Triangle Regional Transit

[uptownliving]

As monsoon has said again and again...the TTA needs a better funding formula...the Rental Car tax is just not going to cut it...they need to do something that will generate as much money or more than the Meck Co 1/2 cent sales tax.

[orulz]

Guys,

I work with some people who are privy to information about TTA's federal scrutiny over modeling issues.

[monsoon]

For sure. It sounds nice, but if they won't commit the money locally to pay for it then most likey the Feds are not going to commit to the system. Any system asking for more than 50% Federal Funding is likely to be shot down.

And it is not like the money will be sitting there even if this does happen. Bush's government is out of money and funds for transportation are almost nill anyway. Not to mention that big losers this year, Houston, Tampa, etc will all be back next year so there is a great deal of competition for these very limited funds. The TTA is going to have to work very hard to get themselves above the pack. And don't forget that Charlotte will be back to get funding for its own commuter rail line which is now in the planning stages.

I think before the Feds will even consider paying for a TTA system, the local taxpayers are going to have to agree to more taxes to pay for it.

[orulz]

What will be left sitting there is the land that TTA has already purchased, and the plans that have already been drafted, revised, and approved by the cities and neighborhoods. I know that most of the $85 million paid so far by the feds has gone for those two purposes. Do you think TTA's just going to pack their bags and sell the land that they waded through miles of red tape to acquire? Do you think they'll just toss their engineering studies in the garbage? Not a chance.

There are lots of transit systems that went through these issues at first, but ended up being funded and built in the end. I bet TTA's staff is already trying to figure out if something can be changed changed to make the system more effective. If TTA comes up empty this year, they'll probably spend the next 11 months reworking some things and drumming up more local support.

I think the best way to do this would be to spend that time drafting some more concrete plans for future expansion. If you read the posts on the WRAL and N&O message boards, you'll see a LOT of people saying "Unless TTA can provide rail service in to the bedroom communities of the triangle, I won't support it!"

The deal is - if you just look at this one line, it's purpose is vague. It starts at one downtown, and ends at the other - and that's a sure way to turn the suburbanites against you. But if people could see see that TTA has a vision, and that this line is the first and most essential component - then maybe more people would see the light. People have a tendency not to see the big picture - UNLESS you show it to them. TTA has a superb opportunity already on the table with the completion of the Eastrans study last year. Show how it complements and interoperates with TTA, and tell people "This is the next step." That engages the East Wake Community, and beyond. Then, duplicate that process for the lines to Fuquay-Varina, Carrboro/Chapel Hill, Apex, Butner, Hillsborough... and then people will start thinking "Oh, so THAT'S what this is all about!"

When Metro in DC was first pitched to the public in the late 60s, they had a plan - you could look at a map and see nearly every stop on every line, and know how it would benefit you from the very beginning. Of course some things changed over 30 years as it was built out, but by thinking big from the very beginning they won a lot of people over. If WMATA's initial presentation showed only the downtown segment of the red line (the first segment that opened) nobody would have even considered getting on board!

Charlotte, of course, has broad local support (and the half-cent sales tax) for their rapid transit network. Why? What's so different about Charlotte? Take a look at their 2025 plan: they have a map showing the routes and stations for EACH of the five corridors radiating from downtown. They've engaged the whole community, and as a result, they have their full funding agreement.

That's exactly what TTA lacks: a long-term (2030?) plan. Their current plans don't reach beyond 2011. I'm sure that TTA's leaders have a vision for their system, but they've been so profoundly focused on the plans for this one corridor that they've completely forgotten to bring the rest of the community along. What they need to do is to put that vision down on paper, quantify it with some numbers, and send it to all the newspapers and TV stations. Then the people will say "Wow."

Think big. It sparks a fire in the souls of men. That's how you get public support.

Agreed. I would gladly pay a 1/2 cent sales tax, or something more creative but with similar results. Although the scar on their reputation from being turned down once might prove to be a fatal blow, I think they can pull it through in the end.

[monsoon]

Do you think TTA's just going to pack their bags and sell the land that they waded through miles of red tape to acquire? Do you think they'll just toss their engineering studies in the garbage? Not a chance.

...

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Maybe, but there are unused subway tunnels in Cincinatti & Detroit, and Marta bought a great deal of land in ATL and partially built infrastructure for new train lines that sits unused today because of funding issues. These are testimates that it does indeed happen. I am certain the TTA will try again, but if they don't get the local funding issue settled they will continue to delay the project year after year and that is also a big waste to the taxpayers.

[ChiefJoJo]

I think before the Feds will even consider paying for a TTA system, the local taxpayers are going to have to agree to more taxes to pay for it.

Exactly.

For now, I am not going to say where i work in DOT, but I do know several people who are involved heavily in the modeling process. FTA has some issues with the Triangle Regional Model (TRM), specifically how they modeled the transit portion. In the article that I linked, there is a mention of TTA's projection that a bus ride from DT Durham to DT Raleigh will take 4 hours in 2025. When looking at these projects, FTA is looking at the user cost-benefit ratio, which examines the travel time benefit for the proposed fixed guideway option (rail) versus the comparable bus transit option. Basically if the cost of the system doesn't benefit enough riders through a travel time improvement over bus transit, then the project will not be recommended. The model issues will be corrected, as they have a national expert in modeling on the case, but there are no guarantees that TTA will make the threshold, and that is straight from the consultant.

I think there are several problems:

1. There is minimal region-wide support for LRT in the area. The local funding effort that Charlotte engaged in was HUGE in them getting FTA approval--they really did it right. I have visited the South Corridor in Clt, and there are already hundreds of people living in condos that were built by developers who saw the local financial commitment to rail in Charlotte. In the triangle, you can see that comparitively, there is a lack of support behind rail. Chapel Hill, a big supporter of transit in general in the region doesn't support TTA rail. Duke University Medical Center, the largest single employer in the triangle, didn't want to negotiate with TTA to be included in the phase 1 of the rail project. The Town of Morrisville chose to be left out. The area transit providers, TTA, CAT, DATA, etc., do not have a cohesive plan for supporting the LRT. All of these are evidence that the area just hasn't had the cohesive community vision that it takes to make this project a reality.

2. Too much sprawl. While I think in some ways things are getting better (DT revitalization is coming along), you can see that the area is not committed to changing land use patterns of the past 30 years (especially Raleigh). Look at Briar Creek. That is the perfect example of a development that could have been done as a more dense, mixed use development in the heart of the triangle, but instead, its a huge spread out mess (in my opinion). Charlotte, on the other hand, has a bustling DT area with several major employers that make it an obvious choice for LRT. In the triangle, most of the major employers are in nowhere land, in RTP. In order to make LRT a reality in the triangle, land use patterns MUST change, or we will be doomed to repeat the mistakes of other sunbelt cities such as Atlanta and Houston.

TTA may still be able to win the contract, but the area must unify behind a common vision, or it will be a failure.

[JunktionFET]

I think orulz smacked the nail on the head regarding vision. TTA needs to show what they think the final system will look like in ~30 years, then point out how the DT-DT line is the backbone or foundation and that it needs to be completed and functional first.

Once you inspire people from all over the region, it makes it easier to swallow a tax increase. I'm sure this kind of long range planning in Charlotte explains their success. Unlike the NCDOT or CATS, the folks at TTA don't seem like they have the best grasp on what they're doing, and that worries me.

The people behind Eastrans really impress me though. They are not a transportation authority or a single municipality, yet they designed this incredible commuter train system with support from all the small towns along the way, with a very wise use of money and ways to tie the Raleigh lines into an existing mutli-modal station.

Anyway, I hope that this consultant for TTA can work it out and assure TTA gets their federal funding next time around. The TTA spokespeople in the papers and such always seem so upbeat about it--they sound positive that they will get the money. However I understand why they would sound that way if it was an act

[orulz]

FTA has some issues with the  Triangle Regional Model (TRM), specifically how they modeled the transit portion.  In the article that I linked, there is a mention of TTA's projection that a bus ride from DT Durham to DT Raleigh will take 4 hours in 2025.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

A lot of people poke fun at that number because they can drive from DT Raleigh to DT Durham in 45 minutes (1 hour at rush hour, and a lot worse when there's a traffic jam.) But remember, the train isn't an express service with no stops in between. For a bus to serve a similar number of destinations, and given 20 years of chronic underfunding due to "reallocation" of highway dollars to rural areas, I don't see how a 4 hour prediction is out of line at all.

If you take one of TTA's 301 or 302 buses from Downtown Raleigh, along Western Blvd, through Cary, and then transfer to a 402/412 bus at RTP, the whole trip can take more than 2 hours AS IT IS - I've done it numerous times before. And that's without any specific trouble or accidents. When there was a traffic jam due to an accident on I-40, it took me four hours to get from Chapel Hill to Raleigh on the bus. People say it's inconcievable that in 20 years I-40, NC 54, and US 70 will all turn into parking lots every day at rush hour. To me, it's inconcievable that it will take 20 years for things to get that bad.

[ChiefJoJo]

Your assumption about the 4 hours may be correct, but I know that is the number that FTA has a problem with in the TRM. Remember that whether the number sounds plausible, isn't exactly the criteria for FTA. They are looking at the nuts and bolts of the TRM to see whether they assumptions and traffic projections make sense for the bus vs rail transit portion. Maybe they will get it worked out. In a selfish way, I hope so, because the DT Raleigh station is 2-3 blocks from my home.

[orulz]

Okay, I've done a bit more digging and I've ended up learning more about the Triangle Transit Authority as an agency, and what role it plays in the long-range planning process. That is to say, none. TTA is chartered as an implementing agency: their job is to carry out the transit improvements that the MPOs (Metropolitan Planning Organizations) tell them to. I use the plural 'MPOs' because there are two such organizations: CAMPO in Wake County, and DCHC in Durham/Orange.

Both of these organizations have long range (2030) transportation plans. DCHC's plan contains a significant transit element, but I find it to be somehow underwhelming. It lacks the spark of vision - it's basically business as usual, and it all but ignores the eastern half of the Triangle. CAMPO's website is quite poor and they don't have the full text (or even a summary) of their long range plan anywhere to be found, but I expect more of the same.

More troubling to me is that, in spite of the potential regional synergy that could be happening, these two organizations are very much independent. This gives TTA two seperate bosses - and leaves them hanging in limbo, mediating uneasily between them. While there is a degree of cooperation between the MPO's, they are still fundamentally seperate, and there is nothing to say that their plans will mesh with each other. Furthermore, their focus is divided between the closely related but yet diametrically opposed fields of roads and transit. It's little wonder that the regional transit plan lacks vision. Under such a system, TTA's very raison d'etre is vague and confusing.

What the Triangle needs is a dedicated transit agency with teeth - maybe something like NJT in New Jersey. Now that I think about it, that could be exactly what the CAT/DATA/TTA transit merger (currently under consideration) is all about. Right now, they're just trying to get as many stakeholders on board as possible. But once that's done, maybe the next step will be to vest the new entity with the power to do its own long-range planning on a truly regional level, independent of the individual MPOs.

Of course, transit systems that don't join up from the start (CHT, C-Tran, and Wolfline) should be given the choice to opt in at a later date. The outlying municipalities without transit systems (Knightdale, etc) could also join as a way to implement transit service, participating in the regional system from the get-go.

Anyway, it seems clear that, in order for transit (particularly rail transit) to succeed in the triangle, something in the organizational structure has to change. I can't say what shape these changes will take, but hopefully we'll start moving in that direction sooner rather than later.

[JunktionFET]

CAMPO does have a series of PDFs containing their 2030 plan, but the links from the ToC do not work. I downloaded the PDFs and copied the maps from them. Basically the maps show TTA Phase I rail, CAT and TTA bus expansion, and a crapload of road improvements on a cluttered map.

[JunktionFET]

I read through the Wake County long range transportation plan. It is based on the 2025 CAMPO plan and it contains a little more creative planning than what comes from CAMPO directly.

It details some long range rail transit options--some of these corridors may start out as bus service but could become rail based if demand is high. It looks as though they all seem to follow either existing or abandoned rail corridors--for example I know that an abandoned rail corridor exists along NC55 from Apex to Holly Springs, etc. Many of the others are existing corridors that are in use today--like the two northbound CSX lines out of Apex.

http://www.wakegov.com/NR/rdonlyres/105A82...tiveSummary.pdf

It is a very large PDF (20+ MB), but I clipped the transit map from it:

[orulz]

Thanks a lot for digging that Wake County transportation plan up, NorffCarolina. It's nice to see proof that at least someone out there is thinking long-term. I'm glad they defined most of these corridors near rail lines. The plan to institute bus service to test/build the market, and upgrade to rail sometime in the future as density/demand/traffic warrants is right on target, in my opinion - as long as that's the stated intention from the start.

Now, they need to get Durham and Orange counties on board. Do something like the Eastrans report for more of the corridors - and finally put them all together under one umbrella organization (TTA, or its successor!), in a regional plan that truly deserves to be called a system.

[ChiefJoJo]

CAMPO in Wake County, and DCHC in Durham/Orange... More troubling to me is that, in spite of the potential regional synergy that could be happening, these two organizations are very much independent.

Yes they are, and it's very common to have adjoining MPOs in NC. Why don't they? It's a power struggle and a battle over philosophy. Areas like Chapel Hill and Carrboro want to maintain their independence from the larger areas as much as possible so that they might continue to have a powerful voice in the organization. If DCHC merged with CAMPO, a town like Chapel Hill would drop in the pecking order from 2nd (in DCHC) to 4th, behind Raleigh, Durham, and Cary (by population). In case you're wondering, the only way to force the MPO merger issue is for the Governor to mandate it.

[orulz]

TTA showed up in the newspapers again, this time in the Durham Herald-Sun. Read the article here.

The gist of it is, that the US house of representatives passed a resolution which includes support for the TTA rail system. Although they haven't put a dollar amount to that support yet, TTA is hoping that they'll get at least $22 million. it shows that congress hasn't already given up on the TTA, and if they can get their 'recommended' rating back things can go back to normal again.

This isn't a big step, but at least it's a step in the right direction for TTA.

[JunktionFET]

This bit of news is outdated, but it has a nifty video clip which sums up the TTA issue and has a brief CGI view of a potential TTA train platform

http://rdu.news14.com/content/story_links/...231&addvid=8387

[JunktionFET]

I have searched high and low for any news regarding the downtown Raleigh "inter-modal" transit station. Like the station planned for Durham and Charlotte, the Raleigh station will ideally be a central point where many forms of transit will come together.

Such an inter-modal station would include passenger rail (Amtrak, intercity rail), high speed rail, TTA regional rail, any other form of commuter rail (Eastrans?), TTA buses, CAT buses, taxis, and a drop-off/pick-up lane for cars. Rumor has it that there will be a mixed-use element in and around the station as well. Here is a conceptual model of a station design for Raleigh.

It looks as though this concept has elevated tracks and passenger platforms while still retaining the existing tracks on the ground (the "Y" shape). Perhaps the idea is to allow freight traffic to always cut through at ground level, while all passenger trains pass over the freight tracks? Also is that round object in the middle a round platform and track? If so I wonder if that is a space-saving trick.

The model looks nice but I would like to know more about it. Actually I'd like to see all the candidate designs with captions and descriptions, but I suppose I'll have to keep waiting.

[orulz]

I have searched high and low for any news regarding the downtown Raleigh "inter-modal" transit station. Like the station planned for Durham and Charlotte, the Raleigh station will ideally be a central point where many forms of transit will come together.

Such an inter-modal station would include passenger rail (Amtrak, intercity rail), high speed rail, TTA regional rail, any other form of commuter rail (Eastrans?), TTA buses, CAT buses, taxis, and a drop-off/pick-up lane for cars. Rumor has it that there will be a mixed-use element in and around the station as well. Here is a conceptual model of a station design for Raleigh.

It looks as though this concept has elevated tracks and passenger platforms while still retaining the existing tracks on the ground (the "Y" shape). Perhaps the idea is to allow freight traffic to always cut through at ground level, while all passenger trains pass over the freight tracks? Also is that round object in the middle a round platform and track? If so I wonder if that is a space-saving trick.

The model looks nice but I would like to know more about it. Actually I'd like to see all the candidate designs with captions and descriptions, but I suppose I'll have to keep waiting.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

That photo actually isn't the selected design.. in fact, I don't think it will bear any resemblance to the final design at all. It's just an artist's conception of what it might look like - and an old one at that. The elevated tracks you mention are from when TTA was still planning on using an elevated structure through the Wye area. That design would have involved a grade crossing of Boylan Ave., so that got nixed in early 2004 due to resistance from the Boylan Heights neighborhood. TTA decided to build below grade instead, in an open trench. I think this redesign is one of the reasons the cost for the TTA project went up and the 3 North Raleigh stations and the Duke Medical Center station got postponed.

The round thing in the middle is the area where you can board buses or taxis. The platforms would probably be built directly underneath the station - which is a great way to do it since space is somewhat limited and it allows direct access from the waiting room to the platforms.

Once upon a time, I e-mailed Martin Stankus (the person from the Raleigh Planning Department who is in charge of this project) to ask when the planning process will get underway. He replied that it's actually been in progress since 1995, when they commissioned a study to determine whether there was any demand for this project. Next they came up with some concept designs, which is what that model is. The next step, combine and tweak the concept designs to come up with a recommended design, was supposed to get started back in January, but I've not seen or heard anything about it.

[JunktionFET]

That photo actually isn't the selected design.. in fact, I don't think it will bear any resemblance to the final design at all. It's just an artist's conception of what it might look like - and an old one at that. The elevated tracks you mention are from when TTA was still planning on using an elevated structure through the Wye area.

Yeah as I said it just a conceptual model and is probably one of several design candidates. This is the only picture out there, and has been plastered on the downtown Raleigh website since the big bang I am quite disappointed that there is not more information out there publicly.

I agree that the stacked approach to this design is great for saving space--because space can get a bit tight in that area, and it would be a shame to level the entire warehouse district for this thing.

I didn't know they had any intention of trenching the tracks, I think that would be very cool and it would add to the impact of arriving in downtown... heh, downtown Raleigh needs all the impact it can get.

Charlotte considered trenching the tracks to its inter-modal station. The trench would've started just outside the I-277 loop, and it was considered as a method of reducing noise for 4th ward residents. That would've been awesome! Imagine rolling up and seeing the skyline from about half a mile away, then you'd go into a trench and remain out of view until you reach the platform... You'd take the stairs or escalator up and voila, you're smack in the middle of "the big city". Sadly, I believe that option was rejected due to cost.

[orulz]

I didn't know they had any intention of trenching the tracks, I think that would be very cool and it would add to the impact of arriving in downtown... heh, downtown Raleigh needs all the impact it can get.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The TTA tracks will be the only tracks constructed below grade. The freight/amtrak tracks will remain at-grade since there aren't too many grade crossings aroudn there anyway. The TTA tracks are below grade so they don't interfere with freight traffic and vice versa.

When (if) the TTA station is built, Hargett Street will be grade-separated with a bridge over the TTA and freight tracks. That's not reflected in the model posted on the city's website since it would have been impossible to do if the TTA tracks were elevated. The bridge might be necessary if that's where they're planning on putting the platforms. It'll be interesting to see the final design for the track layout, since a station built on top of a wye with platforms on all three tracks isn't something you see every day.

[JunktionFET]

I was bored so I took an aerial view and drew some stuff on it.

The blue triangle indicates the location of the existing train station. In my opinion it is a dump, but it isn't quite as bad as Charlotte's station (or Durham's). However it is too small and very uninteresting. Bah, we all know that though.

The yellow box indicates the approximate location where Flash recently took some of the pictures in this thread

And finally, the purple box indicates the approximate slice of land where the new inter-modal station will sit, at least according to the conceptual model above.

[ChiefJoJo]

When (if) the TTA station is built, Hargett Street will be grade-separated with a bridge over the TTA and freight tracks.

I believe this was the initial plan, but it's my understanding that there will be no bridge--it will be an at-grade crossing (much less $). TTA asked the city about closing and dead-ending Hargett at the new TTA tracks, but they said they wanted to keep it open even during peak times, when the trains will be arriving every 15 min (plus Amtrak and freight trains).

[orulz]

I believe this was the initial plan, but it's my understanding that there will be no bridge--it will be an at-grade crossing (much less $).  TTA asked the city about closing and dead-ending Hargett at the new TTA tracks, but they said they wanted to keep it open even during peak times, when the trains will be arriving every 15 min (plus Amtrak and freight trains).

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I'm not sure about the freight railroad crossings, but it's not physically possible for Hargett to cross the TTA tracks at grade, since the TTA tracks will be below grade in an open cut through the wye area. The tracks have to be seperated in some manner since the FRA would never allow the TTA tracks to cross a freight RR at grade. TTA posted a PDF file on their website around September of last year with the revised engineering drawings, indicating a cut, retaining walls, and two side platforms for the downtown station instead of the single center platform used everywhere else. In that same document, they mentioned the Hargett St. bridge, and specifically said that it would go over the freight tracks and the TTA tracks. For all I know, they may have changed their plans, but I've not seen anything to indicate that as of yet.

I think that a Hargett St. bridge would be extremely valuable because of safety issues (this is already becoming a fairly major pedestrian area with the Warehouse district). It would also make a split platform unneccesary (split platforms suck) and allow traffic to keep moving even when freight trains stop and wait to enter the Wye, or long distance passenger trains with lots of luggage to unload are stopped at the station for ten minutes.

[AmericanUrbanDesigner]

Does anyone remember "Eastrans" the proposal to operate commuter trains along existing track from Smithfield/Selma to Raleigh to Wilson?

[orulz]

Does anyone remember "Eastrans" the proposal to operate commuter trains along existing track from Smithfield/Selma to Raleigh to Wilson?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Sure do. It was a very resourceful report, and some planning organization integrated it into their long-range transportation plan for the Triangle region. One thing I'd like to see change with it, however, is better cooperation between Eastrans and TTA so that they can share the same tracks through downtown rather than just running on the CSX freight tracks. I guess that could also happen at a later date, when the TTA North Raleigh extension is built or the CSX S-line reopens as a through line and the increased traffic starts causing reliability issues.

At any rate, I hope that any equipment Eastrans buys is (or can be upgraded to be) compatible with TTA's automatic train control system.