This story is closed for comments.
dukefanv12 Dec 5, 2012
It's not going to work at rush hour. people making a right to make a u-turn won't be able to cross the full lanes to make the u-turn, nor will they be able to cross back over right lanes after the u-turn would be made.
HuckBuck Dec 5, 2012
fillandsandy: "Please don't tell me any of the Engineers involved with this plan graduated from NCSU"
phys.org: "The so-called "superstreet" traffic design results in significantly faster travel times, and leads to a drastic reduction in automobile collisions and injuries, according to North Carolina State University researchers who have conducted the largest-ever study of superstreets and their impacts."
Read more at: http://phys.org/news/2011-01-left-superstreet-traffic-safety.html
davidk_at_unc Dec 5, 2012
"Super streets do NOT work." -- smalldogsrule
How do you reconcile your statement with the following excerpt from the article?
"A similar superstreet project that opened on U.S. Highway 15-501 in Chapel Hill in 2008 reduced travel times by 65 percent, Dunlop said."
I live in Chapel Hill and admit that the interchange they put in there takes some getting used to, and it's still not my favorite thing to do, but it is set up to alleviate any issues with U-turns that people here seem to be in a panic over. Like most people, my initial reaction was "this is really dumb!", so I didn't pay close attention to the actual results of the change, but if the report is accurate and the time savings really are 65%, maybe people should just give it a try and see how it works for themselves before preaching gloom and doom.
davisgw Dec 5, 2012
I have witnessed this system in rural areas of Hoke and Moore counties and it is dangerous. I can't imagine anyone of normal intellegence even thinking it might work in heavy traffic. Traffic planers in North Carolina need to get thier heads out in the sunshine more often.
nomorethanthat Dec 5, 2012
Can't see how it will speed up traffic as traffic is bound to be stopped more often for the personal injury accidents that will happen as drivers attempt to twice cross multiple lanes in traffic. This plan reeks of the poorly planned roundabout schemes that are either already in existence or are on the books to be built.
dgcreech Dec 5, 2012
I have seen this particular idea in live use and I can tell you that this is a *HORRIBLE* idea!!!! Down in Harnett County, they did the same in an attempt to eliminate confusion and to streamline traffic flow. While it did streamline traffic, it also has caused at least 1-2 car crashes per week since then. This is one of those situations where it looks great on paper but in reality it's far from a good idea.
HadEnough Dec 5, 2012
This is much cheaper and more effective.
Do not permit left turns onto Glenwood during heavy traffic except at one or two intersections. All other lights during rush hour are steady green for Glenwood.
fillandsandy Dec 4, 2012
As a native of Raleigh and someone who has lived on both sides of Glenwood Ave., this plan is stupid, boneheaded, etc. Doing u-turns on Glenwood during morning or afternoon rush hour is crazy. The Engineers that designed this plan and those who propose this plan need to get a refund on their education. Please don't tell me any of the Engineers involved with this plan graduated from NCSU. If so I feel my degree is suddenly worth less.
lasm Dec 4, 2012
I drive from Durham on Hwy 70 toward Raleigh and take 540 to go east about 2-3 times a month between 4:00 and 5:00PM. God forbid that I would ever have to go farther than 540 at thet time of day. I used to work in Raleigh and live in Franklin County; and I have used every highway and by-way for over 35 years in and around Raleigh. I know I would be scared to death to try this "superstreet" ""routine"" on any of the major roads in and around Raleigh at rush hour(s). People out there will totally ignore you trying to work your way over 2-3 lanes TWICE and MAKING a U-TURN.....you would be taking your life in your own hands; and none of us have that kind of power!
this is fdup Dec 4, 2012
sorry u turns across five lanes of travel to get to the other side seems like a invitation for more crashes. And what are large trucks going to do?
whatdidusay Dec 4, 2012
You want to help congestion on Glenwood? Then stop the on street parking at Five Points. Cars come around turn in intersection headed west & there is cars parked in right lane. Nearly a wreck everyday
ms b Dec 4, 2012
NO NO NO!!!! They put one of these intersections near me on 15/501 in Chapel Hill and I do everything I can to avoid what we refer to as the d*m* intersection. They're going to have to turn right, cross over several lanes of traffic to turn left, cross several lanes of traffic and turn right again. Not an improvement in my eyes.
croaswife Dec 4, 2012
I live dead center off of this stretch of Glenwood. There are 2 hours a day at the most that people have to deal with congestion. I'm sure they can find more pressing traffic issues to spend money on.
TVs_Deceit Dec 4, 2012
smalldogsrule - "why do our "leaders" always look for the high priced lazy way out???"
Why? Because they and their buddies are the ones who own the companies that profit from it.
Why did a developer and friends lead the charge to get rid of Dorothea Dix hospital? Money. Now they have a draw to develop around.
Who keeps pushing for growth. People who own the property so they can sell it, and run the companies that profit from growth.
They love power and money. They can't get enough of them.
Follow the money and power to learn "why" for anything in this world.
They'll give you a story that sounds good.. but as you learn in Why 101, everything's a business model, it's all about money and power.
jdparke3 Dec 4, 2012
I can see how that might alleviate some congestion on 70, but how do they expect you to do a U-turn in constant traffic? I tried this last night around 6 and had to wait about 10 minutes for an opening.
doghousebrewery Dec 4, 2012
or they could add a third lane on either side without wdening the road...just like Falls of Neuase Road. It works well...if you drive a sub-compact...
turkeydance Dec 4, 2012
1. super-streets work until traffic reaches the non-SS area.
then it backs up. sort of like a bottle-neck in a funnel.
2. SS are super-costly. more pavement/easement/etc.
3. what's cheaper is to SNYCH traffic lights. 2000% cheaper.
emtp2k Dec 4, 2012
This sounds like a recipe for many many motor vehicle accidents. Turn right then make a u turn on a busy street in front of speeding automobiles? Knowing all too well you are going to have to make that u -turn and immediately move over another lane so you can slow down and make a right turn. It will still be stop and go traffic, wrecks and road rage. Next plan please.
SaveEnergyMan Dec 4, 2012
The good news is that Scubagirl is right and that in 8 years the fad that is "superstreet" will have passed. Remember the SPUI - single point urban interchange, or traffic circles on Hillsborough Street? Fads that were going to be implemented everywhere that (fortunately) weren't.
smalldogsrule Dec 4, 2012
Super streets do NOT work. All they do is make money for the over priced contractors that will suck down large quantities of taxpayer money to pay people to stand around doing nothing.
There are better solutions out there, why do our "leaders" always look for the high priced lazy way out???
STRAWBERRY LETTER 23 Dec 4, 2012
GOLO!!!?? OMG! WHAT IS THAT? LOL LOL LOL!
(((((((((Golo))))))) Some good times were had on line, as well as in person.
storchheim Dec 4, 2012
If you two don't stop making sense, you'll be kicked out of golo!
STRAWBERRY LETTER 23 Dec 4, 2012
Scubagirl, I agree!
Scubagirl Dec 4, 2012
by the time they START work on this the area will have grown and it will be outdated before it's even built. 2020-if it's needed so badly why wait 7-8 years??????
Published: 2007-10-05 09:38:00
Updated: 2015-01-14 14:37:58