Skip to main content

Could the NCTA be absorbed by NCDOT?

Well, a North Carolina State House measure may just do that. By 113-4 margin the NC State House approved a merger of the two agencies. A similar measure was ok'd by the State Senate when they approved their version of the state budget.

The merger is seen as a cost saving move in a state that faces an approximate $1.6 billion shortfall. However, it is unknown how much of a savings the merger of the two agencies would provide.

If the measure remains in the budget, the NCTA would report to the sitting NC Secretary of Transportation. However, the NCTA would continue working on toll projects throughout the state and any funding for the toll projects would not be impacted.

Story:
DOT to take over Turnpike Authority ---The Daily Advance

Commentary:
Not even five years after it was created as a separate entity - could this be the end of the NCTA? Of course, its projects would go on - but the agency would be under the supervision of the DOT.

I don't have an issue with the NCTA going under the responsibilities of NCDOT - but considering the multitude of errors made by NCDOT in this decade - will there actually be any efficiencies gained from this?

And finally, though it is said currently that none of the NCTA funding for their various projects would change as a result of the merger - the article is specific to the Mid-Currituck Bridge - I just don't see that happening as long as the state is in the red.

Comments

Anonymous said…
This was the plan all the time. This allowed the poorly planned toll projects which were in the TIP for the late 2020's jump to the head of the line and gobble up the funding for all the other local projects and even take the money that had been illegally transferred from the Highway Trust Fund for the "gaps". Most of the original toll projects were low balled in cost to get the TPA started. Once the TPA was formed all of them grew in cost astronmically. Cape Fear Skyway was originally on the TIP for around 2030 and is a great example. Its estimated cost in 2004 was $350 million. It is now in 2009 listed between $1.1 and $1.5 billion. If the past is any indication that means $1.5 billion. "Gap" is now bigger than the cost of the bridge. But guess what, it is now the number one project on the WMPO TIP. If that is not bad enough now the TPA wants to toll a project that was never under their mandate from the legislature as a toll project, namely, the I-140 bypass of Wilmington. The I-140 bypass is funded in the TIP without tolls, so why should it be tolled to pay for another project that doesn't justify its existence financially. Current estimates are that tolls will only pay about 40% of the cost fo the bridge. Does that qualify as truly needed? Could there be other alternatives that would work just as well and be much less expensive?

Popular posts from this blog

Route 75 Tunnel - Ironton, Ohio

In the Ohio River community of Ironton, Ohio, there is a former road tunnel that has a haunted legend to it. This tunnel was formerly numbered OH 75 (hence the name Route 75 Tunnel), which was renumbered as OH 93 due to I-75 being built in the state. Built in 1866, it is 165 feet long and once served as the northern entrance into Ironton, originally for horses and buggies and later for cars. As the tunnel predated the motor vehicle era, it was too narrow for cars to be traveling in both directions. But once US 52 was built in the area, OH 93 was realigned to go around the tunnel instead of through the tunnel, so the tunnel was closed to traffic in 1960. The legend of the haunted tunnel states that since there were so many accidents that took place inside the tunnel's narrow walls, the tunnel was cursed. The haunted legend states that there was an accident between a tanker truck and a school bus coming home after a high school football game on a cold, foggy Halloween night in 1

Porter-Parsonsfield Covered Bridge - Maine

  Spanning over the Ossipee River on the border between Porter in Oxford County, Maine and Parsonsfield in York County, Maine is the 152 foot long Porter-Parsonsfield Covered Bridge. The Porter-Parsonsfield Bridge is built in a Paddleford truss design, which is commonly found among covered bridges in the New England states. The covered bridge is the third bridge located at this site, with the first two bridges built in 1800 and 1808. However, there seems to be some dispute for when the covered bridge was built. There is a plaque on the bridge that states that the bridge may have been built in 1876, but in my research, I have found that this bridge may have been built in 1859 instead. That may check out since a number of covered bridges in northern New England were built or replaced around 1859 after a really icy winter. The year that the Porter-Parsonsfield Covered Bridge was built was not the only controversy surrounding its construction. There was a dispute over building and maintain

US Route 299 and modern California State Route 299

US Route 299 connected US Route 101 near Arcata of Humboldt County east across the northern mountain ranges of California to US Route 395 in Alturas of Modoc County.  US Route 299 was the longest child route of US Route 99 and is the only major east/west highway across the northern counties of California.  US Route 299 was conceptualized as the earliest iteration of what is known as the Winnemucca-to-the-Sea Highway.  The legacy of US Route 299 lives on today in the form of the 307 mile long California State Route 299.   Featured as the cover of this blog is the interchange of US Route 101 and US Route 299 north of Arcata which was completed as a segment of the Burns Freeway during 1956.   Part 1; the history of US Route 299 and California State Route 299 The development of the State Highways which comprised US Route 299 ("US 299") and later California State Route 299 ("CA 299") began with 1903 Legislative Chapter 366 which defined the general corridor of the Trinit