Future Interstate 587 (Zebulon-Greenville)

[LM117]

That said, I agree that signing I-587 north-south is stupid.  I can't believe NC doesn't know better than that.

For some damn reason, NCDOT thinks that a 3-di MUST be signed as the same direction as it's parent, despite examples in other states proving otherwise. I wish I was making this up.

[LM117]

https://www.greenvillenc.gov/home/showdocument?id=20340

http://prntscr.com/16uke7q

They want to bring this part up to interstate standards.

From this account, it appears that the northern half of the Greenville/NC 11 bypass is being considered as a part of the I-587 corridor, although IIRC the designated Interstate segment terminates at the junction of westward US 264 and that bypass.  Alternately, given the recent I-designation activity in this neck of the woods, upgrading the bypass would be the "camel's nose through the door" regarding a full N-S designation between I-42 at Kinston and I-87.  Guess the idea of leaving a spur hanging at Greenville just doesn't appeal much to local boosters!

It won't be part of I-587. That upgrade is listed because Kinston and Greenville had been pushing for an interstate from Kinston to Bethel (likely another I-x87), with the purpose of giving the Global TransPark an interstate connection to the Port of Virginia in Norfolk.

The mayors that started that push are no longer in office, so I'm not sure how big of a priority it is for their successors, though there's been very little public mention of it in recent years.

[sprjus4]

https://www.greenvillenc.gov/home/showdocument?id=20340

http://prntscr.com/16uke7q

They want to bring this part up to interstate standards.

From this account, it appears that the northern half of the Greenville/NC 11 bypass is being considered as a part of the I-587 corridor, although IIRC the designated Interstate segment terminates at the junction of westward US 264 and that bypass.  Alternately, given the recent I-designation activity in this neck of the woods, upgrading the bypass would be the "camel's nose through the door" regarding a full N-S designation between I-42 at Kinston and I-87.  Guess the idea of leaving a spur hanging at Greenville just doesn't appeal much to local boosters!

It won't be part of I-587. That upgrade is listed because Kinston and Greenville had been pushing for an interstate from Kinston to Bethel (likely another I-x87), with the purpose of giving the Global TransPark an interstate connection to the Port of Virginia in Norfolk.

The mayors that started that push are no longer in office, so I'm not sure how big of a priority it is for their successors, though there's been very little public mention of it in recent years.

If anything is to happen to the NC-11 corridor between Kinston and Bethel, the only time I can see it reasonably gaining traction would be in 20-30 years from now, once both I-87 and I-42 are complete in full, to close that gap in between and link Greenville to either corridor. Until then, I see the project unnecessary. Focus on I-42 then I-87 first.

[sprjus4]

That said, I agree that signing I-587 north-south is stupid.  I can't believe NC doesn't know better than that.

For some damn reason, NCDOT thinks that a 3-di MUST be signed as the same direction as it's parent, despite examples in other states proving otherwise. I wish I was making this up.

Yup...

https://twitter.com/NCDOT/status/1201971710989414406

[tolbs17]

https://www.greenvillenc.gov/home/showdocument?id=20340

http://prntscr.com/16uke7q

They want to bring this part up to interstate standards.

From this account, it appears that the northern half of the Greenville/NC 11 bypass is being considered as a part of the I-587 corridor, although IIRC the designated Interstate segment terminates at the junction of westward US 264 and that bypass.  Alternately, given the recent I-designation activity in this neck of the woods, upgrading the bypass would be the "camel's nose through the door" regarding a full N-S designation between I-42 at Kinston and I-87.  Guess the idea of leaving a spur hanging at Greenville just doesn't appeal much to local boosters!

It won't be part of I-587. That upgrade is listed because Kinston and Greenville had been pushing for an interstate from Kinston to Bethel (likely another I-x87), with the purpose of giving the Global TransPark an interstate connection to the Port of Virginia in Norfolk.

The mayors that started that push are no longer in office, so I'm not sure how big of a priority it is for their successors, though there's been very little public mention of it in recent years.

If anything is to happen to the NC-11 corridor between Kinston and Bethel, the only time I can see it reasonably gaining traction would be in 20-30 years from now, once both I-87 and I-42 are complete in full, to close that gap in between and link Greenville to either corridor. Until then, I see the project unnecessary. Focus on I-42 then I-87 first.

AADT is high enough for a full freeway. Even 264 going to Washington could definitely use it.

[tolbs17]

Are these bridges too narrow for I-587 to be signed on it?

https://www.google.com/maps/@35.6109549,-77.5017152,135m/data=!3m1!1e3

When looking at this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interstate_Highway_standards

The bridges are too narrow. They are not 10 feet. They are 6 feet. The ones going over US-258 are fine even though they were built at the same time.

Existing bridges can remain part of the Interstate system if they have at least 12-foot-wide (3.7 m) lanes with 3.5-foot (1.1 m) shoulder on the left and a 10-foot (3.0 m) shoulder on the right, except that longer bridges can have 3.5 feet (1.1 m) shoulders on both sides. For all bridges, the railing should be upgraded if necessary.

[jdunlop]

Look for a press release on I-587 in the next few days.

[LM117]

That said, I agree that signing I-587 north-south is stupid.  I can't believe NC doesn't know better than that.

For some damn reason, NCDOT thinks that a 3-di MUST be signed as the same direction as it's parent, despite examples in other states proving otherwise. I wish I was making this up.

Yup...

https://twitter.com/NCDOT/status/1201971710989414406

Pure stupidity. By their logic, if the Goldsboro Bypass had been an I-x95 instead of part of I-42, it would be signed N/S. JFC...

[LM117]

Look for a press release on I-587 in the next few days.

Guess that means I-587 shields will be going up east of I-95 now that the upgrade is done.

[bob7374]

For what its worth, the new 2021-22 NC State Map is out and it does not show I-587, see North Carolina thread for link.

[sprjus4]

I've gotten an email from the USRNC contact, and they said that they are in the process of adding the 2016-present USRNC decisions onto the big database sometime later this month.

CORRECTION: The USRNC member emailed me a PDF with the final decisions. Hopefully this link works. Among the changes confirmed are:

I-587 in North Carolina has been conditionally approved.

The AASHTO has approved the designation of Interstate 587 along US-264 between I-95 and US-264 / NC-11 Bypass in Wilson and Pitt County at their Spring 2021 meeting. Furthermore, according to Page 12, the FHWA has also approved.

My guess is now, NCDOT will likely be signing the highway in the coming months.

"North-South" 

[LM117]

I'm not holding my breath, but I really hope NCDOT changes it's mind about signing it N/S instead of E/W. Surely, somebody there has to realize how ridiculous it is. I-587 is about as N/S as I-95 is E/W.

"To get to Raleigh from here, take I-587 North to Zebulon, then hop on I-87 South..."

[roadman65]

I wonder if they'll drop US 264 once it gets done. It's a one stater and doesn't go very far.

[WashuOtaku]

I wonder if they'll drop US 264 once it gets done. It's a one stater and doesn't go very far.

I believe it will revert back to its original alignment, which the current alternate route travels along; because in AASHTO eyes, the mainline and alternate routes are of equal weight. Of course, would need AASHTO approval.

[LM117]

I've gotten an email from the USRNC contact, and they said that they are in the process of adding the 2016-present USRNC decisions onto the big database sometime later this month.

CORRECTION: The USRNC member emailed me a PDF with the final decisions. Hopefully this link works. Among the changes confirmed are:

I-587 in North Carolina has been conditionally approved.

The AASHTO has approved the designation of Interstate 587 along US-264 between I-95 and US-264 / NC-11 Bypass in Wilson and Pitt County at their Spring 2021 meeting. Furthermore, according to Page 12, the FHWA has also approved.

AASHTO has posted all the applications they received for the spring 2021 meeting. NCDOT's application for I-587 can be seen on pages 99 thru 105:

https://route.transportation.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/50/2021/08/USRN-Applications_Compiled_2021.pdf

[bob7374]

I've gotten an email from the USRNC contact, and they said that they are in the process of adding the 2016-present USRNC decisions onto the big database sometime later this month.

CORRECTION: The USRNC member emailed me a PDF with the final decisions. Hopefully this link works. Among the changes confirmed are:

I-587 in North Carolina has been conditionally approved.

The AASHTO has approved the designation of Interstate 587 along US-264 between I-95 and US-264 / NC-11 Bypass in Wilson and Pitt County at their Spring 2021 meeting. Furthermore, according to Page 12, the FHWA has also approved.

AASHTO has posted all the applications they received for the spring 2021 meeting. NCDOT's application for I-587 can be seen on pages 99 thru 105:

https://route.transportation.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/50/2021/08/USRN-Applications_Compiled_2021.pdf

Well, at least in the application NCDOT agrees I-587 is an east-west route:
"The route begins at the I-95 interchange in Wilson County. The route is going east along existing sections of I-795, US 258 and US 264 in Wilson, Greene and Pitt Counties. The route is traveling along existing alignment, which is a multilane, divided, full access control facility. The route is going east. The focal point cities along the route are Wilson and Greenville. The route will cover approximately 37.07 miles. The route ends at the US 264 interchange in Greenville (Pitt County)."

[Interstate 69 Fan]

I've gotten an email from the USRNC contact, and they said that they are in the process of adding the 2016-present USRNC decisions onto the big database sometime later this month.

CORRECTION: The USRNC member emailed me a PDF with the final decisions. Hopefully this link works. Among the changes confirmed are:

I-587 in North Carolina has been conditionally approved.

The AASHTO has approved the designation of Interstate 587 along US-264 between I-95 and US-264 / NC-11 Bypass in Wilson and Pitt County at their Spring 2021 meeting. Furthermore, according to Page 12, the FHWA has also approved.

AASHTO has posted all the applications they received for the spring 2021 meeting. NCDOT's application for I-587 can be seen on pages 99 thru 105:

https://route.transportation.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/50/2021/08/USRN-Applications_Compiled_2021.pdf

So that means I-587 is officially established? Weird that they're going from I-95 east though.

[sparker]

I've gotten an email from the USRNC contact, and they said that they are in the process of adding the 2016-present USRNC decisions onto the big database sometime later this month.

CORRECTION: The USRNC member emailed me a PDF with the final decisions. Hopefully this link works. Among the changes confirmed are:

I-587 in North Carolina has been conditionally approved.

The AASHTO has approved the designation of Interstate 587 along US-264 between I-95 and US-264 / NC-11 Bypass in Wilson and Pitt County at their Spring 2021 meeting. Furthermore, according to Page 12, the FHWA has also approved.

AASHTO has posted all the applications they received for the spring 2021 meeting. NCDOT's application for I-587 can be seen on pages 99 thru 105:

https://route.transportation.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/50/2021/08/USRN-Applications_Compiled_2021.pdf

So that means I-587 is officially established? Weird that they're going from I-95 east though.

Not really; branches are supposed to connect to an existing Interstate route unless a waiver is obtained (like in S. Texas), and US 64 at the west US 264 interchange hasn't been upgraded to Interstate standard yet, so it's not yet I-87.  That being said, there's no reason the section west from I-95 to US 64 couldn't be signed as a "double-ended " Interstate spur like I-140, but apparently NCDOT just doesn't want to connect it to its parent until its parent is actually designated at the junction point; it would be pointless.  If the portion east of I-95/I-795 is signed, at least that puts Greenville onto the Interstate system via the 587 spur. 

[sprjus4]

That being said, there's no reason the section west from I-95 to US 64 couldn't be signed as a "double-ended " Interstate spur like I-140, but apparently NCDOT just doesn't want to connect it to its parent until its parent is actually designated at the junction point; it would be pointless.

US-264 also does not meet interstate standards between US-64 / Future I-87 and I-95, so that is a no-go there until that part is upgraded.

US-264 did not meet interstate standards east of Wilson, however a recent resurfacing project added full shoulders to that portion, bringing it to interstate standards, which is now being officially designated as such.

I-587 connecting to I-95 for the time being, with provisions for eventual connection to the parent (I-87) is similar to how I-369 is branched off of I-30 in Texarkana, TX, but doesn't yet meet its parent (I-69). So it's not totally unprecented.

[sparker]

US-264 also does not meet interstate standards between US-64 / Future I-87 and I-95, so that is a no-go there until that part is upgraded.

US-264 did not meet interstate standards east of Wilson, however a recent resurfacing project added full shoulders to that portion, bringing it to interstate standards, which is now being officially designated as such.

Now it makes sense -- accounting for reasons #1-20 why that section isn't slated to receive signage in the near term!  I'm guessing that when US 64 is brought up to standard for I-87, US 264/I-587 won't be too far behind. 

[LM117]

US-264 also does not meet interstate standards between US-64 / Future I-87 and I-95, so that is a no-go there until that part is upgraded.

US-264 did not meet interstate standards east of Wilson, however a recent resurfacing project added full shoulders to that portion, bringing it to interstate standards, which is now being officially designated as such.

Now it makes sense -- accounting for reasons #1-20 why that section isn't slated to receive signage in the near term!  I'm guessing that when US 64 is brought up to standard for I-87, US 264/I-587 won't be too far behind.

The stretch of US-264 between Zebulon and Sims is gonna take a little bit more than shoulder widening in order to get it to interstate standards. Back in 2016, former NCDOT secretary Nick Tennyson said that the overhead bridge clearances would need increased. Given NCDOT's budget problems right now, I don't see that upgrade happening anytime soon.

Greenville just got what they really wanted in the first place (an interstate connection to I-95), so I don't think there will be much (if any) local pressure from them to finish the remainder of I-587, and I'm pretty sure Wake County couldn't care less about having an interstate connection to Wilson and Greenville.

[fillup420]

Greenville just got what they really wanted in the first place (an interstate connection to I-95), so I don't think there will be much (if any) local pressure from them to finish the remainder of I-587, and I'm pretty sure Wake County couldn't care less about having an interstate connection to Wilson and Greenville.

That is the only reason I-587 even exists, because some bureaucrats in Pitt County felt let out. I still can't wrap my head around why changing the number of a route thats been around for 60+ years and been on freeway alignment for ~30 years makes so much difference. Its all just a waste of money. The road will always be US 264 to me and pretty much everyone else that uses it.

[LM117]

Greenville just got what they really wanted in the first place (an interstate connection to I-95), so I don't think there will be much (if any) local pressure from them to finish the remainder of I-587, and I'm pretty sure Wake County couldn't care less about having an interstate connection to Wilson and Greenville.

That is the only reason I-587 even exists, because some bureaucrats in Pitt County felt let out. I still can't wrap my head around why changing the number of a route thats been around for 60+ years and been on freeway alignment for ~30 years makes so much difference. Its all just a waste of money. The road will always be US 264 to me and pretty much everyone else that uses it.

Greenville wanted it so they could use it as a marketing tool for luring companies to the area. Some (albeit not many) companies won't locate to an area unless it has nearby interstate access, and since US routes can be anything from a 2-lane road to a full-blown freeway, they sometimes write the area off without bothering to find out what quality the US route in the area is in. An interstate shield would automatically tell them that it's a freeway. I'm not saying that I agree that an interstate will automatically cause jobs to come pouring in, but that's their logic.

That said, even if I-587 never happened, I still think it's a good idea to have wide shoulders on a 70mph freeway from a safety standpoint. Personally, my only beef with I-587 is the fact that NCDOT is planning to sign it N/S instead of E/W. They have to be smoking crack.

[sparker]

US-264 also does not meet interstate standards between US-64 / Future I-87 and I-95, so that is a no-go there until that part is upgraded.

US-264 did not meet interstate standards east of Wilson, however a recent resurfacing project added full shoulders to that portion, bringing it to interstate standards, which is now being officially designated as such.

Now it makes sense -- accounting for reasons #1-20 why that section isn't slated to receive signage in the near term!  I'm guessing that when US 64 is brought up to standard for I-87, US 264/I-587 won't be too far behind.

The stretch of US-264 between Zebulon and Sims is gonna take a little bit more than shoulder widening in order to get it to interstate standards. Back in 2016, former NCDOT secretary Nick Tennyson said that the overhead bridge clearances would need increased. Given NCDOT's budget problems right now, I don't see that upgrade happening anytime soon.

Greenville just got what they really wanted in the first place (an interstate connection to I-95), so I don't think there will be much (if any) local pressure from them to finish the remainder of I-587, and I'm pretty sure Wake County couldn't care less about having an interstate connection to Wilson and Greenville.

Bridge clearances usually end up as the main obstacles to upgrading older freeway sections (cf. CA 99 in the San Joaquin Valley); shoulder work, lines of sight, ramp length, etc. can usually be addressed by spot fixes, whereas clearance -- especially for bridges under about 15'3" -- generally require a full reconstruction.  Sometimes a few inches can be dealt with by "lowering the floor" of the carriageway under the bridge, but the clearances of more than a few examples need over a foot additional inside height -- hence rebuilding is often the only practical way, particularly with cast concrete structures. 

[ahj2000]

Anyone with insider knowledge have any idea when we're going to see signs go up?