From what I’ve seen they’re laying asphalt for the parking lot. As @atl_transplant noted it’s hard to see further back where the building will actually sit, and see what’s happening. The grading work started a few months ago. In any case the work seems to be underway still.
6 Likes
re: making a pedestrian-friendly crossing of Six Forks near North Hills (e.g. tunnel shopping mall)
Again, the Midtown/St. Albans area plan specifically did NOT recommend a bridge, but they made it sound like cost was not the only reason. I wonder if there are technical reasons (right-of-way, geology problems etc.)?
To add onto that, @Kanatenah’s idea seems cool, but I don’t think I’ve ever seen bridges or tunnels in the US that are purpose-built to also act as places of business. I’m guessing legal and insurance reasons are more in the way than engineering challenges, but is that something we could petition to change?
@paytonc or @atl_transplant, y’all have any expert ideas on this?
2 Likes
It’s been discussed before on another thread but a bridge with a park would be great in this location connecting north hills. 
12 Likes
Hmm interesting. I’m not sure here. NCDOT wouldn’t be a factor since Six Forks is not a state route. ROW shouldn’t be a huge factor either since I’m sure Kane would easily sign off and the bridge wouldn’t really affect the road. Also since it’s already a pretty built up area, environmental shouldn’t be too much of a holdup.
3 Likes
Six Forks is an NCDOT maintained road, SR1005 https://xfer.services.ncdot.gov/imgdot/DOTCountyMaps/PDFs/Wake_CountyMap_Sheet08_Final_web.pdf
2 Likes
Interesting. Forgot NC numbers non signed routes as SR. But I thought those were still maintained by the locals unless they are signed 2/3 digit routes?
1 Like
Nope, it looks like SRs (secondary roads) are maintained by the state, too, since that designation goes away when they come under the charge of municipalities. Case in point: Six Forks shows up in this map of state-maintained roads. @Anti-carAction thanks for the correction.
Well, that’s going to be a bundle of joy for the tunneling idea… It sounds like tunnels would involve closing down and digging up parts of Six Forks, which NCDOT and Six Forks drivers would absolutely not be a fan of.
2 Likes
I guess one possible way to make a tunnel is by box-jacking, which is a new way to build tunnels in days (not months/years):
I only found one company that specializes in this in the United States (though this technique seems to be much more common in the rest of the world). Plus, I haven’t seen any examples by them for tunnels smaller than multi-lane roads.
With that said, if Kane and the City think it’s a good idea, maybe they could use this technology, and use the extra tunnel space for underground “outdoor” seating or pop-up stores/events (and use construction space for additional buildings)? Perhaps something like this (jacking could be done in the yellow arrow’s direction)…
…or this?
Note that blue arrows are entrances/exits to existing parking decks. This means the southern route (1st image) is more likely to get in the way of increased drivers, unlike the northern route (2nd pic). Plus, the former requires a North State Bank branch to be torn down. I’m not sure if that’s worth it, though, since the latter idea could be more convenient depending on where the planned North Hills bus transit center gets placed. (Note that bridges will also have the same problem where it could easily look awkward and out of place. To design a better sense of space, maybe tunnels aren’t a bad idea, after all?)
Either way, if NCDOT is the only problem, I think it’s time our civil engineers got creative. Whether we end up using modular bridges or this fancy digging technique, it looks like North Hills could be a good test bed for these techniques. If they go well, maybe it’ll make it easier to bring them into DTR as well, if/when they become necessary?
7 Likes
Sky escalator, much cheaper, moves people fast and efficiently.
2 Likes
Normally you could do something like this by temporarily shifting the road to one side and narrowing / reducing lanes while for the time being. But in this case, where you have a built up area, even that becomes nearly impossible. Meanwhile, a ped bridge is made offsite and basically brought in an plopped down.
Also back to this, that’s so different from Georgia and seems like such a huge responsibility / sheer difference in the number of roads the state controls compared to Georgia.
Also, I think if you laid a culvert you could probably get it done in just a weekend of closing six forks.
2 Likes
If it were just dirt to move and pavement to replace then box jacking a shallow tunnel is the obvious choice. Probably cheaper than a bridge! Utilities are the wildcard. The question is, what would have to move? Are there sewer lines in the way?
3 Likes
The city’s GIS layer for septic lines is still incomplete according to iMaps, so I’m not sure. Stormwater drainage pipes will certainly get in the way if you dig or build on the Six Forks/Dartmouth intersection, though.
EDIT: just realized I cropped this screenshot badly… Red arrows are underground stormwater pipes, and blue arrows are exposed channels.
I guess a culvert would work here, too. Wouldn’t that force us to have very narrow or low-hanging tunnels that would feel claustrophobic (instead of letting us have the more open experience that @Kanatenah and others were talking about), though?
1 Like
Just glancing at this, I’m willing to bet this is very incomplete. I’d be shocked if you don’t have a sewer main and water main going down Six Forks.
Yes, unfortunately that is correct. It would be similar to how most of the multi-use paths are made.
I think upgrading the intersection and having a dedicated ped scramble phase (All lights red, only peds crossing phase, also allows diagonal crossing), with more landscaping, lighting, benches etc could suffice. It’s a much more welcoming and safe experience that fits what this area should be. Something similar to this intersection in Cary would be much better than what we have now.
Also if nothing else, the Six Forks interchange itself is disgusting. Would really like to see some improved landscaping, streetscaping, lighting, increased sidewalk size and lighting to really make the area look better since it’s one of the main focal points in our city.
Probably dreaming here, but Six Forks Rd bridge should be a candidate for a land bridge similar to 5th St in Atlanta. All it requires is a few extra beams (although this bridge really needs to be replaced)
11 Likes
Honestly Kane has deep pockets. I don’t think cost is the issue. When you have that type of money you dont have a care. I think its personally more a council or some type of restrictions in place still holding back specifics. I think things will come to fruition once the New north hills is built.
2 Likes
Septic data may be incomplete, but are sanitary sewers?
Here is the sanitary sewer map for the area.
There is a line under Circle at North Hills, but nothing under Six Forks. This seems at least somewhat reasonable, because a sewer would have to be exceptionally deep here in order to go under both Six Forks and 440.
Water lines, I’m not sure. Those maps are only available upon request, per City of Raleigh website.
2 Likes
I believe that the City does plan to address this at some point. The Six Forks Corridor Plan made some recommendations for the road around North Hills, and part of that was working on the existing interchange. Not sure what specific improvements it would involve, though.
2 Likes
If I recall correctly, there’s some freshening up and landscaping things which would be a big help. Not sure if those corridor studies are actually binding plans though.
Not when you’re running a business. Kane Realty’s not just John Kane’s personal plaything, but a private company with lots of employees and investors to please. Maybe he can afford to not choose the cheapest option around, sure, but he can’t just ignore a cost-benefit analysis or risk management.
City Council approval for new construction (i.e. submitting a site approval plan) has to happen no matter what, so that’s not the problem here. The state could be annoying, though, and that’s why we were talking about NCDOT’s road ownership earlier. But all of those things have to be thought through before any plan starts going through red tape.
Thanks for catching that 
this is what happens when you rush your research over breakfast… Looks like water lines (and septic maybe?) are the big unknown, then, pending an actual surveyor’s review.
6 Likes
This is the spot where I think a tunnel would make sense. You’d probably want a tunnel under Circle at North Hills as well, but I’m not sure that’s feasible thanks to the sewer line.
The ground elevation of the plaza on the NHE side of Six Forks is 14 feet below the pavement of Six Forks Road. This is about what you’d want for a box-jacked tunnel with a 10 foot ceiling. It would run afoul of neither stormwater nor sanitary sewer lines.
Water mains, power lines, gas, and telco? Anybody’s guess. Some of those probably could be in the way. But those are, in some ways, less challenging to move, though, because they don’t rely on a downhill slope for anything to flow.
7 Likes
I like this and think it’s reasonable and sensible.
I kind of get what @Chat_curieux is saying in this sense.
Kane has the opportunity to really make a statement centerpiece here if he went the bridge route, and he may be willing to spend big on pulling whatever strings, moving whatever utilities, making the ramps / elevators whatever he needs to do to make it happen. Imagine coming off Six Forks and having a centerpiece ped bridge with lights, designs etc on it. It’s pretty much the focal point of his new center of town.
I’m envisioning something like the MB Stadium Bridge in Atlanta.
But realistically, the tunnel idea or just beautifying the intersection is much more sensible.
BUT remember who we are talking about. The man has basically built a city center from scratch in less than 20 years haha
4 Likes