Jump to content

Triangle road & traffic thread


uptownliving

Recommended Posts

AASHTO doesn't always go along with what NCDOT wants. For example AASHTO turned down the request to redesignate the then-newly-rebuilt US 1 between Cary and Sanford as I-140. The number was later assigned to the Wilmington bypass. But NCDOT is on a roll with I-285 and I-495, so why not try it.

 

At best the stretch of I-885 through downtown Durham would be labeled "Future I-885" and could stay that way for the next 50 years because it's far from compliant with current Interstate standards. 

 

This "Future I-nnn" labeling makes a mockery, really, of the AASHTO process.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Replies 1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

I think that US 70 should be signed over the portion of the Durham Freeway through downtown, from I-85 to the EEC and from there onto Miami Blvd and toward Raleigh. US70 gains a dedicated, strictly east-west freeway route and loses most of its multiplex with I-85 except for 2 miles between exit 170 and 172.

 

Then, sign I-85 over the current freeway segment of US70, from the existing US70/I85 interchange in East Durham (exit 178) to the EEC, and south along the Durham Freeway, ending at I-40. Re-sign Triangle Parkway through RTP, ending at NC540 as NC885. Then, drop the NC147 designation entirely.

 

The fewer multiplexes and the straigher each route is, the less confusion that will result.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

NCDOT has posted a bunch of details on their website about the Beltline widening between Walnut and Wade.

 

http://www.ncdot.gov/projects/i-440improvements/

 

Generally it's pretty good stuff. At least one, and possibly two flyovers at Wade Avenue. No gratuitous collector/distributor lanes. Ramps braided appropriately to eliminate short weaves. No excessive additional right-of-way. They are considering a flyover in one quadrant at the I-40/I-440 interchange as well, but that might conflict with a future I-40 project through there so they might just widen 440 and leave the interchange untouched for now.

 

The most disappointing item is the diverging diamond configuration proposed at Western Boulevard. Sure that would handle the traffic, but it's not a very pedestrian friendly configuration since every turning movement has a high speed slip ramp. I would rather something like this, and if they have to build triple left turn lanes at the off ramps, then so be it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

NCDOT has posted a bunch of details on their website about the Beltline widening between Walnut and Wade.

 

http://www.ncdot.gov/projects/i-440improvements/

 

Generally it's pretty good stuff. At least one, and possibly two flyovers at Wade Avenue. No gratuitous collector/distributor lanes. Ramps braided appropriately to eliminate short weaves. No excessive additional right-of-way. They are considering a flyover in one quadrant at the I-40/I-440 interchange as well, but that might conflict with a future I-40 project through there so they might just widen 440 and leave the interchange untouched for now.

 

The most disappointing item is the diverging diamond configuration proposed at Western Boulevard. Sure that would handle the traffic, but it's not a very pedestrian friendly configuration since every turning movement has a high speed slip ramp. I would rather something like this, and if they have to build triple left turn lanes at the off ramps, then so be it.

 

Great news on the flyover at Wade Avenue! I was afraid that wouldn't be part of the project.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
  • 8 months later...

CAMPO has completed a study of the I-40/I-440/US1/US64 interchange near crossroads. This is an old interchange with an awful lot of cloverleafs and weaves for how much traffic it carries.

There are two projects coming in this area: first, the update of the Beltline from Walnut to Wade, which should begin construction in 2018, and the I-40 managed lanes which don't have a construction date set but will have a significant impact on this interchange.

They analyzed three basic configurations (A Texas-style Stack, a Turbine, which is more common here in NC, and a Box which is a little "unconventional" because it involves some left exits). This is a fairly constrained spot in which to build such a massive interchange, especially one that accommodates managed lanes. Constraints include South Hills and Crossroads, both of which are pretty close to the highway, Walnut Creek which runs directly adjacent to the interchange, and the nearby Crossroads flyover partial interchange.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 months later...

Fun idea. I think it's easier to take out the part from 501 to Mangum/Roxboro. Like Ctl said, the loss of a direct shot into downtown from the south is harder to deal with. Maybe making Pettigrew and Angier a one way pair from the connector into downtown fixes that? Angier would need routed up on to Main probably...anyway, freeways that bisect historic cores of cities are terrible ideas (as opposed to going around or adjacent to historic cores) and this seems like a good one to take out. Had the north/south freeway been built in Raleigh, we'd surely think its a great idea to take that out in this day and age...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/16/2016 at 7:06 PM, ctl said:

It is a radical idea. Seems to me it would hurt the entertainment venues (Bulls, DPAC) that pull a lot of audience from Wake County on NC 147,

I think the author is saying convert it to an avenue.  Only change from Wake County might be a few stop lights.  Hardly a deterrent. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I could see roughly the part from Duke St to Fayetteville St converted into a one-way pair with traffic funneled along Jackie Robinson and Morehead. This would be a busy one way pair along the lines of Dawson and McDowell in Raleigh.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Green_man said:

I think the author is saying convert it to an avenue.  Only change from Wake County might be a few stop lights.  Hardly a deterrent. 

Maybe, maybe not. Let's suppose that 147 remains as-is south of Briggs Avenue. The existing crossings north of Briggs are Bacon, Lakeland (the pedestrian bridge), Alston, Grant, and then the Fayetteville - West Chapel Hill Street segment. People in Hayti on the south side of 147 have always been angry about not being able to access Pettigrew. The neighborhoods will want multiple crossings and this will become a political issue. Three stop lights is one thing, six or more is something else.

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.