CATS Long Term Transit Plan - Silver, Red Lines

[ajfunder]

What about a stop right here. Isn't A north supposed to expand out this way. Make this a new airport transit center with it's own TSA entrance and joint bag check.

[tozmervo]

27 minutes ago, Desert Power said:

Yes, this is the latest I have seen.  Given the airport layout, I'm not sure they would need anything but a stop at the main terminal entrance.  Our terminals aren't split into separate buildings like a SFO for instance. 

It's been a long time since I saw the master plan, but basically it was a giant donut that follows the main roadways to/from the terminal to Wilkinson. Along the way, it had stations located at the major parking areas in addition to the terminal itself. Once A is completely built out, I would expect a "remote" terminal station to access that end. 

[Guest]

4 minutes ago, tozmervo said:

It's been a long time since I saw the master plan, but basically it was a giant donut that follows the main roadways to/from the terminal to Wilkinson. Along the way, it had stations located at the major parking areas in addition to the terminal itself. Once A is completely built out, I would expect a "remote" terminal station to access that end. 

The latest plans I've seen have a check in at A North. I'll see if I can dig them up they are somewhere in the Airport thread.

[tozmervo]

34 minutes ago, ricky_davis_fan_21 said:

The latest plans I've seen have a check in at A North. I'll see if I can dig them up they are somewhere in the Airport thread.

The  commercial development master plan shows something quite different from the original donut. 

 

[Hushpuppy321]

I've been studying other cities transit maps and think that once the Silver Line is built (hopefully in my lifetime) that it'd be prudent not only to extend the blueline into Ballantyne but also to construct Spur lines into other parts of the city like a spur off the blue line into SW CLT and/or the Redline could spur off the northern section of the blue line into Northend.  Sort of sharing an existing ROW with the Blueline/Silverline Main Trunks at some point.

I think these options would limit costs of purchasing ROW and make it more feasible to build.

[nmundo]

CATS has posted more detailed information on the Red and Airport lines along with plans on how to get them through uptown.

http://charlottenc.gov/cats/transit-planning/center-city/Pages/default.aspx

Out of the 4 alternatives 2 include tunnels and the other 2 include turning either Trade or MLK into transit priority streets, 3 of them connect to Gateway directly. None go down Stonewall.

[nicholas]

48 minutes ago, nmundo said:

CATS has posted more detailed information on the Red and Airport lines along with plans on how to get them through uptown.

http://charlottenc.gov/cats/transit-planning/center-city/Pages/default.aspx

Out of the 4 alternatives 2 include tunnels and the other 2 include turning either Trade or MLK into transit priority streets, 3 of them connect to Gateway directly. None go down Stonewall.

Trade will already have the Gold Line, so I feel like it would get really crowded with the street car and light rail coupled with the traffic that uses the street already.  I was thinking that the LR should go on the south side of uptown, but after looking at the CATS' proposal you linked, I think the northern route that follows 277 and goes past Gateway would probably be best, as it would go past Gateway and also would hopefully stimulate development on the north and west sides of uptown.

[EllAyyDub]

Everyone should absolutely take this survey, especially if you can not make any of the community input meetings.

https://lynxsystemupdate.metroquest.com/

Vote on you preferred options, you can see how everyone else has voted after you take the survey.  Ex:

[tozmervo]

38 minutes ago, nicholas said:

Trade will already have the Gold Line, so I feel like it would get really crowded with the street car and light rail coupled with the traffic that uses the street already.  I was thinking that the LR should go on the south side of uptown, but after looking at the CATS' proposal you linked, I think the northern route that follows 277 and goes past Gateway would probably be best, as it would go past Gateway and also would hopefully stimulate development on the north and west sides of uptown.

The notes about the Gold Line connection include "Auto access would be reduced on Trade St. to create a transit-priority street," which makes this the most appealing option to me. Not only would we get a through-connection, but we would improve conditions for the gold line and busses passing east-west through Uptown.

The only one I'm really struggling with is the north connection. While I think there's certainly redevelopment potential in that area, I don't see much benefit unless Brookshire Freeway was also completely undone into a boulevard. 

[nicholas]

18 minutes ago, tozmervo said:

The notes about the Gold Line connection include "Auto access would be reduced on Trade St. to create a transit-priority street," which makes this the most appealing option to me. Not only would we get a through-connection, but we would improve conditions for the gold line and busses passing east-west through Uptown.

The only one I'm really struggling with is the north connection. While I think there's certainly redevelopment potential in that area, I don't see much benefit unless Brookshire Freeway was also completely undone into a boulevard. 

I think it would be better to try to run the Silver line along the tracks north of 277 to allow development to grow around it.  I think 277 would act a little bit like a wall, so building the light rail too close to that would likely reduce its effectiveness.

[Desert Power]

39 minutes ago, EllAyyDub said:

Everyone should absolutely take this survey, especially if you can not make any of the community input meetings.

https://lynxsystemupdate.metroquest.com/

Vote on you preferred options, you can see how everyone else has voted after you take the survey.  Ex:

Love the idea of a Blue Line connection through town running on the same tracks to improve north/south headways

[kermit]

I am underwhelmed by both the West corridor options presented: http://charlottenc.gov/cats/transit-planning/west-corridor/Pages/default.aspx

The Allegheny / Wesley Heights option appears to use the old P&N infrastructure between Graham and Tuckaseege. Unfortunately the lack of a Wesley Heights stop seems foolish.

The Wilkinson alternative shares a good bit of NS row and has some attractive stops at Summit and W Morehead. The sheet also notes that the NS tracks will severely limit access to the line from the South.

For both proposals:

• The very long run between the last Mecklenburg stop (Sam Wilson) and Belmont suggests that Gaston plans to pay a big $$$ to get rail across the river
• Airport stops on both proposed routes are North of Wilkinson (e.g. nowhere near airport property). I guess a people mover is part of the plan.
• Both proposals ignore the river district and stick to the Wilkinson corridor

RE the airport and river district: I am very disappointed in these two options

Edited July 17, 2018 by kermit

[nmundo]

21 minutes ago, Desert Power said:

Love the idea of a Blue Line connection through town running on the same tracks to improve north/south headways

It would only decrease headways between 9th & 3rd which I doubt many people use while making it almost impossible to improve headways on the rest of the blue line or add spurs. Also  doesn't create any new transit connections uptown. Not worth it IMO.

4 minutes ago, kermit said:

I am underwhelmed by both the West corridor options presented: http://charlottenc.gov/cats/transit-planning/west-corridor/Pages/default.aspx

The Allegheny / Wesley Heights option appears to use the old P&N infrastructure between Graham and Tuckaseege. Unfortunately the lack of a Wesley Heights stop seems foolish.

The Wilkinson alternative shares a good bit of NS row and has some attractive stops at Summit and W Morehead. The sheet also notes that the NS tracks will severely limit access to the line from the South.

For both proposals:

• The very long run between the last Mecklenburg stop (Sam Wilson) and Belmont suggests that Gaston plans to pay a big $$$ to get rail across the river
• Airport stops on both proposed routes are North of Wilkinson (e.g. nowhere near airport property). I guess a people mover is part of the plan.
• Both proposals ignore the river district and stick to the Wilkinson corridor

RE the airport and river district: I am very disappointed in these two options

They do make mention of a spur to the river district so hope isn't lost there. It seems like there was some neighborhood opposition to taking the west blvd route. 

[kermit]

I seriously feel like CATS phoned-in their North corridor suggestions: http://charlottenc.gov/cats/transit-planning/red-line/Pages/default.aspx

The proposals are:

• The original Red Line (but they essentially write it off as impossible and slow -- 56 minutes)
• I-77 BRT (the fastest (and cheapest) of the four options at 40 minutes)
• LRT on US 21 (and Statesville ave). Expensive, slow (63 minutes) and bypasses the walkable and moderately dense downtowns. On the plus side, stops at Oaklawn and Atando would certainly create development around Camp North End.
• BRT on US 21: Ugh. Expensive, and BRT, but slightly better circulation in N Meck towns than the I-77 BRT.

The seriously feels like sandbagging to generate acceptance for Express Lane BRT. But its hard to see I-77 BRT motivating many votes for an expanded transit tax (or legislative approval for same).

Pressure from state pols might be the only thing that would move NS (e.g. "in return for access to the O-Line we will give you x,y and z"). If only we had statewide politicians who gave a crap about transit...

Here is the CBJ article on the alternatives: https://www.bizjournals.com/charlotte/news/2018/07/17/cats-moving-into-next-phase-of-west-north-corridor.html

Edited July 17, 2018 by kermit

[atlrvr]

On 7/13/2017 at 3:36 PM, atlrvr said:

Given there is a contract out to look at the long-range (2050?) transit plans...I thought I'd put the figurative pen to paper of what I'd love to see  (these plans don't include commuter rail sketched out).

This first regional map is all Light Rail lines to be built.  The idea was to provide multiple lines sharing tracks, with some marginal extensions to really increase access in the region.  Changes from the established plans. 

Blue Line (southern end extended to Ballantyne)

Silver Line (basically developed as currently envisioned)

Green Line (River District access via the Airport/Silver Line then connecting with Blue Line north extension via Gateway Extension alignment and Brookshire rebuilt, and finally servicing Univ Rearch Park)

Orange Line (Albemarle Rd corridor accessing Eastland Mall site, then downtown access via Silver Line, connecting to Blue line via a Carson Ave tunnel, then serving South Park via Tyvola Rd spur)

This second downtown map shows how the lines would interact in the Center City, with dashes representing tunneled sections.  I am proposing Brookshire to be rebuilt completely below grade with LRT included in that below-grade ROW, and a the street-grid re-established through there at grade level....given the consultant already acknowledge the need for a tunnel, this would accomplish multiple goals, and allow a lot of different line connectivity.  The other tunnel is a spur off of the Blue Line under Carson emerging along the existing rail ROW to allow a secondary entrance into Uptown.....BTW, I didn't draw the lines at the bottom of the map to the edges correctly, but you get the idea.

This map also has 4 streetcar lines.  The goal of the street cars are the "support" the planned LRT corridors by using parallel thoroughfares that already have density.  The order listed below would be priority.

Gold Line - (As designed though not extending to Eastland)

Purple Line - (Camp North End project to Kenilworth/Scott/Park Rd intersection via Graham and Stonewall...each terminus is a "one-way" loop)

Brown Line - (Monroe/7th St alignment from Sharon Amity then traversing downtown via McDowell and Stonwal, then existing downtown via Mint St, and then heading along West Blvd, possibly using W Tyvola/Tyvola until reaching the Old Coliseum/City Park project)

Pink Line - (Parkwood Ave to Seigle Ave, traversing Uptown via McDowell, Trade St, Graham, exiting Uptown along the planned Stewart Creek trolley line and then using Tuckaseegee to reach Freedom terminating near I-85 at the Meck County services center).

 

I don't know if this could all be achieved in the $7B price-tag, but the important thing to note is that there is actually pretty marginal new LRT track planned relative to the current 2030 plans (less than 25% additional to what is already planned)

The streetcar obviously is a bunch of new lines, but there aren't many challenges and some places using abandoned rail ROW (like at Camp North End)...I believe the only real challenge on the streetcars is the rail bridge over 7th St at Lupies, and MLK under the rail lines adjacent to Panther stadium which would require a new tunnel probably all the way under Cedar.

^^^ shamelessly quoting myself, but I hope the "North End" connection happens as it allows for the buildout I propose above, which allows maximum routing of different lines, with limited infrastructure beyond what is being contemplated.

[cjd5050]

3 hours ago, kermit said:

For both proposals:

• The very long run between the last Mecklenburg stop (Sam Wilson) and Belmont suggests that Gaston plans to pay a big $$$ to get rail across the river

I am very happy on this if true.  

[Nick2]

5 hours ago, nmundo said:

CATS has posted more detailed information on the Red and Airport lines along with plans on how to get them through uptown.

http://charlottenc.gov/cats/transit-planning/center-city/Pages/default.aspx

Out of the 4 alternatives 2 include tunnels and the other 2 include turning either Trade or MLK into transit priority streets, 3 of them connect to Gateway directly. None go down Stonewall.

Obviously they all have their benefits which is why they're included but I think the east west tunnel would be best because of its connectivity possibility with the redline and it passing directly through gateway. Unfortunately it wouldn't pass through the center of uptown but still being within 27u means that it can still spur higher density development in northern uptown.

The blue line connection is next best because of the significantly cheaper construction costs and it wouldn't have significant delays sharing the route with blue line and I like the positioning of the route heading west immediately off of trying passing the stadium.

Sharing with gold line would be a huge mistake.

[nicholas]

3 hours ago, kermit said:

I am underwhelmed by both the West corridor options presented: http://charlottenc.gov/cats/transit-planning/west-corridor/Pages/default.aspx

The Allegheny / Wesley Heights option appears to use the old P&N infrastructure between Graham and Tuckaseege. Unfortunately the lack of a Wesley Heights stop seems foolish.

The Wilkinson alternative shares a good bit of NS row and has some attractive stops at Summit and W Morehead. The sheet also notes that the NS tracks will severely limit access to the line from the South.

For both proposals:

• The very long run between the last Mecklenburg stop (Sam Wilson) and Belmont suggests that Gaston plans to pay a big $$$ to get rail across the river
• Airport stops on both proposed routes are North of Wilkinson (e.g. nowhere near airport property). I guess a people mover is part of the plan.
• Both proposals ignore the river district and stick to the Wilkinson corridor

RE the airport and river district: I am very disappointed in these two options

I agree.  I left a comment (under the optional comment box) saying the same thing.  Not sure what it's worth, or if anyone will even read it, but hopefully if we make enough noise, CATS will realize how ridiculous it would be to not connect the light rail directly to the airport.

[Dale]

One seat to downtown would be ideal. But if I had to choose, I'd prefer people mover to downtown line than downtown train that has to transfer prior to downtown, as in cluster**** NYC.

[dubone]

If they have to rebuild Wilkinson to get it, I'd far the Allegheny routing.  I think they should be planning a stop at McNinch Street with that district in 3rd Ward still wide open for development.  Wesley Heights proper is still walking distance to the Gesco / Tuck station they have placed in this concept, but obviously with much more redevelopment and densification option.   The historic district itself might get too much tear down pressure if it's in the dead center. 

I do hope the airport circulator tram is a convenient switch over, but I'm sure with the airport as a base layer of passengers, focusing on the grown in the Airport North districts will help position it in the transit models.    

I plan to go to the 8/2 public meeting, so it is a good place for feedback and hearing some of the design challenges that are hard to see off a simplified map. 

[jjwilli]

One thing I heard (and this may not be 100% correct) is that any stops connected to the airport and the rail between those stops can be funded in part by using the airport funds. Just another pot of money to help pay for the project and would explain why the stops are where they are and why there are two instead of one.

[cjd5050]

14 hours ago, nicholas said:

I agree.  I left a comment (under the optional comment box) saying the same thing.  Not sure what it's worth, or if anyone will even read it, but hopefully if we make enough noise, CATS will realize how ridiculous it would be to not connect the light rail directly to the airport.

I wonder if the airport has been asking for this to not happen or not make it as easy as we would like.  The CO showed that parking was the #1 funding source for CLT and is more than 27 percent of the airport’s revenue.  That's a lot of money that might go away with light rail access.  

I don't know if this is done in any other city but I wouldn't mind some sort of added charge for an airport transfer that could be waived for employees.  I want rail but also want to keep CLT chugging along.  

Edited July 18, 2018 by cjd5050

[CTiger]

5 minutes ago, cjd5050 said:

I wonder if the airport has been asking for this to not happen or not make it as easy as we would like.  The CO showed that parking was the #1 funding source for CLT and is more than 27 percent of the airport’s revenue.  That's a lot of money that might go away with light rail access.  

I don't know if this is done in any other city but I wouldn't mind some sort of added charge for an airport transfer that could be waived for employees.  I want rail but also want to keep CLT chugging along.  

It would be interesting to see an estimate of how much parking revenue the light rail would actually eliminate.  Where are the people that park in the lots at CLT actually coming from?  I feel like the parking lots mostly serve people flying out of Charlotte that live further outside the city and wouldn't be served by a light rail that connects to uptown anyways.    The light rail, in my opinion, would be more of an alternative for the crowd that Ubers, taxis, or has people drop them at the terminal.  Or people with long layovers as an easy way to get to and from the city.  But hey, that's just a hunch.

[cjd5050]

1 hour ago, CTiger said:

It would be interesting to see an estimate of how much parking revenue the light rail would actually eliminate.  Where are the people that park in the lots at CLT actually coming from?  I feel like the parking lots mostly serve people flying out of Charlotte that live further outside the city and wouldn't be served by a light rail that connects to uptown anyways.    The light rail, in my opinion, would be more of an alternative for the crowd that Ubers, taxis, or has people drop them at the terminal.  Or people with long layovers as an easy way to get to and from the city.  But hey, that's just a hunch.

I think this is a completely reasonable conclusion and I agree with it.  That said, my fear is that irrational concerns about lost revenue would be in play.   

It's why I suggested some sort of transfer fee to use the 'people mover' at the airport.  At worst it would offset parking revenue reduction.  At best it would open another revenue source to help the airport.   I know people who have a 9hr layover in Charlotte and spending an extra $1 on top of whatever the rail pass cost be would be a no-brainer for them to pass the time somewhere uptown.  

[dubone]

The whole thing from the old transit plan is just how low the ridership scores were without large scale development.    The airport alone cannot support a transit line but it can provide a nice baseline of support, but be a huge symbolic win as people globally tend to expect that cities have rail transit to their airports.  

CLT isn't going to be having some existential loss of parking revenue. People come from all directions to park at the airport.   But on a plus side, with those parking people taking the airport people mover too, they are pretty much going a mile of the 5-6 mile trip to uptown. So maybe it can get a decent share of the airport to uptown market.   

The Airport North economic development zone has much bigger aspirations now and there will actually be people more willing to stay at airport-area hotels knowing they can be mobile with out need for a car or multiple taxi/uber expenses.