Mount Holly NC Forum

Post by **Scott L** » Thu Aug 25, 2016 3:53 am

I spoke with some of the crew this morning installing the new road. Indeed they have milled 4" deep and replaced that with the sub-layer. Apparently the "fiberglass" (some reports that as Kevlar) additive to the asphalt is something that is rarely done. (ie..the guy that had been doing this for 7 years has never seen it before) The first batch the plant made 2 nights ago didn't get made properly and they had a late start in order to scrap that batch and make another. They say next there will be a bonding agent applied and then a top coat of about 1.5" thick to finish it off. When I asked if they had heard anything about an 8" deep fix they responded that they heard the road was supposed to be patched up to 7" deep but the patches were so close together that it got changed to a milling of the entire road 4" deep. They didn't have much of an opinion about how the road might hold up with heavy trucks. Just that this road is being repaired as well as any high volume, heavy load road they've done. (I think they referenced Hwy 74 and I think an interstate ramp or something.) The conversation left me thinking if this road breaks now, it would be a deep foundational element that's at fault.

Good folks doing this work. They feel like they would be unwelcomed with all the noise and lights all night. I assured them the community is so thankful and appreciative to have them do this work. I think we'll open a free lemonade stand tomorrow night while they work in front of my home. That asphalt is hot stuff -- even at night. The two flagmen like to bicker about which one gets to stand on the "hot side" of the work on the new hot asphalt.

Looks like the equipment is now done for the night. They start at 7pm.

Post by **Guest** » Wed Aug 24, 2016 10:10 am

As I read the information Scott has provided I come to the conclusion that our City Council and City Manager do not want to petition the NCDOT directly with the truck traffic issue.

Post by **Scott L** » Tue Aug 23, 2016 7:48 am

What I observed last night:

A machine made a pass on the northbound side of N. Main that tore up about 4 inches of asphalt and put most of that into dump trucks. Then two sweepers followed to clean up. At that point, cracks in the asphalt were still visible. A truck followed that put down something that looked like tar or liquid asphalt sealer of some type. Then a machine that spread asphalt loaded by dump trucks. And finally two steam rollers. What is left is a road that is about an inch below the old road.

Two things I didn't see: (1) there was mention early on that the road would be milled down 8". Seems only half that deep - even over the troubled areas the NCDOT marked twice before as such with white paint. (2) there was mention that repairs would be made to deeper issues/problems as found. I saw nobody doing any kind of inspection or fixing as the road was torn up.

In any case, the crew that worked at night to make this happen were impressively doing their jobs in a highly coordinated manner. From the pilot car escorting the one lane of traffic all night long to folks using shovels to ensure a nice smooth road, it will be a shame if this major repair intended to last 10+ years deteriorates from a lack of council declaring a municipal truck route to the north. Here's to hoping Council is wiser than I am.

Post by **Scott L** » Mon May 23, 2016 10:41 am

Another example of a council considering implementing a truck route by those who know how to do it:

Post by **Scott L** » Mon May 23, 2016 10:10 am

Self-explanatory

Post by **Scott L** » Mon May 23, 2016 10:07 am

If/When there are technicalities in any specific proposal, there are ways to still get the objective done. Here Rockingham petitions the NCDOT which begins the process of CONSIDERING the IMPLEMENTATION of a truck route -- something our town manager erroneously said our council has no authority to do:

Post by **Scott L** » Mon May 23, 2016 9:30 am

Mount Holly's City Manager Statement: “The town’s city manager said council has not considered implementing a weight restriction on North Main Street, nor is it in its authority to do so.”

Albemarle's City Manager Statement: "The City Manager stated that on NCDOT maintained streets, any such measures would require the approval of City Council and the concurrence of NCDOT."

Why do these two City Managers have different understanding of the process role of City Council?

http://www.ci.albemarle.nc.us/LinkClick ... 71&mid=537

Post by **Scott L** » Mon May 23, 2016 9:05 am

This is how it's done:

Post by **Scott L** » Sat May 21, 2016 1:26 pm

Is it as simple as turning the residential area of N. Main into a "black line" like other towns have done? The "restriction" could be weight, length, number of axles, weight per axle, etc.

1) In 2008, National Gypsum added to the Heavy Industrial traffic demands of N. Main Street. The mitigation plan to build a bypass failed. City Council should react to the bypass failure and act.
2) In 2009, NC legislation was changed to allow more and bigger Heavy Trucks to use N. Main Street. City Council should react to the change and update local ordinates to restrict Heavy Truck traffic as they did updating local gun laws when Raleigh changed the laws on that.
3) In 2015, Freightliner petitioned the town to expand their Heavy Industrial zoning and the town people protested it. City Council should plan and manage growth; and in a way that does not harm the citizens that they serve so that our Heavy Industrial facilities have citizen-supported growth capabilities.
4) In 2015, the completion of I-485 made the access to/from I-485 a viable alternative to the National Truck Network for the Heavy Industrial facilities on N. Main St. City council should capitalize on this new development.
5) In 2016, the NCDOT will invest many millions of dollars repairing N. Main St. City Council should act to protect the residentially-constructed N. Main St. to best protect that investment.

City Council acting (as other NC towns have done) looks like this:
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City of Mount Holly City Council: (1) Declaration that Highway 273 south of the Industrial zoning on Highway 273 to be strategically important to the development and preservation of residential zoning along and near North Main Street so that industrial truck traffic should be encouraged not to use North Main Street as a Reasonable Access Route to the National Truck Network. (2) Using the authority of NCGS 160A-77(b)(5) establishes a truck route on Highway 273 north of Industrial zoning on Highway 273. (3) The Department of Transportation should approve the municipal truck route designation by concurring ordinance using NCGS 19A NCAC 02B.0213. (4) The Department of Transportation should consider a Truck Restricted Route on Highway 273 south of the Industrial zoning.

Post by **Scott L** » Fri May 20, 2016 3:10 pm

"..an ordinance adopted by a municipality prohibiting truck traffic on a state highway system road would not be enforcable unless DOT approved the posting of a "No Trucks" sign in the DOT right of way. An appropriate procedure for obtaining such approval would be for the municipality to request that DOT designate the road at issue as a light traffic road and provide an alternate heavy trust route under G.S. 20-116(h) and approve the appropriate signage."

- Jimmy Lynch, State Traffic Engineer

https://connect.ncdot.gov/resources/saf ... T-41_m.pdf

So the question is, why has our council not started the "apporpiate procedure for obtaining the truck route approval"?

1) In 2008, National Gypsum added to the Heavy Industrial traffic demands of N. Main Street. The mitigation plan to build a bypass failed. City Council should react to the bypass failure and act.
2) In 2009, NC legislation was changed to allow more/bigger Heavy Trucks to use N. Main Street. City Council should react to the change and update local ordinates to restrict Heavy Truck traffic as you did updating local gun laws when Raleigh changed the laws on that.
3) In 2015, Freightliner petitioned the town to expand their Heavy Industrial zoning and the town people protested it. City Council should plan and manage growth; and in a way that does not harm the citizens that you serve so that our Heavy Industrial facilities have citizen-supported growth capabilities.
4) In 2015, the completion of I-485 made the access to/from I-485 a viable alternative to the National Truck Network for the Heavy Industrial facilities on N. Main St. City council should capitalize on this new development.
5) In 2016, the NCDOT will invest many millions of dollars repairing N. Main St. City Council should act to protect the residentially-constructed N. Main St. to best protect that investment.

Post by **Scott L** » Tue May 03, 2016 8:26 am

A side-by-side comparison of the choice:

(a) traffic through 2 miles of residential area
(b) traffic through 2 miles of unpopulated area

http://mymtholly.com/compare.html

Post by **Scott L** » Sun Mar 13, 2016 10:30 am

A good public communication from the Manager in the March 2016 newsletter on this matter:

viewtopic.php?f=15&p=1265#p1265

Post by **Scott L** » Fri Feb 26, 2016 10:41 am

Today a heavy industrial freight truck full of untreated gypsum crashed on Hwy 16. Thankfully there were no injuries -- in part because this truck was not traveling along N. Main Street 24 inches from a sidewalk where school busses stop for children and homes are only 20 feet away from the road:

http://www.wsoctv.com/video?videoId=116 ... ersion=1.0

Post by **Scott L** » Fri Feb 19, 2016 1:44 pm

"The N.C. Department of Transportation has deemed North Main Street a designated route for trucks. To reverse that decision, NCDOT spokeswoman Jordan-Ashley Walker said the department must find a safety and capacity deficiency for the road."

Ref: http://www.gastongazette.com/news/20160 ... -off-roads

The NCDOT recommends a sidewalk be 6 feet from the side of an industrial road. Why is that? Is it a "safety issue" when that advice is ignored?

The NCDOT has design and build requirements that specify a specific road foundation for heavy industrial traffic. Why is that? Is it both a "safety issue" and a "capacity issue" if roads are not constructed with the appropraite foundation?

The NCDOT advises (or requires) a certain distance of setback for constructing homes along heavy industrial roads. Why is that? Is it a safety issue if hazardous material is transported "too close" to homes on a daily basis?

If former Councilman Jason Gowen writes to our state legislators: "the road was not designed for the weights of the trucks moving their product. This has resulted in several accidents, awful driving conditions, and continuous repair funded by our city on a state maintained road" -- Is that a "safety issue" or a "capacity issue"? I mean I sure wouldn't want to believe when there's potential to receive money, City Council will state the problem with integrity -- but wants to be silent when voters' concerns are involved.

Post by **Scott L** » Fri Feb 19, 2016 12:52 pm

If a 4-lane road to the interstate is important to the industrial facilities, this blue line proposal should be a plan everyone supports. The City of Gastonia owns most/all the undeveloped land on the right side going north. I'm sure they wouldn't mind at all the NCDOT digging into their land for a few more lanes. Notice how there's a small "bypass" at Pinewood and it entirely misses passing the charter school. THIS is a strategic vision!

Post by **Scott L** » Fri Feb 19, 2016 8:20 am

It's rare that City Council will publicly acknowledge what the problem is. But here is part of the problem described by former Councilman Gowen on 5/6/2015 in his own words:

I thought you might enjoy portions of a letter I recently sent after having my feedback on an economic incentive plan solicited by several in our state legislature.

"I will bring to you what I see as one of the most ill-conceived pieces of legislation that has not only damaged my municipality, it has created an enormous legal liability for us. NCGS 105-275 8-b allows any net recycler to avoid property taxes. While this sounds like a wonderful solution to encourage recycling and a green approach to manufacturing and waste, in our case it has been a disaster. We have the largest single structure manufacturing facility in the south east in our small town of 14,000. The facility is for profit and turns waste ash from Duke Power into drywall which seems fairly noble. They run three shifts and have 70 employees, of which less than 20% live in our town, and help us add diversification to our industrial infrastructure. However, with all things, there is a catch. Since construction began we have had multiple death, employees pinned in equipment, extractions, two major fires, and several other issues. So while we put our emergency workers lives in danger, require special equipment, continually up fit our emergency apparatus, and have had our roads destroyed by this company, they make a profit which is only exacerbated by their lack of basic contributions to the safety infrastructure. I have sought every legal remedy possible, addressed the NC School of Law through the league of municipalities, addressed Senator Harrington’s office and Representative Torbet’s office with no solution to date.

However, the story has improved significantly in the last year. Since the closure of our coal fired steam station, the trains don’t run as frequently and now all of the drywall/wall board is transported by road instead of rail. At this point NC Hwy 273 has turned into four huge ruts with a yellow line dissecting them because the road was not designed for the weights of the trucks moving their product. This has resulted in several accidents, awful driving conditions, and continuous repair funded by our city on a state maintained road. Moreover, while I don’t seek the full bounty of their reasonable property taxes I do believe that a pro-rata portion equal to the expenses incurred by our citizens for police and fire protection is warranted at minimum. When recycling for a profit one should not receive the same luxuries as a non-profit or not for profit."

Now Mr. Gowen's solution to the problem is to give the town government money to compensate our town for the blight and resource demands this facility causes. Lacking any progress on that front, perhaps the tax breaks that National Gypsum enjoys should be meant to cover the costs to run heavy industrial traffic a little differently or be incentivized to go back to using rail.

Ref: https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php? ... 85&fref=nf

Post by **Scott L** » Tue Feb 09, 2016 2:49 pm

That might be a contributing factor for sure. But I live on N. Main near town where the stormwater drains work very well. The road is also horrible here.

Someone mentioned somewhere that long ago the city limits used to end at Lanier. If that's the case, maybe the road within the city limits was constructed differently or at a different time than outside the city limits -- north of Lanier.

Post by **Djhaywood** » Tue Feb 09, 2016 2:42 pm

I haven't read through all the posts, yet, however has it been brought up any that one of the major issues this road has is drainage? The road is bad where there are curbs that keep the water from rains on the road too long and seeping too close instead of draining properly and timely. That combined with the heavy truck traffic is root causes of the road conditions. If one looks at this road where the curbs end, and where water has room to run off!, it is fine. The problematic part of the road is where they're curbs! When it rains there's parts where the water pools and causes issues as it stays and can cause hydro planing. That itself proves there isn't proper drainage. Those are the two factors that cause the bad road. The trucks only aren't an issue-it's combining them with the design of the road/lack of drainage that's causing al the issues.

Post by **Scott L** » Mon Feb 08, 2016 11:47 pm

WCOC-TV covered the council voting not to re-route heavy truck traffic immediately after receiving a petition signed by 155 people to do so:

http://m.wsoctv.com/news/news/local/mt- ... fic/nqL7r/

Post by **Scott L** » Fri Feb 05, 2016 8:26 am

Online petition yielded 149 people on record wanting trucks routed as the council once mandated by an unenforceable agreement:

viewtopic.php?f=12&t=549

Post by **Scott L** » Wed Feb 03, 2016 12:07 pm

Four types of heavy freight truck traffic on N. Main:

a) Freightliner-controlled truck traffic. Stated above to already be using Hwy 16.
b) National Gypsum truck traffic. Cutting through 2 miles of residential N. Main.
c) Third party trucking companies to either industrial facility. At least some cutting through 2 miles of residential N. Main.
d) Cut-through traffic.

Recently a checkpoint at 27/273 resulted in 7 of 8 trucks receiving a violation. (88%) This suggests we might have a truck problem.

This is the cut-through problem described:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ec9hshoRBZg

Post by **Scott L** » Mon Feb 01, 2016 4:37 pm

Evidentially, the 100+ trucks/day are not Freightliner. So says people who claim to know.

Post by **Trucker** » Sun Jan 31, 2016 11:10 pm

here are the kinds of restrictions that can be made https://connect.ncdot.gov/business/truc ... ctions.pdf

Post by **Scott L** » Fri Jan 29, 2016 9:01 pm

Online petition started:

https://www.change.org/p/mount-holly-nc ... m=copylink

Post by **Scott L** » Fri Jan 29, 2016 7:26 pm

City Council is having a retreat next week. Perhaps this is a good time to remind them about the issue they tabled from their August meeting:

https://youtu.be/S7uXAhLzLHA

AND

https://youtu.be/6Jl9yIkoqjE

Post by **Scott L** » Mon Dec 21, 2015 11:44 am

One of the strategies for using a city-defined truck route for the N. Main industrialism problem is that truckers can't be managed from the shipping/receiving offices of Freightliner and National Gypsum. There are third party trucking companies that have nothing to do with Mount Holly and certainly would not respect any informal request from the Mayor or City Manager to route elsewhere.

There even has been suspicion that some of the truck traffic use N. Main in order to bypass the weigh station on I85. The city heard the citizen's concerns and followed up on those concerns for a period of two hours -- I suppose to find out if the concerns were legitimate. From a reported 8 trucks stopped at a checkpoint on 27, 7 of them were ticketed. That's 88% of the truck traffic! I suppose after 2 hours the CB radio starts to play against the checkpoint. Although this was on Hwy 27 at the river, it stands to reason some truck traffic on N. Main would also benefit from this kind of traffic management.

Ultimately, we'd like to see a weight-restricted N. Main to at least take the heavy freight traffic off the road so that damage is not done to it and the bordering residential properties.

http://www.gastongazette.com/article/20 ... 0/0/SEARCH

Post by **Scott L** » Thu Sep 24, 2015 5:23 pm

I have noticed a difference. Still some heavy freight traffic and coal ash coming through.... but for sure some improvement - even if unenforcable and possibly temporary. There are times when no trucks travel through that I feel inspired to walk downtown. Just hoping it continues to improve and last. That's the best way to bump up quality of life improvement along N. Main. And if we can be assured this will continue to improve and last, I'd sure appreciate knowing to whom we owe gratitude.

Post by **rgwiazdzinski** » Thu Sep 24, 2015 10:31 am

I am at the Harris Teeter on Mount Holly Huntersville Road and highway 16 and I just saw freightliner Trucks coming from the North headed south towards i-85 apparently Freightliner is doing their part in keeping their trucks off of north main and sending them away from town.

Post by **Scott L** » Fri Sep 18, 2015 8:22 pm

Below according to the Belmont Banner News 9/17/2015 edition. It's time to take the "thus subject to change" out of the equation and make the routing of truck traffic off N. Main residential areas "enforceable", lasting, and benefiting our town while allowing our industry to thrive.

(Credit: http://banner-news.com/Front-Page-71.htm)

Post by **Scott L** » Wed Sep 02, 2015 12:37 pm

We have had an investigative reporter connect with every agency: NCDOT, Federal DOT, and the State Highway Patrol Director. It comes down to this:

"...its all in the hands of the Mayor and City Council. The City has the Authority to put up signs restricting Truck Traffic through our town - PERIOD. There is no magic DOT agency that will come here and put up signs. In fact the Mayor is putting the Citizens of Mount Holly at risk, by allowing these trucks to cut through on a street that is not designed or designated for Heavy Industrial use. He needs to be alerted, told, warned, that if there is an accident, he can be held at fault..."

If step one of this process is negotiating with Freightliner to voluntarily use Hwy 16, that is now done. (Per the City Manager's newsletter.) I believe the next step would be to actually put up the signs -- which now will not impact Freightliner.

We've had the non-enforceable handshake agreement before. Citizens should demand that it be made enforceable!

Post by **Scott L** » Wed Sep 02, 2015 9:58 am

What I think I observed today on N. Main: A NCDOT crew took a core sample of the road to determine how deep the asphalt is. They might also be able to tell what kind of material the road is made of. It seemed they also tested the ground under the pavement using what might have been a calibrated hammer pounding a steel rod while measuring how it penetrates the soil through the hole that was drilled.

I still hope we get the industrial traffic out of the residential areas. But there seems to be some thought going into how N. Main should be repaired. Two separate issues that are related.

Post by **Scott L** » Tue Sep 01, 2015 2:46 pm

A mention of the truck traffic issue in the monthly newsletter:
viewtopic.php?f=15&t=364

Post by **Scott L** » Fri Aug 14, 2015 7:11 pm

Wouldn't we want to have the city councilman in this video represent us in Mt. Holly:
http://wwlp.com/2015/08/06/trucks-banne ... rthampton/

Third party trucking companies are part of the problem we have in Mount Holly -- like this issue in the video:
http://fox17online.com/2015/07/28/grand ... mi-trucks/

Mount Holly once had advice for big rigs to use Hwy 16. But rather than trucks ignoring signs, Mount Holly just lets them do as they please -- like the ones in this video described by a city councilman:
http://fox59.com/2014/07/21/carmel-lead ... y-streets/

Post by **410main** » Fri Aug 14, 2015 6:06 pm

I guess everyone can draw their own conclusion on the august council meeting, but the bottom line is that the elected City Council does not want to upset heavy business and ask twice about them using the 273 N to I-485 route. Even though this would be a positive and well received step toward improving the relationship value between the Mt. Holly citizens and "big business". Which was lightly mentioned that they had done this with caution that any insistence may cost jobs and tax revenue. I don't guess my 30 years of paying taxes to the city with no expense has any value according to our Mayor elect. Does anyone in the city notice the direction of the line of traffic through town when Freightliner and the drywall plant changes shifts? What doesn't leave going 273 N comes through town and heads toward Mecklenburg Co. on Route 27 over the river bridge. And the rest head toward Belmont and I-85 to Gastonia or Route 27 toward Stanley. Is their anyone who works at these facilities and resides in the township of Mt. Holly? So much for "jobs".
It was easy to see that the council was very cautious about the focus of the meeting by devoting so much time on the subject of North Main st. repaving. When and how good a job they're going to do. The D.O.T. rep. seemed very knowledgeable and interested as he should have been, that's his job. But the North Main agenda was not to be so much about street paving. That has already been decided by D.O.T. and not city council. They're past conclusion on that matter has been "it's out of our hands". So who and why request D.O.T. attendance? The agenda that they stayed away from was supposed to be reduce and eliminate heavy trucks from Main st. Mt. Holly. That would have been impossible before I-485 was completed. But now it is. So their is no logical reason that it cannot be done with ease. But more profit at the expense of Mt. Holly citizens.
Does anyone remember the agreement between City Council, the mill owners and Freightliner in order for Freightliner to get approval from the city to build their manufacturing plant in the city jurisdiction? So the reply may be "we were not on council at that time". Maybe not but the thought process is still there.
Our basic recourse, although their are others, is the voting poles which are coming up. And as a Mt. Holly citizen I won't vote any incumbent. Nor advise anyone to.

Malcolm Prevatte

Post by **rgwiazdzinski** » Tue Aug 11, 2015 7:44 pm

so hurry up and wait i suppose, we live in Runnymede and have noticed how bad the road has gotten since the drywall trucks started rolling, i fear someone will hit a pot hole and cross the center line trying to over compensate. i bet as we get rain and freezing this winter the road will become even worse and we will start seeing more accidents due to it.

Post by **Scott L** » Tue Aug 11, 2015 2:01 pm

Please see here:

viewtopic.php?f=14&p=654#p654

Councilwoman Breyere asked the Mayor if the item will be further discussed in the next workshop meeting. The Mayor said they will discuss it further if/when there is new information to discuss. So frankly, I don't know what the next step is. But I do know there were lots of take-aways from the NCDOT to get back (to council?) with more information. I read a direct public comment and the policy is not to respond during the meeting. So at least the answer that I am due is something I must be patient and wait for a response. I do appreciate that kind of response -- one that is well-thought, deliberate, and meaningful. (Not something off the cuff or unprepared.)

Council cannot deliberate this issue outside of the public record. (Violation of open meeting laws.) So they can't work on a response together until they meet again. In a correctly-performing government, each councilperson would be doing a little research to come prepared for that next meeting where they would then formulate a response. The "research" should be: "What does the public that they represent want of this issue?" The "research" should not be: "How are roads built?", "What does a trucking company think about truck routes?", or "Who is in charge of the NCDOT that should be called in to speak?" This is where it's important that councilpersons understand their role in this: to represent the people in the formation of strategy. It's equally important voters also understand how to judge the performance of their elected councilpersons and vote people who do not represent you well out of office. And since all councilpersons are at-large representing all of the people of Mt. Holly, their "votes" on any issues ought to be unanimous all of the time unless some of them have data that says a majority of their constituents support an issue while others have data that says a majority of their constituents do not support an issue.

(Note, the role of "Mayor" is different. The Mayor represents everyone in MH (citizens, business, and government) as the "salesman" of the entirety of the town. He does, however, get to decide things in a tie-vote -- which should NEVER happen since the councilpersons are all representing the same people.)

Post by **rgwiazdzinski** » Tue Aug 11, 2015 1:55 pm

any news from the meeting?

Post by **Scott L** » Mon Aug 10, 2015 2:07 pm

Fortunately, this truck was broken down on N. Main today and emergency crews quickly responded to direct traffic. What happens if a fully loaded freight truck driver were to have a medical condition? What happens to the fully loaded truck?

Post by **Scott L** » Sun Aug 09, 2015 8:50 pm

Here is where Mount Holly is asking Raleigh to make N. Main into a 4-lane road -- similar to what exists between I85 and Tuckaseegee Rd:
(We all know what happens to sidewalks and bike lanes when the budget is negotiated down.)

http://www.gclmpo.org/documents/MPOBoar ... 3-2014.pdf

Attached is the part that asks for the project.

9/4/2015 Update: Mr. Toomey is no longer the primary MPO representative for Mt. Holly. As of today, the MPO representative is Councilman David Moore. Mr. Toomey is now the secondary/alternate MPO representative.

Post by **Scott L** » Sun Aug 09, 2015 9:12 am

The Gaston Gazette published an article on this:

https://shar.es/1tGJwX

Post by **Value Engineering** » Sat Aug 08, 2015 5:51 pm

I Value Engineer 3-5 year Hotmix Asphalt into 20+ year concrete.

Not only does it speed up schedule by eliminating multiple stone/lime lifts for the asphalt sub base (1-2 months)
It is also cheaper, greener, stronger, it has a longer life, reflects more light from the sun (reducing power usage) and goes down 3 times as fast.

I am a member of the NRMCA (National Ready Mix Concrete Association) ACI (American Concrete Institute)and PTI (Post Tension Institute) and work closely with local Vendors such as Argos, Concrete Supply Blue Dot and Thomas.

If anyone would like a Commodity, Cost and Schedule provided I can be reached at
Brandon Oberg
704-674-1655
brandon@benchmark-concrete.com

Would I mind getting the contract? sure
Would I mind giving a free competitive bid with the backing of a National Association and Major Supplier to save Mt Holly time, headache and money? Yes
Even if I don't get the contract. 100% Yes

Post by **Scott L** » Fri Aug 07, 2015 4:44 pm

This published in the 5/21/15 Belmont Banner News

Post by **Scott L** » Wed Aug 05, 2015 12:15 pm

"has anyone ever wondered why a truck going north or south on I-85 or I-485 would pull off of either of these routes and come into Mt. Holly by either 273,[Main st.] or 27,[Freedom Dr.] and make a left or right turn at the intersection at 27 & 273 [the underpass] to go back to I-85 or I-485?"

My wife told me about this yesterday! She followed a truck from I-85 north on 273 and then on 27 to get back on 485! If anyone wants to start quoting traffic studies and counts, that kind of statistic shouldn't be overlooked! Yesterday I saw a blinking-yellow-light semi going up N. Main with a heavy load right past my house. Video of it posted on YouTube.

Post by **410main** » Wed Aug 05, 2015 11:18 am

Scott, I've found that a lot of forums are mostly complaining, venting, special agenda and what about me platforms that produce no good or informative information for the common good of the "community" it's representing. And hope this forum will continue to shy away from such. But on the information and food for thought side I assume that those who live on Main st. have noticed the new truck traffic that we have acquired since Duke Power has started to remove the coal ash from the now closed River Bend power plant. When it began, Channel 9 News in Charlotte covered it and stated that the truck traffic would follow route 16 onto I-485 to a point in Georgia. Well guess what they discovered? Highway 273 and main st. is a closer and more direct route. Win win situation for industry and lose lose for Mt. Holly citizens! I wonder who redirected the drivers route through Mt. Holly?
One reason is called a "WEIGHT STATION", which the Mt. Holly Main st. route bypasses. Before my retirement I spent 44 years in the trucking industry so I do have a small amount of understanding on this subject. Weight stations are not only to check the weight of a loaded truck but also to check the vehicles obvious maintenance condition for public safety.
It also checks the drivers log books to see how many hours he has been driving. In my few years of experience the lack of proper truck maintenance and sleeping drivers are the major cause of truck accidents. It's not the ability of the drivers, as most of them are well trained professionals. While we are on the subject of weight stations, has anyone ever wondered why a truck going north or south on I-85 or I-485 would pull off of either of these routes and come into Mt. Holly by either 273,[Main st.] or 27,[Freedom Dr.] and make a left or right turn at the intersection at 27 & 273 [the underpass] to go back to I-85 or I-485? The reason is simple! To avoid the weight station!! Their drivers logs are not accurate, too many hours at the steering wheel, they are over weight,[80,000 lbs.], and or their equipment will not pass a standard safety inspection. Why does our City Council continue to turn their eyes from the obvious while the citizens of this community are put at a safety risk? Houses along main st, north and south, are shaken to pieces, the street condition resembles a plowed field, the infrastructure under the streets are destroyed, citizens can't sleep because of the all night noise of truck tires hitting potholes and the devaluing of property values, try selling or renting a house on Main st. Consider the safety factor of hundreds of 80, 000 lb. trucks going up and down the "main st. corridor" 24/7.
This is just something for the citizens to think about before the July council meeting and the upcoming City Council elections. Be there and be involved in our community.

Malcolm Prevatte

Post by **Scott L** » Mon Aug 03, 2015 1:12 pm

A video representation of how Mt. Holly allows residential areas and non-industrial roads to be abused:

http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL ... rCmD3kHD-t

Post by **Scott L** » Tue Jul 21, 2015 9:12 am

*** OPEN INVITATION TO MT. HOLLY CITIZENS, VOTERS, AND TAXPAYERS ***

Hot dog cookout to socialize the exact message to give to City Council. (If you want to cook something other than hot dogs, you're welcomed to bring your own grilling material.)

Where: Tuckaseegee Park - shelter on left nearest skateboard park (Shelters 2 and 3)
When: Saturday, August 8, 4pm-6pm
Who: Anyone and Everyone that would like to route heavy freight trucks off N. Main
Why: The NCDOT will resurface N. Main next year. With continued heavy trucks on it, the repairs won't last. (Heavy Industrial traffic through 2 miles of residential areas is also not good for the community.)
Cost: FREE $0

We have 100 MyMtHolly.COM free t-shirts to give away with priority going to those who plan to attend the Monday 8/10 7pm council meeting. (So far, about 50 people have indicated they will attend the Monday council meeting.)

If you plan to attend, please RSVP (mrmtholly@mymtholly.com) so that we have a good idea how many hotdogs and buns to cook. Bring as many neighbors or friends as you like... just be sure to mention how many so that we don't run short on food. We'll have all the information about routing heavy trucks off N. Main available. At least one city council candidate has expressed intent to attend this cookout. A friendly, cooperative, and neighborly event this should be!

The Mt. Holly City Council has an item on the Monday, August 10th @ 7pm to consider routing truck traffic off N. Main Street. The NCDOT is aware of this event and State Rep. John Torbett is aware of this event. Asking City Council to use their "Define Truck Route" powers is similar to how our town zones property for land use. But to do so, "enough" public opinion needs to be present to encourage council to act.

Post by **Scott L** » Thu Jul 02, 2015 3:23 pm

I have invited the NCDOT and State Rep. John Torbell to the 8/10 city council meeting so that they can see and hear the public opinion on this matter for themselves.

Post by **Scott L** » Thu Jun 25, 2015 7:47 am

Calling all citizens, taxpayers, and voters... Please join in Town Hall at the August council meeting to ask council to take action to route trucks off N. Main:

viewtopic.php?f=14&p=556#p556

Post by **MtHollyMom** » Wed May 20, 2015 8:07 pm

That was a good May council meeting. Glad to see so many come out to support homeowners.

Post by **Scott L** » Thu May 14, 2015 6:34 am

Here is perspective to consider. If you ask someone who knows a lot about roads what Mt. Holly needs, it's likely you'll get an answer that we need more roads and bigger roads. But if you ask regular citizens about what Mt. Holly needs, it's likely they will not agree that we need more and bigger roads. It's likely most Mt. Holly citizens want to preserve our small town more than increase its size or capacity. That's why it's important for our town to be influenced by citizens and not by professional infrastructure planners. Our town's identity and strategy is set by citizens and represented by council.

Post by **mrmtholly** » Mon May 11, 2015 11:08 am

POSTED LETTER

Post by **Scott L** » Fri May 08, 2015 2:48 pm

Some interesting perspective from Councilman Gowen... Mr. Gowen represented our solution for N. Main is to wait for the 2030 NCDOT/MPO plan that will improve the road. Mr. Gowen will not consider routing trucks off N. Main but he will consider adding more trucks to it with the 5/11 public hearing to re-zone Residential to Heavy Industrial. It's my opinion that the town intends to continue and even make worse the N. Main problem caused by heavy trucks so that NCDOT/MPO would consider improving the road with a higher priority.

Facebook Posting #1:
"Councilman J. Jason Gowen: From my reports from staff, council persons, and on up you have spoken to many but you refuse to listen."

(Perhaps Mr. Gowen doesn't understand his job as an elected representative is to listen to his constituents - not sell whatever strategy government wants sold to the electorate. I and many others have "complained" about the condition of N. Main and if there is a "refuse to listen" problem, it's on the part of whoever thinks it's a good idea to intentionally make the problem worse.))

Facebook Posting #2:
Q: "What's the strategy to manage Heavy Industrial freight traffic that is tearing up N. Main?"
A: "Councilman J. Jason Gowen" ...there is a strategy, it's on a 30 year plan. it is at the bottom on priorities according to the regional MPO and the State."

(The 2030 MPO/NCDOT plan is to improve N. Main. So it seems that Mr. Gowen's strategy is to adopt whatever it is that MPO/NCDOT says they want to do to our town. No town citizen input required.)

Post by **Scott L** » Tue Apr 28, 2015 7:29 am

nessie wrote:273 through Mt. Holly is beyond atrocious with potholes and such caused by the heavy trucks. I wish something could be enforced to make them use an alternate route and/or fix 273 to make it amenable to large trucks AND normal traffic. It seems that Mt. Holly has not been able to keep up with the amount of traffic that flows through its roadways.

The frequency of traffic light changes at the two intersections where Food Lion is also needs to be addressed, too. In the morning hours, barely 5 cars get through either of the lights before waiting side traffic causes them to change. This enormously disrupts the flow of through traffic, which often contains two or more large trucks. As a result, traffic on the 273 thoroughfare has to sit through 2 to 3 light changes. Often, the light triggers through traffic to stop to let one lone car come out of the side roads. The lights just need to be adjusted to not trigger so quickly to let traffic out of the side roads. It would make for a less frustrating commute in the mornings!

Important to note: patching the road will not address what keeps breaking it -- heavy trucks incompatibility with the road foundation that was built for passenger cars.

I agree that the two traffic lights @ S. Main and Highland (Food Lion) are AWFUL! They ought to work together and it is clear they do not. It would be nice if as a part of the widening project at least one of those intersections was a traffic circle with NO stoplight. I'd bet some of that NCDOT brilliancy could combine the two traffic lights into one intersection if they tried hard enough.

Post by **nessie** » Thu Apr 23, 2015 10:42 pm

273 through Mt. Holly is beyond atrocious with potholes and such caused by the heavy trucks. I wish something could be enforced to make them use an alternate route and/or fix 273 to make it amenable to large trucks AND normal traffic. It seems that Mt. Holly has not been able to keep up with the amount of traffic that flows through its roadways.

The frequency of traffic light changes at the two intersections where Food Lion is also needs to be addressed, too. In the morning hours, barely 5 cars get through either of the lights before waiting side traffic causes them to change. This enormously disrupts the flow of through traffic, which often contains two or more large trucks. As a result, traffic on the 273 thoroughfare has to sit through 2 to 3 light changes. Often, the light triggers through traffic to stop to let one lone car come out of the side roads. The lights just need to be adjusted to not trigger so quickly to let traffic out of the side roads. It would make for a less frustrating commute in the mornings!

Post by **nessie** » Thu Apr 23, 2015 10:40 pm

273 through Mt. Holly is beyond atrocious with potholes and such caused by the heavy trucks. I wish something could be enforced to make them use an alternate route and/or fix 273 to make it amenable to large trucks AND normal traffic. It seems that Mt. Holly has not been able to keep up with the amount of traffic that flows through its roadways.

The frequency of traffic light changes at the two intersections where Food Lion is also needs to be addressed, too. In the morning hours, barely 5 cars get through either of the lights before waiting side traffic causes them to change. This enormously disrupts the flow of through traffic, which often contains two or more large trucks. As a result, traffic on the 273 thoroughfare has to sit through 2 to 3 light changes. Often, the light triggers through traffic to stop to let one lone car come out of the side roads. The lights just need to be adjusted to not trigger so quickly to let traffic out of the side roads. It would make for a less frustrating commute in the mornings!

Post by **MtHollyMom** » Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:23 pm

Scott L wrote:PS -- I have heard many people say they "have called the city to complain". Thinking about what needs to happen, it might be more productive to sign up here and watch for any public support that might be needed. Perhaps someday soon a petition would help and organizing support for that event in advance might be a good idea.

More community involvement sounds like just what is needed. How do we get more people involved? I like the idea of a petition - so city council can see the amount of people who want improvement. Those pot holes are sure getting worse fast...

Post by **Prevatteme** » Sun Apr 19, 2015 7:58 pm

Concerning a request to the City of Mt. Holly for a cost analysis on street repair for North Main for the fiscal year, it was stated by Mt. Holly's "fiscal analyst" that only three repairs were made by the city for infrastructure damage, broken water piping and etc. And were made at a cost to the city of $1300.00. With in several months there were three repairs made in front of my house on the 400 block with one of them done twice due to the pavement sinking before the day was out. I spoke to the Assistant City Manager about this and he promptly had the paving repair re-done, which I thank him for. Unfortunately an 8ft. section has caved in beside of it now and has to be the worst spot on North Main at the present time. One thing about the heavy trucks that most people don't know or even think about is that the weight limit on these trucks is 80,000 lbs. And they need to be on a highway that was constructed for that weight limit. Not MAIN st. that was constructed for no more than a car or horse and buggy. I don't understand the city's cost figures. I spoke to the person in Belmont, whom I've known for years, who has charge over the water department and their repairs to the city's streets due to broken piping. I ask him what the general cost to the city for this type of repair was and his answer was "the lowest cost for a patch, coupling, with a 5'x7' street opening was $3500.00". Assuming this to be a consistent cost to the city of Belmont, how can Mt. Holly do it three times for $1300.00? Perhaps an audit would be more accurate. But of course, it could be a simple misunderstanding or mistake.

Post by **Scott L** » Fri Apr 17, 2015 3:59 pm

Prevatteme wrote:In IV a You made a comment about a "non-enforceable" agreement reached between the city and National Gypsum pertaining to the route of all product traffic on 273 North to route 16 and on to I-485 and I-85 to their destination and all incoming product from Duke Powers coal fired stations to be shipped in by rail. Therefore not turning Main Street into an Interstate with large heavy trucks. I find this hard to believe! Please bear with me. I refuse to believe that our elected Mayor, City Council and City managers would show that much dis-intrest and dis-regard for the tax payers and residents who live anywhere close to route 273. I believe their intelligence and rational goes far beyond that. They have sworn to place the betterment and safety of our city's citizens above the wants and desires of out side industrial business, and anyone else. Surely this agreement was part of the ground work for allowing National Gypsum to be built in our jurisdiction and just as valid as the building permit itself! Or did it come with a purposeful "loop-hole" to a hidden agenda? Surely not! After all, don't we have confidence in our elected leaders?

Regarding having confidence in our elected leaders, if we don't have confidence in them, then we vote into office those we DO have confidence in. There is a section here to describe the performance of and the confidence in our elected leaders. Let's start compiling a list of pros and cons for each leader. Having only lived here 2 years, I really don't know their history and performance very well and I need data to form an opinion on them. I imagine many who live here would appreciate the same.

Post by **user** » Fri Apr 17, 2015 1:21 pm

if I were you I wouldn't hold your breth

Post by **Scott L** » Fri Apr 17, 2015 12:44 pm

PS -- I have heard many people say they "have called the city to complain". Thinking about what needs to happen, it might be more productive to sign up here and watch for any public support that might be needed. Perhaps someday soon a petition would help and organizing support for that event in advance might be a good idea.

Post by **Scott L** » Fri Apr 17, 2015 12:35 pm

user wrote:some one tell city council to read this stuf. no brainer. others citys have people that stop this why cant we. or do the plants have them in there back pocket?

Well I met with a couple council members last week about this and they had no problem sympathizing that North Main is tore up and getting worse. It seems they and town staff have been comfortable stating that "N. Main is a state-owned road" thereby suggesting it's someone else's problem and responsibility. And that is a valid point. But our town has the duty to determine land use and they also have the ability to define a truck route that would better manage how Heavy Industrial traffic can be separated from Residential zoning. Trust me when I tell you this: it seemed to me that the folks I spoke with didn't know that the city has the ability to define a truck route by NC law. Though I can't say for sure HOW they will consider that information, I can say that they are considering it. And even if our town did want to route industrial truck traffic on Hwy 16, there is still the NCDOT to convince -- but having a city-defined truck route I think is the first step in doing that.

I also believe that most of the truck traffic is by third party truckers. So be careful suggesting the manufacturing facilities would be influencing council or town staff. If Duke Energy is sending 50 trucks per day of raw materials to National Gypsum for example, it's not National Gypsum that can tell Duke Energy truck drivers how to drive. And for that matter, it could be that even Duke Energy can't tell them how to drive since they could be a contracted trucking company hired to pickup and drop off only.

The all-important starting block is to define the strategy. Land use is already defined as there are clearly (growing) Heavy Industrial zones and Residential zones. That is supposed to be the "requirements" that NCDOT will satisfy with roads. There is just one more element left out and that is how Heavy Industrial and Residential are separated and that should be set by our town by defining a truck route. The NCDOT should then respect that requirement and satisfy it with their processes.

Don't lose patience. Slow and steady wins the race. There may be a time where public support will be needed to persuade people to take action. (Perhaps when the NCDOT will hear our case.) Let's continue to socialize this to build that support and let our town's leaders do their jobs to organize that support formally.

Post by **user** » Fri Apr 17, 2015 11:00 am

some one tell city council to read this stuf. no brainer. others citys have people that stop this why cant we. or do the plants have them in there back pocket?

Post by **Scott L** » Thu Apr 16, 2015 3:02 pm

Prevatteme wrote:In IV a You made a comment about a "non-enforceable" agreement reached between the city and National Gypsum pertaining to the route of all product traffic on 273 North to route 16 and on to I-485 and I-85 to their destination and all incoming product from Duke Powers coal fired stations to be shipped in by rail. Therefore not turning Main Street into an Interstate with large heavy trucks. I find this hard to believe! Please bear with me. I refuse to believe that our elected Mayor, City Council and City managers would show that much dis-intrest and dis-regard for the tax payers and residents who live anywhere close to route 273. I believe their intelligence and rational goes far beyond that. They have sworn to place the betterment and safety of our city's citizens above the wants and desires of out side industrial business, and anyone else. Surely this agreement was part of the ground work for allowing National Gypsum to be built in our jurisdiction and just as valid as the building permit itself! Or did it come with a purposeful "loop-hole" to a hidden agenda? Surely not! After all, don't we have confidence in our elected leaders?

Council serves the people and sets the strategy of the town. The town staff then supports the strategy in the day-to-day operations of the town. What I'm worried about is that lacking a defined strategy, either the manufacturing facilities and/or NCDOT is setting our town's strategy. That's kind of the tail waging the dog in my opinion. I know at least a few councilmen know of this issue and know they can act. I'll trust they will act properly and that will give town staff a good foundation to support our town properly. As for a purposeful loop-hole, who was on council when the deal-making was done for the National Gypsum facility? Any loop-holes purposeful or not would be on their watch -- perhaps not the current council. Right? In any case, we can make this right. Just need people to get onboard.

Post by **Scott L** » Thu Apr 16, 2015 2:09 pm

Again, the Town of Burgaw in NC has a state-owned road and has nearly the exact circumstances we have on N. Main:

The high level of truck traffic is causing damage to the pavement as well as potential damage to
structures along the corridor. Limiting the high volume of truck traffic can be accomplished when an alternative
truck route is identified via a bypass of the community or an existing alternative route.

http://www.townofburgaw.com/Data/Sites/ ... y-text.pdf

Post by **Scott L** » Thu Apr 16, 2015 1:49 pm

Look at how city council helps residents in Pinehurst, NC:

Council members agreed that they should look at ways to better control through-traffic with signage. “We have an opportunity to help that neighborhood,” council member John Strickland said of Lake Hills Road, “and also redirect some truck traffic off our residential streets. I think a little more direction that we could supply, routing people up to the other areas would help.”

http://www.thepilot.com/news/village-ap ... 9346d.html

Post by **Scott L** » Thu Apr 16, 2015 1:09 pm

Here is an example of a competent traffic engineer offering up a solution that is nearly identical to the one we have on North Main:

The reduction of truck conflicts in the residential areas may be achieved through the separation of uses. Maintaining truck travel in the industrial and commercial areas avoids potential conflicts. Truck traffic may be guided away from the residential areas in the following ways:
* Destination routes developed for each business and/or area
* Trail blazing/wayfinding signage for the industrial/commercial area; and/or
* Placing weight restrictions on the roadways in the residential area to limit truck traffic.
Any of these options may be developed, approved and implemented in the short term and modified over time to reflect land use changes.

https://denvergov.org/Portals/646/docum ... ngMemo.pdf

Post by **Prevatteme** » Tue Apr 14, 2015 7:38 pm

In IV a You made a comment about a "non-enforceable" agreement reached between the city and National Gypsum pertaining to the route of all product traffic on 273 North to route 16 and on to I-485 and I-85 to their destination and all incoming product from Duke Powers coal fired stations to be shipped in by rail. Therefore not turning Main Street into an Interstate with large heavy trucks. I find this hard to believe! Please bear with me. I refuse to believe that our elected Mayor, City Council and City managers would show that much dis-intrest and dis-regard for the tax payers and residents who live anywhere close to route 273. I believe their intelligence and rational goes far beyond that. They have sworn to place the betterment and safety of our city's citizens above the wants and desires of out side industrial business, and anyone else. Surely this agreement was part of the ground work for allowing National Gypsum to be built in our jurisdiction and just as valid as the building permit itself! Or did it come with a purposeful "loop-hole" to a hidden agenda? Surely not! After all, don't we have confidence in our elected leaders?

Post by **MtHollyMom** » Tue Apr 14, 2015 5:03 pm

There is way too much truck traffic on Highland & North Main Street. Hopefully this town will start thinking of the future & solutions to this issue.

Post by **user** » Tue Apr 14, 2015 9:45 am

well wat happened at the meeting? did anyone speak up?

Post by **Scott L** » Fri Apr 10, 2015 2:40 pm

This is on April 2015's Council Agenda:

10.Call for a public hearing to rezone approximately 4.93 acres, Parcel ID # 212120 from R-8 Single Family/Conditional Use to Heavy Industrial.

There is a proposal to convert residential land into Heavy Industrial land near Freightliner. If the heavy industrial freight traffic isn't properly managed today, why should the public support increasing heavy industrial zoning?

It will be interesting to see if any town leaders raise the issue of industrial traffic through residential areas for discussion at this opportunity.

Post by **Scott L** » Fri Apr 03, 2015 11:57 am

***DRAFT RESOLUTION***

Mount Holly City Council
The State of North Carolina {Date}
Resolution to Designate Highway 273 north of Industrial Zones as a Truck Route

WHEREAS, the General Assembly has authorized municipalities to establish truck traffic routes within their corporate limits by NCGS 160A-77(b)(5); and

WHEREAS, the General Assembly has authorized the Department of Transportation to restrict or prohibit truck traffic on certain State highway roads by NCGS 20-116(h) so that whenever there exist two highways of the State highway system of approximately the same distance between two or more points, the Department of Transportation may, when in the opinion of the Department of Transportation, based upon engineering and traffic investigation, safety will be promoted or the public interest will be served, designate one of the highways the "truck route" between those points, and to prohibit the use of the other highway by heavy trucks or other vehicles of a gross vehicle weight or axle load limit in excess of a designated maximum. In such instances the highways selected for heavy vehicle traffic shall be designated as "truck routes" by signs conspicuously posted, and the highways upon which heavy vehicle traffic is prohibited shall likewise be designated by signs conspicuously posted showing the maximum gross vehicle weight or axle load limits authorized for those highways; and

WHEREAS, the City of Mount Holly has properly zoned the first approximately 2.5 miles of North Main Street “Residential” and the northern most approximately 2.5 miles of Highway 273 as “Industrial”, “Business”, and “Rural Agricultural”.

WHEREAS, the City of Mount Holly has a duty and intent to protect the public interest of properly zoned residential land uses by discouraging heavy or dangerous vehicular traffic when possible in residential areas.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City of Mount Holly City Council: (1) Declaration that Highway 273 south of the Industrial zoning on Highway 273 to be strategically important to the development and preservation of residential zoning along and near North Main Street so that industrial truck traffic should be encouraged not to use North Main Street as a Reasonable Access Route to the National Truck Network. (2) Using the authority of NCGS 160A-77(b)(5) establishes a truck route on Highway 273 north of Industrial zoning on Highway 273. (3) The Department of Transportation should approve the municipal truck route designation by concurring ordinance using NCGS 19A NCAC 02B.0213. (4) The Department of Transportation should consider a Truck Prohibited Route on Highway 273 south of the Industrial zoning.

Adopted this the xx day of mmm, 2015.

Post by **Scott L** » Thu Apr 02, 2015 10:28 am

This is a graphic illustration of the problem that causes hundreds of property owners to suffer along N. Main.

Post by **user** » Tue Mar 31, 2015 7:07 pm

wat did greg beal say about it?

Post by **Scott L** » Mon Mar 30, 2015 6:15 pm

The town of Mt. Holly says that North Main Street was repaired due to water/sewer issues 4 times in the last year. I know there were 2 repairs on the 300 block of N. Main. There might have been one at the 200 block of N. Main at the Highland/Main intersection. Anyone know where the other one was? Or does anyone know of more than one in the last year?

There was also a major repair along the 200-500 blocks that occurred twice. Those repairs are already torn up. Those repairs presumably were not done by the town but by NCDOT as a "general" repair not caused by leaking water/sewer.

Post by **Scott L** » Mon Mar 30, 2015 5:01 pm

This is a DRAFT North Main Street corridor strategy being socialized with town leaders. Anyone have input on this?

Mt. Holly North Main Corridor Strategy

I. N. Main is one of four gateway entrances to Mt. Holly. (South Main + Hwy 27 both ways)
II. There is strategic development occurring along North Main
----a. Riverpark (upscale?)
----b. High-end New development near old power plant
----c. Rehab investment near town
III. Three problems plague N. Main
----a. The road is in disrepair
--------i. Repair causes severe congestion of the ~11,000 daily travelers
--------ii. The broken/patched road contributes to an “industrial” or “utilitarian” feel to the road and therefore the town
----b. There is too much freight traffic
--------i. Freight traffic has increased significantly in the past 2 years
--------ii. Heavy loads are ruining the 1930’s road and the water/sewer pipes under it
--------iii. Major repairs last year are already ruined
----c. N. Main now bypasses downtown
--------i. Since the bypass went into effect, downtown businesses have trouble thriving
--------ii. The bypass encourages freight traffic
--------iii. “Main Street” bypassing downtown is kind of a design flaw.
IV. Did town leaders have a strategy for N. Main?
----a. When the N. Main manufacturing facilities were permitted, there was an “unenforceable” agreement that suggested freight traffic would use Hwy 16 and rail. (“unenforceable” per the Assistant City Manager)
----b. The MH Strategic Vision Plan did call for a traffic circle at N. Main and Highland as a welcomed gateway entrance, a traffic calming measure, and something that would better accommodate pedestrians and bikers while embracing the town’s “place to play” image
----c. Council is on record wanting an “upscale” development at N. Main and Riverpark
----d. Council had well-documented plans for two bypasses to handle the industrial traffic differently than routing down Main Street
V. It is strongly desired that a formal N. Main corridor strategy be adopted by council so that town staff and public activists can better encourage NCDOT to support the adopted N. Main strategy

It can only be deducted that the N. Main corridor is important to Mount Holly to attract good citizens in the development north of town and encourage investment and success in the downtown area.

Next year, NCDOT plans to resurface N. Main. Using last year’s major repairs as an indicator, the resurfacing will not last as the freight trucks carrying maximum weight for reinforced interstate roads will continue to tear up the resurfaced N. Main Street. There is some urgency to remedy the root cause of the problem rather than patch it: eliminate or reduce freight traffic by requiring or encouraging freight traffic to use Hwy 16.
How can this be done? N. Main is designated a “reasonable access” truck route to the interstate system through 2 miles of residential areas.

Eliminating the 2-mile “reasonable access” route through residential areas approaching the town is likely the best approach. Alternately, making it less favorable for freight traffic to use N. Main and more favorable to use Hwy 16 is appropriate. This can be done by implementing traffic calming measures such as: a traffic circle with raised pedestrian crossings, road humps, more traffic signals or all-way stops, lower speed limits, and posted signs suggesting N. Main is not a preferred freight route.

Data Points to Consider:
1) A freight route change would fit nicely while planning the execution of the South Main expansion
----a. Wouldn’t the manufacturing facilities appreciate an appropriate routing of freight traffic on Hwy 16 in anticipation of S. Main construction occurring?
----b. Wouldn’t there be minimal protesting to formalize a no-freight route through 2 miles of residential area while freight trucks would prefer to avoid the S. Main construction anyway?
2) A traffic circle @ Highland and Main would likely have the effect of routing more car traffic through downtown thereby potentially making it more attractive to locate businesses there.
----a. More people passing a coffee shop would likely result in more coffee sold
----b. When there was no bypass going around town, a hardware store and men’s clothing store thrived downtown.
----c. More people passing through town would certainly make it more likely some of them would stop to eat at a nice restaurant.
3) A traffic circle with pedestrian crossings @ Highland and Main would eliminate the existing (ugly) traffic island and make it more conducive for pedestrian traffic to visit downtown.
4) Occasionally an overweight vehicle travels on N. Main specifically to miss the weight station on I85. (From a source that has firsthand knowledge.) That’s horrible for the road and that’s an illegal activity.
5) An attractive gateway entrance from N. Main could attract the higher-end residents in Riverpark and near the old power plant to visit any restaurants/shops in town.
6) Preserving a resurfacing of N. Main would better encourage development and rehab investment along N. Main.
7) N. Main’s congestion would be better served with freight traffic moved to Hwy 16.
8) The opportunity cost of moving freight traffic to Hwy 16 would mean very little to the manufacturing facilities while it would mean a great deal to the homes along N. Main
9) Manufacturing near Freightliner and National Gypsum will only grow. Both in their expansion and in potential new facilities. There must be a competent strategy to manage that increased freight traffic and routing that increased traffic through 2 miles of residential area is not the best strategy.
10) Any overloading of trucks on N. Main is unenforceable. MH police can’t weigh trucks and the NCDOT has little or no interest in our little 2-mile residential part of N. Main.
11) A reduction of the speed limit to 25 mph in the 2-mile N. Main residential area would allow road humps to be implemented thereby deterring freight traffic and also reducing speeding.
12) There is a 2030-2040 NCDOT plan to improve (strengthen/widen?) N. Main from Highland to the manufacturing facilities. Perhaps at that time it would be appropriate to route freight traffic on N. Main. Council should proactively consider if the 2030-2040 NCDOT plan be best for the town. Stating residential property along a 2-mile section of N. Main could be demolished or otherwise devalued in 15-25 years is not a good way to encourage investment.
13) How quickly can a fully-loaded truck with hazardous material (or other heavy industrial freight) stop for a child crossing North Main Street to reach the sidewalk? If a tanker truck were to wreck on North Main Street in the middle of a residential area, what danger would there be to homes that are less than 50 feet from the road?

Post by **Scott L** » Tue Mar 24, 2015 9:48 am

That website seems to be in error. The 273 bypass was implemented in 1991 per the NCDOT. And per town staff, the bridge on Highland over the creek is supposed to have a sign on it we think that says it was constructed in 1981. Anyone around a long time know any differently?

Post by **user** » Mon Mar 23, 2015 2:22 pm

http://www.vahighways.com/ncannex/route-log/nc273.html

Post by **Scott L** » Wed Mar 18, 2015 2:58 pm

An afterthought. After speaking with people "in the know", it's likely the change to the intersection of North Main and Highland to "bypass" downtown had negative effects on the town:

1) The result of bypassing downtown made it difficult for many shops to stay in business now that most traffic goes around town.
2) The result of bypassing downtown made it attractive for heavy trucks to favor the bypass rather than use Hwy 16 to the north.

It should be studied if the North Main / Highland intersection should be reverted back to its original condition. It would be hard to find anyone that thinks Mt. Holly is better off with the new configuration.

Post by **Scott L** » Wed Mar 18, 2015 9:53 am

There is a lot of heavy freight traffic traveling between downtown and Freightliner/National Gypsum. It's tearing up the road and causing waterlines to break. Main Street is a NCDOT responsibility but the town has to dig it up to repair the water lines and then patch it. The root cause of the problem is traffic that is too heavy for a road that was built decades ago when there were no manufacturing facilities on North Main.

The NCDOT should be asked to block or restrict heavy traffic on North Main Street. Alternately, North Main Street could be made more obstructive with more stoplights or road humps that would make truck drivers want to take Hwy 16 to reach the interstate.

Post a reply

Expand view Topic review: Freight Traffic on Main Street