Jump to content

2030 Transit Plan


monsoon

Recommended Posts

Well you thought wrong as this has not been determined to be an unfair comparison except by those who have now other defense for the dismally low ridership goals of the 2030 plan. I invite you to go back and read that discuss and bring up any point that you don't like instead of just calling it "unfair".

When Atlanta made the decisions to design its system with the design specifications it had, it was not much larger than Charlotte is now, and the fact that Charlotte in 20 years can't match a system that Atlanta design 50 years in the past speaks volumes for how much the 2030 plan is all about words, but very little on substance.

Unfortunately after asking several times in this very thread as well as hours of research in trying to dig up the numbers I have yet to find out what the opening ridership numbers were for the first rail line in Atlanta. I believe someone may have stated that those numbers may have not been tracked but what are the earliest numbers for ridership that we know of Atlanta's rail system and how much of the system do those numbers represent in comparison with the population?

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Replies 1.3k
  • Created
  • Last Reply
......

My only point is this -- I don't mind the honest and open debate, but Charlotte is growing and will continue to do so and to follow those that simply want us to stop in our tracks like a picture in time is not realistic. Angry stubborness and attempts to derail everything doesn't help anything. I still contend the anti folks would get so much further if they lost the bitter and angry tone. We can also have good growth and not all old-timers, me included, mind the new face of Charlotte. I love it, welcome it, and the people and activity it brings......

Link to comment
Share on other sites

atlrvr, I agree with most of your ideas. Couple comments:

I would not emphasize grade separation so heavily. Instead I would emphasize at-grade, dedicated corridors. The presence of grade crossings really has very little impact on the actual operation of the line. It has some impact on traffic around the line, but that's often greatly exaggerated. By insisting on 100% grade separation, you will end up with a lot of ugly concrete structures that feel like barriers and a lot of missed opportunities for connectivity.

I absolutely agree with having the SE corridor and W corridor tied together with a subway, probably under Trade (or 5th) and Charlottetowne. The streetcars could, but might not, be connected to this same subway.

For the West corridor, I might forgo the elevated line on Wilkinson, and instead do a LRT using railroad rights-of-way, just like the S corridor. Norfolk Southern and P&N out of uptown, some abandoned P&N industrial spurs along W. Morehead (you can see them on Polaris), and NS again along Wilkinson before curving south to the terminal at CLT.

The four commuter lines (Rock Hill, Statesville, Gastonia, and Kannapolis) seems to make sense though I don't know what the demand is or will be.

Any ideas for crosstown streetcars? S Line Tyvola Station -> South Park -> SE Line Sharon Amity Station -> Eastland Mall seems like a place to start.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can't say that I speak for everyone in the Fort Mill, Rock Hill area, but if there was a commuter rail line running to SC you can bet you bottom dollar that I would be riding it more than I would be driving. Of course, since I work in the Southpark area, I would also love some type of train service through that area (it seems to be a no-brainer since it is such a large business district, but i digress).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well honestly, Larry left UrbanPlanet because of the bad treatment he received here so this goes both ways, and I can't tell you how many nasty and I do mean nasty PMs, posts and emails I got for supporting the repeal of the tax. Nevermind that nobody ever listened to why I wanted to remove it. In any case the debate on the tax is over. From my viewpoint there was never an honest debate on what this tax means because whenever the difficult questions of CATS was asked, then let the attacks begin. It just happened again above so I think my cases is proved.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Larry obviously had no intentions on becoming part of UP as he did advertising for his campaign. He came on, argued some, once he saw the heavy opposition and strength in those that believed against his campaign, he left, not debating anymore because 1)he couldn't answer some of the questions, 2)he was in a heavy opposition area that was very educated on the issue. We all treated eachother the same.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

atlrvr, I agree with most of your ideas. Couple comments:

I would not emphasize grade separation so heavily. Instead I would emphasize at-grade, dedicated corridors.

...

Any ideas for crosstown streetcars? S Line Tyvola Station -> South Park -> SE Line Sharon Amity Station -> Eastland Mall seems like a place to start.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Larry obviously had no intentions on becoming part of UP as he did advertising for his campaign. He came on, argued some, once he saw the heavy opposition and strength in those that believed against his campaign, he left, not debating anymore because 1)he couldn't answer some of the questions, 2)he was in a heavy opposition area that was very educated on the issue. We all treated eachother the same.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can't say that I speak for everyone in the Fort Mill, Rock Hill area, but if there was a commuter rail line running to SC you can bet you bottom dollar that I would be riding it more than I would be driving. Of course, since I work in the Southpark area, I would also love some type of train service through that area (it seems to be a no-brainer since it is such a large business district, but i digress).
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You simply have no idea of what you are talking about. We are very good here at vetting out people who come here to cause trouble along with spammers and I will tell you that Larry was not one of them. I spend a good part of my day dealing with people like this so I know what I am talking about. Neo and I decided to let him voice his opinion here, and despite my constant warnings in that topic to follow the rules, a number of people didn't. Our trash is littered with posts to prove it. Take care before you choose to criticize other legitimate forumers on this site as you are not exactly the model of a good forumer either. The only reason I brought it up in the first place was to respond to the commentary about it as it was not an invitation to you to start taking pot shots. Which as usual, you chose to ignore.

I suppose I also have no idea what I'm talking about as I was of the same opinion that Larry was unable to answer some of the hard questions presented. Yes, some posts were deleted, but those that weren't really weren't answered accordingly. It seems that all of us here have managed to stick to our guns regardless of our opinion and what side of the fence we stand on yet we didn't throw our arms up after a couple of days and leave. You should know better than anyone that when standing in opposition against the popular opinion you shouldn't simply back away but should support your conclusion and I think that we can all say we're happy that you do just that. Larry didn't travel down the road of backing up his opinion very far and while none of us can prove exactly why his stay was so short here I think the conclusion of many is that the hard questions simply couldn't be answered thus to avoid further questioning that couldn't be answered it would be best to leave to keep what ground you still have left.

Unless you know Larry personally I don't think you or anyone else can say why he stopped conversing with us here regarding the issue. I certainly can't put words in his mouth about why he left but I myself came the the conclusion that some questions couldn't be answered. I would have more respect of an opinion if any drive at all was given to prove the point but backing down regardless of the opposition shows weakness and mercy, not something that holds up very well, especially when you're opposing such a force as this issue is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

^ You are being very diplomatic (as you probably should in your position) by giving Larry any kind of out here. We as the members do not have to be so tactful. But, that said, I do respect him for showing up at all, I mean that sincerely. However, his brief stay here pretty much proves his underlying motive and mindset, and Larry quite underestimated his audience.

And THAT is why I am insulted at his behavior, such as his passive aggressive and fake demeaning of his own knowledge - obviously he is a leader for his group - it dosn't say much for his message if he were truly that ignorant; and particularly his sudden departure. He managed to answer practically no direct question, and ignored or deflected nearly all the rest. And so it is little wonder that the typical American is apathetic about it's leadership, and the voting process in general.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is the thread in question. In reviewing it again, I don't see where he tried to avoid the issues. He attempted to answer the questions at hand, but as you can see between his first post and when he came back to make his next post, that thread went off on quite a rant. I commend him as a new person putting up with what was going on there. On him leaving, you may remember that I messaged you that he was going to do so if something wasn't done about the treatment that he was getting here. Several hours later, he did.

It is interesting that Larry kept pulling the "I'm not intelligent" card:

"Could you just ask me in a simple way that somebody with my limited intelligence could understand."

That to me sounds as if he was skirting the issue. If Larry truly became a member here to discuss his views he never would have pulled the 'I'm not intelligent' remarks but would have instead used his wisdom of the issue to allow us to see his views. Larry is a very smart guy but to pull a sarcastic remark as he did (multiple times) simply does nothing in his favor.

Regardless Larry left for reasons that we disagree on which is fine but we both must understand that neither of us know why Larry truly left. It appears to me that he left because he was skirting the questions, but that may or may not be the case, however I'm not about to state this as fact.

Now back to the topic at hand, how to make the 2030 system better...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

^Then most likely then it was a mistake for us to have agreed to give him a forum here as it ended badly for reasons we disagree with. It was a nice idea, but at least in my opinion, the dialog that should have happened didn't and that gets us back to the post I made earlier this morning in that there hasn't been an honest dialog on the issues around this tax. I don't see how anyone could conclude there has been.

I do agree the debate on the tax is over and we have what we have now. As for the 2030 plan, that is set in stone now and the only thing that can change it is that CATS comes back and says they want even more money to build it. (a very distinct possibility)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Keith Parker was just named as Tober's replacement.....sigh....we continue to trend of hiring from within. Oh well. Not that I have any problem or concerns about Keith, it's just becoming troubling that all new top-level city positions are internal hires. Keith...read my plan and get it done! :)
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hiring from within- particularly someone in his position- is a good thing. He knows the system, he knows the key players in the city and the state, and he has a lot of people under him that already know transit. He's a good person to manage the system, and I think he will be an asset to CATS.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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

Important Information

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