CATS Long Term Transit Plan - Silver, Red Lines

[Desert Power]

On 7/23/2021 at 8:45 AM, TGIBridays said:

 

 

 

Blue Line Station and Caldwell/Davidson Station

Here they're proposing having a station for the transfer to the Blue Line as well as another one 2 blocks away between Caldwell and Davidson, which seems kind of redundant, but I'm sure those living in 1st Ward would appreciate it.  They're also showing a park cap over 277 between Caldwell and Davidson. The lady talking mentioned the Caldwell/Davidson station/cap isn't currently part of the alignment and is just to illustrate the potential options.  They're also showing the Grace Immanuel Village Apartments right next to the proposed station getting knocked down for mid rise apartments. 

 

 

Interesting also that they are showing a road cutting through the current Cats bus yard with some development on that site. A cap there makes a lot of sense and would make that property really valuable. Needs better connectivity to Alexander Park and the greenway from this direction.

Also wish there were a station closer to Optimist Hall than Parkwood. Blue line slows down a lot under 277 anyways.

[QCxpat]

Today - WFAE 90.7 Interview of Dr. Elizabeth Delmelle by Marshall Terry - "As Lower-Wage Jobs Move to Charlotte's Suburbs, How do Residents Fare Financially" 

Excerpts:  "Terry:  And when it comes to transportation in Charlotte, the focus seems to be on light rail.  But based on your research, do you think having a vehicle is more important than access to light rail or bus service for long-term employment?  Delmelle:  So for lower-income households, again, as they move out to these less accessible older suburbs that have less connectivity, older cul-de-sacs, for example, poor sidewalk connections — the reality is in Charlotte, we need to deal with the built environment as it is.   And so for these households, having a car will definitely make a bigger impact than having access to a bus or light rail.  Not that light rail should not be part of the conversation.  But if our goal is to decrease inequality and increase wages of low-income households so that they can afford to live in this city, then we can't forget this element of the solution.  

Terry: We talked about access to employment, but you also studied how physical access to jobs affects income.  What were your findings there?  Delmelle:  So we found that as access to employment or job opportunities increased, then the incomes of lower-income neighborhoods, the average incomes increased.  So this means that transportation is one way to increase the earnings of low-income individuals.  

Terry: What would you like policymakers to take from your research, particularly now that we are still going through a pandemic that's affected how we work and live?  Delmelle:  So I think the important take-home message of this is that as we go through all of these changes in our urban planning and long-range forecasts, the emphasis has largely been on public transportation and light rail investment.  And that is important given the climate emergency we're in.  We should definitely think about these sustainable modes of transportation.  But this is telling us that we need to look at the reality of the way that Charlotte has been built and the way that the demographics have evolved.  And if low-wage and low-income individuals are in increasingly inaccessible neighborhoods, then one of the solutions might need to be increasing car ownership — at least in the short term, so that they're better able to access these jobs and improve their chances of increasing their earnings.  And that will have a better impact on improving overall equity and reducing inequalities."  

Dr. Elizabeth Delmelle is an Associate Professor in the Department of Geography and Earth Sciences at The University of North Carolina at Charlotte.  She co-authored a research paper on spatial mismatch hypothesis.

Links: https://www.wfae.org/charlotte-area-news/2021-07-26/as-lower-wage-jobs-move-to-charlottes-suburbs-how-do-residents-fare-financially  

https://www.cogitatiopress.com/socialinclusion/article/view/3735  -  Delmelle, E., I. Nilsson, P. Adu, "Poverty Suburbanization, Job Accessibility, and Employment Outcomes" (05/13/2021)

 

Edited July 26, 2021 by QCxpat

[TGIBridays]

On 7/25/2021 at 12:56 PM, Desert Power said:

Interesting also that they are showing a road cutting through the current Cats bus yard with some development on that site. A cap there makes a lot of sense and would make that property really valuable. Needs better connectivity to Alexander Park and the greenway from this direction.

Also wish there were a station closer to Optimist Hall than Parkwood. Blue line slows down a lot under 277 anyways.

Yeah, I wonder how much of these renderings were just an artistic look at what the area could be rather than CATS actually fleshing out ideas.  If they developed the bus yard, it would need to move somewhere.  Though it might make sense to get it further from such an active and valuable area.

I agree about the cap.  Though I fear the cost will make it a nonstarter with the amount of political will for these types of projects have around here. Still not holding my breath for the Silver Line to even happen in my lifetime, though I hope it does. 

[MarcoPolo]

CATS does not have the staff time nor the development chops to assess actual build-out scenarios.  It's not their purpose.  These are illustrative renderings.    Back several pages ago (189/190), I wrote about the substantial shortcomings of the current Silver line routing, and the impossible assignment CATS has been given to plan/build a transit line as cheaply and with the least political and public fallout possible, while still justifying its need by actually providing "service" meaningful to riders and business.   The current meandering route avoids many "win" scenarios, thus encouraging thinking minds to begin questioning its purpose; Dr Delmelle's research paper a prime example.  While she does state her support for transit projects and funding, she inserts a powerful (and accurate) observation regarding access, jobs, and income.   Insightful studies such as her's echo in the ears of the uninformed anti-transit opposition who misinterpret the findings (knowingly and unknowingly) and cherry pick points to use in their arguments.  A subtle, but poignant example of what happens when process (build it cheaply and with no controversy), overrides purpose (provide high volume alternatives to access jobs and housing).   The ever growing and now noticeable gap between what the Silver Line alignment looks like vs what it should look like has created room for doubt.   Both the gap and the doubts will continue to grow.  

This is a significant problem because at the end of the day, the answer is "all the above", ie: transit in the form of heavy rail, light rail, trolleys, BRT's, on-demand, etc.  Charlotte's urban pattern is analogous to a teenager with very crooked teeth and an overbite, and the non-auto oriented transportation alternatives are braces on those teeth.  Re-aligning teeth and bite into their proper places, takes time,  is painful, and not necessarily an attractive look while happening, but in the end so worth it!    These necessary interventions are what will enable Charlotte's urbanism to shed its inefficient, inequitable, and wasteful baby fat, to become a lean, fit and energetic young adult.  

[Hushpuppy321]

1 hour ago, MarcoPolo said:

CATS does not have the staff time nor the development chops to assess actual build-out scenarios.  It's not their purpose.  These are illustrative renderings.    Back several pages ago (189/190), I wrote about the substantial shortcomings of the current Silver line routing, and the impossible assignment CATS has been given to plan/build a transit line as cheaply and with the least political and public fallout possible, while still justifying its need by actually providing "service" meaningful to riders and business.   The current meandering route avoids many "win" scenarios, thus encouraging thinking minds to begin questioning its purpose; Dr Delmelle's research paper a prime example.  While she does state her support for transit projects and funding, she inserts a powerful (and accurate) observation regarding access, jobs, and income.   Insightful studies such as her's echo in the ears of the uninformed anti-transit opposition who misinterpret the findings (knowingly and unknowingly) and cherry pick points to use in their arguments.  A subtle, but poignant example of what happens when process (build it cheaply and with no controversy), overrides purpose (provide high volume alternatives to access jobs and housing).   The ever growing and now noticeable gap between what the Silver Line alignment looks like vs what it should look like has created room for doubt.   Both the gap and the doubts will continue to grow.  

This is a significant problem because at the end of the day, the answer is "all the above", ie: transit in the form of heavy rail, light rail, trolleys, BRT's, on-demand, etc.  Charlotte's urban pattern is analogous to a teenager with very crooked teeth and an overbite, and the non-auto oriented transportation alternatives are braces on those teeth.  Re-aligning teeth and bite into their proper places, takes time,  is painful, and not necessarily an attractive look while happening, but in the end so worth it!    These necessary interventions are what will enable Charlotte's urbanism to shed its inefficient, inequitable, and wasteful baby fat, to become a lean, fit and energetic young adult.  

Just curious as to what you think the "Win" vs "Meandering" Scenario's are?  I know some people don't like the proposed alignment of the Silverline @ CLT Airport could be one issue.

[go_vertical]

Really like the braces analogy. 

[TGIBridays]

17 hours ago, MarcoPolo said:

CATS does not have the staff time nor the development chops to assess actual build-out scenarios.  It's not their purpose.  These are illustrative renderings.    

That's basically what I assumed. Makes sense. Like I said, it felt more like it was marketing to voters to get them primed to approve the sales tax so that any of this can actually have a chance at happening. 

17 hours ago, MarcoPolo said:

Back several pages ago (189/190), I wrote about the substantial shortcomings of the current Silver line routing, and the impossible assignment CATS has been given to plan/build a transit line as cheaply and with the least political and public fallout possible, while still justifying its need by actually providing "service" meaningful to riders and business.   The current meandering route avoids many "win" scenarios, thus encouraging thinking minds to begin questioning its purpose; 

I personally like your previously mentioned two routing suggestions much better than the current alignment (i.e. 1. make John Belk a boulevard opening up land for development and the light rail to follow that path 2. do anything necessary to tunnel/elevate the tracks through the center of uptown).  But like you mentioned CATS has been given an impossible task. I think they felt the current alignment met most of their goals with the cheapest price (i.e. they had to get to the Gateway Station, keep costs lower, spur development in underdeveloped parts of the uptown, and allow for new low income housing).  I would argue that bulldozing John Belk to put a more human scale boulevard could do all of that except maybe reaching Gateway Station all the while removing that concrete scar. But it also seems like a much harder battle to fight in car loving Charlotte.  Maybe the political winds are changing in that regard, with more attention being placed on urban highway removal, urban renewal, and the racist nature of many of these urban highways in the first place. 

All that said, I feel like the train has left the station and it's too late for them to start changing the routing and redo the center city section of the alignment. Maybe I'm wrong. If so, who do we email/call? haha

17 hours ago, MarcoPolo said:

Dr Delmelle's research paper a prime example.  While she does state her support for transit projects and funding, she inserts a powerful (and accurate) observation regarding access, jobs, and income.   Insightful studies such as her's echo in the ears of the uninformed anti-transit opposition who misinterpret the findings (knowingly and unknowingly) and cherry pick points to use in their arguments. 

Between WFAE's interview with her and Steve Harrison's transit time article about giving people money for cars instead of spending money on improving transit, my hopes for a more multi-modal Charlotte have been taking a beating. I recognize that these are complex issues, but I can't believe the answer is cars, cars, cars. Especially since his math in the article is ridiculously woeful.  It reeks of someone who hasn't tracked how much it costs to own and maintain a car let alone build and maintain the infrastructure needed for cars.

[DMann]

Giving people cars is one thing, but maintaining the car is something else. For any of us who had a car and had to pay maintenance or replace the tires do the oil changes things like that getting a person with very little means a car and then not being able to support that car will create a car up on blocks in the front yard.

[TGIBridays]

6 minutes ago, DMann said:

Giving people cars is one thing, but maintaining the car is something else. For any of us who had a car and had to pay maintenance or replace the tires do the oil changes things like that getting a person with very little means a car and then not being able to support that car will create a car up on blocks in the front yard.

Right. My car is a relatively economical Mazda 3 and it costs me around $0.22/mi for gas, fees, and maintenance. It goes up to nearly $1/mi if I factor in the initial cost of the car.  And I've done a lot of the maintenance myself saving me some on labor (I did have to buy a lot of tools so that probably offset the savings but I don't track those expenses in my spreadsheet so I'm not sure).

[jthomas]

To continue the discussion on Silver Line alignment...

I agree that an alignment along (ideally replacing) the Belk would be superior, as it would run right through the heart of the hottest growth in the area. It's clear, though, that a non-negotiable goal for the Silver Line is for it to serve both CLT and Gateway Station. Given those constraints, it's impossible to use the Belk and hit Gateway on the way to the airport without a circuitous and awkward backtrack. So, I think the proposed alignment is defensible given the above goals, which are also defensible. 

That said, the Belk alignment still screams out for rail transit. A city the size of Charlotte needs to be thinking about a comprehensive system anyway, so I would propose a third line to complement the Blue and Silver. This line would start in the South Park area, following Fairview to Park, then up Park/Kenilworth to the Belk, turning north to interline with the Silver line through Gateway. From there, it seems there are a couple of alternatives. One would be to take the proposed route of the Red Line, following the O-Line at least as far as I-85 and possibly all the way to I-485. Another alternative would be to follow Statesville all the way to 485. I'll defer to those of you who are local as to which would be a better route.

I realize that this route would have many technical and political challenges. I think it would be a strong complement to the first two lines, as it would tie together several more major destinations that are not on the current network and fill in some important coverage gaps uptown. This line would have a much stronger chance of getting built if 1) federal funding formulas changed to prioritize transit, and 2) the US figured out how to tunnel at rest-of-world costs.

[southslider]

Ironically, the distance between the Belk and Gateway is less than that between Wilkinson and the Airport.

[MarcoPolo]

Hushpuppy321, your question is the perfect segue into further discussions on the proper role of transit, and to do it justice requires more writing and reading than many can tolerate on a forum such as this.  I can summarize a few main points and direct you to a wonderful transit planning resource online, colleague of mine, who brilliantly lays out the rationale for equitable, functional, transit planning.   I gather some on this site may already be well versed in these techniques and principles, and I hope you will add to the chat.  Knowing fundamentals permits critical thinking.  Merely writing about an alternative alignment without explaining the rationale only leads to "yes buts", and "that's your opinion", and "you don't know all the issues", etc. etc...   

The four goals of any transit system should be:  Freedom, Access to Opportunity, Usefulness, and Enduring Ridership Potential.   If you step back and think on these you'll come to the same conclusion most do.... these are all basically self-reinforcing attributes.  The question to be asked from the start is "where can I be in "x" minutes, which translates into what is the "opportunity shed" offered to a rider by the system?   How does it increase their quality of life and standard of living, ie: how many possible jobs can be accessed, critical needs serviced, cultural and learning assets reached, etc.   It's all about understanding the extent to which the system expands, or restricts " the boundaries of one's life".   Boundaries are simple geometry, a geometry of the possible, (geometry plays a fundamental role in city planning at the human scale, a guide-line for many important decisions).   This proposition should inform every other decision, as opposed to trying to predict what people will do through social science calculations, or what a government thinks it can afford, through cost studies and engineering analysis.   When the focus is on the equitable distribution of freedom, in this case mobility freedom, then the system envisioned will always be useful and attractive to riders.  The latter aspect is critical because the largest cost by far associated with transit (of any kind) is ongoing operations and maintenance.  If saving cost through compromise and/or value engineering is the driver of purpose from the beginning, a two fold failure is almost certain;  1- a system that is not useful for residents, and 2- a system that costs too much to operate and maintain for the City. 

Assuming the above are handled correctly, the next task is to avoid a system that creates its own delays.  The Kryptonite of any transit system is "delay".   I'm not referring to the red herring of "congestion", the boogie man transportation engineers throw about as the ultimate villain to be eradicated from existence, (congestion is actually a good thing...a sign of success and prosperity, and a topic I can talk about all day).  By "delay" I'm referring to needless complications in the pursuit of "freedom".   Here is where transportation planning and land planning have talked past each other historically and have only recently, in a few fortunate places, begun to talk to each other.  To expand a commuter's "opportunity shed" one can enlarge the area physically accessible (move the boundary outward), or add more useful opportunities accessible within the existing boundary.  The former is transportation planning, the latter is land planning.   Since the original question of "where can I be in "x" minutes" will vary depending on "what I'm trying to get to" it is important that these two disciplines cooperate fully.   Not doing so causes transit riders delays, resulting from inefficient stops, longer distances, and needless modal transfers.  Here's where the really interesting and elegant "complexities" of layering a robust system of light rail, heavy rail, BRT, trolley's, and on demand come into play.   And, as I have done in the past, I'm using the words complex and complicated in specific ways.  A complex solution elegantly resolves the realities of a difficult real world issue, or task.  A complicated solution does not, and is therefore not a solution to begin with.  

I know this is a round-a-bout response to your question Hushpuppy321, but if the Silver Line is viewed through the lenses above you can begin to see why the current alignment in some places, is falls short.   Rail transit, light and heavy, provide high rider output with maximum efficiencies regarding space and energy needs (geometry again), and minimum emissions and noise externalities.   One light rail train carries 200 to 300 people.  A well planned system running trains at 5 to 10 minute intervals can easily deliver 10,000 people per hour through a station without delays, (as well as each station along its route, which gets into the topic of predictability and development, also fascinating, and a topic I can talk about for days).  Freeways are the exact opposite.  They are land, energy, pollution and noise maximizers, and like cancer in the body, destroy community tissue.   They are also delay prone, as rush hour traffic demonstrates, and are almost always through systems, which is to say their integrations with surrounding community are restricted.    Independence Blvd/Freeway and Brookshire Freeway's current ADT's hover at about 10,000 trips (read people) per hour, the equivalent of one light rail line.   In Charlotte, neither pass through centers of employment, they pass by them.   By shadowing their trajectories does the Silver Line increase job opportunities, or avoid delays to a transit rider's "opportunity shed"?   Will it permit easy and complimentary transit support in the form of BRT, or regular buses to further make a rider's opportunity shed a richer experience, or increase its footprint beyond the immediate corridor?  The answer to both questions is no.  If you envision each light rail corridor with the capacity of an Independence Blvd in terms of  "people moving",  minus the grossly exaggerated space needs, pollution generation, and traffic delays that come with, you become aware of the potential of the Sliver Line, and indeed all the other light rail lines too.   The most bang for you buck is not found along an existing system that serves different goals, but instead introducing new capacity along an underutilized system that aligns with the goals aspired to.  

Stepping back to look at the southeast corridor along which the Silver Line will run and deploying the thought points above, where can one find elements of walkability (existing and potential), job concentrations, complimentary transit connections (existing and potential), that would inform a better alignment?  I'll offer a hint.  Just as the Blue Line does not hug I-77, but rather runs through neighborhoods, and along existing rail lines and surface streets, so to should the Silver Line.  And, happy coincidence, a similar urban geography to that of the Blue Line, is also present near to where the Silver Line is currently proposed.  In fact, it does manage to find this better alignment at times (notably around Matthews, which I talked about back on pages 189/190).   I'll rudely answer my own question.   Monroe Rd.   Monroe Rd is to Independence, as South Blvd is to I-77.  It even has a nearby rail line that meanders back and forth within its route corridor as did the original Blue Line corridor.  Monroe Rd passes through centers of employment, through neighborhoods, through towns.  As it approaches Uptown Charlotte it becomes E. 7th St with access to other street routes that open up Elizabeth and Midtown (you know all the things there), on the way into downtown, underground ideally along Trade St., (and yes, I did write back a few pages that the JBelk removal replacement with light rail/blvd was my favorite, but only from the point of killing two birds with one stone so to speak.  Trade is the more optimum alignment).   The synergy with the Gold Line at grade above would be explosive, as that system expands along Central out to the Eastland area eventually.   The opportunities, assets accessed, and importance of Uptown are obvious and need no rehashing here.   Is it easy?  No.  Is is inexpensive?  No?  To play devil's advocate for a moment, neither is building an urban freeway, or even crazier, widening an existing urban freeway, both of which routinely get a "smell test" pass when it comes to funding.  

As an aside, on the way out to Gaston County, don't focus so much on the Airport.   Yes, it would be nice to have a station closer to the Terminal, but in the future, Terminal Check in functions will move out to mini "terminal" offices, at select, transit stations/hubs, where luggage and check in services are preformed, freeing up air passengers to travel on trains and buses minus their luggage.   The airport terminals of the future will become security clearing houses and shopping/business centers adjacent to airplane concourses.  Crazy you say?  The check-in aspect is already possible in some Asian countries.  For, example, you can check into your flight and drop off your luggage at the train station in downtown Kuala Lumpur, and hop on the train that takes you out to the airport.  Effortless.  Works both when arriving and departing.  Imagine being able to check into your flight at Gateway Station, Southpark, UNCC, or a handful of other transit hub locations around the City, at a small, less crowded "office" check in counter.  Then hop on a train, or BRT and not see your luggage again until you arrive at your destination...hopefully in a City with similar services?  In such a scenario, needing to transfer from the train to an airport people mover is no big ask, as long as the distance covered isn't too great from the "delay" perspective .    It's game changing!   Don't even get me started on how this will completely reshape the relationship of airport to City and the amazing development/services opportunities that will come about!  

I've already written way too much, apologies in advance.  If you want to learn more, I would point you to an extraordinarily talented and well known transit planner, Jarrett Walker, with Jarrett Walker + Associates.  Google him.  His projects, videos, and writings, represent benchmark thought, much of it the basis for my rant above.  He and others are who I've learned from in my practice over the years.  I hope this has been helpful.  Look forward to the discussions to come!  

 

[go_vertical]

Absolutely no apologies needed. There need to be more posts like this on every forum that exists. 

[nicholas]

I'm gonna have to come back to this post a few times to fully digest everything you wrote.  Well done

[KJHburg]

from the Charlotte Ledger transit weekly email and this brings up some good questions rosy economic projections for tax revenues and not so much inflated costs.  Both of which I think are way off.

City consultants estimate sales tax revenues will exceed historical growth, with costs lower; Missing the mark like original Blue Line?

by Steve Harrison

In 2007, Mecklenburg County voters went to the polls to decide whether to keep or repeal the half-cent sales tax for transit.

Leading up to the vote, the city and Charlotte Area Transit System said keeping the tax would not only preserve existing service, but would generate enough money to build so much more. They said the half-cent would let them finish the 2030 transit plan: the Blue Line extension to UNC Charlotte, a streetcar through Center City, a commuter rail line to Lake Norman and bus rapid transit from Matthews to uptown.

Voters kept the tax. Hardly any of that happened.

The city did squeeze enough money from the tax to finish the $1.1 billion Blue Line extension to UNC Charlotte, though it shortened the length of the line to save money.

CATS didn’t have enough money for the streetcar, so City Council voted to spend money from the general fund to build it. Rapid transit on Independence Boulevard was never built. The city didn’t get permission from Norfolk Southern railroad to build the commuter train, but it didn’t have enough money anyway.

Around five years ago, CATS said it was out of money, admitting the half-cent was tapped out.

A new tax that will pay for everything

Now, in 2021, there’s an entirely new City Council, a new city manager, a new transit director. And city leaders are proposing a penny increase to the sales tax. Similar to 2007, they say it will pay for: a Blue Line extension to Ballantyne, a train to Lake Norman, more bus service and a light rail line from Matthews to Belmont. It will also pay for new roads, sidewalks, bike lanes and greenways.

Total cost: $13.5 billion.

“One of the things that I do want to say up front is that the one cent covers it all,” City Manager Marcus Jones told council members in June. “We’re able to do both the transit and the transportation. It covers the capital costs, the operating costs and the financing costs.”

The manager’s confidence is based on work from a consultant, InfraStrategies, whose managing principal is former CATS CEO Carolyn Flowers. She was the leader of the transit system in Charlotte from 2010 to 2015 when it faced the reality of the transit tax running dry.

At the time, CATS blamed the Great Recession on its inability to build more. And while the recession did hurt the city’s sales tax collections, the transit system wasn’t able to bounce back even after the economy recovered and the country entered the longest economic expansion in the nation’s history.

To make the numbers work, InfraStrategies has created a financing plan that spreads debt payments over 50 years. It also says sales tax revenue will come in higher than historical norms, and that costs will increase at a slower rate than what’s happened in the past.

First, the revenue side: InfraStrategies project the penny sales tax would increase by an average of 4.4% a year for 50 years. Consultant Amanda Vandegrift said that figure was based on numbers from the last few years — “assumptions that we have vetted as conservative.” She said recent Mecklenburg sales tax collections have grown at 7.7% a year “in recent years.” Her figures cover a period of strong economic growth and do not include the effects of the Great Recession, when tax collections fell and then grew sluggishly. In her presentation to the City Council in June, she characterized 4.4% growth as being on the low end of what the city can expect: “You’re likely to see higher growth, but we won’t know until we’re there.”

Sales tax growth is lower, though, if you go back farther in time. The first full fiscal year of the half-cent sales tax for transit was in 1999-2000, when it generated $53.1 million. In 2018-2019 — the last full year before the pandemic — the tax brought in $107 million.

That works out to an average annual growth rate of 3.8%.

The difference between growing a 3.8% and 4.4% may not seem like a lot. But over 30 years, it would be about $1.4 billion. The city plans to finish paying off the debt in 50 years. By that point, the difference is nearly $7 billion.

“It’s the difference between this whole plan being feasible and not,” said council member Ed Driggs, a member of the transportation committee who said he’s concerned about the projections.

Projections by a city consultant show sales tax revenue increasing by 4.4% annually — higher than the average rate over the last two decades. (Slide presented at City Council meeting in June)

 

Whitney Afonso with the UNC School of Government said sales taxes are “extremely difficult to forecast.” One reason is that they are less stable than the property tax. They increase rapidly in good times but drop quickly during downturns.

Afonso said there’s another problem: Mecklenburg County’s population growth will likely slow over the next 10 years as it runs out of space for new homes. She says more families will move to neighboring counties that, for now, don’t have transit taxes.

“Once you are stopping adding to the population, a commuter doesn’t spend as much of their income within the city limits as an actual resident,” she said. “And they should be taking that into consideration.”

Is the city also underestimating costs?

While the city is arguably overestimating its revenue growth, it may also be underestimating how much transit projects cost. The consultant estimated costs would increase by 3.5% a year.

That’s probably too low, said Steve Polzin, a former adviser with the U.S. Department of Transportation in the Trump administration. He said the cost of transit projects historically grew faster than that, and that President Biden’s infrastructure plan will pump billions of dollars into transit spending.

“So you’ll see very significant inflation on the cost side for things like electric buses and train cars and track equipment and those kinds of things,” Polzin said. “That will push tremendous pressure on the domestic market.”

Recent history bears that out.

When voters kept the half-cent sales tax in 2007, CATS said the Blue Line extension would cost $750 million. When the city finalized the cost five years later, the price had risen to $1.16 billion — despite shortening the length of the line by eliminating a station at Interstate 485.

That’s an increase of 7% a year — twice what the consultant is projecting.

Former CATS chief executive Ron Tober said the sales tax projections of 4.4% may “be a little high.” But he’s more worried that the consultant is underestimating how much construction costs and operating costs may increase.

He said escalating operating costs are, in his opinion, the biggest threat to the plan. If costs exceed revenues then “sooner or later you are going to become a deficit operation or eat into any reserves that you have built up or over time.”

No institutional memory

The city’s projections are reasonable enough to pass a cursory review, which will likely satisfy City Council, whose most veteran member, Julie Eiselt, was elected in 2015.

The construction schedule is delayed so far into the future that the people in charge today will be long gone if the money runs dry.

And a future council will be left with trying to keep the promises from 2021. Just as today’s council is trying to fulfill the promises of 2007.

 

[southslider]

Highway revenue has far exceeded expectations coming out of the pandemic, however, so have construction and real estate costs, and extremely so.  In fact, costs have increased so dramatically, that no new major projects will be added to the upcoming State Transportation Improvement Program update, and many projects will be removed from the prior STIP update.

Back to transit, if sales taxes grew that much, you can guarantee that costs would be going up as well (and already are). And while the new Silver Line has a better alignment for development by no longer being trapped inside Independence and Wilkinson Boulevards, such design adds up to a lot more miles of private real estate to acquire, and all in a market that costs more than ever.

[jthomas]

Maybe sales tax shouldn't be the answer, or at least not the whole answer. Since the Silver Line is being sold as a development scheme just as much as a mobility tool, CATS (i.e. the public) should work to capture some of the development value that the transit investment creates. I don't know what form that would take, but I could imagine a special tax district in the 1/4 mile radius around each station, for instance. I could also see CATS buying up land around each proposed station, upzoning it, and then selling it at a profit to developers once the transit line is complete. This is what the private sector does - why shouldn't the public sector reap some of the benefits of its own investment?

[KJHburg]

29 minutes ago, jthomas said:

Maybe sales tax shouldn't be the answer, or at least not the whole answer. Since the Silver Line is being sold as a development scheme just as much as a mobility tool, CATS (i.e. the public) should work to capture some of the development value that the transit investment creates. I don't know what form that would take, but I could imagine a special tax district in the 1/4 mile radius around each station, for instance. I could also see CATS buying up land around each proposed station, upzoning it, and then selling it at a profit to developers once the transit line is complete. This is what the private sector does - why shouldn't the public sector reap some of the benefits of its own investment?

I have said this before just like the special taxing authority uptown which is a couple pennies on the rate.  In Georgia they used special tax districts called  Improvement Districts like there is one in the Perimeter area Perimeter Community Improvement Districts – Creating the Southeast's Premier Livable Center in Atlanta Georgia (perimetercid.org)    Absolutely this should be looked at if these finances are going to work because their tax projections are completely rosy and assume not another recession EVER. 

[Desert Power]

On 8/5/2021 at 7:39 PM, KJHburg said:

from the Charlotte Ledger transit weekly email and this brings up some good questions rosy economic projections for tax revenues and not so much inflated costs.  Both of which I think are way off.

 

“One of the things that I do want to say up front is that the one cent covers it all,” City Manager Marcus Jones told council members in June. “We’re able to do both the transit and the transportation. It covers the capital costs, the operating costs and the financing costs.”

The manager’s confidence is based on work from a consultant, InfraStrategies, whose managing principal is former CATS CEO Carolyn Flowers. She was the leader of the transit system in Charlotte from 2010 to 2015 when it faced the reality of the transit tax running dry.

...

To make the numbers work, InfraStrategies has created a financing plan that spreads debt payments over 50 years. It also says sales tax revenue will come in higher than historical norms, and that costs will increase at a slower rate than what’s happened in the past.

...

The construction schedule is delayed so far into the future that the people in charge today will be long gone if the money runs dry.

And a future council will be left with trying to keep the promises from 2021. Just as today’s council is trying to fulfill the promises of 2007.

 

These passages really capture exactly why these figures cannot be relied on.

[Third Strike]

New mobile CATS pass for Android and iOS is now available:

https://charlottenc.gov/cats/bus/Pages/CATS-Pass.aspx

[davidclt]

2 hours ago, Third Strike said:

New mobile CATS pass for Android and iOS is now available:

https://charlottenc.gov/cats/bus/Pages/CATS-Pass.aspx

Glad to see the new app. Still no real-time information and items from the old app's wallet don't transfer over with phone number. Lynx still at 20 minutes headways. Why does CATS hate their customers?

[davidclt]

5 minutes ago, davidclt said:

Glad to see the new app. Still no real-time information and items from the old app's wallet don't transfer over with phone number. Lynx still at 20 minutes headways. Why does CATS hate their customers?

Oh and now purchased tickets expire. I may be a bit of a ticket packrat. Old vs. New

[KJHburg]

Good story about bus service in Charlotte.  We need better shelters everywhere in Charlotte and really need to implement some Bus Rapid Transit with stations, fare collection off the bus,  upgraded buses with bus only lanes.  It is far cheaper, can be built quicker and a wider system reaching more people. 

Overcoming the 'stigma' of riding the bus | UNC Charlotte Urban Institute | UNC Charlotte

Need to see how BRT can work look at the new lines being developed right now in Raleigh

Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Projects | Raleighnc.gov

Or being done in Houston now 

METRORapid | Bus Rapid Transit | Public transportation | Houston, TX (ridemetro.org)

Or Salt Lake City

Bus Rapid Transit (rideuta.com)

 

[RANYC]

2 hours ago, KJHburg said:

Good story about bus service in Charlotte.  We need better shelters everywhere in Charlotte and really need to implement some Bus Rapid Transit with stations, fare collection off the bus,  upgraded buses with bus only lanes.  It is far cheaper, can be built quicker and a wider system reaching more people. 

Overcoming the 'stigma' of riding the bus | UNC Charlotte Urban Institute | UNC Charlotte

Need to see how BRT can work look at the new lines being developed right now in Raleigh

Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Projects | Raleighnc.gov

Or being done in Houston now 

METRORapid | Bus Rapid Transit | Public transportation | Houston, TX (ridemetro.org)

Or Salt Lake City

Bus Rapid Transit (rideuta.com)

 

Thanks for sharing.  Pre-COVID, bus ridership was down 12% nationally, but down 38% in Charlotte.  So we appear to have uniquely Charlotte issues, and aren't just riding a national trend.

Article quotes CATS senior planner: “Ultimately, how we create a successful transit network in this region, it’ll be on the bus.”

I wonder why light rail is such an outsized chunk of future expenditure and capital investment - if this quote true?

If instead of 13bn for light rail, we invested in covered/transparent shelters at all bus stops, next-gen apps and sensors to provide real-time updates on bus locations and expected arrivals, bus-focused smart GPS where app detects current location and takes in destination and then lays out an optimized set of instructions for the rider, (wonder if CATS could contract with Lyft or Uber to basically reprogram our fleet), electric/hydrogen-powered bus fleet to tell young people they can ride electric and fight climate change by taking the bus, perhaps themed buses and visual spectacle vehicles like double-decker buses specifically targeted for charlotte visitors/tourists...

Hell, work with tinder or bumble or some other match app, and try and romanticize the bus - a special CATS campaign marketing the bus as a great platform for a first-meet-conversation...First Date Route...Just thinking very imaginatively here...

Edited August 23, 2021 by RANYC

[CLT2014]

Poor bus service means this city will always require the vast majority of people to own a car. Adding another light rail line won't change that. They got to get the bus service right as well to build a full SYSTEM.

The views on the CTC though and bus riders as undesirables that influenced the demise of the Epicentre (even among this pro-transit crowd on UP) shows this city is a FAR way off from bus service breaking the stigma it has among choice riders. With bus service so poor, even low-income riders do everything they can to scrape money together for a car because buses don't go where they need to get (note, many transit dependent people DO NOT work in a high rise at a bank).  People could literally get fired relying on the bus to get them to their job here.

Edited August 23, 2021 by CLT2014