Traffic, Freeways and Road Construction

[Miesian Corners]

A2, I've been in touch with NCDOT officials about this for three years now. They're all still playing the blame game. The state says Duke Power is to blame, Duke says it's the state. I even got Action 9 involved last year to find out who REALLY is the responsible party.

Now the state says they will make the repairs but they have no cash to do it right now. What's really infuriating is that a subcontractor installing new guard-rails severed the lines for the Independence/Brookshire/John Belk fly-overs. Why is it they are not responsible for making those repairs?

[A2]

A2, I've been in touch with NCDOT officials about this for three years now.  They're all still playing the blame game.  The state says Duke Power is to blame, Duke says it's the state.  I even got Action 9 involved last year to find out who REALLY is the responsible party. 

Now the state says they will make the repairs but they have no cash to do it right now.  What's really infuriating is that a subcontractor installing new guard-rails severed the lines for the Independence/Brookshire/John Belk fly-overs.  Why is it they are not responsible for making those repairs?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Amen to that MC !!!

[dubone]

i know.

most of those north meck residents use northern 77 as a parking lot at rush hour.

what annoys me about the 77 widening, is that they spent SOOO much money on concrete and steel noise walls, which are exceedingly ugly and just asking for graffiti.... With the cost of those commodities, surely there are cheaper ways to build walls. If the wood in the trees was a good enough buffer before, why can't they build the sound walls out of lumber like they do in connecticut and save all that money. perhaps they could even just stack the logs of the trees they fell like a log-cabin style wall. not only are they more attractive, and can easily be sanded if they are tagged, but lumber is not nearly as expensive as those walls must have been.

with the extra money, and concrete, they could have built a full-on retaining wall and lights.

On a slightly related topic. when are we going to get to a point where they put up street lamps with solar-panels? A major part of the expense of those freeway lights, is they have to run electrical power to the middle of the freeway. and in cases like 277, when something goes nutty in the wires, the whole freeway loses its lights. Surely we are at a point where a laptop battery and a solar panel are reasonably priced to charge the battery during the day for a night's worth of lighting. Then all they need to do is build a foundation for the lights and pop them up whereever they want to.

[orulz]

On a slightly related topic.  when are we going to get to a point where they put up street lamps with solar-panels?

I believe your average high-pressure soduim freeway streetlight is somewhere in the neighborhood of 1,000 watts.

Your average laptop drains about 70 watts while in operation, and runs for about 2 hours on a charge. So that's 14 laptop batteries to deliver 1,000 watts. Figure 16 hours of lighting during winter months - so that makes 112 laptop batteries minimum. But that's not where the expense comes in - imagine how HUGE of a solar array you'd need in order to recharge those batteries during 8 hours of winter daytime on a cloudy day. It just ain't possible.

They could cut it down to 600 watts and get the same amount of brightness if they used low-pressure sodium lamps, but those let off a sickening yellowish-orange glow rather than the bright orangish-pink glow that is generally used for streetlights.

[dubone]

thanks for the analysis, o. that explains it pretty well. Do you think that LEDs will solve the lighting part of that equation? LEDs are bright, emit true-white color and don't use but a fraction of the wattage.

perhaps we can also throw in a couple mini-windmills or something to compensate for lower solar generation in winter.

[orulz]

I doubt if semiconductor-based lighting (LEDs) will ever approach the efficiency of Sodium lamps, high or low pressure. 1,000 Watt sodium lamps aren't 1,000 watts because they're inefficient. They're 1,000 Watts because they're REALLY freaking bright. Low pressure sodium lamps have an efficiency in excess of 200 lumens per watt. A quick glance at wikipedia shows that the best white LEDs are around 75 lumens per watt; and that's only in very small packages (1 watt or less). 10 watt lamps @ 60 lumens per watt should be on the market soon. So, if you stack 100 of those LED's together, you'll get something that uses as much power as a sodium streetlight but emits less than 1/3 the light. In addition, sodium lights last longer and stay brighter than LEDs as well. LED technology is still improving by leaps and bounds, but I don't think anybody expects it to meet or beat sodium in the game of efficiency, ever.

Spreading the lamps out, which might lend a bit of an advantage to LEDs, is not really practical, because the cost of wiring and installing the poles would be prohibitive. It would just cost too much to install 10 times as many lights.

[dubone]

Spreading the lamps out, which might lend a bit of an advantage to LEDs, is not really practical, because the cost of wiring and installing the poles would be prohibitive. It would just cost too much to install 10 times as many lights.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

i didn't realize that sodium lights were so efficient like that... the wiring part, though, is what i view as the prohibiting factor to lights being ubiquitous on freeways. If there were a way to make them self-contained units that collect and store enough power for the lights, then it would allow them to be put up anywhere needed without need to fund a system for the whole area.

...if only there were a way to have a power-source and lighting source that went along with the drivers, so that if there were cars on the road, it would be lit up, and if no cars are there, there wouldn't be any lights. hmmm...perhaps they could even put the on the front and back of every car. (...sorry, A2, couldn't resist)

[monsoon]

Why do we need all this lighting anyway? There is already too much light pollution in the cities. And there are some studies that suggest that excessive light pollution has a negative effect on human psychology.

[A2]

Yes, but NO lighting has an impact on more accidents. I can't see going North on 77.

A2

[dubone]

to prevent death.

[orulz]

Quite simply, it's a matter of safety.

Younge people do just fine without freeway lights, but as you get older, your ability to adjust quickly to huge changes in lighting diminishes significantly. Having lights on a freeway can keep you from being momentarily blinded by every car that comes by in the opposite direciton. Saying "no driving after dark for people over 50" is not an acceptable solution.

Streets are lit everywhere. Why not freeways as well?

[tiblerbrit]

Very long stretches of Harris blvd are not lit. What do you mean be streets are lit?

[dubone]

Very long stretches of Harris blvd are not lit. What do you mean be streets are lit?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

obviously he was saying in general streets are lit... no one would really be saying that 100% of all streets are lit.

[monsoon]

Yes, but NO lighting has an impact on more accidents. I can't see going North on 77.

A2

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Light pollution turns peeps into werewolves and freaks.

[Mobuchu]

Take Dubones mini-windmills and put them on the median wall right next to the cars in the fast lane. Let the wind from the cars going by during the day charge the batteries, wonder if that would work?

[Mobuchu]

Better yet, put A2 on a treadmill with a box 10ft in front of it with a sign on top saying "65 story Wachovia rendering inside". That treadmill will light up all our interstates...

[dubone]

Better yet, put A2 on a treadmill with a box 10ft in front of it with a sign on top saying  "65 story Wachovia rendering inside".  That treadmill will light up all our interstates...

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

... that treadmill will light up the whole city.

[A2]

Ha-ha very funny. ^

A2

[Miesian Corners]

... that treadmill will light up the whole city.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The city? HA! All of Metrolina would be ablaze, and possibly some small small towns in Tennessee and Georgia.

This could quite possibly be the answer to our energy crisis.

[ChiefJoJo]

Better yet, put A2 on a treadmill with a box 10ft in front of it with a sign on top saying "65 story Wachovia rendering inside". That treadmill will light up all our interstates...

I have noticed he is a bit, um, excitable. I think the caption of this--> <-- smiley should read A2. Maybe the Char-Meck Planning Commision should fire all the staff and hire A2 in their place. He certainly has the desire!

[dubone]

485 - will the northwest section (and all the remaining sections) be 6 lanes wide as well?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

i believe so.

[dubone]

http://www.charlotte.com/mld/charlotte/news/12699813.htm

Congress basically forced prioritization of $290m in projects, but only gave $15m to pay for it. It will cause delays of projects already on the books.

And, as always, the first project listed for a delay is Independence Blvd. ( and i'll also place my bet that 'leaders' in certain areas of this county will seek the southern 485 widening to be one of those projects delayed and pick at that scab again... but that is just my speculation)

On the positive side, the mandates include widening 77 in north meck, which is not a state priority because it doesn't lead to greensboro or raleigh ( hee hee) Other mandates that i view as positive, are the Monroe Bypass, Cabarrus 85 widening, and (i think i am interpreting the article correctly) Little Sugar Creek Greenway.

If design-build is used for projects like widening of 77 in north meck, it could end up coming online not too long after 485 opens, and prevent the much publicized bottleneck on northern 77 as 7 or 8 lanes of traffic squeeze into 2 or 3 lanes.

[monsoon]

Is the I-77 widening from I-485N, where the current widening ends, up to exit 30 where the county line ends?

[A2]

Not to be insensitive, but one of the last lines in that article kind of piss me off. It basically states that the Federal gov't is looking at potentially holding back monies from their Transportation budget for the relief efforts in NO.

Here is the line from the article D already posted:

"Meanwhile, Congress is debating whether to cut back federal highway spending as it looks for money for the war in Iraq and for hurricane relief on the Gulf Coast"

I am beginning to get a little pissed at the deficit spending that these jokers are doing. I am all for NO, but to give a city 200-300 Billion Tax Payer dollars for a city that lies lower than sea level seems a bit much.

I am wondering if short-changing the entire US for important funds needed in Trasnprotation is justified to re-establish NO (as a city). This to me makes NO sense. I know this tradgedy is one that is hard to deal with, but one has to remember that the city is also getting Red-cross money, INSURANCE MONEY *which the feds have NOTHING to do with), and other private donations.

I read somewhere that the economically depressed city of NO could rake in almost

ONE TRILLION DOLLARS from this disaster !!!!!!

Is this what the US really wants. I mean, don't get me wrong I LOVE THE CITY , but this is over the top.

A2

DON'T SPEND ALL YOUR MONEY IN ONE CITY MR. FEDERAL GOV'T , AT THE ERXPENSE OF OTHER CITIES THAT DESPERATELY NEED THE MONEY NOW !!!

[monsoon]

A2, if people want sensible govenment again, they need to stop voting in idealogs. They need to think hard what has happened to this country in the last 5 years and put an end to social conservatism and the enrichment of the elite and corporations at the expense of spending on the public.

Charlotte is lucky to have gotten the money to fund the South LRT. My guess as long as this bunch is in office, we will never see the federal money for the rest of the 2025 system. The government doesn't have it. It needs to fight the "war" in Iraq and pay for its other mistakes.