Category: NCDOT

Highways, congestion and a power broker’s lessons

Frontispiece of The Power Broker maps Moses’ roads, bridges, parks and playgrounds. 

The headline in this morning’s newspaper could not have been more appropriate for the day I have to, at long last and reluctantly, return to the UNC Charlotte library my copy of Robert A. Caro’s The Power Broker: Robert Moses and the Fall of New York.

I checked it out in September 2013. It’s roughly the size of a cinder block and just as heavy, and the librarians graciously let me keep renewing it, since apparently no one else wanted the tome. Which is sad. Published in 1974, it should be required reading for anyone studying public administration, transportation, planning, urban studies, political science, sociology and journalism. I finally finished it a few months ago but after so long it felt almost like a family pet and I didn’t want to part with it.

The headline today: N.C. DOT says Monroe Bypass construction has started. The article by Steve Harrison notes a lawsuit over the project is still active, and it could well be stopped for a second time.

As it happens, one of Robert Moses’ faithful techniques for getting money for his projects was to start work on them
with only part of the funds he needed – having promised, of course, that the funds in hand would fully cover the cost. Then, when the money well ran dry, he’d successfully argue that so much money had already been spent it would be a waste not to finish the project, and he’d get more millions from the city or the state.  I suspect someone at N.C. DOT has read The Power Broker, or at least absorbed some of its lessons about how Moses extracted public money for his projects.

The Monroe bypass will be a state-funded toll road intended to “relieve congestion” on Monroe’s existing U.S. 74 bypass, a highway built to keep traffic congestion out of downtown Monroe. Today, of course, downtown Monroe has no traffic congestion to speak of, since the city and county allowed so much congestion-generating development on U.S. 74 that it successfully sucked all the economic energy out of downtown and into a now-fading enclosed shopping mall and a series of strip centers, fast-food restaurants and chain businesses – each with its own separate, congestion-generating driveway. Monroe’s old bypass is like virtually every other bypass built in America in the past 50 years: clotted with traffic and deteriorating, cheaply built structures.

The sad irony of the Monroe Bypass proposal – not to mention Charlotte’s own Interstate 485 outer loop bypass highway (which will finally be completed in about a week), its own version of U.S. 74 a.k.a. Independence Boulevard, Gaston County’s proposed Garden Parkway, and a dozen other projects I could mention in North Carolina alone – is that planners figured out as early as the 1930s that building highways was not relieving traffic congestion.

Consider this passage from The Power Broker. Reminder: It was written in 1974. Caro is writing here about the 1930s. From page 515:

“The Grand Central, Interborough and Laurelton parkways opened early in the summer of 1936, bringing to an even one hundred the number of miles of parkway constructed by Moses on Long Island and in New York City since he had conceived his great parkway plan in 1924. … One editorial opined that the new parkways would, by relieving the traffic load on the Southern and Northern State parkways, solve the problem of access to Moses’ Long Island parks ‘for generations.’

“The new parkways solved the problem for about three weeks. … Some city planners noticed that the traffic pattern on Long Island had fallen into a set pattern: every time a new parkway was built, it quickly became jammed with traffic, but the load on the old parkways was not significantly relieved.

“If this had been the pattern for the first hundred miles of parkways, they wondered, might it not be the pattern for the next forty-five also? Perhaps consideration should be given to trying to ease Long Island’s traffic problem by other means…”

Caro describes throughout the book Moses’ staunch opposition to mass transit, his blatant racial discrimination, and the illegal, politically infused methods he used – all while Moses was hailed nationally and internationally as “the man who got things done,” the honest “non-politician” and so on.

It’s one of the most persuasive works I’ve ever encountered for the importance to our democracy of expert journalists who look deep into local and state governments and pay attention to what is really happening in their city’s neighborhoods.

I acquired The Power Broker a few weeks before I heard Caro speak in September 2013 to a roomful of journalists gathered for a Nieman Fellows reunion. He recounted the advice his editor at Newsday gave him, when he asked how to be an investigative reporter. The advice: “Turn every page.” Indeed.

——– 

New lawsuit against Gaston toll road

Two Charlotte area environmental groups, assisted by the Southern Environmental Law Center, today sued challenging the proposed Garden Parkway toll road that would cut across southern Gaston County.

Clean Air Carolina and the Catawba Riverkeeper contend that the 22-mile highway would destroy homes and communities, pollute the Catawba River basin and add to air pollution. Read Clean Air Carolina’s press release here.

The group says, “In their complaint, conservation groups allege many of the same concerns that were raised in the recent victory challenging the Monroe Bypass.” In May, the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals rebuked the N.C. Turnpike Authority, finding it had erred in its environmental review and misrepresented key facts. “The conservation groups allege that many of the same flaws infect the analysis for the Garden Parkway,” the CAC press release says.

And in today’s Charlotte Observer (read the article here), attorney Kym Hunter of the SELC, says, “We think (the Garden Parkway study) is worse than Monroe.”

Here’s a 2011 piece I wrote while at The Charlotte Observer about the Garden Parkway and the Monroe Bypass:  “Road planning from the disco era.” The link to the Observer piece must have died but thanks to the Yadkin Riverkeeper for re-running the article. And if you’re really really interested, here’s an Observer-sponsored blogpost I did on the same topic: “Road planning from the disco era – the rest of the story.”  

(Editor’s note: Those articles are the opinions of the Observer associate editor, a post I held at the time, and are not necessarily the opinions of the UNC Charlotte Urban Institute or the University of North Carolina at Charlotte.)

NCDOT moves ahead with new uptown train station. But …

After years of planning, the N.C. Department of Transportation and the City of Charlotte are officially seeking developers for the proposed new passenger rail station in uptown Charlotte. They’re issuing a Request for Qualifications (RFQ), with proposals due Sept. 21.

If you’re an interested developer, click here for more information.

“This RFQ is the next step in selecting a master developer for the project,” says the NCDOT press release issued Thursday morning. What’s being called the Charlotte Gateway Station is envisioned as a central hub for Amtrak, Charlotte Area Transit System bus and streetcar service, the long-proposed-but-still-unfunded Red Line commuter rail project to north Mecklenburg County, Greyhound Bus service and the county greenway system.

Unfortunately for the Red Line and possibly for the streetcar, Mayor Anthony Foxx said in an interview Wednesday that, when it comes to any transit services beyond the Blue Line, “We’re stuck.” (More from that Q-and-A format interview will be posted at PlanCharlotte.org as soon as I can type up the transcript.)
The streetcar has funding only for about a mile and a half between Presbyterian Hospital and The Square at Trade and Tryon. An expansion proposal using city funds only, that would take it to the Gateway Station site on West Trade Street near Johnson & Wales University, was killed by the City Council in June.

The N.C. General Assembly has, for two years in a row, tried to kill funding for the planned-but-not-yet-built Blue Line Extension. Both times the BLE was saved in closed-door bargaining.

But this year the legislators decided to make any rail transit projects compete head-to-head with funding for highway projects, a prospect that most transit supporters believe will all but doom any further rail transit in the state.

But to end on a more cheerful note, replacing the dreary Amtrak station a couple of miles north of uptown on North Tryon Street will be a relief to many rail passengers who use the state’s three daily trains to Raleigh and back.

Why Charlotte needs that ‘noose’ study

As expected, the Charlotte City Council on Monday approved the measure to allow a study of the uptown loop and all its interchanges. As I wrote in Time to neuter that noose around uptown Charlotte? the idea to put a cap onto part of Interstate 277 (leaving the highway there, but creating usable space above it) has been proposed since at least 1997.

During discussions for the Center City 2020 Vision Plan, the idea was broached of converting the section of the loop at the north end of uptown into a boulevard, although the final plan only recommended further study.

I checked with Charlotte Department of Transportation’s manager of planning and design, Norm Steinman, about the I-277/I-77 study. He pointed out that the study – which might or might not end up making recommendations for a freeway cap or boulevardization – is needed for a more essential reason. It’s been at least 40 years since the I-277 loop was designed, with its early alignment concepts more than 50 years old. “Obviously,” he said in an email, “a lot of growth has happened since then.” The NCDOT and the Federal Highway Administration essentially have said no more changes can happen to any of the I-277 interchanges without a study.

“For the first time in 50 years we’re taking a look at what should be done,” Steinman told me.

I have in my possession a copy of the 1960 master highway transportation plan for the city of Charlotte, prepared by Wilbur Smith and Associates. It shows the route for I-77 and for a loop around uptown a lot like what eventually opened in the 1980s. (It also shows the Independence Boulevard Freeway, which remains unfinished. Gee.)

Atop this blog is a not-great-quality cellphone photo of that map. Notice how similar it looks to today’s configuration. The study is dated April 1960, so the designs for I-277 must be more than 50 years old. Goodness knows how old the original concept is.

Another highway-street design tidbit: Monday night the council also OK’d a “roadway classification study” for the Brookshire Boulevard and W.T. Harris Boulevard. This is deep in the weeds of transportation policy, but it could be potentially significant. The classification for roadways affects lane widths, speed limits and whether, for instance, they’d have bicycle lanes and sidewalks, which aren’t appropriate along a freeway. The study is necessary, the agenda says, because these two roadways today contain a variety of different roadway classifications, and “are being affected by discrete land development and transportation investment decisions.”


And, let me add, both are high-volume city corridors that, today, look like highways but cut through neighborhood and commercial areas that maybe would be healthier if they weren’t next to freeway-style highways?  But that’s just me ….

The huge significance of the Red Line proposal

MOORESVILLE – “Revolutionary is not too strong a word for plans being laid out today to a room full of government officials, consultants and interested laypeople. We’re at a “summit” to discuss ideas for reviving a long-stalled proposal to build a commuter rail line to Iredell County.

For starters, the plan involves regional cooperation. Second, the current public money crunch has forced a creative new way of thinking about transportation financing.

Even for a region that’s had plenty of regional “discussions” for decades, what’s being proposed is a major leap forward for working across county boundaries. The complicated proposal depends, in part, on seven governmental bodies agreeing to form a new legal entity, called a joint powers authority. Members would be Mecklenburg and Iredell counties, and Charlotte, Huntersville, Cornelius, Davidson and Mooresville.(The JPA wouldn’t have taxing authority.)

Not since the great Mecklenburg annexation/spheres of influence agreements of the 1980s and the formation of the Mecklenburg-only Metropolitan Transit Commission in the 1990s have so many local governments been asked to come to a formal, legal agreement of this sort. And this time the agreement must cross county lines. That’s a rare proposition around here, where crossing the county line can put you into a place with an entirely different political culture, and where most of the counties outside Mecklenburg harbor, if not fear, then at least wariness of Charlotte’s behemoth footprint.

But if there’s to be any hope of prudently guiding this huge and sprawling metro region away from financially unsupportable growth, it’s going to have to come with a large dose of inter-county cooperation. The choices at hand are these: Cooperate, and continue to progress? Or maintain geographic silos and find the region bypassed by other, more cooperative metro regions?

Viewed that way, what happens to the Red Line proposal could well be a harbinger of the region’s future.

The other reason today’s summit and the Red Line plan carries major significance is this: For the first time since the 1998 transit sales tax campaign, the MTC and member governments are putting on their thinking caps about financing.

Here’s a link to the slide show presentation Tuesday.

Until now, most people here pretty much figured transportation money – including roads, not just transit – would eternally flow down from the feds and the state. For transit, you’d also add in the local revenue stream from the half-cent sales tax, collected only in Mecklenburg. (Individual cities, of course, also use local tax money for local street projects that aren’t part of the vast state road network.)

Even before the 2008 financial crash, it was starting to look as if the MTC couldn’t build out its five-corridor plan in 25 years without more money than it could expect from the half-cent sales tax and expected state and federal funds. Since then, the recession and continuing high unemployment have battered the sales tax revenue. Until a year ago the MTC appeared to believe it had few options beyond delaying transit construction for decades, pushing for a politically unlikely sales tax increase or passively hoping the sales tax revived.

Finally, with help from the N.C. Department of Transportation and some savvy consultants, it has gotten smarter and more creative about finding money. They have looked around the country at other metro areas that are building transit systems. Two important words arose: Value capture.

That means recognizing that building infrastructure such as highways and transit lines makes nearby property more valuable.  (It’s why land speculators like to buy property 20 years before the state highway goes through.) Instead of letting public spending enrich private landowners with little monetary benefit to the public, why not “capture” some of that increased value for public purposes?

A value-capture set-up would use some of the new, higher tax revenues from the now-more-valuable property to pay off bonds sold to build those same infrastructure improvements. The Washington Metro, the Dallas Area Rapid Transit System and the Portland, Ore., streetcar system have all used value capture in their construction.

The Red Line plan proposes two value-capture techniques. One is tax-increment financing (TIF) – using some of the expected higher property taxes to pay off bonds.  Another is a special assessment district, formed when a majority of the income-producing property owners (i.e. not owner-occupied residential homes) along the Red Line rail line agree to an extra property tax (.75 per $100 in assessed property value is what’s been proposed).  Most of that tax revenue would help fund construction, but 25 percent would go to the general fund of the local governments.

The proposals laid out today must undergo weeks of examination and discussion among elected officials before any decisions. And nothing is certain. For instance, Iredell County is a key player, yet not one Iredell County commissioner was at today’s meeting in Mooresville.  All other affected elected bodies had representatives in the room.  What does that mean for the proposal’s chances?

But even if the proposal ultimately fails, the precedents it’s setting, in pushing for smarter transit financing and in pushing for cross-county cooperation, will have far-reaching resonance.

Tell them where you really go

Where do you really travel, and how do you get there, and how long does it take? The collection of transportation planning groups in the Charlotte metro area (a group I like to call the Seven Dwarfs), is undertaking a survey to learn more.

I learned this tidbit in reading the Oct. 28 memo to Charlotte City Council from City Manager Curt Walton. (This is why the world needs journalists; someone has to read these things and sort the chaff from the wheat. Whether this survey is chaff or wheat remains to be discovered.)

The memo reports:

Over the next few months, a sample of residents of Mecklenburg, Gaston, Union, Cabarrus, Iredell, Rowan, Cleveland, Lincoln, and Stanly counties in North Carolina and residents of York and Lancaster counties in South Carolina will be contacted by phone to participate in the regional household travel survey.  ETC Institute, the firm conducting the random survey on behalf of the planning agencies, will be recruiting 4,000 households to participate based on geographic location, household income, and household size. 

Households participating in the survey will have each household member keep a travel diary for one day.  They will be asked to record the destination address, travel time, travel mode, and vehicle occupancy for their trips throughout the day.  The travel diary results will be used to understand travel patterns, and specifically, how, when, and where people travel.  All information collected is confidential and individual responses will not be released.

Wondering about the reference to Seven Dwarfs?

The memo goes on to list the multiple transportation planning agencies in the Charlotte region, saying, “This study was programmed by Mecklenburg-Union MPO (MUMPO), Cabarrus-Rowan MPO (CRMPO), Gaston Urban Area MPO (GUAMPO), Rock Hill-Fort Mill Transportation Study (RFATS), NCDOT, SCDOT, Rocky River RPO (RRRPO), and Lake Norman RPO (LNRPO).”  Where’s the seventh dwarf? That would be the Hickory-area MPO, also known as GHMPO.

Getting better information about how and where people travel is sound planning. If you worry that it’s sort of Big Brotherish you don’t have to take part in the survey. Plus, your cellphone is keeping a record of everywhere you go, anyway, courtesy of AT&T or Verizon or whoever.

But the larger point about transportation planning is this: How in the world can the Charlotte region think it is doing anything that is even in the same hemisphere as “sane transportation planning” while it is split among seven different planning groups, each jealously guarding its own projects and only one of them (MUMPO) shouldering the very real need for regional mass transit?  Merge them all. Even consider – gasp! – merging  transportation planning and the Charlotte regional land-planning agency, the Centralina Council of Governments. Many, many large and successful metro areas did that years ago. It’s not a cure-all. But it’s a smart start. 

New strategy for transit to North Meck

The Charlotte transit project getting the most attention the past four years has been extending the Lynx Blue Line from uptown to UNC Charlotte. But in recent months plenty of behind-the-curtains work has been focusing on the planned commuter rail line to north Mecklenburg. Tonight, the transit governing body heard about a significant shift in strategy for the Red Line.  The idea is to change the focus from “commuter rail” to “rail.”

Charlotte Area Transit System rendering of Red Line car

Quick background: The proposed commuter rail is a different form of transit from light rail. In many ways it’s more like intercity passenger rail than the electric-overhead-wire, plenty-of-stops Lynx. The rules for federal money for commuter rail and the cost-benefit analyses the feds require are structured so as to make the proposed 25-mile Red Line from uptown to Mooresville ineligible for federal money. That left a huge gap – 50 percent of the total – in the proposed funding plans, estimated at $373 million total for both phases of the project.

In addition, the countywide half-cent sales tax revenues tanked in 2008 and haven’t revived to the earlier estimated levels.  The Charlotte Area Transit System has been stumped over the problem of finding local money for the Red Line to cover the gap left by the lack of federal money, not to mention how to operate the existing bus system and Lynx, plus pay the local share for the $900-million-some Lynx Blue Line Extension.

Back to tonight’s meeting of the Metropolitan Transit Commission, which oversees CATS: The Red Line Task Force subcommittee that’s been meeting for about a year has agreed on recommending a new approach. Led by Paul Morris – formerly a consultant and starting this month,  the N.C. Department of Transportation’s deputy secretary for transit – the group wants to pitch a strategy Morris says will be nationally unique.  Use the rail line as an economic development strategy for both passenger rail and freight rail.  And form a formal partnership among Huntersville, Cornelius and Davidson so they can share tax revenues from new development, via a Joint Powers Authority.

But where would the money come from? Morris said the JPA would have no taxing authority. Whether it could issue bonds might depend on how any financing package is structured.  The Red Line Task Force is, for now, looking at four potential “value capture” ideas (warning, tax-policy-geekdom coming up): tax increment financing, special assessment districts, partnering agreements with private developers, or jointly developing property with a private owner. Which of those ideas, if any, would come to fruition can’t be known at the moment.

For most of the past 15 years, the strategic thinking about the north corridor’s Red Line was to use it to shape residential development. The area was booming, and the three towns adopted zoning ordinances to encourage transit-oriented development at the proposed station areas. The fact that the rail line’s owner, Norfolk Southern, was still running freight trains on it was generally mentioned only in passing.

Now, residential and commercial development are, if not dead, certainly no longer booming. So the strategy being proposed is to use that freight line as a selling tool for industrial development while using the prospect of passenger rail on the same right of way as a selling point for residential and retail development.

Will it fly with the rest of the MTC?  Tonight’s discussion might make that more clear. No MTC vote comes until next month.

Here’s a link to the PowerPoint presentation Morris gave to the Red Line Task Force in August.

The fantasy land of transportation planning

The N.C. Department of Transportation is seeking people’s opinions to help guide them in putting together a 2040 plan. They’ve launched an online survey, which you can weigh in on at this link.

I encourage you to take the survey, but if you do, you’ll notice most of the questions require only one answer where several answers are needed. Example: For the question: “Which of the following is the most important to address the transportation needs of our changing population?” your choices are:
  •    Invest additional resources in public transportation (rail and buses).
  •    Expand roadways in North Carolina’s major cities.
  •    Encourage development with higher numbers of people per acre.
  •    Better coordinate transportation and land development.
  •    Other (please specify)
 You can choose only one. Which seems, to me, a bogus choice. Transportation and land use have to be coordinated or they are all but worthless. Additional resources must be invested in public transportation. And we all need to encourage development where more people live closer together – the only way to make public transportation work. No one of those is more important than another.

Land use planning and transportation planning are as linked as conjoined twins. The state likes to say it doesn’t do land use planning but that’s a fig leaf of an excuse that doesn’t hide the truth: Every time NCDOT makes a transportation decision, that decision affects land uses.

Accept that reality. Then accept the related reality that planning and transportation, to have validity, should be undertaken at a metro region level. Merge all the state-sanctioned transportation planning agencies in each of North Carolina’s metro regions. Charlotte has four to seven, depending on what you count. (You gotta love their names, too: The MPOs are MUMPO, GUAMPO, CRMPO, GHMPO and RFATS. Lest you think that’s not surreal enough, we also have two rural planning organizations, named LNRPO and the snarly sounding RRRPO.) We need just one, region-wide MPO.

If you’re looking for true sanity, then (as I have often written before) merge all those metropolitan planning organizations (a.k.a. MPOs, which despite the name do only transportation planning) with the regional Councils of Government, which attempt a regional approach to land use planning – although of course they aren’t allowed to adopt zoning ordinances and thus have little clout. Has all this made Salvador Dali seem reasoned and predictable by comparison?

So have your say on the NCDOT survey.  But recognize that efforts at serious urban region planning are fantasy, until the state adopts a more realistic approach linking land use and transportation.

Road planning from the disco era – the rest of the story

In putting together my op-ed, “Road planning from the disco era,” the limitations of space and time required me to leave out some juicy tidbits. You lucky blog readers now may read the rest of the story.

I wrote that the N.C. Turnpike Authority is required by the feds to analyze impacts/effects of the very roads that the authority is, by law, expected to build. The point here is that the legislature, for example with the 1989 Highway Trust Fund, decides to build roads well in advance of any detailed and painstaking analysis of whether the damage they’ll do will be worse than their benefits. Today, significant questions have been raised about both Gaston County’s Garden Parkway and the Monroe Bypass – the latter having been ordered up by legislature in 1989.

Let’s let politicians, not planners, choose the routes. March 17 the General Assembly passed, and the next day the governor signed, a bill that in essence requires the N.C. Turnpike Authority to consider only one route – the most sprawl-inducing one – for the proposed Triangle Expressway Southeast Extension toll road, a link of Raleigh’s I-540 outer loop. The bill, sponsored by Wake Sens. Dan Blue, D, and Sen. Richard Stevens, R, appears to box the turnpike authority into such a spot that it might not be able to meet federal law. The feds require analysis of several alternatives.

“We think that they’ve probably backed themselves into an untenable corner,” says David Farren of the Southern Environmental Law Center. He adds, “What’s most outrageous is just the idea of going as far out as you possibly can, which means the road is longer, the road is more expensive and it’s more sprawl-inducing.” The SELC has filed two lawsuits contesting what it says are improprieties and falsifications involving the federal impact study for the Monroe Bypass.

Why spend only $15 million when you can spend $800 million? Another tidbit that didn’t make the column: The SELC found a 2007 NCDOT study showing that for $15 million, traffic flows on U.S. 74 in Union County could be improved significantly by changing lights, timing and intersections. The N.C. Turnpike Authority, engaged in studying the $800 million Monroe Bypass which aims to alleviate congestion on U.S. 74, didn’t even know that study existed, Farren says.

The state doesn’t do land use planning. And Richard Nixon wasn’t a crook and Bill Clinton never had sex with that woman. When the state plans highways, it engages in land use planning. Next time the state agrees to spend your tax dollars to build a bypass for a city that hasn’t had the sense to say no to congestion-causing highway sprawl development, the state should not pony up dime one until the local government enacts unambiguous land use and zoning ordinances that will prevent said sprawl, including single-family subdivisions, from the new bypass.

The chances of that happening? About like snowballs in hell.

NCDOT chief: No more bypasses of bypasses

Don’t expect the state to build your city a bypass to compensate for the existing bypass your local governments have glopped up, State Transportation Secretary Gene Conti said today. “Those days are gone,” he said.

OK, he didn’t say “glopped up.” That’s my description. Conti dropped by the Observer editorial board today in between local meetings in town – a business roundtable at UNC Charlotte, and he’ll be at the 5 p.m. Charlotte City Council meeting for a discussion about recommendations for the Independence Boulevard project (also see this link, for more information).

He was being questioned about two toll road projects, the so-called Garden Parkway in Gaston County (See “Money-waster road will induce sprawl”), and the proposed Monroe Bypass. Both highways are needed, he said. That’s his story and he’s sticking to it, obviously. After all, the legislature has ordered them both, and Conti’s job is to produce the roads he’s charged with.

Neither of those highways, of course, is worth the taxpayer money that will be spent. But the Monroe bypass is at least an attempt, however uncreative, to ease a terribly unpleasant drive along U.S. 74 through Monroe and Union County.

The problem, of course, is that you can hardly go anywhere in North Carolina, or even in the country, and not find a state-taxpayer-built highway envisioned as a “bypass” that has become a traffic nightmare because the local government involved allowed extreme highway glop to be built along it. Even places as comparatively traffic free as Albemarle have clogged bypasses. Shelby wants a bypass of its bypass. They are all what former Charlotte Mayor Pat McCrory has referred to as “corridors of crap.”

So, I asked Conti, should the state’s taxpayers reward those towns with another new bypass?

His reply: “Well, no.”

“All of us would benefit from a much greater collaboration on those growth issues,” he said. He said the DOT is trying to work to bring local governments more into transportation discussions.
“The days of just trying to continually build bypasses of bypasses, those days are gone,” he said.

So Shelby, Albemarle, Asheboro, Ramseur and all the other N.C. towns that have allowed corridors of crap along your state highways, be forewarned.

The realist in me, though, requires me to mention this: If the legislature orders a highway to be built, as it did via the Highway Trust Fund of the late 1980s, there’s not much a DOT secretary can do about it.