2035 Triangle Regional Transit Vision Plan

[DCMetroRaleigh]

On 12/28/2018 at 1:21 PM, ctl said:

Perhaps not, but from what my son in DC has said about WMATA, traveling by bus and subway there can be just as time-consuming. 

Yes, gridlock here is so bad that buses are caught in the same traffic everyone else is. The Metro has been plagued by incessant problems that delay trains. 

[Merthecat]

In the meantime, Durham residents are filing a lawsuit against the City and GoTriangle over the proposed location of the DOLRT storage/maintenance facility:

https://www.newsobserver.com/news/local/article225407280.html

[DeleteMe]

Development, and density, follow transportation.  Motorized, single-occupancy, modes of transportation require large quantities of space that detract from transit, bike, and ped mobility options.  Charlotte got it right.  Durham, and Triangle, continue to blow it.

[Jones_]

7 hours ago, MACyr said:

Development, and density, follow transportation.  Motorized, single-occupancy, modes of transportation require large quantities of space that detract from transit, bike, and ped mobility options.  Charlotte got it right.  Durham, and Triangle, continue to blow it.

As an aside, it's my firm belief that governments should have been encouraging dense development all along. Whether it be extremely high taxes on non-farm acreage, an urban growth boundary or what I don't know, but the pure sprawl is not a sustainable pattern on multiple fronts, the most concerning to me being shrinking amounts of untouched land. Can't do anything to scare away the god damned developers around here, so unchecked soul sucking, land wasting sprawl is what we get. We'll be in very dire straits before the effing 'market' self corrects any of this. Where are you John Hood? I want to hear how endless population growth spread evenly on 1/4 of an acre parcels is supposed to work in the long term before any negative effects become irreversible...

[DeleteMe]

10 hours ago, Jones_ said:

As an aside, it's my firm belief that governments should have been encouraging dense development all along. Whether it be extremely high taxes on non-farm acreage, an urban growth boundary or what I don't know, but the pure sprawl is not a sustainable pattern on multiple fronts, the most concerning to me being shrinking amounts of untouched land. Can't do anything to scare away the god damned developers around here, so unchecked soul sucking, land wasting sprawl is what we get. We'll be in very dire straits before the effing 'market' self corrects any of this. Where are you John Hood? I want to hear how endless population growth spread evenly on 1/4 of an acre parcels is supposed to work in the long term before any negative effects become 

It's tragically ironic that the John Hood's of the world screaming about fiscal responsibility havent figure out the least fiscally responsible pattern of development is the one currently engulfing the Triangle.   "Government should be run like a business" my a##. If government were run like a business the business would be land and services, the income, tax revenue and property owners would be shareholders.  We would be maximizing the return on existing investments and maximizing development where public investments have made instead of forfeiting our fiscal responsibility because god-forbid we mess with "personal property rights" regardless of what it does to our shareholders.  If a business operated like that, they'd be out of business.  If government were run like a business, we'd be analyzing land suitability and telling Joe Blow, sorry but allowing a shopping center on your property isn't part of our strategic investment plan.   The Triangle Realtors Association, NC Homebuilders, NC GOP, Art Pope, John Hood and the rest of the rest of their kind lose their s&!t over government running like a business because it means they might have eat their own words and play be the rules.  They are worse than hypocrites.  

Edited February 11, 2019 by MACyr

[ctl]

Or maybe it's because the majority of people in the greater Triangle (the 12-county CSA) simply don't want to live in a dense urban environment. You can blame the status quo on identifiable persons who don't share your views, but the more likely if also more intractable scenario is that you have a lot of evangelization ahead of you if you expect people beyond the boundaries of Raleigh and Durham to flip the development pattern away from 1/4-acre lots to high density. 

[kermit]

6 hours ago, ctl said:

Or maybe it's because the majority of people in the greater Triangle (the 12-county CSA) simply don't want to live in a dense urban environment.

This appears likely, although we can't be certain this is true. There are really no options available to Triangle residents for well-planned dense urban living. The pockets of urbanity that exist (the neighborhoods immediately surrounding downtown Durham and Carborro) are isolated from the economic core of the region and quite expensive (the price is suggestive that there is a shortage). Despite the shortage, relatively few new urban-living options have been built since the Triangle began its explosive growth (keeping new construction prohibitively expensive). Even where new residential density is being created (Glenwood?)  it is sub-optimal since transit connectivity to other urban districts (and shopping) is non-existent. Since most of the benefits of high-density living come from the auto-free availability of daily needs high-density islands without retail clusters AND  frequent transit to other activity nodes have little to recommend them.  Until zoning changes (eliminating parking requirements) and transit is an option to create a web of interconnected urban districts (and enough of them that they can be offered at a competitive price) we have no way of knowing what Triangle residents truly prefer.   

At the risk of diverging towards anecdote I'll share the stories of folks I know in the Triangle. My father spent 50+ years living in rural Durham County. When his life circumstances changed he wanted to move to a walkable area somewhere in Durham or Chapel Hill. Unfortunately he found no reasonable options for urban living (the barrier was supply not price), much to his dismay, he ended up in a subdivision. This lack of choice would have made him leave the Triangle if not for his social network. Just about everyone I went to high school or college with who remained in the Triangle feel trapped in their sprawling burbs as well -- they just don't see any other options in their price range but they are tired of spending much of their day in a car.

Edited February 11, 2019 by kermit

[Jones_]

6 hours ago, ctl said:

Or maybe it's because the majority of people in the greater Triangle (the 12-county CSA) simply don't want to live in a dense urban environment. You can blame the status quo on identifiable persons who don't share your views, but the more likely if also more intractable scenario is that you have a lot of evangelization ahead of you if you expect people beyond the boundaries of Raleigh and Durham to flip the development pattern away from 1/4-acre lots to high density. 

Beyond just the single family orientation of of the residential options, the absolute forced dependency on cars due to lack of pedestrian infrastructure, lack of road connections, and separation of uses makes this lack of options a critical path economically and is negatively impacting quality of life for the thousands of people who would indeed like other options. A well designed mass transit system would alleviate some of that ...relieves the economic cork and supports dense options that disconnected roads cannot.  If our 1/4 acre lots were laid out like Oakwood we'd have much less of a need for mass transit...loss of natural resources (animal habitat, carbon sinks, cropland etc) notwithstanding.  I contend its very much 'build it and they will come' because right now all I hear is 'I effing hate it here, why does everyone think its so great?'

[ctl]

Given how few people in Raleigh do live in dense urban environments, relative to the population of Wake County as a whole, I think it was remarkably progressive for the county's electorate to embrace the tax increase for transit. I voted for it even though I live on one of the aforementioned 1/4-acre lots between 440 and 540.  Indeed, if a good percentage of the 1/4-acre folks hadn't voted for transit, it would not have passed. So don't be too critical of them.

You might not get all the transit you want, but it's all that you're going to get for the foreseeable future. If the request of the voters had been 3X larger to fund light rail, I believe it would have been defeated handily -- and then the well would have been poisoned for years.  Pots of federal gold at the end of the rainbow are difficult to rely on, given the current climate in DC. The people who drove the referendum knew exactly where the sweet spot was.

If the demand is sufficiently strong for dense urban living and the "itch" for mass transit is sufficiently "scratched" by the bus system we're paying for, there is plenty of land ITB for dense redevelopment... aside from complaints about pushing the poor OTB.  Otherwise, don't waste your time expecting some kind of consensus across the 12-county area to put an end to 1/4-acre lots. Won't happen, absent a huge increase in gasoline prices. The experience in metro Atlanta proves that traffic congestion is no disincentive to carving out more 1/4-acre lots from the countryside, even though expressway construction there is effectively halted forever.  

Edited February 11, 2019 by ctl

[kermit]

^ I think you are exactly right about all of this. But I also think those collective attitudes will doom the Triangle to a future of stagnation (and possibly decline outside of DUMC) for generations to come. 

(I tend towards pessimism) 

[DeleteMe]

On 2/11/2019 at 7:09 AM, ctl said:

Or maybe it's because the majority of people in the greater Triangle (the 12-county CSA) simply don't want to live in a dense urban environment. You can blame the status quo on identifiable persons who don't share your views, but the more likely if also more intractable scenario is that you have a lot of evangelization ahead of you if you expect people beyond the boundaries of Raleigh and Durham to flip the development pattern away from 1/4-acre lots to high density. 

Consumer preference surveys show that most people would prefer to live in, what is essentially, a facsimile of Mayberry.  The other fact is that developers will tell you they are in the business to turn a profit, not build towns.  The reality is the best selling neighbors with new construction snd ithe highest price points are in neighborhoods that function like the fictional Mayberry.  They are walkable, you can walk to work, for food, etc.,  if choose, and parks and open space are readily accessible,   this notion that developers are building what consumers want is bull.  Consumers are purchasing what developers build and the vast majority of developers and builders have no interest in building new neighbors that contribute to anything outside the parcel boundaries.

Edited February 13, 2019 by MACyr

[Jones_]

On 2/11/2019 at 5:42 PM, ctl said:

Given how few people in Raleigh do live in dense urban environments, relative to the population of Wake County as a whole, I think it was remarkably progressive for the county's electorate to embrace the tax increase for transit. I voted for it even though I live on one of the aforementioned 1/4-acre lots between 440 and 540.  Indeed, if a good percentage of the 1/4-acre folks hadn't voted for transit, it would not have passed. So don't be too critical of them.

You might not get all the transit you want, but it's all that you're going to get for the foreseeable future. If the request of the voters had been 3X larger to fund light rail, I believe it would have been defeated handily -- and then the well would have been poisoned for years.  Pots of federal gold at the end of the rainbow are difficult to rely on, given the current climate in DC. The people who drove the referendum knew exactly where the sweet spot was.

If the demand is sufficiently strong for dense urban living and the "itch" for mass transit is sufficiently "scratched" by the bus system we're paying for, there is plenty of land ITB for dense redevelopment... aside from complaints about pushing the poor OTB.  Otherwise, don't waste your time expecting some kind of consensus across the 12-county area to put an end to 1/4-acre lots. Won't happen, absent a huge increase in gasoline prices. The experience in metro Atlanta proves that traffic congestion is no disincentive to carving out more 1/4-acre lots from the countryside, even though expressway construction there is effectively halted forever.  

The fact that so many 1/4 acre lot people voted for it tells me exactly what I have been saying...lots of people don't want to live that way. ("that way" includes the commute that sucks away 2+ days of your life per month, plus other time you must be in a car)...there just isn't much other choice here. The built environment has been forced on people by developers and obliging regs. You just said that "Or maybe it's because the majority of people in the greater Triangle (the 12-county CSA) simply don't want to live in a dense urban environment. " I highly doubt their vote for the transit tax is a bone for the dense dwelling folks...its a plea regarding their own plight. 

[ctl]

If you think people between 440 and 540 are pleading for help because of their own plight, you have really misunderstood the situation and projected your own views onto them. There's no evidence at all that people are dissatisfied or looking to get out. Homes on the 1/4 acre lots sell quickly. The only people I can see who want to get out are the folks turning 70, but not many of them are headed for DTR. 

[Jones_]

It's the commutes. The commutes are because of the distance to work and terrible road "networks". They voted for the transit tax. 1/4 lots on a grid and RTP not the center of the universe would be a much more tenable physical buildout. Since that cannot be undone, the only option left is transit. The popularity and rapid rise of prices downtown is also a clue about what people want. Given largely no options but primary arterial commutes from cul-de-sacs you cannot conclude people love or even like it...the jobs are here...they have to live here if they work here...if anything it seems like the circumstantial evidence (transit vote and booming downtown prices) says one is higher on more people's lists than the other or at least in a ratio different from the actual residing stats. 

[ctl]

Maybe. I heard yesterday there is now more commercial office square footage on Six Forks between 440 and Strickland than in DTR, if you exclude governmental offices. Governmental employment aside from WCPSS (which is inherently distributed) isn't growing. My point is that there are more than two commute destinations, DTR and RTP. Even for RTP a fair proportion of newcomers have been settling in east Chatham and western Wake... no transit there. 

One might think that all job growth could be or should be DTR, but that's far from reality.   

And if someone moves here from Miami, Atlanta, NoVa/DC, Dallas, etc -- not to mention NYC, Chicago, LA -- and hears a local complaining about traffic and long commute times, they giggle endlessly. For the record it took me about 2 hours to get into my London office... riding both trains and the Tube. 

Edited February 17, 2019 by ctl

[orulz]

I live on a quarter acre in Cary, and although I do not really wish to change that at the moment, I do wish there were more alternatives. My current company is located in office space out in a sea of parking lots by the airport (cheapskates) but I would rather work in a better environment. Transit and cycling are both options for me and I do use them, but they are marginal and I would not expect most people in my situation to do this. I would be hard pressed to recommend this lifestyle to a coworker living nearby. However, if my company were downtown, or somewhere like Centennial Campus, then transit would be a more reasonable option - with a (pleasant) 3/4 mile walk to a bus stop, with a bus coming every thirty minutes every day.

[Green_man]

Transit should be a huge priority - especially if the proposed developments materialize.  Just within a 1/2 mile radius on the west side of town: adding five 20 story buildings (301 Hillsborough, 400 Hillsborough, City Hall, N&O site rumor, and RUS BUS), and two 10-story buildings at One Glenwood.

[kermit]

So WTF has caused Duke to become such a BS, child-like NIMBY about DOLRT? https://www.heraldsun.com/news/local/article226786574.html

Duke has had nearly a decade to voice its concerns about the project, waiting till the very last minute to object to vital elements of the project appears to serve no one well and seems likely to force Triangle taxpayers to throw millions of design dollars into the toilet.

A quick look around the transit landscape of US cities reveals that their objections about vibration and electromagnetic interference are complete BS. Some examples include both electric transit and heavy rail running through the middle of MIT's campus (and directly adjacent to Boston General). Light rail running adjacent to the U of Minnesota medical center and through the center of their campus and many other examples (including Memorial Hospital 9 miles away which apparently has no similar worries). 

I just can't see what Duke gains from this intransigence.

EDIT: And about those vibration concerns:

 

Edited February 28, 2019 by kermit

[InitialD]

I mean, Duke is the university of Richard Spencer and Stephen Miller, do you think they would care about the "commoners" who live and travel around Durham?

[kermit]

This is particularly ironic given that James B Duke spent his life after  American Tobacco working to improve the quality of life for North Carolinians. These efforts included the creation of the company that became Duke Energy and an electric railroad in the Charlotte area and points south. He would not be happy about this decision.

Didn't take long for the backlash (and eminent domain talk) to begin: https://www.newsobserver.com/news/local/article226856199.html

Edited February 27, 2019 by kermit

[Jones_]

5 hours ago, InitialD said:

I mean, Duke is the university of Richard Spencer and Stephen Miller, do you think they would care about the "commoners" who live and travel around Durham?

Exactly this. Berger and Moore just sent the memo based on the form letter in the RNC handouts. It is their last ditch, behind the scenes, attempt to stop it. 

[DeleteMe]

Ef Duke.

[southslider]

Develop a new alignment that avoids them. Instead of Erwin Rd, stay along 501 to Durham Freeway.

[Seaboard Fellow]

These issues should have been resolved YEARS ago. Unbelievable. 

[ctl]

17 hours ago, Jones_ said:

Berger and Moore just sent the memo based on the form letter in the RNC handouts. It is their last ditch, behind the scenes, attempt to stop it. 

So what did Berger and Moore -- assuming they remain in power beyond 2020 --  promise Duke as an incentive to be obstructionist? Unless the Duke leadership is truly stupid, they know the PR cost in blocking the program. Surely they see some upside for themselves in doing so, beyond the ridiculous reasons they've cited.

Meanwhile the North Carolina Railroad and Norfolk Southern must be delighted to see Duke catching all the PR heat. The railroads aren't on board with the program, either, and that's not so easy to fix.

Edited February 28, 2019 by ctl