A couple other value-add features of the greenway idea:
1 - creates greater equity in access to greenway system for people living south of I-40. We currently have no direct access.
2 - could provide direct access to the central prison property and Governor Morehead school property, which will eventually be redeveloped. Couple links on that topic: link 1 and link 2. Also search “Connections 81.2”
I think Kate Pearce would be a good person to reach out to. I believe she’s with the city’s Parks & Greenways department. If the city already has plans in mind for varying levels of proposals to Norfolk Southern it would be good to find out what those plans are and how the discussion on this site might contribute to such proposals. I think Kate probably knows what the city has in mind if Norfolk Southern is willing to come to the table. Side note - does the city’s website not have a staff directory?? I couldn’t find any contact info for Kate.
This video is a good primer on how parks and greenways bonds work. This is the working session on the new parks bond from last month. Meeting starts at 7’ mark of video.
I believe Patrick Buffkin was on the Parks, Recreation and Greenway Advisory Board for many years before being elected to council. Maybe he’s also a person to present this to? Of course, the area in question is in District D - so Saige Martin should be in the loop.
I first emailed Kate Pearce about this idea back in November 2016, and incidentally while looking for that email I found the old autocad drawing I did of the route that diverges from the NCRR north of I-40.
It got about the response one would expect for something sent out of the blue like that. (Which is the usual response I get for these sorts of things, most likely because of this). Basically “Thanks, that’s interesting! We’ll keep it on file along with the other 10,000,000 public comments!”
There are many stakeholders for this sort of thing, and all of them have their opinions and suggestions. It is very difficult to rise above the level of background noise in the first place, and when the suggestion is complicated and full of moving parts like this, absent some political momentum behind it, planners tend to see suggestions like this and … not dismiss or ignore them off hand, but quickly place them in the “not feasible” bucket and move on.
I would love to meet up but I’m out of town. I only pay for a condo in downtown Raleigh. I apparently don’t actually live there. My wife does tho. Anyway, we’re out of town for her b-day. The next day I’m in Raleigh for a full day is 2/24 (unless you count this coming Thursday).
@orulz@dbearhugnc Can you guys tell me where exactly control point Southern Junction is located? I have made the following claim in the proposal and want to make sure it’s true:
Control Point Southern Junction is north of Union Station between Morgan Street and Hillsborough Street
Also, where can I search for control points, switches, crossings, etc. I tried NC One Map, but I think their servers are not working.
These are very valid cultural issues you are bringing up, but I don’t think a sentence in a simple proposal will prevent this opposing narrative if a group of people choose to make it. Also, I’m not sure I can really explain this comment without getting into a larger cultural discussion that is not productive to the proposal.
In short, I suggest taking this statement out to avoid getting wrapped around the axle it may create.
@orulz@dbearhugnc Dumb Question > Why not increase the size of the wye? So abandon the current western side of the wye for the NS-line segment. Still get rid of the diamonds of course. Is there any reason why that’s not a viable option?
@orulz can probably do it better than I, but geometry and private land ownership is a pretty funny thing with respect to railroads. And, there is more that’s potentially happening in the wye when SEHSR/Southeast High-Speed Rail gets added in to the mix.
Currently there is a 10mph restriction on the west leg of the wye. That is conservative given the geometry but it probably has more to do with the diamond and numerous switches nearby than how sharp the curve is. I think if the diamond were removed, 20mph should be possible.
Increasing the curve radius and thus the speeds on the west leg of the wye would definitely be possible if the NS line were removed, but we’re not talking earth shattering differences here… increasing the radius from the current (imprecisely measured) ~625ft, to ~850ft, which is what I estimate is the maximum possible without having to rebuild the bridges at both Morgan and Boylan, gains you perhaps about 5mph. This is not an unambiguous win either, because it would:
push the future S-line platform further north away from Union Station, when it is already pretty far to begin (platforms have to be straight), and
Put about 1.5 acres more land inside the wye, compared with what would happen if the NS line were removed and the curve were left unchanged, rendering that land less valuable for redevelopment.
This curve is immediately adjacent to the future platform as well, so passenger trains will already be moving slowly as they approach it, so little would be gained.
Pictured is a steam shovel working on a new section of railroad that was built to connect the northern and southern segments of the Norfolk Southern Railway through Raleigh, July 1912.
This photograph was taken from the old wooden Boylan Bridge looking southwest. The steam shovel is seen filling small railcars with fill dirt taken from the hillside. This dirt was then used to fill in and level the ground approaching a new wooden trestle spanning Rocky Branch creek (Western Boulevard). The wooden trestle was later replaced in 1936 by the concrete and steel structure we see today.
N.53.15.5156a
From the Albert Barden Collection, State Archives; Raleigh, NC.
(So, that diamond crossing just didn’t happen during an overnight push of track building)
Came up with a new alternative that is about 1-2 miles further south of the others that would mostly run at or below grade (rather than on an elevated embankment), in a trench, through land at the Raleigh/Garner border that is either entirely industrial or otherwise undeveloped.
There is no way through there that has no property impacts, but unlike the other alternatives which kind of have to thread the needle to find a way through, here there is plenty of wiggle room to adjust the route to minimize them (in number or cost) and to avoid otherwise problematic spots.
@orulz@dbearhugnc@keita Are you guys willing to meet and discuss specifics about the proposal? I want us to present this to Council. Some of the benefits are very railroad specific–claims I cannot backup on my own. I would like us to introduce ourselves, go over the proposal and figure out next steps. If so, please email me at patrick.gravinese@gmail.com so we can schedule a time to meet.
