Red Line "options" show plan as much or more about land use than moving people

The CATS mass transit sales pitch rolled into Davidson Town Hall on Tuesday evening to discuss the options proposed for the North Corridor of the 2030 Transit Plan.  However, to see that this project has little to do with moving people and more to do with land planning and high density development, one just has to look at the CATS website for the project.

The four options for the project are posted below.

Option 1:  Commuter Rail on Norfolk Southern's O Line.  This option is the "original" - the one that was used to convince North Mecklenburg into voting for tax increases to build rail to the area.  If it is built it will run through the North Meck towns.  In Davidson in particular it would change the town's character.  The inevitable gentrification it would cause would eliminate much of the racial and economic diversity in town.

Option 2:  Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) utilizing the I77 HOT lanes when that project opens in coming months.  This option will cost the least, could be implemented the soonest, and provide by far the fastest service to Uptown Charlotte.  (Note:  Even though efforts continue to make major changes to the HOT contract, it is looking more and more likely there will be at least one HOT lane that could be used to support BRT service.

Option 3: Light rail to Charlotte.  Many people love the idea of Light Rail Transit (LRT) to Charlotte.  However, this option will be the most expensive and take by far the longest to ride.  The question you have to ask yourself is "Do I care more about riding on a train than getting to/from work much, much faster on a bus?"

Option 4:  BRT on NC21.  This option will be significantly more expensive than the BRT in Option 2 because it will need to acquire right of way for dedicated BRT lane along NC21.  It will have a similar trip time as commuter rail.

So, what do Options 1, 3, and 4 have in common over Option 2 other than being slower, more expensive, and longer to implement?  They all support higher density development.  In fact if there is a perceived drawback to Option 2 from the New Urbanist planner perspective (that's the perspective that drives all planning in the area), it is that Option 2 doesn't support high density development known as Transit Oriented Development (TOD) as well.

So as this discussion unfolds people need to keep this in mind, if development proposals in Davidson like the Linden, Potts Street, and Davidson Depot bother you, then you should only consider supporting a mass transit option like BRT on I77 under Option 2.  Supporting anything else means you also support more small town character destroying high density development because that's what those options are designed to do.