Jump to content

Charlotte's Outerbelt / Outerloop


Neo

Recommended Posts

In all honesty, Charlotte is not the only city in NC feeling the money squeeze, and in many ways Charlotte is better off than the Triad and the Triangle. After living on both sides of the fence now, it sounds absurd to blame Charlotte's road woes on some kind of Raleigh preference from the DOT. :lol:

Instead of being Meck-centric perhaps the urban areas of the state should act together and try to obtain more road funding.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Replies 182
  • Created
  • Last Reply

When NCDOT assigned these projects for planning, design, etc., it was some time in the early 80s I think.  At that time, you can bet that all the sections of where 485 is now were then, in fact, rural as designated by the census bureau--which is what determines the project classification (e.g., Rural, Interstate, Urban, etc.).  US Census Bureau classifies urbanized areas as continiguous areas with a population density of at least 1000 persons per square mile.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Indeed that was the case and this came directly from the city/county governments that told the State they intended to keep it that way. Well the local government here can't say no to the developers, especially developers such as the Harris's, and the zoning was changed to allow the current mess to develop down there.

i.e. 485 is overwhelmed in that part of the county not because the State/NCDOT did not design it properly, but because the City & County did not stick to their own planning which the road was designed for. They told the NCDOT to develop a rurul highway, then built a bunch of sprawl around it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Or since Mecklenburg voted democrat last election, we will get no representation like DC.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

That makes no sense since we happen to have a Democratic Governer, the Democrats hold a majority in the Legislature, and the Speaker of the House is from Mecklenburg County.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In all honesty, Charlotte is not the only city in NC feeling the money squeeze, and in many ways Charlotte is better off than the Triad and the Triangle. After living on both sides of the fence now, it sounds absurd to blame Charlotte's road woes on some kind of Raleigh preference from the DOT. :lol:

Instead of being Meck-centric perhaps the urban areas of the state should act together and try to obtain more road funding.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

i agree. i think it is a rural vs city issue. Traditionaly, i think charlotte people think raleigh gets the money they don't deserve, but it is clear with refunds that the dot is redistributing from the cities to the rural divisions that this is something the cities must work toghether on to change the law.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Focus shifts to widening I-485's south leg

Momentum began building Thursday to speed up widening Interstate 485's southern leg, even though that could delay completion of the outerbelt's last stretch in northeast Mecklenburg.

A transportation advisory panel unanimously recommended the shift in priorities on Thursday.

Two other boards are to vote on the controversial proposal Monday and May 18.

Members of the advisory panel, called the Technical Coordinating Committee, said they didn't want to delay the northeast segment and hoped the state might transfer road money from other parts of the state to Charlotte.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the Charlotte region needs to do a better job in selling its needs to the NC Legislature. I don't think it is resentment or anything like that that we don't get more money, instead I think it is because they really don't understand the problems here as they never come to Charlotte. Charlotte really does get a lot of money for road building and if you are say a legislator from Elizabeth city, you would really wonder why so much money is sent to Charlotte and not other parts of the state. (population numbers on a spreadsheet don't effectively tell the story)

I remember when the hurricane Hugo clean up was occuring and people came from all over the state to help with the effort. NC people that had never been to Charlotte. They would remark they simply had no idea the traffic and number of people here were so intense. And that was 15 years ago.

If you look closely at NC, Charlotte due to its location is kinda isolated from the rest of the state and people rarely have to come here unless they do so on purpose. We are also hurt by the fact that a portion of the metro is in SC, yet there is almost no representation in the SC Legislature to help the Charlotte region. I don't think I ever remember anyone from Charlotte bothering to address the Legislature down there. I think the City and County governments would really serve our needs well if they would attempt to partner with SC more. Ironically the best interstate in the region is I-77, on the SC side of the line.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You're right about I-77 monsoon. I've always wondered how York County got on the ball first with I-77. The SCDOT has done wonders for that area in the past 2 years.

What exactly could the SC Legislature do to help the Charlotte metro (besides I-77) on the SC side of things?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know the city of Rock Hill is certainly interested, but good luck with the SC Legislature (epitome of anti-urban). I would've attended the meeting they had a few months ago, but I work second shift, even though I probably will not be in the area once it's established. I believe that demonstrates that Rock Hill/York County sees light rail as a viable option in this area. This past week in the Rock Hill Herald (newspaper), a poll was presented with various options for mass transit to and from Charlotte. Among light rail was commuter rail, diesel multiple units, and bus rapid transit. So far in the poll, light rail is winning.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

:) of course council voted that way. they are spending half a bil on a light rail project that basically bypasses the 77 traffic, relying on 485 to bring them most of their customers. If most of the traffic in the commute is on 485, then lightrail doesn't help, they'd just take park or providence or whatever to get uptown.

i think it will be better FOR northern meck to wait a few more years for the stretch between 77 and 85 in the north. It means that the development pressure will be spread over more years, with slower, more quality growth around there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In an interesting twist in this, Huntersville may vote with Charlotte because they want Charlotte's support in diverting money to the Hwy 73 widening between 115 and 21. This project is much more important to Huntersville than the 85 to 77 connection.

I agree that delaying the 85-77 part of 485 is a good idea. It means that sprawl will stay out of the North for longer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree that delaying the 85-77 part of 485 is a good idea.  It means that sprawl will stay out of the North for longer.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

But the lack of the northern section of I-485 hasn't stopped or slowed sprawl in the north. At least it doesn't appear to have done so.

I still don't see how even light rail can change things. Building it will not make people use it. There is a cultural phenom that has to be addressed. People really really really really want to stay in their cars. They want highways that will get them there faster not mass transit.

I prefer light rail, of course, but I'm in the minority of the Charlotte citizens I know.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the lack of the northern section of 485 is not going to stop or slow sprawl in the north. but when it is built or when constrction starts on it, sprawl will only accelerate and get worse in that area. so in the long-run, delaying construction on the northern leg is better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I prefer light rail, of course, but I'm in the minority of the Charlotte citizens I know.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

That's okay, because the light rail will have only a small minority of the capacity compared to freeways. The key is to have enough people use to sustain it until such time as TOD alon g the tracks and 77 is completely maxed out (already not far away). Capacity on light rail can be added faster and cheaper than 77 lanes. 485, though is a different story, as it is not a transit corridor, and has some median room for more lanes.

There is no way south charlotte can survive without a widened 485 (unfortunately), but north meck will be quite fine without that stretch of 485.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Did anyone attend the TIP meeting in Cornelius yesterday? (I was there)

Also, the council reconsidered the decision on north vs south 485, and did not vote again. In other words, they supported the previous vote to support including the south widening by delaying the north segment by one year. The council directed MUMPO's Chair Pat Mumford's vote to suport that decision, which passed on MUMPO's board last night by a large margin. MUMPO will negotiate with NCDOT to get both projects included as soon as possible.

Here's today's article.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i think this solution is a very good compromise. That means that within a decade (a small length of time fo road building), 485 will be complete, and will be widened between Tryon and Johnston in the south where a significant majority of the usage is and would be.

I think that the wideing of 485 in the south is important for keeping the freeway bottlenecks west of light rail/south blvd. That will make the transit a reasonable alternative. If most of the backups are east of south, then it meters the 77 route, and lowers the proportion of their commute that has light rail as an alternative. and people won't perceive as much value in using light rail for the remainder.

honestly, I can't believe people are complaining about the delay in north east 485. It is the only route in charlotte that has a wide arterial alternate route (harris boulevard).

In fact, i wish mump would work to make a serious alternate surface route to 485 in that section. The easiest option is to connect centrum parkway across little sugar creek to south boulvard, so the alternative will be that parkway, and then all the parkways around carolina place, and then widen lancaster highway between carolina place parkway and ballantyne commons parkway. Right now, it just 1 lane per direction to avoid 485 between south and johnston, going through pineville.

http://maps.google.com/maps?q=pineville,nc...,0.024916&hl=en

I know they won't do this, but perhaps an exit only lane for park road south of carolina place mall, to create a different option for mall traffic, that is all right turns to the mall, and in conjunction with widening park road and lancaster highway, is yet another non-freeway path to ballantyne.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

then widen lancaster highway between carolina place parkway and ballantyne commons parkway.  Right now, it just 1 lane per direction to avoid 485 between south and johnston, going through pineville. 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I don't know if that would be possible or feasible. The buildings on that stretch are pretty close to the road so there's not much land to take for a widening. There's the James K. Polk Homesite which is a National Landmark (or is it just a State site) that I don't think they would cut into and across the street is the lake for a set of apartments. You go farther down and you get to the church that is about 30 feet from the road and across the street are houses that are pretty close to the road as well, with a steep incline so they would essentially have to buy all of those houses. Then right next to Ballantyne Commons, you have an apartment complex that is also pretty close to the roadway. I think it would be too much trouble to widen Lancaster Highway.

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.