Charlotte Gateway Station and Railroad Improvements

[kermit]

1 hour ago, LKN704 said:

Is it actually confirmed that the station will be below-grade at Gateway? 

This is the first I have heard of it, and if true, that's pretty exciting. Below-grade could mean many things though I guess and doesn't necessarily mean a tunnel...could be in a trench, etc. 

Are there any links to the station plan at Gateway?

What they are clumsily trying to say is the station building (where people will wait, get baggage and (theoretically) get tickets) will be at street level, which is below the grade of the tracks. The tracks are definitely not getting trenched or tunneled, they have nearly finished the track and platform work (ex canopy) for the station already.

Oops, sorry. I just now realized you are asking about bus, not train access. I have fully tuned out the bus plans so I can't help there.

Oops again. @Real Ricky Clayton Fan has said that the Silver Line will be tunneled though the district. I assume the tunnel will be dug as cut and cover during building construction. I don't doubt RDF, but I will say he is (I believe) the only datapoint we have referencing the underground Silver Line (along with recent rendering not showing the Silver Line).

Edited March 7, 2022 by kermit

[JRCLT]

I thought silver line? Lol

[LKN704]

2 hours ago, kermit said:

What they are clumsily trying to say is the station building (where people will wait, get baggage and (theoretically) get tickets) will be at street level, which is below the grade of the tracks. The tracks are definitely not getting trenched or tunneled, they have nearly finished the track and platform work (ex canopy) for the station already.

Oops, sorry. I just now realized you are asking about bus, not train access. I have fully tuned out the bus plans so I can't help there.

Oops again. @Real Ricky Clayton Fan has said that the Silver Line will be tunneled though the district. I assume the tunnel will be dug as cut and cover during building construction. I don't doubt RDF, but I will say he is (I believe) the only datapoint we have referencing the underground Silver Line (along with recent rendering not showing the Silver Line).

If they truly plan to put the Silver Line in a tunnel underneath the Gateway Station...that's almost (hypocritical?) about face.

By hypocritical, I remember CATS saying how tunneling is "off the table",  "disruptive",  "too expensive", "risky", "we don't know what the conditions under Uptown are like". 

I wonder what made them change their minds. 

[CarolinaDaydreamin]

3 hours ago, LKN704 said:

If they truly plan to put the Silver Line in a tunnel underneath the Gateway Station...that's almost (hypocritical?) about face.

By hypocritical, I remember CATS saying how tunneling is "off the table",  "disruptive",  "too expensive", "risky", "we don't know what the conditions under Uptown are like". 

I wonder what made them change their minds. 

It is the plan. Its not the same thing as having a widespread underground tunnels. It will be a relatively small tunnel, and not under any existing buildings. 

[B Randy]

18 hours ago, CarolinaDaydreamin said:

It is the plan. Its not the same thing as having a widespread underground tunnels. It will be a relatively small tunnel, and not under any existing buildings. 

Do not believe that Silver Line will be underground.   Would be very surprised if this is the plan. 

[Guest]

The City has alternate plans, and I am myself doubtful this will come to fruition, but this is most certainly the current plan.

[JRCLT]

Considering this tunnel is not very long I wouldn’t say it is too great of a challenge that it couldn’t be done. There is already (albeit a way smaller tunnel) to get to UNC Charlotte terminus. This tunnel would be a step up, but wouldn’t as convoluted as say… tunneling under trade. It’s short, on underdeveloped land, and as someone mentioned before it could be made even simpler by having a cut and cover operation (cheapest way to build a tunnel). As of now it seems like an ideal situation with the least disturbance of any other alignment through uptown and relatively straightforward operation (with the little knowledge I know). They couldn’t cut and cover trade.

[Reverie39]

This makes me curious about something. As we all know several cities in the US have extensive underground rapid transit systems. The most obvious examples are huge metro areas with densely populated urban cores (NYC, Philadelphia, DC, etc.) and it's not too shocking that they accomplished this. Especially given many of them were partially constructed many decades ago, some before cars became more mainstream. 

But like, Seattle has an impressively long light rail subway line. Seattle is a big city, the metro area is substantially larger than Charlotte's, but it's no DC or Philly. And this is a relatively new light rail line, like Charlotte's, so the whole "different era" thing doesn't apply. So I'm wondering what exactly Seattle has done that makes such a feat doable for them, whereas the idea of something like that is laughable in Charlotte. I'm not asking for an underground line in Charlotte, but more just curious: how come it's so flabbergasting to even think about the idea? Do Seattle citizens pay more taxes towards public transportation? Is the geography/geology somehow better there? Do they just have different/better leadership?

Dallas is another example of a modern light rail subway line (with another one planned), although Dallas is gigantic so I figured it didn't compare as much.

[kermit]

^ Seattle's tunnel had been discussed and sorta planned for a long time (arguably 100 years). The city has lots of relief so tunneling can be less of an incremental cost compared to running rail on the surface when lots of grading is needed. The city also lacked a good transit ROW for rail though the center of the city.  Perhaps most significantly the downtown tunnel got started when Seattle thought it was going to get the massive wad of federal funding that was going to build a full subway system for the city (but the funds ultimately went to Atlanta because Seattle voters did not have a supermajority in support of the local funding match). While the subway system went to Atlanta, Seattle did get a bunch of federal funds for the downtown tunnel (roughly $1 billion in today's dollars per wikipedia), which was initially used for buses, was retrofitted for LRT and buses, and then recently converted to rail only.

Charlotte on the other hand had a pretty good surface ROW though downtown (going North-South anyway), had relatively little relief downtown, and never had plans for a big subway system. If we had planners who were thinking about 100 year timespans, we would have a tunnel under Trade street. But, we all know how our situation played out...

Edited March 9, 2022 by kermit

[Reverie39]

Wow, great explanation, thank you.

I assume Charlotte is seeking or expecting some amount of federal funding for the Silver Line and Gateway Station? I'm jealous of cities that get "massive wads of federal funding" to build their transit systems, but I assume Charlotte needs to accomplish certain things in order to earn that.

[kermit]

10 hours ago, Reverie39 said:

Wow, great explanation, thank you.

I assume Charlotte is seeking or expecting some amount of federal funding for the Silver Line and Gateway Station? I'm jealous of cities that get "massive wads of federal funding" to build their transit systems, but I assume Charlotte needs to accomplish certain things in order to earn that.

The “massive wads” were from the Lyndon Johnson, Great Society, era of federal funding. The federal government was interested in improving quality of life for the impoverished and funding massive transit investments in second tier cities was a tool for that. The era gave us Washington Metro, San Francisco BART, Miami Metrorail and Atlanta MARTA (only because Seattle said no to the cash) and a few other smaller projects.  These days transit funding is restricted to a much smaller scale with the expectation of MUCH higher local funding matches (the fed paid 80% of the cost of most of the above projects)

This change for the worse seems like really bad timing. The ‘massive wads’ are unlikely to return, unless all levels of government have a ‘come to Jesus’ moment about climate change.

Edited March 9, 2022 by kermit

[JRCLT]

Wow, great explanation, thank you.
I assume Charlotte is seeking or expecting some amount of federal funding for the Silver Line and Gateway Station? I'm jealous of cities that get "massive wads of federal funding" to build their transit systems, but I assume Charlotte needs to accomplish certain things in order to earn that.

CATS is working on getting those funds. They understand the momentous moment this is for funding.

[davidclt]

8 hours ago, JeanClt said:

CATS is working on getting those funds. They understand the momentous moment this is for funding.

I hope they do better at approaching Washington (hat in hand) with plans than they do running the (light) railroad or managing the Norfolk Southern team railroad.

[15895]

There’s a certain city between Washington & Charlotte that would have to play ball and commit a couple hundred million to build the silver line. 

[JRCLT]

I hope they do better at approaching Washington (hat in hand) with plans than they do running the (light) railroad or managing the Norfolk Southern team railroad.

From what I hear NS railroad is not fun company to deal with…

[davidclt]

4 hours ago, JeanClt said:

From what I hear NS railroad is not fun company to deal with…

Getting to the point the city, county (yes, I know the county has no dog in this fight but a strongly worded letter might help?) and state should put the dick in dictator and exercise whatever rights or powers they have in this matter to  compell Norfolk Souther to come to the table and negotiate in good faith. Or, does NS really hold ALL the cards?

[kermit]

On 3/9/2022 at 8:14 PM, davidclt said:

Or, does NS really hold ALL the cards?

Thanks to RRs having immunity from eminent domain there is nothing that can be done directly to compel access to the line. I suspect some arm twisting could be done related to environmental issues at the Tryon yard (we are gonna make sure you pay $$$ to clean it up unless...), but railroads have been around a longggggg time and they have lots of lawyers for those situations so it would be unlikely to be successful.

NC does have more power over NS than any other state would thanks to NS leasing their main line from the NCRR (which is controlled by the state). The state could, theoretically, dangle NCRR access as a bargaining chip, but given the current composition of the legislature its actually more likely they would just sell the NCRR to NS for a sweetheart price (this was seriously discussed back about 15 years ago ("the state shouldn't own a RR, grumble, republican grumble..."). Such a sale might actually shake the O-Line loose from NS' grasp, but it would come at a big cost -- dense inter-city rail connecting CLT-Triad-Triangle is critical to the state's continued growth of high wage jobs.

Edited March 11, 2022 by kermit

[CLT Development]

On 3/7/2022 at 5:16 PM, kermit said:

What they are clumsily trying to say is the station building (where people will wait, get baggage and (theoretically) get tickets) will be at street level, which is below the grade of the tracks. The tracks are definitely not getting trenched or tunneled, they have nearly finished the track and platform work (ex canopy) for the station already.

Oops, sorry. I just now realized you are asking about bus, not train access. I have fully tuned out the bus plans so I can't help there.

Oops again. @Real Ricky Clayton Fan has said that the Silver Line will be tunneled though the district. I assume the tunnel will be dug as cut and cover during building construction. I don't doubt RDF, but I will say he is (I believe) the only datapoint we have referencing the underground Silver Line (along with recent rendering not showing the Silver Line).

Thats what the stacking plan I've seen shows. cut and cover is the only way to fit it all in. What I can absolutely say for certain, is that the alignment of uses is whats holding this entire thing back.

Edited March 10, 2022 by CLT Development

[Reverie39]

Seems like the Lake Norman commuter rail idea will have a tough time getting off the ground. Are there any other options that could be explored for commuter rail? Something to Concord or Rock Hill maybe? I'm not sure what the situation is with existing railroads and ownership.

[kermit]

17 hours ago, Reverie39 said:

Seems like the Lake Norman commuter rail idea will have a tough time getting off the ground. Are there any other options that could be explored for commuter rail? Something to Concord or Rock Hill maybe? I'm not sure what the situation is with existing railroads and ownership.

1) Sugar Creek, UNCC, Harrisburg, Concord, Kannapolis, Salisbury

Very feasible and relatively low cost. Tracks 100% owned by the NCRR and are completely double tracked. Concord does not have a great station site, it would probably need to be out by the bus terminal near 85, otherwise would be a home run in terms of ridership.

2) Airport, Belmont, Cramerton, Gastonia, Bessemer City, Kings Mountain.

Less easy, 100% owned by NS and the tracks are very near capacity. NS would require _lots_ of money for upgrades and probably insist on a frequency level that would make the investment difficult to justify.  Ridership so so (there are not a huge # of uptown workers in Gaston county beyond Belmont)

3) Airport (adjacent to airport actually, station probably at West blvd), 485 (blue line transfer), Pineville, Fort Mill, Rock Hill, Chester (and hopefully onto Columbia)

This is a middle-difficulty option. NS uses this line less than the Gastonia route, but it is all single track with few sidings. Upgrade costs would be significant, but not overwhelming. The biggest road block is that it is unlikely SC would contribute to necessary upgrades. Ridership good (assuming office workers return to Uptown)

4) Monroe, Matthews, Charlotte, Mt Holly, Lincolnton

CSX does not really know what it wants with these tracks. Currently their intermodal yard and tanktown around Paw Creek generate a large amount of freight, but otherwise CSX seems to be pretty disinterested in this spur line. Intermodal faculty could move to Monroe (been discussed in the past). If CSX were willing to share (or sell to a shortline) a solid agreement for time-shifting freight and some new sidings would make this a viable route. Excellent route for S-bahn style service. Ridership OK

5) Sugar Creek, 485, Midland, Stanfield, Oakboro

The ACWR would love to get reasonable fees for commuter service to run on these tracks. Unfortunately the route is slow, very few people live out this way (even fewer who commute to uptown), and the parallel road is one of the least congested in the metro. But the tracks run through a very transit under served portion of Charlotte and it would become a 'build it and they will come' route. Ridership poor in initially but would make a bunch of attractive, possibly cheap, new housing available.

Edited March 10, 2022 by kermit

[CLT Development]

41 minutes ago, Reverie39 said:

Seems like the Lake Norman commuter rail idea will have a tough time getting off the ground. Are there any other options that could be explored for commuter rail? Something to Concord or Rock Hill maybe? I'm not sure what the situation is with existing railroads and ownership.

Its certainly possible with new leadership. I don't think John Lewis lurks here, but I think we need to bring someone in that has a ton of experience in a bigger city than Charlotte, vs a smaller and even more spread out city than Charlotte (Orlando). Lets grab someone from LA, San Fran, NYC, Seattle, Boston, DC, or Philly.

3 minutes ago, kermit said:

1) Sugar Creek, UNCC, Harrisburg, Concord, Kannapolis, Salisbury

Very feasible and relatively low cost. Tracks 100% owned by the NCRR and are completely double tracked. Concord does not have a great station site, it would probably need to be out by the bus terminal near 85. Would be a home run in terms of ridership.

2) Airport, Belmont, Cramerton, Gastonia, Bessemer City, Kings Mountain.

Less easy, 100% owned by NS and the tracks are very near capacity. NS would require _lots_ of money for upgrades and probably insist on a frequency level that would make it difficult to justify.  Ridership so so

3) Airport (adjacent, West blvd), 485 (blue line transfer), Pineville, Fort Mill, Rock Hill, Chester (and hopefully onto Columbia)

This is a middle-difficulty option. NS uses this line less than the Gastonia route, but it is all single track with few sidings. Upgrade costs would be significant, but not overwhelming. The biggest road block is that it is unlikely SC would pay anything for these upgrades. Ridership good (assuming office workers return to Uptown)

4) Monroe, Matthews, Charlotte, Mt Holly, Lincolnton

CSX does not really know what it wants with these tracks. Currently their intermodal yard and tanktown around Paw Creek generate a large amount of freight, but otherwise CSX is pretty disinterested in this spur line. If CSX were willing to share a solid agreement for time shifting freight and some new sidings would make this a viable route. Ridership OK

5) Sugar Creek, 485, Midland, Stanfield, Oakboro

The ACWR would love to get reasonable fees for commuter service to run on these tracks. Unfortunately the route is slow, very few people live out this way (even fewer who commute to uptown), and the road is one of the least congested in the metro. But it would serve a very transit under served portion of Charlotte and it would become a 'build it and they will come' route. Ridership poor

We need to keep working on ACWR, CSX and NS. Chicago has a significantly large harbor and yet as many commuter trains as freight trains run on their tracks every single day. Its certainly possible here. https://www.up.com/aboutup/community/inside_track/chicago-commuter-1-11-2017.htm

Edited March 10, 2022 by CLT Development

[orulz]

1) Sugar Creek, UNCC, Harrisburg, Concord, Kannapolis, Salisbury
Very feasible and relatively low cost. Tracks 100% owned by the NCRR and are completely double tracked. Concord does not have a great station site, it would probably need to be out by the bus terminal near 85, otherwise would be a home run in terms of ridership.

I think this is on the right track. I'd probably fit in a few more stations though. Under no circumstances should there be literally more than 5 miles between stations on this line. Concord probably gets 3 stations for example. NC49, Cabarrus Ave, and the bus depot by I-85. That's still at least 3 miles between each station. Maybe fit in another one between Sugar Creek and UNCC, Grier Rd perhaps. Although maybe that is not necessary if you can extend the Blue Line to connect with the commuter rail at Universit City Blvd.

[orulz]

Here are some mileposts and station spacings for a NCRR Mecklenburg-Cabarrus-Rowan commuter rail line:

46.5 miles, 13 stations (including Gateway, 14.)
From 2.5 to 5 miles (4-8km) between stations for the entire line.

With Diesel Multiple Unit trains and level boarding, trains could cover the distance to Spencer in about an hour?

0 Gateway
(3.5mi)
3.5 Sugar Creek
(3 mi)
6.5 Grier Rd
(3.25 mi)
9.75 UNCC
(4 mi)
13.75 Harrisburg
(4.75 mi)
18.5 NC 49
(3 mi)
21.5 Concord
(3 mi)
24.5 I-85
(4 mi)
28.5 Kannapolis
(3.5 mi)
32.0 Landis
(2.5mi)
34.5 China Grove
(5 mi)
39.5 Peeler Rd
(4.5 mi)
44.0 Salisbury
(2.5mi)
46.5 Spencer

Figure about 2 minutes saved for each station cut.

Stations that can conceivably be cut:
-Grier Rd
-NC49
-Landis
-Peeler Rd

That gets the travel time from Salisbury maybe down to under 50 minutes, but you have to weigh that against the lost ridership from cutting the stations.

[XRZ.ME]

There is ramp on 5th st. to the platform.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[deleted account]

This piss everyone else off as much as it did me?