Jump to content

Charlotte's Outerbelt / Outerloop


Neo

Recommended Posts

Yep that is what happened. And the Charlotte City council voted to do this knowing thieir position on the MPO and the long term plans of the region where the MPO, the State, and all of the local leaders had agreed to finish the road before any money would be used to widen the road. The city council, which created the mess down there in the first place, broke this agreement. The end result is the vote in the NC Legislature where the House voted overwhemlingly to prevent the widening with loop money. (namely by delaying the north section)

It looks as if at least one of the Mecklenburg Senators will vote for the delay as well which should put the last nail in the coffin of the Charlotte City Council's plans.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Replies 182
  • Created
  • Last Reply

When did this happen?  Was it an MOU?  That was certainly never mentioned in any discussions I am aware of.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

If you are referring to discussions at the NCDOT, that is no surprise as it seems to be remarkably disconnected from the local road situation. The towns are quite frustrated with the organization's complete disregard for what the local leaders want and what the people need. As a result they are constantly forced to do end runs at the NC Legislature as this example proves. Hopefully one day there will be enough political clout in getting Legislators elected which will break up the NCDOT and turn over more control of road building to the localities. NC having the 2nd largest department in the country yet some of the worst urban roads that I have ever seen is simply mind blowing.

To answer your question about the plans, I don't have the specifics but I believe if you do a search on the Observer's files you will find this has been the stated plan since cries to widen that part of the road began more than a decade ago.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

I've been looking at this thread and have a couple of suggestions to throw in as well.  Something I have not seen mentioned on the I-485 project in the Northwest is the easy connection/bypass of the city that is created for people traveling on 85 with the completion of the loop.  Folks traveling on I-85 through town would be able to take this and bypass driving through the commuter nightmare through the city.  Wouldn't that make a significant impact on some of the traffic issues that this city faces right now?

Just a couple thoughts.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

i agree with you that the northern and western parts of 485 will be very good bypasses for 77 and 85 when they are complete, as taking them will be only a few miles longer than taking the main freeways through the city. (this is very much unlike taking the southern and eastern parts as a bypass to get between pineville and concord, as it is many more miles of travel).

I think it will resolve some traffic in 77 through the city, especially for truck traffic leaving the arrowood industrial park and the airport and heading north. there is so much growth, though in SW mecklenburg and Mountain Island Lake/Northlake areas, though, that it could very quickly become less valuable as a bypass.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes it matters, the University City lacks infrastructure, the only radial road is Harris Blvd and that is congested, it would provide a better connection from University City to Hunterville where NC 73 is also congested, plus it will be an alternate for I-85.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Northbound I-85 tells us to exit on to I-485 to travel to Rock Hill, not Mint Hill, Matthews or Pineville.  If a driver has missed I-77 south while on 85 north and is traveling to Rock Hill, they don't need directions that send them 40 miles out of the way.  They need to hang up the phone.  I say let em figure it out when they get to Greensboro. 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

i just laughed pretty hard about that. i never noticed it before, but that is just ridiculous!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lol, I don't get the purpose of that Rock Hill sign on Northbound I-85, well the locals would know not to take it, and I'm sure anyone with a nagivation or a map know that's not the best and shortest route to Rock Hill. I understand taking I-485 towards Hunterville once it is finish all the way to Western leg to I-77 South to bypass the city entirely for traffic or accident problems. However when there are NASCAR events, state trooper advise out of towners to use I-485 to get to the University Area, but I think that is stupid to, that's like an extra 10 miles.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://www.charlotte.com/mld/charlotte/new...on/12071704.htm

http://www.charlotte.com/mld/charlotte/new...on/12071712.htm

Two points of good news in the paper today. The gas tax is rising a bit, which could raise as much as $130m more per year than before for construction across the state.

Also, a deal was struck for the outerbelt to put the northern leg back on track to start in 2010, and then Southern part to begin by 2012.

I'm glad that it worked out... we need to get the outerbelt construction BEHIND us as soon as possible so our road money can start going to our radial freeways like 77 and independence. The longer it takes to finish build 485, the more it costs us overall.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with you Mesian. I'm a bit nitpicky myself when it comes to signage. Besides the ones you bring up, it also peeves me that the names of numbered roads are often not spelled out on 485 interstate signs. In the university area, we see exits for 49 (not University City Blvd) and 29 (not Tryon St.). Further south, there is an exit for "Matthews" (no road given).

And they still have no consistency with directional signs on 485. On the western side, they sometimes use "outer" and "inner" loop. On the eastern/southern side they exclusively use N, S, E or W.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey, widening in 2012 is better than being widening beyond 2030. The Weddington interchange as claimed by CDOT and MUMPO will relieved the congestion for commuters going towards Union County and will help the air quality in that area. But the Weddington interchange isn't really close to another interchange for a couple of miles.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

as long as the city holds firm on zoning around the weddington interchange, it can serve to improve traffic, as it will reduce congestion on the providence interchange. those people are already users of 485 west of johnston, it is just that they have to use another interchange and sit in traffic to get distributed.

I'm just hoping that the widening of the south section isn't the lesser version, where only 1 lane is added. It probably already has enough traffic to justify 2 extra lanes, but 7 years from now it will be even more so... so if they just approved the lesser widening, we will be right where we are now in 7 years.... delaying construction so long that the approved project is obsolete before construction even begins.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm just hoping that the widening of the south section isn't the lesser version, where only 1 lane is added.  It probably already has enough traffic to justify 2 extra lanes, but 7 years from now it will be even more so... so if they just approved the lesser widening, we will be right where we are now in 7 years.... delaying construction so long that the approved project is obsolete before construction even begins.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The concensus was to add only 1 lane in each direction. But they do have years to plan it now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The concensus was to add only 1 lane in each direction. But they do have years to plan it now.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

does that mean it definitely will get only one lane in the 2012 construction? that is a big shame, and i'm sure that is based on money more than anything else.

Hopefully people will get the hint that 485 is not just going to be expanded when the traffic builds up... so they'll consider that more when they buy their house far out in the burbs. Perhaps people are learning that already, and it is a factor in the growth of intown housing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it's both money and the engineering, it was asked before why wouldn't the proposal to widen I-485 be 4 lanes in each direction, but a CDOT planner said there might not be enough ROW under the overpasses. It's on this post, but a couple of pages back. It seems like NCDOT has a new standard of 11 ft for the median shoulders and 12 ft and 15 ft for the outside shoulders.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it's both money and the engineering, it was asked before why wouldn't the proposal to widen I-485 be 4 lanes in each direction, but a CDOT planner said there might not be enough ROW under the overpasses. It's on this post, but a couple of pages back. It seems like NCDOT has a new standard of 11 ft for the median shoulders and 12 ft and 15 ft for the outside shoulders.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

yeah, i questioned it a few pages back, too :). that is just silly if they scrap an extra travel line simply for width of a shoulder under a bridge. for crying out loud you have to hold your breath to stay in your lane on 77 between 85 and 277... surely they can make a compromise on 485, too.

It is a little irritating that an ncdot rule like that basically requires that they tear down bridges to get the extra lanes, and then of course there is no money for it... this might be the real reason we can't afford to build what we need. I'm also sure this traces back to SUVs... (not that i want to restart that whole discussion), but it would be interesting know why this rule exists (jojo?).

thanks for the update s&z.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://www.charlotte.com/mld/charlotte/news/12081137.htm

Yesterday, the observer's report of the 485 deal was cast in a very positive light. The northern section is now earlier than was feared a few months ago, and the other construction was included in the 7 year plan. It was cast as a positive that NCDOT was likely to approve it.

Today, the same reporter announces a four year delay in 485. Is there any change in the dates compared to yesterday's article? no. the only news is that NCDOT approved the dates.

is dianne bipolar?

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.