I’m not one to assign race or gender based on appearance, but none of those people on the right look like Dylan. Is he in disguise?
If you zoom the image, the guy wearing the red beanie is my only guess.
That’s the one. Red toque, mustache, overall OCD vibe.
1 Like
Save Our Toilets!
3 Likes
The toilet has NOT been preserved, at least not in it’s original location. I believe it’s been relocated.
2 Likes
I saw them actively removing stuff from that part last Thursday. Sad loss for our city’s cultural history. Is it even Raleigh anymore?
5 Likes
Keep Raleigh Boring (KRB).
We had the framework for our next attraction…
3 Likes
Seems more cost efficient just to rebuild facade with same bricks .
3 Likes
They can rename it the “where” house district. This tower better be as sexy as the renders or I’ll be pissed.
1 Like
Nice and sad all at the same time 
6 Likes
I don’t think cost was the driving factor otherwise you’d likely be right.
Expanding further on my other post here.
The RUS feasibility report for the Greater Triangle Commuter Rail (GTCR) project included some details about new platform construction at RUS. While three alternatives were proposed, NCDOT preferred only two of them, and one has a (significant?) cost advantage, leading me to believe it is the current preferred solution. This could change, of course, but I feel that it is the most likely at the moment.
Essentially, a portion of the north platform for future S-Line trains will be constructed, and all Piedmont trains will be directed to that platform. A tunnel will connect the platform to the station building. Then, commuter trains + intercity trains (Carolinian and Silver Star) will stop at the current platform. Also note that this solution would impose some constraints on the commuter rail rolling stock, as it would require high-floor trains to service the 48" platform at RUS, i.e, no bi-level coaches.
Here’s a diagram:
8 Likes
Raleigh certainly has a difficult station placement.
8 Likes
That’s not necessarily true, though. The version of the Stadler KISS used by Silicon Valley’s Caltrain is a double-decker, but its doors can handle both high- and low-level boarding. Notice how the two doors on each end of a car are at different heights, making it possible to use both types of platforms with the same train.
As an added bonus, this lets Caltrain have a strategy to eventually offer level boarding at every station. That’s not as relevant to us, but it’s still a neat feature.
10 Likes
Interesting – did not know that about Caltrain!
So, I guess bi-levels are still on the table (maybe no [existing] Bombardier bi-levels?).
Can’t say I’d be disappointed with a DMU KISS train.
1 Like
It should be. But the report didn’t mention it, so I assume GoTriangle’s consultants and staff haven’t thought about that, either.
It’s a good thing there’s a place where we could tell them what we think of their study’s findings, including what they may have missed, lol.
3 Likes
Is there somewhere to write free-form responses about the plan? I can view the form on PublicInput with the canned questions, I see that there are ~200 “comments,” but cannot actually see any comments, if that makes sense.
For any of the multiple choice prompts with an “Other” option, you can write more detailed explanations.
1 Like
Having to reconstruct the boylan bridge is killer to the option A cost.
They do point out the superior reliability of option A, and mention it being used for the overall project cost estimates. I do hope it’s not completely DOA.
3 Likes