Public Comments Summary

January 8, 2001

Mallard Creek Presbyterian Church, Charlotte, NC

 

 

Purpose of the meeting: 

To review the MIS process with the public and receive citizens reaction to the screened transit alternatives in the Northeast Corridor.

 

Attendees: 18

 

Staff Present:

City of Charlotte Lead Staff:

Kelly Goforth, Project Manager, CATS

Kathy Cornett, Land-Use Manager, C-M Planning Commission

Jessica Stipe, CR specialist, CATS

Brian Nadolny, Transit Planner, CATS

Vida Covington, CATS

Keith Richardson, Charlotte Corporate Communications

 

Consultant Team:

Myrna Valdez, PBQ&D

Debbie Porter, PBQ&D

David Holden, LDR

 

Public Comments

Questions Following Presentation

Q:  How much interface does CATS have with planning, zoning, and etc. to keep informed of developments such as land-use and roads?

A:  The Charlotte-Mecklenburg Planning Commission is partnering with the Charlotte Area Transit System on these corridor studies.   Each corridor is assigned a land-use manager, which means this member of the corridor study team is involved in each stage of development, focusing on linking land-use to the transit alternatives, so that we have land-use in place to support our transit system.  C-M staff will examine zoning requests within the corridors.  And in some cases, since we still have several alternatives, we are not able to identify specific alignments or technologies for petitions, and so we have recommended to them to postpone any action, until an alternative is selected. 

Q:  At the last meeting for the NE corridor, there was a LRT alternative proposed along the proposed corridor on Graham St., why was it not considered for further study?  With that proposed alignment, travel time would be faster, and it would encourage development along that corridor.

A:  The proposed corridor would create a spine that would serve only area close by therefore ignoring some of the outlying areas.

Q:  Would the UNCC portion of the BRT travel beyond David Burnham Road and continue to parallel I-85?

A:  Yes, it would continue on along I-85.

 

Breakout Session

What are the advantages/disadvantages of each alternative?  (A) Advantages  (D) Disadvantages

Alternative NE-3:  Bus Rapid Transit on I-85 plus Rapid Bus

Willingness of Cabarrus County/Concord to pay their share of line beyond county line is a concern.

Why do you turn off I-85?

What type of stations will there by along I-85, i.e. Park-n-Ride lots?

BRT offers relatively quick trips. (A)

BRT will spur economic development. (A)

BRT is not user friendly, especially having route on I-85.

Alternative NE-4:  LRT on NCRR to N. Tryon via Sugar Creek with Bus Rapid on Harris Blvd.

Seems to serve what we observe as the greatest traffic needs of the area. (A)

 

Alternative NE—6:  Streetcar on N. Tryon/BRT on US 29 with Rapid Bus on Harris Blvd.

Streetcars suggest more stops. (D)

Seems more like a sightseeing tour (D)

Does not provide good transit service to commuters (D)

Is there redevelopment planned along N. Tryon to encourage/boost ridership?

Provide express service in addition to frequent stop service

More expensive but has real opportunity to create re-development in N. Tryon and get commuters in Univ. Research Park (A)

People will use it for shopping. (A)

Can we afford to have BRT/LRT system?

Will local bus routes on Statesville be eliminated once BRT service is implemented? 

Make sure bus system has both local and express service

Most rail systems have a lot of stops further out, but fewer as you get closer into the city

System has to be attractive to choice riders and car owners, and it must provide efficient service.

Where has BRT worked in the U.S.?

Many jobs are being created in this corridor.

Express service will get people out of their cars.

Rail is sexy.

There is stigma attached to bus service whether it's deserved or not.

What is the average trip time on a bus?

Density will affect the success of rail.

It seems that BRT is a transit planner's idea.  If that's the case build it on I-85 without constructing a dedicated ROW to avoid waste of investment (if system is proven unsuccessful.)

If streetcar on N. Tryon is fast enough, BRT will not be needed.

 

Comment Sheets (5 returned)

Q:  How important do you think each of the following Major Investment Study Goals are?   Scale 1-5, ranging from not important to very important

Improve access and mobility

Three— selected 5

One— selected 4

One— selected 3

 

Coordinate growth and transportation

Three—selected 5

Two—selected 4

 

Locate stations to maximize development opportunities

Two—selected 5

One—selected 4

Two—selected 3

 

Preserve and protect the environment

One—selected 5

Three—selected 4

One—selected 2

 

Provide effective and efficient transit options

Four—selected 5

One—selected 3

 

In relation to the goals above, how well do you think the following alternatives will serve the corridor?  Ranging 1-5 from not well to very well

Alternative NE-3:  Bus Rapid Transit on I-85 plus Rapid Bus

Two—selected 4

One—selected 2

One—selected 1

One—no response

 

Alternative NE-4:  Light Rail Transit (LRT) on NSRR to N. Tryon via Sugar Creek

Two—selected 5

One—selected 4

One—selected 3

One—no response

 

Alternative NE-5:  Light Rail Transit on N. Tryon with Dedicated Right of Way

One—selected 4

Two—selected 3

One—selected 1

One—no response

 

Alternative NE-6:  Streetcar on N. Tryon to the Weave plus Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) on US 29

Two—selected 5

One—selected 4

Two—selected 2

 

Additional Comments

North Tryon isn't the place to put LRT.

I think putting stops at Craighead is a poor location—Industrial sites along Tryon is good and could encourage revitalization.

We want rapid service.

Serve neighborhood near Mount Holly/Huntersville Road

We need improvement in our existing transit and roadway systems.

Roadway system in NE Corridor has been neglected.

Have there been studies on density along line and Center City destinations?

What will be the impact of I-485 improvements?

We need continuity.

HOV lanes should be incorporated into BRT system.

Light rail out N. Graham to Neal with extension through IBM to W.T. Harris and another extension across I-85 to University area sounds like the best idea.

People have 1 or 2 automobiles.  They have pride in them.  I don't see many people riding this system.  People enjoy riding to the malls whose owners have invested a great deal in parking lots to accommodate those cars.