Jump to content

Charlotte Center City Streetcar Network


Sabaidee

Recommended Posts


From watching people park yesterday on Elizabeth Avenue: either CATS and CDOT need to remove all on-street parking (preferably), or paint a bright red line with the words "VEHICLE MUST NOT CROSS RED LINE" up and down Elizabeth.  No one knows what the white line means (and honestly, it's difficult to see on concrete on a bright sunny day). 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From watching people park yesterday on Elizabeth Avenue: either CATS and CDOT need to remove all on-street parking (preferably), or paint a bright red line with the words "VEHICLE MUST NOT CROSS RED LINE" up and down Elizabeth.  No one knows what the white line means (and honestly, it's difficult to see on concrete on a bright sunny day). 

The number of times I see the streetcar stopped is ridiculous. It's ridiculous for two reasons: 

1) There are signs all along Elizabeth warning people not park over the white line 

2) The streetcar in most cases has more than enough room to pass the vehicle, one time it was becuase the front left wheel was about half an inch over the line. 

I don't think parking should be removed from Elizabeth Ave; but I do agree that the white line can be too hard to see in bright light, and should be replaced with clearer red lines with the words "VEHICLE MUST NOT CROSS RED LINE". I think it's a great suggestion MC! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is interesting the selection for the West line to the airport going down Cedar St. Cedar St. really has little development on it, and I don't understand the rationale behind choosing it, unless the only motivation is that the same trackage be used as the Gold line so as to get under the existing NCRR. As far as logical alternatives, I see two main ones.

Either the airport line would come into uptown on Morehead under the NCRR, then turn by Bank of America stadium where there used to be the trackage that went to the Charlotte Observer, heading north on Church street until Trade.

The other viable alternative is after going under 77 on Morehead, cross-over to the old P&N, across Cedar under the NCRR, and then either heading up graham or preferably down Graham one block and turning to Mint St, until meeting Trade.

Cedar is an interesting choice for the airport spur, given that it's a residential street. I also wonder about how on earth the streetcar would navigate Cedar and Morehead (or Graham) on football game days, when all turn into parking lots for hours before & after the game.

I don't think there's any way for the streetcar to run under the tracks off the old P&N line; currently, that's a pedestrian tunnel and a lot of people would be upset to lose their access to uptown. I'm also not sure that underpass is large enough to accommodate the streetcar. Google maps don't do it justice; it's extremely narrow. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cedar is an interesting choice for the airport spur, given that it's a residential street. I also wonder about how on earth the streetcar would navigate Cedar and Morehead (or Graham) on football game days, when all turn into parking lots for hours before & after the game.

I don't think there's any way for the streetcar to run under the tracks off the old P&N line; currently, that's a pedestrian tunnel and a lot of people would be upset to lose their access to uptown. I'm also not sure that underpass is large enough to accommodate the streetcar. Google maps don't do it justice; it's extremely narrow. 

That's why I think it could be easier for the airport spur to go down Mint instead, but I don't know. I guess CATS would have thought/ will think of that. =-/

Edited by Piedmont767
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mint is clearly a better option because it allows for more distribution within the uptown density.  It would serve all the growth around Bearden Park, the stadiums themselves, the northern part of Wilmore/South End, and the significant redevelopment of Observer land.   It is wider than Cedar, would not have the same noise issues as the lowrise residential on Cedar.

They can work around the tracks for NFL game days, even if it is an additional consideration.  

https://www.google.com/maps/@35.2335051,-80.8679007,1290m/data=!3m1!1e3

Another option I think they should consider is actually forge a new path in western Wesley Heights.   Wesley Village Road will be connected to Tuckaseegee eventually.   They could coordinate to build that connection and from Freedom to Morehead and help spur new development in that warehouse district area.    That would be more development-minded to support the FreeMoreWest plans.  It will be far easier to build the streetcar tracks into a brand new road and than existing.

bpweb.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

^ Fantastic idea!

At the other end of town, they only have two streetcars but they still manage to get them bunched up.

I rode the Streetcar on Friday evening (6 riders on the trip from CTC to Earls) and the operator was great. Lots of announcements, friendly and helpful. He made a big difference in ride quality.

streetcar bunch.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mint is clearly a better option because it allows for more distribution within the uptown density.  It would serve all the growth around Bearden Park, the stadiums themselves, the northern part of Wilmore/South End, and the significant redevelopment of Observer land.   It is wider than Cedar, would not have the same noise issues as the lowrise residential on Cedar.

 

I agree with this about Mint St.....however, I think it depends on what the long range plan is. Ideally, I would want a streetcar network that people would walk to switch lines. Which I think would need to be in the 2-3 uptown block range. If this is the case, then eventually, I would be in favor of lines on both Graham and on Church (and not Mint) to provide the most N/S coverage of 3rd Ward.

And while this is utterly realistic now, to envision in a piecemeal fashion is stupid. You have to have an overall vision of what build out will look like, so that you can find the appropriate means to get there. Are these two lines viable now...no. In 50 years...yes. So don't bother with splitting the difference and going down Mint now.

Edited by tusculan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Graham and Church are both key vehicle thoroughfares with very tight rights of way.  It is not a good match for the streetcar.  

Church is one way, and is likely to always be because it is paired with College to keep cars off Tryon.     

Mint is wider than Graham but serves fewer cars and has a more direct route to Morehead and also has very wide pedestrian amenities and right of way, but serves a low number of cars.    

 

Regardless, I actually would prefer a light rail to the airport part of a larger east-west route.   But if it is going to be a streetcar, the ideal would be to route it close to the higher density developments, so Mint or Graham over Cedar, or in an area in need of a development trigger, like the Wesley Village Road route.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Graham and Church are both key vehicle thoroughfares with very tight rights of way.  It is not a good match for the streetcar.  

Church is one way, and is likely to always be because it is paired with College to keep cars off Tryon.     

Mint is wider than Graham but serves fewer cars and has a more direct route to Morehead and also has very wide pedestrian amenities and right of way, but serves a low number of cars.    

 

Regardless, I actually would prefer a light rail to the airport part of a larger east-west route.   But if it is going to be a streetcar, the ideal would be to route it close to the higher density developments, so Mint or Graham over Cedar, or in an area in need of a development trigger, like the Wesley Village Road route.  

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. So I propose we parallel the tracks from Gateway Station along Wilkinson, have a station where the current control tower is at the airport and then continue with new tracks to Belmont and Gastonia. Of course, this would cost a lot more than a streetcar line: so I don't think it would be feasible. 

If it's a streetcar, I think it should go east along Trade from Gateway and turn right down Mint with RoW near BoA stadium, so that on game days they'd be less people on the tracks allowing streetcars to pass. But I also think the streetcar should have RoW near the airport to speed up journeys to provide a reliable way to get to the airport. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/13/2015, 12:40:03, tusculan said:

http://tinyurl.com/ocqechg

Upon reviewing my comment, I altered things a bit to see that there are a few more alternatives (8 in total) for the airport line that heads south from CityLynx and continues north of Morehead St. The link above is a map to the various options. 

I think I have perhaps a better grasp...that the alternative proposed supports J&W, but really its strong suit is sharing the Gateway stop. While I can see how this would seem to be a big factor, as here is a proposed major interchange of different transit types, that doesn't seem reasonable with the idea of this being an airport line. If people are riding from the airport, then they aren't going to want to just transfer out by the side of the street with their bags. I think to have this intermodal hub at Gateway requires a LRT or train to the airport. Thus, I don't think this warrants the trip down Cedar St. so as to preserve the same Gateway stop.

My favorite option is using the former P&N crossing under the NCRR to go up Graham street. It provides the fewest number of stops, but ones that would be popular and encourage usage - one stop at the South side of Gateway, between BB&T and Bank of America Stadium; and a second stop at the crossing of Cedar St.

Excellent analysis.  I just care about one thing:  since the City is perpetually scared about losing the Panthers (Jerry Richardson has willed the team to be sold when he passes), build the Airport Line as a package to entice the Panthers to extend their lease even further, just like they did in the last round of improvements to BofA Stadium.  What NFL team doesn't want a better game-day experience including a better commute?  

Since the future Atlanta stadium will have its own MARTA stop, Charlotte has to remind the team that they need to keep up with the Joneses. :)  

The general public can also get behind an Airport Line if it means keeping the Panthers...

Edited by ChessieCat
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looking at the maps for Phase 2, further up the thread. It's should on the east portion, Sunnyside and Hawthorne & 8th Street are the stations. I thought Independence Park was the first stop after Hawthorne & 5th. I'm assuming 8th Street will be the next station. But when was Independence Park dropped as a station?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
5 hours ago, Piedmont767 said:

Reading back to the very first page of this thread, it mentions that the route wouldn't go straight to Central along Hawthorne, becuase it would have to cross CSX tracks, so why does Phase 3 include the part where it goes over the CSX tracks? 

It's going to run along Hawthorne underneath the existing railroad bridge. Clement Street would then be extended to Hawthorne so that it can connect back around to Central. It's not the 'crossing' in the literal sense... just the implied "at grade" crossing that would have to be made where the CSX tracks cross Central. It's also worth noting that there is no technical reason the streetcar can't cross at Central - it would have to stop when the freight trains come just like any other car. CSX just doesn't want to play ball. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Spartan said:

It's going to run along Hawthorne underneath the existing railroad bridge. Clement Street would then be extended to Hawthorne so that it can connect back around to Central. It's not the 'crossing' in the literal sense... just the implied "at grade" crossing that would have to be made where the CSX tracks cross Central. It's also worth noting that there is no technical reason the streetcar can't cross at Central - it would have to stop when the freight trains come just like any other car. CSX just doesn't want to play ball. 

Has there ever been any serious discussions of grade separating the CSX line and Central? With the amount of cars that commute daily on the road, as well as the frequency of train crossings, it seems like a project that should have been done years ago. It could have shaved a half of mile off the Gold Line, and possibly reduced costs for phase 3, and I'm sure CSX wouldn't have mind.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To go over, CSX would want enough clearance for intermodal freight, making for really long approaches to a tall bridge. To go under, the approaches would be shorter, but the construction more expensive. And talk about visual impact either way.  But with all the new apartments despite an active freight line, maybe location is strong enough to overcome bridge approaches. 

I always thought a pedestrian bridge over CSX between Sunnyside and Commonwealth via Hatcher's mill village would be much easier.  Plus, such bridge would help the Gold Line overcome ending short of Plaza.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The street itself should be inclined to go over the tracks.  There is a hill up toward Clement and Pecan, so you just level that off, build a short bridge across the tracks and an incline down to Hawthorne.

Of course the time to put that in the works would be before it is getting redeveloped.  It would actually benefit the developers greatly to have a higher street level as they can then build a podium-style project but have the parking seem like underground parking from Central.   it would also help because subsequent projects build up more of a sound wall to block the train noise some.

It is odd to me that this was not ever brought up and simply made part of the streetcar project or otherwise.  It is too much a major road to be blocked by a slow moving train, and the benefits to building in the streetcar tracks on the new roadbed would be very good.    

We missed the opportunity of it being factored into the design of 1305 Central, though.

 

It still makes me mad that the streetcar project had to pay for rebuilding the Hawthorne bridge over Independence.  It should have been shared with the toll lane project that benefitted from the removal of the support pillar, but also it seems like some consultant failed when they determined that the bridge would not need to be replaced during feasibility studies.  The loads and lifespan of bridges are pretty well documented, so I would guess the bridge WAS sufficient and other factors led to that needing to be done.    

BUT if the economics for the streetcar can help pay for a long bridge span, then it can certainly easily pay for the cost of a raised road and short bridge span on Central.  Especially with the savings of some length of track and land purchases to go the way of "Banhardt" and Clement.  That's especially true with the city paying since they'd need to build the bridge some day anyway.   Phase III, should probably be to Briar Creek and include multiple improvements to Central beyond this bridge. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm sure a bridge over CSX was at least discussed at some point between CATS and CSX, but my guess is that it would have been dismissed quickly due to the incredible expenses associated with it. I think that the development creeping up on either side of it will make a future grade separation more challenging too.

We don't have many good comparisons in Charlotte, but the future grade separation of Sugar Creek Rd over the tracks as part of the BLE is probably the best comparison. The distance needed to raise the road up, build the bridge, and go back down is right around 2000ft. That's roughly the same distance as Central Ave between Hawthorne and Pecan. There are fewer tracks on Central, so the bridge span itself won't need to be as wide, and dubone is right that the tracks are in a natural low spot which might also reduce the distance... but even with that, you'd still probably need a good1500ft or so (that's an educated guess). That's 1500ft of retaining wall, bridge abutments and the span itself. It would destroy the built environment along that part of Central (which is gradually improving), and probably (definitely) mess up the view of uptown from the business district itself.

I think going under would be much less of an impact to the community, even if it would be more expensive. Either way, a lot of businesses would need to be bought out since they would loose driveway access to Central.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would love to see the grade lowered so that the trains go under the road, but I don't see CSX ever allowing that. It would shut that line down for a long time.

 

Traffic is pretty miserable on Central through the business district though, even without the train. It's an absolute nightmare after a train comes through. It's only going to get worse when 1000+ apartment units hit the market on Central Ave.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

^ They were planning to shut down the rail line for 12 months to build the ADM grade separation.

I do agree that not relocating Central avenue over the CSX is already a lost opportunity. However keep in mind that CSX has just closed the Northern portion of this line (the old Clinchfield RR) -- so CSX no longer runs north of Johnson City TN. This means that there is no more coal traffic through NC and CSX no longer has the ability to move intermodal trains north from Charlotte. It is not unlikely that traffic on the CSX will fall and this reduction makes it possible (but not likely) that CSX could be convinced to relocate their intermodal terminal to the Matthews or Monroe area (they need a bigger intermodal terminal) and close the line from the grade separation to 485.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.