Triangle road & traffic thread

[ncwebguy]

Maybe someone could explain this: Why would the first plan for Wake expansion be to follow the 'Easttrans' path? Why are we neglecting the entire east side of DT Raleigh? For me, these are A) folks who would use the train, and B) densities are much higher than any other station would have.

There are *no* train tracks on the east side of DT Raleigh. The Easttrans line is the closest, as it runs under Wilmington, across Blount extension near the Cargill plant, and under Hammond Road. That is to the south more than east, and is on the fringe of downtown. Tracks *through* downtown Raleigh might run along MLK but not through the city center. Though maybe a lane could be spared each way on New Bern/Edenton, and maybe along Morgan once New Bern crosses Person headed west. That would be cool, therefore not likely to happen. Densities are highish, but is still primarily single family homes with the occasional apartment complex and housing project.

The eastside *is* well served by buses, with most east/west running streets being at most a block away from a bus stop. If there is good bus to train transfers, a train isn't necessary.

Also the NE Cary Parkway extension combined with no 40 access at Trinity will send all the cars to 54/40 anyway. Maybe the 40/Wade development will want to improve Trinity Road's I-40 around 2014?

[sax184]

We have to remember that 8 million live in DC metro area. That is about how many people live in the entire state of NC. If rail ain't working there then there are other problems.

The DC Metro system works very well, carrying over 800,000 commuters and tourists daily. This is about 2/3 of the entire Triangle population. Anyone who says the DC rail system doesn't "work" shouldn't be talking about transportation, because they have no idea what they're talking about.

Saying "it doesn't relieve traffic congestion" because the roads are still cluttered is brain-dead analysis. It does relieve congestion for the 800,000 people who aren't in their cars! It probably moves the level of service up a grade (maybe from grade F to grade E or D) in certain corridors, which prevents total gridlock.

Rail doesn't make traffic disappear. It makes the overall throughput and efficiency of a region's transportation system increase.

Boston just took a big hit to its transport system with the collapse in the Central Artery Tunnel, serving one of the busier airports in the US and the confluence of 2 interstates in the downtown of a city of 3 million people. Has Boston's economy caved in? No, because the MBTA, which was already carrying 1.3 million people every day extended rush hour service from 6 am to 6 PM on 2 subway lines, and is adding extra cars to commuter rail trains, and augmenting its extensive bus network.

Now, let's pretend that I-40 suffered some similar catastrophic incident that would close the road somewhere near RTP and need 2-3 weeks for repair. The work commute in the Triangle under such conditions is for the most part, over- game, set, match, goodnight, lights out, don't even try getting to work-over.

[ChiefJoJo]

the MBTA, which was already carrying 1.3 million people every day extended rush hour service from 6 am to 6 PM on 2 subway lines, and is adding extra cars to commuter rail trains

The great thing about rail transit... you can very easily add capacity as needed once it's up and running.

[Cary NC]

The DC Metro system works very well, carrying over 800,000 commuters and tourists daily. This is about 2/3 of the entire Triangle population. Anyone who says the DC rail system doesn't "work" shouldn't be talking about transportation, because they have no idea what they're talking about.

Saying "it doesn't relieve traffic congestion" because the roads are still cluttered is brain-dead analysis. It does relieve congestion for the 800,000 people who aren't in their cars! It probably moves the level of service up a grade (maybe from grade F to grade E or D) in certain corridors, which prevents total gridlock.

Rail doesn't make traffic disappear. It makes the overall throughput and efficiency of a region's transportation system increase.

Boston just took a big hit to its transport system with the collapse in the Central Artery Tunnel, serving one of the busier airports in the US and the confluence of 2 interstates in the downtown of a city of 3 million people. Has Boston's economy caved in? No, because the MBTA, which was already carrying 1.3 million people every day extended rush hour service from 6 am to 6 PM on 2 subway lines, and is adding extra cars to commuter rail trains, and augmenting its extensive bus network.

Now, let's pretend that I-40 suffered some similar catastrophic incident that would close the road somewhere near RTP and need 2-3 weeks for repair. The work commute in the Triangle under such conditions is for the most part, over- game, set, match, goodnight, lights out, don't even try getting to work-over.

I was quoting a person who said rail doesn't work in DC. I KNOW RAIL WORKS IN DC. I RIDE IT EVERYTIME I VISIT THERE. In response to that poster, I was merely pointing out that the shear volume of people in the metro area is not a reason that rail doesn't work there.

[Jerseyman4]

In the mid to late 90s, you heard a lot about the TTA on the news (WTVD mostly from memory). Pretty much after Bush got into office in 2000, you heard less and less about the TTA and more and more about highway related stories (expansion of I-540, Capital Blvd traffic issues, NC 55 widening project, etc).

[RaleighRob]

I live in Durham and work in Knightdale (blessed be that I travel 50-75% of the time and just need to get to the airport). With the price of gas and traffic growth patterns (I-540 can't come soon enough), I'm considering a relo to North Raleigh or Knightdale (now we're talking SPRAWLISM on steroids).

Well, you don't have to live in sprawling suburbia to have an easy commute to Knightdale, just quite.

Instead of North Raleigh, try the Longview neighborhood areas of eastern Raleigh. (The Independent Weekly recently named it one of the most promising up-and-coming areas of Ral.)

You'll be just a few minutes from downtown for fun stuff, and you can cruise down New Bern Ave (Business 64, which now has way less traffic thanks to the new bypass) to get to Knightdale.

So keep that option in mind.

[Atlside]

Durham is first city in the Triangle area to have urban lighting on its freeways. Charlotte has long had lighting on I-85 and I-77. Burlington has lights on I-40/85 (often not turned on) and Greensboro has had lighting for years along the old part of I-85/I-40 before the I-40 split. Winston-Salem has lighting along the old I-40 through the downtown area and on US 52 near the downtown area.

Click photos links to view live images

http://apps.dot.state.nc.us/tims/cameras/v...oxboro-i-85.jpg

http://apps.dot.state.nc.us/tims/cameras/v...=guess-i-85.jpg

http://apps.dot.state.nc.us/tims/cameras/v...andale-i-85.jpg

http://www.ncdot.org/traffictravel/cameras/triangle.html

Do you think that I-40 in Durham and Raleigh should have lighting as well?

How about on the Durham Freeway HWY 147, on the I-440 Beltline and on US 70 between I-85 and where it becomes Glenwood Avenue?

[RaleighRob]

So the newly fixed parts of I-85 will have lights? Cool!

There are some at the I-40 interchange with Fayetteville Road/Southpoint exit. But that's all I've seen in the Triangle really so far.

I'd be satisfied if they at least put them at intersections like they did at 40/Fayetteville. Having it along the whole line isn't a total necessity, but just at major intersections would be an improvement.

On a related note, anyone else here notices that Durham (and Chapel Hill too) City streets have WAY less lights on them than Raleigh city streets do?? No wonder so many people think Durham is "dangerous"...most of its streets are pitch black.

[ChiefJoJo]

FYI, info on lighting is in this topic.

[DCMetroRaleigh]

It's about time. They need to do the same with I-40 throughout the Triangle.

[JDC]

On a related note, anyone else here notices that Durham (and Chapel Hill too) City streets have WAY less lights on them than Raleigh city streets do?? No wonder so many people think Durham is "dangerous"...most of its streets are pitch black.

I'm sure that's a factor. Even in Trinity Park and Duke Park and some of the "nicer," shall we say, neighborhoods are very dark, but it's not only a result of little or no lighting but the huge, old, low hanging trees that create canopies over the streets.

Recently though, on the topic of lighting, they've installed some pretty great old fashioned street lamps downtown. One of these days when it's not so damn hot I'll get some pics on here.

[RaleighRob]

I'm sure that's a factor. Even in Trinity Park and Duke Park and some of the "nicer," shall we say, neighborhoods are very dark, but it's not only a result of little or no lighting but the huge, old, low hanging trees that create canopies over the streets.

I'm glad I'm not the only one who noticed that. Perhaps if they got brighter bulbs, trimmed branches near the light socket, etc that'd help. But I think they're also more widely-spaced out than Raleigh's.

That, and of course, I suspect Duke Power is even lazier than Progress Energy is at replacing burnt-out bulbs.

[DCMetroRaleigh]

That canopy of trees is why the area is so devastated by ice storms.

[Tayfromcarolina]

All I-540 interchanges have some lighting of some sort in Wake county and the stretch of I-540 that goes beneath the Knightdale Parkway (U.S. 64) near the spanking brand new knightdal Target and Home Depot is lit up like a christmas tree for a few miles. Simaler to the 40/85 highway lighted down the median. I need to take some pics out that way.

[pack-man]

Congrats to Durham for getting a world-class highway. that section of I-85 is top-notch. You really feel like you've entered a big city for that brief section.

[DCMetroRaleigh]

It's time Raleigh look like a real city on I-40, and not the black forest.

[ewt]

Its sad that the capital city of NC has no street lights. When I moved here, I thought it was either a joke or part of the I-40 renovation that would be replaced. Guess not.

[Sharpless]

Its sad that the capital city of NC has no street lights. When I moved here, I thought it was either a joke or part of the I-40 renovation that would be replaced. Guess not.

I think you meant to say that it

[RaleighRob]

I think you meant to say that it

[hoobo]

The Triangle highways really need some lighting. It's just plain dangerous without them. It was raining, not pouring, on my drive back home to Virginia Beach from an open house at UNC a couple years back. It was at night around 8 or so and I was just coming up on the interchange near RBC. I couldn't see anything with all the ambient lighting (makes it hard to see but does illuminate the road) in the area and glare from the opposing traffic. I was using the other cars' taillights to figure out the lanes. And like I said it wasn't pouring, just raining. The only other time I've been so tense driving was on I-64 through downtown Richmond in a hard downpour. Anyway, I understand not having lights on a rural highway with little traffic and no ambient lighting, but not in a major metro area.

[ncwebguy]

The 40/Wade intersection is near Umstead State park, so that may be why there are no lights from there to the airport.

440 has a lot of residence that don't want the light pollution. The City of Oaks *likes* being in the middle of a forest. Same for Durham Freeway south of downtown and north of RTP.

Lighting at exits (and intersections like 40/440/US 1 intersection in Cary) would be appropriate, but not along straight stretches of interstate or highway just for the sake of lighting.

[Subway Scoundrel]

Use paint that is reflective and use reflectors. Lights are pollution and it is great we do not have it on our interstates. As far as the streets, I like it the way it is. You dont go to Europe and see street lights lit up like bombs. They are very subdued.

Sorry, but I find the talk of "we would be a big city if we just had bright lights on our streets and interstates" as .....well..............it is best I just don't say anything at this point.

Like I said on the other long post about this. You don't walk into the room butt naked with seductive low lighting where you lover is waiting for you and then throw on every light there is to make is as bright as a atomic bomb and say "LOOK AT ME". Leave it a little dim and nice and enjoy the mood.

[willrusso]

The beltline and I-40 are black at night. That is not attractive. lol

[Atlside]

All I-540 interchanges have some lighting of some sort in Wake county and the stretch of I-540 that goes beneath the Knightdale Parkway (U.S. 64) near the spanking brand new knightdal Target and Home Depot is lit up like a christmas tree for a few miles. Simaler to the 40/85 highway lighted down the median. I need to take some pics out that way.

Cool, take some photos of the freeway lighting when you have the chance. That'll be nice to see.

Other Triangle freeways that could use lights?

1. I-40 between Raleigh (Wade split) and Durham (South Point area).

2. Raleigh beltline (the older one).

3. Durham Freeway definatley needs lights from North edge of RTP to I-85

4. US 70 from I-85 to Miami/Mineral Springs Rd

It's odd that the Durham Freeway has no lighting and it runs into the heart of Durham City.

Use paint that is reflective and use reflectors. Lights are pollution and it is great we do not have it on our interstates. As far as the streets, I like it the way it is. You dont go to Europe and see street lights lit up like bombs. They are very subdued.

Sorry, but I find the talk of "we would be a big city if we just had bright lights on our streets and interstates" as .....well..............it is best I just don't say anything at this point.

Like I said on the other long post about this. You don't walk into the room butt naked with seductive low lighting where you lover is waiting for you and then throw on every light there is to make is as bright as a atomic bomb and say "LOOK AT ME". Leave it a little dim and nice and enjoy the mood.

In American cities the freeways in urban areas have lighting. It's very unsafe when it's raining at night and it's not safe if your car were to break down on an urban freeway at night.

European cities also do not sprawl like American cities. It's a totally different kind of set up in Europe.

[dmccall]

I think 40 needs lighting for safety reasons. More than one time I've been out there and seen a deer doing the hokey-pokey between lanes 2 and 3. Problem was that when going 70 mpg with light traffic, you don't get any warning (unless, of course, they paint the deer with that highly reflective paint, too).

There was another time when I hit an area during rain and it became a complete white out. I had no idea which way the road was turning or how far away the wall was. Lights would have helped in both of those situations.