Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
There's an interesting story on the N&O website today regarding the push for the non-preferred option for the higher speed rail route. This is the one that will NOT skirt through the Five Points neighborhood. Apparently, the neighborhood is doing everything that they can do to change the minds of those recommending the route that skirts the east side of their homes. I'll have to say that the proposal linked below is pretty darned ambitious. It's also bound to be hugely expensive. One of the main reasons why the route that was chosen was chosen is because the alternate would have to close lots of DT streets in the Glenwood South district and it would essentially cut it off from the rest of DT. To allay those concerns, the proposal elevates the tracks for several blocks so that traffic can continue under it. (think Chicago's L) Needless to say, this proposal comes with its own set of headaches for others in addition to expense.
As usual, I think it's interesting to see the comments of others following the article. An obvious anti-Meeker (the mayor) comment suggested that it run through his backyard. I guess nobody told that person that Meeker's neighborhood has a maximum security prison behind it. I think that I'd prefer a train. Crosstown Traffic - Stop that train: DOT says Capital Blvd flyover scheme won't fly | newsobserver.com blogs
It's good that the issues are being debated in the way that they are so that concerns are fairly discussed in open forum. Seems that the 'elevated proposal' won't get off the ground (no pun intented) due to the following:-
* Require a too-steep grade of 2 percent to elevate the tracks 12 feet, and impose other constraints on CSX freight traffic.
* Cause problems for the Cotton Mill historic site and condominums on the east side of Capital.
* Put trains on a bridge running close by the windows of condominium residents in the West at North tower on the west side of Capital
* Require DOT to relocate all the properties beneath the new bridge.
* Require extra construction to elevate high-speed rail tracks and Norfolk Southern tracks, and to lower West Street in order to make room beneath the tracks for West.
This rail thing is going to kill downtown no matter what they do. The dream of the railroad to have no crossings can finally be realized as the trains blow through an empty dowtown Raleigh.
As a "know nothing" about engineering matters, but having seen this sort of thing in other places, I thought it would neat to have elevated tracks. But I couldn't picture them having enough of a run to get it to the elevation needed. Now an engineer is telling us it won't work.
I'll be honest, I haven't followed this one bit. Did I hear that the train is proposed as a hi speed link thru Raleigh from whatever points N&S ? And, does this mean that it will be used in the triangle for commuting from downtown Raleigh to Durham? I did hear that one proposal might shut down Jones St. for thru traffic.
Guess I need to read up on it in my "spare" time!
BTW, which streets in Five Points are potentially affected? Are we talking the houses nr the current tracks off Fairview nr the convenience store?
This rail thing is going to kill downtown no matter what they do. The dream of the railroad to have no crossings can finally be realized as the trains blow through an empty dowtown Raleigh.
Please tell us why you think it will kill downtown? I live there and don't share your concern. The route that's currently preferred minimizes the number of street closings to 1 in Glenwood South and (perhaps) 1 in the Warehouse District. I'm not sure about that one.
To the best that I can understand, the Five Point folks are fighting it for two reasons:
The route skirts their neighborhood on existing active tracks.
The route closes their neighorhood's "back door" access to/from DT via Capital Boulevard.
I too would be annoyed and put out if I lived there. I especially wouldn't want the street to be closed and my access options reduced. However, the track that they are already next to is active and trains are already moving through the area regularly. When people bought their houses next to it, they knew it was an active track. They propose that the active track be moved to the (basically) inactive track that runs between Logan's Nursery and The Cotton Mill Condos. This is a service yard track that doesn't carry regular active routes but rather very slow moving trains in and out of the service yard. In my opinion, they just want to make their headache someone else's problem at someone else's huge expense.
I know that this has been discussed before but I still question why the trains can't slow down while in downtown so that the crossings can remain open. For me, this should be an option that's exploited to its fullest. Perhaps this will put aside some of the concerns for the chosen route?
Maybe it won't kill donwtown as a whole, but if I were a business owner in the Glenwood south area, I would be very concerned about what they are wanting to do around Jones Street. I just don't see any option that will keep things flowing there and someone, somewhere is going to lose out as people adjust their traffic patterns to the access that is provided.
I deally, I think we would want as much of a connection as possible between the business distric and the place where there is stuff to do. Cutting that off just can;t be a good idea.
I agree that an elevated section seems to make the most sense. OK, maybe there are some grad issues, but nothing that can't be worked out. I just am not sure how much credence we shoudl give to some guy from the DOT, when they are perfectly happy to build major highway connections all over with two lanes going in one direction and one in the other, like somehow half the traffic will just decide to take another route in the morning or afternoon. Also, if the condo people think there is much difference between this train going by at grade and on a bridge, they are deluding themselves. Its still going to have plenty of impact. At least a bridge will keep their access intact.
There was a presentation last night at the city council meeting of a "tweaked" version of what we call "NC4" or the "NC1/2 Avoidance Alternative" that addressed everything brought up by NCDOT as reasons why they don't think it would work. "NC4" would also have the benefit of tying in with the Capital Bl. improvements and the whole gateway concept.
The presentation was put together by some of our group, in collaboration with the person who first drafted "NC4" and was well-received by both the council and NCDOT... if it survives further technical scrutiny this could be the closest thing to a win/win situation possible, since they say existing rail corridors must be used.
I'm part of the group working to oppose the NC3 route, as the Glenwood-Brooklyn neighborhood is very much affected also. Glenwood-Brooklyn as a neighborhood, and the Five Points CAC (we're in that area) have also voted our support of the high speed rail project as a whole... I personally am very much in favor of increased rail infrastructure... just do it right and with forethought.
I would suggest reading what Bob Geary at the Independent has been writing on this issue, facts without the condescending spin... his article about last night's City Council meeting (which supersedes the N&O article you link to):
He's gone so far as to come to our CAC meeting and refuse to speak to a member of our group he knew wrote an LTE objecting to his slanted coverage (we are not wild-eyed revolutionaries by any stretch of the imagination ;-)
I will quote my comment in response to the above:
Quote:
I RESPECTFULLY ASK: WHAT MEETING DID YOU ATTEND, MR. SICELOFF?
Tue, 08/31/2010 - 12:53 — glenwoodbrooklynite
I've been waiting for the "snobby whiny NIMBYites" commentary to appear any day now, but to see it from an actual reporter like this is disappointing. I know it's easier to get website hits by playing the class warfare card but geez... this issue is important and deserves more than the few quotes and observations you present in your post.
No mention of the a large part of the meeting--the Glenwood-Brooklyn neighborhood position paper presented with a ton of specific hard references to issues.
No mention of how we also voted our support of SEHSR as a whole.
You completely missed things like how the "... or our famous hundred-year-old terracotta sewer pipes." line was spoken as sarcasm, which was obvious by how the crowd responded. Did you ask people when they began thinking about this issue before declaring "The mood changed after Norfolk Southern launched its own campaign against the proposal." because that isn't what I've been hearing here on the ground.
By focusing on the "soft" emotional parts of the presentations and presenting our group of concerned citizens as a stereotype, you do the city of Raleigh a great disservice. I would expect as the flagship newspaper in our city there would be efforts to foster fruitful discussion instead of presenting dismissive, incomplete and misleading accounts of what's happening with the people concerned.
Our neighborhood groups have gotten more info out about about the issues involved in the last few weeks than the city and NCDOT has in the last few years... that shouldn't have been needed. I feel bad for other areas who may not get out and advocate for themselves in time...
Whatever your opinion, you can and should state it to NCDOT on this form, the comment period has been extended to September 10... why did they extend the time? Because we raised a ruckus.
Okay, end of rant...
Last edited by weblackey; 09-01-2010 at 11:05 AM..
Reason: Evicted the typos that snuck in out of the night...
Why can't the trains travel on existing tracks through the city and then switch on the outskirts of downtown?
The fact is that the public transportation infrastructure needs to be built NOW. Not when population is at max capacity and/or property values are double or triple what they are now.
HS_DUDE:
We agree completely about the need for our public transportation infrastructure to be updated, the sooner the better... but do you have any thing to say about the practicalities behind making that happen in the real world?
To answer your question: The existing tracks are not rated for high-speed travel, they need to be welded together and set on rubber and concrete footings. What's there now are the antiquated staked-on-wood-ties tracks.
HS_DUDE:
We agree completely about the need for our public transportation infrastructure to be updated, the sooner the better... but do you have any thing to say about the practicalities behind making that happen in the real world?
Who is the "we" that agrees with the proposal for high speed rail that is being rammed down our throats? The many will pay for the few that ride it.
Last edited by Green Irish Eyes; 10-09-2010 at 12:20 PM..
Reason: Deleted off-topic comment
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
