Charlotte-Douglas Airport (CLT) Expansion

[Miesian Corners]

Had a brief conversation with Vasu Raja at AA this week, where I asked him why new domestic service had been added to several of the airline's hubs, but not CLT--especially since 7 gates will be available in Q4 of this year or Q1 of 2020. He said AA's growth in CLT will be very different than that at DFW (new service at DFW was about adding lots of short-haul markets the airline had not flown to before).  In CLT the growth will be driven by up-gauging from small jets to big ones, adding more frequencies in Midwest markets, and "growing like hell in Florida". 

[Miesian Corners]

21 hours ago, uptownliving said:

Well we have a final design on the airport entrance at Wilkinson and Josh Birmingham Parkway. Going with a big crown motif that will glow blue at night. In addition they will be putting in large CLT markers on Wilkinson and some other spots close to the airport. And also some really nice landscaping to go along with all the new signage. Cost is roughly $8M and should be complete next summer.

Additional images...

The power lines in the image with the "CLT" are a nice touch. I'm glad they're at least being honest.

[urbanlover568]

Can't wait for light-rail to go here. Very beautiful and efficient airport! 

[JacksonH]

6 hours ago, mpretori said:

Can't wait for light-rail to go here. Very beautiful and efficient airport! 

I WISH it were going to the airport.  As someone who travels to cities with trains from the airport, which I almost always use, I think it may be a mistake for it not to go directly to the airport.  The plans are for the "airport" stop to be on Wilkinson Blvd., rather than at the airport, and then a "conveyance" to take passengers from there to the airport.  I don't know exactly what they mean by conveyance.  Whatever it is, I hope it's a really easy transition from the Silver Line to that conveyance and on to the airport.  Traveling is a big hassle, and people don't want to have to keep switching from one mode of transportation to another, while dragging their luggage along.  You want to be able to get to and from the airport as easily and directly possible.

[Desert Power]

22 minutes ago, JacksonH said:

I WISH it were going to the airport.  As someone who travels to cities with trains from the airport, which I almost always use, I think it may be a mistake for it not to go directly to the airport.  The plans are for the "airport" stop to be on Wilkinson Blvd., rather than at the airport, and then a "conveyance" to take passengers from there to the airport.  I don't know exactly what they mean by conveyance.  Whatever it is, I hope it's a really easy transition from the Silver Line to that conveyance and on to the airport.  Traveling is a big hassle, and people don't want to have to keep switching from one mode of transportation to another, while dragging their luggage along.  You want to be able to get to and from the airport as easily and directly possible.

I think, at best it would be like SFO, but I wonder if buses wouldn't just be enough.  The airport buses seem to work well circulating people for parking, not sure this would ever have enough traffic to justify the expenditure of a train people mover.

[urbanlover568]

46 minutes ago, JacksonH said:

I WISH it were going to the airport.  As someone who travels to cities with trains from the airport, which I almost always use, I think it may be a mistake for it not to go directly to the airport.  The plans are for the "airport" stop to be on Wilkinson Blvd., rather than at the airport, and then a "conveyance" to take passengers from there to the airport.  I don't know exactly what they mean by conveyance.  Whatever it is, I hope it's a really easy transition from the Silver Line to that conveyance and on to the airport.  Traveling is a big hassle, and people don't want to have to keep switching from one mode of transportation to another, while dragging their luggage along.  You want to be able to get to and from the airport as easily and directly possible.

Yea, I think the airport should take priority over South Park and such. I think that would be a good selling point to international and of state companies and people. 

[Matthew.Brendan]

I guess I haven't been paying too close attention to the Silver line. Had no idea it was stopping short of the airport. That's really special.

[CLT2014]

27 minutes ago, Matthew.Brendan said:

I guess I haven't been paying too close attention to the Silver line. Had no idea it was stopping short of the airport. That's really special.

It would add an extra 2 miles to route the train down into the narrow terminal drop off area with sharp 90 degree turns that would have to be approached pretty slowly (not even sure if it is possible to turn that tightly). The entire terminal drop off area is only .2 miles wide with a sharp 90 degree turn required at either end due to the airport configuration and the runways. You'd likely have to elevate the entire route above the roadways at incredible expense. Other airports with a "loop" drop off format with 90 degree turns like LAX have also struggled to figure out how to route a train directly to the terminal. 

The other option would be not running the light rail to Belmont / Gaston County and just having the line terminate at the airport which would prevent needing a loop (Denver, Portland, Atlanta, et. have the line end at the airport to avoid a loop). You could also bury the line through the terminal area but that would likely burn through the "big bang" money in a hot minute. 

Edited September 23, 2019 by CLT2014

[TCLT]

I guess I haven't been paying too close attention to the Silver line. Had no idea it was stopping short of the airport. That's really special.

Not so much stopping short, but bypassing the terminal. The airport station will be on Wilkinson Blvd where passengers would connect to the planned airport people mover to shuttle them to the terminal. Kinda similar to the way the light rail works at PHX. Silver line continues past the airport to Belmont. I think it’s a wasted opportunity. A direct connection to the terminal is so much more desirable imo. I’ve heard that the cost/feasibility of crossing back and forth over the freight tracks is part of the reason for this indirect routing but I don’t know how legitimate that concern is. Also not sure how much the airport’s desire to protect parking revenue plays into it.

[CLT2014]

9 minutes ago, TCLT said:

Not so much stopping short, but bypassing the terminal. The airport station will be on Wilkinson Blvd where passengers would connect to the planned airport people mover to shuttle them to the terminal. Kinda similar to the way the light rail works at PHX. Silver line continues past the airport to Belmont. I think it’s a wasted opportunity. A direct connection to the terminal is so much more desirable imo. I’ve heard that the cost/feasibility of crossing back and forth over the freight tracks is part of the reason for this indirect routing but I don’t know how legitimate that concern is. Also not sure how much the airport’s desire to protect parking revenue plays into it.

 

You would also have to elevate the route or bury it as you approach the terminal. You might be able to build a station where the current Daily North parking lot is located and then passengers could take a shuttle from there to the terminal. But if you have to transfer anyhow, might as well leave the station on Wilkinson. 

Other than burying the station right up against the terminal, I don't think above ground is an option with the new elevated roadway being constructed and rental car deck / counters taking up all the terminal frontage within walking distance of check in / security. 

Edited September 23, 2019 by CLT2014

[DMann]

I always conceived the line coming to the airport elevated between the parking garages, a line in and a line out sort of V shaped, coming in, dropping off, heading to Belmont, and the reverse.  Also, the Belmont leg might be limited to 6 am - 10 am, 4 pm - 7pm with limited service on the off hours.

[JacksonH]

3 hours ago, CLT2014 said:

The other option would be not running the light rail to Belmont / Gaston County and just having the line terminate at the airport which would prevent needing a loop (Denver, Portland, Atlanta, et. have the line end at the airport to avoid a loop). You could also bury the line through the terminal area but that would likely burn through the "big bang" money in a hot minute. 

In the case of Denver, there's no reason to continue the line beyond the airport anyway because where would it go, cornfields?  I did really appreciate the fact that the train in Denver reaches all the way to the airport.  Had it not, I might have made different travel arrangements.  I haven't been to Atlanta since 2001, but when I was there I did use the train to get from the airport to downtown.  It was pretty easy.  Same thing on a recent trip to Boston.  And always when I go to DC and most major European airports.

I recognize there is no easy answer for Charlotte.  Perhaps they could put the idea of a train to the airport on the back burner for the future, beyond the 2030 plan.  Maybe eventually create a spur off of the line to Belmont, so there would be express trains passing the airport (and maybe eventually going all the way to Gastonia), and other trains going directly to it.  I just worry these efforts to save money may end up resulting in a waste of money if the design results in fewer riders.  Many would-be airport travelers would be going to and from Uptown, which is only eight miles from the airport.  Some travelers, for example, traveling from Bank of America, or Lowe's in South End, who are on a tight schedule, see that they have to get on the Blue Line, switch over to the Silver Line, then switch again to that so-far mysterious "conveyance" to the airport.  How long is all that going to take versus a 15 minute ride in a car?

By the way, I'm not one of those people who thinks the Silver Line needs to carve its path through the intersection of Trade and Tryon; I'm just saying that this plan for the airport station adds yet another changeover for people coming from the Center City.

Edited September 23, 2019 by JacksonH

[tozmervo]

An important challenge for running transit to CLT is that the airport is already so close. Ride sharing is so cheap that it will be extremely difficult to compete on a cost basis. DEN is a much further drive, so $2 train fare vs a $40 uber ride is suddenly much more attractive, despite the inherent hassle of luggage on public transit. 

I'm certainly not saying that CLT shouldn't factor into prominent transit access, but I really don't think it should be the tail wagging the dog. Providing reliable access to local, daily riders is a far higher priority IMO. 

[TCLT]

2 hours ago, JacksonH said:

How long is all that going to take versus a 15 minute ride in a car?

7 minutes ago, tozmervo said:

An important challenge for running transit to CLT is that the airport is already so close.

The more I think about it the more I agree with this unfortunately. On the one hand, running the train directly to the terminal might be the only way to truly make the light rail a competitive option. But on the other hand it still would really only be competitive  for people who are starting or ending their journey along the silver line (and maybe at close in areas on the blue line if frequencies are increased). Uber/Lyft is about a $15/15 minute ride almost anywhere in center city, so is it really worth dealing with the infrequent schedule and one or more transfers? And any business travelers coming into Charlotte would be able to expense rental cars/parking/taxi rides anyway so you've just lost a good portion of the travelers for whom a transit connection to center city would make sense. So as much as I think running the train directly to the terminal is the right way to do it, maybe the expense it would take just isn't worth it. Plus putting the station at Wilkinson makes the development of an airport gateway district more likely and gives the airport more incentive to develop the people mover to connect the parking decks, rental car center, future hotel, and light rail to the terminal and eliminate most of the need for the airport shuttle buses.

10 minutes ago, tozmervo said:

Providing reliable access to local, daily riders is a far higher priority

I think this is the right conclusion.

 

I wonder what the ridership predictions are for this line, both in total and airport o/d passengers.

[KJHburg]

The airport is a HUGE employment center over 10,000 people with the airlines, retail shops, restaurants, and other workers. 

[videtur quam contuor]

I live near Park Road Center and it is a 15-17$ Lyft/Uber to CLT off-peak. Door to door in 18 minutes.

32 minutes ago, tozmervo said:

An important challenge for running transit to CLT is that the airport is already so close. Ride sharing is so cheap that it will be extremely difficult to compete on a cost basis. DEN is a much further drive, so $2 train fare vs a $40 uber ride is suddenly much more attractive, despite the inherent hassle of luggage on public transit. 

I'm certainly not saying that CLT shouldn't factor into prominent transit access, but I really don't think it should be the tail wagging the dog. Providing reliable access to local, daily riders is a far higher priority IMO. 

 

[kermit]

42 minutes ago, tozmervo said:

An important challenge for running transit to CLT is that the airport is already so close. Ride sharing is so cheap that it will be extremely difficult to compete on a cost basis. DEN is a much further drive, so $2 train fare vs a $40 uber ride is suddenly much more attractive, despite the inherent hassle of luggage on public transit. 

I'm certainly not saying that CLT shouldn't factor into prominent transit access, but I really don't think it should be the tail wagging the dog. Providing reliable access to local, daily riders is a far higher priority IMO. 

I agree with all of this and I have seen tons of data which shows that airports are not great traffic generators for transit in cities that have good connections.

Having said that, a good airport-transit connection is REALLY important for the type of growth that Charlotte is trying to attract. If you look at the last few big scores Atlanta has made (Mercedes comes to mind) most of them have touted airport transit access as a big part of their decision. While this connection is more critical in Atlanta due to their traffic, I would remind all of us that the airport transit connection is a headline item that knowledge firms look at. They don't really give a crap about how long it takes, and they may not even use it, but they really want to know that connection is there.

 

 

[xapostrophe]

3 minutes ago, kermit said:

I agree with all of this and I have seen tons of data which shows that airports are not great traffic generators for transit in cities that have good connections.

Having said that, a good airport-transit connection is REALLY important for the type of growth that Charlotte is trying to attract. If you look at the last few big scores Atlanta has made (Mercedes comes to mind) most of them have touted airport transit access as a big part of their decision. While this connection is more critical in Atlanta due to their traffic, I would remind all of us that the airport transit connection is a headline item that knowledge firms look at. They don't really give a crap about how long it takes, and they may not even use it, but they really want to know that connection is there.

 

 

When the old control tower comes down, why not have a station there.  Then it's just a short walk to the terminal.

[queensguy06]

2 hours ago, tozmervo said:

An important challenge for running transit to CLT is that the airport is already so close. Ride sharing is so cheap that it will be extremely difficult to compete on a cost basis. DEN is a much further drive, so $2 train fare vs a $40 uber ride is suddenly much more attractive, despite the inherent hassle of luggage on public transit. 

I'm certainly not saying that CLT shouldn't factor into prominent transit access, but I really don't think it should be the tail wagging the dog. Providing reliable access to local, daily riders is a far higher priority IMO. 

It's a $9 train ride....but your points are spot on lol.   DIA is out in the middle of nowhere - the A line that services the airport is 23 miles long.  Couple that with the terrible traffic on I-70, which is undergoing a 4 year, $10 billion upgrade.  35 min train ride vs. an hour or longer in an expensive cab/lyft and it's a no brainer.

Other reasons include the number of residents in a 3 mile radius of downtown Denver (I think there is something like 3 or 4 times as many as Charlotte), and the number of origination/final destination travelers.  Charlotte has a TON of connecting passengers.  Back in 2016, the number of O&D flights from Charlotte was 6 million; Denver was 18.5 million.   Something like 3/4 of all traffic through CLT doesn't leave the airport, whereas over half of all passengers in and out of Denver are origination or final destination. 

One final thing to note is that light rail is NOT conducive for airport traffic.  The A line in Denver uses heavy rail commuter trains that provide overhead luggage racks and places to stack luggage that can't fit on the overhead racks.  Can you imagine trying to fit a train full of people with luggage mixed with daily commuters on the current blue line in Charlotte?  It just isn't feasible and would deter even more riders from using the light rail.

[U_R_]

On 9/22/2019 at 12:44 PM, Miesian Corners said:

The power lines in the image with the "CLT" are a nice touch. I'm glad they're at least being honest.

Besides the power line, the entire sculpture thingy looks exceptional.  Maybe one day I'll be able to see it. 

Edited September 23, 2019 by Ric0_0

[urbanlover568]

12 hours ago, Matthew.Brendan said:

I guess I haven't been paying too close attention to the Silver line. Had no idea it was stopping short of the airport. That's really special.

Isn't that were the people mover will go? 

[dubone]

The thinking on the Wilkinson site for the station is that is where the Airport North development will be focused, to allow for  hotels, meeting space, offices, etc. to be built there, adjacent to the airport and be transit supporting.   This development will also give the route points to help it get funded, even though of course it will be mainly built due to the airport.  But those developments will help spur visitors staying at the airport without a car to hop on the rail to down town for restaurant and other meeting options. 

 

My guess and hope would be considering all options for moving around on the airport grounds, as they need to also consider their parking customers  in addition to the rest.   I like the very long fast-moving travelator / moving sidewalk systems they have in some airports to move long distance, without the need to wait for a train or shuttle.  But if they do a people mover, I suspect they will eventually shift to a looping route to drop at the new A and Main or various stops closer to the individual terminal entrances.  The central spine will be hard to reserve for this purpose. 

But for now, the master plan still has the people mover down the central spine, as it was last planned in the 2010 master plan.  I'm guessing they will refresh that master plan and will start to review how to include the A Extension entrance and other new considerations. 

[t_money]

So can someone help me understand 'people mover'?  Like a moving walkway, like flat escalator? Or like a tram?

Its a long way from Wilkinson to the airport terminal?

 

[kermit]

6 minutes ago, t_money said:

So can someone help me understand 'people mover'?  Like a moving walkway, like flat escalator? Or like a tram?

Its a long way from Wilkinson to the airport terminal?

 

Think subway. CLT does need a better way to connect remote lots and (before long) to other terminals.

While it seems ridiculous to spend 100s of millions on a stand alone, small area, transit system, it makes political sense. The airport has plenty of money for this and it would be a decent investment. Using airport cash for CATS transit would raise a bunch of eyebrows among the folks who attempted to steal the airport a few years ago. At least the people mover will allow CATS to run a speedier route to Belmont.

 

 

 

Edited September 25, 2019 by kermit

[Desert Power]

8 hours ago, dubone said:

The thinking on the Wilkinson site for the station is that is where the Airport North development will be focused, to allow for  hotels, meeting space, offices, etc. to be built there, adjacent to the airport and be transit supporting.   This development will also give the route points to help it get funded, even though of course it will be mainly built due to the airport.  But those developments will help spur visitors staying at the airport without a car to hop on the rail to down town for restaurant and other meeting options. 

IIRC, isn't the plan to replace the Long Term Lots with closer in decks?  That would allow more to be built south of Wilkinson too.  If all goes right, this could be a pretty hot area outside the central core.  I think that is worth more than kneecapping the Belmont/Gastonia possibility by ending the line at the airport.

56 minutes ago, kermit said:

Think subway. CLT does need a better way to connect remote lots and (before long) to other terminals.

While it seems ridiculous to spend 100s of millions on a stand alone, small area, transit system, it makes political sense. The airport has plenty of money for this and it would be a decent investment. Using airport cash for CATS transit would raise a bunch of eyebrows among the folks who attempted to steal the airport a few years ago. At least the people mover will allow CATS to run a speedier route to Belmont.

 

 

 

It just strikes me how similar in layout SFO and CLT are.  Not that the line to SFO doesn't present its own issues, but  a people mover will eventually make sense at CLT regardless as it builds out.