AARoads Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

New rules to ensure post quality. See this thread for details.

Author Topic: Interstate 795 extension (NC)  (Read 37542 times)

LM117

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2902
  • Age: 32
  • Location: Danville, VA 👎
  • Last Login: September 16, 2021, 05:55:10 PM
Interstate 795 extension (NC)
« on: July 16, 2016, 11:00:45 PM »

I thought now would be as good a time as any to start a thread covering the extension of I-795 from US-70 in Goldsboro to I-40 west of Faison in Sampson County along the US-117 corridor.

Utility relocation work should be starting anytime now on US-117 south of Goldsboro at the intersections of Oberry Road in Dudley and Country Club Road just north of Mount Olive in preparation for converting those intersections into interchanges beginning next year. The US-117/Oberry Road intersection has the only traffic light between the Mar-Mac area south of Goldsboro and I-40. Once it becomes an interchange, there will be no stoplights on US-117 between Mar-Mac and I-40.

The most recent feasibility study for upgrading US-117 was released July 2015. There were 4 alternatives for the section of US-117 between Mar-Mac and Ash Street. Alternative 4A was requested and favored by the Wayne County Board of Commissioners. This alternative would have I-795 leave US-117 about 3 miles south of the US-13/US-117 junction and run on a new alignment east of US-117 heading north with interchanges at Genoa Road and NC-581/Arrington Bridge Road, at which point it would cross US-117 and run west of it on new alignment to connect with the existing I-795 by upgrading the NC-581/Ash Street intersection to an interchange.

I-795 would then use an upgraded US-117 from the new alignment split from just south of US-13 to I-40, with I-795 and US-117 being concurrent until the future US-117/West Trade Road interchange in Calypso, where US-117 leaves I-795. The US-117 Connector designation would be decommissioned between US-117/West Trade Road in Calypso and I-40. It would be signed solely as I-795 except for a brief concurrency of I-795/NC-403 between I-40 and the new NC-403 interchange. The interchanges for the section from Mar-Mac to I-40 would be at:

Oberry Road in Dudley

Country Club Road just north of Mount Olive

Existing NC-55 interchange in Mount Olive (existing bridges would need replacing since they lack shoulders)

Old Smith Chapel Road just south of Mount Olive (an extension would be built to connect Old Smith Chapel Road to Lees Country Club Road in order to build the interchange)

US-117/West Trade Road in Calypso

NC-50 near Faison

NC-403 near I-40 (road would be realigned with upgrade of I-40 interchange)

I-40 (upgrade existing Exit 355)

(65 pages, 7.70MB)
https://connect.ncdot.gov/projects/planning/FeasibilityStudiesDocuments/Feasibility-Study_1304A_Report_2015.pdf

Alternative 4A was recommended in the study.

Quote
More detailed design analysis is needed during future studies to identify an optimal interchange at I-40 and US 117 (Alternative 1) that addresses Sampson County concerns for avoiding disruption to the 355 Prospect development. A southern interchange with I-40 (Alternative 1A)
is not recommended based on Duplin County and Eastern Carolina RPO concerns about impacts
to agri-businesses and farming communities.

Wayne County officials recommend considering Alternatives 1, 4, and 4A. NCDOT Division 4
staff prefers Alternatives 4A, 4, and 1 in order of priority. Between NC 581 (Ash Street) and
NC 581 (Arrington Bridge Road), important local issues for these alternatives include:
accommodating access to downtown Goldsboro and major hospital, correctional center,
and agricultural facilities.
locating the alignment and service roads to maintain property access.
avoiding or minimizing impacts to FEMA buyout properties and Old Waynesborough
Park (near Elm Street).

Alternative 4A is the way to go, IMO.
« Last Edit: July 18, 2016, 10:02:11 AM by LM117 »
Logged
I dont know whether to wind my ass or scratch my watch! - Jim Cornette

LM117

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2902
  • Age: 32
  • Location: Danville, VA 👎
  • Last Login: September 16, 2021, 05:55:10 PM
Re: Interstate 795 extension (NC)
« Reply #1 on: July 20, 2016, 10:00:21 PM »

I meant to update this thread earlier today, but the recent announcement of a massive new CSX intermodal terminal hub to be built in Rocky Mount may (hopefully) speed up the extension of I-795 in the future (beyond the currently scheduled interchange projects next year). I-95/I-795/I-40 combined form a direct route to the Port of Wilmington from Rocky Mount and vice-versa.

While the goal of the new terminal is to reduce truck traffic on highways, trucks will still need access to and from the terminal. There's a section of railroad between Wallace and Wilmington that's currently out of service, so there is no current rail access to Wilmington by rail from Rocky Mount, making truck travel the only option between those two cities and I-795 would be used as a shortcut, which could make upgrading US-117 a higher priority in eastern NC.

https://www.csx.com/index.cfm/about-us/projects-and-partnerships/ccx-intermodal-terminal/

« Last Edit: July 20, 2016, 10:05:13 PM by LM117 »
Logged
I dont know whether to wind my ass or scratch my watch! - Jim Cornette

orulz

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 151
  • Age: 39
  • Location: NC
  • Last Login: September 15, 2021, 11:02:59 AM
Re: Interstate 795 extension (NC)
« Reply #2 on: July 21, 2016, 08:21:39 AM »

As a fan of both highways and railroads, I hope the CSX plan in Rocky Mount accellerates both the I-795 extension as well as the CSX line restoration between Wallace and Castle Hayne. The highway project has been extensively discussed here. The rail project is on NCDOT's radar too, because it is on the agenda of some NCGA members for port / freight / economic develo pment purposes. Let us also not forget that this rail segment is critically important to the restoration of passenger rail between Raleigh and Wilmington.

LGL33L

Logged

LM117

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2902
  • Age: 32
  • Location: Danville, VA 👎
  • Last Login: September 16, 2021, 05:55:10 PM
Re: Interstate 795 extension (NC)
« Reply #3 on: July 21, 2016, 10:00:32 AM »

As a fan of both highways and railroads, I hope the CSX plan in Rocky Mount accellerates both the I-795 extension as well as the CSX line restoration between Wallace and Castle Hayne. The highway project has been extensively discussed here. The rail project is on NCDOT's radar too, because it is on the agenda of some NCGA members for port / freight / economic develo pment purposes. Let us also not forget that this rail segment is critically important to the restoration of passenger rail between Raleigh and Wilmington.

LGL33L

Agreed. I'm not sure why (or when) the railroad from Wallace to Castle Hayne was put out of commission. That will definitely need to be restored. As far as I-795 goes, if anything gets speeded up, it will probably be simpler upgrades for the time being, such as shoulder widening on US-117 between the existing at-grade intersections from just south of US-13 to just before I-40, since that existing interchange will need to be reconstructed to meet interstate standards. The two US-117 interchange projects beginning next year at the Oberry Road and Country Club Road intersections may involve shoulder widening in the vicinity of those interchanges. NCDOT recently, out of the blue, let a contract to widen the shoulders on parts of US-70 between La Grange and Kinston, so it's possible we could see the same thing happen for US-117.

The biggest, and probably last, project of the I-795 extension is the new terrain routing from US-117 just south of US-13 to the current end at NC-581/Ash Street. An alternative hasn't been officially chosen yet, but NCDOT is leaning towards Alternative 4A in the feasibility study I posted above. There's just no way to upgrade existing US-117 between Mar-Mac and Ash Street. The terrain isn't suitable, especially near the Neuse River, and there are a lot of businesses, including the Wayne County Fairgrounds, and a cemetery (Wayne Memorial Park) right off of US-117 just north of the proposed I-795/US-117 split. One of the new terrain alternatives will have to be chosen. I can't see Alternative 2 getting much support and whoever came up with Alternative 3 was smoking crack. Most of Alternative 4 was fine, but the linkup to existing I-795 needed tweaked. Alternative 4A looks to be the best one.
« Last Edit: July 21, 2016, 10:10:02 AM by LM117 »
Logged
I dont know whether to wind my ass or scratch my watch! - Jim Cornette

The Ghostbuster

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3135
  • Age: 36
  • Location: Madison, WI
  • Last Login: September 16, 2021, 03:09:52 PM
Re: Interstate 795 extension (NC)
« Reply #4 on: July 21, 2016, 04:49:52 PM »

When might the Interstate 795 extension be constructed?
Logged

LM117

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2902
  • Age: 32
  • Location: Danville, VA 👎
  • Last Login: September 16, 2021, 05:55:10 PM
Re: Interstate 795 extension (NC)
« Reply #5 on: July 21, 2016, 05:10:38 PM »

When might the Interstate 795 extension be constructed?

Only the two interchange projects on US-117 at Oberry Road and Country Club Road are funded, with construction starting next year. Other than that, there's nothing on the timetable in the near future, unless NCDOT decides to suddenly let a contract to widen the shoulders on US-117 like they just did for US-70 between La Grange and Kinston.

One thing to note is that NCDOT never did send an application to AASHTO (during their last meeting) and FHWA to designate US-117 between Goldsboro and I-40 as "Future I-795", which kinda surprised me. My guess is that it's due to the fact that I-795 will be using a new alignment between US-117 near Mar-Mac and Ash Street in Goldsboro. Either that, or they simply forgot during AASHTO's last meeting. We'll see what happens at AASHTO's next meeting in the fall.
« Last Edit: July 21, 2016, 05:16:23 PM by LM117 »
Logged
I dont know whether to wind my ass or scratch my watch! - Jim Cornette

WashuOtaku

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 602
  • Location: North Carolina
  • Last Login: September 13, 2021, 10:24:54 AM
Re: Interstate 795 extension (NC)
« Reply #6 on: July 21, 2016, 07:31:06 PM »

I honestly don't see more trucks between Wilmington and Rocky Mount because the CCX Intermodal Terminal; remember they are building to reorganize freight on tracks for efficiency, not a terminal facility like the inland NC Port in Charlotte.  As for the rail disconnect, I suspect rail line was simply not profitable between Wilmington and Rocky Mount. 
Logged

LM117

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2902
  • Age: 32
  • Location: Danville, VA 👎
  • Last Login: September 16, 2021, 05:55:10 PM
Re: Interstate 795 extension (NC)
« Reply #7 on: July 22, 2016, 10:17:06 AM »

I honestly don't see more trucks between Wilmington and Rocky Mount because the CCX Intermodal Terminal; remember they are building to reorganize freight on tracks for efficiency, not a terminal facility like the inland NC Port in Charlotte.  As for the rail disconnect, I suspect rail line was simply not profitable between Wilmington and Rocky Mount.

I don't know why it wouldn't be profitable since the railroad from Wallace northward connects to the main line in Wilson to VA and points north, but even if it wasn't profitable then, it would likely be profitable now, since the hub is being built. Linking the Port of Wilimington to the CSX hub seems like a no-brainer to me. I also figured that until the missing rail line is connected, trucks will be using the highways from Wilmington to Rocky Mount to off-load since that's currently the only means of transportation between the Port of Wilmington and the future CSX hub, thus the possibility of upgrades to US-117 being moved up the timetable in the future (other than what's already scheduled for next year). Once the missing rail line is connected, then truck traffic between Wilmington and Rocky Mount will drop.
« Last Edit: July 22, 2016, 10:19:19 AM by LM117 »
Logged
I dont know whether to wind my ass or scratch my watch! - Jim Cornette

WashuOtaku

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 602
  • Location: North Carolina
  • Last Login: September 13, 2021, 10:24:54 AM
Re: Interstate 795 extension (NC)
« Reply #8 on: July 22, 2016, 04:47:05 PM »

I honestly don't see more trucks between Wilmington and Rocky Mount because the CCX Intermodal Terminal; remember they are building to reorganize freight on tracks for efficiency, not a terminal facility like the inland NC Port in Charlotte.  As for the rail disconnect, I suspect rail line was simply not profitable between Wilmington and Rocky Mount.
I don't know why it wouldn't be profitable since the railroad from Wallace northward connects to the main line in Wilson to VA and points north, but even if it wasn't profitable then, it would likely be profitable now, since the hub is being built. Linking the Port of Wilimington to the CSX hub seems like a no-brainer to me. I also figured that until the missing rail line is connected, trucks will be using the highways from Wilmington to Rocky Mount to off-load since that's currently the only means of transportation between the Port of Wilmington and the future CSX hub, thus the possibility of upgrades to US-117 being moved up the timetable in the future (other than what's already scheduled for next year). Once the missing rail line is connected, then truck traffic between Wilmington and Rocky Mount will drop.

You forget though that the CCX Intermodal Terminal is for the CSX system, specifically the north-south line through the state (which is why both Virginia and South Carolina were wanting it too).  You are right, it makes sense to link Wilmington back to Rocky Mount now, but I still doubt the increase traffic you believe will happen between Wilmington and Rocky Mount, because that is not the focus.  You also give Wilmington too much credit, it is still a secondary port compared to Charleston and Norfolk, which are both well connected.
Logged

LM117

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2902
  • Age: 32
  • Location: Danville, VA 👎
  • Last Login: September 16, 2021, 05:55:10 PM
Re: Interstate 795 extension (NC)
« Reply #9 on: July 23, 2016, 01:39:31 PM »

I honestly don't see more trucks between Wilmington and Rocky Mount because the CCX Intermodal Terminal; remember they are building to reorganize freight on tracks for efficiency, not a terminal facility like the inland NC Port in Charlotte.  As for the rail disconnect, I suspect rail line was simply not profitable between Wilmington and Rocky Mount.
I don't know why it wouldn't be profitable since the railroad from Wallace northward connects to the main line in Wilson to VA and points north, but even if it wasn't profitable then, it would likely be profitable now, since the hub is being built. Linking the Port of Wilimington to the CSX hub seems like a no-brainer to me. I also figured that until the missing rail line is connected, trucks will be using the highways from Wilmington to Rocky Mount to off-load since that's currently the only means of transportation between the Port of Wilmington and the future CSX hub, thus the possibility of upgrades to US-117 being moved up the timetable in the future (other than what's already scheduled for next year). Once the missing rail line is connected, then truck traffic between Wilmington and Rocky Mount will drop.

You forget though that the CCX Intermodal Terminal is for the CSX system, specifically the north-south line through the state (which is why both Virginia and South Carolina were wanting it too).  You are right, it makes sense to link Wilmington back to Rocky Mount now, but I still doubt the increase traffic you believe will happen between Wilmington and Rocky Mount, because that is not the focus.  You also give Wilmington too much credit, it is still a secondary port compared to Charleston and Norfolk, which are both well connected.

I should've been more specific. I don't think the increase in truck traffic will be significant. Just slight, and the reason I say that is although I'm well aware the point of the terminal is to take trucks off the road, it will still be a key on-loading/off-loading site, as Adam already mentioned in the I-87 thread and while truck traffic will definitely drop on other routes, trucking is currently the only option between Wilmington and Rocky Mount until (if/when) the missing railroad is restored between Wallace and Wilmington. I'm also aware of the Port of Wilmington's disadvantages compared to the ports in Charleston and Norfolk, which is why I think if there's any temporary increase (until the rail is restored), it would only be slight.

However, I wasn't aware that Virginia was competing for it. There was no mention of it in the media up here. I'm not doubting you, I'm just surprised. I already knew South Carolina did their damndest to steal the terminal once they caught wind of all the BS that CSX was running into in Johnston County and tried to use it to their advantage. It's a miracle that eastern NC didn't lose the terminal altogether, thanks to the idiot leaders in Johnston County (and to an extent, the state), but I digress. That being said, Rocky Mount is a MUCH better location for the terminal that would benefit eastern NC more than the original site in Selma, so it all worked out for the best, IMO. I'm from eastern NC so it's good to see something finally work in their favor for a change, as far as business goes.
« Last Edit: July 23, 2016, 01:44:13 PM by LM117 »
Logged
I dont know whether to wind my ass or scratch my watch! - Jim Cornette

wdcrft63

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 722
  • Location: Durham, NC
  • Last Login: September 16, 2021, 06:20:14 PM
Re: Interstate 795 extension (NC)
« Reply #10 on: July 23, 2016, 03:21:00 PM »


However, I wasn't aware that Virginia was competing for it. There was no mention of it in the media up here. I'm not doubting you, I'm just surprised. I already knew South Carolina did their damndest to steal the terminal once they caught wind of all the BS that CSX was running into in Johnston County and tried to use it to their advantage. It's a miracle that eastern NC didn't lose the terminal altogether, thanks to the idiot leaders in Johnston County (and to an extent, the state), but I digress. That being said, Rocky Mount is a MUCH better location for the terminal that would benefit eastern NC more than the original site in Selma, so it all worked out for the best, IMO. I'm from eastern NC so it's good to see something finally work in their favor for a change, as far as business goes.

I don't know personally that Virginia was competing for it; that statement was in a story on the terminal run by WRAL-TV in Raleigh.
Logged

sparker

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 8495
  • Location: Bay Area, CA
  • Last Login: September 12, 2021, 12:44:33 AM
Re: Interstate 795 extension (NC)
« Reply #11 on: July 23, 2016, 04:09:19 PM »

The severed track between Castle Hayne & Wallace was originally a ACL (Atlantic Coast Line) branch; the other CSX line serving Wilmington from the west (along US 74 and NC 211) was built by SAL (Seaboard Air Line), both were components of what eventually (mid-80's) became CSX.  ACL lines were not as robustly constructed (less ballast underpinning, lighter rails) than were the competing SAL, which was laid out as single-track, high-capacity/high-speed lines; after the dust had cleared from the various mergers that resulted in CSX, Wilmington traffic only required one line, so the better-constructed SAL line was retained, and the other severed, with the remaining segments functioning as local servers.  Also, the former SAL western line led directly into a longstanding system hub at Hamlet, where what Wilmington port traffic there was could be distributed in three directions (W,S,N). 

With the Panamax-related enlargement of the Wilmington port (news reports showed the first large container ship docking there a week or so ago), it makes sense that the Wilmington-to-Wilson line would not only be reconnected but likely fully rebuilt to handle long & heavy container trains.  Now that the principal non-fuel RR cargo is containerized loads, port facilities and major hubs serve as the location for the massive gantries, stationary cranes, and lifters necessary to load and unload containers from the specialized railcars on which they travel.  Once a load has been seated on a container railcar, it never has to leave until it gets to the hub nearest its destination.  Railroads, often with subsidies from local development agencies, have, over the last couple of decades, been deploying hubs in strategic locations along their main lines; Rocky Mount is simply the latest to be announced.  By rebuilding the track north of Wilmington, CSX retains its monopoly on port traffic from that city, but adds system efficiency northward to its major market destination area -- the Northeast.  Following established RR practice, a sizeable train, likely 80-120 cars, will be assembled at Wilmington and dispatched north to Rocky Mount.  Containers destined for NC or most of VA will be located at the rear of the train, and dropped off at RM.  The rest of the train will continue to the next hub (likely Baltimore), where containers for the Balt/Wash area and environs will be the next to be decoupled and shuffled into the hub yard.  This will continue north through the NJ section of NY metro, dropping off still more cars, until the train reaches Selkirk (outside Albany), CSX's massive NE US hub, where what is left will be distributed to upstate NY, New England, and Canada.  A returning train collecting empty container cars (in RR parlance, "baretables") will head south to Wilmington, collecting cars from the hubs as needed.  This process will be repeated from other CSX-served ports:  Savannah, Charleston, and Newport News (even comparatively small Brunswick, GA, has been expanding its port facilities in anticipation of large inbound Panamax ocean traffic). 

Where the I-795 extension fits into this is pretty simple: some containerized cargo is more time-sensitive than others; those fitting that description and intended for final delivery in NC or VA will most likely be put directly onto trucks at the port of Wilmington and those trucks dispatched directly to their destinations.  Currently, about 15% of inbound cargo nationwide is considered time-sensitive ("just-in-time" assembly parts deliveries, high-ticket holiday-sales items [read I-phones, tablets, and the like]) -- most of that goes directly from ship to trucks ("dwell" time at RR hubs and yards is considered, in those cases, as unacceptable delay).  Thus if it comes into the country at Wilmington, and is time-sensitive and heading north, then the I-795 extension might cut a bit of valuable time off the trucking schedule.

Of course, all this is speculative -- pending whether the aggregate inbound Wilmington port traffic will justify the expenses of both rail and road improvements in NC.  And it goes to explain why the recent push for connection to the Morehead City/Beaufort port areas is underway (re I-42):  The other SE main regional RR, Norfolk Southern (NS), is essentially shut out of Wilmington access -- but it leases and operates the state-owned North Carolina Railroad, which IS the line serving Morehead.  While Savannah, Charleston, and the Hampton Roads port areas are shared by both railroads, the NC ports are "single-server" in regards to rail egress.  Without Morehead City, NS doesn't have a "dog in the race" re NC port service; dredging out the shoals at Morehead and enlarging and modernizing the port there (and negotiating attractive docking fees with the ocean shippers) will put NS in a position to remain, in the overall sense, competitive with CSX for overall Southeast Seaboard inbound cargo volume.  And to say these two rail companies are competitive almost to the point of open warfare is an understatement (UP and BNSF have much the same relationship on the West Coast).  And with both hurting from the volume loss in coal traffic, they're like wolves sniffing out fresh meat!  It'll be quite fascinating to see how it all shakes out in the end!   
Logged

LM117

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2902
  • Age: 32
  • Location: Danville, VA 👎
  • Last Login: September 16, 2021, 05:55:10 PM
Re: Interstate 795 extension (NC)
« Reply #12 on: July 23, 2016, 05:31:21 PM »

The severed track between Castle Hayne & Wallace was originally a ACL (Atlantic Coast Line) branch; the other CSX line serving Wilmington from the west (along US 74 and NC 211) was built by SAL (Seaboard Air Line), both were components of what eventually (mid-80's) became CSX.  ACL lines were not as robustly constructed (less ballast underpinning, lighter rails) than were the competing SAL, which was laid out as single-track, high-capacity/high-speed lines; after the dust had cleared from the various mergers that resulted in CSX, Wilmington traffic only required one line, so the better-constructed SAL line was retained, and the other severed, with the remaining segments functioning as local servers.  Also, the former SAL western line led directly into a longstanding system hub at Hamlet, where what Wilmington port traffic there was could be distributed in three directions (W,S,N). 
Thanks for filling me in about that missing track. I don't know if there are currently any plans to reconnect it, but I hope they do in the future.

With the Panamax-related enlargement of the Wilmington port (news reports showed the first large container ship docking there a week or so ago), it makes sense that the Wilmington-to-Wilson line would not only be reconnected but likely fully rebuilt to handle long & heavy container trains.  Now that the principal non-fuel RR cargo is containerized loads, port facilities and major hubs serve as the location for the massive gantries, stationary cranes, and lifters necessary to load and unload containers from the specialized railcars on which they travel.  Once a load has been seated on a container railcar, it never has to leave until it gets to the hub nearest its destination.  Railroads, often with subsidies from local development agencies, have, over the last couple of decades, been deploying hubs in strategic locations along their main lines; Rocky Mount is simply the latest to be announced.  By rebuilding the track north of Wilmington, CSX retains its monopoly on port traffic from that city, but adds system efficiency northward to its major market destination area -- the Northeast.  Following established RR practice, a sizeable train, likely 80-120 cars, will be assembled at Wilmington and dispatched north to Rocky Mount.  Containers destined for NC or most of VA will be located at the rear of the train, and dropped off at RM.  The rest of the train will continue to the next hub (likely Baltimore), where containers for the Balt/Wash area and environs will be the next to be decoupled and shuffled into the hub yard.  This will continue north through the NJ section of NY metro, dropping off still more cars, until the train reaches Selkirk (outside Albany), CSX's massive NE US hub, where what is left will be distributed to upstate NY, New England, and Canada.  A returning train collecting empty container cars (in RR parlance, "baretables") will head south to Wilmington, collecting cars from the hubs as needed.  This process will be repeated from other CSX-served ports:  Savannah, Charleston, and Newport News (even comparatively small Brunswick, GA, has been expanding its port facilities in anticipation of large inbound Panamax ocean traffic).  Agreed.

Where the I-795 extension fits into this is pretty simple: some containerized cargo is more time-sensitive than others; those fitting that description and intended for final delivery in NC or VA will most likely be put directly onto trucks at the port of Wilmington and those trucks dispatched directly to their destinations.  Currently, about 15% of inbound cargo nationwide is considered time-sensitive ("just-in-time" assembly parts deliveries, high-ticket holiday-sales items [read I-phones, tablets, and the like]) -- most of that goes directly from ship to trucks ("dwell" time at RR hubs and yards is considered, in those cases, as unacceptable delay).  Thus if it comes into the country at Wilmington, and is time-sensitive and heading north, then the I-795 extension might cut a bit of valuable time off the trucking schedule.

Of course, all this is speculative -- pending whether the aggregate inbound Wilmington port traffic will justify the expenses of both rail and road improvements in NC. It would certainly be worth it, IMO. Connecting Wilmington to Rocky Mount by rail is, as I've said before, a no-brainer now that the hub is confirmed. As far as I-795's extension, there have been plans for it's extension long before CSX thought of building a hub in NC. Providing a shortcut to Wilmington from I-95 and vice-versa is just one of the reasons the extension is being pushed. I-795 would also help serve as a high-speed hurricane evacuation route for those going to Goldsboro, Wilson or points north on I-95 from Wilmington and it's surrounding coastal areas. Wayne County, Goldsboro and Mount Olive obviously want I-795 extended for economic development purposes, though I doubt Mount Olive will amount to much more than it is now. Nobody would know where the town was if it weren't for it's famous pickles. :-D Goldsboro has been growing the last few years, albeit slowly. Another big reason for the extension is to make US-117 safer. US-117 can get pretty congested during rush hour between Ash Street in Goldsboro and the Mar-Mac area on the southside of Goldsboro, due to the numerous businesses, traffic lights and at-grade access points, though it wasn't quite as bad as US-70 used to be before the Goldsboro Bypass got built. There have also been numerous crashes along certain parts of US-117. Extending I-795 to I-40 makes sense, IMO.

Replied in bold.
« Last Edit: July 24, 2016, 07:20:56 AM by LM117 »
Logged
I dont know whether to wind my ass or scratch my watch! - Jim Cornette

sparker

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 8495
  • Location: Bay Area, CA
  • Last Login: September 12, 2021, 12:44:33 AM
Re: Interstate 795 extension (NC)
« Reply #13 on: July 24, 2016, 11:02:57 AM »

Question:  is there also a town called Mt. Pickle that's famous for its olives?  Just checking  :-P!
Logged

LM117

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2902
  • Age: 32
  • Location: Danville, VA 👎
  • Last Login: September 16, 2021, 05:55:10 PM
Re: Interstate 795 extension (NC)
« Reply #14 on: July 24, 2016, 12:12:10 PM »

Question:  is there also a town called Mt. Pickle that's famous for its olives?  Just checking  :-P!

I'm pretty sure there is in the parallel universe. :sombrero:
Logged
I dont know whether to wind my ass or scratch my watch! - Jim Cornette

WashuOtaku

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 602
  • Location: North Carolina
  • Last Login: September 13, 2021, 10:24:54 AM
Re: Interstate 795 extension (NC)
« Reply #15 on: July 24, 2016, 03:54:00 PM »

However, I wasn't aware that Virginia was competing for it. There was no mention of it in the media up here. I'm not doubting you, I'm just surprised. I already knew South Carolina did their damndest to steal the terminal once they caught wind of all the BS that CSX was running into in Johnston County and tried to use it to their advantage. It's a miracle that eastern NC didn't lose the terminal altogether, thanks to the idiot leaders in Johnston County (and to an extent, the state), but I digress. That being said, Rocky Mount is a MUCH better location for the terminal that would benefit eastern NC more than the original site in Selma, so it all worked out for the best, IMO. I'm from eastern NC so it's good to see something finally work in their favor for a change, as far as business goes.

Competing was the wrong word for it.  It's what transpired after people freaked-out in Johnston County by trying to take land from farmers who didn't want to sell and the community there fighting against it.  Both Virginia and South Carolina then came out saying "look, North Carolina doesn't want you, come build it in our state instead."  So it was more of an opportunity, but appears CSX wanted to stay in North Carolina after all.
Logged

LM117

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2902
  • Age: 32
  • Location: Danville, VA 👎
  • Last Login: September 16, 2021, 05:55:10 PM
Re: Interstate 795 extension (NC)
« Reply #16 on: August 05, 2016, 09:49:16 AM »

I was just looking at NCDOT's preliminary 2018-2027 STIP map feature on their site and it appears that NCDOT has chosen Alternative 4A from the feasibility study linked in the OP of this thread for the new terrain routing for I-795 between US-117 south of US-13 near Mar-Mac and NC-581/Ash Street in Goldsboro. They have broken the new routing into phases, similar to what they did for the new US-70 Goldsboro Bypass. The remaining projects that will upgrade the existing US-117 to interstate standards between the future US-117/I-795 split near Mar-Mac and I-40 are also listed.

I'm hoping the new alignment between US-117 and NC-581/Ash Street makes the final STIP. The Oberry Road interchange project starting next year will remove the only traffic light between the southside of Goldsboro and I-40, so once the new alignment is built, people will be able to travel non-stop between I-95 and I-40, giving flowing North-South movement to complement the free-flowing East-West movement created by the new Goldsboro Bypass, at least as far as Wayne County is concerned.

https://www.ncdot.gov/strategictransportationinvestments/2018-2027.html
« Last Edit: August 05, 2016, 06:27:30 PM by LM117 »
Logged
I dont know whether to wind my ass or scratch my watch! - Jim Cornette

LM117

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2902
  • Age: 32
  • Location: Danville, VA 👎
  • Last Login: September 16, 2021, 05:55:10 PM
Re: Interstate 795 extension (NC)
« Reply #17 on: August 24, 2016, 09:38:24 PM »

As previously mentioned in the main NC and I-42 threads, NCDOT made an announcement regarding the draft 2017-2028 STIP. The upgrade of a good chunk of US-117 to interstate standards is included.

http://wnct.com/2016/08/24/key-eastern-n-c-projects-to-be-included-in-next-state-transportation-plan/

Quote
Upgrading U.S. 117 from north of Country Club Road to south of Genoa Road in Wayne County, improving the I-795 corridor

While the upgrade of US-117 is definitely great news for I-795's extension, I'm a little surprised that the new alignment segment between south of Genoa Road and Ash Street in Goldsboro didn't make it in the draft. That's the most important segment because once the Oberry Road intersection becomes an interchange, there won't be any traffic lights on US-117 between I-40 and where I-795 will leave US-117 near Genoa Road, which would mean non-stop travel between Goldsboro and I-40 once the new alignment is built.

They got this one backwards, IMO. They should've focused on the new alignment first since it would help traffic the most, then upgrade the remainder of US-117 to I-40. But, it beats nothing at all.
Logged
I dont know whether to wind my ass or scratch my watch! - Jim Cornette

LM117

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2902
  • Age: 32
  • Location: Danville, VA 👎
  • Last Login: September 16, 2021, 05:55:10 PM
Re: Interstate 795 extension (NC)
« Reply #18 on: August 26, 2016, 10:59:48 AM »

Well, I stand corrected. :pan: According to this full list of regional projects that are included in NCDOT's draft 2018-2027 STIP, the I-795 new location alignment is included after all, though it's split into segments like the Goldsboro Bypass was, since only part of it is included rather than the full length from US-117 to NC-581/Ash Street.

In addition to upgrading the section of US-117 to interstate standards mentioned in my previous post, the first segment of the new alignment from US-117 just south of Landfill Road to Genoa Road is included (TIP: U-5946), using Alternative 4A in the feasibilty study posted in the OP.

What puzzles me is that the new alignment scored lower than the US-117 upgrading project. :hmm:

https://www.ncdot.gov/strategictransportationinvestments/download/regional_impact_projects_P4.pdf
Logged
I dont know whether to wind my ass or scratch my watch! - Jim Cornette

LM117

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2902
  • Age: 32
  • Location: Danville, VA 👎
  • Last Login: September 16, 2021, 05:55:10 PM
Re: Interstate 795 extension (NC)
« Reply #19 on: October 09, 2016, 12:45:29 PM »

The Goldsboro News-Argus removed their paywall for the weekend, so I went back through the archives and found more info on what type of interchanges on US-117 will be at the Oberry Road and Country Club Road intersections. They will both be standard diamond interchanges, with Oberry Road going over US-117 and US-117 going over Country Club Road.

Here's an article from April 19: http://www.newsargus.com/news/archives/2016/04/19/us_117_utility_work_to_begin/

Quote
Motorists on U.S. 117 South can expect to see utility relocation work begin within the next few months at the highway's intersections with O'Berry Road at Dudley and Country Club Road just north of Mount Olive.

That work will precede the start next summer of the construction of interchanges at the two locations.

The two U.S. 117 interchanges are among highway projects that were accelerated by the N.C. Board of Transportation earlier this year and were made possible thanks to Gov. Pat McCrory's 2015 budget.

The state has budgeted $1.38 million for right of way for each interchange.

Construction cost is budgeted at $7.296 million at O'Berry Road and $10.260 million at Country Club Road.

Crews already have tested the subsurface conditions at the two locations for the overpass foundations.

"We are getting close to having right-of-way plans ready to move forward with right-of-way acquisition," said Jiles Harrell, district 3 engineer for state Department of Transportation Division 4 that includes Wayne County. "There is very limited right of way that will have to be acquired in this project. O'Berry Road is going to be a typical interchange, and O'Berry Road is going to go over 117. It will be your typical diamond-shaped interchange.

"Country Club Road, just due to the proximity of old 117 on the east side of 117, we are not able to tie back down. I believe it is only 400 feet (between the two roads). So what we are doing, we are actually going to build two bridges for each direction on 117. We are going to carry 117 over Country Club Road. Then we are going to have our standard diamond interchange there with on-bound and off-bound ramps on both sides."

It has not yet been decided how traffic will be temporarily detoured during construction, Harrell said.

Harrell said he did not yet have a construction timetable.

"Both projects, we are looking at letting them together, combining them" Harrell said. "Those projects right now we are targeting June of next year to be let. That will put us in construction late summer, or into the fall of next year to begin construction. We will put it out for contract next June and with the limited right of way we have out there, we shouldn't have any issues getting there. It has a little shorter right-of-way window than we normally have for most of our projects."

But to make the start next year happen, the utilities relocation probably needs to start this June, he said.

"That is the next step," Harrell said. "Usually when we get right-of-way plans is when we go into our utility relocation and right-of-way acquisitions. Basically both of those happen at the same time. So we will be moving forward with our utility relocation, probably here in the next couple of months."

The interchanges are part of a long-range goal by local leaders to extend Interstate 795 from Goldsboro south along the U.S. 117 corridor to Interstate 40 in Sampson County just west of Faison.

The upgrade would require a new roadway from Ash Street to south of Goldsboro with the remainder using the existing U.S. 117 South.
Right of way, expected to cost $31.592 million, and utilities at $3.791 million, are both scheduled for 2024.

However, construction cost of $194,826,000 has not been funded and has yet to be scheduled.

Last December, President Obama signed into law a new five-year transportation bill designating the U.S. 117 and U.S. 70 highway corridors as future Interstates.
« Last Edit: October 09, 2016, 03:23:05 PM by LM117 »
Logged
I dont know whether to wind my ass or scratch my watch! - Jim Cornette

LM117

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2902
  • Age: 32
  • Location: Danville, VA 👎
  • Last Login: September 16, 2021, 05:55:10 PM
Re: Interstate 795 extension (NC)
« Reply #20 on: October 09, 2016, 12:54:27 PM »

Here's another article detailing Mount Olive's water line relocation.

From September 18: http://www.newsargus.com/news/archives/2016/09/18/water_line_relocation_means_road_upgrade/

Quote
MOUNT OLIVE -- The pending relocation of a water line signals progress on plans to upgrade U.S. 117 South to Interstate status, Mount Olive Town Manager Charles Brown said last week.

The town board awarded a $113,196 contract to Cox-Edwards to relocate the water line south of its current location.

The approval is contingent on state Department of Transportation approval as well. The work could start as soon as October and be completed by the end of the year, depending on how quickly the Department of Transportation acts.

"We have a 6-inch water line that runs under Country Club Road which crosses the current (U.S.) 117 -- all four lanes," Brown said. "It also crosses the old (U.S.) 117 (Alternate)."

In order to facilitate the building of an overpass at Country Club Road, the water line has to be relocated south, Brown said.

"It is a sign of progress for the town of Mount Olive because it means I-795 is becoming a reality," he said.

Under state law the Department of Transportation will pay the non-betterment cost for the relocation of water and sewer lines located within the existing state transportation right-of-way project that are necessary to be relocated for a state transportation improvement and are owned by municipality with a population of 10,000 or less.

That means the town will not have to pay for the work, Brown said.

Upgrading U.S. 117 from north of Country Club Road to south of Genoa Road near the Wayne County Fairgrounds -- the future Interstate 795 South corridor -- is included in the state's next draft 10-year transportation plan.

It has yet to receive final approval or funding.

However, construction of interchanges on U.S. 117 South at Country Club Road and at O'Berry Road at Dudley have been approved.

The state has budgeted $1.38 million for right of way for each interchange. Construction cost is budgeted at $7.296 million at O'Berry Road and $10.26 million at Country Club Road.

Crews already have tested the subsurface conditions at the two locations for the overpass foundations, and construction is expected to start next summer.

Because of U.S. 117's proximity to U.S. 117 Alternate, the overpass will take U.S. 117 over Country Club Road. Two bridges will be built, one for each direction on 117. The project at O'Berry Road will take that road over U.S. 117.
Logged
I dont know whether to wind my ass or scratch my watch! - Jim Cornette

orulz

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 151
  • Age: 39
  • Location: NC
  • Last Login: September 15, 2021, 11:02:59 AM
Re: Interstate 795 extension (NC)
« Reply #21 on: October 27, 2016, 04:56:01 PM »

What is the planned southern terminus of I-795? I-40 at Faison, right? I wonder if part of the I-95 "dilemma" in NC (where the road is ancient and inadequate, but never seems to get prioritized for construction) could be dealt with by extending I-795 even further, to link back up with I-95 in Lumberton. This would provide a bypass of 100 of the 180 miles of I-95 in NC, including some of the most ancient sextions. It would cross very rural, wide open land, and there would be no phasing to avoid traffic disruptions, so it would probably be similar or cheaper compared with widening I-95, and would certainly be welcomed by the business communities in Goldsboro and Clinton.

Could we go so far as to declare this the Manifest Destiny of I-795?

LGL44VL

Logged

sparker

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 8495
  • Location: Bay Area, CA
  • Last Login: September 12, 2021, 12:44:33 AM
Re: Interstate 795 extension (NC)
« Reply #22 on: October 27, 2016, 05:26:54 PM »

What is the planned southern terminus of I-795? I-40 at Faison, right? I wonder if part of the I-95 "dilemma" in NC (where the road is ancient and inadequate, but never seems to get prioritized for construction) could be dealt with by extending I-795 even further, to link back up with I-95 in Lumberton. This would provide a bypass of 100 of the 180 miles of I-95 in NC, including some of the most ancient sextions. It would cross very rural, wide open land, and there would be no phasing to avoid traffic disruptions, so it would probably be similar or cheaper compared with widening I-95, and would certainly be welcomed by the business communities in Goldsboro and Clinton.

Could we go so far as to declare this the Manifest Destiny of I-795?

LGL44VL



Probably not.  A longer-mileage bypass is not an efficient substitute for upgrading a routing-efficient (read more or less straight-line) existing route such as I-95.  One thing about NC Interstate additions: pretty much each segment exists as a SIU:  I-42 connects other Interstates and the state capital/Research Triangle region with a developing port area, I-87 connects the same with the Hampton Roads metro complex, and the existing/planned I-795 functions as a local Goldsboro server as well as a "cutoff" for traffic to and from Wilmington (and its port) to northerly points along I-95.  A Lumberton-Faison I-795 extension wouldn't really do much for traffic patterns in that part of the state; it's too much out of the way to function as a connector for NB I-95 traffic to Wilmington (that's what I-74/US 74's for, anyway!), and it's unlikely that there's enough Goldsboro-bound traffic on NB I-95 to warrant a more direct connection.  No SIU to be seen here.

I do agree that NC's segment of I-95 really needs an upgrade -- but a 2nd and less efficient facility isn't the solution -- any action regarding that route needs to amass levels of political support that it currently does not have.
Logged

orulz

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 151
  • Age: 39
  • Location: NC
  • Last Login: September 15, 2021, 11:02:59 AM
Re: Interstate 795 extension (NC)
« Reply #23 on: October 27, 2016, 05:50:49 PM »

Measuring it out on google maps, it would increase the mileage by about 7 miles, from 100 to 107. To me, that is almost a rounding error, especially if 795 is 70mph from end to end. This is contingent on finding a relatively efficient straight line route from Faison to Lumberton (which might not be possible, due to geological formations like the Carolina Bays in that stretch).

http://goo.gl/GWYFlX

« Last Edit: October 27, 2016, 05:54:31 PM by orulz »
Logged

sparker

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 8495
  • Location: Bay Area, CA
  • Last Login: September 12, 2021, 12:44:33 AM
Re: Interstate 795 extension (NC)
« Reply #24 on: October 28, 2016, 03:52:29 AM »

Regardless of the relative similarity of distance between Lumberton and Wilson endpoints for both I-95 and the routing proposed by orulz, it's highly unlikely that if NC is unwilling to undertake projects to improve capacity and/or safety along I-95 they would readily opt to construct a largely new-terrain I-795 southwest extension to accomplish much the same goal.  As I stated in my earlier post, there's little if any local need for such a facility -- and, by and large, the push for new NC Interstate corridors has been "bottom-up" (with I-73/74 being an obvious exception), with local coordinating groups taking point and pushing projects up the chain until all relevant parties are on board.  Unless the various towns along a I-795 projected SW corridor -- such as Clinton or Roseboro -- can muster up enough political muscle to get such a project prioritized as a localized server, it's more than likely that I-795's long-term southern terminus will remain at I-40.   
Logged

 


Opinions expressed here on belong solely to the poster and do not represent or reflect the opinions or beliefs of AARoads, its creators and/or associates.