Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Those who oppose growth could be happy if this bill passes. Cities and towns will not be approving developments if they can not afford the demand on infrastructure.
Got this email this morning from WakeUp Wake County - not good news if true (and I imagine it would affect the Durham-Orange light rail line as well)
Quote:
ACTION ALERT! Federal Transit Funding could be Eliminated. Contact Congress NOW!
Please call our US Senators and key Members of Congress and urge them to oppose cuts to federal funding for public transit. President Trump's budget would zero out funding for future capital investment grants -- which means funding for commuter rail and Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) in Wake County. Trump's budget also would end funding to the Federal Transit Administration and for TIGER grants (funds projects like Raleigh's Union Station).
We JUST approved our new transit plan for Wake County, and these cuts would be devastating to our transit system! Transit supporters in Congress are circulating "Dear Colleague" letters supporting transit funding for both FY17 and FY18. Please ask our North Carolina Congressional delegation to sign these letters and oppose transit cuts! DEADLINE is APRIL 5th.
Please take just 3 minutes and make quick calls to (leaving short messages is fine!):
US Senator Thom Tillis
202-224-6342
US Senator Richard Burr
202-224-3154
US Representative George Holding
202-225-3032
US Representative David Rouzer, Transportation Committee member
202-225-2731
Key Talking Points:
Please oppose cuts in federal funding for public transit.
Support Capital Investment Grants for transit projects for rail and Bus Rapid Transit.
Please sign Dear Colleague letters supporting transit by April 5th
Tillis and Burr will continue to be beholden to the rural counties to maintain their seats so I doubt they will care much about this since rural areas get little benefit from these transit funds.
You completely lost me at why mast arms are necessary for signals. The reason the 5 Points signal was replaced is because Glenwood Avenue curves north of the 5 Points signal and one of the signal supports was at the curve and it kept getting hit. It wasn't because the signals were just randomly falling down
Something tells me that people are on here merely trying to elicit a response by countering whatever position or opinion being expressed. I was too lazy to type how cars repeatedly knocked down old signal at 5 Points and hoped that "improved safety" was a reasonable substitute.
As with previous posts, I never stated or implied much of what is being objected to.
I'm on here out of pride for where I grew up, mostly with compliments and to remind everyone of much worse things could be.
1) Raleigh and NC are considered to be one of the country's better developed, more visually appealing areas.
2) This is attributable to a city (and state) that has grown in size and sophistication but in a low-key manner that has, so far, managed to keep much of the natural beauty of the surroundings.
3) AESTHETICS couldn't be more important to a state than as with North Carolina. The beaches sans boardwalks or much concrete, the absence of billboards on I-40, the flowerbeds at highway interchanges, all-brick sound walls on I-85 and the Beltline ... These were calculated decisions to enhance the local surroundings and benefit the state's tourism industry.
4) America's infrastructure is old, deteriorating & very primitive due to its age. Much of Europe has buried all power lines and utilities as protection from the elements. As an architect while driving down the street, highway signs ,utility poles, power lines and traffic signals are as visible and as significant visually as buildings are for me personally. They are an extension and reflection on of the state and local municipality.
5) The sagging "clothesline" wire-hung traffic signals can be eyesores especially when attached street names is jacked up 30 degrees from the horizontal. Cities out West, in some Atlanta burbs and several Avenues in Manhattan now have the Street Names backlit at night (MacArthur below glows at night . A lot of money is being spent on nicer fixtures, which are permanent objects shaping our environment.
So in summary,
1) I believe that aesthetics are directly tied to the Triangle's success and reputation, and if I-40 was lined with billboards from the Airport to Clayton, that the area would be perceived just like all other places where rapid development and commerce trump everything else , and area wouldn't be as talked about nationally.
2) Few places in America are more focused on aesthetics can Cary.
3) Sometimes your comments seem apathetic to the region's continued success, and that your concerns stop with how you're enjoying the "newness" of everything , how much money the area's success added to your home's worth, how you got in to enjoy getting around while traffic was still in the little-leagues, how the taxes you pay on your home and gasoline are more than enough to cover any density of sprawl that proliferates, extension of water, sewer, natural gas lines, streetlights, signs, signals, police, fire & EMT services, radio dispatch, postal services. I won't mention deforestation & carbon accumulation, heat island expansion. I'm being flippant so don't take so seriously.
One thing I say about the cramped developments with postage stamp-sized lots: They preserve the continuous, green, tree canopy observed during descent into RDU, perhaps the area's greatest asset.
Imagine if Raleigh's interstates were falling apart & not shedding water but $1-2 million was being spent per bridge to decorate (tackily) overpasses, with at least 6 identified so far You'd really be upset...
Last edited by architect77; 04-05-2017 at 09:02 PM..
I'm an engineer, you're an architect - that's where we disagree
I just care that something works, you care that something looks good haha
I love reading about the engineering solutions for superstructures.
It's fascinating to me how the engineering solutions for them are based on concepts we all understand but on a huge scale.
Like the Salesforce Tower going up in San Francisco that instead of two separate systems to prevent collapse after an earthquake will be replaced with only one system.
The concrete core (enclosing stairs, elevators) with, I assume, little cutouts (at the corners?) at specified intervals that will act "ductile" absorbing enough energy and shifts in what it's holding up to not require a separate backup system to prevent collapse if main system failed.
Also it's astounding how the new Bay Bridge rests on bedrock on one side and soft mud on the other, and the single tower will also behave as "ductile" through its construction out of 4 independent columns with "shock absorbing" connections to each other.
Those who oppose growth could be happy if this bill passes. Cities and towns will not be approving developments if they can not afford the demand on infrastructure.
No, they are too stupid to think logically.
All these bozos think is that more losers pouring into our area is great. The counties further out need new residents. To this area, they are a curse and rip off all taxpayers to feed the developers.
One of the most common errors I see in prognosticating future highway conditions is in discounting the advent of autonomous vehicles. Properly spaced and timed, they could very well eliminate the need for intracity rail transport, since the technology could conceivably make traffic signals obsolete, eliminate road rage (no one can cut anyone off, etc.) and provide a solution to living in the suburbs versus the city, in that they would be separated by a few minutes at most. I used to think it was a pipe dream, but various entities seem hell-bent on bringing the tech into the mainstream as soon as possible. That'll make it possibly the most disruptive technology to ever affect the public, apart from the personal computer, maybe. I never thought I'd see the decline of the car culture I grew up with, but young people seem more interested in how to get where they're going and less about getting there in a big-block asphalt eater. Interesting times.
One of the most common errors I see in prognosticating future highway conditions is in discounting the advent of autonomous vehicles. Properly spaced and timed, they could very well eliminate the need for intracity rail transport, since the technology could conceivably make traffic signals obsolete, eliminate road rage (no one can cut anyone off, etc.) and provide a solution to living in the suburbs versus the city, in that they would be separated by a few minutes at most. I used to think it was a pipe dream, but various entities seem hell-bent on bringing the tech into the mainstream as soon as possible. That'll make it possibly the most disruptive technology to ever affect the public, apart from the personal computer, maybe. I never thought I'd see the decline of the car culture I grew up with, but young people seem more interested in how to get where they're going and less about getting there in a big-block asphalt eater. Interesting times.
There's a lot of "what-ifs" when it comes to autonomous vehicles so unfortunately there is no real way in accounting for the impacts that autonomous vehicles will have so it'll just have to be a "adapt as you go" type of deal probably. If there was a way to include autonomous vehicles in future highway conditions, I'm sure we'd all be doing it by now. The technology is still in development so we can only work with only what we know for sure.
There's definitely the potential for a lot of changes - you're right that it has the potential to make driving more efficient. Capacity is still going to be an issue so a societal change will need to happen so people give up personal ownership of a vehicle and go to a shared fleet of autonomous vehicles. There's also the legality issues - will people be able to ride in 100% autonomous vehicles or will it sort of be like an airplane situation where there are autopilot functions but you still need a pilot for takeoff/landing (who gets the blame for an accident with an autonomous vehicle?). Then there's changes with regards to parking - if vehicles are autonomous, is there any need to provide parking since you can share rides or send your car wherever.
There's a professor at Clemson doing some research right now about wireless communications between cars at intersections so that traffic signals can be eliminated in the future - definitely some interesting stuff going on in that area.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
