Triangle road & traffic thread

[Cary NC]

Where would that section terminate in 2010?

US 1 South by Cary and Apex. Once it is complete you can expect the sprawl to be kicked up a notch.

[ChiefJoJo]

Today was the 2nd meeting for the NC 21st Century Transportation Committee.

[RiverwoodCLT]

I read on the Charlotte forum on how great the roads are in Raleigh. I don't think many have ever been to Raleigh to see some of the traffic problems. I think Charlotte and Raleigh should get more funding to correct these problems before it gets to a critical stage. I can name 4 or 5 places in Raleigh that are just as bad as Charlotte or worse. I hope this NC 21st Century Transportation Committee can get something done to help our larger cities in NC can get some relief.

[redjeep77]

^ I drive through Raleigh at least 6 times a month (now using the 540 bypass, and formally using the 440) and i can say that raleigh traffic is bad, but in no way/shape/form does it compare to the awful parking lot of charlotte's traffic. Raleigh roads are predominantly 3+ lanes on each side of the interstate...no so in the charlotte area.

The two areas the state NEEDS to absolutely address are:

1. Adding at least 2 more lanes to each side of I-85 from concord mills to salisbury.

2. Adding 1-2 lanes on I-40 from where it branches off 85 all the way to where raleigh-durham begins. That area is just miserable during rush hour!

[RiverwoodCLT]

Yes on 540 I think the NCDOT learn their lesson here in Charlotte how they mess up the south leg of 485.

[ncwebguy]

I thought this was the *Triangle* traffic thread...

I could just as easily make a similar claim by saying I use 485 from I-77 to US 74 (Independence) several times a month, Charlotte highways are predominantly 3+ lanes on each side with occasional traffic but nothing serious. And I would be just as wrong.

I-77 and I-85 are 3+ lanes through Meck. County and beyond now that construction is done, only dropping to two lanes at Concord Mills.

Charlotte's problems stem from a lack of planning, most obvious in the southern part of the 485 corridor. My dad used to live just inside what is now 485 and we used to "play in the woods" were Park Road extension crosses 485 now. The corridor could have been wider to the south, but it wasn't. Zoning Ballentine to be an alternative to uptown only created an office park that creates traffic bursts during rush hour. The lack of regional planning put cheaper housing further from the employment centers, leaving a lot of people with longer commutes going every which way.

I-40, one of the main corridors of the region, (not a loop) is only two lanes in each direction from Wade Ave. to US 1/64 with no plans to widen it until a few months ago. A major interchange ramp, 540 W to 40 W, is only one lane, resulting in a daily "parking lot". 540 itself is of no help to anyone more than a mile south of it. 40 and 85 in Durham were two lanes in each direction until the last couple of years.

40 starts as three lanes in Chapel Hill. Widening it from there to 40/85 will require serious work, since a lot of explosives will be needed to get one more lane each way. As evidenced by the recent I-40 repave, I-85 W to NC 147 S is a good alternative and is only one mile longer.

As posted eariler in this thread, the triangle only has a few small projects in the pipeline for the next three years, and nothing in the three years after that. The state can't take away from nothing, but it will probably try.

[DPK]

Wake Forest Road to see some improvements next years:

http://www.newsobserver.com/news/story/815592.html

Mostly just adding additional turn lanes.

[Gard]

Wake Forest Road to see some improvements next years:

http://www.newsobserver.com/news/story/815592.html

Mostly just adding additional turn lanes.

Great to see. This area needed those turn lanes badly.

[coreyt]

Living in Charlotte for all of my life, I did hear that Raleigh roads were a lot nicer because of all the politicians, etc. The roads in Charlotte suck ass, and the southern part of 485 is just a disgrace in planning. I live on that part, and avoid it like the plague from 4-6. And 77, don't even get me started. However, I go to school at UNC, and commute to State to see my girlfriend. Not to mention I drive around Raleigh a lot when I am there. The roads suck just as equally as Charlotte, imho. What moron decided that 40 should be two lanes on its busiest stretch?? I think it's safe to say that road planners in NC suck on a whole, not just in one city or another.

[magicmk]

The two-lane section of I-40 (from Wade Avenue east) is easily the worst stretch of highway in the Triangle, congestion-wise. I'm glad I don't have to make my daily commute through there. It is slated to receive additional travel lanes in the future, I'm not sure when though. I'm thinking that's 3-5 years away, someone else might have better info on that.

I'd like to see I-40 widened from the I-85 split to Chapel Hill as well - I get the idea that's a low priority though, I've never seen it mentioned in future highway plans anywhere. I know a lot of traffic uses this stretch of road, but I never knew it was a problem for commuters. The road re-work east of Chapel Hill didn't help this past summer, I'm sure.

An observation I've made regarding freeways around Raleigh compared to other areas - why do none of them have overhead lighting? Many portions of I-40 have lighting through Winston-Salem, Greensboro - even a long stretch through Burlington! The Charlotte area has lighting on much of I-77 and parts of I-85. Most of 440 lies well within Raleigh city limits and not a single part of it has street lighting. Driving it between Capital Blvd and Wade Avenue is so dark, it's like running through a black hole... and it's even worse in inclement weather. I know it costs money for this stuff, but if the state can light up rural portions of I-40/85 in Alamance county, couldn't they do the same for the entire beltline plus I-40 out to RTP here? Given the traffic volume, you'd think it would have been done by now.

[Creasy336]

An observation I've made regarding freeways around Raleigh compared to other areas - why do none of them have overhead lighting? Many portions of I-40 have lighting through Winston-Salem, Greensboro - even a long stretch through Burlington! The Charlotte area has lighting on much of I-77 and parts of I-85. Most of 440 lies well within Raleigh city limits and not a single part of it has street lighting. Driving it between Capital Blvd and Wade Avenue is so dark, it's like running through a black hole... and it's even worse in inclement weather. I know it costs money for this stuff, but if the state can light up rural portions of I-40/85 in Alamance county, couldn't they do the same for the entire beltline plus I-40 out to RTP here? Given the traffic volume, you'd think it would have been done by now.

I do agree that the lack of lighting through RTP and western Wake County is much needed. The lack of development near Umpstead Park, Lack of Billboards (a good thing), that thick tree buffer near Harrison Ave, and the lack of reflectors attribute to the problem.

I-85/40 through Burlington is a special case because it carries both I-85 and I-40 traffic, our state's busiest interstates. As well as a good amount of overnight commuter traffic connecting the Northeast to the Triad, Charlotte, Greenville-Spartanburg, and Atlanta metro areas. Notice I-85 is now lit up through all the states largest metro areas. I-85/40 through Alamance County is one of states busiest roads 7 days a week. The area it passes through in Burlington has been the victim of bad planning, but is still in an urban area well over 100,000 that is experiencing a major boom in growth and construction.

[cophead567]

Anyone see this article?

http://www.newsobserver.com/news/story/827473.html

The $16.5 million Road User Charge Study will enlist 2,700 drivers in six states to determine whether Americans would accept the idea of paying by the mile, instead of by the gallon.

So does this make gas free or just cheaper? I'm not sure whether I agree with this or not. Paying by the mile makes the benefit of driving an efficient car practically non-existent. But, if you want to get people out of their cars and driving less, this would probably raise support for public transit.

Also, does $16.5 million seem astronomically high?

[Gard]

Anyone see this article?

http://www.newsobserver.com/news/story/827473.html

So does this make gas free or just cheaper? I'm not sure whether I agree with this or not. Paying by the mile makes the benefit of driving an efficient car practically non-existent. But, if you want to get people out of their cars and driving less, this would probably raise support for public transit.

Also, does $16.5 million seem astronomically high?

Makes gas cheaper, but by no means free. With more people using hybrids and vehicles that use no gas at all, such as a pure electric car, tax dollars are decreasing. State and Federal highway programs are largely dependent on the gas tax. By taxing by the mile, they are ensuring that everyone is paying for the construction and upkeep of roads. Considering that the government has to buy and develop equipment for monitoring how many miles the people drive, not to mention all the people that have to collect and analyze the data , $16.5 million isn't too bad. As for my position on it, I'm all for it. I think its only fair that everybody pays the taxes associated with using our roads and not just those using gas.

[cophead567]

Makes gas cheaper, but by no means free. With more people using hybrids and vehicles that use no gas at all, such as a pure electric car, tax dollars are decreasing. State and Federal highway programs are largely dependent on the gas tax. By taxing by the mile, they are ensuring that everyone is paying for the construction and upkeep of roads. Considering that the government has to buy and develop equipment for monitoring how many miles the people drive, not to mention all the people that have to collect and analyze the data , $16.5 million isn't too bad. As for my position on it, I'm all for it. I think its only fair that everybody pays the taxes associated with using our roads and not just those using gas.

The way i read the article, thats $16.5 million for the 2,700 people in the study, not everyone. Besides, if they wanted to monitor miles driven they could implement something that works with a car odometer, which everyone already has. maybe get it checked each time we do our yearly inspections. Just seems like overkill to me when there are cheaper options.

[ncwebguy]

I think there should be a combined method for taxing:

- a tax on the sale of new and used cars

- a sales tax on gas as if it were any other item and maybe a little extra for environmental improvments.

- this GPS system to collect *where* miles are driven.

- (edit, added) tolls on roads/bridges/tunnels (as part of the GPS system?) that aren't necessary for the interstate/highway system, but make local trips more efficient -- 540, Currituck and Oregon Inlet bridges, Clayton bypass

I commute from downtown Raleigh to RTP, so some miles are in Wake County and others are in Durham County. If they just checked my odometer at inspection time, then all the miles would be attributed to just Wake. To say nothing if I go on an in-state or out of state road trip. If Virginia continues to rely on gas taxes, why should I pay North Carolina for that milage? Or if the whole country goes to this method, then I should pay all the states somethign for my big cross country adventure.

NC DOT could use this to do a better job of assigning money by region, and take a smaller percentage to help smaller "in between" areas with road projects. This could lead to shifting more road maintenance to the county/region level as well, since they could get more detailed road usage data.

I hope the "big brother" aspect of keeping *where* the miles are driven as anonymous is kept. Using EZ Pass to place vehicles at a certian place is kinda odd, but do I want anyone knowing about late night Krispy Kreme drive thru visits? No.

About 10+ years ago when I biked *everywhere* (including several NC State to Crabtree and Cary Town Center rides), I thought about writing a science fiction book about a similar set up. The government would give away/mandate GPS technology in all motor vehicles. It all starts off nice but led to abuse by "malfunctions" erroniously issuing speeding citations, etc., eventually leading to an increase in bicycle usage and an "underground" of unmonitored mass transit. Maybe I should go back to that...

[magicmk]

I think there should be a combined method for taxing:

- a tax on the sale of new and used cars

- a sales tax on gas as if it were any other item and maybe a little extra for environmental improvments.

- this GPS system to collect *where* miles are driven.

- (edit, added) tolls on roads/bridges/tunnels (as part of the GPS system?) that aren't necessary for the interstate/highway system, but make local trips more efficient -- 540, Currituck and Oregon Inlet bridges, Clayton bypass

I commute from downtown Raleigh to RTP, so some miles are in Wake County and others are in Durham County. If they just checked my odometer at inspection time, then all the miles would be attributed to just Wake. To say nothing if I go on an in-state or out of state road trip. If Virginia continues to rely on gas taxes, why should I pay North Carolina for that milage? Or if the whole country goes to this method, then I should pay all the states somethign for my big cross country adventure.

NC DOT could use this to do a better job of assigning money by region, and take a smaller percentage to help smaller "in between" areas with road projects. This could lead to shifting more road maintenance to the county/region level as well, since they could get more detailed road usage data.

Well as you know, there's already a per gallon sales tax on gasoline. In North Carolina it's like 30 cents a gallon or so. Shifting that to a percentage-based sales tax (I presume is what you meant) would basically just drive that amount up. I don't see how that could work - if the cost of fuel goes sky high, then so does the tax accordingly and that only hits us taxpayers that much harder in our pocketbooks for something that's a commodity. Realistically, it's to be expected that if the state does anything with the fuel taxes, they'll just tack on another penny or two per gallon or so. The mileage based-tax is intriguing to me (I said intriguing, not attractive); I don't doubt it would alter the driving habits of a lot of people. I'm the type of person who would just as soon relocate to have a shorter commute to work, rather than put up with a 30, 45, or hour-plus commute indefinitely anyway.

Reading this thread and elsewhere, it was a bit of an eye-opener to see how much money is spent on road projects in rural areas. I do agree that the state needs to examine where this money is being spent and better prioritize needs for transportation spending.

As far as tolling goes, I'm in favor of electronic tolling, however they want to implement it - EZ-Pass, license plate tracking, whatever. Toll booths are roadblocks in my eyes. I think anyone who's driven much in New Jersey or Illinois would readily agree with that.

I have had the experience of driving the 407 ETR in the Toronto, Ontario region. Rather than a transponder, there are cameras at entrance and exit points on the tollway that take a snapshot of the rear tag on the vehicle as it passes through. The car's owner is tracked down through registration and an account is automatically created (yes, regardless of which state or country you live in) and a monthly bill is generated. There may be higher administrative costs associated with such a system, but it saves drivers from having to go and purchase a transponder, register it, assign it a credit card, maintain current account info on it, etc. It's a much more hassle-free process. You also don't pay the toll balance until you get your statement, so you only pay for what you use... as opposed to having to pay a balance up front for a transponder and have it debited as you go.

[ncwebguy]

The tax on gas is in two parts -- the federal part was fixed at $.184/gallon in 1991, regardless of the price of gas. In North Carolina, the tax is based on wholesale prices, and adjusted twice a year. It is now capped at $.299/gallon. So, for now, the most gas will be taxed in NC is 48.3 cents/gallon, thanks to short-sighted politicians trying to make a run for govenor next year.

*Food* is a commodity, yet there is no cap on the tax of a gallon of milk or loaf of bread. A fixed tax per gallon has capped revenue, creating the road maintenance/construction mess we are in today. A rise in costs (materials, labor) has not been offset by a rise in revenue. Using the 7% sales tax, the gas tax would only be less, $.21/gallon.

Use tax based on miles driven would ensure hybrid and electric car drivers pay their fair share

+

Gas tax, which would charge more for less efficient vehicles but still allow freedom of vehicle choice

+

Tolls, which would alllow for less necessary roads when users are willing to pay for it.

+

vehicle purchase tax and/or suppliment to property tax on vehicles would generate a base revenue stream.

These combined sources would generate funds based on use and choices consumers make. Taxes would go to areas that need it the most via use tax and tolls, while the gas tax and vehicle tax can be used to help fund rual projects, not pay the whole bill.

[RiverwoodCLT]

In the Charlotte Observer this morning, it stated that Charlotte, Greensboro, Winston-Salem Fayetteville, Wilmington and Asheville loops are still in the 2011-2013 budget. There is no funding for I540 Outer loop in the Raleigh area.

[ncwebguy]

I found the online copy of the Observer letter to the editor from NCDOT's Lyndo Tippett to Sue Myrick. Myrick seems be pulling double duty as US and NC representative for her area.

This statement makes it sound like even gap funding for a tolled 540 will not be avaiable. So the southwest leg has now gone from "completed by 2010" to "not going anywhere any time soon". But at least we now know where our 2011-2013 money is going, since it isn't the Triangle. Ugh. Not that the Triangle have grown another 10-15+% by then, with a lot of that growth occuring south of the proposed unbuilt section of 540.

To attempt to address this situation in a fair manner, it has been proposed that every loop project scheduled for construction between 2011 and 2013 be delayed. In addition to Charlotte, that includes projects in Greensboro, Winston-Salem, Fayetteville, Wilmington and Asheville. And there is no funding in the plan at all for the completion of the I-540 Outer Loop in the Raleigh area.

I think it is good for Mr. Tippett to point out to Ms. Myric that there would be more money for highway construction if she worked on things she does have a say in, like NC's continuing donor state status for the federal gas tax:

In addition to the large increases in the cost of construction materials and rights of way, the department is also dealing with the continuing issue of being a donor state in the federal program while facing a projected decline in federal funds being made available to our transportation program.

[ChiefJoJo]

I found the online copy of the Observer letter to the editor from NCDOT's Lyndo Tippett to Sue Myrick. Myrick seems be pulling double duty as US and NC representative for her area.

This statement makes it sound like even gap funding for a tolled 540 will not be avaiable. So the southwest leg has now gone from "completed by 2010" to "not going anywhere any time soon".

The gap funding for 540 was never programmed because it doesn't exist in the TIP, which was the reason it was a toll candidate in the first place. The loop projects in NC (Charlotte, Raleigh, Greensboro, etc) all compete with each other for funds each year irrespective of the infamous "equity formula." It creates a situation where the projects that are ready to be constructed generally recieve the funds and those that aren't, generally don't. Of course there's a fair amount of political banter as well. In the Triangle, IIRC, the East End Connector leapfrogged 540 as the region's top priority for loop fund-eligible projects, so that's part of the reason why 540 had to go the toll route... because NCDOT said it wouldn't be built via conventional methods for 30 or more years... hence the mantra: "toll road, or no road."

So the gap funding scenario for the 540/147 extension, the Triangle Expressway, hasn't changed at all. There is no available gap funding for *any* of the turnpike projects in NC that has specificially been designated as such. All the turnpike projects are waiting for the 21st Century Transportation Committee to make funding and other recommendations to the General Assembly in the upcoming short session beginning in May. If and only if state funding is approved by the GA, the Triangle Expressway and the rest will be able to move forward, with the Triangle project starting first (land mostly acquired, designs finished, and nearly permitted)... likely later this year.

[DanRNC]

It seems as if legislators in other parts are good at the "grab for cash" game whereas Triangle legislators are busy with symbolic gestures of political correctness. Hell, Malone won't even push for the purchase of the Dix property.

[ChiefJoJo]

The Triangle ranks middle of the pack in traffic congestion, or 35th best among the top 65 most populous metro areas. I would imagine that is about where our population lies as a metro relative to the others, so the results are probably about what you'd expect. I do think we are not positioned well as a region to deal with the type of rapid growth that is coming our way though.

[DPK]

WRAL has a video that talks about all of the proposed urban loops that were supposed to be complete by 2004. 60% of the state's loop system has not been built.

http://www.wral.com/news/local/video/2279605

[ncwebguy]

They also have a text story on the loops as well.

I don't know if it is good or bad that we don't have four lane loops around all the major cities by now. Not all of them would be clogged like South Charlotte, but they would accelerate sprawl and be difficult to expand. This is the legacy of govenor Jim Martin, who put good roads above good schools in the late 80s. I remember a lot of political cartoons showing how easy it would be to build all the roads since school funding was dismal, creating thousands of undereducated tarheels ready to lay asphalt. Yet the Republican candidates for govenor are now blaming Democrats for their own party's underfunding and aversion to planning.

[magicmk]

Interesting story on the planned loops (and lack of funding).

I had no idea there was a proposed loop for Durham until a week ago, I was staring at a huge wall map and I saw an outlined area for "Future Durham Loop Connector" on 540 between Glenwood Avenue and Leesville Road. It didn't show a proposed route or anything else related to that loop elsewhere on the map. Is there any information about this online or hasn't the planning even gotten that far yet?