Jump to content

monsoon

Traffic Congestion and Highway Construction

Recommended Posts

It's been discussed elsewhere, but because the ROW is so narrow for much of that stretch of 77, new lane capacity may have to be elevated. There have been some studies done, but I'm not sure where to find them now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


1 hour ago, tozmervo said:

It's been discussed elsewhere, but because the ROW is so narrow for much of that stretch of 77, new lane capacity may have to be elevated. There have been some studies done, but I'm not sure where to find them now.

That's what I thought. The stretch between Nations Ford Rd and 277 is very narrow in some sections with businesses close on each side. 

Would there be a benefit in limiting access to the road by closing off ramps at Nations Ford Rd, Clanton, Remount, and West Blvd? I know it sounds crazy to do this but can you imagine how bad this road will be in another 5 years as more folks choose to live in SC and work in Charlotte. Perhaps it just needs to become too painful of a choice to make and in the end it will be difficult for employers to hire people for jobs located in uptown if it's not suited for a young college grad willing to live in NoDa or SouthEnd.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Third Strike said:

Yes. The road is going to be widened from six lanes to ten, four being toll lanes. Construction should start sometime in the 2020s. Unlike the widening project on I-77 in north Mecklenburg, the toll lanes will be owned by the state. 

Im going to open up an old wound but I gotta be me.

Instead of of funding and building 795, 840, 74, 73 or 84 I think that the interstate designation for that convluted interstate from RAL to Norfolk; the state should have addresssed the high growth areas first.  I summize the finding of these projects was a way to stick it to CLT for building light rail.  Which light rail has been a catalyst for growth and actually a reason CLT is a legit GDP, pop growth, job creation juggernaught.  If I'm wrong someone correct me.  

I actually could understand 74 if there was a numberesd spur to CLT, I-174, that ended in WILM or even dog-legged to the SC border.  But we all know that is not the reality nor how this is going to end.

  • Thanks 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, NcSc74 said:

Im going to open up an old wound but I gotta be me.

Instead of of funding and building 795, 840, 74, 73 or 84 I think that the interstate designation for that convluted interstate from RAL to Norfolk; the state should have addresssed the high growth areas first.  I summize the finding of these projects was a way to stick it to CLT for building light rail.  Which light rail has been a catalyst for growth and actually a reason CLT is a legit GDP, pop growth, job creation juggernaught.  If I'm wrong someone correct me.  

I actually could understand 74 if there was a numberesd spur to CLT, I-174, that ended in WILM or even dog-legged to the SC border.  But we all know that is not the reality nor how this is going to end.

I genuinely don't understand why they haven't already dedicated us74 as a future interstate to Rockingham where it can link up with i-74 and continue to the coast.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, easzman said:

That's what I thought. The stretch between Nations Ford Rd and 277 is very narrow in some sections with businesses close on each side. 

Would there be a benefit in limiting access to the road by closing off ramps at Nations Ford Rd, Clanton, Remount, and West Blvd? I know it sounds crazy to do this but can you imagine how bad this road will be in another 5 years as more folks choose to live in SC and work in Charlotte. Perhaps it just needs to become too painful of a choice to make and in the end it will be difficult for employers to hire people for jobs located in uptown if it's not suited for a young college grad willing to live in NoDa or SouthEnd.

I don't think shutting down those ramps is a good idea.  Yes, it may help alleviate some traffic but at the expense of those who live in NC, mainly off those exits and pay NC taxes to maintain and expand 77 all the while benefiting people in SC who do not pay these same taxes.   I believe that after 77 is widen as planed, along with a mix of express buses and the blue line, there should be plenty of options for those people who live in SC to make it to Uptown.  No, I do not believe it is not going to become too painful and employers are not going to find it difficult to hire people for all the jobs located in Uptown.  All major, fast growing cities have traffic issues, many worse than Charlotte, and employers continue to build and add jobs in those downtowns. 

 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/4/2019 at 1:16 PM, easzman said:

That's what I thought. The stretch between Nations Ford Rd and 277 is very narrow in some sections with businesses close on each side. 

Would there be a benefit in limiting access to the road by closing off ramps at Nations Ford Rd, Clanton, Remount, and West Blvd? I know it sounds crazy to do this but can you imagine how bad this road will be in another 5 years as more folks choose to live in SC and work in Charlotte. Perhaps it just needs to become too painful of a choice to make and in the end it will be difficult for employers to hire people for jobs located in uptown if it's not suited for a young college grad willing to live in NoDa or SouthEnd.

Or, this stretch of highway should simply not be widened. If we widen it to 10 lanes that too will fill and people will be clamoring for 14 lanes. If

This will have the added benefit of making SC less desirable because of the congestion between the state line and Charlotte.

Put this kind of money into commuter rail to Rock Hill and pay back far more dividends than a massive highway widening.

The costs? Serious loss of parkland, something which the county can ill afford, loss of additional historic neighborhood fabric, and loss of over 140 businesses.

Feasability Study here: https://connect.ncdot.gov/projects/planning/FeasibilityStudiesDocuments/Feasibility-Study_0810A_Report_2015.pdf

These are the Alternative plans in the fesability study (Note these are 2014 $, so it will likely be far higher when land aquisition would start)

  • It is anticipated the 5-2-2-5 Alternative will require 122 residential relocations and 187 business relocations, with a total cost of $1,028,000,000, which includes $310,100,000 in right of way, $3,250,000 for Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS), $26,250,000 for potential toll equipment, $686,800,000 in construction costs, and $1,600,000 in utility costs.
  • It is anticipated the 4-2-2-4 Alternative will require 110 residential relocations and 136 business relocations, with a total cost of $970,800,000, which includes $283,900,000 in right of way, $3,250,000 for ITS, $26,250,000 for potential toll equipment, $655,800,000 in construction costs, and $1,600,000 in utility costs.
  • It is anticipated the 3-2-2-3 Alternative will require 107 residential relocations and 135 business relocations, with a total cost of $925,400,000, which includes $262,500,000 in right of way, $3,250,000 for ITS, $26,250,000 for potential toll equipment, $631,800,000 in construction costs, and $1,600,000 in utility costs.
  • It is anticipated the 5-2-2-5 Elevated Alternative will require 112 residential relocations and 142 business relocations, with a total cost of $2,160,900,000, which includes $288,600,000 in right of way, $3,250,000 for ITS, $26,250,000 for potential toll equipment, $1,841,200,000 in construction costs, and $1,600,000 in utility costs. • It is anticipated the 3-2-2-3 C-D System Alternative will require 122 residential relocations and 187 business relocations, with a total cost of $1,130,600,000, which includes $357,700,000 in right of way, $3,250,000 for ITS, $26,250,000 for potential toll equipment, $741,800,000 in construction costs, and $1,600,000 in utility costs.

 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^All alternatives have the same cost for toll equipment.  If the new lanes aren't free, they shouldn't fill up so quickly as with a normal expressway widening.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Toll lanes on 485 will not provide relief to the congestion getting to 485 due to all the commuters coming in from Union County & Lancaster County. The feeder roads (Johnston Rd / Rea Rd /  Providence Rd) are backed up every morning and evening.  

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not to mention what happens when the toll lanes get backed up because there is only 1 lane, there are going to be unavoidable car accidents from merging to and from the lanes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, grodney said:

Whoa the 485 lanes start this year?  Wow and ugh.  And am I reading that correctly that they're adding an exit at Weddington Rd in the same project?

Yes they are starting within the month if not sooner.  and the long planned Weddington Rd exit is apart of this project. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On 7/10/2019 at 11:39 AM, KJHburg said:

Yes they are starting within the month if not sooner.  and the long planned Weddington Rd exit is apart of this project. 

The Weddington Road exit will just further the congestion, would be great to see them not build the final 2 unbuilt interchanges and forbid any new ones in the future. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A friend who lives on Tremont in South End told me his technique of navigating home from northbound 77. He exited at Remount, crossed straight on to Toomey and turned right on Tremont. If one catches the light at Tryon this is nearly seamless. This answers the northbound issue as your solution was for southbound.

I have also used two of the three businesses that are on the dead end part of Tremont where it turns to parallel 77. As forgotten an address as one could find. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^ I say we nominate you to head up DOT.  I would agree with Everything you posted ertley! 

A2

Edited by A2.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, ertley said:

 

Perhaps the future widening of 77 would obviate this, but it's just a bridge, so I don't see how it couldn't be achieved, if prioritized. 

I agree with this 120%. Tremont needs to be a funnel into and out of South End from 77. The feasibility plans (below) for 77 would kill your idea as presented, however they are just now actually designing the road way. It will have at least four fewer lanes than this monstrosity below.

Can we bury 77 through here? 

image.png.434bc721f316b3e3d3d02958fe8256eb.png

  • Like 1
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, jjwilli said:

I agree with this 120%. Tremont needs to be a funnel into and out of South End from 77. The feasibility plans (below) for 77 would kill your idea as presented, however they are just now actually designing the road way. It will have at least four fewer lanes than this monstrosity below.

Can we bury 77 through here? 

image.png.434bc721f316b3e3d3d02958fe8256eb.png

Where did you find this map from?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • 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.