Interstate 42

[LM117]

Another upcoming ramp closure at the Clark's Road interchange near New Bern.

https://www.ncdot.gov/news/press-releases/Pages/2019/2019-11-15-craven-county-highway-ramp-closed.aspx

[LM117]

https://www.ncdot.gov/news/press-releases/Pages/2019/2019-11-18-craven-county-highway-ramps-closed.aspx

​NEW BERN — Two highway ramps in Craven County will be closed this week as state transportation crews work to bring the highway up to interstate standards.

On Tuesday, between 6:30 a.m. and 7 p.m., the entrance ramp from Clarks Road to U.S. 70 East and the exit ramp from U.S. 70 East to U.S. 17 will be closed. The ramps will close again during the same times on Wednesday.

N.C. Department of Transportation crews will pave the ramps. The construction is part of the project to bring U.S. 70 up to interstate standards between Raleigh and Morehead City. Crews are widening shoulders and milling and repaving the highway, which will be renamed Interstate 42. The project in Craven County is 32 miles long and costs $25.5 million.

Detours

During construction, Clarks Road traffic needing U.S. 70 East should get on U.S. 70 West and travel about 2.5 miles to the exit for Tuscarora Rhems Road. Drivers will turn left at the stop sign at the top of the ramp, go over the bridge, and make another left to get onto U.S. 70 East.

For drivers on U.S. 70 East needing to get on U.S. 17, stay on U.S. 70 East for about 1 mile to Exit 411 (N.C. 43). Drivers will turn left at the top of the ramp, go over the bridge, turn left onto U.S. 70 West and drive about 1 mile to Exit 410A (U.S. 17 South).

[LM117]

More ramp closures related to the upgrade project near New Bern.

https://www.ncdot.gov/news/press-releases/Pages/2019/2019-11-25-craven-county-highway-ramps-closed.aspx

[LM117]

https://www.ncdot.gov/news/press-releases/Pages/2019/2019-12-04-craven-county-highway-ramp-closure.aspx

​NEW BERN — A highway entrance ramp in Craven County will be closed for about 12 hours on Thursday as work continues to upgrade it to interstate standards.

Between 6:30 a.m. and 7 p.m. Thursday, the U.S. 70 East on-ramp from N.C. 43 will be closed so N.C. Department of Transportation contract crews can safely pave the ramp.

Traffic needing access to U.S. 70 East will go to U.S. 70 West from N.C. 43, drive about two miles to Clark Road (Exit 409), and turn left at the top of the exit ramp to get onto U.S. 70 East.

The construction is part of the project to bring U.S. 70 up to interstate standards between Raleigh and Morehead City. Crews are widening shoulders and milling and repaving the highway, which will be renamed Interstate 42. The project in Craven County is 32 miles long and costs $25.5 million.

[RoadPelican]

I attended the most recent meeting of the Interstate 42 commission in Goldsboro last month.  The meeting lasted about two hours and 95% of time was spent discussing disaster relief and flood mapping.  Unfortunately, in my opinion the meeting focused very little on the Interstate 42 corridor.  If I decide to attend the next meeting, I do hope they post an agenda beforehand.

[LM117]

I attended the most recent meeting of the Interstate 42 commission in Goldsboro last month.  The meeting lasted about two hours and 95% of time was spent discussing disaster relief and flood mapping.  Unfortunately, in my opinion the meeting focused very little on the Interstate 42 corridor.

I can probably guess the answer to this, but was there any mention of when the I-42 signs will go up on the Goldsboro Bypass? NCDOT chief engineer Tim Little told the commission earlier this year that federal approval was given to put up I-42 signs on the bypass, but when I asked NCDOT about the timetable last month, Matt Clarke responded to me and spoke as if the bypass wasn't I-42 yet.

I looked on FHWA's interstate logs, but they haven't been updated since December 31, 2018. As I understand it, the I-42 approval for the bypass happened in January.

If I decide to attend the next meeting, I do hope they post an agenda beforehand.

Good luck with that. The commission has been real lazy about posting minutes and agendas. The last meeting minutes posted was from their January meeting. They've had 3 meetings since then, and absolutely nothing has been posted since July.

[RoadPelican]

I attended the most recent meeting of the Interstate 42 commission in Goldsboro last month.  The meeting lasted about two hours and 95% of time was spent discussing disaster relief and flood mapping.  Unfortunately, in my opinion the meeting focused very little on the Interstate 42 corridor.

I can probably guess the answer to this, but was there any mention of when the I-42 signs will go up on the Goldsboro Bypass? NCDOT chief engineer Tim Little told the commission earlier this year that federal approval was given to put up I-42 signs on the bypass, but when I asked NCDOT about the timetable last month, Matt Clarke responded to me and spoke as if the bypass wasn't I-42 yet.

I looked on FHWA's interstate logs, but they haven't been updated since December 31, 2018. As I understand it, the I-42 approval for the bypass happened in January.

If I decide to attend the next meeting, I do hope they post an agenda beforehand.

Good luck with that. The commission has been real lazy about posting minutes and agendas. The last meeting minutes posted was from their January meeting. They've had 3 meetings since then, and absolutely nothing has been posted since July.

There was NO mention of a timeline for when I-42 signs would go up on the Goldsboro bypass.


Fixed quote. - rmf67

[LM117]

I attended the most recent meeting of the Interstate 42 commission in Goldsboro last month.  The meeting lasted about two hours and 95% of time was spent discussing disaster relief and flood mapping.  Unfortunately, in my opinion the meeting focused very little on the Interstate 42 corridor.

I can probably guess the answer to this, but was there any mention of when the I-42 signs will go up on the Goldsboro Bypass? NCDOT chief engineer Tim Little told the commission earlier this year that federal approval was given to put up I-42 signs on the bypass, but when I asked NCDOT about the timetable last month, Matt Clarke responded to me and spoke as if the bypass wasn't I-42 yet.

I looked on FHWA's interstate logs, but they haven't been updated since December 31, 2018. As I understand it, the I-42 approval for the bypass happened in January.

If I decide to attend the next meeting, I do hope they post an agenda beforehand.

Good luck with that. The commission has been real lazy about posting minutes and agendas. The last meeting minutes posted was from their January meeting. They've had 3 meetings since then, and absolutely nothing has been posted since July.

There was NO mention of a timeline for when I-42 signs would go up on the Goldsboro bypass.

I figured as much. Thanks for letting me know. I've been keeping up with the local newspapers and they haven't mentioned a word about it, either.


Fixed quote. - rmf67

[tolbs17]

I don't think any of I-42 would be signed until the part of US 70 would be upgraded to interstate standards which is at the western end of the Goldsboro bypass and at the eastern end of the Clayton bypass.

[tolbs17]

Going back to the I-42 discussion, which alternative is the best for the Kinston Bypass?

https://xfer.services.ncdot.gov/PDEA/Web/R-2553/july-2019-alternative-maps/R-2553_Alternatives_KeyMap.pdf

I like some of Alternative 1UE, and these are the maps.

https://xfer.services.ncdot.gov/PDEA/Web/R-2553/july-2019-alternative-maps/R-2553_A1UE_5.pdf

https://xfer.services.ncdot.gov/PDEA/Web/R-2553/july-2019-alternative-maps/R-2553_A1UE_6.pdf

I think they should keep the interchanges, but some how try to save as many businesses as possible and make it an expressway design. I think we should try to get rid as many signals and have free-flowing traffic! People on their phones and writing down on their notebook and having to wait just plain sucks.

https://xfer.services.ncdot.gov/PDEA/Web/R-2553/july-2019-alternative-maps/R-2553_A1UE_4.pdf

This one is questionable. I do like the 70 improvements when looking at the interchange from main 70 to 70 business, but where Walmart is and Cookout and Lowe's and all those other businesses, eh. I think they should keep it at-grade.

the alternatives I like for myself:

1. Alternative 1SB

2. Alternative 31

3. Alternative 1UE (some of it, but not all of it)

[tolbs17]

I figure the area where the current I-95 - US 70 interchange is will get zoned for business after it gets relocated.  It's not like life will change much for say JR Cigar-- they'll just have I-95 running behind them instead of in front of them.

It was announced today that there's a huge development planned next to the interchange.

https://www.wral.com/proposed-300m-live-work-play-project-on-i-95-in-johnston-could-transform-county/18543094/

http://prntscr.com/qawate

Why can't they put that development there and leave room for the I-95 relocation? There's still a lot of space.

http://prntscr.com/qawbpi

They can also do some here too. There's no need to build right on a proposed highway project.
There's lots of space, so why that area?

I want to bring this back up!

[wdcrft63]

Are you aware that I-42 is to be an interstate highway? Only full freeway alternatives can be considered.

[tolbs17]

Are you aware that I-42 is to be an interstate highway? Only full freeway alternatives can be considered.

I'm saying that they could use Alternative 1SB to put I-42 on and use some of 1UE for some Hwy 70 improvements.

[LM117]

For those interested that may be in the area, the US-70 Corridor Commission will have their next meeting on January 23 in Kinston.

http://www.super70corridor.com

[tolbs17]

https://connect.ncdot.gov/projects/planning/FeasibilityStudiesDocuments/Skinners-Bypass-Kinston-Feasibility-Study_Kimley-Horn-Report-2010.pdf

Hey guys! I found this cool document and I wanted to show you that something like this would be needed even if there's a Kinston Bypass. Like i said; not a full freeway but some grade separations would be ideal.

[sprjus4]

https://connect.ncdot.gov/projects/planning/FeasibilityStudiesDocuments/Skinners-Bypass-Kinston-Feasibility-Study_Kimley-Horn-Report-2010.pdf

Hey guys! I found this cool document and I wanted to show you that something like this would be needed even if there's a Kinston Bypass. Like i said; not a full freeway but some grade separations would be ideal.

Once the Kinston Bypass is built, it's debatable whether anything of this scale would be needed. I can see the access management proposals, but there would have to be heavy demands at that intersection to warrant a grade separated interchange.

The majority of the traffic there is thru traffic, and would be re-routed onto the bypass.

[tolbs17]

https://connect.ncdot.gov/projects/planning/FeasibilityStudiesDocuments/Skinners-Bypass-Kinston-Feasibility-Study_Kimley-Horn-Report-2010.pdf

Hey guys! I found this cool document and I wanted to show you that something like this would be needed even if there's a Kinston Bypass. Like i said; not a full freeway but some grade separations would be ideal.

Once the Kinston Bypass is built, it's debatable whether anything of this scale would be needed. I can see the access management proposals, but there would have to be heavy demands at that intersection to warrant a grade separated interchange.

The majority of the traffic there is thru traffic, and would be re-routed onto the bypass.

So maybe that would be a waste then? They tried doing something similar like that I'm sure to the 258 intersection too.

https://connect.ncdot.gov/projects/planning/TPBCTP/Lenoir%20County/Lenoir%20County%20Highway%20Map.pdf

http://prntscr.com/qeedu3

[Finrod]

https://connect.ncdot.gov/projects/planning/FeasibilityStudiesDocuments/Skinners-Bypass-Kinston-Feasibility-Study_Kimley-Horn-Report-2010.pdf

Hey guys! I found this cool document and I wanted to show you that something like this would be needed even if there's a Kinston Bypass. Like i said; not a full freeway but some grade separations would be ideal.

Once the Kinston Bypass is built, it's debatable whether anything of this scale would be needed. I can see the access management proposals, but there would have to be heavy demands at that intersection to warrant a grade separated interchange.

The majority of the traffic there is thru traffic, and would be re-routed onto the bypass.

I can see them keeping a plan like that in their back pocket just in case the bypass doesn't alleviate the traffic situation there as much as expected.

Personally, I'm curious as to how enthusiastic they are about building the north-south expressway-- will they plan to build it at the same time as the I-42 bypass, or will it happen later on down the line.

[sprjus4]

Personally, I'm curious as to how enthusiastic they are about building the north-south expressway-- will they plan to build it at the same time as the I-42 bypass, or will it happen later on down the line.

Likely later. The I-42 / US-70 bypass is already funded to begin around 2025, whereas there's no funding allocated to the NC-11 bypass as of now.

The NC-11 bypass is the last remaining piece needed to complete a 4-lane divided highway linking US-70 (I-42), Greenville, and US-64 (I-87). The under construction C.F. Harvey Parkway extension will complete that link to/from US-70 (I-42) West, along with providing a completed 4-lane corridor to Greenville, Hampton Roads, and the Port of Virginia from the Global TransPark, a major transportation barrier that will be eliminated by this connection, but does not provide a corridor to/from US-70 (I-42) East.

[tolbs17]

Also, when looking at some of the bypasses, I think it would still be nice to upgrade the old route that desperately needs an overpass and interchanges (not a freeway design).

That only should come when intersections are clogged so bad.

[tolbs17]

They should have made I-42 go to Raleigh instead of Garner that way it would attract more drivers I'm sure.

[NE2]

They should have made I-42 go to Raleigh instead of Garner that way it would attract more drivers I'm sure.

w
hat

[sprjus4]

^

How would it "attract more drivers"? I-42 feeds into I-40 which feeds straight into Raleigh.

The junction of I-42 will also be at the future large interchange area with I-40 / I-42 / NC-540, so it's certainly within the metro area, especially as it grows outwards.

[tolbs17]

^

How would it "attract more drivers"? I-42 feeds into I-40 which feeds straight into Raleigh.

The junction of I-42 will also be at the future large interchange area with I-40 / I-42 / NC-540, so it's certainly within the metro area, especially as it grows outwards.

Maybe I guess not but it seems kind of odd of having an interstate fun from a town to another town with no major cities. I mean it's in the metro, yes. but it doesn't go all the way to Raleigh.

[sprjus4]

but it doesn't go all the way to Raleigh.

Does it need to?