Jump to content

Triangle road & traffic thread


uptownliving

Recommended Posts

Maybe we're talking about semantics here, but if you ignore the name, the primary purpose of urban loops is to relieve traffic congestion on primary interstate highways (40, 85). The unstated or secondary purpose of urban loops may be related to creating opportunites for suburban development, but their primary purpose is definitely transportation related. As you said, Europe has many loop freeways... Edinburgh (which I've visted) has one, London (M25), etc. The difference is in the transportation accessibility (# interchanges) and land use policies of European nations vs the US. I get your point though. We're probably splitting hairs.

I think we are splitting hairs. I guess my biggest gripe is that instead of focusing on building things that are efficient, most of our policy instruments point towards capacity. Check out 540, and to a lesser degree I-40, in the middle of the day. Talk about underused facilities. On 540, it's unbelievable how little traffic there is at 1 PM for an interstate quality road.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Replies 1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

I think we are splitting hairs. I guess my biggest gripe is that instead of focusing on building things that are efficient, most of our policy instruments point towards capacity. Check out 540, and to a lesser degree I-40, in the middle of the day. Talk about underused facilities. On 540, it's unbelievable how little traffic there is at 1 PM for an interstate quality road.

Greetings,

When you are designing a highway facility, in particular a freeway (I-540), you typically design for the peak hour....in the future. Currently, NCDOT designs for 2030 traffic. However, with growth as it is, 2030 traffic can easy become 2010 traffic. If I-540 was designed for 2007, 1PM traffic, (1) the 2007, the 5-6:30 pm rush hour traffic would become a 5-7:30pm rush hour as all that traffic would attempt to squeeze through a facility designed for lunch hour traffic (2) and the facility would have had be widened by the time it opened b/c would have already been under capacity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I figured I'd post this article on I-540 noise enhanced by the highway's extension to US 64/264.

The DOT has built sound-deflection walls along several stretches of the Outer Loop, using studies that were supposed to predict how much noise the traffic would create, and how many homes would be disturbed.

But the studies were conducted before Schauer's house was built, when the area was sparsely developed. Neighborhoods that grew up fast around the I-540 path after the late 1980s are less likely now to have noise barriers.

Schauer recalls her home builder saying something about a 12-foot berm to block the roar. The homeowners' association haggled with the DOT about adding a noise wall. But nothing happened.

That was one of the more pointless articles I've read. The feds and DOT will not build you a wall if you move AFTER the road's construction is imminent. I know this is coarse, but that woman needs to take a look in the mirror if she thinks she deserves a govt bailout of a problem she created. Let's all have a cry for the person who moves next to the airport and 540 and has trouble sleeping. :cry:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I figured I'd post this article on I-540 noise enhanced by the highway's extension to US 64/264.

The DOT has built sound-deflection walls along several stretches of the Outer Loop, using studies that were supposed to predict how much noise the traffic would create, and how many homes would be disturbed.

But the studies were conducted before Schauer's house was built, when the area was sparsely developed. Neighborhoods that grew up fast around the I-540 path after the late 1980s are less likely now to have noise barriers.

Schauer recalls her home builder saying something about a 12-foot berm to block the roar. The homeowners' association haggled with the DOT about adding a noise wall. But nothing happened.

That was one of the more pointless articles I've read. The feds and DOT will not build you a wall if you move AFTER the road's construction is imminent. I know this is coarse, but that woman needs to take a look in the mirror if she thinks she deserves a govt bailout of a problem she created. Let's all have a cry for the person who moves next to the airport and 540 and has trouble sleeping. :cry:

The key definition is remediation. DOT will remediate all sorts of things, noise, water quality etc.....but won'tt put in noise barriers before land is developed though because that maximizes future land value , who knows what the land is zoned etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When I was looking to purchase a house, I looked at some of the neighborhoods off Westgate Road. I was wondering why the houses were so affordable until the first plane flew over. The plane was only halfway into the decent, but it was close enough for me to stop looking.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The key definition is remediation. DOT will remediate all sorts of things, noise, water quality etc.....but won'tt put in noise barriers before land is developed though because that maximizes future land value , who knows what the land is zoned etc.

Yes, noise abatement... I've actually performed some of these studies myself. Once the env study (EIS) is finished and right-or-way is imminent, that sets the final point that DOT will provide abatement for adjacent properties.

This gets at the issue of development paying it's own way. Taxpayers fund a new road, it drives up land values, gets developed, and then folks complain about traffic, noise, etc. In this situation, developers should fund their own improvements (if they build homes up to the edge of the highway) since the taxpayers just gave them a develoment opportunity (=cash in their pocket) that was not previously there. Bottom line is new development--esp sprawl--doesn't come remotely close to paying it's own way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I laughed when I read this. She bought the house knowing it was next to a highway. Did she think it wasn't going to increase in traffic? I don't understand some people. I'm glad I don't live there, then again, I wouldn't be so stupid to buy a house next to a highway and an airport. :unsure:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When I was looking to purchase a house, I looked at some of the neighborhoods off Westgate Road. I was wondering why the houses were so affordable until the first plane flew over. The plane was only halfway into the decent, but it was close enough for me to stop looking.

I live off of Westgate and Leesville roads and I have no problems with the planes overhead. Maybe once a day you hear one that I would consider loud, but I really don't even notcie any difference from anywhere else in the area. I don't know why you think the houses over here are so affordable though? I mean for us they were, because we were coming from the DC area when we bought here last year, but looking all over Raleigh, we found that the area we live in to be more expensive then any other comparable houses we looked at. Now across I-540 from us might have a lot more plane noise, as those people are directly over the flight path. Also why are some people mad at the article mentioning sound barriers? I mean if that woman bought the house in '93 and they told here they would build them when I-540 went up, then doesn't she have a right to be pissed if that never happened? Some people need to take a chill pill...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I live off of Westgate and Leesville roads and I have no problems with the planes overhead. Maybe once a day you hear one that I would consider loud, but I really don't even notcie any difference from anywhere else in the area. I don't know why you think the houses over here are so affordable though? I mean for us they were, because we were coming from the DC area when we bought here last year, but looking all over Raleigh, we found that the area we live in to be more expensive then any other comparable houses we looked at. Now across I-540 from us might have a lot more plane noise, as those people are directly over the flight path. Also why are some people mad at the article mentioning sound barriers? I mean if that woman bought the house in '93 and they told here they would build them when I-540 went up, then doesn't she have a right to be pissed if that never happened? Some people need to take a chill pill...

I feel for her to a point. I caught the crap end of a bad developer and it is nobodys fault but my own that I did not ask the right questions or wait for positive answers. In this lady's case there was no promise of a wall, or even of a 12' berm. She should have told the developer to provide a DOT agreement or other evidence of sound remediation before handing over that deposit. Her other option would have been to demand sound reducing architecture be built into the house...sounds stupid to do before the highway is built, but I am sure the developer knew he was getting off the hook completely. This lady should be mad at 1) the developer, and 2) herself for thinking that suburban living was the glass slipper of living that it is sold to everybody as. I would not want to live next to I-540 either...thats why I live downtown....

I apologize for the edge in my response, but the people who think hard about where and how they live, and the many of us who push hard for urban everything...architecture, development planning, transportation, business mix etc etc, get quite tired of the people who accept this spoon-fed, cookie cutter, cul-de-sac, mega-highway, chain store way of life.....and then complain about it....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I feel for her to a point. I caught the crap end of a bad developer and it is nobodys fault but my own that I did not ask the right questions or wait for positive answers. In this lady's case there was no promise of a wall, or even of a 12' berm. She should have told the developer to provide a DOT agreement or other evidence of sound remediation before handing over that deposit. Her other option would have been to demand sound reducing architecture be built into the house...sounds stupid to do before the highway is built, but I am sure the developer knew he was getting off the hook completely. This lady should be mad at 1) the developer, and 2) herself for thinking that suburban living was the glass slipper of living that it is sold to everybody as. I would not want to live next to I-540 either...thats why I live downtown....

I apologize for the edge in my response, but the people who think hard about where and how they live, and the many of us who push hard for urban everything...architecture, development planning, transportation, business mix etc etc, get quite tired of the people who accept this spoon-fed, cookie cutter, cul-de-sac, mega-highway, chain store way of life.....and then complain about it....

I hear what you're saying in the last part of your response, trust me I do. wasn't angry with you and I too apologize if I came off that way The thing is, is that not everybody can live "downtown". Raleigh would not be what it is today if not for it's suburbs. When city's grow like Raleigh has done, it's almost impossible not to build out. Many people don't want to live in Condo's, so the only solution can not be just to build up and not out, although I understand that 99% of the people in this forum wish that is what would happen.

I do think the lady in that article was kind of naive for buying a house literally right off of the interstate. I bought my house in a 10 year old, more established surburban neighborhood that is about a half-mile off of 540. I know I live in the suburbs, but I'm not complaining about it. After living "on top" of everyone else up in DC, I kind of like the change in lifestyle a bit, plus I'm only 10-12 miles from downtown Raleigh and Durham so I get the best of both places. I love going downtown, but also like where I live now. You don't have to worry about me complaining about traffic, because within a 50 mile radius of DC traffic is a nightmare. Although Raleigh traffic is only going to get worse and I would like to see more mass transit within the coming years, because in 20-30 years this area could most definately support a rail system.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Raleigh would not be what it is today if not for it's suburbs.
Could not have put it any better myself...especially when it comes to Raleigh's many problems such as traffic and untenable tax situation

When city's grow like Raleigh has done, it's almost impossible not to build out.
I would like to qualify this by saying cities without natural topographical boudaries, the automobile and cities without alternative mass transit grow like Raleigh has

Many people don't want to live in Condo's, so the only solution can not be just to build up and not out, although I understand that 99% of the people in this forum wish that is what would happen. I do think the lady in that article was kind of naive for buying a house literally right off of the interstate. I bought my house in a 10 year old, more established surburban neighborhood that is about a half-mile off of 540. I know I live in the suburbs, but I'm not complaining about it. After living "on top" of everyone else up in DC, I kind of like the change in lifestyle a bit, plus I'm only 10-12 miles from downtown Raleigh and Durham so I get the best of both places. I love going downtown, but also like where I live now. You don't have to worry about me complaining about traffic, because within a 50 mile radius of DC traffic is a nightmare. Although Raleigh traffic is only going to get worse and I would like to see more mass transit within the coming years, because in 20-30 years this area could most definately support a rail system.

Good urban design does not have to be dense...Oakwood neighborhood in Raleigh e.g. has excellent street connectivity, has bus service, sidewalks, and is close to a small supermarket and numerous other stores...and is mostly single family homes, just like sprawl can be very very dense (Los Angeles). I Personally am not an advocate of super highrise mega downtowns but prefer mid-rise swaths like say Georgetown or Old Town Alexandria, or the core of D.C. (references you should know well) I have family up there and yes outside of the older areas, modern planning and growth strategies have turned it into what it is, an interstate fed hell hole, making the nice places to live incredibly expensive...nice meaning pleasant by easy access to 'stuff' and low traffic, etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think I was looking in this part of Westgate, before the "new" Leesville/Strickland intersection was opened.

The houses are close to each other, but appear to have appreciated well. This house sold for $106,500 in 1998, but nearby houses that have resold recently have gone for a lot more.

I might have been on the other side of 540 off Leesville, but I started the driving at Glenwood and Westgate. Looking at a wider map, the RDU runway is close, and Brier Creek shopping/offices are closer.

People can live downtown if they choose to. A lot of people already live near downtown, not in expensive condos but older houses in transitional neighborhoods. The flashy condos get the headlines, but only make up a (small) part of the housing stock.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think I was looking in this part of Westgate, before the "new" Leesville/Strickland intersection was opened.

The houses are close to each other, but appear to have appreciated well. This house sold for $106,500 in 1998, but nearby houses that have resold recently have gone for a lot more.

I might have been on the other side of 540 off Leesville, but I started the driving at Glenwood and Westgate. Looking at a wider map, the RDU runway is close, and Brier Creek shopping/offices are closer.

People can live downtown if they choose to. A lot of people already live near downtown, not in expensive condos but older houses in transitional neighborhoods. The flashy condos get the headlines, but only make up a (small) part of the housing stock.

It's crazy that it's a newer single family home with only 970 sq. feet. This one is for sale now small house. My house is about 2000 sq. ft, but I'll think you'll find that even though it's close to the airport, this area appriciates much better then most parts of North Raleigh. I like being close to the airport, RTP, downtown Raleigh and downtown Durham. I get the best of all worlds, plus I don't have to worry about highway noise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Could not have put it any better myself...especially when it comes to Raleigh's many problems such as traffic and untenable tax situation

I would like to qualify this by saying cities without natural topographical boudaries, the automobile and cities without alternative mass transit grow like Raleigh has

Good urban design does not have to be dense...Oakwood neighborhood in Raleigh e.g. has excellent street connectivity, has bus service, sidewalks, and is close to a small supermarket and numerous other stores...and is mostly single family homes, just like sprawl can be very very dense (Los Angeles). I Personally am not an advocate of super highrise maga downtowns but prefer mid-rise swaths like say Georgetown or Old Town Alexandria, or the core of D.C. (references you should know well) I have family up there and yes outside of the older areas, modern planning and growth strategies have turned it into what it is, an interstate fed hell hole, making the nice places to live incredibly expensive...nice meaning pleasant by easy access to 'stuff' and low traffic, etc.

Man you really broke that post down. All good points, but I think I disagree with some of what you said. I wish I had more time to post, but basically this area is booming and has a great quality of life. Like most other parts of this country when an area is booming it has growing pains, but think about all the new business and industry that has developed here as Raleigh has grown. RTP is one big sprawl park, but would you rather not have it in this area? I agree things need to change somewhat, such as some zoning regs, tax assesments (being every year or every other year), and I do believe developers need to start paying some more towards impact fees. However in a capitalist economy developers are only building what "most" people want.

With that being said I agree with a lot of what you actually say, even though it sounds like I probably don't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

DOT approved a $21.7M contract for the I-40 fix.

Says all work will be done at night to minimize disruptions.

Also, here's the link to Div5's TIP... not much new... did see they are repaving I-40 between Crossroads and 440 in SE Raleigh. Part of the reason there aren't many new projects, is because much of the division's money has been eaten up by the I-85 widening in Durham ($270M), US 64/264 Byp ($200M+), US 64/264 in Cary ($60M+), and I-540 E & W ($100s of M).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I-85 looks really nice. I'm not surprised that this ate up most of the budget.

Which is a sore point for me, that the I-85 work counts entirely against other road construction in the region. I-85 is not a major commuter route (yet) for Durham or the Triangle, and the expansion mostly serves state-wide and (literally) inter-state traffic. Charlotte, G'boro, etc. all benefit from a better I-85 through Durham, which previously was a bottleneck, but only our district pays for it... which means less money to pay for our growth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Which is a sore point for me, that the I-85 work counts entirely against other road construction in the region. I-85 is not a major commuter route (yet) for Durham or the Triangle, and the expansion mostly serves state-wide and (literally) inter-state traffic. Charlotte, G'boro, etc. all benefit from a better I-85 through Durham, which previously was a bottleneck, but only our district pays for it... which means less money to pay for our growth.

A lot of people in other areas--Charlotte for example--have been trying to make the argument that the interstates should be exempt from the funding formula-- to no avail. I think it's a mixed bag because I-40 has a high % of local commuting traffic whereas I-85 & 95 have quite a bit more through traffic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Perhaps I-85 will hold some more commuter traffic when

A) the East End connector is built; and

B) when Wake County is too full for any more people and the newcomers getting jobs in RTP finally realize it makes more sense to live in Durham.

Now, how long that will take, who knows.

Back to Chief's mention of I-40 in south Raleigh getting repaved...great news. (Although not as great as if they were finally widening the stretch between Crossroads and Wade exit.) Also, I hope they replace the *extremely* outdated signs along that stretch as well!! Some of them are faded and no longer reflect light....while others just give completely false info. :wacko:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

that section of I-40 is just plain old tired. That concrete has dismantled itself into one bumpy ride. I would also like to see them soften that tight turn between hammond rd and rock quarry exits. That thing is dangerous, especially with the speeds that vehicles travel through there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

N&O article about pedestrian safety on Capital Blvd in North Raleigh. I love how Taliaferro is always complaining about North Raleigh, and throwing in a Hillsborough Street jab. So if she had her way, she would just expand the taxbase drain from inside the beltline and divert it to North Ralegh. She likes to talk about people in N.Ral and how they have been paying taxes for years with no relief--what about ITB folks? N.Ral is a relative Johnny-come-lately... gets plenty of roads and Capital is a nice wide road (for cars) all the way out to 540. As the article points out it was never intended to serve pedestrians at all--just cars and trucks.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

As the article points out it was never intended to serve pedestrians at all--just cars and trucks.

I agree, a pedestrian trying to cross Capital is like playing a real life Frogger game. Don't do it. Capital is like a mini-highway, and people don't walk across those. Well I mean they do, but well let's not go there, lol. I guess what I'm trying to say is that Capital has too high a traffic volume to support pedestrians. You really don't see pedestrians trying to cross it anyways so isn't this a moot issue.

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.