of making the line like the blue line having its own ROW outside of uptown like Denver and a few other cities. That's a smart move. The public is very supportive of light rail.

 

 

[cltbwimob]

^^^Siemens makes a version of the S70 that is about ten feet shorter than the current Lynx S70s that can be used for both streetcar and light rail applications.  The S70 Ultrashort is used in Salt Lake's and San Diego's light rail systems and is used in Atlanta's streetcar system.  The only difference in the streetcar and light rail versions is the streetcar version comes from the factory without couplers whereas the light rail version comes with couplers for multi-unit trains.  Other than that, the two are identical. The Gold Line has been designed specifically to be able to handle this vehicle.

[kermit]

The current news stories are not discussing the possibilities accurately or fairly. No one is thinking of running a streetcar (like we just opened on Trade / Elizabeth) to Matthews -- its just too slow. However one possibility that is being consodered is street running LRT in dedicated right of way that could be in he middle of the street (many reporters are wrongly referring to this as a "streetcar").

Salt Lake City's system uses this approach extensively and, with proper signal premption, it can be slightly faster than driving. Its not as fast as dedicated ROW but it does put stations closer to existing activity spaces. If done properly it can also improve the pedestrial environment. It is also a very cost effective approach when you have wide streets (like Monroe). This system in SLC looks like this: http://www.stvinc.com/portfolio_images/salt_lake_city_university_light_rai_web.jpg

i doubt the current batch of RWNJs in Raleigh will consent (let alone fund) any proposal that takes away travel lanes. However turning Independence into an expressway makes this he ideal time to take two lanes away from Monroe for LRT.

 

Edited July 31, 2015 by kermit

[illustration82]

So in other words Kermit, the system on Monroe could possibly be a streetcar that acts as an LRT.  If that is the case, then they really need to consider doing the same for the additional phases of the Gold line.  It would definitely increase it's popularity. 

[15895]

So in other words Kermit, the system on Monroe could possibly be a streetcar that acts as an LRT.  If that is the case, then they really need to consider doing the same for the additional phases of the Gold line.  It would definitely increase it's popularity. 

that's how the Observer article read to me. In particular about the airport extension. 

 

Unless I misread it. I wouldn't mind the gold line in mixed traffic in and around uptown then ROW in other areas, particularly the airport. 

[Spartan]

^^ LRT can run on the same tracks as the streetcar & vice versa. With the upgrades in the LRT/Tram technology it's possible to have custom made cars that could mix in traffic & run in dedicated space outside of Uptown

Is that true? I thought the streetcar could run on LRT tracks, but not vice-versa. I was/am under the impression that the streetcar tracks weren't designed to accommodate the weight of LRT vehicles.

 

Wouldn't planning for anything to have dedicated ROW on an existing suburban roadway corridor effectively be a death wish for development on that corridor until the line is built (ie: Independence, N Tryon)? I think funding for the SE line will be 10+ years out, so the specific corridor will likely lag in development/redevelopment until a specific alignment and plans are drawn up.

 

[kermit]

Is that true? I thought the streetcar could run on LRT tracks, but not vice-versa. I was/am under the impression that the streetcar tracks weren't designed to accommodate the weight of LRT vehicles.

I have not read anything definitive on this from CATS. In th absence of an official document I gotta assume that the streetcar tracks could not support our LRT vehicles due to differences in track construction (i believe the streetcar rail is a lighter weight and fewer ties underpin the rail on the streetcar than on the LRT tracks). 

Anyone want to dig into the construction specs?

 

Edited July 31, 2015 by kermit

[js4life]

Is that true? I thought the streetcar could run on LRT tracks, but not vice-versa. I was/am under the impression that the streetcar tracks weren't designed to accommodate the weight of LRT vehicles.

 

Wouldn't planning for anything to have dedicated ROW on an existing suburban roadway corridor effectively be a death wish for development on that corridor until the line is built (ie: Independence, N Tryon)? I think funding for the SE line will be 10+ years out, so the specific corridor will likely lag in development/redevelopment until a specific alignment and plans are drawn up.

 

i talking about the technology  more so than the actual vehicle used. I do think the blue line models are to heavy but as others have pointed out their are smaller versions that can serve both purposes 

[DEnd]

I have not read anything definitive on this from CATS. In th absence of an official document I gotta assume that the streetcar tracks could not support our LRT vehicles due to their construction (the rail is a lighter weight and fewer ties were used than on the LRT tracks). 

Anyone eager to dig into the construction specs?

 

The rail and ties would only create a maintenance issue, however considering the gold line was built with the s70 in mind, I don't think it's a huge issue.  I'd bet system design weights for both are within 10 tons of each other.  And that is close to nothing as far as rail is concerned. 

[dubone]

The current news stories are not discussing the possibilities accurately or fairly. No one is thinking of running a streetcar (like we just opened on Trade / Elizabeth) to Matthews -- its just too slow. However one possibility that is being consodered is street running LRT in dedicated right of way that could be in he middle of the street (many reporters are wrongly referring to this as a "streetcar").

Salt Lake City's system uses this approach extensively and, with proper signal premption, it can be slightly faster than driving. Its not as fast as dedicated ROW but it does put stations closer to existing activity spaces. If done properly it can also improve the pedestrial environment. It is also a very cost effective approach when you have wide streets (like Monroe). This system in SLC looks like this: http://www.stvinc.com/portfolio_images/salt_lake_city_university_light_rai_web.jpg

i doubt the current batch of RWNJs in Raleigh will consent (let alone fund) any proposal that takes away travel lanes. However turning Independence into an expressway makes this he ideal time to take two lanes away from Monroe for LRT.

 

The Observer article does explain that difference pretty well.  I don't click any links to local TV news, because they are always wrong or misleading yellow journalist ventures, so maybe that is what you are referring to.  

I still believe that the streetcar needs far more of its own right of way.  Even the historic one back in the olden days had its own medians for much of its route, and that gave the streets it ran on stately qualities that remain nice today (Plaza, Queens, East Blvd, etc.)   It would raise the pricetag, although it could be covered by non-transit transportation dollars to change the cross section of Central Blvd (parts of it does have median now, though). 

 

But for other lines like the Matthews Silver line and the West line to the airport, it all seems reasonable once they are at certain point of transit capacity running through Trade to make it a transit only street and poof you have light rail on dedicated right of way (or at least as I mentioned the other day, just some exception for local traffic only).   

 

It's good to hear that it is not wildly off as far as weight capacity.  I can't imagine that a full thick concrete road bad is somehow lower capacity that chipped granite with ties, but I'm not very technical in these matters, so I will defer to others. 

[ajfunder]

The current streetcar stations are designed for the S70 ultra short level boarding as well. Turning radius is the big difference between the ultra short and the standard S70 models. The connector spur around the arena, a few of the lane transitions, and the curve at Hawthorne and Elizabeth are too tight for standard S70's and this is why the ultra short model would have to be used. Ultra short models can be run in trains of multiple vehicles like the standard S70 vehicles but doing so would require station expansion and possibly station relocation on the streetcar alignment.

 

 

[orulz]

I like the idea of adding light rail branches that use the Trade-Elizabeth corridor as a spine. However, this will not come easy or cheap. First, you'd need larger platforms. To make the platforms larger, you'd have to tear up at least part of the new rails to accomplish this.

There aren't a lot of stoplights along Elizabeth Ave, so it's entirely possible that it could be converted for longer light rail trains like the Blue Line, and remain a mixed-traffic corridor. The other possibilty would be a transit mall, which I'm not too keen on.

Trade street has shorter blocks and more stoplights, so dedicated lanes would be necessary and signal priority would be a big benefit. One could imagine this looking something like Main Street in Houston, with dedicated lanes for trains, but the street still open to local traffic. Left turns across the rails would have to be prohibited, and they would somehow have to do a better job than Houston at physically preventing them from happening.

BTW does anybody have a link to the PDF that showed the precise streetcar alignment (eg, when it runs on the curb vs in the median, and showing the precise extent of the planned platforms?

[dubone]

Light rail would presumably have far fewer stations, though.  

But I still think the best approach is to just have tram / modern streetcar vehicles that operate like a light rail with dedicated right of way, but just keep the smaller vehicles and mix with traffic at various places along the line for the streetcar network.  But the actual east and west light rail concepts, I do hope they just use the railroad corridors.  

 

 

[illustration82]

If we used the CSX line (which seems like a smart idea), I wonder if we would run into the same interference we did with Norfolk Southern for the Red Line.  And if we did use the CSX railroad corridor for the silver line, it should definitely be light rail in my opinion.  Does anyone know how often that rail line is used now?

 

[RiverwoodCLT]

CSX for Silver line would not work, too many trains every day.

[Third Strike]

The Silver Line wouldn't use the same tracks as the CSX. It would simply run parallel to them, like how the Blue Line runs next to Norfolk Southern's line in south Charlotte.

The biggest problem I see is the CSX alignment in Plaza Midwood. It would be extremely tight to fit two light rail tracks, along with the existing CSX track. I'm sure CSX would also like some extra room, especially if they ever decide that they want double tracks there. If the CSX corridor was used, the Silver Line would likely have to run down 7th Street as a streetcar, spurring off from the Gold Line, and then continue along the CSX railroad at the overpass near Briar Creek.

[illustration82]

Spurring off from the Gold Line would probably be the be route to go regardless of whether or not they chose to use CSX or Monroe Rd for the silver line.  It would cut construction cost by using the same tracks as the Gold line to reach uptown.  

A part of me wonders if its even necessary to run the gold line along Central Ave and the silver line along Monroe. Both lines would be very close together and serve pretty much the same area.  It may make more sense to just extend the Gold line down Monroe, eliminating the need for the silver line.   

Edited August 3, 2015 by illustration82

[ajfunder]

I'm fairly certain canceling the Gold Line via Central would create a huge issue with residents in those neighborhoods. They have been promised the Gold Line in some form and were also a big reason the transit tax was approved and reaffirmed. It is also one of the busiest bus routes so some sort of improved transit is absolutely necessary on Central at some point. I'm all for prioritizing the Silver Line but completely scrapping the Gold Line would create a huge political backlash. Also the neighborhoods on that side of Independence would be poorly served by the Silver Line on Monroe and would see little benefit.

[Third Strike]

I'm fairly certain canceling the Gold Line via Central would create a huge issue with residents in those neighborhoods. They have been promised the Gold Line in some form and were also a big reason the transit tax was approved and reaffirmed. It is also one of the busiest bus routes so some sort of improved transit is absolutely necessary on Central at some point. I'm all for prioritizing the Silver Line but completely scrapping the Gold Line would create a huge political backlash. Also the neighborhoods on that side of Independence would be poorly served by the Silver Line on Monroe and would see little benefit.

I agree with this.

The Gold Line will serve east Charlotte, whereas the Silver Line will serve southeast Charlotte and Matthews. It wouldn't be right to cancel out one for the other. But you can consolidate a lot by having the two lines run concurrent with each other while in uptown. The other end of the Silver Line could spur off of the Gold Line from Cedar to Morehead, and then onto Wilkinson towards the airport (while running next to the NS railroad).

[orulz]

As for using railroad corridors on the Southeast and West routes, stay tuned to what happens in Raleigh because the current iteration of transit plans is considering DMUs sharing (expanded) tracks with freight.

It remains to be seen whether this will be successful, but it will basically attempt to not be just commuter rail, as frequency would be every 15 minutes off-peak, and there would be multiple stations in urban locations within the city (though certainly not the 0.2 mile spacing you find on the Blue Line through uptown Charlotte - it has been mentioned as potentially one station per mile tops.)

For Charlotte, let's take the example of the CSX line. This would put stations at (approximately):

(1) Gateway
(2) North Tryon/Alpha Mill (transfer to Blue Line)
(3) Central (transfer to Streetcar)
(4) Bascom/Monroe/Coliseum area
(5) Wendover

.. and probably spread out more from there; say:

(6) Rama
(7) Sardis
(8) Matthews

The beauty of this is that you could extend every fourth train to Monroe, too.

IMO 1 mile station spacing is actually something of a sweet spot, since the ten-minute walk areas would abut but not overlap. Plus, this would hit basically every district along the line that has the potential to be developed into an urban node.

I see no way Charlotte would be able to do this without at least an extra quarter-cent sales tax, but I think it has a lot of potential for success.

[kermit]

I really like that scale of service for the Silver Line -- provided off peak frequencies can actually be every 15 minutes (that is a pretty high bar). The CSX runs through quite a few low density SFH neighborhoods area areas where new development is unlikely (flood plains), so I don't think wider stop spacing is a problem. The extension to Monroe is also a nice bonus. In addition, once you get CSX to agree to share its tracks to Monroe it should be a trivial exercise to extend the DMU's to Mt. Holly (with another streetcar interchange at French st) and on to Gastonia on the P&N from there. (even an ocasional train to Lincolnton in a pie-in-the sky world)

That said, I do think that the Charlotte CSX sub carries significantly more freight than any of the lines in Raleigh. The rebuilt CSX intermodal yard in Pincoa combined with a lack of sidings and all single track bridges between Monroe and Charlotte mean that 15 minute DMU service would create -lots- of freight disruption. CSX would certainly require big money for new track, and there is a point where you may as well build a separate (electrified) line. 

Despite my focus on problems I really would like to see the DMU model work. Given the number of active rail lines that remain around Charlotte this strategy could be a game changer.

Edited August 3, 2015 by kermit