Proposed Tolling of Capital Boulevard (I-540 to Harris Road) – Project Report
Project Overview
Capital Boulevard (U.S. 1) between Interstate 540 in Raleigh and Purnell/Harris Road in Wake Forest is slated for a major upgrade to address severe congestion. The plan would convert approximately 10 miles of Capital Blvd into a controlled-access six-lane highway (three lanes each direction) with no stoplights or driveways and new interchanges at key crossroads. This upgraded freeway would replace the current four-lane divided roadway, which today has numerous at-grade intersections and traffic signals. The project (NCDOT Project U-5307) is included in the draft 2026-2035 State Transportation Improvement Program and has completed preliminary engineering and environmental assessment (a Finding of No Significant Impact was issued in 2024). What remains is determining how to fund and implement the improvements – and local officials are now considering tolling this stretch of U.S. 1 as a solution.
Technical Proposal Details
Under the tolling proposal, Capital Blvd’s planned freeway upgrade would be built to full highway standards: a 70 MPH design speed, grade-separated interchanges instead of intersections, and parallel service roads for local access. Private driveways would no longer connect directly to Capital Blvd; instead, local traffic would use new frontage roads to reach the nearest interchange. Major junctions such as Durant/Perry Creek Road, Burlington Mills Road, N.C. 98 (Wake Forest Bypass and Business routes), Stadium Drive, and Purnell/Harris Road are expected to have interchange ramps, eliminating existing traffic lights on the corridor. Additionally, bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure is planned alongside or over the highway to maintain safe non-vehicular connectivity for the communities bisected by the road.
All-electronic tolling infrastructure (shown here on another NC highway) would be utilized on Capital Blvd. No cash toll booths are planned – drivers would pay via NC Quick Pass transponders or license-plate billing. Toll rates could vary by vehicle class and time of day, and state law mandates tolls cease once construction bonds are paid off.
If tolling is approved, the project would be administered by the NC Turnpike Authority (NCTA) in partnership with NCDOT and regional planners. The NCTA would manage the toll collections and financing, likely integrating this segment into its existing Triangle Expressway system. In fact, one preferred scenario (Option 2) is to add the new Capital Blvd toll road into the larger NC Turnpike network, which boosts bonding capacity and revenue potential. Toll collection would be all-electronic, using overhead gantry systems similar to those on NCTA’s existing roads (no stopping to pay). Motorists would receive bills by mail or use NC Quick Pass transponders, and state legislation will be required to authorize tolling on what is now a free highway. Notably, North Carolina law stipulates that once the toll facility’s construction debt is paid off, the tolls must be removed.
Design & Implementation Timeline: The design phase (environmental studies and preliminary engineering) has already identified a preferred alternative for the freeway conversion. If funded through tolling, construction could begin as early as 2027 and finish by 2033 under the plan endorsed by Raleigh officials. This accelerated timeline contrasts sharply with the “no-toll” funding scenario, in which initial construction was recently pushed out to 2031 or later due to budget reprioritizations. By leveraging toll revenue bonds, the project may be built in one continuous phase (or in tightly phased segments A through D) instead of waiting for each segment to be incrementally funded over many years. This means drivers could see a completed freeway by the early 2030s with tolling, whereas without tolls the full upgrade might not be finished until much closer to 2040.
Rationale for the Tolling Plan
The push to toll this section of Capital Boulevard is driven by significant funding gaps and urgent infrastructure needs:
Cost Escalation and Funding Shortfall: The price tag for the U.S. 1 improvements has ballooned dramatically over the past decade. Early plans in the 2010s estimated only about $93 million to upgrade Capital Blvd to a freeway. Since then, repeated delays and scope increases (extending the project limits and adding more interchanges) caused cost estimates to soar to around $1.3–$1.6 billion. For example, between the 2012 and 2018 STIP (State Transportation Improvement Program) cycles, the project’s cost grew from $93M to $581M as the planned extent was extended to Purnell/Harris Rd; by the 2024 STIP it reached $772M, and in the latest draft it’s roughly $1.34 billion – over $1 billion higher than originally expected. These escalating costs far outpace available state and federal transportation funding for the region, resulting in the project being delayed five times in the STIP process. Local officials describe the situation as untenable, with CAMPO’s director Chris Lukasina noting that “inflation has kicked in… costs… have kicked in” and if nothing changes, even by 2040 the corridor might still be unimproved. Tolling is seen as an “innovative financing” method to bridge the funding gap and get the highway built much sooner.
“Pay Now or Pay Later” Philosophy: Planners emphasize that the cost of doing nothing isn’t zero – drivers are already “paying a toll of delay and stress every day with nothing to show for it,” as one regional business group put it. Traffic on this stretch of Capital Blvd is notoriously bad, with daily rush-hour backups. Current volumes range from about 32,000 to 65,000 vehicles per day, and projections show growth to as high as ~75,000 vehicles/day by 2040 as northern Wake County and surrounding areas continue to develop. The existing at-grade boulevard cannot efficiently handle this demand – commuters experience frequent stop-and-go conditions at traffic lights, and even off-peak travel can be sluggish. By converting to a freeway, travel times would improve significantly (since vehicles could travel at highway speed uninterrupted by lights), thus reducing the “time tax” drivers currently pay. CAMPO’s director framed it this way: ongoing congestion itself is a kind of toll – if traditional funding keeps falling through, the region pays in worse traffic and lost time. Tolling, while a direct cost to users, would buy a guarantee of relief by a certain date. In fact, partially financing the project with toll revenue would allow construction to begin up to four years sooner than waiting on normal funds.
Road Condition and Safety Improvements: Beyond congestion, the existing Capital Blvd corridor has safety and design deficiencies that a freeway upgrade would fix. Currently, there are numerous driveways and minor crossroads intersecting the high-speed road, creating conflict points and accident risks. Left turns across oncoming traffic and signal cycles contribute to collision hazards. The toll-funded plan would implement a fully controlled-access design, eliminating those conflict points and likely improving safety (fewer chances for angle crashes) while also accommodating future Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) or express bus service by designing wider medians or shoulders. Rebuilding the roadway will also address pavement condition issues and improve drainage and bridge structures along the route. Local leaders in Wake Forest note that growth has far exceeded the road’s capacity, and that improving this corridor is critical to keep up with development. In their view, exploring toll financing is worthwhile because it may be the only viable way to prevent the road from falling further behind needs.
Projected Traffic & Regional Mobility: Capital Boulevard/US-1 is a primary commuter artery between bedroom communities like Wake Forest/Youngsville/Franklinton and jobs in Raleigh. Without expansion, peak-hour traffic is expected to worsen considerably, spilling over onto secondary roads. Models indicate that upgrading to a freeway will attract more drivers back to the main route (due to improved travel time), whereas if the project doesn’t happen, many would divert through local streets and parallel routes as congestion worsens. The toll aspect introduces some uncertainty: some drivers might opt to avoid a tolled highway to save money, potentially shifting traffic onto alternatives like NC-98, NC-50 (Creedmoor Rd), or Falls of Neuse Road. This concern has been raised in public comments – that a toll could send bargain-seeking drivers cutting through surface streets. However, the inclusion of untolled service roads and the option of an express lanes scenario (in some alternatives) is meant to provide choices. Overall, transportation planners expect that providing a high-speed facility (even tolled) will reduce overall congestion in the corridor by removing stoplights and increasing capacity. In other words, those who value time over cost will use the tolled freeway, while those who prefer not to pay can still use either the new parallel service roads or other routes. The net effect should be better traffic flow region-wide once the freeway is in place, which is a key rationale for proceeding.
Tolling Scenarios Considered
Regional authorities did not take the toll decision lightly – a detailed Tolling Feasibility Study was conducted by the N.C. Turnpike Authority (at CAMPO’s request) in late 2024 to early 2025. That study analyzed multiple financing and design scenarios to see how toll revenue could fund the Capital Blvd upgrades. Four primary toll scenarios were developed, all of which assume building the same six-lane freeway and interchanges (the difference lies in how tolls are applied and financed):
Option 1: Full Toll (Standalone) – Toll all lanes on the entire 10-mile stretch of the new freeway, operating it as a standalone toll road. Revenue from this fully tolled highway was estimated to support about $800 million in project funding. This option would rely solely on the traffic of this corridor to pay back bonds, limiting the borrowing capacity.
Option 2: Full Toll (Integrated Network) – Toll all lanes on the 10-mile highway and integrate it into the existing Triangle Expressway system (the regional toll network). By combining finances with the larger system, the state could leverage additional bonds and revenue streams, covering an estimated $1.4 billion in project costs. This is the preferred option that Raleigh’s City Council endorsed, as it most robustly fills the funding gap and would allow construction to start by 2027 and finish by 2033. It effectively treats the Capital Blvd upgrade as an extension of the current NC-540 toll road, requiring special legislation but offering the maximum funding (~85-100% of the needed $1.6B).
Option 3: Partial Toll – Express Lanes – Build the freeway with one tolled “express lane” in each direction, while keeping the other lanes free. This is akin to a high-occupancy toll lane approach (similar to the I-77 Express Lanes in Charlotte). The existing four lanes would remain free for general use, and drivers could choose to enter the new tolled lane for a faster ride. However, because only a fraction of drivers would opt into the toll lane, the revenue potential is much lower – about $100 million if done as a standalone project. This covers only a small portion of costs, meaning the majority of funding would still need to come from traditional sources or subsidies.
Option 4: Partial Toll – Express Lanes Integrated – One express toll lane each way, integrated into the Turnpike’s network for funding purposes. This scenario could raise roughly $600 million via tolls, significantly more than Option 3, but still not enough to fully fund the project. It would also entail adding the facility to the regional system to increase bonding capacity. Even with $600M in toll-backed funding, the rest (potentially another ~$700M) would need other funding, so this option might still face schedule risks unless state/federal funds fill the gap.
All four scenarios assumed cashless toll collection and similar physical designs; the differences were financial structuring and whether some lanes remained toll-free. Importantly, all options requiring tolls would need authorization from the NC General Assembly, since state law generally prohibits converting an existing free route into a toll road without legislative exemption. Among these, Option 2 (full toll, integrated) emerged as the most viable to actually deliver the project. It closes the funding gap and shortens the timeline the most, albeit at the cost of requiring every driver on the highway to pay a toll. Options 3 and 4 (express lanes) were less financially potent and would still leave funding shortfalls – they were considered but found to delay completion unless additional money is identified. The study results were shared with local leaders in March–April 2025, prompting discussions on which path to choose.
Stakeholder Perspectives and Impacts
The tolling proposal for Capital Boulevard has far-reaching implications for a variety of stakeholders. The corridor serves different groups – long-distance commuters, local residents, businesses, and even transit users – each of whom would be affected in unique ways. The sections below discuss these impacts in detail, followed by a summary table.
Commuters to/from Downtown Raleigh
For the tens of thousands of commuters who travel between Raleigh and its northern suburbs (Wake Forest, Rolesville, Youngsville, etc.) each day, the Capital Blvd freeway project promises much faster and more reliable trips – but only if they are willing to pay a toll. Today’s commute on this road can be a nightmare: drivers describe it as “horrendous,” “nuts” and “horrible” due to the stop-and-go congestion. Travel times during rush hour are highly unpredictable, and many drivers detour or endure long delays. The freeway upgrade (with all signals removed) would drastically cut travel times. NCDOT’s models show it will “ease traffic congestion by removing stoplights and creating highway interchanges”, improving average speeds and reducing delays. For commuters, this means potentially arriving in downtown Raleigh (or back home in the evening) much quicker than today – a significant quality-of-life improvement. One Raleigh transportation official noted that even a tolled highway can “streamline the traffic” and reduce overall drive times.
On the other hand, the introduction of tolls means a new daily expense for these commuters. Unlike current free routes, using the improved Capital Blvd would incur a per-trip fee. While exact toll rates are not yet set, drivers would likely pay electronically per mile. Over a month of daily round-trips, this could add up to substantial out-of-pocket cost. Commuters will have to weigh the time savings versus the toll cost. Some may choose to continue using parallel free roads (like NC-401 or other backroads) to avoid paying, even if it’s slower. Notably, when local news interviewed drivers, “most… said they would’ve preferred an option that included a single toll lane” rather than tolling all lanes. This suggests many commuters are more comfortable with optional toll lanes – where you only pay if you choose the express lane on a day you’re in a hurry – as opposed to a mandatory toll on every lane. However, the region’s chosen plan is to toll all lanes (out of funding necessity), meaning commuters have little choice if they want to use this corridor once it’s built. Some may feel it is essentially a commute tax. Others, especially those familiar with toll roads elsewhere, acknowledge the pros and cons. For example, a Raleigh resident who moved from California noted he’s not thrilled about paying, but “it helps… it has its pros and cons” and ultimately “it streamlines the traffic” in his experience.
In summary, commuters stand to gain shorter and more reliable commutes, but at a monetary cost. Many will likely begrudgingly accept the toll as the price of finally getting this long-promised road built. Those who absolutely refuse to pay may strain other secondary routes. If managed well, the improved highway could also support expanded park-and-ride and express bus services, giving commuters a non-driving option that still benefits from the faster travel times. Ensuring that transit vehicles can use the toll road free of charge (or that transit is enhanced alongside the project) will be important for this stakeholder group.
Local Residents Along the Corridor
Residents living near Capital Boulevard – in North Raleigh neighborhoods and in Wake Forest – have a more complex set of concerns. For them, Capital Blvd isn’t just a commuter route, it’s often the road to get to schools, grocery stores, churches, and daily errands. Many local trips use short segments of Capital Blvd or cross it. These residents will benefit from reduced cut-through traffic on their neighborhood streets if regional commuters shift back to the main highway after it’s improved. They’ll also see local safety improvements: fewer collision points on Capital, and new sidewalks or bike paths at crossings.
However, the freeway design means some local access will be altered or reduced. Where today one might turn directly into a subdivision or shopping center from Capital Blvd, in the future you may have to use a nearby interchange and doubling-back via a service road. The project will likely increase noise in some areas (though noise walls are typically provided where needed), and during construction there will be disruption. Critically, if all lanes are tolled, even local residents making short trips on the highway would have to pay – effectively charging them to drive the same road they’ve used freely for years. Council member Megan Patton, who represents North Raleigh neighborhoods, highlighted that many of her constituents are very “concerned about paying to drive on a road they use every day… [and] have no other option to use”. For example, if a family in Wakefield (north Raleigh) wants to drive 5 miles down Capital Blvd to a bigger shopping center, they’d hit a toll gantry and incur a fee for that short trip – something that feels unfair to some longtime locals. Patton even found that some residents would prefer “no build” (keeping the status quo of congestion) over having to pay tolls, because at least today it’s free.
To mitigate these concerns, planners ensured that the design includes parallel free routes for local access. As CAMPO’s director explained, “the proposals include frontage or service roads for local use” so residents can reach local destinations without hopping on the tolled mainline if they wish. These service roads, along with the existing alternative of South Main Street (old US-1) through Wake Forest, mean locals could avoid tolls for short trips. Still, using the main highway will be far more convenient and quicker in many cases, so locals face the dilemma of time vs money just like long-range commuters. Public feedback from the Wake Forest area indicated frustration at years of delay and a reluctant openness to tolls “such as tolling” as a necessary innovation. The mayor of Wake Forest, Vivian Jones, voiced that residents and businesses have been “waiting for years” for the US-1 upgrades and tolling is worth exploring if it secures a “more viable timeline” to completion.
In addition, local residents should see improved local roads as part of this project – for example, new connector roads, intersection upgrades at the interchanges, and possibly landscaping or greenway improvements. The project’s multimodal elements (sidewalks, bike paths) could give nearby communities safer ways to cross or parallel the highway on foot or bike, which is a benefit if designed well. Overall, local residents face a trade-off: short-term inconvenience and new toll costs vs. long-term congestion relief and infrastructure upgrades in their area. Opinions among this group are mixed, often hinging on how much they trust that tolling will indeed deliver the promised road after decades of waiting.
Businesses and Economic Stakeholders
Businesses along and near Capital Boulevard have a strong interest in the project, as it will impact customer access, freight movement, and regional economic growth. For businesses in the immediate corridor (retail stores, gas stations, restaurants, etc.), a controlled-access highway can be a double-edged sword. On one hand, better traffic flow and a more attractive commute can bring more people into the area and increase the customer base. On the other, when a road is converted to a freeway, drive-by visibility and direct access can decrease – motorists can’t just pull off anywhere; they must exit at interchanges or service roads. Some smaller businesses might lose traffic that previously stopped by when drivers were sitting in traffic at a light. Careful attention will need to be paid to ensure the service roads still channel motorists conveniently to shopping centers and business fronts. There may also be right-of-way acquisition that impacts certain properties (some buildings might need to be removed to make way for wider roads or ramps). Those businesses could be bought out or relocated.
That said, the business community largely supports the toll road plan, seeing it as vital to keep the region’s economy moving. The Raleigh Chamber of Commerce and Wake Forest Area Chamber both passed resolutions supporting studying toll financing to accelerate the project. The Regional Transportation Alliance (a coalition of businesses) made the Capital Blvd freeway its “top priority,” arguing that current congestion is already a drag on productivity and that “travelers are already paying a toll of delay” without any benefit. These groups view the upgrade as enabling future growth north of Raleigh (including new development in Wake Forest and beyond) by providing a high-capacity corridor. If nothing is done, congestion could deter investment in those areas or make commuting so difficult that labor access is limited. From a regional economic standpoint, improving this segment of US-1 strengthens a key link in the Triangle area’s transportation network, supporting commerce between Raleigh and communities in Franklin County and the Research Triangle at large.
Businesses also consider the freight and logistics benefits: Capital Blvd/US-1 is an important route for trucks and deliveries. The freeway upgrade (toll or not) would allow trucks to move more efficiently, potentially lowering transport costs. Toll policies might include discounts or off-peak rates for commercial vehicles to lessen the burden on local trucking. Another consideration is that by integrating the toll into the existing Quick Pass system, interoperability with other toll roads means commercial drivers can use one transponder for multiple routes (e.g., a delivery truck from Durham can take NC-540 then continue on the new US-1 toll segment seamlessly).
In summary, while some corridor businesses may need adjustments, the wider business community sees the toll road as necessary infrastructure for growth. They are generally in favor, provided that the implementation includes measures to maintain access to business areas (via clearly marked exits, service roads, and good signage). The improved road should attract more development and customers in the long run, more than offsetting the changes in traffic patterns near specific establishments.
Public Transportation and Transit Riders
Public transportation stands to gain from the Capital Blvd improvements, although there are some caveats. Currently, transit service along this corridor is limited – there is a GoRaleigh express bus (the Wake Forest Express) that connects Wake Forest to downtown Raleigh, and local Wake Forest circulator buses that use parts of Capital Blvd. These buses often sit in the same traffic as everyone else, so their schedules are at the mercy of congestion. With a new freeway, buses could travel faster and more reliably to connect Raleigh and Wake Forest. In fact, one of the City Council’s requests was that the highway be designed to accommodate future Bus Rapid Transit (BRT). This could mean preserving space in medians or shoulders for bus lanes or stations at key interchanges. If BRT is implemented (a concept in the Wake Transit Plan for a northern BRT route), a freeway would allow the BRT vehicles to bypass signal delays – dramatically cutting transit travel times between northern communities and Raleigh.
However, a potential concern is transit equity when using toll infrastructure. Typically, public buses are exempt from tolls or the toll authority works out a payment so that buses can ride free. It will be important that the GoRaleigh and GoTriangle buses are not penalized by tolls – otherwise the transit agency would incur costs or need to raise fares. Assuming buses can use the road toll-free, riders will benefit from quicker trips without any toll cost to them. Furthermore, the service roads and bicycle/pedestrian paths included in the project could facilitate better first-mile/last-mile connections for transit users (e.g. a safer walk or bike to a park-and-ride lot or bus stop).
Public transit advocates likely see the toll road as a net positive if it’s truly “multimodal.” The project’s current plans do include bike/pedestrian accommodations and mention of transit consideration. If a park-and-ride lot is built near one of the interchanges, that could encourage carpooling and transit use, allowing people to avoid the toll by taking the bus. On the flip side, if the new highway encourages more people to drive (because it’s faster, albeit tolled), transit might struggle to attract riders unless the toll is high enough or congestion returns. There is a balance to strike in managing demand.
In summary, transit riders and agencies will likely benefit from the infrastructure upgrade, and careful policy choices (like toll exemptions for buses and BRT planning) can maximize these benefits. Public input so far hasn’t shown large opposition from transit perspectives; rather, the focus has been on making sure the project doesn’t preclude good transit. The Raleigh City Council’s insistence on future BRT compatibility is a sign that transit will remain part of the conversation even as this primarily highway project moves forward.
Summary of Impacts by Stakeholder Group
The table below summarizes major anticipated impacts – both positive and negative – for key stakeholder groups:
Stakeholder Group — Major Impacts of the Capital Blvd Toll Project
Commuters (Raleigh ↔ Wake Forest) — Faster, more reliable travel times due to a 70mph freeway with no stoplights. However, commuters would incur new toll costs on daily trips (tolls vary by distance/time). They must weigh time saved vs. money spent. Some may seek alternate free routes; others accept toll as a trade-off for a shorter commute. Overall congestion on US-1 and parallel roads is expected to decrease, improving regional mobility.
Local Residents (North Raleigh & Wake Forest) — Local accessibility changes: safer, faster trips along Capital for local errands once upgraded, but everyday short trips could now cost money if using the main road. New service roads will provide toll-free local pathways, albeit with more circuitous routes. Improved safety (fewer crashes) and new bike/ped facilities are positives. Noise and construction disruptions are concerns. Opinions split between welcoming the upgrade and resentment at being charged for a road they rely on daily.
Businesses (Corridor & Region) — Better infrastructure for commerce: improved freight movement and connectivity is a boon for business growth. The freeway can attract more customers to the region and support new developments. Major business groups support tolling to accelerate the project. On the corridor, however, some businesses lose direct access/visibility – they will need adequate exits and signage to ensure customers can still reach them. Those near interchanges may see increased patronage, while those on bypassed segments could see less pass-by traffic. In the long run, the region’s economy benefits from reduced congestion and avoided delays (which currently act like an “economic toll”).
Public Transportation & Transit Riders — Faster bus service: transit vehicles (e.g. Raleigh–Wake Forest express bus) will be able to travel at highway speeds, improving schedule reliability. Potential for future BRT is preserved by design. Toll revenue could fund park-and-ride or transit facilities, but it’s crucial that buses are exempt from tolls to keep transit affordable. Riders will enjoy quicker trips without paying tolls themselves (if on a bus). Enhanced parallel routes and sidewalks benefit those walking or biking to transit. If many drivers opt for the tolled freeway, transit might need incentives to remain competitive, but overall the project’s multimodal approach aims to integrate transit into the solution.
Feedback from Officials and Public Ahead of Decision
Leading up to the final decision on May 21, 2025, there has been extensive discussion among government bodies and the public:
Raleigh City Council: On May 6, 2025, the Raleigh City Council voted 7-1 to endorse the toll road option (specifically backing the full toll integrated scenario, Option 2). Councilors acknowledged this was not a perfect solution but saw little alternative to get the road built. Mayor Janet Cowell and a majority of members agreed tolls are likely the “best option for getting the project built” given funding realities. Council Member Megan Patton (the lone ‘no’ vote) raised concerns on behalf of her constituents about the toll burden and the very need for an expressway, as noted earlier. Even those who voted yes did so with some reservations: Councilor Jonathan Melton indicated it was essentially a choice of which toll option, since doing nothing would leave the project stalled. The Council attached suggestions to their endorsement – for instance, asking that off-peak or overnight toll rates be lower (to ease the burden on those who must travel at night) and that the road accommodate future transit (BRT) in its design. These recommendations reflect a sensitivity to public concerns and a desire to maximize the project’s benefit. Overall, the Council’s vote signaled to CAMPO and state officials that Raleigh supports tolling US-1 in principle, as a means to an end of fixing the road.
Capital Area Metropolitan Planning Organization (CAMPO): CAMPO, the regional body of local governments, has been the primary driver of this initiative. Its Executive Board (comprising elected officials from Raleigh, Wake Forest, Wake County, and neighboring jurisdictions) partnered with NCTA for the toll study and hosted the public engagement on the options. In early 2024, CAMPO and several municipal bodies (Wake Forest, Youngsville, Franklinton) passed resolutions supporting exploring toll financing. CAMPO leaders like Chris Lukasina have been upfront that without tolling, the project’s timeline would slip further, citing the multiple STIP delays already seen. CAMPO scheduled two Public Information Sessions (April 30 in N. Raleigh and May 5 in Wake Forest) and an online survey to gather community input. The public comment period ran through May 14, 2025, after which CAMPO staff would compile feedback for the Executive Board. The final CAMPO vote is set for May 21, 2025, where the board will choose whether to officially adopt a tolled approach and which option to pursue. Given Raleigh’s endorsement and supportive signals from other jurisdictions, CAMPO is expected to vote in favor of the toll plan (Option 2). This would effectively green-light NCDOT and NCTA to move forward with seeking approvals and funding for the toll project, with the goal of beginning construction in 2027.
Public Opinion: Public reaction has been mixed, with a common theme that people desperately want the road fixed, but many are uneasy about tolls. At CAMPO’s public meetings, attendees could review the options and ask questions. Some citizens expressed a preference for the express lanes approach rather than a fully tolled highway, feeling it’s a fair compromise (you only pay if you need the faster lane). Others, especially some in Wake Forest, feel they’ve waited too long for improvements and now support tolling if that’s the only way – “we are obliged to explore… tolling”, as Mayor Jones said, capturing this reluctant support. On social media and comment threads, there’s debate: a number of drivers say they would find alternate routes to avoid a toll, while others say they’d gladly pay if it ends the gridlock. A WRAL News interview with several drivers who use the 10-mile stretch found that most would rather have an optional toll lane; one driver said “One lane would be so much better… people might use that. I definitely wouldn’t want all the lanes [tolled]”. This suggests some public appetite for a middle ground, but as noted, that option likely won’t fund the project fully. Meanwhile, some residents essentially said they’d rather live with congestion than pay – reflecting a principle that roads should be covered by taxes, not direct fees.
Public feedback also brought up concerns about spillover traffic: if tolls are implemented, will drivers divert onto roads like Six Forks, Falls of Neuse, or NC-98 to avoid paying? Citizens urged that a “comprehensive solution” is needed so that one improved road doesn’t simply shift the problem elsewhere. CAMPO and NCDOT have likely modeled these scenarios; part of the reason for including parallel free service roads is to alleviate local diversion. Additionally, state law requires that a non-tolled alternative route remain available, which in this case could be the network of service roads and existing parallel highways. Equity issues were also a topic: some asked if low-income drivers, for whom even a few dollars a day is significant, would have any toll relief or alternative. While no specific discount programs have been announced, these concerns are on the table for policymakers as they refine the toll strategy.
In general, sentiment seems cautiously in favor of moving forward with the toll project – not out of love for tolls, but out of frustration with the status quo and recognition that traditional funding isn’t coming through. As one official put it, “if we can get something not tolled, we would take it… [but after] the fifth delay… do we want to wait… for likely another delay?”. The public and their representatives appear to be concluding that doing something now (even if it means tolls) is better than doing nothing and enduring another 15 years of congestion. The upcoming May 21 CAMPO vote will formalize that direction, taking into account all the feedback and technical analysis.
Conclusion and Next Steps
After decades of studies and delays, the Capital Boulevard North upgrade is at a crucial turning point. The proposal to implement tolling on the I-540 to Harris Road segment offers a viable path to finally secure funding and deliver much-needed congestion relief. Technical plans are in place to transform the corridor into a modern freeway with interchanges, auxiliary lanes, and parallel service roads – a design that will improve safety and travel times for tens of thousands of drivers each day. The toll element is the linchpin to make it happen sooner rather than later, by leveraging future user fees to pay for construction bonds up front.
The rationale for tolling rests on stark realities: the project’s cost is now well over a billion dollars and rising, and traditional highway funding sources are overextended, causing critical projects like this to slip repeatedly. Tolling would fill the funding gap and protect the schedule from further political or budgetary swings. In effect, drivers would invest directly in the road to get it built years earlier, reaping the benefit of time savings once it opens. As shown, this approach is not without controversy – it challenges long-held expectations of “free” highways and raises equity and diversion questions. But local leaders have increasingly coalesced around the view that the cost of inaction is worse: continued growth with no infrastructure upgrade would mean intolerable congestion and economic loss. In that context, tolling is seen as an acceptable solution, especially if implemented thoughtfully (with local access roads, transit accommodations, and possibly variable pricing to manage demand).
The final decision on May 21, 2025 by the CAMPO Executive Board will likely ratify the toll plan, given the endorsements from the City of Raleigh and other stakeholders. Assuming it is approved, the next steps will include:
Formally requesting the North Carolina General Assembly’s approval to designate this segment as a toll facility (exempting it from the general prohibition on tolling existing roads). Legislative action would need to occur in the near term to keep the 2027 start on track.
NCDOT and NCTA would proceed with detailed design and financing plans. This includes determining toll rate policies, procuring contractors, and finalizing the phasing of construction. They will also develop strategies to minimize disruption during building and to inform the public about how to navigate the new roadway once it’s open.
Continued public outreach will be important to address concerns. Before tolling begins, education on using Quick Pass transponders, understanding the alternate routes, and clarifying that tolls will end once the project’s debt is paid (per law) should be emphasized to gain public trust.
Coordination with local governments on land use and transit will also follow. For example, Raleigh and Wake Forest may update their plans around the new interchanges, perhaps encouraging transit-oriented development or new bus routes to park-and-rides, taking advantage of the improved mobility.
If all goes as planned, construction would break ground in 2027 and the Capital Blvd toll highway could be open by 2033. Commuters and residents would then experience a very different drive: one where a trip that used to involve bumper-to-bumper jams and multiple red lights becomes a smooth cruise at highway speed – for a fee. By the mid-2030s, the hope is that the funding gamble of tolling will have paid off: the road will be delivered and operational, supporting the region’s growth, and the toll revenue will steadily pay down the bonds. Once the construction costs are recouped, the tolls can be removed, leaving a free freeway for future generations.
In conclusion, the proposed tolling of Capital Boulevard is a bold response to a funding impasse, aiming to turn a long-delayed project into reality. It reflects a pragmatic shift in how transportation improvements can be achieved when traditional methods falter. The plan addresses not only the engineering of the road itself, but also the financial engineering needed to build it. Different stakeholders will feel different effects – commuters gain time but lose dollars, local communities gain safety but lose some direct access, businesses gain reliability but must adapt to new traffic patterns. The careful balancing of these impacts, with ongoing input and adjustments, will determine the ultimate success of the project. As of May 2025, the region appears ready to embrace this tolling strategy to finally fix one of its most congested corridors. The upcoming decisions and implementation steps will set a precedent for how North Carolina tackles major highway funding challenges in the future, watched closely by all those who travel on (or depend on) Capital Boulevard.
Sources: Official CAMPO press releases and public input materials; NCDOT project documentation; Raleigh City Council meeting reports; WUNC and WRAL news coverage of toll study results and public feedback; statements from local officials and stakeholders including City of Raleigh, Town of Wake Forest, and regional business groups. All data and quotations are sourced from these public records and news reports as of May 2025.