Jump to content

Traffic Congestion and Highway Construction


monsoon

Recommended Posts

Traffic counts at various intersections in Charlotte still not up to pre Covid higher counts.   

I think the daytime traffic outside of rush hours has recovered fully.  Many of these work at home people are doing errands all day long it seems just my observation. 

https://www.wsoctv.com/news/local/theres-less-traffic-charlotte-than-before-pandemic-data-shows/S4ZLB5DHVFA4RA3FQIZUGNK7T4/

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites


1 hour ago, Hushpuppy321 said:

Toll Lanes do suck but I for one hope that this Unsolicited Bid is strongly considered.  This section of I-77 will be tolled either by a State Entity or Private Entity.  Either way the work needs to begin ASAP and not in 2029 or beyond.

I just don’t get it. South Mecklenburg and North Meck same demographics. Didn’t hear a peep from the latter about their toll roads. How did North Meck expect new roads, capacity? The NCDot has stated multiple times it’s BROKE. Then I thought it was southern thing. But Florida, Georgia, Texas cities are covered with toll roads.

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

From today's Charlotte Ledger, they talk about the fight in south Charlotte to block Goldberg's Legacy Arboretum addition. This video reveals that NCDOT (who is responsible for highway 51, correct?) doesn't care about the traffic engineering of the road (note the huge backups entering Providence High, while the oncoming traffic is relatively light and flowing freely). It's clear CDOT isn't advocating effectively with the state to engineer a solution to the traffic flow issue (not to mention the monstrosity that "highway 51" is).

 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

A regional HOT/managed lane system is the future here for all of our freeways. If you want a quicker ride then you'll have to pay in a private vehicle or ride the regional express buses to be offered utilizing these very lanes. See Other Sunbelt major cities such as Atlanta, DC, Miami, Houston,  Los Angeles, and DFW are proof of this setup of regional HOT lanes. 

NCGA are the reason why NCDOT is broke but when you consistently vote anti-urban morons in the majority (see NC GOP) then you wind up with these results. The irony is their main constituency are voters whom live in suburban areas that quickly becoming more urban and densely populated with time.  Fighting the density is killing the goose that lays the golden eggs...

Edited by kayman
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
2 hours ago, jjwilli said:

Agree 110%. Everyone seems to be all on board for the cap idea but as this well put together page calls out, it is very short sighted. Connecting the two pipe foundry parcels and then also having the new Pearl Innovation district directly connected to uptown would be huge for both areas. Let’s hope the city swings for the fences on this one in applying for the federal funds.

I think the cap would be perfect if the option to remove wasn’t there. For example like the Big Dig in Boston where it’s the main highway going right through and removing it would eliminate access. But with the direct route of I-77 to 277 north segment adding no distance at all I’m shocked the idea to remove hasn’t been brought up before. No better time than now to discuss it with the new funding. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, urbanconnector said:

I think the cap would be perfect if the option to remove wasn’t there. For example like the Big Dig in Boston where it’s the main highway going right through and removing it would eliminate access. But with the direct route of I-77 to 277 north segment adding no distance at all I’m shocked the idea to remove hasn’t been brought up before. No better time than now to discuss it with the new funding. 

Why would you keep the northern segment? It would be much easier to remove the northern segment of 277 and fully develop the blocks between 11th and 12th. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, urbanconnector said:

Several reasons imo:

- connectivity with 16 

- direct route from all 4 directions on the north side

- the need for cohesiveness between Uptown and South end is much greater currently than between Uptown and the north. 
- the south segment is taking up more room than the north segment which is straight and directly in between two blocks 

 I can maybe understand prioritizing the South side over the North side but I don't see any advantage of keeping a portion of an urban freeway when we already acknowledge all of the downsides..

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, JHart said:

 I can maybe understand prioritizing the South side over the North side but I don't see any advantage of keeping a portion of an urban freeway when we already acknowledge all of the downsides..

Fair point. End of the day it's still Southern City that's still relatively car-dependent. DOT and probably even the city would never go for it. Not even sure they'll go for removing any of it, even though the benefits are incredible. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Had a random thought today. Obviously many of us are in favor of capping or eliminating some of the freeways around Uptown. Assuming for a moment that that won't happen, what are the odds that we could see some sort of reconstruction of freeway interchanges to save room? See for example the first two images below which are 77 and 277 interchanging with surface roads using humongous looping ramps and a ton of plain grass that looks out of place and very empty, especially being right on the boundaries of Uptown where development is otherwise dense.

I was in Chicago recently and noticed that most of their urban interchanges are way more compact. Just straight on/off ramps that hug the freeway as they rise to and from bridges. See third picture. 

I'm just thinking about how much space that saved. Feels like we could build pretty large housing and office complexes in the spaces that would be freed up if we eliminated those giant loops. Is there any reason we couldn't do this? Wouldn't it also be relatively cheap for an infrastructure project?

1987237541_Screenshot2022-07-16123404.thumb.jpg.24a7adf0f033ac6432fd50b6b2d039e0.jpg

1715499714_Screenshot2022-07-16123434.thumb.jpg.b5c9bef5914e0380c4dbc01be6b1ee4b.jpg

2033498342_Screenshot2022-07-16123922.thumb.jpg.ea8e394bbb3c88f00f13f2738e2196f5.jpg

Edited by Reverie39
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Reverie39 said:

Had a random thought today. Obviously many of us are in favor of capping or eliminating some of the freeways around Uptown. Assuming for a moment that that won't happen, what are the odds that we could see some sort of reconstruction of freeway interchanges to save room? See for example the first two images below which are 77 and 277 interchanging with surface roads using humongous looping ramps and a ton of plain grass that looks out of place and very empty, especially being right on the boundaries of Uptown where development is otherwise dense.

I was in Chicago recently and noticed that most of their urban interchanges are way more compact. Just straight on/off ramps that hug the freeway as they rise to and from bridges. See third picture. 

I'm just thinking about how much space that saved. Feels like we could build pretty large housing and office complexes in the spaces that would be freed up if we eliminated those giant loops. Is there any reason we couldn't do this? Wouldn't it also be relatively cheap for an infrastructure project?

I love this question because they already did it once 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
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.