Charlotte's Light Rail: Lynx Blue Line

[southslider]

The City is already rebuilding the "weave" (US-29/NC-49) section of North Tryon with road bonds. But much of the BLE still requires widening Tryon outside of the "weave" project: south to Old Concord, plus north to UNCC. I imagine all this widening significantly adds to the total project cost. Thus, I wonder if a huge savings to the transit project could be the City assuming more of North Tryon as a road-bond project.

Granted, that would be a bit of "shell game" for local match, switching from County sales tax to effectively City property tax revenues. But the total project cost would go down, lowering all funding matches (Fed, State and Local) for the New Starts project.

To sweeten the deal, maybe CATS could assume streetcar operations with the County sales tax revenue stream, in exchange for the City effectively taking on more of the BLE project cost with its own revenues.

[thetrick]

Maybe this has been addressed before, but why does the BLE have to diverge off of Tryon and "dip" into the university? Keeping the BLE in the N Tryon median seems considerably less complicated than cutting through the UNCC campus, and building in the wetlands north of the campus. Not to mention a current unresolved design issue dealing with the BLE going under north Tryon to get into the university and cutting off access to the hospital.

Keep the station and the BLE alignment in N Tryon, the UNCC kids could stand to walk up the hill to it.

TH

[Spartan]

Any rail is linear. Our light rail is certainly not alterning its path any time soon.

As far as right-of-way, who here really believes monorails are just as obtrusive and/or invasive as ground rails that shut down traffic while they pass, isolate neighborhoods, and in general create hard-to-cross tracks? Height clearances? 30-40 feet? Come on, my warehouse is that high, and so what if air-rights have to be attained...would that be a problem?

You guys just have a bad taste in your mouth for Disney Land or something. Do you think the "L" in Chicago was a poor investment? In reality, a monorail is just an elevated lightrail. The columns in LV allowed traffic to flow unimpeded, pedestrians to walk underneath, and nobody ran the risk of stalling out at crossovers.

I'm not suggesting that rail isn't linear. In Las Vegas, the city's development and destinations are essentially all along the strip and the Convention Center. The set up there makes sense given the extremely high volumes of tourists for which the rail is built. It's not unlike Myrtle Beach in that it's one long strip of attractions.

My objection to modern elevated rail systems of any sort is the high cost associated with building things in the air. Right of way still has to be purchased no matter what. The projected price of the BLE is twice that of the South Corridor, and it's not due to the right-of way costs. It's because of all the elevated sections that have to be built (6 or 7 including complete reconstruction of 2 major streets to go under the tracks) compared to just 3 rail-only overpasses in the south.

[Urbanity]

Maybe this has been addressed before, but why does the BLE have to diverge off of Tryon and "dip" into the university? Keeping the BLE in the N Tryon median seems considerably less complicated than cutting through the UNCC campus, and building in the wetlands north of the campus. Not to mention a current unresolved design issue dealing with the BLE going under north Tryon to get into the university and cutting off access to the hospital.

Keep the station and the BLE alignment in N Tryon, the UNCC kids could stand to walk up the hill to it.

TH

I have to admit that I agree. UNC Charlotte would still be served by the rail line and it would be a more direct path to 485. It certainly would seem to be a much cheaper route for reasons you mention. I also think the straight down Tryon route makes more sense TOD wise.

If UNC Charlotte wants it to swing on campus maybe they could fund that section?

Edited November 24, 2010 by Urbanity

[tozmervo]

The UNCC stop is located so that nearly the entire campus is within 1/2 mile of the stop. If it was relocated up to Tryon, parts of the campus would be over a mile away. Given that this stop would be providing a significant chunk of the ridership of the line, I think its a worthwhile move to make the stop a part of the campus.

I do agree, though, that they should look into having the campus provide some funds - particularly for the station itself.

[New Name]

I thought I remembered something about how there was to be only one UNCC station until UNCC agreed to fund (some?) of an actual on-campus station - if I remember this right, UNCC was to build the station in that kind of "academic brick" style of the campus. But I don't know if there was ever talk about how much the extra track/infrastructure would cost to get onto the campus...

[thetrick]

I have to admit that I agree. UNC Charlotte would still be served by the rail line and it would be a more direct path to 485. It certainly would seem to be a much cheaper route for reasons you mention. I also think the straight down Tryon route makes more sense TOD wise.

If UNC Charlotte wants it to swing on campus maybe they could fund that section?

The other side of the coin I imagine is that CATS needs to keep the BLE within so many feet of high density living to be able to keep it's ridership numbers up and get the federal funding. It's proably necessary to move the station into the center of this high density area to get the numbers right.

TH

[southslider]

^Transit ridership models are likely more sensitive regarding a station's surrounding land uses when it's a walk-up station (like UNCC), yet less sensitive, when it's a park-and-ride (like 485). What's likely more important to park-and-ride stations is the road accessibilty or motorist travel time on surrounding road network leading to that station.

[kermit]

never underestimate the laziness of the average undergraduate (very few will voluntarily walk a mile)

[tozmervo]

I think a lot of people would walk (or ride a bike) a mile, the problem is how much time you're investing in transit at that point. At an average speed, walking a mile takes about 20 minutes. Add that to time waiting on a train then trip time on the train, and you've suddenly got 45-65 minute trip to Uptown.

Edit:

AWW it's hard to believe our little guy is gettin' so old. Happy 3rd birthday, LYNX.

Edited November 25, 2010 by tozmervo

[caterpillar2]

The many years I lived in London, I never minded the half mile walk to the tube station. Of course, in the summer the temperature was between 65 an 75 normally. To tell the truth, the weather could be a considerable problem in the Charlotte area. When it is ungodly hot in the summer, one isn't motivated to walk to the station wearing a suit.. I really want the rail and hope that I am wrong. I especially want the Red Line though.

Edited December 7, 2010 by caterpillar2

[grodney]

AWW it's hard to believe our little guy is gettin' so old. Happy 3rd birthday, LYNX.

Are there monthly or weekly ridership numbers summarized all in one place anywhere?

[tozmervo]

LYNX Blue Line Extension - Public Meetings

The Charlotte Area Transit System (CATS) invites you to attend one of the following upcoming public meetings on the LYNX Blue Line Extension light rail project. CATS staff will present proposed changes to the Blue Line Extension project to start service in 2016. The same information will be presented at both meetings.

Meeting dates and locations:

Tuesday, January 11, 2011

6:00 p.m. – 8:00 p.m.

Sugaw Creek Presbyterian Church

101 W Sugar Creek Rd

Wednesday, January 12, 2011

6:00 p.m. – 8:00 p.m.

Oasis Shriners Center

604 Doug Mayes Place

[tozmervo]

http://www.bizjournals.com/charlotte/blog/queen_city_agenda/2010/12/light-rail-cuts-include-reduced-route.html

The MTC has been presented with recommendations on how to scale back the BLE. The most significant piece is ending the line at UNCC and redistributing commuter parking to other stations. This allows the line to avoid building over the wetlands around Mallard Creek Road.

Another recommendation was buying only 18 cars instead of 26, which would allow them to defer building a second maintenance facility.

There was also discussion on scaling back the streetscape improvements like sidewalk upgrades and bike lanes, although it sounds like CDOT can potentially move that work to another pool of money.

There are some other odds and ends in the article, but those are the main chunks of the potential cuts.

My $.02:

Of all the ideas, I am the most against cutting the streetscape upgrades. I think they're imperative to successful stations and allowing the line to integrate into the N Tryon neighborhoods like it does with the South Blvd neighborhoods. I think it sucks to cut out the commuters at the end of the line, but extending the line later seems much more likely once it's already built out to UNCC.

[thetrick]

I think we need to look at the south portion of the LYNX as being built in a economic environment that is gone and might not return for a long time, the BLE will be different from what already has been built because it has to be.

I think the MTC recommendations are good, and none of them seem to lock us into any un-correctable situations. Frankly I would not have a problem with more cuts as long as we get the core of the BLE. Projects die on the vine all the time because people are not willing to accept the reality of their finical situation and make the call on what to cut back. We need to do what ever it takes to get the BLE under construction.

TH

[Sabaidee]

It all sounds good, but I'm somewhat against limiting the purchase of the LRVs. Hopefully with the LRV contract, it will have an option of purchasing additional LRVs at the original contracted price.

About the streetscape, CDOT did have a project (South Corridor Infrastructure Program) to beautified and add sidewalks along South Blvd around the Blue Line. However, the BLE streetscape is quite different than what was required of the SCIP as half of the BLE is in the middle of Tryon Street.

[Urbanity]

Overall I agree with most of the plan and think it says alot about Charlotte's commitment to mas transit. I would rather see the two-stop shortened line built by 2016 then endangering the whole line with a longer wait while costs will continue to rise.

My $.02:

Of all the ideas, I am the most against cutting the streetscape upgrades. I think they're imperative to successful stations and allowing the line to integrate into the N Tryon neighborhoods like it does with the South Blvd neighborhoods.

I fully agree. You have to build the foundation for TOD and urban density along with the line itself. It's one of the smallest items that they are suggesting to cut that could have the biggest (negative) impacts.

[New Name]

Another $9 million could be saved by delaying construction of a deck at the Sugar Creek station. Instead, CATS would build surface lots.

I've never understood why CATS is in the business of providing infrastructure for cars anyway. I understand the convenience goes up if you provide a place for people to drive/park/ride - but not this close to the inner city (maybe in the 'burbs). Charlotte is not that treacherous of an urban auto landscape, and Sugar Creek Rd is actually more treacherous to drive on than any road in Uptown. But I suppose it's the culture of Charlotte where buses aren't used by people who can afford cars.

Build on parking structure at Harris Blvd. Every other station should be fed by walking, biking, or feeder bus routes.

[New Name]

I've never understood why CATS is in the business of providing infrastructure for cars anyway. I understand the convenience goes up if you provide a place for people to drive/park/ride - but not this close to the inner city (maybe in the 'burbs). Charlotte is not that treacherous of an urban auto landscape, and Sugar Creek Rd is actually more treacherous to drive on than any road in Uptown. But I suppose it's the culture of Charlotte where buses aren't used by people who can afford cars.

Build on parking structure at Harris Blvd. Every other station should be fed by walking, biking, or feeder bus routes.

Let me be more eloquent: I assert that if CATS were to spend 99% of the budget on making the best, and most efficient transit line possible, people would find a way to use it (despite inconvenience). Smart land developers would find a way to integrate with it. And you might see social trends change as result.

[dubone]

Realistically the $45m streetscape budget should have been a coordinated cost of the city's anyway. Beyond that, I am happy that all the stations remain, as it is easier to get funding for a future extension than the addition of random intermediate stations.

I just hope they have picked a recipe for success in gaining the federal grant.

[kermit]

I too am pleased that they are looking for ways to move forward quickly, the cuts do seem reasonable and dropping frequency from 6 to 7.5 minutes is better than I had hoped. Given the reduction in vehicle purchases I was surprised to hear that they plan to build platforms for 3 cars on the extension (but not yet on the south line) -- perhaps that is being saved as a potential future cut in case of overruns? My preference would be that they design for three car platforms but only pour concrete for two cars until they can do the whole line, I guess its possible this strategy saves little cash.

All of CATS' new stations will have platforms long enough to handle three-car trains. But before the line can handle such trains, existing stations would have to be lengthened.

My link

Edited December 17, 2010 by kermit

[New Name]

BAH HUMBUG!

death of the lame-duck Senate’s decision to kill the $1.1 trillion omnibus spending bill. It included three local projects, led by an $11 million earmark for final design of the 9.4-mile light-rail

Interesting to get the scoop on that $3.7M sum from a few months back though:

In August, an error whittled a request of $33.7 million to $3.7 million.

Was this REALLY a $30M typo?!

[New Name]

Here is a link to the CATS presentationof 30% cost-cutting on the BLE.

And here is a link to the Charmeck Planning website with a survey about the presentation.

[grodney]

Leaving my car at Hendrick Honda for the day, they gave me a ride to Sharon Road West, and gave me two little gold tokens for the train (one for the trip uptown, one for the trip back, they told me). They say "one ride local - CATS" on one side, and "LYNX - one ride local" on the other side. They're a little smaller than a nickel.

My question: How do I use these? I punched up a one-way ticket on the ticket machine and punched CASH (CREDIT was the only other option) and put in the token, and it just spat back out the coin return. I looked on the CATS/LYNX website, but wasn't able to find anything. What am I missing here?

[jednc]

Leaving my car at Hendrick Honda for the day, they gave me a ride to Sharon Road West, and gave me two little gold tokens for the train (one for the trip uptown, one for the trip back, they told me). They say "one ride local - CATS" on one side, and "LYNX - one ride local" on the other side. They're a little smaller than a nickel.

My question: How do I use these? I punched up a one-way ticket on the ticket machine and punched CASH (CREDIT was the only other option) and put in the token, and it just spat back out the coin return. I looked on the CATS/LYNX website, but wasn't able to find anything. What am I missing here?

My guess would have been to take the coins on the train with you and if you're asked for a ticket, you show the inspector your coin. That solution would lead me to believe that the coins are not meant to be recycled, but rather kept by the rider.