Jump to content

Greensboro Urban Loop (Painter Boulevard)


Roadgeek

Recommended Posts

^ This a great article and hopefully the loop will improve traffic flow. The only thing that I forsee is an increase in sprawl. I wonder though if the I-73 future interstate will run by downtown GSO like buisness 40 does for Winston. If so, it would be good to get that completed first then finish the loop so that the loop doesn't draw buisness from downtown but the new interstate invite big buisness into downtown.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Replies 410
  • Created
  • Last Reply

^ This a great article and hopefully the loop will improve traffic flow. The only thing that I forsee is an increase in sprawl. I wonder though if the I-73 future interstate will run by downtown GSO like buisness 40 does for Winston. If so, it would be good to get that completed first then finish the loop so that the loop doesn't draw buisness from downtown but the new interstate invite big buisness into downtown.

I-73 will never run close to downtown Greensboro. I-73's route uses US 220 to NC 68 near the airport (mostly on new location referred to as the US 220-NC 68 Connector), from their it runs along Bryant Blvd to I-840. Next I-73 uses the southern loop until reaching US 220 then heads southbound.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I-73 will never run close to downtown Greensboro. I-73's route uses US 220 to NC 68 near the airport (mostly on new location referred to as the US 220-NC 68 Connector), from their it runs along Bryant Blvd to I-840. Next I-73 uses the southern loop until reaching US 220 then heads southbound.

Well, that's crappy. Is it because of the neighborhoods inbetween the airport and downtown? It would just be nice to have an interstate view of downtown.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I believe it was cheaper for the DOT to build new rather than rehabilitate 29, which was the original routing plan of I-73, I believe. US 29 is not up to interstate standards and it would take an enormous amount of money to upgrade all of the at-grade intersections and the interchange with Business 40/85 while also acquiring right-of-way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I believe it was cheaper for the DOT to build new rather than rehabilitate 29, which was the original routing plan of I-73, I believe. US 29 is not up to interstate standards and it would take an enormous amount of money to upgrade all of the at-grade intersections and the interchange with Business 40/85 while also acquiring right-of-way.

The whole southern loop was a waste of money IMHO. I-85 in Durham is a good model for what NCDOT should have done to business 40/85. Even with all the through traffic being taken off of that stretch guess what? Traffic merging on to US 29 is still a mess due to all that traffic merging into 1 lane. That issue along with a poorly designed on-ramp from MLK to Business 40w/85s is the major root of the problem, but not that costly of a fix on the grand scale of road building here. :offtopic: If Bryant Blvd past the airport was up to interstate standards I wouldn't mind seeing an I-x73 spur to the Friendly Shopping Center area.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The whole southern loop was a waste of money IMHO. I-85 in Durham is a good model for what NCDOT should have done to business 40/85. Even with all the through traffic being taken off of that stretch guess what? Traffic merging on to US 29 is still a mess due to all that traffic merging into 1 lane. That issue along with a poorly designed on-ramp from MLK to Business 40w/85s is the major root of the problem, but not that costly of a fix on the grand scale of road building here.

I aboslutely agree! Having the DOT rehabilitate and modernize Death Valley would've been such a boon for that area. You would not have seen the few hotels/restaurants that have gone out of business on Randleman/South Elm Eugene. Most of those businesses depended on the constant traffic that poured through that area. If a Durham-ish widening had been done it would've offered prime opportunites for redevelopment on the many brownfield sites up and down that corridor. I don't understand for the life of me why the DOT cannot repair its existing roadways before building new.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I aboslutely agree! Having the DOT rehabilitate and modernize Death Valley would've been such a boon for that area. You would not have seen the few hotels/restaurants that have gone out of business on Randleman/South Elm Eugene. Most of those businesses depended on the constant traffic that poured through that area. If a Durham-ish widening had been done it would've offered prime opportunites for redevelopment on the many brownfield sites up and down that corridor. I don't understand for the life of me why the DOT cannot repair its existing roadways before building new.

I-85 is the lifeline of the NC Piedmont Cresent. I-40 provides the connection of NC's urban piedmont with the rural coast and the mountains. Together, in the Greensboro area, the both of them carry significant volumes of local and regional traffic. You have to be mindful of that. Death Valley does need some modernization. However, when thinking of modernizing, one must be mindful of some things. In order to carry current and design year, say 2030 traffic, I-85Bus/I-40 through death valley would need atleast 5 thru lanes in each direction. Say, NCDOT constructs 4 thru lanes in each direction, you would need approximately 140' of pavement (including inner and outer shoulders and median jersery barrier). To accommodate merging and weaving you would need 1-2 auxillary lanes between interchanges that are already extremely close. Bridges carrying I-85Bus/I-40 over other roads would have to be widened to accommodate the additional lanes. Also, bridges carrying roads over I-85BUS/I-40 would need to be replaced because they do not provide enough horizontal clearance for additional lanes to pass under them. Also, because longer spans to accommodate the wider horizontal clearances means larger beams, the elevation of all the roads crossing over I-85BUS/I-40 would be raised, requiring improvements up and down Randleman, Elm-Eugene, the Norfolk Southern Railroad, and Patton Avenue. Any funky left-hand exits and entrance ramps would need to be eliminated and converted to right-hand ramps. The I-85BUS/I-40/US 29/US 421 interchange complex at the eastern end of Death Valley would need to be totally reconfigured as would the I-85BUS/I40/Randleman Road road interchange complex in order to provide for adequate laneage and access. This would have resulted in a destructive and extremely disruptive project as additional right way would have needed to be purchased to accommodate these improvements virtual closing the majority of the businesses adjacent to the highway within the corridor.

The I-85 bypass accomplished a number of things:(1) It provided a means to separate local traffic from regional east-west traffic and regional east-southwest (toward Charlotte) traffic, (2) lowered the accident potential in death valley by reducing the total number of vehicle-miles traveled through the area, (3) added additional freeway capacity through Guilford county and providing an alternate route if an accident occured in Death Valley, (4) provided a route for future I-73 without routing traffic through the Greensboro urban core, and improved my travel time between Raleigh and Charlotte as I can now drive 70 mph through all of Guilford County.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Shoot, I thought that the whole stretch from Bryan all the way to I-85 was going to open. I thought I was going to be able to swoop right down next weekend on my way to Charlotte instead of taking stinking Holden road all the way down. I hope they open the final stretch to I-85 in January like they say might happen. It takes forever to get from northwest Greensboro down to I-85 south.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.