Traffic Congestion and Highway Construction

[Third Strike]

I would kill to have commuter rail down the middle of I-77 instead of more lanes, especially if the Red Line isn't happening. 

[Matthew.Brendan]

I can't tell you how tempting it is to scrawl "Where's the train?" on the barrier walls all up and down 77, especially between Exit 23-25

[southslider]

Sure, usually 77 would need to get back in line for regional prioritization. But with all of the grading already done between 485 and Cornelius, it would be very foolish not to widen at least to Exit 28 in the near future.

Maybe the settlement with the Private Partners could be to pay them to widen this section. A smaller widening certainly costs the same or less as the contracted public share of a much larger project all the way into Uptown. 

[dubone]

But meanwhile you'll have lanes that are going to allow buses to be faster than the commuter train was and have a variety of collection areas for the low density LKN area that wasn't built for transit.   These HOT lanes ARE transit infrastructure.   Plus having to pay for the high social costs of auto-commuting will encourage some to shift to transit as it will be a comparison of toll vs fare  or faster vs the free lanes.  

[southslider]

^Except the buses will need to merge right back into the stop-and-go traffic north of 485 to access the Huntersville Gateway and Northcross Park and Rides. In other words, the new HOT lanes will provide very little time savings over existing HOV lanes.

Plus, for the next couple years, construction will soon close the HOV lane south of 85 into Uptown, where it actually does save time over abutting lanes.

[dubone]

Well, the Red Line isn't going to happen, so I'm just looking at positives as I see them.  Certainly if the HOT lanes get canceled and the Red Line is already canceled, a 2040 horizon year looks pretty brutal for LKN.   

 

It's perfectly within my ethic to let them choke on their own excesses and poor planning, but realistically the compromise position is HOT lanes now to have skin in the game for the people wasting the road, and build up transit ridership and sane planning and eventually turn back to build the transit when ridership can be expected and the state isn't being run by charch deekens. 

[SgtCampsalot]

Yeah, I don't know, the Cintra deal just stinks, but it is in motion. Then there's also the fact that widening the interstate would induce demand. So it's a lose lose either way. The Red Line would be sweet, and dedicated ROW for the HOT lanes for merging would be SWEET, but (apparently) are not there. So what do we do? It's a pile of dead skunks.

[dubone]

Really though don't forget to zoom out to the big picture.  It stinks because we don't have infrastructure funding at either the state or federal level due to austerity measures by conservatives disallowing increases in nominal gas tax rates at the same time we have had success in dramatically improving the fuel efficiency of the auto fleet.   The latter is a very good thing, but we still need to fund the infrastructure for the common good.   Roads used to be the obvious investment because they have a significant economic return, but the policies have starved that infrastructure funding, which now only barely covers maintenance, not growth.  Especially wasteful growth when towns allow exponential development despite no plans for proper infrastructure.    

Also, the deal only stinks to the extent that we have to give some return to the private company fronting the money, but borrowing that money to build would clog our budgets for a very long time.   You know how we know?  We are still paying for 85, us74, and 485 for the next decade or more from having to borrow to complete those more urgent needs.  So now we have even less to spend on new projects, and that needs to cover surface roads in addition to high cost interstates.  

 

This is mostly preaching the choir, but it's so frustrating talking to average people offline about the tolls because most of the articles don't bother with the reason they're needed nor the point about inducing demand by the least efficient users like you said.  

[kermit]

It truely offends me that a full length observer article can discuss population growth and congestion in N Meck from a roads only perspective. (Yes, I know the red line was mentioned briefly, but transit simply was not a serious part of the discussion here)

http://www.charlotteobserver.com/news/local/community/lake-norman-mooresville/article81538992.html

[tozmervo]

Came across this interesting map from last year (using 2013 data) illustrating traffic deaths on interstates across the country. All things being equal, the Charlotte metro (and all of North Carolina, really) look pretty good. http://www.vox.com/a/deadliest-interstates-united-states

[cjd5050]

On 6/5/2016 at 0:50 AM, kermit said:

It truely offends me that a full length observer article can discuss population growth and congestion in N Meck from a roads only perspective. (Yes, I know the red line was mentioned briefly, but transit simply was not a serious part of the discussion here)

http://www.charlotteobserver.com/news/local/community/lake-norman-mooresville/article81538992.html

I can see both sides.  

On one hand, why talk about the red line when it's not going to happen?  

On the other hand, I think it would have been good journalism to look up all of the building permits issued up north starting in 2006 and up to when the red line was 'officially' marked as dead.  If the red line was "designed to address this population surge by easing traffic in the Lake Norman area" and in turn the Lake Normal area grew around that expectation...it would make sense to at least discuss that growth.  

The most interesting thing is that while I live in South Charlotte, my friend/agent is based out of Cornelius.  I have asked her a couple of times if the 77 tolls have started to have a negative impact on property values.  If buyers were shying away from the area due to now having the possibility of no traffic relief in site if the toll lanes are cancelled or having the possibility of paying high costs on the tolls.  She said it really wasn't.  

You have to feel for some long time residents but at what point do you stop your concern for people moving to an area with known traffic issues only to turn around and complain about traffic issues once they unpack?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited June 9, 2016 by cjd5050
typos

[SgtCampsalot]

The ironic thing for someone like me is that Cornelius, Davidson, Mooresville, have some of the best shots at being self-contained communities that don't need to have easy commutes to Charlotte. But, the fact that they're so nice makes them valued, which attracts people that make a lot of money, who are more likely to work in Charlotte. Plus there's The Lake to add to that equation.

[Spartan]

5 hours ago, cjd5050 said:

I can see both sides.  

On one hand, why talk about the red line when it's not going to happen?  

On the other hand, I think it would have been good journalism to look up all of the building permits issued up north starting in 2006 and up to when the red line was 'officially' marked as dead.  If the red line was "designed to address this population surge by easing traffic in the Lake Norman area" and in turn the Lake Normal area grew around that expectation...it would make sense to at least discuss that growth.  

The most interesting thing is that while I live in South Charlotte, my friend/agent is based out of Cornelius.  I have asked her a couple of times if the 77 tolls have started to have a negative impact on property values.  If buyers were shying away from the area due to now having the possibility of no traffic relief in site if the toll lanes are cancelled or having the possibility of paying high costs on the tolls.  She said it really wasn't.  

You have to feel for some long time residents but at what point do you stop your concern for people moving to an area with known traffic issues only to turn around and complain about traffic issues once they unpack?

I wouldn't say the Red Line is 'not going to happen.' Its just going to take more than $400m to make it happen and that doesn't work within the realm of what CATS can afford.The result is a re-prioritization, not a cancellation, of the project.

[cltbwimob]

4th Circuit Court rules in favor of NCDOT for the Monroe Bypass. 

https://apps.ncdot.gov/newsreleases/details.aspx?r=12614

While, in principle, I do not favor the never ending expansion of highways, this project will be a vital part of a the Asheville-Charlotte-Wilmington corridor.  We need this project for more than just traffic relief; we need it for logistics purposes as well.

[southslider]

Red Line got put on ice when NS refused to share their tracks. I think CATS should fight back and propose sharing tracks then at Gateway for Amtrak, which is advancing ahead of Red Line. Not only would this give NS a taste of their own medicine, but it'd also allow the TIGER federal grant to actually build a temporary station Uptown, instead of paying just a bit towards multiple bridges and miles of new track to separate passenger and freight in Uptown. And when NS complains, CATS says it's temporary until FTA and NCDOT fully fund Gateway.

Back to highways, the Monroe Bypass will be the project that most likely kills tolls in NC.  While the 77 project has seen the most outcry thus far, it at least keeps two free expressway lanes. Immediately outside I-485, all US-74 commuters will pay to continue traveling on current lanes.  And Union County happens to be the most populous place in a state currently gerrymandered in favor of its population's and General Assembly's current political tilt.

[cjd5050]

2 hours ago, southslider said:

Red Line got put on ice when NS refused to share their tracks. I think CATS should fight back and propose sharing tracks then at Gateway for Amtrak, which is advancing ahead of Red Line. Not only would this give NS a taste of their own medicine, but it'd also allow the TIGER federal grant to actually build a temporary station Uptown, instead of paying just a bit towards multiple bridges and miles of new track to separate passenger and freight in Uptown. And when NS complains, CATS says it's temporary until FTA and NCDOT fully fund Gateway.

One has to wonder what would happen if all of the effort that is going into blocking the tolls was instead focused on forcing the hand of NS on the Red Line.  It also makes me wonder why there does not appear to be any effort to stop the growth up north to at least try and pause some of the traffic issues.  

The crazy thing is not only do they continue to build up there they are building at a much higher density.  I was up in Cornelius to pick up a table and there was this awesome PUD that was still under construction.  A bit of damned if you do, damned if you don't.  They are building communities they way they should but it's actually compounding the traffic issue.

[kermit]

NS didn't really say no the the red line, they just set the price for cooperation beyond the current ability of CATS to pay. If the money that was going to be spent on the toll lanes was reallocated to the red line it would be a viable project.

[southslider]

^Building an entirely new parallel track is more than "the price for cooperation," it's practically extortion, especially when the requested new track also requires real estate.  Hence, why CATS then should use the NCRR as their leverage for relocating Amtrak to Uptown at a temporary Gateway Station. That project ironically would separate the tracks. But since NS is far from being cooperative, I say don't build a separate track in Uptown, unless they agree to shared tracks to Lake Norman. 

Edited June 10, 2016 by southslider

[cjd5050]

14 hours ago, southslider said:

^Building an entirely new parallel track is more than "the price for cooperation," it's practically extortion, especially when the requested new track also requires real estate.  Hence, why CATS then should use the NCRR as their leverage for relocating Amtrak to Uptown at a temporary Gateway Station. That project ironically would separate the tracks. But since NS is far from being cooperative, I say don't build a separate track in Uptown, unless they agree to shared tracks to Lake Norman. 

So a couple of questions here as I know next to nothing on this...

How important is NS to the Charlotte and North Carolina economy?  Would poking the bear possible have some unexpected negatives or does just NS pass through the area?

Who has the power to 'leverage' NS?  Can CATS do it or does it need to come from the State DOT?

How does moving the Amtrak station uptown leverage NS?  

 

Thanks in advance.  What I know now I 'vote' to leverage the hell out of NS but know next to nothing.

[kermit]

^ despite getting off topic I'll share my perspective.

1) Normally railroads have unparalleled legal powers. There Is little or nothing that the state can do to force their hand. Therefore railroads are immune from bear poking. NS will not reduce its presence in the state and the state lacks the power to do anything other than be vaguely annoying to NS.

2) This situation is a bit different on the tracks between 16th street in Charlotte and Raleigh via Greensboro. These tracks are owned by the NCRR and leased to NS. The lease has about 30 (?) years remaining on its term. So NS does not own these tracks but they have the right to run as much freight as they want on the tracks that existed when the lease was signed. The NCRR has the right to run as many passenger trains on the tracks as they want, provided they don't interfere with NS freight traffic. Right now NCDOT is finishing up a federally funded project that essentially built another track between CLT and Greensboro in order to create more passenger rail capacity.

3) NS (not the NCRR) owns the tracks where Gateway station will go. They could play hardball which would force NCDOT to build completely separate tracks from 16th street to Gateway (I believe this is essentially the current plan)

3.5) phase one of the red line plan was to run commuter trains on the rebuilt existing NS tracks from downtown to Mt Mourne. Phase two of the redline was to build a second track for denser service. NS has tacitly told CATS that it cannot do the phase one plan (NS won't share) but it can do the phase two plan (but CATS can't afford to do that).

4) Since NS does not own the tracks which connect its Atlanta line to its Virginia line (The NCRR owned tracks between Greensboro and 16th street in Charlotte make this connection) it is very protective of its alternative route -- the tracks which will be used for the red line. The Red line tracks are the only negotiating leverage NS has with the NCRR when the lease gets renewed.

5) There are a long list of reasons why NS will never be able to use the red line tracks as a replacement for the NCRR so the NS reluctance to share these tracks with commuter rail is nothing more than political theater and an effort to position itself for lease renewal negotiations with the NCRR. These tracks loose NS millions per year (mostly in property taxes)

6) NS is also in a period of significant financial upheaval at the moment. Its revenues are down substantially due to a 35% reduction in coal traffic, shareholders are getting restless and management just fought off a takeover of the RR by Canadian Pacific. This means that NS will quickly change its views on the red line tracks,  but they will want to have a long talk with the NCRR and NCDOT before that happens.

7) the current state government has zero interest in the Red Line (but they are perfectly content to drop hundreds of millions to subsidize toll lanes). So any progress on the red line will need to wait for a new political climate -- no matter how loudly N Meck residents whine.

Edited June 12, 2016 by kermit

[southslider]

^Right, passenger and freight trains would still need to do their dance on shared NCRR tracks, just as they do now up on North Tryon. But if NS refuses to share their tracks on Red Line, then CATS should be in no hurry to help separate leased tracks for Gateway. The latest TIGER funding can't build the permanent station anyhow, and it would stretch a lot further, if focused on a temporary station, instead of a lot of new track.

[Spartan]

Apparently it will cost $800m to cancel the contract. Glad to know that our all-knowing tea party legislature is using our tax dollars wisely.

http://www.bizjournals.com/charlotte/blog/queen_city_agenda/2016/06/ncdot-ripple-effect-of-i-77-toll-lanes-bill-costly.html

Regardless of what happens, this is why you should pay attention with things like the Metropolitan Transportation Plan and the Comprehensive Transportation Plan come up. These plans are long term, but they have real impacts even if it doesn't happen immediately.

[urbanlover568]

38 minutes ago, Spartan said:

Apparently it will cost $800m to cancel the contract. Glad to know that our all-knowing tea party legislature is using our tax dollars wisely.

http://www.bizjournals.com/charlotte/blog/queen_city_agenda/2016/06/ncdot-ripple-effect-of-i-77-toll-lanes-bill-costly.html

Regardless of what happens, this is why you should pay attention with things like the Metropolitan Transportation Plan and the Comprehensive Transportation Plan come up. These plans are long term, but they have real impacts even if it doesn't happen immediately.

Would you rather give complete control to Cintra for 50 years? Id rather pay the money and have the state remain in control of the road. I think they will cut a deal with Cintra or they could just say screw them and put the project up for bid and just have the company construct the infrastructure and have DOT control the road. 

[kermit]

$800 million is nearly double the cost of the Blue Line. So many people beotched about the cost of that line that they had a refferendum to repeal the tax used to pay for it.

$800 million would have certainly made the Red Line possible.

$800 million is an awful lot of money to just piss away.

[Spartan]

45 minutes ago, mpretori said:

Would you rather give complete control to Cintra for 50 years? Id rather pay the money and have the state remain in control of the road. I think they will cut a deal with Cintra or they could just say screw them and put the project up for bid and just have the company construct the infrastructure and have DOT control the road. 

The problem is that there is a traffic problem right now, and the only way to have the state fund it, apparently, is to pay the $800m, and then build the $650m project on top of that. Additionally, you're probably looking at 15 or so years before the funding MIGHT become available for this project through the regular process. So, for the low low price of only $1.45 billion you can get a highway widening project that's 15 years late (but is owned by the state) and dozens of other cancelled or delayed transportation projects in the area - including the I-77 widening between uptown and South Carolina.

Just a reminder, there are $261m worth of project in the North Meck/Iredell area that would be used to pay for the cancellation. It's not clear to me where the remaining $539m would come from. The I-77 south project would still be able to advance without a private-sector partner, but it would mean that they would have to go back to the drawing board in terms of working out the financing and likely result in delays.

I'm not what you'd call a 'pro-highways' person, but I am 100% against wasting that much money. The decisions have already been made, and the time to fight this project was 5+ years ago. I say build it and change the strategy going forward. More transit and local streets are needed more than large highways that allow people to live further and further away from the city.