Many of us have been watching closely the developments in the case of Triangle Transit Authority's (TTA) regional rail project. For more on this initiative, feel free to visit the following link:

TTA Regional Rail :: Overview :: (http://www.ridetta.org/Regional_Rail/Overview/projectOverview.html)

What is also known to most of us is that due to the Triangle's lack of true urban density, such a project is a risky proposition and will only serve a small percentage of residents, unless the areas surrounding the stations begin to thrive with urbanity and dense residential neighborhoods. From time to time we hear about TTA's efforts to convince the feds into providing some considerable financing, as well as how miserably we fail to present a strong case. This time, I think, TTA has great chances... Working closely with developers in building dense, urban communities around the future stations may be the strongest argument for getting the approval and assistance (~60%, if I am not mistaken) of the federal government.

Without further ado, let's take a look at the most recent news and a small presentation of TTA's regional rail. The link to the following brief can be found here (http://www.newsobserver.com/business/v-printer/story/2723405p-9160929c.html).

TTA gets interest from developers
From Staff Reports

RESEARCH TRIANGLE PARK -- The Triangle Transit Authority has received three submissions from developers proposing to blend retail, offices, housing and entertainment around planned stations for the regional rail project, which is to open in late 2008.

Carter Hadco of Atlanta and two Raleigh businesses, Cherokee Investment Partners and Triangle Metro Developers, responded to TTA's request for qualifications.

The agency's board is to select one or more developers to manage the development process for the 12 stations along the 28-mile segment of the rail project.

Everybody loves pictures, therefore it will be wise to provide a few, mostly from the TTA's web page:

Regional Transit Plan Map:
http://www.ridetta.org/Regional_Rail/Current_Status/images/regionalmap.jpg

Regional Rail Transit System Map:
http://www.ridetta.org/Regional_Rail/Overview/images/TTAPosterPPJPG.jpg

Rail Vehicles:
http://www.ridetta.org/Regional_Rail/Current_Status/images/Untitled1.jpg

http://www.ridetta.org/Regional_Rail/Current_Status/images/vehicleTTAwebsite.jpg

Stations:
http://www.ridetta.org/Regional_Rail/Current_Status/images/BarrelUN-24.jpg

http://www.ridetta.org/Regional_Rail/Current_Status/images/cary-sim-revised2.jpg

http://treklite.com/bh/Archive/Issues/tta/images/Wye_1-sim.jpg

http://treklite.com/bh/Archive/Issues/tta/images/wye2sim.jpg

Intermodal Center (DT Raleigh):
http://www.raleighnc.gov/portal/server.pt/gateway/PTARGS_0_2_306_203_0_43/http%3B/pt03/DIG_Web_Content/project/public/livable_streets/Images/intermodal.jpg

Triangle Metro Center (transit-oriented development; RTP):
http://www.hokplanninggroup.com/services/nus/F3FB4930-6FB1-4645-B9D6-719D8CFA2F3B/projimages/mouseover1_1.jpg

http://www.hokplanninggroup.com/services/nus/F3FB4930-6FB1-4645-B9D6-719D8CFA2F3B/projimages/mouseover1_2.jpg

Unfortunately, we still lack the big news that will set the Triangle apart as a leader in public transportation initiatives/efforts, but there is a lot of hard work being done and we should not discount the possibility of our planned regional rail to get the proper funding and to work better than envisioned. Without major developments around the future stations, I do not see any reasoning behind spending hundreds of millions of tax-payers' dollars. We need solid, concrete plans for a regional rail that will actually serve thousands of people, on a daily basis, and the local government must encourage high-density, urban neighborhoods, where people can live and easily access other destinations around the Triangle, without wasting their valuable time.

Please share your thoughts. I am sure most of us are on the same page, but it will be refreshing to hear other view points as to how optimistic, or pessimistic, you are about the piece of news I posted above. Has anyone heard of the above developers? If yes, then what can you share with us?

Some more news following yesterday's updates, this time from the Triangle Business Journal (this is the link (http://www.bizjournals.com/triangle/stories/2005/08/15/daily1.html?t=printable) to the story, but I also took the liberty to post the brief, for those who don't want to visit the source:

IBM gives TTA three acres for regional rail station

IBM has donated a little more than three acres of land in Research Triangle Park to the Triangle Transit Authority, which will use it in the construction of the regional rail project.

TTA plans to build the North RTP station on the property IBM donated, which is on the west side of South Miami Boulevard, adjacent to the southeast gate entrance to the IBM RTP campus.

TTA plans to build a 28-mile rail system with 12 stations connecting Durham, RTP, Cary and Raleigh. The $631 million rail transit system is scheduled to open in December 2008.

IBM (NYSE: IBM), with 11,000 Triangle employees, is the largest employer in RTP.

© 2005 American City Business Journals Inc.

If this is not great news, then what is it? Having someone like IBM participating in this effort legitimizes TTA's regional rail as a serious project. Three acres may not sound much, but in most cases such offer provides solutions. Nice move :okay:

Thanks for all the info Raleigh-NC can't wait till it gets built

This is really exciting. I am reading this right, do they expect to have this rail line completed in December 2008?

Believe me when I say this: I am VERY anxious to see this done... as long as it is done right. It would be nice to hop on the "train" and get to DT Durham for a few drinks, or just a nice dinner that involves a great bottle of wine. I would hate to be stopped by a cop on the way back home and get a ticket for being drunk. What am I going to say? "Excuse me officer, but I was too drunk to walk?" :lol: It would be extremely wise if the city could find ways to connect the TTA stations with light rail, in the future, or at least provide good transportation routes. The importance of large Triangle employers jumping on the bandwagon is needless to mention. IBM's gesture is exactly the type of moves that helps TTA build a stronger case to the feds. I know that many people fail to understand this, but the feds would gladly funds this project. What we are missing is a winning case that involves major employers and developers demonstrating commitment. The interest is there, and it is very sincere, but everyone is waiting for the blessing of the Federal government instead of moving forward, regardless. Guts, is what our local developers are missing.

Expat, it is a bit hard to say whether the deadline mentioned is real, or not. It all depends on whether the feds give TTA the funds. Let's keep in mind that TTA is asking for ~60% of the financial resources from the federal government... Now, that is VERY high, especially when you consider how other cities built their cases and won the approval. So far, the feds seem to be right every time they point to shortcomings and excessive estimates; TTA can trim a lot of fat and make this work. If, and ONLY if we receive the federal funds, we can meet the December 2008 deadline. That would be over 1.5 years of delay. Many people are confident, and I surely hope they are right.

Thanks for this information Raleigh-NC. Indeed, this is extremely exciting! This will fly, I'm telling you. There are an awful lot of Northeastern transplants to Raleigh, and this thing will work! Especially with gas approaching $3 a gallon! :)

Some more news following yesterday's updates, this time from the Triangle Business Journal (this is the link (http://www.bizjournals.com/triangle/stories/2005/08/15/daily1.html?t=printable) to the story, but I also took the liberty to post the brief, for those who don't want to visit the source:

IBM gives TTA three acres for regional rail station

IBM has donated a little more than three acres of land in Research Triangle Park to the Triangle Transit Authority, which will use it in the construction of the regional rail project.

TTA plans to build the North RTP station on the property IBM donated, which is on the west side of South Miami Boulevard, adjacent to the southeast gate entrance to the IBM RTP campus.

TTA plans to build a 28-mile rail system with 12 stations connecting Durham, RTP, Cary and Raleigh. The $631 million rail transit system is scheduled to open in December 2008.

IBM (NYSE: IBM), with 11,000 Triangle employees, is the largest employer in RTP.

© 2005 American City Business Journals Inc.

If this is not great news, then what is it? Having someone like IBM participating in this effort legitimizes TTA's regional rail as a serious project. Three acres may not sound much, but in most cases such offer provides solutions. Nice move :okay:

Too bad there is nothing one can walk to from that location. Are their plans to develop this site with TOD?

Expat, it is a bit hard to say whether the deadline mentioned is real, or not. It all depends on whether the feds give TTA the funds. Let's keep in mind that TTA is asking for ~60% of the financial resources from the federal government... Now, that is VERY high, especially when you consider how other cities built their cases and won the approval. So far, the feds seem to be right every time they point to shortcomings and excessive estimates; TTA can trim a lot of fat and make this work. If, and ONLY if we receive the federal funds, we can meet the December 2008 deadline. That would be over 1.5 years of delay. Many people are confident, and I surely hope they are right.

People at the FTA are not confident. Hopefully that will change...but I really think that unless the TTA comes up with an alternate funding source to get the Fed share below 50%....then this project has NO chance of getting federal funding.

What is your reading of the tea leaves that the politicos in the Triangle can come up with an alternate funding source?

BTW, the station renderings are really nice.

Honestly, I am totally clueless about any alternative funding talks :( There is some optimism, even though the confidence levels are not the highest possible. This project sits on the "in-between" area and nobody can say with confidence what will happen... it is still a work in progress. Now, there is something that adds optimism, and that is the willingness of some developers to play along. There is sincere interest in developing around the proposed stations, but at the same time there is desire to "urbanize" RTP. I am not sure I love this idea, but it shows the new trend. If you drive in and around RTP you will definitely notice some of the new residential communities that have blossomed in the last 2-3 years. I mean large communities, not just small pockets. Unfortunately, they are not traditional neighborhoods, but they do contain sidewalks and density. For RTP, suburban developments make a lot of sense, and they could be done right the first time.

Along with residential developments in and around RTP, you can observe the increasing number of shopping centers :( The ONLY good thing I see in those centers is the ease of converting them into more traditional, mixed-use urban centers 20-30 years down the road, when RTP and the surrounding areas will no longer be the quaint places they used to be 10-15 years ago. Developers are now building shopping centers in a way that future, more urban developments may replace those symbols of suburban life. Hopefully, this trend will continue - strictly speaking about shopping center developments - and when the time is right, we'll see urban projects replacing strip malls.

@nothcaylina: Please don't remind me of gas prices :lol:

The town of Morrisville has gone back on their previous stance of not wanting a TTA station, and have actually petitioned TTA to add a station in their future downtown redevelopment area (http://www.ci.morrisville.nc.us/citizen/downtown.asp). They want to use it to stimulate denser, mixed-use development, but in a way that's not overwhelming and respects the area's historic character. Low-rise mixed use sounds just about right for Morrisville.

Regarding local funding for the TTA line: I wonder if the option of Tax Increment Financing has been explored? NC voters approved TIF in a referendum last November. That means that the cities/counties can issue bonds and pay them off with the increase in property tax revenue collected in the area around each station. This is how Atlanta wants to fund their Beltline loop (except they call it a Tax Allocation District, or TAD). Why not do the same thing here? In Atlanta, they're projecting well over a billion dollars of revenue from their TAD; surely we could drum up the 40 million we need to bring the FTA new starts share back down to 50%.

I don't want to bring only positive news. Here is a link to an article that may demonstrate that TTA needs to speed up a lot in order to meet deadlines:

Fed report says TTA likely to miss start date (http://www.bizjournals.com/triangle/stories/2005/08/22/story6.html?t=printable)

As for Morrisville, the town didn't want the station in the beginning, at all. I never understood why, but my guess is they were afraid of adding traffic, or having to take major initiatives; remember that the population, up until a few years ago, was around 5000. In the last 5 years, Morrisville has seen tremendous growth, which brings more money and responsibilities to the town. Fortunately for Morrisville, some people saw this growth as an opportunity and these days anyone who is familiar with the town can testify about it. We are not discussing traditional urban areas, but denser, suburban types, which will attract many people.

TTA needs all the help they can get on their regional rail project. Every player counts, and that includes the town of Morrisville. I won't make predictions about what will happen, nor I will critisize the Feds for having caused delays. Had everyone agreed on TTA's rail up front, it would have been much easier to make up for delays. I would like to remain optimistic, though.

Its coming down to the wire for the TTA...if they miss this deadline...then you need to get rid of the guy running TTA. Get someone who has worked the FTA system before and won.

That's a nice suggestion... assuming the current leadership is completely responsible for not getting the green light. What I have noticed more than anything else is the slow pace at which major players, including big companies and developers, have been throwing their support behind TTA. No matter who leads the effort, we need major developments along the rails, especially near the stations, plus RTP-located companies to throw their muscle behind the envisioned regional rail system. Without these players, the project is dead. Many people like the idea of having a regional rail, but there is still a large group of people who oppose this project, and not necessarily because they don't want it. Skeptics fear that unnecessary spending and the money pit effect may do more damage than we expect. It would certainly help to have an experienced person to lead TTA; personally, I know almost nothing about the current leadeship.

There are a couple of articles on TTA's regional rail I would like to share with you. One is a positive, and the other is a somewhat negative:

Rail station plans get on track (http://www.newsobserver.com/business/v-printer/story/2752671p-9190305c.html)

Rail's cost jumps by $58 million (http://www.newsobserver.com/news/v-printer/story/2752705p-9190280c.html)

Allow me to add one more image from the proposed Triangle Metro Center (image is courtesy of Venture Graphics):
http://www.venturegraphicsinc.com/images/Residential/R%20aerial/TriangleMETRO-wc-lg.jpg

I think that TTA is stuck between a rock and a hard place. They really need the N Raleigh stations to make this thing work. Why? Becase the majority of people that work in RTP commute from N Raleigh....thats the whole reason 540 was built.

Now that the N Raleigh stations were axed due to cost constraints that is really going to take a chunk out of the ridership projections. And that brings us back to the crux of the matter..Cost. The TTA should set up an alternative tax source for themselves. Maybe a .25 cent sales tax in Wake and Durham. The Car Rental Tax is just not cutting it. If they got the new funding source...then they could add the N Raleigh stations back on in the 1st Phase...then they would have the funding and the ridership that would give them FTA approval.

At the current juncture, my contacts in FTA say that TTA has no chance of getting approval until they change either the funding or the ridership...or both.

We are all crossing our fingers to see this project materialize under the best conditions possible. To get funding for a money pit would have been foolish. I'd rather see this project move slower and get stalled for a few more years than seeing it become a great example of financial disaster.

You made a VERY GOOD observation, and I totally agree with you... The North Raleigh stations MUST be part of the deal - you are right on the money. The most populous area in Raleigh needs to be served by the regional rail system. Here is a big problem, and this is obvious in the map (first image) I linked to: In order to serve the North Raleigh population that commutes to RTP, the rail system must have a service that goes directly from North Raleigh to RTP. Going from station 16 (in the first image) to station 6, one has to go through downtown, which adds more time. In my opinion, this is one of the major obstacles to convince North Raleighites - I am one of them - to hop on the train and go to RTP. Personally, I would take the train to go to DT Raleigh, or Durham, and have a few drinks, then hop on the train and come back home, without running the risk of getting into an accident, or get a DWI. Also, I would take the train to RDU; take a cab to the station and then catch the train to RDU - assuming the latter won't cost me more than a cab.

In my previous post I included a link to a positive article, where we see developers and TTA working on some serious redevelopment efforts for the areas surrounding the stations. TTA knows that if the feds are to approve the funding, it will boil down to ridership and dollars. TTA is not doing a bad job, at least as of late, but we need solid urban developments around the stations before we present our case to the feds. Personally, I am hopeful, even if we don't get the funds soon. It is not just the regional rail, but the increasing interest in urban development that makes me happy. I expect no miracles, but nevertheless, it is the right direction to go, before sprawling communities take over the remaining space around the proposed stations.

What is the estimated time to get from the N Raleigh stations to the RTP stations? How would this compare with 540?

TTA hasn't published schedules, but it's a safe assumption that it 540 would be faster, assuming that there are no traffic jams. My best guess is that it would be in the range of 35 minutes by rail. If there's a wreck on I-40 that day, all bets are off.

However, some of the North Raleigh stations, New Hope Church and Spring Forest Roads, are not particularly close to 540 or 440, so it could take 8 or 10 minutes before some folks even get to the interstate, which evens things out a bit.

But in my mind, the appeal of transit is not that it moves faster than automobiles. TTA's trains are projected to average around 40mph end-to-end. Trying to "beat the cars" is impossible on the best day and you end up with a worse system because you have fewer stations. Transit's appeal lies in the fact that you don't have to deal with traffic - everybody hates I-40 at rush hour because you never know when an accident will tie things up and you'll be stuck for an hour. But if you're really gonna sweat the extra 15 minutes best-case travel time, then chances are the train is not for you.

I would say that it takes about 15 minutes to get from North Raleigh to RTP using the car, assuming you use I-540. This time includes turning the car on and reaching your destination. I-540 is busy, but the traffic moves fast, even during rush hours. Using the rail will most likely take over 45 minutes, assuming your destination is in close proximity to the station. Let's face it, most riders will not even walk to the station, which is why this proposal gets so much opposition. People will still have to drive their cars to the station and most likely wait a few more minutes for the train. Unless we place thousands of people within walking distance from the train, the latter has great chance to become a money pit. The segment of the population that will benefit from the rail system right away is the students, especially those who take courses in both UNC and NCSU - I know many people who have done this - or simply students who would like to live away from the campus, but want the convinience of a good transportation system. I am sure there are other population segments that could support the rail, but North Raleighites will probably need more time before they become a profit-making group. Still, I believe that the stations in North Raleigh should be part of the initial plan; many developers will be more likely to respond immediately when it comes to developing in that area.

One article, a bit unrelated to TTA's plans, shows that demand for townhomes has been increasing and [in my opinion] slowly becoming a serious first step towards denser neighborhoods. This is the only way we can create larger communities around the proposed rail stations. If we are to succeed, we need strong urban communities - the article describes suburban type of townhomes, I know - and once people get used to density we will increase our chances to see a population booming in areas previously neglected, or underutilized. Here is the article:

Area home sales strong - Demand for townhouses helps drive housing sales to record levels in the Triangle
(http://www.newsobserver.com/business/v-printer/story/2755887p-9193500c.html)

I believe that in the past I have posted these images, but here they are again, since we discuss TTA's regional rail. This vision is not pie in the sky, but very real and feasible plans. In the first image you can see what the big picture should look like. Then you can see some images from the area near the Fairgrounds, where one of TTA's rail stations is planned to go.

Arena Small Area Plan:
http://www.raleighmsa.com/images/projects/SmallAreaPlans/Arena/ArenaSmallAreaPlan-RaleighNC-8.jpg

A more detailed image that shows some urban density around the station:
http://www.raleighmsa.com/images/projects/SmallAreaPlans/Arena/ArenaSmallAreaPlan-RaleighNC-7.jpg

http://www.raleighmsa.com/images/projects/SmallAreaPlans/Arena/ArenaSmallAreaPlan-RaleighNC-5.jpg

http://www.raleighmsa.com/images/projects/SmallAreaPlans/Arena/ArenaSmallAreaPlan-RaleighNC-6.jpg

http://www.raleighmsa.com/images/projects/SmallAreaPlans/Arena/ArenaSmallAreaPlan-RaleighNC-2.jpg

http://www.raleighmsa.com/images/projects/SmallAreaPlans/Arena/ArenaSmallAreaPlan-RaleighNC-1.jpg

These images came from a workshop and we all know that this is nothing written in stone. Parts of this vision may get delivered as captured in the above images, other parts may disappoint, and other parts may actually be delivered in larger, more urban scale. All we can do is cross our fingers because this area is going to be a tough one to develop... It will take 20 years to get nearly as close to the drawings as possible. As fast-growing as Raleigh is, we are not New York City, with its millions of residents.

Just a little update concerning the area near the Warehouse District TTA station. Not bad, considering that TTA hasn't even gotten the funds for their regional rail proposal. Regardless, this project has created momentum and if the stories we hear and read about are real, the Warehouse District will boom with construction in the next few years. Personally, I am not fond of its current appearance, but I surely hope that things will change once the station gets built.

TTA, owner set price in Raleigh (http://www.newsobserver.com/business/v-printer/story/2774238p-9212781c.html)
By BRUCE SICELOFF, Staff Writer

RALEIGH -- The Triangle Transit Authority has agreed to pay Florence and Preston Wilson Jr. $2.65 million for a one-third-acre lot and building on the planned site of a commuter train station at Hargett and West streets in downtown Raleigh.

The settlement was announced Wednesday. TTA paid Dillon Supply Co. $9.8 million in November for 6.14 acres adjoining the Wilson tract.

TTA wants the land for one of 12 stations it will build as part of a planned 28-mile rail transit service between Durham and Raleigh. Construction could begin as soon as May 2006 if TTA wins federal approval early in the year.

The Wilsons, early investors in Raleigh's warehouse district revival, had rented space in the converted two-story building to 10 businesses and organizations, including a music shop and two restaurants.

They received $1.69 million, based on TTA's appraisals, when the site was condemned last year. The two sides disagreed about the value of improvements the Wilsons had made since they bought the building in 1994, and the rental revenue they could have expected to earn from their investment.

A mediator helped TTA settle with the Wilsons and their lawyers, George and Stephanie Autry of Raleigh, on an additional payment of $955,000.

If the case had gone to trial as scheduled on Sept. 12, it would have been the first TTA condemnation case to reach the courtroom.

Staff writer Bruce Siceloff can be reached at 829-4527 or bruce.siceloff@newsobserver.com.

My assumption is that they talk about the warehouse to the right of the photo below:
http://www.pbase.com/raleighmsa/image/24730640.jpg

A couple more images from that same building.

http://www.pbase.com/raleighmsa/image/24730642.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/raleighmsa/image/24730645.jpg

I hope 5 Star finds another space downtown...I love that place.

To be honest, I've never been there before :( Is it really good?

I am pretty much certain that most of the businesses will eventually relocate in the vicinity, but so far we have not gotten solid proposals for the nearby parcels. We know where the station will be, but quite frankly I am clueless as to where other [urban] developments will end up. In older articles I heard of proposals as high as 10-story buildings, but no specifics about the actual locations. I am breathless with anticipation because now that the gas prices have pretty much nailed us down, we may have a fighting chance to get the funding for our regional rail, and you know what that means for future developments ;)

Unfortunate, but expected: TTA Rail is delayed another year.

...until TTA gets it right ;) I'd rather wait 2 more years and make a strong case than build on something that simply gets smaller and smaller, but more expensive each year. The Triangle can present better arguments next year, when it will take us 30 minutes to cover the distance we now cover in 20 minutes. Eventually, we'll get it.

The main problem right now is in the modeling...they just can't seem to get it right...and if they do get it right...I am not sure that the ridership numbers will be there to support this project now that the FTA has raised the bar on certification.

I do wish the TTA well, but realistically I think its going to be an uphill battle for them...unless something drastic changes between now and next year.

Well said... The ONLY changes, however, that could support this project will come from higher density, urban developments around the proposed stations. The developers need to put this well into their thick skulls and get moving. Sure, there are many more things we can think of, but without the numbers this project will be dead in the water. Unlike Charlotte, TTA's rail is regional and we must justify 61% of federal funding really well, and without numbers we don't have a chance even in 30 years.

Recently, there was an article in the N&O, titled Plans irk builders (http://www.newsobserver.com/news/v-printer/story/2807803p-9251905c.html), which made me a little optimistic about the future. While much damage has been done already, there is still hope and we must look at the future in a more optimistic way. If Cary and Moorisville get a few things right, we can increase our chances dramatically.

Yawn...Raleigh is so slow. None of this news about the rail surprises me at all!

:|

Oh yeah, Raleigh is getting about 80 more Walgreens over the next year, some more Food Lions to! Yay :runaway:

Do you know why Food Lion's and Walgreen's are built? Because of the perception that "this is what people want". Has ANYONE EVER asked YOU what you want? Speaking for myself, I have never been asked what I want... To be fair, these stores provide an image of growth that every developing city displays. We are all responsible, in a way, for the spread of big-box retailers and chain stores, because we expect things to happen and we do not act when we need to. Developers throughout the country will continue doing what they've been doing all along: making quick money, at the expense of the ever-growing lazy public that will take the car to drive 1/4 mile, but refuse to walk for 5 minutes. Why putting a sidewalk and offer people the chance to walk? Why integrating shopping, within short distance from residences? Why paying attention at smaller cities like Savannah and Charleston, which have amazing fabric and make walking around a pleasant experience? This doesn't bring quick money, does it? [I am being sarcastic, of course.]

There is hope, though, and we shouldn't let those who ruin our cities do so on our expense. Raleigh is openly now being ruled by NIMBY's and their puppets; you know, those who want "responsible" development and only manage to push the sprawl outside the Beltline. Raleigh (and the entire Triangle actually) needs to remain united and fight for better urban guidelines, better transportation and great cooperation between the private and public sectors. If we fight for it, our area will manage to gain all of the above. If we leave it up to every NIMBY-supported city official, Raleigh will soon reach the outskirts of Greensboro :lol:

Charlotte's system is already regional...serving Mecklenburg, Gaston, Iredell, Cabarrus, Union, and York counties. Not only does it cross county lines, but it crosses state lines as well.

i cant wait to visit the area again and ride these....

Here are some photos I took last Saturday, during my visit to TTA's mockup demonstration. It wasn't bad at all, and I was surprised to see how many kids loved the whole idea... Well, that should be expected, I guess.

http://www.pbase.com/raleighmsa/image/50988613.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/raleighmsa/image/50988610.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/raleighmsa/image/50988611.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/raleighmsa/image/50988612.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/raleighmsa/image/50988614.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/raleighmsa/image/50988615.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/raleighmsa/image/50988616.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/raleighmsa/image/50988617.jpg

"Oops!!! Did I touch the wrong button?"
http://www.pbase.com/raleighmsa/image/50988618.jpg

I'd say, he had an easy job, while his coworkers had to babysit much larger crowds at the Fairgrounds :lol:
http://www.pbase.com/raleighmsa/image/50988619.jpg

I really like the car design

The car design looks just like what NJ uses today.

I wonder if CATS will pick the same design for its 30 mile North Rail line.

I like the design, too. I think it will look good and most people will react positively once they see this train in action. I have been saying to many people that I would love to see something like a theme park, or a children's attraction near a station. TTA can work with that park's management and provide coupons and discounts for those who ride the train. Another thing I found weird is that TTA did not select a site near the Fairgrounds for demonstrating the mockup. I am sure that more people would have reacted positively if they had a chance to see it with their own two eyes.

I wonder if CATS will pick the same design for its 30 mile North Rail line.Judging from the photo below, it will look very similar:

http://web.presby.edu/~jtbell/transit/images/Charlotte/200502b/Speeches.jpg

There are many nice photos in this site: http://web.presby.edu/~jtbell/transit/Charlotte/LightRail

LOL...that might be what the Conductor looks like...but not the trains...word on the street is that CATS will be going with the Double Decker amtrak style trains for the North Line instead of DMUs.

Hell, I don't know where that photo came from, but it surely looks funny :lol: Seriously, there was an actual photo in that location... Even when you visit the site you see the same image :( Don't know what happens, but I surely hope the admin fixes it fast.

Hey, just visited the site again and the actual photo is there... WTF is happening? Here is the link: http://web.presby.edu/~jtbell/transit/images/Charlotte/200502b/Speeches.jpg

I hate to be the bringer of bad news, but it looks like TTA's regional rail has hit major obstacles. If you read the following links you will see that the project is far from dead. However, without federal support, this is not easy to pull :( Anyway, there is still hope, but TTA has to create a miracle.

Federal Government Cuts Funding For Triangle Rail - WRAL 5 (http://www.wral.com/news/5538396/detail.html)

Feds Derail Regional Train System - WTVD 11 (http://abclocal.go.com/wtvd/story?section=local&id=3726624)

TTA rail project will receive low rating - Triangle Business Journal (http://www.bizjournals.com/triangle/stories/2005/12/12/daily33.html?t=printable)

Triangle gets bad news on rail - The News & Observer (http://www.newsobserver.com/102/v-print/story/378177.html)

I know that some forumers already felt uncomfortable with the status of this project and pretty much guessed the number of obstacles. We'll see, though. TTA has a few more options to examine before we pronounce the proposed system dead. Let's face it, we ask for too much :( My hope lies in the continuous momentum and the will of some developers to deliver large mixed-use communities within short distance. Only then we may convince the Feds that we have the numbers to make a regional rail work.

Well I like to look at it as an opportunity to develop a better system. We need mass transit here, otherwise we are going to fall flat on our face in 20 years when sprawl completely chokes our streets or when gas prices skyrocket.

I suggest that our transit agencies rise to the challenge and push on despite the challenges. I think the ideal way to tackle this is looking top down and bottom up simultaneously.

Top Down Goals (Acting like a region)
Connecting the dots. Don't worry about creating a system with 11, 12 or 16 stops. Priority should be connecting 4 dots right now. Downtown Raleigh, Durham and RTP and the airport need to have quick and consistent access to each other. Quickness is key in pulling people out of their cars. I can drive from downtown Raleigh to downtown Durham in about 30-35 minutes, Our system should have a goal of about 40-45 minutes. Also this system should be very consistent; there should never be a fear of being stranded. 24 hours a day, 7 days a week you should never have to wait more than 1 hour for transit to arrive. This system will be expensive and we can take our time building it. This should be done over the course of 10-15 years. ( I still recommend 70 for the majority of this.) Initially it will apply for "touristy" type trips. an out of towner in Raleigh's convention hotel going to a bulls game. A Durhamite taking a trip to the museum of science etc etc. As the housing options in DT Raleigh and DT Durham increase, this part of the service will gain commuters as riders. Living downtown and working in the park would be very attractive if the commute was only 40 minutes and there was a guarantee of no traffic.

Bottom up (Making the forementioned dots accessible)
This applies to Raleigh and Durham and the park to some extent, but being more familiar with Raleigh, here goes.

Don't make any drastic changes to the current system, but I think its important that we focus on some areas and encourage/reward smart growth.

Priority number1, connect downtown. I know I've hiked all over downtown numerous times but not everyone is going to do that. Have a line (square route) going along the perimeter of the 4 outside squares (I do like the idea of a trolley here). Instantly you connect moore square, glenwood south, city market, the warehouse district. In addition to stopping at the 4 squares, also have a stop at bicentennial plaza and why not a stop at the foot of our new tallest building downtown? The other major line dowtown would circle the Salisbury/Wilmington pair connecting our cultural and entertainment downtown.

Priority #2 extending downtown. We have several areas that need persistent mass transit connections to downtown. NC State and Cameron Village are priorities, the transit should make those neighbrohoods feel as though they are an extension of downtown. Then we start looking for other areas Capital/Atlantic/New Bern in which we can extend connectivity to downtown.

Priority #3 connecting satellites. Connect North Hills, Crabtree, Wake Med Triangle Town, Highwoods. Start with busses, but if bus traffic is heavy, create the rail connection. Expensive, but once again, there isn't a rush. then move on to other cities and towns in the region. Cary, Garner Wake Forest etc. Start with lots of bussing until rail makes sense to build.

The key to all of this is the way mass transit is presented to the public. Make it so that its seen as reliable and most importantly, convenient. I don't want to dig around for change to catch a bus, give me an RFID bus card that I can keep in my wallet and is automatically charged when I get on a bus. I don't want to get "stranded" because bus service stops at 7:00pm. We can slowly build up an awesome transit system, we just need to make sure that it "works" where we have it.

^^ Romec, this is a great posting :okay: You touched all the aspects of the project that matter. TTA's regional rail proposal isn't a pie in the sky, nor a winning idea. First, we need to change perceptions, but let me ask you this: Why in the Earth didn't TTA host the presentation of the rail cars in the Fairgrounds? At the same time TTA was displaying the rail cars, thousands of people were at the State Fair. What other place would have been unique for this presentation? Kids LOVE trains. Those children at the State Fair would remember the rail cars and their parents would take them for rides, just for fun. Creating easily accessible destinations for children is a good selling point, especially if there are some ticket discounts associated with the regional rail. Park your car in DT Raleigh, hop on the train and go to a theme park, or a large playground - get a 10-20% discount if you ride the train. Or, take the train from Chapel Hill and go to DT Raleigh's IMAX theater. This regional rail proposal could be marketed in many different ways, if public and private sectors work together. But everything is about connecting the dots.

Triangle needs alternative means of transportation, and regional rail is a winner, in my opinion. However, it must be done right, from the beginning, before it becomes a money pit. Starting with the wrong foot is going to prove disasterous. The proposed system can start small, but be designed for easy upgrades. Adding new stations should be as simple as building a small station and a platform. We should not be concerned with public art and all that. Wasting money during the initial phases makes no sense. Fayetteville Street is a great example: once the city trimmed some fat and moved forward with a simpler idea, more investments came and the street reopening will eventually pay for itself... sort of. Same holds true with TTA's regional rail idea. We do need the developers on this early in the game, however. They must move forward with plans for dense, urban communities. In the future, these communities will provide the winning numbers that will grant us the funds. We should thank the feds for opening our eyes; there were a lot of wrong things to be addressed, let's face it.

Well this is not suprising news for me as I have known this was coming for quite some time. Bottom line is that TTA needs to find more local funding to get the fed request to 50% or below. How you do that is up to you, but until you do that, you can kiss the fed money goodbye.

Developers are going to be VERY hesistant now to do any kind of TOD development around future stations until TTA gets its act together and funding is secured.

I wish the best of luck to the Triangle, but right now the future for transit is cloudy.

Darn, Darn, Darn.

Well I guess it's time to think about HOV Lanes, and alternative means of transport. Let's try again in 2010 Shall we?

^^
Don't lose hope. As uptownliving nicely said, TTA needs to get its act together and secure funding from other sources, and then ask for a lower percentage of federal assistance. Anyone who thinks this project is dead is too pessimistic. The Triangle may have to consider other solutions, including a light rail system, or even improve the existing bus lines.

The developers will most likely be hesitant to deliver urban projects fast, but fear not. At the end they will build as planned. They have the means and the incentives to do so, and help TTA in its goals while they are at it. Right now, developers have already invested in land; too late to back down. The only obstacle is timing. I just hope that TTA and local officials manage to achieve something more than a complete shutdown of this proposal.

Just to cheer you up a bit, let me share an update on Davis Park (http://www.davisparkrtp.com/), the 198-acre development where TMC will be located. While the 25-acre TMC will have the taller structures, the rest of the community will feature a few urban amenities, too. The project is moving as planned, and I assume it won't be affected by the recent [bad] news. Here are a couple of images for you to view:

http://www.craigdavisproperties.com/images/davispark_pics.jpg

Let's see how different this project will be from the drawings. I assume no deviation because these are the latest images. However, I do anticiapte the TMC to get delayed, but not cancelled. It's OK with me, as long as they take that pastoral view and turn it into something nice. According to the developer, the condos and townhomes should be ready for people to move in by Fall of 2006. That's some great news, if you ask me, assuming they do it right. Unfortunately, the developer isn't going to do a better job for the sides that face "main" streets (Hwy 54, Hobson Rd and Davis Dr) :( At least, the areas inside the development will look good.

So then this project is already under construction? They would have to be if they plan to have move in 10 months away.

The website is not very informative. How have sales been?

Double post. Oops.

This is very close to where I work (also, unfortunately, where I live) and grading on the site has been going on for several months now. The first phase will be at the N/W corner of the intersection of Davis Drive and Hopson Road. I'm not entirely clear on what they're planning here, but it's clear on the other side of Davis from the rest of TMC. I Wonder if / how these two sides of the development will be linked together.

This will probably end up looking a lot like Meadowmont in Chapel Hill. Better than a strip mall, but not really "urban." You'll be able to walk from one shop to another without feeling threatened, but there will be no connectivity to the outside world for anything other than automobiles. And, oh yeah... as of January, bus service on Davis is being cut down to 6 daily buses in each direction.

This whole area is built on a framework of 55mph highways, and Davis Park will most certainly be designed to take full advantage of all the heavy traffic flying by every day.

Uptownliving, I got no information about the sales, but I will ask Jim Lepley, who is my contact for this project.

Orulz nailed this for us. The biggest concern is the link between Davis Park - TMC is only a component of the project - and the rest of the development, West of Davis Dr. The intersection of Merrion Ave and Davis Dr will be the key to this transition, but I do not anticipate much. If the buildings don't face major roads, then the project has little visibility. My guess is that a) the developers are planning for future developments along the major roads at a later time, and/or b) natural obstacles (i.e. creeks) prevent this development from being all that it can be, although I am sure there are ways to fix this.

Well, we certainly have to settle with something FAR BETTER than the usual crap, but we'll still be left unsatisfied knowing that this is yet-another missed opportunity for something great. I wish Kane was able to develop this instead :( On the other hand, I do expect a comfortable semi-urban environment inside Davis Park. Hey, if people can walk instead of getting behind their wheels all the time, I am all for it. At least it is not a subdivision, and the master plan looks very upgradeable when things begin to change in RTP. I wish the developers best of luck because their idea is still bold for RTP standards.

Orulz, have you taken any photos from that development? You don't live too far from there, do you?

Orulz, have you taken any photos from that development? You don't live too far from there, do you?I'm really close. Last time I went by during daylight hours (two weekends ago) they were still in the process of grading, and with weather like it's been I doubt they've progressed much since then. I'll see about stopping by tomorrow, though.

Stop the presses!!! I found the solution to keep TTA's regional rail idea alive. Here is what I propose:

http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/thumb.php?f=Dampflokomotive_The_Rocket_im_Original_von_1829.jpg&w=800

:hilarious :hilarious :hilarious :hilarious :hilarious :hilarious :hilarious :hilarious

Bleh, we don't need trains, or rocket trains. we need Flying cars!!!

Yes, I have been waiting for my flying car since I read about it in 3rd Grade!

When DT Raleigh gets its first 60-story skyscraper, then pigs will fly... and so will cars :lol: When can I reserve mine? Flying car, that is, not flying pig.

Well this isn't really TTA, but its in Raleigh. The Wolfline, which is the campus mass transit for NC State University now has a cool online tracking map that shows the realtime locations of every bus. They are using the Wolfline as a test run on their gps tracking software to be rolled out to other transit systems in the future. This is the first mass transit system in NC to have visual online real time tracking:

http://ncsu.transloc-inc.com/

That is a pretty cool find :okay: NCSU rules ;) Maybe they should design TTA's regional rail... I am sure they will do a much better job in getting approval :)

In President Bush's FY 2007 Budget released yesterday there is a $20M earmark for TTA Rail....this will give them 1 more year to get things back on the right track.

This should be more than sufficient to maintain some momentum, but the solution of the problem lies in the hands of the developers. If they move forward with 50% of what has been proposed, the numbers may begin to add up in a way that the Feds become satisfied. I know this has been mentioned before, many times, but as is, TTA's plan makes little sense. Outside DT Raleigh and DT Durham, no other stop seems to be useful. There is another proposal, outside TTA, but I won't say anything until I learn more about it. But as is, TTA needs to entice more developers and create destinations near the proposed stations. Otherwise, only Plan B can work, whatever that might be.

This is what the FTA reported in their Annual New Starts Report released today concerning TTA Rail:

"The project is rated Low at this time. FTA approved the project into preliminary engineering (PE) almost eight years ago and final design nearly three years ago. Since that time, TTA has reduced the scope of the project while experiencing a three hundred percent increase in the project capital cost. In addition, TTA has been unable to produce and submit to FTA reliable information on the project’s transportation benefits for the past two years, and has this year been rated Medium-Low for local financial commitment. TTA must submit reliable information on the costs and benefits of a project scope that results in a Medium overall project rating by September 30, 2006, or be removed from final design status."

Ouch...that is very blunt and to the point. The clock is ticking.

http://www.fta.dot.gov/documents/NC_Raleigh_Profile.doc

This is reality, uptownliving. Cities/metros that want as much money as TTA is hoping to get need to investigate and do some serious research before asking for 61% of the costs from any source, not just the feds. In fact, they should be thankful they went this far without having to show significant progress. Population increase and more density around the proposed stations is probably the only thing that TTA can push for at this point in time. Even the TMC, in RTP, is rumored to be moved to the center of Davis Park instead of the edge - I don't have a problem with that, at all. The developer wants to make this move in case TTA's regional rail doesn't get the green light, but that is not necessarily a bad move from an urban design standpoint. Unfortunately, the developer still thinks in a suburban way; the edges of this project will look just as suburban as anything, only the inside will have some urban feel to it :(

As is, TTA has until September 30, 2006 to answer all the questions and do some VERY detailed research, before the feds pull the plug on this project... at least the federal funding part. TTA has a chance, and while it will take a miracle to really get what it is asking for, it's doable. Hopefully, the supporters of the regional rail will generate more realistic projections and leave less to the luck factor. Neither pessimism, nor excessive optimism will do good. As I mentioned in my previous post, there are alternatives, but they won't surface until TTA's effort fails.

I know we need to get the rail going. At least some part of it. I think if it went to the airport the FTA would be quicker to give the project a medium rating. If we get it started now we can always add more spurs and corridors in the future.

Actually going to the Airport would lower the rating...as they would have to build completely new rail for that spur that would not be cost effective with respect to the number of people that would ride the rail. If adding the RDU spur would have helped the TTA's plans they would have done it already.

I think that having a great connection between the closest rail stop to RDU and the airport is crucial. Having RDU's leaders on board, with or without an additional stop, would be a major advantage, but the airport's management would not like the idea of losing revenue from the parking. Also, Duke University Hospitals system just doesn't want to play along, for reasons beyond my [full] understanding. Good connections to this area's universities, hospitals, downtowns, sports venues and denser residential areas are all important components and cannot be ignored.

Since the TTA line will be traveling in the same corridor as the Freight lines, could the TTA use those tracks between stations, while having 'spurs' at the locations of the stations? I'm thinking that the stations and the 'spurs' near the stations could eventually be used connected into its own system.

So, phase 1) build stations/spurs off freight line
2) TODs established
3) Massive Development arround stations
3) Connections of 'spurs' to get off freight tracks

If use of the frieght lines could be used, maybe all the original station locations could be built.....

It seems that the Feds aren't going to pay into this. For many reasons, which includes the lack of local financial support. So Wake and Durham should add in some kind of gas tax to supply the rail with a steady stream of cash.

Basically, this is what TTA is trying to do, at least for the most part. The hardest part will be to create and establish TODs. It will take time, and without the Feds supporting this project it will be hard to convince developers to build on the promise that some day we may see something in those areas. I am not sure whether this is true, or not, but it appears to me that the city of Raleigh and the city of Durham are not as aggressive in creating and enforcing strong urban guidelines, especially around the proposed stations - downtown areas are of course an exception. Looking at 4-5 story buildings isn't a solution, nor provide the numbers we need to make the regional rail an attractive proposition. Unfortunately, time is running against us and we should all be prepared. I am still hopeful, but a Plan B would not hurt our chances when September comes.

Howdy gang. I've been keeping up with TTA developments, including the (expected) rejection of FTA funding for commuter rail. I agree with the low rating that the feds gave this project based on funding structure, political organization, et al. At least while the Bush administration is in office, you will not find a basket of money for shovel-to-lights completion for a project based on speculative use and/or peripheral development for which dirt has not even been turned. That having been said, I am a big fan of the promise of this system, and if the Triangle is going to avoid a Houston-style fate of malaise, this has to get done now, while the land is still available.

Several things need to be changed about the DNA of this project, if indeed it is to work. First, TTA needs to get far more involved in the land business surrounding the service area of the corridor. Not merely being a bystander while developers mouthpiece the deal, TTA needs to get into the actual development, by either acquiring the land outright and subbing out the developmental work, or buying into the projects (even some that already exist), and infusing money into the developmental aspects. In that way, the agency can guarantee (to the best degree that it is possible) that such developments (giving the "Triangle Metro Center" area of RTP as an example) are sufficient in scope and size (density) to create the needed economic impact that TTA is trying to tell the feds that it will. A pre-existing building is a much better sell than a concept drawing for a piece of property that may later be occupied by a strip-mall. Also, much of the income derived from rental and sales of commercial property, as well as assessments to condos and apartments in the areas surrounding stations (focus areas) would feed into the TTA budget on a continual basis. Air rights over the top of the actual rail corridors (assuming the corridor was in TTA's, or in the state's possession) could also be leased out to developers, also providing monetary infusion into TTA's budget. Granted, I don't have access to everything you guys do over there (I'm based in Denver), but I have yet to see anything in TTA's documentation that would suggest that they are pursuing, or even considering such strategies.

That's a funny thing, since John Claflin came to TTA from Denver's RTD, which got its foot in the stirrup by doing just that. For just one example, RTD's Civic Center Station (an underground commuter and express bus terminal) has a 22-story building on top of it, collecting hundreds of thousands of dollars in air rights leases. Similar projects are slated for the Union Station area when RTD's FastTracks buildout gets underway. America Plaza in San Diego -- same thing -- it straddles the San Diego Trolley. The Ferry Building in San Francisco, DC's Union Station to an extent, and Chicago's train stations are phenomenal sources of commercial rental income. It all feeds the books. Right now, TTA is very much a paper tiger. Without an impressive stream of proprietary income, it is my gut feeling that this thing doesn't stand a chance -- not only with the feds, but for any kind of local funding either. People will just not throw money into a system that can only support itself from taxes and farebox recovery, no matter what the real benefits are.

I am a Raleigh native, and I understand the politics of the place. What I am espousing (although many of the world's transit systems are invoking this strategy) is probably regarded by many native Tarheels as nothing short of blasphemous and communistic. Government making a profit off of a restaurant owner's business? (Even though the "government" is dropping thousands of potential customers off at his or her doorstep daily.) Denying a private developer 100% of the profit off of any project? (Although without the "government", the project might not have existed in the first place.) Oh, the humanity! Real sickle and hammer stuff boys and girls.

It's folks like yourselves, that have an active interest in these civic matters, and stay in touch through the media and blogs like this one, that need to put the heat on these administrators and get them out of this handout mentality, and make them make it work, or move them aside and get someone who will. Someone with a vision far beyond the next EIS or funding presentation (or as the feds call it -- the dog and pony show). As an example of this, several years ago, TTA had proposed a station for the Whitaker Mill Road area, at the confluence of both Old Wake Forest Road and Atlantic Avenue (my boyhood neighborhood as fate would have it), which as all of you know is one of the three biggest chokepoints for traffic in the city of Raleigh. The entire warehouse district around the place was a teardown waiting to happen, but the station was killed because "there was nothing there" and they eliminated the station in order to save money.

I had proposed a sweeping commercial area in, around, on top of, underneath, whatever, the Whitaker Mill station called Seven Continents Pavillion, which would actually incorporate the platform of that station. Starting with the old Winn-Dixie warehouse at trackside, an indoor bazaar of international markets (some in stalls, others in enclosed storefronts) with a humongous food court, would offer space for mom-and-pop establishments selling food and products (ranging from foreign language books, periodicals, and movies, to cork paintings and other artistic wares) from around the world. The implicit argument was that such a facility would bring in foreign-born immigrants (and their capital as well), and would be a magnet for North Carolina's burgeoning immigrant population (many of whom are highly educated, well-paid technicians, scholars, and other professionals at industries that drive the Triangle's economy). It would also become a major tourist draw, as no other such facility exists outside of a major city in North America, or anywhere close to the Triangle. Also, it would (because of the extensive food court) become a major activity corridor for state employees and other downtown workers, as well as those from Highwoods, and actually GENERATE a significant daily (and non-peak, at that!) traffic base for that section of rail. Obviously it wasn't seriously considered, and it might have actually gone straight to the garbage can, as I later called TTA to confirm that it was received, and no one could remember it.

In case you're interested, the prototype for the proposal was the Emeryville Public Market, which was built in the East Bay north of Oakland from just such a district. The link:

http://www.emerymarket.com/

This can't see the forest for the tree thinking has got to stop. I moved on to other projects, but I hope that one or more of you can help break the complacency mode of this agency, and get them to see the light. Indeed, with this ruling, TTA's very survival is on the line, and it would be a shame to lose the talented people they have there. It's hard enough in this economic climate to get transit projects to fly, but nigh unto impossible if they lack vision.

Ciao!

Vitaviatic, first of all allow me to welcome you to this forum. I surely hope you continue to visit SSC. If your first post is an indicator, I know you will be much help and provide great input. I really like your suggestions :okay:

Allow me to assure you that TTA is doing at least one thing right: working with some developers on developing areas along the rail corridor. Unfortunately, the results will not be evident to the vast majority of Triangle's residents, but the truth of the matter is TTA is actually heading to the right direction on this one. While I will lament the loss of federal support, if we fail to come back with a viable and reasonable proposal this coming September, I will be very unhappy if TTA's regional rail gets funding and then fail miserably. Developers wanted to see better ratings for the regional rail, therefore they will be lukewarm to pursuing denser developments without assurance from TTA, or the Feds, that regional rail may eventually happen, but building on speculations isn't good either.

Here is an article I meant to post for everyone's information: Rail worries delay RTP plan (http://www.newsobserver.com/102/v-print/story/400259.html). While I applaud the county's effort to manage traffic in RTP, I surely hope they speed things up a bit. Davis Park may not be the best urban project in the area, but it will surely achieve for TTA a lot. Moving the Triangle Metro Center closer to the rail station is most definitely important and I surely hope that the powers-that-be move fast on approving this change. At least on the paper, this change looks good!

Glad to be of help, if I can. It does appear that the developers of the TriMet are getting cold feet, and on the verge of throwing away the baby with the bathwater. Which is all the more reason for TTA to right the ship quickly with a more proactive position in the course of things.

As always, the devil is in the details. Transit agencies are rarely authorized by the charters of their taxing districts to acquire property for non-transit uses, and frankly there aren't that many enlightened developers that are enamored of the idea of "competing" with a publically funded agency in development projects. This requires a seriously finessed PR job, and plenty of concessions for potential partners. But, in lieu of having the said properties wasted by nervous landholders, some concessions may be in order.

Using the residential figures presented in your article, I've crunched some numbers on an aspect that I touched on earlier -- assessments. In the range that was presented in the article -- 1,185 to 2,285 units slated for the TriMet South (and I would hope that it would even go a bit higher than the upper range, although suburban areas tend to get a little weak at the knees when those kinds of densities come up) -- I extrapolated the two ends and came up with 1,718 units. Now, using 1,000 square feet per unit as a benchmark, let's toss out a $5 per square foot TTA dedicated assessment against the units in that particular zoned area. Here's the math: 1,000 sq. ft. x $5 = $5,000 x 1,718 units = $8,590,000. Not much, you might say? We have a lot more to go than that, right? But keep in mind that is just one area along a 35-mile system. When you get into downtown areas where the property values are ostensibly at a premium, of course the assessments might get a bit higher (and could do so without greatly increasing the burden on the buyer since infrastructure is already pre-existing in those areas, and assessments for those such things could be deeply discounted).

Several big things to remember concerning this. While Joe Taxpayer in North Hills might get a bit peeved about having to pay for something that really doesn't benefit him directly (and you have already seen the flashfire resistance from those folks, and perhaps not without reason), the homebuyers that would be assessed here would benefit directly from TTA in the matter of home value. Also keep in mind that these assessments would be paid over the term of a 30-year mortgage, wrapped into a home loan. I guarantee that the increase in value (and equity) created by the proximity of TTA to the given home, condo, whatever, will far outstrip the $5,000 tacked on to the house.

In my own situation, for instance, my wife and I bought a condo in the Denver Tech Center, which already had the benefit of being dense enough to be transit-ready. Still we bought at a discount based on heavy construction on the nearby freeways and the attending congestion. However, our unit is sandwiched between two light rail stations on a brand new line that will open in November of 2006. Already, as the construction nears completion and the light rail line comes online, our condo is appreciating now at a factor of 1.47, and that's after only 6 months! The same kind of thing will happen there as well.

What's more, the people who would buy into neighborhoods served by TTA -- in the TODs -- are generally not averse to paying for it. Oftentimes it's the reason they wanted to move there in the first place. Now, let's say the local governments hammered out an agreement that buyers in those areas would get rebates on those assessments. It almost becomes a no-brainer at this point because of a few things: 1) the government gets the benefit of transit implementation without the catfights and inherent political casualties from an at-large tax, 2) the government is not sacrificing any money in this way, because the property improvements will raise the tax revenues exponentially through much increased valuation in those areas anyway, more than recouping the "lost" revenue through the rebates, and 3) it speeds the process way up because the PODs (acting in a quasi-government function) can implement these revenue streams without the messiness of a fractured vote, while the local governments are not required (at least to my knowledge) to get voter approval to issue a tax rebate.

Now, here comes the good part. Let's assume (since I don't have concrete figures, and I would imagine that current figures would be understated anyway due to the iffiness of TTA's project at present) that over the entire 35-mile line, that around 5,000,000 sq. ft. of office space would come online (and I think that is conservative). Now, with commercial properties you can push the assessments a bit higher, due to the nature of a business holding. Commercial tenants and owners will write the assessments off on taxes anyway, as well as benefit enormously from employees having expedited access to work. OK, so here's the math for this: 5M sq. ft. of space x $20/sq. ft. for TTA assessment = $100,000,000. Again, this plays out over the term of a mortgage or lease, so it is not an immediate hit to the buyer. If a commercial client signs for 4,000 sq. ft., for example, it will pay $80,000 over a long span of time -- again, able to write off those charges as it goes.

So, back to the residential for second., Let's figure on, say, 15 TODs in that same range. At $8.59M per, we come up with $128,850,000. Added to the $100M we now have funding of roughly $229,000,000, which takes us about a quarter of the way up the ladder. If this is all drawn out beforehand, TTA could comfortably write a quarter billion in transit bonds, just by itself. At this point the state can more easily take on more of the underwriting for the project as well, as one could easily ascertain that the tax receipts from the certain job growth, whether as a direct or indirect result from this project, would offset higher funding as well. If 15,000 new jobs appear in the TTA zone, with the taxpayer paying $1,000 per year to the state (just in income taxes, forgetting about sales, gas, and other contributions), the state would receive $15 million per year, and could sink $450M in 30-year bonds based on that.

The only serious concern would be if the Triangle could actually produce those types of employment figures and numbers, and could foster a housing market that could absorb that level of sales on a regular basis. Given the area's astounding 30-year record for growth, I would think that it has been sufficiently demonstrated that the answer to that is yes, and that any reputable national developer would have few concerns about laying money down in this market. Raleigh/Durham is a market held in very high esteem in the world of developers, and the presence of TTA rail service would only make it that much more attractive.

Now it would be incumbent on readers of this blog to start putting a bug in the ears of Wake and Durham commissioners, as well as Raleigh and Durham councilpeople, in order to get these types of agreements in place. Once done, TTA can go back to the feds (with our numbers here, funded well over two-thirds locally) and have a far, far easier time wrangling the rest out of FTA. And, if TTA does have ongoing rental or sales income from real estate holdings, it gets that much easier. I am not there to do it myself, so it depends on you guys.

It still won't be easy.

Ciao!

There is no way I could have envisioned, let alone state these ideas better than you did... Let's hope that someone is listening out there, or better... have a way to make this idea work for TTA's regional rail project. It would be a shame to miss this opportunity. Keep the suggestions coming, I really enjoyed reading them :okay:

As a little update, I went to the "State of the City" luncheon today and heard Mayor Meeker talking about alternatives to TTA's regional rail, IF the latter does not get Federal help. The main idea is to connect North Raleigh with Cary and RTP (if I understood well), using main corridors (i.e. Capital Blvd). His talk of Plan B makes me feel better because I have pretty much heard the same thing from other sources. I think that Raleigh will eventually get a rail, just not the way TTA envisioned it.

Not related to the regional rail, Meeker mentioned the joined effort by all of the Triangle's bus systems into creating a single one that works and that it is only 2-3 months away... whatever that means. My understanding is that in a few months we'll see the beginning of a more serious attempt to unify the bus system in the Triangle. If done right, it may provide a great solution to the transportation headaches in this area.

In a poll on WRAL 75% of people thought that TTA should abandon its current rail plan. I would say that is pretty resounding and something the local politicians can't ignore.

WRAL's polls mean nothing... unless everyone in the area votes. Besides, even if 25% of the population wants the rail, it is more than enough, assuming most of them use it. Nevertheless, I will agree with your last sentence: local politicians have to keep in mind the will of the majority and approach any rail projects with caution. At least there is talk of alternatives :okay:

It is a shame to see almost 10 years worth of work on the TTA's part going right down the drain just 10 yards short of the finish line.

Indeed... :( Hats off to Charlotte for doing it right, and doing it fast. I think Raleigh will look at the Queen City for inspiration and ideas, and pretty soon. As for the rest of the area (Triangle), they can join in and try, along with Raleigh, to be more convincing to the Feds next time they ask for funds, or TTA will have to pull a miracle - still possible.

It is confirmed that the city will continue its interest in developing along the proposed corridor. We are talking about TOD/Urban developments that will pop up around the proposed stations, one way or another. TTA's vision will eventually be delivered, even if support by the Feds disappears this coming September. Going full speed ahead with TODs is critical and will help TTA big time in the future.

Re: the WRAL poll...

This has been seen before. An at-large electorate encompassing six or seven counties (or more, depending on how it was taken) will obviously be against a plan that discernedly only enhances a much smaller geographic area (of two counties), and is funded by either a sweeping tax on all of those areas, or a huge federal pot that simply isn't available. Again, the revenue sources need to be targeted toward the area of immediate impact (and benefit), and the debt constructed upon the future value of that area. What needs to be done is to take the matter completely out of voters' hands (as they will only be concerned with their own pocketbooks) and throw it onto the consortia of public/private partnerships or quasi-governments that could be enacted to get this through. It's quite a bit less democratic that way, but then again, democracy, for all its merits, isn't the most efficient form of government by a long shot. Especially when it comes to providing for the common good.

I was in Charlotte recently, and I can tell you -- they aren't out of the woods yet either. There are still plenty of trapdoors that their light-rail could fall through. But the reason I believe that Charlotte is farther along in the process is that there are major players with vested interests, e.g. the banking community, that are politically pushing it along over the obstacles. In Raleigh and Durham, where the politics are historically much more passive as far as the commercial sector goes, it simply isn't getting done. Duke University's outright indignation for the project is mystifying, considering that institution wants to be perceived as cutting-edge in technology, yet denounces and refuses to accommodate TTA, after it has deployed an internal transit system in the very same medical center it now garrisons off from TTA rail. That, in and of itself, is a damning statement of several things: 1) the myopia of civic leaders of how rail will change the complexion (and for the most part, for the better) of the Triangle, and 2) how the concept is being promoted.

There are basically three reasons that anything in this world progresses. The first is necessity and/or survival. The second is fear from what can happen without whatever is being considered. The third is greed, whereby there is lots of money to be made by someone in whatever is under consideration. Since the first two are not applicable in this case, the third must be exploited to the fullest. Indeed there is quite a bit of money to be made with the TTA corridor -- not just by the developers and the cities themselves, but people who buy homes along that corridor, businesses that open and cater to transit passengers, real estate speculators, and let's not forget the not insignificant amounts of money that will be saved by people actually using the system, as opposed to an SUV creeping down I-40.

Those of us following this project - and its impact to the urban fabric of our area - may not be surprised to hear the good/bad news (you choose to translate this anyway you like) that came out of TTA. The latter removed its request for federal funding and it is moving forward on a path that, IMHO, shold have been taken from the very beginning. That is, to get closer to the major players and those that stand to benefit from a regional rail. City councils, developers, investors and future commuters will most definitely be brought closer than ever before. TTA's regional rail has more chances to qualify for future funding if everyone truly works together, but not if we request 61% of the costs to come from the Feds. This is ridiculous and I am glad that TTA is finally recognizing that a new direction needs to be taken. Here are a few links for y'all to visit:

TTA withdraws bid for transit line approval (http://www.newsobserver.com/125/v-print/story/476559.html)

TransitAuthority Drops Federal Assistance Request (http://www.nbc17.com/news/9703253/detail.html)

TTA Puts Brakes On Federal Funding For Rail Project (http://www.wral.com/news/9703237/detail.html)

As a side note, I am sick and tired of reading/hearing people's complains and witnessing the need to assign blame to someone. TTA made some mistakes. Unfortunately, costly ones, but nevertheless mistakes. Some locals oppose this project, and for a VERY good reason. There is no ridership to justify a regional rail, particularly one that is very expensive and covers very few important stops (RDU Airport is not even included, while Duke University and the Town of Morrisville opposed a station within their boundaries). Councilman Isley [correctly] voices his concerns, only to be misquoted by some morons, who make him look as an opponent. I heard him on the radio this morning saying for one millionth time that he is not against the project, but not as proposed; he stated that this project will be needed in the next 20-25 years, and I see no fault to his logic. As for the Feds, why the Hell should they fund 61% of the cost, for a city that has no population density/numbers to support such an ill-planned transportation line.

Before anyone says that I am against this project, let me say again that I am not. However, if we want to see increased density in our cities, then this project is not going to do this to the extent that we want. In fact, it will increase density in areas like RTP and Morrisville, but in a very suburban way, I am afraid. I wish I was an expert, to propose something truly valuable and useful, but I am not convinced that TTA started with the right foot and now we have to pay the price. I am still optimistic and I hope that all players get their acts together. Come on TTA, we can do this right ;)

I agree wholeheartedly that we need to work on a regional basis to move this project forward. No doubt. I do however have one sticking point about the ridership projections. the report says that ridership will only have 10,200 daily riders in 2030. Now come on. Our projected population is close to 2M in 2030 and wake county will have 1.3M and only 10,200 people riding it a day. I site Salt Lake City as an example because they are comparable to us in population. Their light rail was built from the suburbs 15 miles down the line straight into DT they have since added a 4 mile spur to the University of Utah and Childern's Hospital. It today after only being in existence for 4 years has a ridership of 35,000 and they only projected 10,200 ten years out also. Their stops go nowhere but to DT where their big employment base is. They only have 1.5M in their metro area with only one line. They are now having the Feds by 80% of the cost for a 44 mile commuter line.
I think the TTA projection of ridership was full of crock. People will ride if you build it. one reasone alone: GAS $3.00 per gallon.

While that ridership number defintely sounds low, keep in mind that we are a unique metro in that our jobs center is in RTP. While DT Raleigh is still growing and creating jobs people also work in the Park and in Durham etc etc.

While that ridership number defintely sounds low, keep in mind that we are a unique metro in that our jobs center is in RTP. While DT Raleigh is still growing and creating jobs people also work in the Park and in Durham etc etc.

Completely agree that we have a unique situation with three job centers. Duke Medical center, RTP, and DT Raleigh. I think though the line was serving all three of those areas and you could only find 10,200 riders. That is 1/2 of 1 % of the total population.

To put it another way. That is like only Holly Springs current population would ride rail and the rest of the Triangle drive cars in 2030.

I don't want to come off as anti-transit here, because I defintely want regional rail in the Triangle. In fact had you talked to me a year or two ago, I would have been 110% behind the current proposal. Its just that as I've thought more about this and seen the hurdles, I see an opportunity for the region to get something better.

Think about a typical person in Raleigh that works in RTP. For the sake of convenience, lets put them in North Raleigh (but it also works in most parts of Raleigh.) Lets say without traffic your commute is 25 minutes and during rush hour its an hour to an hour and a half. In order to ride the rail its likely a 10 minute drive to the closest station, a 45 minute ride to the park, and then another 10 minute ride to your office. In the best case (never waiting to change your mode of transportation) its going to take a little over an hour using the rail system. Furthermore the park is probably the worst place in the world to be without personal transportation: if you want fast food for lunch, to visit the bank or go to a store, at present you need a car.

Now I know and you know that traffic is only going to get worse and gas prices are only going to get higher. But in order to convince everyone in Raleigh that we need regional rail this system has to be accessible and fast. If you want riders, you have to connect sources (homes) with destinations (jobs + retail) At present it looks like the system is really only connecting jobs to jobs. (Yes there is retail in downtown Raleigh/Durham and there are residents there, but at present we're talking about small percentages)

A lot of us on these forums understand that there will hopefully be future density and retail and residents near the stations and lines, but the trick is convincing people that are here now and drive to work now that its worth it in the long run.

Like Raleigh-NC said, I wish I was an expert and had the perfect plan, but even though I'm not, I still believe that it is best to put the current plan behind us and work on something better. When regional rail was first proposed it was projected to cost around $100mil. Once the railroads got a hold of it and screwed around with TTA adding new tracks and right of way purchases, the costs soared to the current $800mil+. Lets start over on a smaller scale hitting key areas and build from there. Maybe trolley lines out Hillsborough St. to the fair grounds and stadium/arena area, up towards N.Raleigh. I don't know. Many cities are turning to trolley lines to build there transportation options. I do believe that Raleigh is many years from needing mass transit, but we must start now to plan, secure right-of -ways, and promote transit friendly development or we will always be fighting an up hill battle.

Maybe this is a blessing in disguise, but it has to hurt for all those involved over the past decade...after alllllll the blood sweat and tears that went into this...for this to be the end result. With death comes rebirth and renewal...hopefully this will be something bigger, better, and real in its second life.

Excellent post, uptownliving :okay: This project's first incarnation is nearly dead, but there is a good chance something bigger and better will be born. Phillip Isley's views are right on the money and consistent with the realities that the Triangle is facing today. What he said in a recent interview is that we spent so much money, put all this effort and we have nothing to show for it :( TTA, however, has a way to make this proposal work better and get more in sync with our needs. First, the local population needs to see mass transit not only as a vital option, but also as the preferred one. This is a very difficult step, which is why many believe that we need to work on our bus system before regional rail becomes reality. If people do not have faith in our existing transit system, then how could anyone expect them to take the train?

What I mentioned before, and I apologize for repeating it, is that TTA needs to work with a developer of an amusement park. Nothing major, just a medium size park that families can choose as a destination, motly during the weekends; take the kids for a day of fun in a local park. Place the park within walking distance from a planned station and make sure it is located between DT Durham and DT Raleigh. Limit the parking spaces - yes, this is a risky proposal - and through a cooperation between TTA and the park's owners encourage a park-and-ride pattern, maybe with some coupons included for those who ride the train. Sure, it is not a bullet-proof idea, but it may work. For those who say that people are not willing to walk, I need to mention the exhibition [soccer] game between DC United and Rochester Rhinos; the crowds had to walk for a while, after parking their cars far from the field, in a pedestrian-unfriendly area. This happens all the time, provided there is an attractive event going on. Maybe the park can be complemented by an outdoors amphitheater, where plays and concerts could take place throughout most of the year. Again, in cooperation with TTA.

More links for you:

TTA To Seek Local Partners For Commuter-Rail Funding (http://www.wral.com/news/9714336/detail.html) (with video)

Big Questions Remain over Rail Future (http://abclocal.go.com/wtvd/story?section=local&id=4482609#)

Many urge TTA to hold assets, for now (http://www.newsobserver.com/102/v-print/story/477787.html)

Uptownliving, what were the biggest challenges Charlotte faced with its light rail system? Do you see any similarities in those challenges with the ones we are facing here? Did any "players" refused to play ball?

Wow, this looks like a great project. Hopefully it comes out as nice as the one in Charlotte, which it looks like it will. Here is a pic of Greenville, SC's future multi-modal transportation center, which is going to be built downtown: http://www.greenvilleforward.com/Main%20Pages/visiontransportation.htm

That is a very impressive project, g-man430. There is one such center planned for Raleigh, regardless of TTA's regional rail (see image below):

http://www.raleighnc.gov/portal/server.pt/gateway/PTARGS_0_2_306_203_0_43/http%3B/pt03/DIG_Web_Content/project/public/livable_streets/Images/intermodal.jpg

I know that many Triangle forumers may be disappointed with the way TTA's regional rail has evolved. From a feasible and cost-effective project to being overpriced and stalled... It does hurt us, somehow. However, this vision is not dead and here is some good news to demonstrate it:

Rail is stalled, but developer soldiers on (http://www.newsobserver.com/102/v-print/story/480514.html)

Some excerpts from the article (see below) demonstrate determination to make this work out to the area's benefit. Unless we see it, it will be hard to believe that the Triangle may actually become urban in some areas - we all know that density does not equal urbanity - but we rarely get a chance to hear someone sound positive about a proposal which has a stalled project as its selling point. How could a developer sell a transit-oriented community if the transit isn't there?
Tom Darden, CEO of Raleigh-based Cherokee Investment Partners, said Tuesday that the lack of funding needed to build the rail system hasn't dimmed his company's interest in creating high-density developments of homes, offices and stores around the proposed stations.

"We're moving forward irrespective of the federal funding situation," Darden said.

"There is going to be a system. We don't know how it is going to be funded. We don't know when it is going to be built."

While Triangle leaders figure out what to do next, TTA and Cherokee are looking to create a dense mix of transit-friendly developments around the station sites. But first they have to agree on a contract.
This shows clearly that the Feds are not insensitive to our situation. The Triangle may actually have a chance to be part of a pilot program that could help us qualify for something.
The Federal Transit Administration also is developing a test program to attract private investment in rail transit projects that don't qualify for federal funding amounting to 60 percent of the total project cost.
It is also nice to see Durham playing the same card and making similar moves. This will help not only TTA's regional rail vision, but also Durham.
Bill Kalkhof, president of Downtown Durham Inc., is eager for development to begin around a proposed station at the corner of Duke and Chapel Hill streets -- with or without a train system. Several abandoned buildings sit on the property. Nearby, developers plan to convert massive brick tobacco warehouses into hundreds of apartments.

I think it was good that this plan didn't go forward as planned. One of the great challenges with the Triangle is appropiately planning infrastructure according to needs, present and future. When TTA set out in the mid 90s this plan was looking good. However since then 300,000 people plus have moved into wake county and southern and eastern Wake County are really booming. I am glad that we can look over what will be the best option to represent all of Wake county.

I like your thinking :okay: To build a system envisioned yesterday for the needs of tomorrow isn't as simple as it might seem. Growth in this area is constant AND unpredicatable. We need a vision that will neither fall through the cracks of bureaucracy, nor be obsolete in a few years. A regional rail, or even light rail system would work better if ALL the major players, cities and municipalities saw its value and worked together towards a common goal. Let me add that many opponents of the regional rail are not as anti-public transportation as some proponents try to label them. Many opposing individuals suggest that we look into monorail, while others say that we should plan ahead, but not spend millions of dollars until we build the density that will help us present a winning case for a regional rail system. Personally, I am looking forward to Cherokee Investments' proposals. They can help us justify a regional rail that will be useful and will meet our long term goals as a city.

Cary_NC, I have a question for you: What is that large 2-story building on Chatham Str. It is situated to the left (North?), after DT Cary, as you drive towards Raleigh? It has a restaurant on the ground floor, with outside seating. I know I will find the name of that restaurant, but if you can help me a little it will be great ;) That building looks very nice and it is urban in its form. Unfortunately, I didn't have my camera with me, so I could not take any photos :(

Are you talking about the wedged shaped building in between Circus Burger or whatever it's called and Maynard on Chatham?

Sorry, but what does "wedged" mean? I believe that is the building I saw. It looks like it has two big columns on the front. Unfortunately, I was in a hurry to get back to work, but I am going to return and check it out. I liked the outdoor seating of the restaurant!

Sorry, but what does "wedged" mean? I believe that is the building I saw. It looks like it has two big columns on the front. Unfortunately, I was in a hurry to get back to work, but I am going to return and check it out. I liked the outdoor seating of the restaurant!

THe name of the resturant is The Triangle Grille. I am going there this week and will let you know how it is. I find this area symbolic to Cary. You have the circus burger that looks like a red and yellow striped barn whichi is a good 35 years old right beside the "new" Cary. (ie the 2 story brick building.)

I think one thing they need to look at is cutting out the Durham county portion of the rail and adding the north Raleigh portion of the rail. Run the rail from RTP to North raleigh.

Why do i think this.

Wake county's growth is far greater than Durham county. Adding this stations in north raleigh will help with some of the traffic up there. Now I know the complaint about this is the time to drive to RTP vs time to ride rail to RTP. But people will use this to go to DT Raleigh for a show or shopping or work as well.

What are your thoughts on this?

I totally agree with you, provided Durham County is not interested in getting connected with Wake County, at this point in time. A more extensive line to North Raleigh and the northern suburbs would orobably serve us better, not to mention that North Raleigh is the largest area in Raleigh, both geographically and population-wise. One thing we need to keep in mind, however, is that connecting Raleigh (NCSU) with Chapel Hill (USC) would be important. There are academic programs where both universities cooperate - I had a friend who did that with Nuclear Physics as applied in the medical field - and it would have been great to connect the two universities. Games would be another reason, particularly because UNC has many graduates/fans in Raleigh.

To achieve this, we must find a way to connect the line from point 6 (see map below), to Chapel Hill. Then, if Durham is interested, another line can be created between Carrboro and North Raleigh, passing through Durham. How possible this is I cannot tell. It may require additional expenses and possibly replacing the regional "heavier" rail with a monorail, or a light rail system. I think that TTA and/or the city of Raleigh can pull this, but I wonder how feasible it is to begin a study at this point in time. If we cannot pay the sanitation workers a little more, I find it hard to believe that we'll be able to put a good rail system in place, strictly as a city. The idea of beginning with Raleigh and RTP is solid, though :okay:

http://www.ridetta.org/Regional_Rail/Current_Status/images/regionalmap.jpg

At the risk of sounding iconoclastic, the demise of this particular TTA scheme was probably the best thing that could have happened. There were several things about the project as it was that bothered me, and everyone else. First, you don't simply build a 26+ mile line from scratch, all at once. No other city has ever done it that way. Start small, flesh out your numbers then increase your petition for funding based on proven numbers. It's far easier that way. Second, TTA management seemed to have a one-track mind, never thinking of (much less coordinating with) development strategies along the corridor that would actually create the market in which the transit would be viable. I'll be the first to tell anyone that it's true that transit isn't justified for what is there, but for what will be there. It takes strong leadership to steward a project through that kind of a speculative environment, and TTA did not have that, I felt, with Claflin at the helm.

But keep your chins up, folks. A bunch of dead weight just got kicked off of this endeavor. Opportunity abounds. There are several other things at work that make the rail project a better prospect now. To wit...

Having now run out of options, TTA will have to reinvent its role in the project, and cede some of the technical specs back to NCDOT/NCRR, where it belonged in the first place. If DOT (or NCRR through their auspices) is allowed to plan for the trackage, and TTA is content to resign itself to a tenant operator upon the trackage, several things will happen: 1) better planning and control over future operations will be manifested over multiple use trackage; 2) the pissing wars over who will build what where and when will stop -- NCDOT will have the responsibility to incorporate the High-Speed Rail into the physical plant from the outset, but at the same time will necessarily bear the cost of doing so, which will free quite a bit of cash for the rail enterprise to invest in rolling stock and nuts and bolts operations; and 3) the state's original proposed share of TTA funding could be spent directly on the right-of-way, enabling TTA to begin operations with minimal subsidy, but leaving the trackage on the books as a state asset, which makes state funding more reasonable (even if increased) than would be a direct handout to a quasi.

What I would propose is that TTA start first in Raleigh (Phase 1) between Government Center and the Fairgrounds (ostensibly the most difficult piece of ROW on the entire system), develop that traffic base over a year or two, then move on to Durham and initiate the 9th St. to Alston/NCCU leg (Phase 2). This essentially would bookend the system at the urban cores but allow for a bootstrap startup with a minimum of, or no federal funding. Projects will begin to settle around these lines (trust me), and as the ridership numbers are cultivated then federal funding to complete the system in two to three more stages can be applied for. Funding is way easier when you have a demonstrated market. While the Durham segment may not be the most rider intensive set apart from RTP, Cary, and Raleigh, if the most expensive parts of the system are already in place (locally funded) when fed funds are applied for, and basically open road trackage remains to complete the system, fed funding under that strategy is essentially a slam dunk at that point.

Even if the maintenance facility falls into RTP or say, Cary, the trains can operate back and forth on the "dark" track at the beginning and end of the day while that part of the line awaits completion. The DMUs that were slated for service on the NCRR trackage are FRA compliant, therefore the whole ROW does not have to be up to spec to ferry units back and forth.

There are a couple of "atomic bullets" that will get this started. First, initial acceptance of a turnkey operation whereby the rolling stock and the maintenance are leased for a minimum contracted period. (Crews could be contracted through a third party such as Herzog, Bombardier, or probably logistically a better option - Amtrak. Or TTA could crew the trains itself.) Yes, this does involve paying a premium for the service, but allows for a pay-as-you-go scenario that doesn't require tons of upfront cash. Second, the civic structure surrounding the rail corridor needs to be ramped up. One idea that I am adamant about -- Central Prison needs to be closed and moved out of downtown altogether, replaced by a very high density mixed-use project that would cover the prison property (which is about the size of Cameron Village), large enough in scale that it could recoup most of the replacement cost of moving the prison (which at present is a Gothic sump of enormous proportions, and a completely incompatible land use for any large city), plus create enough of a tax base, and generate enough in sales taxes to contribute to funding the rail itself. This is an example of what I have mentioned before, that value and traffic sources need to be created along the ROW in order to make it work. If Dix Hill Park goes through (my fingers are crossed) and a huge and invaluable urban park is created in the process, the area surrounding it (including the prison property, Boylan Heights, and Cameron Park) will rival or surpass Buckhead or any other neighborhood in Atlanta for property values or trendiness -- if that damn prison goes bye bye.

I am already working with certain developers in the area to get these aspects into play before the local politicos make the foolish mistake of folding the entire project. What the readers of this blog can do is put the bug in the ear of the Raleigh and Durham councils (since they are the major players in this), and get on TTA about listening up and being open-minded enough to prevent the entire agency from going down in flames (the bus side ain't doing too well either, friends). It can be done, and I've got the numbers that say it can, but we need to get past the rhetoric and start moving the cart.

Greetings from the Mile High City.

Vitaviatic, you presented a very well thought of idea and I don't have anything to say. I like your emphasis on Government Complex-to-Fairgrounds connection, and let me add one more: North Raleigh-to-Downtown. Both these corridors offer tremendous potential for density, particular the portion parallel to Atlantic Ave. Since I drive every [working] day through that street, let me emphasize that it is the most promising section of Raleigh, only second to Capital Blvd. The redevelopment opportunities are phenomenal. Having the tracks going parallel to Atlantic Ave (in a fashion similar to Hillsborough Str) is a major help, too. Good opportunities for apartment buildings and smaller homes (in denser neighborhoods) because you have a lot of blue collar workers working along most of Atlantic Ave. Additional condos and homes can help diversify the demographics a little, so we don't create strictly a lower income corridor. The same applies to the line parallel to Hillsborough Str, except for the large number of students that could utilize the line.

Can you imagine a voice in the speaker on a regional rail car announcing: "Next stop, Glenwood South"?

Vitaviatic, that was incredible. Obviously you are intimately involved in this project somehow to have that much knowledge about it. What chance is there that your plan will catch the attention of someone or some group that can actually make it happen? We cannot let mass transit die in Raleigh. Please keep us informed of your progress.

NCSU and downtown need a rail link more than anything else. Most of the 30,000 students live on campus and drive downtown, if they ever go there. The CAT connection is insufficient. I bike, but it isn't easy or fun along that stretch of Hillsborough.

The logical extension of that is the Fairgrounds and the Stadium area.

NCSU and downtown need a rail link more than anything else. Most of the 30,000 students live on campus and drive downtown, if they ever go there. The CAT connection is insufficient. I bike, but it isn't easy or fun along that stretch of Hillsborough.

The logical extension of that is the Fairgrounds and the Stadium area.

there are already rails in place that could serve them to glenwood ave but i dont know how that would work.

I went to the Women's Trans. Seminar last night. If anybody wants details let me know. It had a local panel and a national panel from Denver, Dallas, and Salt Lake City.

Why don't you share the details, anyway? We are all interested to hear more ;)

To quote and give correct due Chief Jo Jo saved me a lot time by typing the same remarks I had from the seminar so I will paste his quote from Urban Planet.org. He beat me to the punch basically.
"Update from the meeting:

It was an outstanding forum in my view. I made a few notes, but left them at home so I'll go on memory...

(1) David Price is an asset to the region and is very knowledgeable on transportation issues. He's been a big-time supporter of TTA and he knows the challenges of getting this thing done. I came away impressed with him. He discussed the federal funding issues that are crunching the FTA. He mentioned the bipartisan House transportation committee recommended a much funding for the transportation bill last year, but Bush wanted it much smaller (I inferred this was in part due to funding of Iraq and Katrina--funds aren't as plentiful in Washington these days). Something like $16B in projects and $8B in actual New Starts funds in the last budget, so lots of projects are being left out due to tougher standards. Also, Price mentioned the coming problems with freight rail and passenger rail--there is high demand on these corridors and Congress may address some of these issues next year.

(2) Development panel was good. Cherokee is committed to making TTA work. They have a lot at stake, but made clear that additional local money would almost surely be required to get the rail project going due to FTA $ issues. Grubb Propoerties is doing Elizabeth and Hawthore in Clt--two bigtime TOD projects along the streetcar line. Property values are many times higher now than with the previous uses there (I think up to 10X). It's clear that transit spurs economic development if done right. All felt that the demographics of the region, the US, and the timing is right for more dense, urban development--that people demand to be in areas where they can walk and shop without a car by choice, not necessity.

The Cherokee speaker said something that surprised me but is very true... when transportation is built with public money, real estate becomes more valuable around it, so developers profit on the backs of taxpayers--he said govt needs to tap into the increased land values associated with these projects--be it a new freeway or a new transit line (that means impact fees, real estate transfer fees, etc.). Grubb guy said the tax system, etc still favors sprawl--it's too easy to build on 100 acres of farmland than a redevelopment project in the city--feels that needs to change if we want smarter growth.

An idea was mentioned: maybe we could use impact fees or TIFs from TOD (increased property values around station) for transit since numbers show over 60% of TOD residents don't have kids (and most property taxes go to schools). Sort of the Cherokee idea of capturing the development benefits of real estate that's near new transportation facilities.

(3) Ron Tober was excellent. Maybe it's just because it wasn't in front of city council or MTC, but he was impressive. Showed the System Plan, pics of the South LRT under constr., etc. Mentioned advantages of having a typical center city area (hub and spoke system) in Clt vs Triangle--also CATS is dept within City, and not a separate transit authority like TTA, which is also an advantage. Got some wows in the crowd for the 485 LRT station where CATS is building a parking deck under a new ball field for the school there--essentially CATS got land for free from CMS and adds a "green roof" as a play area for the school (one of the neatest parts of that project IMO). Said do not forget about importance of bus networks. They are key to any system even though they do not get the press. Said latest issues with budget lately are bumps in the road and they will keep moving forward. CATS system will be ~$3.9B at buildout.

(4) Salt Lake City, DART (Dallas), and RDT (Denver) all had transit offiicals there. It was interesting to hear so many of the same experiences they each went through. I have more details but in every case, they had gone to voters for a transit referendum, and in all cases, they were voted down (Salt Lake in '92, DART in '89, RDT in '96) , sometimes up to 2-1 against transit. They all heard "people won't get out of their cars" "no one will ride it" "it doesn't go to the airport" etc... so many of the same issues we have heard here. They all regrouped and went back into the community and got support... businesses, politicians, public, etc. RDT guy said people had thought it was "RDT's plan, not the public's plan" (sound familar?).

All these systems now have a partial or full cent sales tax for transit. Utah they have different tax depending on county--6 counties, and some have 1/4 cent, some 1/2 cent, etc. I thought that was interesting. The DART guy mentioned that Triangle is the only metro with this configurantion, ie, three cities and no central DT--said that will be tremendous challenge to make work, although he did mention demographics & population of Triangle are similar to when those systems were being planned (2030 population for RDU = ~2.3M ppl). Salt Lake said we have to look at this regionally or it won't work--can't be city vs city.

He (DART guy) also said key ingredients for making a transit plan work are: (a) that you have a problem (ie,congestion) (b) have a well though-out solution--a multimodal plan with public support © leadership--from business community, political leadership, citizens, etc. Said it can come in many forms.

Overall, it was somehow a relief to know these systems all have gone through probably worse situations than this area (severe referendum failures, etc) and they found a way to over come adversity and move fwd with a plan that is now successful (they all are). BTW, RDT's plan is ~$4B at full buildout and DART's is a similar number.

(5) David King... I have met him before, but the guy is a winner. I am convinced he's the right guy for the job. He knows rail issues (helped create Rail and Transit Division at DOT I think), and seemed to lay out the issue before the region in a straight-forward way and communicates very effectively. Claflin had a tough job--he was trying to always spin the situation to keep TTA moving ahead despite all the problems, but they were too great to overcome. King pointed out we could leverage the NCRR ownership of the rail corridor (it's state-owned company) for our benefit, although it remains to be seen how it would be done. The two MPO's will lead the transit planning effort with TTA a part as well. King was very positive and I got the sense that he was genuine in his comments. I came away feeling good about TTA's leadership.

(6) Joe Milazzo, Regional Transportation Alliance (represents all area chambers of commerce and lots of business community)... damn he talks fast... said this is about competing in a world marketplace not just NC, SE or US. We need to be "the most mobile metro." IE, it's not just roads or just transit. Talked about partnerships with Turnpike Authority (BRT, HOV, HOT). He said business community is behind this effort.

Overall, a great forum and I feel more positive that everyone that matters knows what needs to be done... engage community, communicate problems and solutions, emphasize our future vision (what do we want in our future?), build sytem plan, build community ownership and consensus (children's future at stake), creative funding solutionssuch as public-private partnerships (Cherokee), new public financing is likely (TIF, fees, partial cent sales tax--maybe for roads too), move fwd with projects for fed funding."

Many thanks to you and ChiefJoJo for the wonderful summary of the presentation. The momentum that exists these days will not fade away with TTA's unsuccessful attempt to have 61% of the projected funded by the feds. In my opinion, we have now been rid of any excessive pressure and all those unfavorable to the previous proposal may actually join the effort for better transportation alternatives. We bet a lot on Cherokee Investments, but we do want to see more developers stepping up to the plate with some nice urban, transit-oriented projects.

One great outcome of the forum was the beginning of these very important relationships between private developers and public and gov't comittee. In fact, one local developer on the panel mentioned that he has only built in the suburbs but is actively looking to build in DT and build dense. Especially close to the light rail route.

Another item. Cherokee is looking for help from these developers to build within these station sites with them to create greater density and variety.
One complaint from the public has been the pricing of the condos. They ( the developers) are looking at bring a wider variety of pricing into these units so that we will have all walks of life LIVING downtown not just coming to DT.

I feel upbeat. All the of the national panel said that their initial proposal met defeat the first time and tweaking was needed to win it over with the voters. the tweaking was done by the public in public meetings. They all recommended we take that course as well. The public has to feel some ownership to this plan since it is their money.

I think it was Dallas that has a 1/2 cent sales tax that brings in $300 million a year to fund mass transit. Don't quote me but I think it was Dallas. Obviously financing would need to be in place.

Just some interesting thoughts.

Certainly a very positive direction. Without public and private sectors working hand in hand, it will be nearly impossible to make a convincing case in front of the feds, who correctly rejected TTA's plan. We may offer upbeat projections and positive figures all we want, but where is the beef? Where is the evidence that supports TTA's claims? Nowhere, I am afraid. Now, EVERY player will be forced to play ball, if they sincerely want to see a successful regional/light rail in place. I am very optimistic about the local powers having finally seen the light.

I think that the local/regional officials are going to rely less on the feds initially. I think they are really going to try to be innovative with Cherokee Investements leading the way, which was mentioned in the forum by Lee from Cherokee.

My thought is that they are going to try to build small with local money and then go to the Feds for $ to build the rest of the 28 mile line.

So, are they going to build this rail line or is it dead. I don't feel like reading all of the posts to find out. I was wondering because Greenville is going to pass something today to build a rail stop here for the Southeast High Speed Rail Corridor: http://councilagendas.greatergreenville.com/minutes/2006/October/Formal/10-23-2006/Item15a.pdf

g-man, this project is not dead, although some people like to predict otherwise. Currently, TTA has gone back to the drawing board and tries to see where things went wrong - believe me, MANY things were wrong about this proposal. As Cary_NC correctly said, local "powers" will try to offer alternatives and then TTA may go back and ask for money in order to complete their vision. There was very little density along the proposed corridor, so it was a bit hard to make a convincing case without residents around the stations, never mind asking for 61% of the costs. Now, everybody seems to be "emotionally hurt" by the "rejection" and wants to jump on board. It sort of bothers me that they decided to join in so late in the game, but it is better than having all parties turning their backs entirely.

if i were apart of TTA i'd start out small with a simple streetcar that connects NCSU with downtown raleigh and REALLY push developers to build on that line. then extend that line a little bit.

then i'd go for a REALLY bare regional rail line that gets some of the LARGER suburbs as well as some of the suburbs around raleigh and then bring it into RTP. put in three spurs (one to the north, one to the direct east along 64, and another to the south) and then link them all up in RTP around one huge new station that then uses buses (small circulator buses to give the feel of 'full transit' or something of the sort).

but i'm no transportation planner, yet. ;)

The head of the DART ( Dallas TX) said something interesting in that the Triangle is very unique. In fact the only place in the whole nation that has a employment center in the RTP with no population base. Meaning everyone works there but doesn't live there. He wished us good luck to figure out how we plan a line with DT raleigh and RTP as the two employment hubs and just DT Raleigh as population base.
With that said. I envision actually a two spoke system going on. One that focuses on DT Raleigh and one that focuses on RTP with a connecting line between each other. I think most lines should funnel to DT Raleigh because there is more of a reason to go there. Whereas RTP is just a work stop.

I think that our existing highways provide pretty good routes to DTfor lines to emulate and it would be light rail in some cases. 70,50, US1 and 64, and 40.

55, 40 and 54 to RTP.

Cary NC, you said that most of the people in the region work in RTP, yet most of it should be focused on DT Raleigh. I dont quite understand this.

Most people use transit to get to work. if you do not work in downtown raleigh, there is no major retail in downtown (most of it is found in malls, the largest being in RTP), there isnt a large base of residential in the core, and there is no tourist draw in the downtown area, how are you going to get people to ride? nobody is going to go somewhere they dont need to go.

i think the raleigh lines will start off as commuter lines and stay as mostly that for the next few years given the current design of the metro. there's high demand to get to RTP during rush hour, but no demand to go there much after 6PM.

Style, your suggestion to connect NCSU with Downtown is good, except for one thing: there is no aparent reason to connect these two areas any better than they are connected today (Hillsborough Str). Of course, recommending a light rail line along Hillsborough Str, from the Fairgrounds, all the way to Downtown (if not further), would be an ideal thing, although we have 2 potential problems: 1) only the City of Raleigh can run this line because it "owns" the street, and 2) they are planning on putting roundabouts on several intersections along Hillsborough Str and reduce it from 4 to 2 lanes of traffic :bash: This would limit us to the existing rails, which offer no opportunity for redevelopment along the tracks :( If some wise investors, in cooperation with NCSU and the City of Raleigh could see the potential of Warehouse District, they could probably build serveral taller mid-rises in the latter area, where NCSU students could rent apartments. Then, such a line would be somewhat profitable. In fact, it is already part of TTA's vision, but I doubt it will happen as a 4-5 stop line.

RTP, while created as an employment center, is slowly changing its attitude. Within a very short distance, communities like Davis Park and Kitts Creek will provide many options for living. There are more and more such communities in the pipeline. While not truly urban in character, they offer many great opportunities for density, walkability and recrational activities of all sorts. Running a light/regional rail nearby is a major plus and could help TTA build a much better case. Highway 54, in particular could serve as a great corridor for a light rail system that will serve RTP and DT Raleigh, via Hillsborough Str.

So, how long will it be before it gets built? 5-10 years?

Thanks to the REPUBLICAN controlled congress, it will be 2,023,234 years before light rail gets built here or in Greenville due to the debt were in.

Thanks to the REPUBLICAN controlled congress, it will be 2,023,234 years before light rail gets built here or in Greenville due to the debt were in.g-man, please take your bullshit politics out of here. Why the Hell should the rest of the country fund Greenville's and Triangle's rail system? For your information, both [Republican] NC senators (Burr and Dole) were behind TTA's project, until they had no other choice but to give up. Neither Republicans nor Democrats would support crappy plans that require 61% of federal funding. Look at how Charlotte got their plans and funding request approved and learn how it's done. The Republicans, as you prefer to call those who rejected TTA's rail, were supportive of our system and ready to give us money, but the numbers didn't demonstrate ability to keep this rail system functional for long. It was we who shot ourselves in the foot, whether you believe it or not.

Ok. So how long until they build it there? In Greenville, it will be no earlier than 2025 and probably not even then.

Does anybody know how Salt Lake City got light rail if they have less people than other cities that don't? I smell a conspiracy.

Does anybody know how Salt Lake City got light rail if they have less people than other cities that don't? I smell a conspiracy.

A couple of reasons why they got it. I lived there during the construction of the main 18 mile line.

Density is one reason. 90%-95% of the population of Utah lives in a 75 mile(Ogden to Provo) stretch along the Watsach Front. It is approximate around 2M. Yet this population corridor is very thin so they are packed in along the mountains.

Second reason was the Olympics came. Granted they had this light rail line in planning for 10 YEARS until fruition in 2001, but the Olympics brought some extra dough in. Not only did they get funding for light rail but also a brand new 10 lane free way 18 miles long as well.

It was just announced that the Feds will fund a WHOPPING 80% of their 45 mile commuter line. One of the forum speakers last week in Raleigh was from SLC and she said it was a very complicated story but that the State of Utah and the Feds did some land deals/swaps or something like that and that led to the funding rate. She did not go into too much detail. Now the rest of the light rail lines will be built with mostly local funds and it is up to vote this November.

My opinion is that this line will be built in the next five years. Raleigh is really trying to go away from federal funds intially and use the private money out there led by Cherokee Investments. Once they get some TODs built then the Fed money will come in. Remember Raleigh has grown 19% is last five years. And will hit 400,000 by 2010 when it started at 276,000 in 2000. Not to offend but Raleigh is growing a little faster than Greenville and so I think Raleigh will get a light rail sooner.

Cary_NC successfully painted the picture. The input on SLC's light rail was much appreciated, too. In my opinion SLC is way ahead of Raleigh in terms of urbanity, which by itself makes a strong case to that city's favor. Raleigh is merely one part of a much larger region (Triangle) and it is more likely to suffer from delays, at least until ALL the major players agree. Cary and Durham play along, but Morrisville, RDU and Duke University presented obstacles. Chapel Hill and Carrboro... well, I am not sure these people have realized the importance of regional rail. They are NIMBY infested areas who call 6-story buildings skyscrapers, even when placed next to existing 6-story buildings. The town officials in those places are too busy defining and redefining high-rises instead of moving forward. The issue here is not partisan, or political, it is the result of stupidity, self-interests and lack of vision. This project was mentioned extensively in the early and mid 90's and it only gained momentum in the last 5-6 years.

I also agree with Cary_NC's opinion that in the next 5 years we'll see the beginning of the first major regional/light rail line (if not the entire project). It is inevitable, and for the first time we may have to admit that sprawl did one good thing for us... Just kidding.

OK, gang. Here's the latest from the Mile High meddlers. :ohno:

Submitted as of today were my firm's input into the TTA scenario to Cherokee's Denver office (which I sincerely hope will make it comat to the Raleigh headquarters post haste). It is pretty safe to say that Cherokee is Raleigh's ace-in-the-hole, and this whole thing will most likely pivot around them. They are certainly motivated, and I sincerely hope that they will be able to counteract the regressive designs of Progress Energy (under whose stewardship Fayetteville Street reverted to the "Mayberry" car-centric motif -- and at great cost I might add).

But I digress. Here are the main points of our strategy:

We are firmly committed to running Central Prison the hell out of town. It is a Stalinistic eyesore (o mejor dicho, a cancer) on downtown Raleigh, and probably the 400-lbs. gorilla that keeps the wrappers on redevelopment west of Salisbury St. It is a true testament to the potential of downtown Raleigh that even with the Big House as a neighbor, Boylan Heights still commands relatively high land values. Ditto Cameron Village and Glenwood South (which aren't that far away). Imagine what will happen when the cons, the razorwire, and the watchtowers leave the neighborhood. For those who might bemoan the loss of jobs, keep this in mind...Corrections jobs by nature are relatively low-paying. Stable, state jobs for sure, but not well-paid. If CP moves to Butner or Down East somewhere, the employees can benefit from being relocated to an area where they can get more for their dollar, whether it be in housing prices, cost-of-living, or whatever. And especially for the old-timers who may own a home in Raleigh -- there is the option of commuting, or selling their house in a premium housing market and banking the inevitable spread, or again, renting said property for a nice income. What's more, there are ways to incorporate incentives for those employees -- relocation assistance -- into the purchase package for the CP property, which would make the inconvenience a little less inconvenient, if you know what I mean. What's more, those correctional jobs will be replaced by entrepreneurial shopkeepers and professional office jobs, as well as conveniently located retail jobs for NCSU students needing an income.

Stage 1 for TTA development would be, as I said before, the Government Center to Fairgrounds segment, which has far and away the most viability for a demonstrator line. Civic planners, in the mold of Edmund Bacon, seek to exploit an "axis of activity", to exhalt a natural corridor between two high-density activity nodes. Amazingly, as "Quadrilateral" pointed out, there is almost nothing of an exchange between NCSU and downtown Raleigh (and with the unaccomdating Mayberry motif in place on FSM, there won't be either, without a rail corridor). If NCRR and NCDOT maintain and expand the rail corridor under state auspices, using the money that the state was going to allocate to the TTA anyway, and design it off-the-bat for High-Speed Rail specs, we eliminate turf wars, we eliminate duplicate EIS processes, and in keeping TTA as a tenant operator only, we minimize the local outlay to rolling stock and maintenance facilities. Furthermore, if the Stage 1 venture is operated turnkey by a private or public/private enterprise, we avoid the upfront funding for the whole shebang for a trial period, say three years, with TTA having an option to continue it as a turnkey (vehicles, maintenance, and crew provided), or to make the operation proprietary. It's a bit more expensive that way short-term, pay-as-you-go, but it alleviates fears of a "white elephant" by the general public, and allows the agency to expand its credit and bonding ability through a proven operation to carry on to the sucessive stages: Stage 2, Ninth St. to Alston; Stage 3, Triangle Metro Center/Cary to downtown Raleigh; Stage 4, TMC to Alston; Stage 5, North Raleigh. It's much less expensive to build in the suburban settings, thus much more effective to use any future federal funding in that environment (more bang for the buck).

Our outline was for a high-density, multi-use complex to be placed on the CP property (which fronts a very critical segment along the NCRR corridor, folks -- and absolutely non-performing with the prison in place). This complex would entail moderate to high-end office space, retail space (including a crucial supermarket, which would be transit and car-accessable to downtown). Broad strokes: 4 residential towers, 2 each of 37 and 28 stories respectively, with 32 and 23 floors of condos respectively, straddled over a 5-story arcade and plaza. Subterranean parking, retail levels of 400,000 sf, including food court with a target of 43 eateries, which will increase TTA rail's (I've always called the thing TETRA) pull from both NCSU and downtown, and flesh out ridership over an 18-hour window. That, as opposed to merely a cost ineffective 3-hour bookended flow at morning and afternoon rush.

Remember that the CP property footprint is on the scale of Cameron Village. Now I know that Raleighites tend to equate highrises with New York, Communism, and all other things evil, but c'mon! If anyone opposed this over a maximum security prison, they are either a state vendor that doesn't like to drive, or just plain stupid. At an FAR of 1.35, this project doesn't even come close to a New Yorkish 11. It leaves plenty of room for greenspace, water features, and the like. And, just in case Joe Sixpack doesn't like transit, he can still take the family there in the car, arriving by a relatively underused Western Blvd. And due to the treescape of Boylan Heights, it's doubtful the neighbors will even notice the complex.

Downtown can't be all things to everybody. Small, inexpensive, food-court type eateries can't survive downtown because of the floorspace layouts, the rents, and the walk-six-blocks-from-the-parking-deck access for the public. Without an easy, free transportation component (the 16th St. Mall Shuttle), Denver's downtown mall would be dead too. Downtown Raleigh is white-cloth territory almost exclusively for all except major fast-food chains. With a skybridge to the new Convention Center via the Downtown Station, this project will aid (we certainly think) in the Convention Center being able to attract meetings (more $$$, and more tax revenue). Between convention traffic and downtown workers commuting in from Government Center, the food/retail for this project is extremely strong in potential. As an example, the Emeryville Public Market, north of Oakland, feeds heavily off of transit foot traffic from the Emeryville Amtrak Station and the highrise neighborhood surrounding it, with an awesome range in distinctive cuisines. Take a look:

http://www.emerymarket.com/

In our eyes, this is a "perfect storm" setting for all of this to take place. If Dix Hill Park comes to fruition, this will become a neighborhood that, collectively along with Cameron Village, Glenwood South, and high-density buildout around the fringe of Centennial Campus, could rival Buckhead as a showcase area for Southern cities. This is far from being a naive, fru-fru, Utopian bong vision. The numbers are there, folks. The people and the institutions are, too.

As for the help part, here is what I am looking for. We are "wheel guys", not developers. I can common-sense some of these numbers onto paper, but I lack hard construction cost figures. And I don't even care to try to guess in this post-Katrina concrete and steel shortage market. I know someone in this thread can do a better job than I in this department. Cherokee already has this stuff, but we want to get a better idea of the margins so we can sketch out the transit applications. Any takers?

Back to the Bay Area for one of our inspirations for this type of project:

http://www.embarcaderocenter.com/ec/

And not so far from home:

http://www.buckhead.net/lenoxsquare/index.html

Personally, I don't care who gets this done or how. Just that it does get done, and the prison gets gone. And to do that, whatever replaces it has to be big just to recover the costs, and to bring the needed players into the game. If Soleil Center can pop out of the Crabtree Valley creekbed, then by all logic, this should be a slam dunk. As for TETRA -- Baby steps! Baby steps!

On the whole I am not a big fan of tax increment financing (I generally regard that as the "Confiscate for Wal-Mart bonanza"). But if there were ever a good scenario for TIF, this is it. In our humble, almost obscenely conservative estimates, this project would generate $3.2m local share, and $5.8m in state share sales taxes per year, and a lowball figure of $26m in property taxes over 10 years. If a "tax fortress" were to be created around this project, with a large percentage of tax proceeds from it dedicated to retiring the debt of the transit system segment that made it possible to begin with, we think that it could carry the ball for the entire Stage 1 TTA share (again, assuming that NCRR and the state would improve and maintain the rail -- they'll have to for the HSR anyway). This works because most of the civic infrastructure needed for the project is already in place (with upgrades only needed). Raleigh comes by a windfall in this scenario, benefitting from transit with minimal outlay for infrastructure (especially when compared to its beloved North Raleigh tract homes, on a cost per tax value basis). Raleigh also reaps a heavily increased tax base around NCSU and Dix Hill Park, which will be (trust me on this one) a magnet for empty nesters who don't want yard work or cleaning up the trash off the street at 5 in the morning after the local dogs and cats have scavenged through the can, but want the luxury of a large urban park to stroll through in their leisure time. Plus, nobody gets condemned or displaced. (Except for convicts who may have to gaze out over a cornfield for their stay instead of the Raleigh skyline.) Win, win.

I have to say that I haven't been extremely impressed with Raleigh's politicians to date, regarding transit, or any other issue that comes to mind. In fairness to them however, right or wrong, I believe that they were waiting for TTA to move the mountain by themselves -- which was a little naive considering the relatively small size of the agency, and the highly Balkanized nature of Triangle transit in general. But with Mr. King at the helm now, and his background at NCDOT, I think this thing gets rerailed here and now.

But don't just write this blog, guys and gals. Write the politicians too. Without a burr in their saddle, they will always take the safe way out -- doing nothing.

Great thoughts, Vitaviatic :okay: It will take me 3-4 times of reading your post to fully absorb the material, but it is worth it!!!

You mentioned that your firm's input was submitted... I do not know if it is apropriate to ask what kind of firm is it, and even ask for its name, but would it be possible to give us more specifics regarding the possibility of getting that prison out of the way? The proposed high-rises will most definitely find a great enemy in the parkies and the NIMBYs that every now and then remind us of who actually is responsible for the uncontrolled sprawl in this area and the Maybery-type feel our city has - nothing against small towns, of course.
Naturally, people will complain that Soleil Center is too tall for Crabtree Valley - I totally disagree with this - and it would fit better in downtown. When 4 (!!!) high-rises get proposed, rest assured that there will be a "slaughter". Your firm will find out the hard way what it means to go against the interests of the NIMBY-infested areas, particularly the ones near downtown. All I can do is wish you best of luck... I truly like the idea, but I am afraid I will be in the minority :(

Keep us posted about this proposal. Hopefully we will see something great coming out of it, without any compromises on your firm's behalf.

Do you really think the state would go along with moving central prison? It was rebuilt not that long ago so it’s in pretty good condition. Could the sale of the land pay for building another one elsewhere? Understand I’m not against relocating it, I just don’t see a cash strapped state going along, although it would be an awesome location for intensive development. Thanks for posting.

if the sale of the property can help pay for a new one then i'm all for it. if not, there's no use for the state to be wasting so much money just for the city of raleigh which seems to be a common motif, as usual.

This is far from being a naive, fru-fru, Utopian bong vision.

^^ I love that line. And of course you are right, if developers see the same potential that you and I can see, the Prison property, Dorthea Dix and Centennial Campus make up a beautiful urban core south west of downtown.

Looking at a satellite image, I can certainly see what prime property the Central Prison is just south of the rail line.

The high density Urban village right on the rail line along with NCSU students would provide plenty of ridership to the stage 1 segment. However, it is a shame that stage 1 can't extend all the way to TMC. As I am sure you know, TMC is already in sales. I believe a initial stage 1 segment that extends all the way to RTP could be the engine to help fill the 4 residential towers that you mention and add the ridership of the community developing around TMC as well

TMC and the CP development that you refer to could be the perfect bookends for Mass Transit.

^^
One little detail: TMC is not actually under development. Davis Park (DP) is. TMC will be a major component of DP, but to the best of my knowledge, the developer was speculating the move of TMC to another location of DP. Most likely because they saw that TTA's regional rail faced an uphill battle. The problem with DP is that it follows the road most travelled. A semi-urban image is more like a half-baked cake. There is nothing actually facing the street, be that along Davis Dr, S. Miami Blvd, or Hopson Rd. There will be some great mixed-use elements, but the end product will overall feel suburban... Too much unused land, IMHO.

With the NC State Governement facing another huge debt for next year, it will become necessary to liquidate assets in order to get short-term and long-term revenues. A high-density urban village at the CP location will generate a lot of momentum and certainly a lot of revenue for the city and county. This may eventually help reduce the need to spend more tax dollars in the city of Raleigh, and even attract some out-of-state investors. I do not know what will eventually happen with Dorothea Dix - God forbid we end up with a huge park and the burden of maintaining it - but I want to see something decent happening in the areas mentioned in the last post. I would love to see a lot of neighborhood squares/plazas (in a Savannah-like pattern) and a lot of density over at Centennial Campus. One warning, which many people tend to ignore: There are power lines crossing the area between the Centennial Campus and Farmers Market. I would hate to see residential projects there, especially condos and houses. I know it sounds crazy, but power lines increase the chances of developing leukemia, whether we like it or not. Maybe a [safety] buffer could provide a minimal protection.

A piece of good news, but also a proof that people jumped too late on board, was posted today in a News & Observer article, titled Neighbors ponder their area with commuter rail (http://www.newsobserver.com/102/story/505655.html). Here are some interesting highlights:
* Two-story shop fronts characteristic of eastern Ninth Street;
* Commercial blocks, from two to four stories high;
* Townhouses;
* Towers not exceeding eight stories in height; and
* Flats with stepped-back stories

...

The plan calls for 14-foot sidewalks with trees close to the street, much wider than the existing eight-foot walkways. It calls for shops with big windows.

...

Several people suggested adding historic preservation to discourage developers from tearing down shops, the old Erwin mill and churches.

...

Glenn Dickson said he was developing plans for a 55,000- to 75,000-square-foot mix of residential and office or retail space on the 800 block of Ninth Street between Elmo's Diner and Green Street.
It is great to see Ninth Street becoming a focus area for Durham. It has always been important, but its potential was never realized. Sure, I love when I hear about 8-story "towers", but for this area it may be just fine. What will determine the height is not the restrictions, but the financial aspect of a project. Good quality buildings cost more, therefore a developer may need to go higher and offer additional units, just to offset some of the expenses. Durham's CBD needs a few high-rises, so I hope that investors with plans for taller buildings find the former as a better venue, but Ninth Street will also be ideal for buildings up to 15 stories. For those familiar with Raleigh, but not with this area, let me say that Ninth Street (the area, not just the street) and Erwin Square is a combination of Glenwood South and Hillsborough Str. There are some great restaurants there (i.e. George's Garage, Parizade Cafe).

It is good that people finally realized that they need to get together in order to establish some much-needed guidelines. Although Durham is infested with some raving psychotic NIMBYs, I also believe that residents must get on board early in the game and help create a vision, thus avoiding misunderstandings later on. Those of you who follow the development process in Chapel Hill should know how bad things are there. It would be nice if the Ninth Street/Erwin Square promoters could go to several of those developers and bring the visions to Durham - assuming those projects will hit a snag in Chapel Hill. Durhamites can promote Ninth Street/Erwin Square as a people & developers friendly environment. To be fair and honest, Raleigh has failed in this department, too, and I do not see much hope for the nearest future, but Durham seems to be doing well with smaller urban projects.

One little detail: TMC is not actually under development. Davis Park (DP) is. TMC will be a major component of DP, but to the best of my knowledge, the developer was speculating the move of TMC to another location of DP. Most likely because they saw that TTA's regional rail faced an uphill battle. The problem with DP is that it follows the road most travelled. A semi-urban image is more like a half-baked cake. There is nothing actually facing the street, be that along Davis Dr, S. Miami Blvd, or Hopson Rd. There will be some great mixed-use elements, but the end product will overall feel suburban... Too much unused land, IMHO.

Yes - I understand that TMC is just one neighborhood in Davis Park. My point is that the developer has started building this project and that a CP project being discussed is years away from being built (if ever). My rationale for suggesting the inclusion of Davis Park and TMC in the first segment is that transit to RTP from the massive CP development would be a huge selling feature. Also the ridership would be increased by both having the park on the route and a residential neighborhood. Transit from RTP to NCSU to the convention center and downtown makes a better back bone in my opinion then just to the state fairgrounds from downtown.

For me, the attraction of living on a rail line is to not have to drive to work everyday. Like it or not, a significant number of Triangle jobs are in the park.

http://www.davisparkrtp.com/neighborhood/index.php

The master plan on the website still shows TMC in the original location. I am not privy to any plan that they are considering to move the station. Personally, I like the design. I feel it is an appropriate start for an urban core in RTP.

I agree... except for the actual Davis Park plan. I drove by this past weekend and I must admit that it leaves much to be desired. The developer is making the very same mistake that he made with Meadowmont Village. He is creating an otherwise great community, in a way that will either be obscured, or simply overwhelmed by parking lots and trees. I bet you that in 5 years after completion, we won't be able to tell if there are houses in there. Please, don't get me wrong, this project will provide a major boost in the increasing population of the areas near RTP, plus make a stronger case in favor to TTA's regional rail, so I am all for it, but I fear that alterations will make DP a missed opportunity. Hopefully I will be wrong ;)

By the way, you made a very good point. While we all want to see the bulk of the employment base to be downtown, RTP is a reality we cannot ignore. Tens of thousands of people work in and visit RTP every day. There must be a nice way to help them move from one spot to another, without having to use their car, either via walking, or via transportation. We need to admit that pedestrian friendliness isn't one of RTP's strongest areas. By this I mean that RTP is too suburban and will take decades before we see all the nearby communities integrate with each other. But, I am an optimist, most of the times, so I will keep my fingers crossed and hope to see good projects filling in the empty spaces. Likewise, I will pray that TMC does not get moved to another location, away from the envisioned station.

The idea of starting the rail segment in downtown Raleigh was simply this -- that it is far and away the most expensive segment of the proposed corridor (same thing with DT Durham on "Stage 2") to be built. Thus, the theory goes, if you can knock those two segments out of the way at the beginning, and with as little fed funding (hopefully none!) as possible, then you have a money magnet in place for future funding. Suburban segments, just by virtue of land value, are less expensive to build in, and also more flexible in the way of planning the rail itself. USDOT, as a matter of principle, is far more eager to fund for the completion of projects than the beginning of them. Bootstrapping gets you a very long way in the transit realm.

For my own part, if the thing started in RTP, and starbursted outward, that would not bother me a bit. As long as it gets done. Our CP project was simply to get the economics along the right-of-way into high gear, in order to enable the transit.

In response to the comments of whether a CP project would pay for the removal of the prison, would it be worthwhile for the state to do so, and whether it would be a waste (read, tax sump) for Raleigh, the answers are these: yes, yes, and no.

I won't release specifics yet, even though we sent the thing out as a more or less "shareware" sort of enterprise (we are "wheel" people, not developers). I will divulge information once we get feedback from the connected parties. I will however say that the 20-year projected returns were in excess of four times the acquisition price (depending, of course, on what that actually came in at, but we budgeted high). The tax-base in creation for the same period was in the ballpark of one-third the acquisition price, which in itself is rather remarkable.

We were aware that, indeed, the state has made recent modifications to Central Prison. Doesn't matter. A good deal of that was retrofit work, and any future expansion would entail the same kind of work. Retrofit is always more expensive than new work, and for the price that the state could retire CP at, they could get a running start on a "supermax" type facility on a more spacious parcel for a lesser cost per square foot, and with better results. Again, more bang for the buck.

If one thinks that Raleigh would waste money on redeveloping the CP site, I would only remind you of this fact -- that the CP site is already a major waste! It brings in no tax revenue. It is a blight of the worst kind to an otherwise beautiful neighborhood. It is the single largest piece of conjoined real estate in the central city, and yet contributes nothing in the way of economics (except for a handful of mediocre-paying corrections jobs) to the city, much less cultural or aesthetic improvement. In our opinion, the far bigger waste would be to simply let it continue to sit there and deplete DT Raleigh of developmental momentum on its westend.

I'd also like to comment on the idea presented before on the Hillsborough Street trolley concept. The current NCRR right-of-way is almost perfect for a long distance transit system because most of the alignment is either sub- or supergrade from DT Raleigh out to Beryl Rd. (I think). Trolleys are completely different in character and make-up. Trolleys are cute, but due to the operation in street settings (with the same traffic light bugaboos that cars and buses have), the operating dynamics are quite different. Some streetcars, such as New Orleans, and even Tucson, are operated as historical oddities, and attract sentimental ridership, but whether a modern system would do that is doubtful. But fusing a streetcar/trolley into a long-range 10+ mile system is not feasible. The traffic delays alone would kill it, and the grade-crossing accident rate would be a long-term malady.

A trolley motif might actually have worked on the Fayetteville Street Mall (a transportation component was all that was missing there). In fact, we proposed a suspended gondola that would operate above FSM, leaving the mall intact. The pavement tile would have been torn out, a garden setting with rubberized walking surfaces installed, and a galleria-like cover built above, literally functioning as a living outdoor aboretum with plant cover to help with sunshade. The raised gondola and its subsequent platforms would have created a second "storefront" level, much like a suburban mall, but without a doubt more endowed with character. Not only that, but we recommended a cross-placed mall to be made out of Martin Street as well to create an activity axis in the middle. But alas, Progress beat us to the punch with their wonderful ideas, and the rest is history. :ohno:

The shame is that other projects have resulted in unintended consequences, and many people are skeptical of big ideas (and rightfully so). Whatever is created to create value is an engine for other things. It is all part and parcel of a bigger whole. Whether it is TMC/Davis Park, 9th St., CP, or the North Raleigh corridor, the object is to create the critical mass needed to support transit and the other civic improvements we all want to see. (By the way we had a project up there too, in North Raleigh at Whitaker Mill Rd. between Atlantic and Wake Forest called Seven Continents Emporium that never was accepted by the "movers and shakers". Taking basically dead warehouse space and building a multi-cultural emporium and media center was not in the conventional thinking, even though we censused 120,000 Latinos, 15,000 Chinese, 5,000 Japanese, and similar numbers of Vietnamese, Filipino, Arab, African immigrants, etc. just in the Triangle metro area (and those were Census 2000 numbers). But even with the force of the numbers there, the mindset isn't. The Triangle is a great place, but in order to exhalt the synergies of the melting pot think tank that it has become, the intransigent civic mindset needs to change. Bit by bit, at least.

Embrace the unknown.

The idea of starting the rail segment in downtown Raleigh was simply this -- that it is far and away the most expensive segment of the proposed corridor (same thing with DT Durham on "Stage 2") to be built. Thus, the theory goes, if you can knock those two segments out of the way at the beginning, and with as little fed funding (hopefully none!) as possible, then you have a money magnet in place for future funding. Suburban segments, just by virtue of land value, are less expensive to build in, and also more flexible in the way of planning the rail itself. USDOT, as a matter of principle, is far more eager to fund for the completion of projects than the beginning of them. Bootstrapping gets you a very long way in the transit realm.

For my own part, if the thing started in RTP, and starbursted outward, that would not bother me a bit. As long as it gets done. Our CP project was simply to get the economics along the right-of-way into high gear, in order to enable the transit.

In response to the comments of whether a CP project would pay for the removal of the prison, would it be worthwhile for the state to do so, and whether it would be a waste (read, tax sump) for Raleigh, the answers are these: yes, yes, and no.

I won't release specifics yet, even though we sent the thing out as a more or less "shareware" sort of enterprise (we are "wheel" people, not developers). I will divulge information once we get feedback from the connected parties. I will however say that the 20-year projected returns were in excess of four times the acquisition price (depending, of course, on what that actually came in at, but we budgeted high). The tax-base in creation for the same period was in the ballpark of one-third the acquisition price, which in itself is rather remarkable.

We were aware that, indeed, the state has made recent modifications to Central Prison. Doesn't matter. A good deal of that was retrofit work, and any future expansion would entail the same kind of work. Retrofit is always more expensive than new work, and for the price that the state could retire CP at, they could get a running start on a "supermax" type facility on a more spacious parcel for a lesser cost per square foot, and with better results. Again, more bang for the buck.

If one thinks that Raleigh would waste money on redeveloping the CP site, I would only remind you of this fact -- that the CP site is already a major waste! It brings in no tax revenue. It is a blight of the worst kind to an otherwise beautiful neighborhood. It is the single largest piece of conjoined real estate in the central city, and yet contributes nothing in the way of economics (except for a handful of mediocre-paying corrections jobs) to the city, much less cultural or aesthetic improvement. In our opinion, the far bigger waste would be to simply let it continue to sit there and deplete DT Raleigh of developmental momentum on its westend.

I'd also like to comment on the idea presented before on the Hillsborough Street trolley concept. The current NCRR right-of-way is almost perfect for a long distance transit system because most of the alignment is either sub- or supergrade from DT Raleigh out to Beryl Rd. (I think). Trolleys are completely different in character and make-up. Trolleys are cute, but due to the operation in street settings (with the same traffic light bugaboos that cars and buses have), the operating dynamics are quite different. Some streetcars, such as New Orleans, and even Tucson, are operated as historical oddities, and attract sentimental ridership, but whether a modern system would do that is doubtful. But fusing a streetcar/trolley into a long-range 10+ mile system is not feasible. The traffic delays alone would kill it, and the grade-crossing accident rate would be a long-term malady.

A trolley motif might actually have worked on the Fayetteville Street Mall (a transportation component was all that was missing there). In fact, we proposed a suspended gondola that would operate above FSM, leaving the mall intact. The pavement tile would have been torn out, a garden setting with rubberized walking surfaces installed, and a galleria-like cover built above, literally functioning as a living outdoor aboretum with plant cover to help with sunshade. The raised gondola and its subsequent platforms would have created a second "storefront" level, much like a suburban mall, but without a doubt more endowed with character. Not only that, but we recommended a cross-placed mall to be made out of Martin Street as well to create an activity axis in the middle. But alas, Progress beat us to the punch with their wonderful ideas, and the rest is history. :ohno:

The shame is that other projects have resulted in unintended consequences, and many people are skeptical of big ideas (and rightfully so). Whatever is created to create value is an engine for other things. It is all part and parcel of a bigger whole. Whether it is TMC/Davis Park, 9th St., CP, or the North Raleigh corridor, the object is to create the critical mass needed to support transit and the other civic improvements we all want to see. (By the way we had a project up there too, in North Raleigh at Whitaker Mill Rd. between Atlantic and Wake Forest called Seven Continents Emporium that never was accepted by the "movers and shakers". Taking basically dead warehouse space and building a multi-cultural emporium and media center was not in the conventional thinking, even though we censused 120,000 Latinos, 15,000 Chinese, 5,000 Japanese, and similar numbers of Vietnamese, Filipino, Arab, African immigrants, etc. just in the Triangle metro area (and those were Census 2000 numbers). But even with the force of the numbers there, the mindset isn't. The Triangle is a great place, but in order to exhalt the synergies of the melting pot think tank that it has become, the intransigent civic mindset needs to change. Bit by bit, at least.

Embrace the unknown.


I do not know about any other posters, but I am trying to figure you out. I am not understanding what you/your company does but from the sounds of things you propose a lot of very interesting ideas to local politicans to find out that Raleigh is a tough place to propose grand and unique projects. That is one thing that makes me a bit frustrated about my hometown, having lived where you do business (ie Denver) and Seattle, Salt Lake, and Sacramento. We are very slow to change for the better in many ways, instead they let the developers with the same vanilla ideas shape our community. Thanks for your efforts and hope they will work out with the Central Prison project (CP).
Maybe it could be the Central Park of the South. (of course not as large but maybe as grand)

What can I say? Best of luck in bringing Raleigh to the 21st century. Not that I don't believe it will happen, but there are a lot of negative elements that will resist until the end. As anxious as I am, I will wait patiently to hear more... hopefully good news :)

Thanks for the nice comments on our attempts at building a new mold for TTA's rail project. I urge you, dear readers, not to get discouraged at the rate, or lack, of progress here. As has been noted here before, other markets of similar size had much different financing and funding dynamics going for them. Like Cary NC, I too have lived in quite a few of the smaller transit markets (some of the same ones, in fact) including Salt Lake, Sacramento (which, when it implemented light rail, was about the same size as the present-day Triangle), Las Vegas, and of course, Denver (a bit bigger). Therefore I am privy to some details that may relieve some of the eye-rolling symptoms that you may have over this.

Las Vegas, and its monorail, should be a prime example of not how to do transit. 'Nuff said. Year and a half shutdowns for retooling are not what you need.

Salt Lake was an anomaly. As was mentioned, the 2002 Winter Olympics factored into UTA getting off the ground. Without the system in place, Salt Lake was facing vehicular paralysis with the onset of the Olympics. The I-15 corridor from Provo all the way to Ogden (about 50 miles, with Salt Lake itself in the middle) very much resembled the pre-expansion I-40, but with a major difference -- there was no parallel highway like US 70 or NC 54 to take any of the heat off. Even after I-15, like I-40, has been expanded, that road is still crushed with traffic. The transit project and the Olympics enabled one another in a rare symbiosis that was wrapped in big money. Certainly other factors played in as well, but not to hammer the subject. The Salt Lake and Triangle projects have a very different financial DNA.

Sacramento, meanwhile had the advantage of scoring the Siemens manufacturing facility, thus making Siemens a big benefactor of Sacto's project. In meantime, the state of California was building out two other major projects as well at around the same time, including the San Diego Trolley and the Metro Blue Line in LA. So Sacto had a little help getting into the saddle as well. But what's instructive here is that CalTrans and the state of California as a whole, like North Carolina, has been very pro-rail, with substantial investments in rail, as a percentage, compared to other states.

As for political obstruction, you guys should have been around for the bitching and screaming when RTD got off the table. The first segment was very short, built from a depressed area north of downtown (interestingly enough, called Five Points), through downtown, and to a freeway interchange just south of downtown at I-25 & Broadway -- a run of just over 5 miles. The screaming was deafening. "Nobody will pay $1.25 just to ride that thing from Broadway to Downtown!" "It doesn't go anywhere!" On and on and on. You hear the same arguments now over there. What the critics didn't consider was that the $1.25 fare (one-way) was far better than the $15 a day it cost (then -- now it's in the $25 range) to park downtown. People drove to I-25 & Broadway to catch the LRT into downtown. In fact the opposite was true.

It was too popular. Parking shortages at the two Park & Rides were chronic, and there were many more passengers getting off buses to make the train connection than there was even standing room for (let alone seats!). The screaming continued, but with a different complaint. The 17-mile extension into Littleton was fast-tracked based on the success of that little stump of an opening segment, and to this day, standing-room only is commonplace 9 hours a day on the RTD system. In fact, we already see major capacity problems when the new Southeast Line opens on the 17th of November. Now the problem becomes how to fit all of those hyperfull LRTs onto a very crowded downtown loop.

Now let's take a look, boys and girls, at the little engine that could.

Albuquerque and the state of New Mexico (yet another former residence of mine -- yeah, I get around) take the cake for moxie in my book. With mainly state support, and overcoming the fact that they will have to operate over a privately-owned freight corridor (the BNSF) except for a small branch line close to Santa Fe, the state will open its RailRunner segment from Belen to Albuquerque soon, and the segment from Sandoval to Downtown ABQ is already open. A rail link further north is planned to Santa Fe (into which we are trying inject our input too), but alignment problems with the current ROW, and the grades along the I-25 corridor to Santa Fe make that segment a bit dicier.

Take a look for yourselves:

http://www.nmrailrunner.com/

That New Mexico market is about half the size of the Triangle in population, and with considerably less in the way of what we call multi-directional dynamics (or, if you will, two-way flow). And considering that the state of North Carolina OWNS THE RAIL CORRIDOR along which not only TTA but its subsidized Amtrak trains and the future HSRC will run, I would classify it as absolutely pathetic if TTA could not, in fact, get done. But we think it can -- the trick is to put the right pieces together so that it becomes not a financial sump, but an actual economic engine in its own right, thus making it not only feasible, but highly desirable. This is where we think that TTA to date has failed. In our opinion this involves mainly exploiting the real estate dynamics of its current and future properties. (RTD has done extremely well in this regard in Denver, so it always puzzled us why John Claflin, coming from RTD, did not make a major effort to do the same. For us it was Job 1.)

The RailRunner people will tell you flat out. That project wasn't justified for what is there now. It was constructed as a pro-active tool to avoid having the sprawl continue northward and southward along the I-25 spine. Creating density and easily accessible submarkets was the objective. Since plenty of buildable land still exists around many of the present and future RailRunner stations, we think they hit the nail on the head. ABQ, for its own part, is also planning a streetcar/LRT system for its Central Avenue (part of the fabled Route 66) corridor.

There has been a mention of light rail scattered throughout the blog here. For what TTA has in mind, i.e. a regional system, we wouldn't recommend that. One could argure that the higher construction costs (by virtue of the catenaries, TPS and relay stations, etc.) would be offset by lower costs for propulsion. Maybe so. But, the extra land required for those TPS stations and other support facilities is not insubstatial (or cheap). What would probably be even more daunting is the fact that with light rail equipment you get locked into a market of one to two suppliers (Siemens being the dominant one), and a parts dilemma of having to resupply with highly specialized OEM parts, perhaps paying $200+ for an oak 1x6 (yes, that's a piece of wood) from the manufacturer for fears of liability stemming from use of a "non-standard part" (which has in fact happened here). At least with DMU the specialization is not quite as strict -- diesel parts are more or less commonplace anywhere, and the traction motors are relatively low-maintenance items. What I especially don't like about LRT systems is that most of them run in the street, or at grade-level, with tons of street crossings, with invariably common car v. train accidents. Your liability goes up, your performance down.

No news as of yet. People tend to be hard to track down this time of the year. But we'll keep you posted gang.

Ciao!

Man, I am so glad you post here. Many of us speak from our hearts and fail to see the other variables that matter the most. I can't say enough about how much I appreciate your input. As for the light rail, I think we can still do it, either as a supplement to TTA's regional rail, or as a first step. The difference is that a light rail system could be more of a city/county transportation initiative, but it must be flexible enough to connect with other rail systems. The new study by the Planning Dept shows that Raleigh can handle effectively an additional 300,000 within the city's current boundaries. This is a positive study and can help promote a light rail system as an alternative way of transportation. Of course, we are a long way from actually getting a successful citywide light rail system.

Not much in terms of updates, but since several forumers are wondering about the TTA regional rail proposal, I think it will provide some relief to know that the project is still alive. Today, there was a presentation on the future of TTA's regional rail, in front of the City Council, which was down-to-Earth and to-the-point. The City Council members were supportive and expressed the desire to see RDU connected with the rail system. Philip Isley, who has been wrongfully labelled as an opponent, wanted to make sure that the price tag will not be increased dramatically, way beyond estimates, when the time comes to build the regional rail. He also expressed concern that the current corridor doesn't serve many urbanized areas and he wanted to make sure that TTA was flexible to build a rail system that would actually serve the existing population, not just the future neighborhoods. TTA is not flexible, in a sense that they wish to keep the existing corridor, but this should not be a problem as population grows. Overall, there was support and TTA seems to be looking at making the numbers work.

On a more positive tone, the TTA spokesman mentioned that in a recent presentation, similar initiatives in Dallas, Denver and Salt Lake City had a lot of bumps in the early stages, but people eventually supported those rail systems. Whether this is true, or not, I cannot tell, but I am happy to see TTA looking into creating an alliance with many local agencies instead of trying to pull this project by themselves. We'll see.

Just wanted to add the following links:

TTA says $15M rights deal is a go (http://www.bizjournals.com/triangle/stories/2006/11/20/story3.html?t=printable)
TTA aims to get rail project on track (http://rdu.news14.com/content/top_stories/default.asp?ArID=94984)
Council Agrees To Continue Funding Triangle Commuter Project (http://www.wral.com/news/10375144/detail.html)

My suggestion: Don't believe everything you hear. I support TTA's regional rail system, but it has a lot of flaws :( Some TTA officials fail to recognize that in public - job security? - but everyone with basic knowledge should understand where the problems lie. The regional cooperation is on the surface. When it comes to details, the powers-that-be take separate paths. How else can I explain that some agencies are on board now, but excluded themselves during the previous [critical] phases? I agree with councilmen Craven and Isley: TTA MUST come up with a good plan and bring it forth before they can ask for Raleigh and Wake County to continue throwing money on a proposal that isn't solid. Considering the money we've spent, as a city, I think we can use all the funds we can get. What surprises me is how easily the mayor and the rest of the city council members fall into the trap. Public transit is good, but it must be done right. I hope that TTA finds a better way to deliver this project, but alas, they have no flexibility :(

It needs a direct airport connection. It'll be worth the cost. Business travelers could take a train directly to downtown Raleigh or Durham without a significant layover period at a TTA hub. That, right there, is money and image. And image is ultimately, more money.

Exactly :okay: That is why many people opposed this project. The vitality of this line depends on a good connection with RDU. No connection, no functionality, no image... no money.

In no way to say that it can't be done (and I hate nothing more than playing party-pooper), but getting trains to RDU is problematic at best, and you can bet on expensive. It is a worthy long-term goal to be sure, but personally it could become a fatal distraction. Better to focus on starting and completing the original (and already studied) project, and get something -- anything -- going on the relatively uncomplicated NCRR corridor.

The reasons why are several. Take a look at RDU's layout:

http://www.naco.faa.gov/d-tpp/0612/00516AD.PDF

The first thing that jumps out at any transit planner would be the fact that the terminal complex is completed sealed off by high-speed taxiways. Now you have two choices: go under them, or go over them.

For the latter, there are very few examples of even static objects spanning active taxiways. The only one that I can even think of is the pedestrian bridge from the main terminal to Concourse A here at Denver. But again, that is a static object, and built over a slow-speed, rarely traversed apron area. It is almost unthinkable that the FAA would approve of any motionary object that could even conceivably fall on a jet and kill hundreds, regardless of the minute risk involved. A light rail system would be relatively heavy (and incredibly expensive) for a suspended guideway, and with monorail's track record, especially in Las Vegas, neither is terribly attractive for that mission.

As for going under -- two words...Expensive. Time-consuming. Now you involve a minimum of four federal agencies in the planning process, with agonizing and specific studies required for each. Mr. (John) Brantley's recent public complaint was angled toward more money for the airport authority, which is fine, and perfectly logical for any politically oriented manager to engage in. But unless the RDU Airport Authority can pitch in the substantial sums required just to study the thing, let alone burrow another hole underneath Taxiway Echo besides the two portals that are already there, then I would drop the idea entirely. Perhaps RDU can do without that particular taxiway altogether, but I doubt it since it would reduce the efficacy of the airfield flow. Plus, that taxiway's elimination will come out of RDU's bottom line.

As unsexy as it sounds, articulated circular bus service around the airport loop, connecting to a Morrisville station (again, another obstacle) would really be the most effective way to connect the platform with the RDU terminals. Since the buses are not dependent on signal progression, they can be the most effective option concerning on-time demand service from the platform to the air terminal. Remember that you will have trains coming from multiple directions delivering air passengers, so you need as many constantly moving seats in the loop as you can get to be truly effective. Also remember that trains have to be spaced with signals, which requires inherent delays of a couple of minutes for staging, loading, and unloading time each, especially where baggage is involved. Add a sequence of several of those signalling delays each hour, and you've got hours of wasted time added up at the end of the service day. On a limited-access corridor such as Terminal Drive, speed reductions by way of traffic signals are not an issue for a bus. If one bus breaks down, another one can pick up the passengers and run around it. Not so with trains. Imagine a brake problem with a train full of passengers trying to make flights. Not only does that trainload of train passengers get screwed, but so does everyone on trains behind them. A redundant, two-track countercircular system such as that at San Francisco Int'l, is almost impossible with the current RDU layout.

While I'm at it, you wanna talk Mayberry, talk to Morrisville. With ostensibly the most to gain from rail service than any other entity, Mo'ville has refused a station from the very beginning of the TTA project. This seems to me to be self-defeating in light of the fact that Cary will soon fully encapsulate Mo'ville, eliminating future expansion of its city limits. If you can't grow out, you have to grow up, or face a statis in your tax base. You can only fit so many McMansions in a small city like that. Or town. (If they still, like Cary, insist on being called such.) Sooner or later the operating costs will catch up to the restrictive tax base, and like many American suburbs, will find itself in fiscal strangulation. A rail station will enable the kind of high-density projects that Mo'ville needs to start planning now, in order to avert this kind of chaotic future.

Something that is rarely brought up is that many of the more dynamic cities are products of sealed boundaries, e.g. San Francisco, Seattle, Chicago, New York, Baltimore, Denver, and to lesser extents Miami, and Atlanta. Those cities have been effectively growth restricted for many years, and thus have been forced to renovate their core areas in order to simply stay afloat, let alone thrive. Closer to home, take a look at Virginia cities, which have been locked in since the early 20th century. Downtown Roanoke puts Raleigh and Durham to shame, especially considering that it has so much less to work with both culturally and economically. Richmond and Norfolk, even with their economic malaise from the "white flight" of thirty and forty years ago have done substantially better.

Raleigh, in the last fifty years or so, has focused nearly all of its capital toward annexing and maintaining suburban areas while downtown suffered. It is the vaunted "doughnut effect". Core city spending is a fairly recent phenomenon in Raleigh, and only after locals began to get the sense that its downtown was a laughingstock from out-of-towners. The level of downtown investment is still, IMHO, marginal. When I hear city council people "express concern" that "the city is perhaps focusing too much on downtown" I have to laugh. To me it simply seems like a little deserved payback. And more is needed. Downtown Raleigh needs a rail link to distinguish itself from the rest of the city, and by making itself truly available to the masses -- not just the ones who work there or can afford the $15 or so it takes to park there. It can support rail, but only with continual upgrades at the city's core. Crabtree Valley could support one too, but would have to add about another 1 million square feet of office space to do so. Above all, it is a mindset. People here who live in the city of Denver (and to a somewhat lesser extent its suburbs) feel connected to our downtown. We watch pro sports games there, go clubbing there, to theaters, and make any bleeping excuse to throw a party or parade there. My own mother, who is a Raleigh-born native, and until recently life-long resident, tells me emphatically that she hates downtown Raleigh, and is scared to death of the place. And I know she isn't alone in that vein of thinking. The future of downtown Raleigh is in transplants, like many of yourselves, who haven't been indoctrinated into this type of thinking. Some of it is racism, some of it classism, but it exists in a significant part of the native population, many of whom still refer to buses as "welfare wagons", and regard the city center as something evil.

Somebody thump Mo'ville on the head please, and tell them they need a station if they are to have any chance at long-term prosperity. As for RDU, they will have to undertake McCarran-like (Las Vegas) tunneling projects to get a proprietary mass-transit anything. I don't think anything that is being budgeted on a shoestring such as TTA can withstand that kind of mission escalation and cost. Morrisville and RDU have a unified interest in TTA, whether they know it or not.

I just proofread this, and now feel obligated to apologize for the rant. I get off on a tangent sometimes, I know. Unfortunately, as for our project submission it was, incredibly, lost in the mail. We are trying to reclaim it through our tracking numbers in order to resubmit it, but for now we're stuck save for paltry e-mails. If one of the readers happens by the Cameron Village post office, could you please drop by and explain to them where Oberlin Road is. Then point to outside the door.

Ciao!

Vitaviatic, your posts are always a breath of fresh air in our forum. Your views are well supported and I would never discourage you to continue along the same path... rants included :)

Your take on the RDU connection is correct, I am afraid. As much as I want to see a station there, I understand that there are challenges and we'll need to overcome them before we make a final decision. Personally, I want to see a connection, but not at a huge expense. Also, I would be satisfied if some sort of transportation existed between the nearest station and RDU, at least during the first phase. What puzzles me is the position that RDU has taken recently. One day they refuse to cooperate, the other day (when it's over) they extend their hand for support. I am truly puzzled.

Now, don't get me started with Morrisville. This little town has a unique opportunity to benefit big time from a regional rail, yet its officials refuse to play ball, although their recent position today is a little bit different than 2 years ago. It doesn't mean they play along, but maybe they will wake up one day and realize that there is still time to do the right thing.

Back to Downtown, I will have to agree that we are focusing on the core a lot more than we focus on other areas. Sometimes, you can say we are focusing too much. It is true that DT Raleigh needs a major boost, but if we lose sight of the rest of the city, we'll go downhill faster than we can say "crap". Regional transportation initiatives don't work when the city gets filled with cul-de-sacs, subdivisions and strip malls. The city leaders need to equally focus on other growing areas and recognize that if downtown is to become the true center, we need to develop East, South and West Raleigh. These areas have massive potential to become desirable and well designed, but the city has to focus a little bit on them. Only then, Downtown will be seen as the true center of activity. Currently, Crabtree Valley and North Hills seem to play that role, with Brier Creek pushing the center to the North... Well, not really, but there is a lot of activity that our center could use, particularly on the retail department.

As for the Cameron Village Post Office, I had some bad experiences a couple of years ago and I try to avoid using that station as much as I can. Luckily, I have not been there for over 6 months, but I would be scared if I had to use their service :(

Some more interesting developments in the regional rail plan: Regional Rail Could Could Be Switched Off TTA's Track (http://www.wral.com/news/10416697/detail.html). It sounds like someone finally realized that wasting money and time isn't going to help us with our mass transit efforts. Hopefully, something good will come out of this.

No rant today, friends. I promise. :nuts:

Having reviewed the WRAL post, I can't say that I can gleen much from it. For one, Wake County, by itself, cannot commandeer the funds allocated to TTA. Any modification to TTA's funding strategy would require state approval, of course. So, in the absence of another regionwide transportation authority, TTA would be the default oversight agency, unless of course either the state took over the whole thing (fat chance), or a separate autonomous agency specializing in just commuter rail were to be created (which seems silly when such an agency would have to essentially replicate what TTA has already done).

What I would be pretty confident in stating what the state would do, in its own self-interest, is to plan, engineer, and construct (or better said, upgrade) the NCRR rail corridor for reasonable lengths of trackage over fixed periods, to high-speed rail specifications, but accomodating the commuter operation. Although a bit more expensive than progressive upgrades, there are substantial advantages to that process: 1) the planning is comprehensive, the benefit of which cannot be overestimated, and 2) two distinct projects can be funded through one budgetary process, which discounts the overhead for both, and by having a dual mission, I guarantee will be weighted more favorably than a TTA solo project for federal funding. That addresses the trackage problem, which is far and away the most capital intensive part of the thing. The rolling stock and station construction are far lesser burdens to address.

What really confounds us is that this project is not that hard to implement, especially in light of two Amtrak trains already operating on the same corridor! By and large, all that would be needed would be for the TTA to contract out to Amtrak a third train, possibly a fourth running countersync to the third (call them, for the sake of absurdity, The Tarheel and The Wolfpack -- notice how I happily snub Duke for their predictably elitist stiffarming of the rail into Duke/VA, which is actually served by a public street). Unlike the The Carolinian and The Piedmont, these two new locally-supported trains would be shortlooped between Raleigh and Durham, using the very same stations that the state-supported Amtrak trains do now. Consider four GE P-42 Genesis locomotives added to the state fleet for the project at about $24 million ($6 million apiece), and about twelve double-decked Bombardier coaches for around $36 million (at $3 million apiece, and that's high). Same tracks as now, same stations as now. Durham, Cary, and Raleigh all have serviceable stations. A simple platform could be erected at RTP until long-term upgrades are made. Good God, they could even use the old Seaboard station in lieu of the Government Center Station short-term if it's still there (and it looks like it is). Again, simple platforms would suffice for Fairgrounds and other outlying stations until major funding began. The only major expense station that would be needed at the outset would be NCSU, which would require substantial restructuring of the ROW there, utilities relocation, and probably a raised platform, with a "shoo-fly" vector in order to achieve the required physical separation from the freight side.

That's it.

Why something simple cannot get done here is a simple study in mission inflation. Everyone wants their own this and that, and with the very tight rail corridor in both Raleigh and Durham, that ain't gonna work! Bottom line, if the cities of Raleigh, Cary, and Durham, and the RTP pitched jointly in for the rolling stock, and possibly Wake and Durham counties, an EIS wouldn't even be needed, as it would merely be expansion of existing service instead of construction of a whole new alignment. (Just think of the millions of dollars that were paid just to Parsons, Brinckerhoff, Quade, & Douglas for shoddy, tragicomically flawed ridership estimates, that were a requirement for the massive federal funding that TTA requested.) For probably less than was paid to Parsons, TTA could have had trains running by now under Amtrak contract. Not killer service mind you, but enough for a start, and certainly enough to prove the market. If my amortizations are correct, this would come out to around $7.7 million per year for the rolling stock (8 years, @ 6%), plus contracted crew and maintenance service fees.

We have pounded on the fact that if an agency has a service up and running, it is far, far easier to acquire federal funding for improvements. The strategy to date has been somewhat like a teenager demanding a Boxster for his sixteenth birthday. Maybe not the most expensive car out there, but certainly way more than most of the other kids could ever hope for.

Two rush hour trains in each direction, with spartan service at non-peak hours, keeping crew requirements down, may just have to be the modest start needed here. Once the trains are running, marketing surveys can be taken to determine future service levels. Pay as you go, build as you go is the only way that we can see this working at all.

We have a turnkey scenario that we have submitted utilizing the same DMUs that were selected for the TTA operation. That is certainly in the realm of possibility as well, given the appropriate financing structures. But the basic third and fourth Amtrak trains are a more than adequate "starter kit" (training wheels included) for any agency, including TTA, to implement. Initial trackage requirements are minimal (again, mainly at NCSU), crewing subbed out to Amtrak, and with the two built-in spare locomotives in the set of four, the power can be shuttled back to Salisbury for routine maintenance without substantially increasing machinist staff. As soon as practically possible, the maintenance work could be shifted to a local Triangle facility, but again without the intial startup expense, and with no drop-dead timetables. Sidings can be added or expanded one at a time in order to piecemeal together the highly desired double-tracking (or better yet, multiple main track) that TTA was demanding from the outset.

The old adage about appreciating what you've got, and working with what you have is a lesson to be learned here from New Mexico, and its up and running RailRunner.

I think its time for Wake County and Durham County to work their own plan. Take input from outside experts, but at the end of the day, it has to start at the lowest level.

Why are we (folks in the triangle) going for the home run? Why can't we be happy with a simple single or double? Winston-Salem is building their own smaller system (http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=320832) and have been able to do this without the rest of the triad.

Something like this in Raleigh, Durham, and cary would be better than some clucker Amtrak train (even if its brand spanking new).

Just my opinion of course. People I've talked to about this always ask why would a system not connect DT to Crabtree Valley area and to North Hills. Places where people are and want to go, yet include the State Fair Grounds where no one lives and would be used 2 weeks a year. Legitimate questions.

I think theres a subway stop in NY that only runs during baseball season.

Are you talking about Mets' Shea Stadium? I used to ride 7 - subway - four times a week to Flushing and I remember that stop, but it wasn't seasonal. There was an Express 7, however, which would skip several stations, and Shea Stadium could have been one of them. Maybe there was a special 7 line that run during the games.

Forgive me folks. I made a bit of a blunder.

My ammortization figures were indeed, not correct. (I forgot to dump the memory in my calculator first - which isn't the first time that's happened.)

For $60,000,000 in rolling stock, over 8 years, at 6%, we would actually come up with something like $9.5 million per year, or $790,000 per month. This would outrun the farebox revenues by a bit more than a normal transit operation, but keep in mind we're aiming for a "starter kit" in order to prove the market. Once more trains came online (thus more schedules and seat inventory) the numbers would balance out to a more representative norm.

I like the baseball analogy provided by Transplant. Four base hits still get the run in, and are much easier to come by. Indeed Raleigh could go this on its own, or a Raleigh/Cary/Wake consortium, but remember that our problem here is multiple intended uses for the one corridor already in place (i.e., commuter, high-speed rail, and continued freight utility). New construction for rail is outrageously expensive. (Even though new rail may be presented as a good investment over the long term - I, for one, am a big fan of the Metro Red Line in Los Angeles, even with the supposedly "exhorbitant" costs.) Any commuter use of this corridor would necessarily have to done under the auspices of NCRR and NCDOT for coordination purposes, whether it through TTA, the city of Raleigh, or anybody.

Lots of people would like to see rail to Crabtree Valley, and up to RDU, then to RTP and Durham. Several huge problems present themselves in that scenario.

First of all, topography. There are only two ways into Crabtree Valley by any flat, non-watershed, non-built area. The first is via the Beltline. The right-of-way for I-440 is completely built out folks. There is no room left for roadway, let alone a rail corridor unless it is built in an elevated scheme, and maddeningly expensive for that reason, without tearing down homes in a venerable, "old money" neighborhood. Any project even proposing either of these would be politically torched to the ground, I guarantee you. The second way in is to take up the median along Glenwood Avenue, which would meet a similar fate. Now we are talking even bigger amounts of "old money". Fact in point, it would indeed destroy the "carriagehouse" character of the neighborhood, and, as we have seen demonstrated in the case of Duke, even ostensibly liberal bastions of wealth will "defend their territory" from an onslaught of outside demographics -- meaning "poor people" who ride transit. It's not fair, and not even sensible -- but that's the way the world works, folks. Not to mention that a Beltline entry would involve a helluva dogleg to either the airport or Durham, adding run time, and would completely bypass the residential and office markets of one of the most affluent cities in America - Cary.

The second problem is land-use patterns. Within the confines of the city of Raleigh, north of Glenwood South, you have too light a density to support any kind of rail service (except for perhaps a New Orleans St. Charles-style streetcar, but then you have the problem of who would use it -- people with Beamers, Mercedes-Benzes, and Range Rovers tend to want to drive them everywhere). Crabtree is a good source of passengers, but then the problem becomes how do we get them where they need to go? Most of those workers either live in the Lake Boone or North Hills areas. Some perhaps in Pleasant Valley, but high-density apartment, condo, and multi-unit housing areas in those parts are too few and far between to make a difference. The norm out there is Brookhaven or Oak Park (still not transit territory). Beyond Pleasant Valley, you run into set institutional land-uses that preclude that kind of development. Industrial and commercial (the "auto-malls"), Umstead Park (which covers almost a fourth of the land-mass frontage along US70 between Raleigh and Durham), and RDU itself. Then RTP, and its "campus" layout. The irony is that some of the features that make the Triangle what it is tend to negate the possibility of mass transit along what many consider to be the original "Main Street" of the Triangle.

The future of the US70 corridor is pretty much set in stone I'm afraid, at least for the next thirty-year redevelopment cycle.

That is why I have pitched all along to build the rail system in an area in which the fate is not yet determined. Much of the NCRR corridor is either high-density institutional with great fonts of traffic (think cash-strapped college students at Shaw, Peace, NCSU, St. Mary's, and Meredith), or older industrial parcels awaiting redevelopment due to inflated land values. (And don't forget event traffic at RBC, Carter-Finley, Dorton, or the State Fair itself!) New projects in these areas can, and I think will, build to densities to accomdate rail. That's the main reason we came up with the Central Prison project, to show the potential for that. Sure, you could skyscraper all of Glenwood beyond Crabtree, but that land is not discounted yet enough to do so, except for some areas around Crabtree itself (thus, you get a Soleil Center). But since this area is traditionally suburban in nature, you'll have a helluva fight on your hands. Whereas, west Raleigh has been urban in character since the turn of the 20th century. It makes a huge difference in perception.

I don't consider myself a straight-line thinker, and I certainly entertain options and other strategies as much as I can. Unfortunately however, due to circumstances many options tend to get weeded out either from sociological factors (density, urban character, and unfortunately, factors of class), simple economics, or other variables, such as the malicious and predatory nature of nearly omnipotent commercial railroad managements (the debacle of Amtrak using freight corridors being the prime example of this). By far the easiest scenario in which to bring transit to the Triangle is to exploit what truly is a godsend, the state-owned North Carolina Railroad, and the corridor along which North Carolina's major cities developed and eventually prospered.

Vitaviatic

You bring up the NCRR. David King,TTA leader, once was in charge of this corridor in his state employment and a meeting I attend two months ago mentioned that is place to look to use to this Traingle's advantage.

You are right on in your thinking- according to the comments of David King.

I wish I could comment on Vitaviatic's excellent presentation of ideas, but I enjoy his posts so much that I feel I wouldn't be able to add anything new at all. Personally, I suspect that many of the scenarios we'd like to see materialize may not be feasible, or within a reasonable budget, but it's always worth sharing ideas with others. Challenges? Too many. Solutions? I haven't heard anything from our local leaders that make me say Wow!!! Maybe some day.

Vitaviatic, you certainly have good points.

If as you say, that along Glenwood there is no density (and I have to agree) then the same arguement could be used for nearly all of the Red Lines route.

I disagree that building Up Glenwood would be terribly difficult, theres no reason that the train has to go up there directly.

I would propose the NW Raleigh route go:
Up the RR right of way on the North side of Capital to Wake Forest Rd
Lots of building capacity along capital
Wake Forest Rd to Six Forks
Six Forks to North Hills.
North Hills to Crabtree, just north of I440.
Crabtree up glenwood.

I'll try to put together a proposal diagram.
Glenwood offers quite a bit of long term development capacity. I Imagine a North Hills style development replacing the two plazas on the corners of Glenwood/Pleasant Valley. Good planning could allow for density all the way up to Lynn.

I'm not saying that the entire route be built at once, as you said theres not enough demand there. But, use that as a carrot for density development.

First off, I really enjoy the dialog here. It's always good to get constructive feedback from every angle.

A little research and I find that the Seaboard Station has already been transformed into a retail complex. So much for that one. But, that doesn't preclude a median platform with an overhead breezeway straddling the tracks to actually feed potential customers into that venue.

I am sure Mr. King is way out in front of us on this one. This is the one guy that could actually mesh the interagency intracacies together into workable form. In my own opinion, this was quite a deft move by the TTA Board to bring him on. Not to beat the topic to death, but it is all about streamlining design, construction, and operations to serve all of the future operators on the NCRR line. If all horses are pulling in the same direction, this gets done.

To be sure, nobody is very gung-ho about a third, fourth (or even fifth) Amtrak train plying the rails to serve as a "commuter" rail service. I understand that. But, as a stop-gap measure, it is by far the cheapest option. Not that I am insisting that a relatively wealthy metropolitan area like the Triangle necessarily needs to go cheap. But if actually proving that a transit market exists there for the least amount of effort and cash is the desired goal, it would certainly work. It is just the first foot in the saddle. It will be classified as a commuter rail service provided it meets a minimum schedule criteria, and as such will get the Triangle credit toward future transit funding. It can't be stressed enough here that, if you have a functional system in place, even if it's a Pullman car with a steam engine (running a regular schedule) it gets you several rungs higher up the ladder. Right now, with just an EIS and a final design submission in place with no funding, you've barely got one foot on the ladder.

By the way, it doesn't have to be called Amtrak, or run with Amtrak livery or colors. It can be called whatever you want it to be. LA's Metrolink contracts with Amtrak for crewing and Bombardier for maintenance. Albuquerque's RailRunner operation and Stockton's Altamont Commuter Express contract out to Herzog. It doesn't mean that it has to be part of the shoddy Amtrak intercity operation, with late arrivals often measured in days.[I] Not at all. In fact, I could see very easily a tipover point being reached whereby North Carolina's various subsidized train operations become large enough to support self-generated crewing and maintenance. Famous Amos started out of a pushcart. This can too if necessary. In any case, it's better than nothing, although we'd certainly rather see the next better option -- a turnkey service.

The thing now is to quiet the noise. Detractors are screaming "see, we told ya so!", and doing their level best to shovel all of the money out of the program. Fortunately, your civic leaders are not so short-sighted. Yet. However, if nothing gets done reasonably soon, it's doubtful that they can hold off the rabblerousers for long.

Again, the bootstrapping idea of "Amtrak type" trains does not require any serious modification of the existing right-of-way. Thus, service can initiate with minimal expense, proving there is actually a transit market out there. (And, with downtowns Raleigh and Durham going the way they are, and with national press coverage that you just can't buy, I do not doubt its eventual success.) Meanwhile, the heavy lifting of resolving the intricate design issues of this extremely high-demand corridor, and packaging the financing for it, can take place while this workaday money magnet rolls on. Keep in mind also that if HSR goes through, and gets any kind of continued funding, the state would have the option to prioritize this particular corridor, and you then can kill two buffalo with one nickel.

For my part, I do like the Wake Forest/Six Forks to North Hills, then to Crabtree idea. It seems to serve everybody. The things you need to keep in mind though, are: 1) what your functional points are, and 2) your headways. The first could only be determined by extensive market surveys (which are notoriously unreliable over a period of years, especially in a dynamic real estate market like Raleigh -- who'da thought downtown and Glenwood South would be sprouting mid-rises and a high-rise here and there, back even 6 years ago, to the degree they are now). If the most popular destination ended up being North Hills, everything's peachy. If the dominant market ended up being Crabtree to downtown, now you have a problem. Why?

If your train averaged 30 mph over the entire line (which is actually quite high), and you cover, say, 12 miles over this route, it's not that big of a geometric deflection when compared to the speed. However, depending on how many stations you located along the line, it becomes a big deal. Let's assume a minimal 10 stations from Crabtree to downtown Raleigh (Crabtree itself, North Hills, Wake Forest/Six Forks, Wake Forest/Whitaker Mill, Capital and Wade maybe, Mordecai, Government Center, and the Downtown ITC -- ok, 8 then).

Here then, is the math:

(Assume a 30 mph speed limit average)

8 stations over 12 miles = about 1.71 miles between stations

at about 2 minutes per mile this equals around 3.42 minutes runtime between stations

x - x - x - x - x - x - x - x

7 dashes equals seven track segments x 3.42 minutes each = 24 min.

Station dwell time equals 1 minute average x 6 intermediate stations = 6 min.

(Make this 2 minutes each intermediate station if the tracks run at grade and have to mesh with street signalling = 14 min.)

For this we come up with a headway range between 30 and 38 minutes. Versus a 5-mile, 15-minute (tops) drive down Glenwood. And if you remove stations from the intermediate points, you diminish the efficacy of the service, especially if it's intended as a locally-oriented service (which I think is what you were trying to come by).

For the record, I would still use this service if I worked downtown, just to avoid the parking ransom. However, if it were just for a concert downtown once in while, or even from a downtown condo to shop at Crabtree, it's a tough sell. If a hardcore downtowner could be convinced to shuck the car and stay on transit, it's actually a good deal. Lose a $300 car payment and that again for full coverage insurance while under finance, and spring for a $65 monthly transit pass -- it's a steal! And this alignment would get you most anywhere urbanized you need to go in Raleigh. But let's face it -- how many people anywhere in the Triangle could afford to be totally without a car? Not many, I think. It's too scary a proposition for most people, so they are stuck with car payments and insurance anyway even if they take transit. And if the downtown employer continues to provide parking stipends it becomes a no-brainer. You're gonna drive. (Not to mention that if you can afford to live in a downtown condo, you're most likely not struggling with car payments.)

*There actually is a service out of Boston called ZipCar, and another based out of DC that are car-sharing services -- you rent them by the hour or by the day, but they essentially stay in circulation throughout the city making them readily accessible. This would offset a bit of the squeamishness about being "deserted without a car". Check it out:

http://www.zipcar.com/

With the NCRR railroad, we stay linear, thus maintaining the expedience of the service. When compared with I-40 traffic between Raleigh and Durham, transit (if designed properly) will win hands down 7 hours out of the day. Plus, most of the grade separation issues have already been delt with by the NCRR. Minor grade crossings remain at Beryl, Powell, and other parts of west Raleigh, Cary, and Mo'ville. However, it's clear sailing again once into the RTP and beyond into Durham. Minimal station dwell and crossing delays here, and lesser improvement costs.

My bet is still on the old horse.

What can I say? I have energetic fingers today.

As a case study in regards to my Glenwood Avenue alignment assessment, let's take a quick look at LA's Red Line.

Factually, the LA and Hollywood parts of the Red Line have some of the highest population densities in the country. I lived within three blocks of the Wilshire/Vermont Station in Koreatown and it was absolutely choked with people. Farther out on Wilshire you have strands of highrises in West LA and Beverly Hills that rival New York. If you're talking the tube segments through the Hollywood Hills, those are certainly low-density, but once it returns to surface in both Hollywood and North Hollywood (San Fernando Valley) again it is surrounded by the teeming masses. MacArthur Park is also high-density, and pretty much everything back toward downtown LA. The throw-away stations (still in relatively dense neighborhoods) are Wilshire/Normandie and Wilshire/Western west of the wye. But they weren't supposed to be. Which is where our story begins.

http://www.mta.net/riding_metro/imap/interactive_map.html

The LA Red Line was supposed to run all the way to the coast along Wilshire Blvd. through West LA, Beverly Hills, Westwood, UCLA, and into Santa Monica. For traffic, it would have been a world-class subway. However, as soon as the tunnel-boring hit the Beverly Hills city limits (yes, friends - it is a real city) everything stopped. And never went any further.

It seems that the burghers of Beverly Hills didn't want working class people riding a (gasp!) subway through their mansion-filled neighborhoods. In a show of bald-faced elitism, and most would say racism, Beverly Hills forbade Metro to enter their town, and killed by atrophy any extension of the Red Line along Wilshire. True, if the project had any flexibility it could have skirted Beverly Hills and cut underneath along Olympic, Pico, or another artery, although in doing so, would have missed much of their rider market in the highrise districts of West LA. But so much energy was expending fighting this alignment that Metro threw in the towel and headed for Pasadena (where they faced similar, but not nearly as agitant, resistance there for the Gold Line).

For sure, no one will ever confuse Glenwood Avenue for Wilshire Boulevard. Wilshire is commercialized beyond reason, and other than glitz, offers nothing in the way of aesthetic value. Glenwood is refined and serene by comparison, and would be guarded much more vehemently than the world's busiest street. The cases are different, but the underlying socioeconomic messages are the same. Even in a liberal bastion like Beverly Hills, which in the same breath will arduously defend the underprivileged from governmental and free-market abuse, will emote a scorched-earth defense of multi-million dollar mansions that could even be perceived as losing value because of a public-transit project.

MTA in Los Angeles is a venerable political juggernaut. TTA is a fledgling transit agency. To even conceive of the mere suggestion of rooting out the dogwoods on Glenwood Avenue for transit of any sort would be sheer political suicide. And here, in delayed form, is your example.

One other lesson from the LA experience, this one a time study. The original transit enterprise in LA was the Blue Line from downtown LA to Long Beach. For most of the alignment past the Convention Center and Staples Center, this line runs at grade. There are grade crossings at nearly every major thoroughfare all the way to Long Beach. During morning and afternoon rush it takes well over an hour to ride between LA and LB. That, and by virtue of the neighborhoods it runs through, it has an overwhelmingly working class and poor ridership. There is nothing wrong with hard-working and poor people mind you (their money is just as good as everybody else's), but whatever chance Metro had of claiming any of the professional, student, or mercantile market for Blue Line ridership was doomed the day that they decided to run grade with this route.

No one who can afford to run a car will put up with the run times of the Blue Line, even if their paths follow the exact same route. The ridership numbers are great (they are SRO during rush hours), but due to its unpopularity among shakers and movers because of its inefficiency, it has been relegated to more or less an afterthought in the big scheme of things in the here and now.

And once it's done, it's done. So do it right the first time!

So much information!!! Way over my head, I must admit. Nevertheless, it is great to see someone having to share some good thoughts. Let me offer my 2 cents on the Crabtree Valley to North Hills connection. I cannot visualize a line that would connect these two areas. The topography would make this extremely hard and costly, not to mention impossible to run through strictly residential areas. Of course, there is always I-440 that could be used, but some serious work will need to be done before such thing could happen.

Crabtree isn't in a good place for a rail link. Perhaps a shuttle could be run between Crabtree and North Hills. A North Hills to Downtown line wouldn't take long to ride. It's a pretty straight shot. The biggest advantages of the connection come in with the connection to NCSU. 30,000 students and faculty suddenly don't have to drive to downtown or North Hills. It becomes economic for them to live and shop there.

Somebody thump Mo'ville on the head please, and tell them they need a station if they are to have any chance at long-term prosperity. As for RDU, they will have to undertake McCarran-like (Las Vegas) tunneling projects to get a proprietary mass-transit anything. I don't think anything that is being budgeted on a shoestring such as TTA can withstand that kind of mission escalation and cost. Morrisville and RDU have a unified interest in TTA, whether they know it or not.

Hi.

Here's what I've heard in discussion with folks at TTA and through reading as many related Morrisville Board of Commissioners meeting minutes and TTA reports as I could get my grubby hands on.

Early on, TTA had contemplated using a Morrisville station as the connection to the airport (the physical distance was shortest.) Morrisville didn't like that because they didn't want their town to become a cheap park-and-ride for the airport. So TTA decded to use their South RTP "Metro Center" hub instead.

TTA was dealt a significant blow by Morrisville around 2002 when the town rejected the idea of a station in their town limits altogether. I believe this would have been the station with the greatest permanent (non-dormitory) residential population within walking distance, and there was plenty of room for further expansion and TOD. This meant a lot to TTA.

Since then, a new mayor and commissioners were elected in Morrisville (and perhaps a new manager - don't know). They pushed the town in a different direction. Now, they want to work on a town center (though they're not sure what they want it to look like.) They also decided they want a TTA station as well. They talked to TTA again and it was too late in the process to get a station added back in, however, in their engineering plans, TTA had already made an allowance for a future station in Morrisville by spacing the tracks further apart to allow for a platform between them.


So, Morrisville has already come around, though it happened too late to get incorporated in the 2005/2006 plan. Now that the plan is back on the drawing board you can expect Morrisville to be more on board.

As an added note, they made similar allowances for future stations in a few other places, too. One was near Six Forks and Atlantic. I don't remember where the others were, but one was probably between Alston and North RTP.

This is a copy of my post on the UrbanPlanet blog.

OK gang...

As promised, our numbers for all of the projects that we touched on in the SSC forum, many of which were reprinted here, have been posted to our internet site. Here is the link:

Thin Air Group, LLC (http://www.thinairgroup.com)

Click on the paper dart to enter the site. At the welcome page click on the link on the sidebar named "RDU Transit Project Portfolio". Our initial turnkey service projections are there as well as Centrium (the TOD replacement for Central Prison) and one other proposal that we have not yet mentioned heretofore -- the World Technology Exposition (or TEXPO). The latter, as the name implies, is a year-long (or close to it) technology fair that would be set to initiate Dix Hill Park once the Dix Psychiatric facility closes. The revenues from the TEXPO would fund the entire park acquisition for the city of Raleigh (if the necessary critical mass were achieved), and provide the same kind of OPM (other people's money, for the anacronym challenged) infusion into TTA's rail project that the 2002 Winter Olympics did for Salt Lake (but fortunately with a more spread out visitor population). Of note is our explanation as to how World's Fairs have played a huge role in the development of some of America's premier parks.

Some disclaimers here.

First, we did punch out some rudimentary, basic numbers for a "turnkey" train operation. This is NOT to tell TTA how to run the show. They already have these numbers, of course, and probably much more thorough ones at that. The problem that most people have with transit funding is that we are all shown huge numbers, but never given a basis by which to gauge if the working figures are high or low based on the income stream. This takes a lot of the "Greek letter mystery" out of the process, and gives a layman's breakdown of things. That is all we were trying to do. Unlike the fabulously well-paid Parsons, Brinckerhoff... we are not armed with 4GB ridership models... :shok: ...in order to satisfy the sentinels of the federal treasury. In fact, our desire is to see that entire level of largesse disappear altogether! The point that we have tried to make is that transit ridership reflects the dynamics of the real estate market, and to that end is next to impossible to gauge. To demonstrate, look at how many downtown Raleigh condo and office towers are coming online that were announced within the last year. Those projects alone invalidate the model numbers generated two to three years ago, and presented by Parsons. If the Centrium itself came online, the high-priced Parsons numbers would simply be rendered as garbage, as the entire commuting dynamics of downtown Raleigh would change (especially if the Centrium included a supermarket and some eclectic shopping).

Second, the Centrium numbers provided here are crude. There are no conceptual drawings (we aren't developers or architects, therefore are in no need of a super-duper CAD program), just numbers, and the general idea along with merits and benefits of the Centrium project as we see them. I'm sure some developers check into these blogs now and then. Feel free to check them and critique them. In fact, they're yours for the taking. We did these simply as a demonstration of what can be done with the Central Prison site, how critical a piece it is to the transit puzzle, and also to show just what a dead weight the prison really is on downtown Raleigh. By the way, we budgeted land acquisition for the prison site at $100 million on our spreadsheet. For 2006, the Wake County Assessor's Office appraised the prison on the books at around $70 million. The income numbers for the Centrium (intentionally conservative) run over $300 million over ten years, including condo sales, retail, and office. Total sales around $128 million a year. Sales and property taxes coming in at around $12 million a year. Do the math now, and tell me the state wouldn't be interested in selling.

I am available for feedback, and not only open to, but requesting suggestions. Our role in this whole thing is speculative. We may try to help organize a turnkey proposal for TTA, maybe not. I myself am a Raleigh native, as has been mentioned before, and this is as much of a citizen activist movement as anything. I get as tired as anybody watching the floundering of bureaucracy over mission inflation. A basic system is not hard to come by, or expensive, considering that the rail corridor already exists, and is already in use for passenger service!!

Laying down a bunt at the beginning of the inning makes it much easier to score later on with a couple of base hits. There is absolutely no need to swing for the fences from the very beginning.

Vitaviatic, you did it again!!! Very impressive work, even without renderings to go with all the numbers. Man, I truly hope that this proposal moves forward and this project materializes. I know how much we all would love to have those 4 towers as part of our main skyline, but I don't mind them being a mile away from the CBD, either. This would be a real transit-oriented development and could help our transportation initiatives significantly. This is the type of proposals TTA should have received prior to going to the Feds for financing their proposal.

One little problem: The Boylan Heights NIMBYs will chew the developer alive. These people are "dangerous", I am telling you. The mayor lives in that area, too, and I am sure he would love the increased value of his property, but not at the expense of losing his supporters. Man, I would give a lot to see Crowder's face if this proposal finds its way to the City Council's agenda :lol:

This piece of news may not sound important, but I think it is. Today's N&O published an article, titled Former drug plant sold in Morrisville (http://www.newsobserver.com/104/story/528931.html). This piece of [good] news is about the former Bristol-Myers plant, 96 acres of prime land, not too far from the proposed TTA station in the borders of Cary and Morrisville. The good news is that the developers want to duplicate North Hills and Cameron Village, blending a mix of retail destinations, office space and possibly condos and apartments - I would not get stuck on the "possibly", as I am sure it will make more sense to add residential options and increase the chances of that development to succeed. proximity to a regional rail station is definitely a plus, although it is not emphasized :okay:

I think there is a station platform at seaboard station.

Did you guys read the N&O article on TTA, titled With a new chief, TTA tries again to tackle traffic (http://www.newsobserver.com/243/story/534406.html)? Pretty nice to see TTA finally heading to the right direction, IMHO. I also liked the following part:
Still, the new transit plan could push TTA's ideas aside in favor of light rail or express bus service from booming suburbs such as Wake Forest and Brier Creek -- easing pressures along busy corridors where traffic conditions are far worse now than they looked to planners back in 1995.
Any discussion that involves light-rail is interesting. I think that without several components working together (i.e. buses, ligh-rail), TTA's regional rail plan is doomed. Sure, Cherokee Investment Partners is committed to building urban communities around the proposed stations, regardless, but it would be nice if we know how far we need to go in order to accommodate the future growth. The following map should show clearly the pros and cons of TTA's proposed line:

http://www.newsobserver.com/content/news/story_graphics/20070120_tta.jpg

In my opinion, I see no value in a line that starts in North Raleigh, goes down South, slowly curves to the West and then goes up North again. I can see more value in extending the line along Hwy 70 S, or Hwy 64 E. A North-South line would also help, connecting North Raleigh with Apex, Holly Springs and Fuquay-Varina, but in the distant future. All these areas are booming with development and have railroad tracks passing through their downtowns, if I am not mistaken. Another addition could be from Clayton towards RTP, via DT Raleigh. A few light-rail and 2-3 TTA regional rail lines would work very well, I think, provided the landscape doesn't present obstacles.

We have some good news and updates. Check out these two articles:

Regional rail rises from dead (http://www.newsobserver.com/news/growth/story/923907.html)
Regional Mass Transit System Inches Closer to Reality (http://www.wral.com/news/local/story/2393859/)

Now, don't misunderstand my enthusiasm... I am optimistic, but at the same time I must recognize that this project is even more ambitious than before. The price tag is prohibitive, IMHO, but it is doable. The following excerpt (taken from the second report) shows that the local powers are beginning to understand a few things:
The system is expected to cost approximately $2 billion, with 75 percent of funding from a sales-tax increase of up to a half percent and possibly an additional vehicle tax.

The federal government would cover the rest of the funding.
Asking for 25%-50% is far more reasonable than 61%, and the chances of getting some assistance will increase. I like the inclusion of light rail between Durham and Chapel Hill and I anticipate to hear more about Raleigh connecting itself with other municipalities, particularly to the East and South of the city.

Still, nobody has commented on this great news :( Anyway, I picked up a copy of Raleigh Metro Magazine and I saw something very positive: High Crimes on Wall Street; Yes — Finally — To Rail Transit (http://www.metronc.com/article/?id=1543). Bernie Reeves has been a critic of the previous version of TTA's regional rail proposal... and for a very good reason. In the aforementioned article, however, he offers his support. The following excerpt was taken from the aforementioned article:
Notes From La-La Land

OK, I give up. I criticized the rail transit plan now under study by the new Triangle region Special Transit Advisory Commission in the December 2007 issue. Upon investigation, I now feel it has merit — perhaps because it follows suggestions I made months back by addressing the big weakness of the old TTA plan — its insistence on running rail where no one wanted to go. The old plan was politically driven and factually bereft, ignoring the reality that the critical mass of population to justify rail transit resides in Raleigh and Wake County — not Durham and Chapel Hill. The new plan radiates outward from Raleigh to destinations that make sense: the RDU International Airport, RTP and other termini. If it works, plans call for spurs to Durham and Chapel Hill. Go with my blessing.
Now, Bernie Reeves may not be a decision maker, and some forumers may even ignore him, but this endorsement shows that there is hope as more and more skeptics get on board. If done right, the new proposal may take off and materialize IF politics is left outside the process. With bi-partisan support and with both public and private involvement, we may see a promising transportation system materializing in the Triangle. With a few light-rail lines passing near the TTA rail stations, we can make this new vision work. As for Bernie, he was a big proponent of monorail and light-rail, if I recall correctly. His kept screaming about connecting meaningful destinations, but most of us wanted that, anyway.

I will continue my monologue with one more report on the new vision for mass transit in the Triangle. The News & Observer had an editorial on the new proposal: Right turn on rail (http://www.newsobserver.com/opinion/editorials/story/926468.html). Glad to see that this time there is more optimism and better cooperation between the private and public sectors.

The monologue continues with more interesting news:

Fund would help urban transit (http://www.newsobserver.com/news/story/958957.html) (News & Observer)
Ex-DOT Chief Proposes $1.9B in Transit Funding (http://www.wral.com/traffic/story/2469279/) (WRAL-5)

Let's see if this effort finds fertile ground. We need solid proposals, and even though we have only a few good examples of such visions in our state, we are going to the right direction, IMHO.

Jesus, this thread has been going on for three years and the last page is the same as the first... lol.

^^ :rofl:

Sad, isnt't it? You would think people would be excited to hear all the latest developments that relate to the transportation initiatives in the Triangle and post here like there is no other thread :lol: On a more serious note, I am very optimistic about the prospects of finally getting something that resembles a decent transportation system. This is the kind of news that may bring more urban communities in Raleigh - and the Triangle, as a whole.

We have the same problem in Milwaukee. For years we've been working on not only establishing a light rail system in the city but also a connector for Chicago/Milwaukee/Madison/St. Paul/Minneapolis. There's an insane amount of red tape to go through on top of finance issues, NIMBYs and conservative think tanks. Rail doesn't just happen... it takes time, patience and above all else, determination. Recently, significant strides have been taken and the future is looking quite bright for our rail system. However, it took a long time to get to that point (longer than this thread has been open) and it's by no means set in stone.

As you know, I have not yet been to Raleigh. From what I've read and heard though, density is a major hurdle for you. Milwaukee is a very dense city and population to support a rail system wouldn't be a problem. Our issue has to do mainly with politics and the strange and slightly ridiculous obsession with cars.

The way the Triangle is approaching this is good though... build up urban centers around the rail stations. It reminds me of the way suburban Washington DC is laid out. Cities like Reston, VA were pretty much built out of nothing and they've created decent sized downtowns with dense, urban living. Granted, there's no rail system there but it's the same principle. Build it and they will come.

We have the same problem in Milwaukee. For years we've been working on not only establishing a light rail system in the city but also a connector for Chicago/Milwaukee/Madison/St. Paul/Minneapolis. There's an insane amount of red tape to go through on top of finance issues, NIMBYs and conservative think tanks. Rail doesn't just happen... it takes time, patience and above all else, determination. Recently, significant strides have been taken and the future is looking quite bright for our rail system. However, it took a long time to get to that point (longer than this thread has been open) and it's by no means set in stone.

As you know, I have not yet been to Raleigh. From what I've read and heard though, density is a major hurdle for you. Milwaukee is a very dense city and population to support a rail system wouldn't be a problem. Our issue has to do mainly with politics and the strange and slightly ridiculous obsession with cars.

The way the Triangle is approaching this is good though... build up urban centers around the rail stations. It reminds me of the way suburban Washington DC is laid out. Cities like Reston, VA were pretty much built out of nothing and they've created decent sized downtowns with dense, urban living. Granted, there's no rail system there but it's the same principle. Build it and they will come.


In most cases, I don't think that density alone is, and necessarily should be, the primary driver behind getting light rail. I think that the actual driver should be commute patterns and freeway congestion. Any light rail system should seek to supplement the busiest thoroughfares, while at the same time reducing traffic congestion.

These days, it seems that some cites are seeking to have light rail for the wrong reasons (i.e. as a status symbol). If you look at density numbers alone, Raleigh should have had light rail before Charlotte, the former being a more dense city.

In most cases, I don't think that density alone is, and necessarily should be, the primary driver behind getting light rail. I think that the actual driver should be commute patterns and freeway congestion. Any light rail system should seek to supplement the busiest thoroughfares, while at the same time reducing traffic congestion.

These days, it seems that some cites are seeking to have light rail for the wrong reasons (i.e. as a status symbol). If you look at density numbers alone, Raleigh should have had light rail before Charlotte, the former being a more dense city.

But do you even have freeway congestion? I wouldn't think it based on this post:

What we need to keep in mind is that the 21-27 miles people drive each day, in most larger metros, take far more time to cover than the 31 miles per day that the average Raleighite drives. This is a very important detail. While we are a car-centric city, we don't have to waste our time behind the wheel like other people do. I'd rather drive 30 miles in 45 minutes, than 20 miles in 1.5 hours.

I agree with what ncnative said, and let me add one more thing: Both Republican senators (Burr and Dole) threw their support behind TTA's regional rail, and the Feds were willing to help. When the latter became bloated and "dysfunctional" (i.e. no stops at key locations), support was weakened, but hasn't disappeared. Hopefully, the new incarnation will be more convincing. There were opponents and supporters of this project from the entire political spectrum. The new proposal seems to be more attractive to both sides of the political spectrum.

Last, but not least, the freeway congestion in the Triangle is nowhere near as bas as in other metros. It will be a while before people get pissed enough to demand alternative means of transportation. Even worse, the density around most proposed stations is not even high enough to justify a regional rail. However, a light rail may be justified as density increases, provided we connect major employment centers. Just my 2 cents...

Raleigh needs to pass a 1/2 sales tax and built it own LRT ot Trolley line to get the ball rolling. Houston built its first LRT line with out federal funds. It is about 6 or 7 miles and it has now going to be expanded to over 30 miles.

Just getting the first line in, helps a lot to get a system going.

I think this is one of the options they are currently considering. This is a huge diversion from the stupid demands by TTA to get 61% funding by the Feds, which is exactly why we have more hopes that we may get things right. Hopefully, we'll move faster than rumored. i don't think we should have to wait many years before we get at least one decent light-rail line. Once we prove that we can handle things well, the Feds may look at the Triangle with a different eye and become more willing to help - not that they were not before.

I'm actually encouraged by some of the news I've been hearing lately with regard to both ramped-up and increased bus service (and for God's sake better shelters, etc.) as well as light rail and streetcars. Let's face it...Raleigh-Durham is one of the fastest growing metros in America. Get this thing built sooner than later. It will need to get built either way, and much better to get moving right now. This morning on WUNC (NPR station here) they had a really nice piece on Mitch Silver and the need to get serious about a truly effective transit system as the Triangle continues to grow. They also spoke with David King, and he commented on the success of the Charlotte line that's up. The density issue is interesting because it's a chicken or the egg thing to me. Build the rail, and you'll see wonderful dense urban projects spring up along the line. Density is coming anyway in Triangle development. At one time Southern California wasn't considered dense. Things change.

Regarding traffic--I would say we have some pretty serious congestion right now, particularly in major commuter corridors like I-40, 440, 15-501 and now 540. These are getting worse by the year. I remember when I-540 was actually not that bad--look at it now. While we're not DC or Atlanta (yet), I would say we have some fairly serious traffic issues for a metro region nearing 2 million. No alternatives to being a single passenger on I-40 is inexcusable and I can't even move on many thoroughfares where I live currently around rush hour. Hopefully the combination of increasing fuel and demand for better alternatives gives us the chance to vote in favor of a better and more mobile future.

I think that Mitch Silver is a vary positive force and his name will be associated with great things, provided the City Council will not boycott him. Like you, I am encouraged with the latest developments and the will to combine the transportation improvement efforts by the Triangle's major municipalities.

Hopefully we won't hit any snags early in the game, but rather start on the right foot:

Plan delays central RTP/Cary link (http://www.newsobserver.com/news/story/973379.html)
Questions shroud new rail plan (http://triangle.bizjournals.com/triangle/stories/2008/03/03/story9.html)

I'd rather see a rough start with a smooth ending than the other way around. It would be scary to walk into this vision with all the optimism, only to find out that it is not feasible months before we make the final decision and get this project rolling. I would like to hear more about how developers are going to help this effort with transit-oriented communities/projects.

More on the TTA's new direction... and name, as well as other transit news:

Triangle Transit no longer has Authority (http://triangle.bizjournals.com/triangle/stories/2008/03/17/daily7.html)
TTA sports new buses, new name (http://www.newsobserver.com/news/story/1004030.html)
Residents favor transit tax vote (http://www.newsobserver.com/news/story/1004092.html)

Not that I think a change in name was necessary, but a change in direction is. This morning, while driving, I was listening to the radio and a TT representative spoke of the new plans and the group's desire to connect the stops with the greenway and pedestrian-friendly areas. This makes a lot of sense, provided those areas are not in the middle of nowhere, or close to subdivisions where people have to drive all the way to the exit. Let's hope tht TT has enough developers backing them up with some plans for transit-oriented communities.

I saw the name change on one of their buses Monday night after a choir rehearsal at the Durham Arts Council. I liked the look and the logo. Much better than the old one.

Triangle Transit (http://triangletransit.org/)

Peace

Can't help "stealing" the image from the link you provided :) I am simpler person, particularly when it comes to colors, but I think this doesn't look as bad. I would like more blue instead of green, but who cares? If the new image goes along with some meaningful routes and frequent service (in the future) this remake of TTA will be worth it.

http://www.triangletransit.org/uploads/home_features/front-page-ad.png

I thought I would share an exchange I had with the Triangle J's Planning Director:


My comment:

I've been following the TTA and now the STAC in their plan to expand transportation alternatives in the Triangle. As a regular traveller and user of local transportation alternatives, I've had some experience with using systems that connect an urban core to a major airport. Yes, it's nice that Atlanta, Cleveland, Philadelphia, Baltimore and San Francisco have direct one-seat options to connect from the airport to downtown. But, yet I've just gotten done using Newark and JFK's AirTrain systems which offer connections to existing transport infrastructures. And, the local population seems to be taking to them rather well.


So, if RDU doesn't want to be directly on the link, it may be okay since the cost of doing it all at once may be more costly than what the taxpayers of the Triangle are willing to invest. I know in a theoretical discussion a transport novice may say they want a one-seat ride to the airport, but they don't have an idea to actually making it happen. Simply put, RDU is off the major transit axes between the urban centers in the Triangle.


It might be wiser to have a separate airport service that gets people around the parking lots, terminals, rental car lots and rail transport hubs anyway. I can think of what Newark, JFK and Dallas have done or are planning to do as a way to offer an incremental approach/compromise which satisfies all of the stakeholders in the discussion. And, if it's built in such a way as to allow a more direct link down the road, then all the better.


RDU is going to have to do more to upgrade it's physical plant to allow a rail-based transit access. From where they are right now, it's either going to have to be on the roof like Dallas or Newark or underground like Chicago/O'Hare. I imagine that when it comes time to demolish Terminal A as well as the old Terminal C garage the opportunity to build an underground access point might be possible. But, yet I also can envision an elevated loop connecting the outlying parking/rental car lots.


Response:

Your thinking seems right on target. It's not that RDU is resisting a connection; in fact, RDU has said they will plan to come meet any regional system passing close by. However, a direct connection would require pulling any line off the direct axis between other major destinations and be very expensive. And unless an RDU line goes directly to the terminals, travelers would have to transfer anyway, so whether it is a half mile away or 3 miles away would be unlikely to make a significant difference.

I am sending your message and this reply on to Ann Hartell, who is compiling comments and suggestions for the members of the STAC.

John Hodges-Copple, Planning Director
Triangle J Council of Governments
PO Box 12276
Research Triangle Park, NC 27709

From a planning standpoint, it will be a nightmare. For some reasons, though, I do not see any mention of Brier Creek. A connection with the latter should not be very hard. Imagine a light-rail line that connects downtown to Brier Creek, intersecting another line, going from Brier Creek to TT's regional rail proposal. Not the easiest scenario, I am sure, but connecting RDU with Brier Creek may have a few advantages.

Thanks for sharing your ideas and the response you received.

^^

When cities start returning to their heritage of streetcars and regional rail, there seems to be two ways of going about it. Saint Louis went with an abandoned Rock Island/Wabash right of way when they built MetroLink. There was a new flyover built at the same time to Lambert airport, but the core of the system lies in adaptive reuse of old rail infrastructure. And, there is no street running of any kind. This mirrors what Triangle Transit was trying to do.

Now, Buffalo does more street running with their line as does Houston. This would go more along the line of thinking you've brought up with Brier Creek. It's certainly possible to do this kind of project with less cost, but I can't begin to wonder how much space the planners would have to reserve along Glenwood Avenue. There's a certain amount of median available west of Crabtree, but you would have to shoehorn it onto traffic lanes once you get to the Carolina Country Club.

I'm not sure how many folks would buy in to a system which sacrifices roadway space. Tunneling would be an option for some areas inside the Beltline, but then you look at a much higher cost to do so. It's a similar kind of opposition raised when Berkeley resisted surface or elevated construction with the BART and what has happened to parts of the planned Dulles extension of the DC Metro around Tysons Corner when local opposition insisted on portions going underground.

If I'm not mistaken, for any federal participation there has to be a certain amount of farebox return for the investment. When that expectation isn't met, then all bets are off. I believe that's what mothballed the first TTA proposal. Granted no system ever pays for itself, but there has to be some proportional return on the investment to qualify for federal assistance. And when you factor in cost overruns and the initial cash outlay spirals ever higher like New York is seeing right now with the new Second Avenue subway, the 7 line extension and the Fulton Street transportation center downtown.

So it goes without saying, the trouble we're seeing is that cities are trying to reverse the effects of seventy years of land-use planning/building that was centered around the free movement of the automobile. As our population expands, available land becomes scarcer. What's ironic is that the whole tear-down argument is going to expand at some point when all of those suburban tracts laid down in the early 20th century begin to be looked upon as blighted and the whole area is torn out and re-built for higher density re-development. England and Japan have kept their homes tightly built in, and the US may be catching up to this idea. In another generation or two, our current love of quarter-acre (or larger) lots could disappear. Now, there's an interesting thought...

Peace :2cents:

Raleigh will have a Hell of a hard time with a light-rail line going all the way to Brier Creek. While I love the idea. I cannot say it is financially feasible right now. Maybe in the future, if a widening for Glenwood Ave is planned. In the meantime, here is another little report: Triangle Transit sitting on $33M in tax money earmaked for trains (http://triangle.bizjournals.com/triangle/stories/2008/03/24/story4.html).

Glad to know some people are finally getting it: Funding for Transportation Ideas Still in Question (http://www.wral.com/traffic/story/2622953/). Hopefully, we'll find a way to pay for this great initiative. Another good article for you to read: Commuter finds longer drive worth price (http://www.newsobserver.com/news/growth/traffic/gas/story/1012295.html).

^^

I'm just curious as to what gasoline price threshold will trigger a change in this debate. We may have not gotten there yet, but it's got to be close. Just curious...

Peace :2cents:

I don't know... Even with these prices, we cannot compare to other countries, particularly in Europe, where people pay a lot more to fill up the tank. Not to mention that most of us like the freedom to move around using our own transportation. Tough to tell how far we can go without good public transit. We can't blame the skeptics, though. Without density and destinations near and along transit lines, there will be no compelling reason for people to use public transportation. It all depends on the city and county governments.

^^Gas should be $10 a gallon. :D

g-man, I am glad you are willing to pay that much per gallon. Move to Germany, where they get pretty close to that, according to a friend of mine, who lives there now ;) All right, he doesn't pay close to $10, but he pays over $7 per gallon. In fact, the price of the gasoline has been reported (http://worldblog.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/03/18/781155.aspx) as high as $8.60 per gallon. According to the same source, Germans seem to love their highways:
...

Still loving the autobahn
But despite the rising costs, Germans have continued their love affair with the open road.

"Our turnover is continuously good. We actually see an increase in fuel purchases every year," said Lars Watzek, the manager of a gas station in Regensburg, Germany.

"Every day, people walk in and complain about the rising prices, but honestly, I don't think our customers will drive less because of that," said Watzek. "Germans are in love with their cars."

In fact, new car registrations in Germany increased by 25 percent this February compared to figures from a year ago. And German manufacturers scored double-digit gains in sales, with Europe's biggest car maker, Volkswagen, leading the way with more than 89,000 new cars sold in the first two months of 2008, according to the German motor industry association, VDA. Last year alone, Germany registered a total of 3.5 million new cars.

...
Of course, you can always move to Venezuela and pay less than $0.20 per gallon. You and Hugo Chavez have a lot in common, plus the girls in Venezuela are pretty hot... Not all, but most I have seen :lol: Or you can opt for Turkmenistan, although I am not sure the girls there are as attractive as in Venezuela ;)

g-man, I am glad you are willing to pay that much per gallon. Move to Germany, where they get pretty close to that, according to a friend of mine, who lives there now ;) All right, he doesn't pay close to $10, but he pays over $7 per gallon. In fact, the price of the gasoline has been reported (http://worldblog.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/03/18/781155.aspx) as high as $8.60 per gallon. According to the same source, Germans seem to love their highways:

Of course, you can always move to Venezuela and pay less than $0.20 per gallon. You and Hugo Chavez have a lot in common, plus the girls in Venezuela are pretty hot... Not all, but most I have seen :lol: Or you can opt for Turkmenistan, although I am not sure the girls there are as attractive as in Venezuela ;)

I'd love driving more thaan I already do ... if I could drive as fast as I could. Hitler invented the highway system. Americans ruined it.

^^ :rofl:

Like Sammy Hagar says: "I can't drive 55"!!!

^^

I suppose I like driving like anybody else. But, I also take transit when it makes sense. Who's to say what ruined it or not, we simply have more people in the same amount of space than there was 60 years ago when highways came into fashion. And, I suspect we're going to have to be able to live with less land around us to accomodate that growth in population. When certain thresholds are reached, then the economies of scale will support more efficient means of mass transit.

Peace :2cents:

^^ :rofl:

Like Sammy Hagar says: "I can't drive 55"!!!

How dare you listen to music that's not heavy metal. :bash: :D

[I]You dumb ass!!! :bash: What do you think Sammy Hagar played: jazz music? :lol:

The Special Transit Advisory Commission has just made it's draft report available on their website:

Regional Transit Vision Plan (http://www.transitblueprint.org/stac.shtml)

From a quick look there seemed to be some noticeable points:

1) A greatly expanded regional bus system.
2) Diesel-multiple unit heavy rail line from Durant Road to Duke. (TTA)
3) LRT or BRT line from downtown Durham to Duke and then UNC.

Some absent points:

1) The RDU connection.
2) The Eastran system connecting Wilson to Goldsboro via downtown Raleigh.

There was a mention of the discussion with RDU and it seems as though the airport is putting their consolidated rental car facility as a higher priority. When built, it seems as though RDU is looking to place it to the west of the terminals with closer access to I-540. That would then be their airport-to-rail link. A rail connection definitely seems to be a long way off and an express bus to DT Raleigh and DT Durham is a more realistic proposition.

I did notice that one of my comments did make it into the document. :nuts:

Peace :2cents:

Finally, a vision is being created!!! Still, I see a lot of shortfalls in the rail system they propose, but I am sure the cities of Raleigh and Durham will eventually connect some dots with city-wide light-rail corridors. Someone who live near Durant Rd has no reason to use the rail to RTP, as I-540 would serve as a much faster venue. It's good to see a plan, though.

I'll be very curious as to how the DMU system will terminate at Duke Hospital and be interlaced with the BRT/LRT system to Chapel Hill. When TTA wanted to have it run in front of the Erwin Road garage and possibly even go across Fulton, there was a large outcry from Duke's administration at the time. The main sticking point was the track structure's block of the hospital's main 'money shot' view as it extended over to the VA site. I'm guessing it could go on the north side of that garage or angle in along the coal/power station spur, but I'd be interested in how it interchanges with the campus transit/circulation system. Either way, it's most likely going to be a destination stop without a park/ride capacity.

Peace :2cents:

^^

This was the response I got back from my comment in regards to the STAC plan:

Plans for the Duke Medical Center DMU station are not complete and
additional coordination with Duke University will be required,
particularly as the University and Medical Center update their master
plans. However, based on our negotiations to date, the Duke Medical
Center DMU station would be, as you have suggested, on the south side of
Elba Street and north side of the garage which is located at the corner
of Fulton and Erwin. Eastbound (towards Downtown Durham) DMU tracks
would follow Elba Street and cross NC 147 in the vicinity of the Elba
Street highway ramp. The Duke station platform is elevated on the west
(Fulton Street) end and at grade at the east end. Patrons could
therefore access the platform at grade on the east end and through a
stairway/elevator structure onto Fulton Street, a short walk from the
escalator that is linked to the tunnel under Erwin Road. Hopefully a
pedestrian bridge over Fulton Street that would link the station
platform and the Veterans Administration Hospital could be negotiated.

While not provided at the Duke station, park and ride options will be
located at the 9th Street station which is easily accessible from the
Swift Street exit, then onto Pettigrew Street using intersection
connections would specifically allow left turns. This station is also
anticipated to attract walk and bike to transit as well as kiss and ride
(drop-off) access from adjacent neighborhoods. All of the stations will
have local bus connections and in the case of the Duke Med and 9th
Street Stations, Duke University transit as well.

The corridor reserved by the City of Durham for the fixed guideway
connection between Durham and UNC Hospital is on the north side of Erwin
Road. More refinement will be required to determine the exact
configuration of the station, but because both Light Rail Transit (LRT)
and Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) vehicles could run in the street, it Is
feasible to develop stations on Erwin Road. Currently, the LRT/BRT line
continues on to the 9th Street DMU Station and then terminates at the
Downtown Durham Multimodal Center. Patrons traveling between Duke and
Chapel Hill who may want to continue into Downtown Durham would not need
to change transit vehicles - although the transfer at each of the 3
stations would be easy. Based on studying travel patterns throughout
our region, trips between Chapel Hill and RTP are more likely to take a
transit option that would provide connections to the Triangle Metro
Center DMU station and then onto the airport or north RTP; or southbound
on the DMU rail service to Cary and Raleigh.

Juanita Shearer-Swink
Triangle Transit


Now, if only DUMC could get it together to extend a tunnel over to the VA and even burrow the PRT up to the surgery center/offices and parking garage. That would be huge. I always thought I was taking my life in my own hands when crossing from the VA to Duke Hospital during my fellowship training!!

Peace :2cents:

Thanks for sharing the response, dbearhug. I truly hope they do this right, as it has massive potential for creating more coordination between TTA's proposal and future light-rail lines. Personally, I would skip the buses, because they do not offer the same excitement as the LTR :lol:

Thanks for sharing the response, dbearhug. I truly hope they do this right, as it has massive potential for creating more coordination between TTA's proposal and future light-rail lines. Personally, I would skip the buses, because they do not offer the same excitement as the LRT :lol:

Actually, I do have a confession to make. Whenever I need to satisfy my addiction to fixed-guideway transit (and can't make it to NYC), I will somehow find an excuse to use the PRT between the Erwin Road garage and Duke Clinic. So, I do have a soft spot in my heart for this area which was where my first job in the Triangle happened many years ago. I hope it's done well, too.

Oh, BTW: On our way from Raleigh to a rehearsal at Duke Chapel last night, I was envisioning an elevated track structure running along Elba Street as well as visualizing LRT trackage on Erwin. Kind of cool...

Peace :2cents:

Yes, that PRT is awesome!!! Very cute, and practical.

^^

Now, here's the potential future of PRT at ULTRAprt. It's being developed for Heathrow airport's new Terminal 5 as a means to get passengers from the car park to the terminal. If it's a success, then it could be expanded to the rest of the airport. With this image, I could almost imagine a PRT system around RTP to connect to the DMU hub in the park. Kind of cool, huh?

http://www.ultraprt.com/stills/Still2.jpg

Peace :2cents:

That is a VERY cool concept :okay: Can't thank you enough, although I would have loved to see a smaller image, so I don't have to scroll all the way to the right :lol: I would have LOVED to see something like this in our area!!!

That is a VERY cool concept :okay: Can't thank you enough, although I would have loved to see a smaller image, so I don't have to scroll all the way to the right :lol: I would have LOVED to see something like this in our area!!!

Sorry about that, mate. I didn't realize that it was going to be as large as it was. And who knows, if the testing gets worked out in Cardiff, Wales and Heathrow, it could still happen.

Peace :2cents:

Just kidding :) It was a very nice rendering and showed a lot of detail :okay:

Got some update for y'all: Regional transit plan goes to Triangle leaders (http://www.wral.com/traffic/story/2921591/). The best part, in my opinion, is this:
Among its key recommendations:


An enhanced bus network throughout the Triangle that includes express service to and from Raleigh-Durham International Airport and rush-hour-only bus service to outlying communities.
Rail service stretching 56 miles from Chapel Hill to north Raleigh, utilizing diesel rail cars and Light Rail Transit.
"Circulators" – initially buses and possibly later, streetcars or trolleys – operating in downtown areas and combined with a system of park-and-ride lots.

I know it's not real sexy, but perhaps cities the size of Raleigh could get rail transit up-and-running more quickly with modest systems like Nashville using conventional stock and existing lines. I think they'd spent all of $79 million to get it running.

Here in Orlando, our starter commuter line is going to cost over a billion. :nuts:

I saw a guy in the video who did not want rail, only buses and more roads. I do not think the people in the triangle want all their land covered with freeways. Buses will do ok if they can run in their own lane. BRTs are supported by the feds as being cheaper than LRT.

But if you can get a LRT line operating away from the jam roads, they can carry a lane of traffic and takes up a lot less land than a highway. LRTs do not need off ramps, on ramps and a wide shoulder. If you are going over 25 miles LRT will be too expensive, so you will need something like a DMU line.

Charlotte has ordered 3 more train units to help keep up with the rider demands. LRT are clear and do not causes green house gases Buses do but cause green house gases unless they are electric.

As you can see here, the South Blue line in South End in Charlotte, it does not take up as much space as 2 lane highway with shoulders.

http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b287/Wlangston1/LRT/P5236604.jpg

http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b287/Wlangston1/LRT/P5236605.jpg

I think that most opponents or light rail are not against the latter, but against an implementation of it at this point in time. Most of them say "not for now, but we should plan for it, for the future". From financial standpoint, I think they are correct. I, however, can't wait to get light rail in Raleigh, assuming it will be useful in terms of destinations.

I think the Triangle will have a lot of pressure to come up with some plan soon, if gas prices keep going up. There is talk that gas could be $5.00 a gallion by end of summer.

I tkink the Triangle is in big trouble in high gas prices. Too many people have to travel a long distance for work. TTA and CAT will have to get on the ball and improve bus service. If people are taking to buses in Raleigh like they are here in Charlotte, you are going to have to buy a fleet of buses.

Well, at least the state is stepping up to the plate to get more transit connections between Raleigh and Charlotte:

More train service planned on Raleigh-Charlotte route (http://www.wral.com/traffic/story/2989028/)

However, if my sources are right on this, the plan was attempted a year or two ago. But, Norfolk-Southern put up some kind of resistance. I'm guessing that with gas prices being what they are, NS may have yielded to pressure. That, or they're going to get some kind of bonus for clearing their schedule. It's always a weird relationship that NS has with the North Carolina Railroad. I'm sure there will be more details later.

Has anybody heard if there will be any new equipment purchased? Or will they simply take the same trainset and simply go back and forth twice a day? I know they have the coaches and the motive power, but I always thought that they were for the Western NC service that has yet to appear.

Peace :2cents:

Charlotte has ordered 3 more train units to help keep up with the rider demands. LRT are clear and do not causes green house gases Buses do but cause green house gases unless they are electric.

As you can see here, the South Blue line in South End in Charlotte, it does not take up as much space as 2 lane highway with shoulders.


Drooling over LRT photos. I'm in love!!! :lol:

Peace :2cents:

No idea about the details, but I am ecstatic about having additional connections with Charlotte. Maybe some day we'll see this line flourishing and hopefully become faster ;) A little over 3 hours is still too much, particularly on a dedicated line, without traffic blocking the train :lol:

All right, dbearhug... Do you want to drool? Drool over these images of the light rail line in Athens (Greece), if you like them :)

http://www.railfaneurope.net/pix/gr/trams/DSC_1023.jpg

http://www.railfaneurope.net/pix/gr/trams/DSC_1116.jpg

http://i59.photobucket.com/albums/g319/greecelightning/mini-TrainTripinAthens204.jpg

^^

Suh-weet!!! :banana:

Now, if this is the Athens Tram, which line is it? T1 or T2? And, where are we looking at?

On a separate note, my ideal retirement job is to be one of the volunteers riding on the Piedmont from Raleigh to Charlotte 1-2 times a week. On the off days, I'd be tooling back and forth between Duke and Durant Road on the Triangle Transit regional rail!!!

Peace :2cents:

I believe there are several lines and you can tell by the numbers. In the photos above: 5, 1 and 4. if you are familiar with Athens I will give you the locations.

Oops, I almost forgot to share some good news: Triangle Transit plots big bus service expansion (http://triangle.bizjournals.com/triangle/stories/2008/06/09/story4.html). Really nice for the Triangle's mass transit future, although we read nothing in this article about light rail :( Still, it is awesome news!!!

I believe there are several lines and you can tell by the numbers. In the photos above: 5, 1 and 4. if you are familiar with Athens I will give you the locations.

I saw the numeric designations which threw me off. My only understanding of the Athens Tramway, Attiko Metro, etc. is from what I've read online, and how they were resurrections of two tram lines which had been abandoned in the past. (I can surmise that the English versions of those websites aren't complete translations since not every link has a non-Greek equivalent.) Anyway, from what I've seen they appear to be a beautiful way to reach coastal areas away from the hustle/bustle of central Athens/Syntagma Square. As to the locations from your photos, I can only surmise their approximate map positions never having been to Athens. (Maybe someday!!)

Thanks for sharing.

Peace :2cents:

Let's bring this thread from the dead with a VERY nice article on the new vision for public transit in the area, particularly the rail portion of it: The Longest-Running Game in Town (http://www.metronc.com/article/?id=1680). The article is taken from the latest Raleigh Metro magazine and illustrates in a very clear way where the obstacles take place. Just reading about the many different players gave me a headache :bash: Anyway, there are many articles out there that focus on blaming, but not many of them succeed in showing the real picture. This is a very good read, IMHO, and I hope you find this article useful.

^^

Now, here's the potential future of PRT at ULTRAprt. It's being developed for Heathrow airport's new Terminal 5 as a means to get passengers from the car park to the terminal. If it's a success, then it could be expanded to the rest of the airport. With this image, I could almost imagine a PRT system around RTP to connect to the DMU hub in the park. Kind of cool, huh?

http://www.ultraprt.com/stills/Still2.jpg

Peace :2cents:

wow, just got a huge chub! sorry, but that concept is awesome.:cheers: