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.
Why weren't commuter rails (if not rails initially, at least right of way for future rail and stops) incorporated into I-40, I-440 and the 540 loop? Wouldn't these purpose build rails be better than putting along on the ancient existing rails, blocking car traffic?
Why weren't commuter rails (if not rails initially, at least right of way for future rail and stops) incorporated into I-40, I-440 and the 540 loop? Wouldn't these purpose build rails be better than putting along on the ancient existing rails, blocking car traffic?
Especially on "milk us forever" toll roads?
That would require foresight and jettisoning the notion that the Triangle would or should remain a low density bucolic sprawling suburban entity
Why weren't commuter rails (if not rails initially, at least right of way for future rail and stops) incorporated into I-40, I-440 and the 540 loop?
You're kidding, right? Most of the I-440 route was laid out in the late 1950s when it was the US 1 Bypass. I-40 from RTP to Wade Avenue was completed in 1972. By the late 1970s, I-40 around the south of downtown was in planning. By the early 1980s, I-540 around the north side was in planning. If anyone claims to have know in those years that Wake County would have over a million residents by 2014, he or she is lying.
NCDOT was barely able to afford these roads and subsequent expansions.
No, actually I'm not. I'll agree that back in the seventies cars were absolute king there wouldn't have been any alternate considerations, but these road have been widened and fiddled with over and over and over since then, and the 540 southern section was sat on for almost 40 years?
How is this area's future going to be any different than those areas / cities we inevitably seem to copy, then despise? Leaving a 20 foot undeveloped right of way down the center of 540 and double-supported the crossing bridges would have broke the bank? I guess so? Where are we headed - same old, same old?
Speaking of "you're kidding, right", if I was benevolent dictator I'd establish a pay for mileage driven times vehicle weight rate tax. Bolt on a variable (minus and plus) for trip type. Hate me now. Bolt on another variable for "stupid vehicles" (like 700HP Mustangs with variable noise exhaust systems or hiked up trucks with gutted mufflers) - gotta have it, well be prepared to PAY.
But, ultimately, I suspect nothing will change the U.S. transportation bias and habits. Keep on filling up the house driveway with a car for each kid.
P.S. I posted a link to a video about stroads (roads versus streets), kinda curious if anybody watched it and their take on the concept.
Last edited by ncwheeling; 04-27-2022 at 11:36 AM..
Widening an expressway designed in the 1950s or 1960s isn't really the constraint. An unfortunate engineering truth: leveling the expressway is the constraint. You can't run trains up and down the same hills that cars and trucks use. The alternative is elevated trackage whose piers vary with height so that the hills and valleys are smoothed out, but that's phenomenally expensive.
If you've ever driven I-25/US 85 between Albuquerque and Santa Fe, where about half the distance of the tracks is in the median, it's clearly doable -- but the construction cost was $500 million in 2005 dollars which would be more like $1 billion today. And people complain that the number of people who ride those trains is way out of balance with the expense of building the track and operating the trains. If anything, NM is becoming the poster child of how not to do it.
Adding rail to the western and southern arcs of 540 during construction would have increased costs beyond the capacity of tolls to pay off the bonds. Remember, most of 540 was and is still being built with borrowed money. The underlying issue is that the funding sources for routine highway construction, for toll highway construction, and mass transit are desynchronized.
Thanks wizard-xyzzy for the terrain / grade reminder. I thought grade is more of a problem for single engine puller freight train configurations than for electrified (motor(s) per car), but I really don't know. I wonder what's done in Switzerland or Italy?
For 540 - just the right of way space, undeveloped, for future "something" people transport was my naive thinking - no track bed, rails, signalling, etc.
Back to the big if of autonomous point to point people haulers or the like that learn rider's needs and load patterns, with rate structures that are tailored accordingly. Maybe you get a ride price or priority break if you're willing to accommodate a charge pad on your property.
While I've driven (and ridden) many miles (and liked much of it), I get the impression there's a growing percentage of people (young and old) that don't like to drive, don't want to own a vehicle but must, are frightened when driving, etc.
And there's the sizable percentage that feels getting around "by my car" works fine or good enough and please don't mess with it, just tweak it - now and in the future.
Also, thanks for the funding issue and separate funding bucket reminder.
Last edited by ncwheeling; 04-27-2022 at 01:41 PM..
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.
