Triangle road & traffic thread

[flith]

I've found reflectors are more helpful than overhead lights in rain or fog. It would be nice if the DOT would maintain the reflectors and reflective paint on the freeways. There are multiple spots on I-40 throughout NC where its hard to tell where the lanes are at night in the rain.

[DCMetroRaleigh]

"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."

Says who? Not most major cities. Not the DC area, not Charlotte, not Richmond, not Baltimore. Bring the lights. End the darkness.

"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."

When you got a body like my lover and me, we use spotlights.

[JDC]

When you got a body like my lover and me, we use spotlights.

[ncwebguy]

How many miles of the interstates in major cities with lighting surrounded by single family residences? Little, if any. At the time of the creation of the intestate highway system, those roads were zoned for industrial uses, either manufacturing, shipping, etc. I-85 and I-77 in Charlotte, the 95 corridor near Richmond, the Baltimore/Washington corridor, the New Jersey Turnpike, etc. go through mostly uninhabited land. Durham Freeway north of RTP and the beltline did not zone appropriately. Sound barriers are not light barriers.

A lot of big cities have few trees in them, so should we cut all our trees down? Should we base all our decisions on what big cities do? If lighting helps visibility, why aren't airport runways well lit? Not on poles, but from the side of the runway sending the light across. From personal experience, I know lights don't help when a windshield is full of water.

[Atlside]

Should US 1 (the Southwest Wake Freeway) in Cary have ligting all the way from Apex to I-440?

[ChiefJoJo]

Should US 1 (the Southwest Wake Freeway) in Cary have ligting all the way from Apex to I-440?

From 1/64 split to 440, yes I think so... see this post.

[NcSc74]

My trip to SoCal taught me a lesson. From just outside of San Diego almost all the way to LA city limits there are no lights. Now there are some in the centers of each city area but as a whole I-5 is not lit the through much of the cities. I have been the biggest advocate of lighting but when you look at it is more of an aesthetic thing. However has there been studies to see if lights or lack there of is a safety hazzard. I agree that 440 is too dark. This is NC we are talking about. Deer heaven in certain months. I like to see what I am going to hit especially when I am moving at 65mph. I can except lighting in stretches in urban areas and such. I do love that stretch of 85 through Burlington though.

[pack-man]

I-85 isn't completely lit through Durham, but it is lit in key areas. this is the case along I-85 in Burlington,Graham, Mebane...etc. It gives off the appearance of being completely lit up, but it really isn't. But this key lighting scenario is a lot safer. They did a really good job w/ the spacing along I-85 in Durham.

[kayman]

The funny thing is a lot of urbanized areas in the South in general do not have lit freeways. The vast majority of the growth in most cities down here have occurred in the last 25-30 years, so this is problem not just in The Triangle but everywhere.

[Atlside]

The funny thing is a lot of urbanized areas in the South in general do not have lit freeways. The vast majority of the growth in most cities down here have occurred in the last 25-30 years, so this is problem not just in The Triangle but everywhere.

Which ubran cities in the South don't have urban lighting? From what I can remember the following do have urban lighting:

Memphis

Louisville

Nashville

Atlanta

Chattanooga

Macon

Valdosta

Montgomery

Birmingham

Mobile

New Orleans

Tampa

Jacksonville

Miami

Orlando

Greenville

Richmond

Norfolk

Washington

Baltimore

Charlotte

Greensboro (I-40/old I-85)

Burlington, NC

Winston-Salem (old I-40 downtown)

[kayman]

Which ubran cities in the South don't have urban lighting? From what I can remember the following do have urban lighting:

Memphis

Louisville

Nashville

Atlanta

Chattanooga

Macon

Valdosta

Montgomery

Birmingham

Mobile

New Orleans

Tampa

Jacksonville

Miami

Orlando

Greenville

Richmond

Norfolk

Washington

Baltimore

Charlotte

Greensboro (I-40/old I-85)

Burlington, NC

Winston-Salem (old I-40 downtown)

What I mean was parts of the urbanized areas not all of them. Like in Birmingham vast majority of the highways don't have lighting on them (due to the lights have blown). However, there are still parts like I-20/59 west of Fairfield that doesn't have any lighting at all.

[DurhamDivaInRaleigh]

There are a lot of Durham-related things that I missed while I was off at college and living on the coast. I was talking to a longtime Durham resident the other day, and he said that NOT having a loop around Durham has damaged the growth of the city. He said Raleigh has TWO loops--I-440 and I-540--and Durham doesn't have one at all. He said that the idea was blocked by hard-core environmentalists, and now it will be virtually impossible to get one built.

I am 100% ignorant on this subject. Has lack of a loop harmed Durham? What were the objections to getting one built?

[NCMike1981]

This is what I've gathered based on my limited knowledge on the subject. The DOT has/had this program to build urban loop highways around all the major cities in NC. Durham was supposed to get one, but environmentalists have pretty much blocked it from happening since it was first proposed back in the '60's or '70's. Now that the DOT is running low on cash it might not ever happen. I'm not sure it has harmed Durham but I'm sure that not having a loop across the northern part of the city has kept some of the uncontrolled sprawl at bay.

[jermainew]

I'm not sure it has harmed Durham but I'm sure that not having a loop across the northern part of the city has kept some of the uncontrolled sprawl at bay.

Agreed. It seems to me Durham has a several major arteries that make a loop less necessary than in Raleigh. 85 and 147 both represent connectivity that Raleigh does not in that one is a major interstate and the other is a major artery that passes directly through the CBD.....

To deviate a little, I must say driving down the Durham Freeway gives you a big city feel -- it actually is rather impressive given the relative lack of height there

[pack-man]

Agreed...Durham's downtown is in no need of a loop of sorts. The only way a loop benefits Durham is in the northern section where it is a little difficult having to drive to an interstate. Either way, I don't think that it has really hurt Durham, just controlled development outside the CBD more than Raleigh.

[RaleighRob]

I seriously don't think Durham has hurt from not having a loop.

Sure, Raleigh has one and a half now, but there are things that Durham has that Raleigh doesn't:

1- Two interstates instead of one.

2- A freeway that runs thru the middle of downtown linking it with the northern and southern parts of the city. In Raleigh, you can't get thru downtown on a freeway, you have to take city streets/secondary routes.

So really, when you put it all together, it kinda equals out, ya know??

In all actuality, I think the fact that Durham doesn't have a loop is a GOOD thing.

[sax184]

I-440 and I-540 are the two biggest contributors to turning most of Wake county into beige ticky-tack crap over the last 15 years.

Durham's employment base has not suffered at all because of a lack of a loop. RTP, in Durham County, remains a strong employment base, and downtown, while still not so strong, is showing some minor growth. Duke Hospital remains an employment center as well.

[bullcity76]

There are a lot of Durham-related things that I missed while I was off at college and living on the coast. I was talking to a longtime Durham resident the other day, and he said that NOT having a loop around Durham has damaged the growth of the city. He said Raleigh has TWO loops--I-440 and I-540--and Durham doesn't have one at all. He said that the idea was blocked by hard-core environmentalists, and now it will be virtually impossible to get one built.

I am 100% ignorant on this subject. Has lack of a loop harmed Durham? What were the objections to getting one built?

Eno Drive changed to the Northern Durham Parkway (different route...less Eno crossings...less homes/businesses affected).

http://www.ncdot.org/projects/ndp/pdf/pres...ion_project.pdf (pretty big file)

Durham citizens and elected officials decided to put the Loop money towards the East End Connector. It would connect I-85 and I-40 via and a new 6-Lane Interstate and Durham Freeway. Waiting for funding. It would essentially form two loops (I-85, 147 and I-85, 15-501, I-40). It is supposed to provide a route to RTP for Northern Durham residents who currently travel Duke and Gregson to 147.

http://www.durhamloop.org/index.html

Hope this helps...

Durham's growth is constricted by a relatively small county and several watershed areas for Jordan Lake in the South and Falls Lake/Little River in the North. There is also an Urban Growth Boundary that specifies where the city will extend service to.

http://durhamnc.gov/departments/planning/c..._landusemap.pdf (Big File)

[RaleighRob]

I think the one project on the books that would help the most is the proposed connector from NC 147 to US 70. It'd be like only a couple of miles long, but would do some major good....way more than a loop could do.

[citiboi27610]

I like that Durham doesn't have a loop. I only like loops around larger cities like Atalanta, DC and Baltimore where there are principle freeways that directly connect the outer parts to the inner parts. Durham has benefited from not having a loop in my opinion because it is not easy for sprawl to occur. I think it has also helped Durham have a better chance at having an identity versus Raleigh, where there is just too much spread over such a larger area. Greensboro doesn't have a loop (yet) or a freeway through downtown, I think that has really hurt its growth.

[ChiefJoJo]

DOT delays projects, but the good news is... (and this is why I placed it here)

One major Triangle project comes out better this year. For the first time, DOT is pledging construction money to Durham's long-sought $98.8 million East End Connector. The construction date is 2012.

By linking N.C. 147 and U.S. 70, the East End Connector will give Durham a fast freeway between I-85 in northern Durham County, and Research Triangle Park and the airport. It will pull traffic from several routes, including Roxboro and Duke streets in downtown Durham and Glenwood Avenue in the Brier Creek area in northwest Wake County.

[bullcity76]

DOT delays projects, but the good news is... (and this is why I placed it here)

2012 for start of construction is a long time...I would be willing to make East End Connector part of the Triangle Parkway Toll Road. An extra 50 cents to get to RTP or Caryites to get to I-85. (I don't think those numbers will work but 2012?)

[orulz]

I think it would make sense if, as a part of the East End Connector project, NC147 and US70 were re-signed.

1. The north-south portion of the Durham Freeway from T.W. Alexander to the EEC, and the current US 70 bypass from the EEC to I-85 could be signed as NC147, making it a North-South route that runs along Durham's east edge, from I-85 to RTP.

2. The east-west portion of the Durham Freeway could be signed as US-70 and connected with the current US-70 eastbound towards Raleigh.

Would this be too complicated? US70 becomes a pure east-west route, and NC147 becomes a pure north-south route. In addition, the I-85/US-70 multiplex is elminated, except for the 3 miles between exit 170 and 173.

[citiboi27610]

I think it would make sense if, as a part of the East End Connector project, NC147 and US70 were re-signed.

1. The north-south portion of the Durham Freeway from T.W. Alexander to the EEC, and the current US 70 bypass from the EEC to I-85 could be signed as NC147, making it a North-South route that runs along Durham's east edge, from I-85 to RTP.

2. The east-west portion of the Durham Freeway could be signed as US-70 and connected with the current US-70 eastbound towards Raleigh.

Would this be too complicated? US70 becomes a pure east-west route, and NC147 becomes a pure north-south route. In addition, the I-85/US-70 multiplex is elminated, except for the 3 miles between exit 170 and 173.

Interesting idea. It would make alot of sense. It isn't likely to happen though considering as far as real life application goes, it doesn't matter alot. Most people don't really care that US 70 will go more north than necessary. They will just realize that taking the connector to the NC 147 North will get them to Hillsborough quicker.

[ChiefJoJo]

OK, this is really interesting--> check out this article. It pits Durham vs Raleigh (they are in the same NCDOT Division) for loop money for the East End Connector vs the Western Wake extension of I-540, which needs some state TIP money for the "free-revenue" portion of the future toll road.

The key move would redirect into the project about $69 million previously reserved for an extension of Interstate 540 known as the Western Wake Parkway. Officials have been talking about making the parkway a toll road, which would help them raise 75 percent of the money they need for it.

The other 25 percent, however, would have to come from traditional revenue sources, a problem that could make officials in Wake County reluctant to part with the money already reserved for the parkway.

The result is a complicated and still unfolding political ballet involving both money and leverage, with Spaulding occupying a key position because the DOT operating district he represents also covers Wake County. Toll-road backers need his support, and for that matter the Durham planning group's too if they want to pull off their entire plan.