North Carolina

[tolbs17]

How does this part NOT meet interstate standards?

https://malmeroads.net/ncfutints/i87exits.html

http://prntscr.com/12bwzfo

https://www.google.com/maps/@35.8275356,-77.1385467,3a,75y,82.79h,73.15t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sYgyWMmGp72pQzro8W5vY2w!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

[Mapmikey]

Is that left shoulder 4 ft?

I'm looking from an iPhone but it looks too small to me.

[tolbs17]

Is that left shoulder 4 ft?

I'm looking from an iPhone but it looks too small to me.

Yes.

[sprjus4]

Is that left shoulder 4 ft?

I'm looking from an iPhone but it looks too small to me.

US-64 between Tarboro and Williamston was the newest portion built after 1991, and was constructed to interstate standards. The only thing preventing designation is, obviously, it does not currently connect to another interstate highway as US-64 west of Tarboro does not meet interstate standards.

[tolbs17]

Is that left shoulder 4 ft?

I'm looking from an iPhone but it looks too small to me.

US-64 between Tarboro and Williamston was the newest portion built after 1991, and was constructed to interstate standards. The only thing preventing designation is, obviously, it does not currently connect to another interstate highway as US-64 west of Tarboro does not meet interstate standards.

And it looks like bob put "no" for it meeting interstate standards.

[froggie]

My first guess would be perhaps something with the substructure or pavement depth....things one (especially non-engineers) would not be able to see on the surface...

[sprjus4]

Likely just a minor error on his site. NCDOT's feasibility segment for US-64 did not recommend any needed upgrades for that portion east of Tarboro.

Additionally, a section added much later to his page, lists the following.

US 13/64 from Edgecombe/Martin County Line to US 17 in Williamston

Route Type: Interstate Standard Freeway    Length: 18.4 Miles    Status: Complete (signage could be updated)

The US 13/64 freeway from the Edgecombe/Martin County Line was built to interstate standards. The feasibility study only recommends possible signage updates and the addition of an ITS system costing $2.2 million. They also suggest the possible reconstruction of the NC 125 (Prison Camp Road) interchange which would add another $2.5 million to the total.

[tolbs17]

So that's a mistake that bob put it looks like.

[sparker]

Likely just a minor error on his site. NCDOT's feasibility segment for US-64 did not recommend any needed upgrades for that portion east of Tarboro.

Additionally, a section added much later to his page, lists the following.

US 13/64 from Edgecombe/Martin County Line to US 17 in Williamston

Route Type: Interstate Standard Freeway    Length: 18.4 Miles    Status: Complete (signage could be updated)

The US 13/64 freeway from the Edgecombe/Martin County Line was built to interstate standards. The feasibility study only recommends possible signage updates and the addition of an ITS system costing $2.2 million. They also suggest the possible reconstruction of the NC 125 (Prison Camp Road) interchange which would add another $2.5 million to the total.

What is interesting is the fact that the portion of the US 64 freeway that was built to Interstate standards was constructed after the facility was designated a portion of High Priority Corridor #13 back in 1991.  One may take an educated guess that when that designation occurred someone at or with influence with NCDOT had the eventual Interstate designation in mind and revised the freeway plans accordingly.  It just took a quarter-century for such a designation to actually occur. 

[tolbs17]

Likely just a minor error on his site. NCDOT's feasibility segment for US-64 did not recommend any needed upgrades for that portion east of Tarboro.

Additionally, a section added much later to his page, lists the following.

US 13/64 from Edgecombe/Martin County Line to US 17 in Williamston

Route Type: Interstate Standard Freeway    Length: 18.4 Miles    Status: Complete (signage could be updated)

The US 13/64 freeway from the Edgecombe/Martin County Line was built to interstate standards. The feasibility study only recommends possible signage updates and the addition of an ITS system costing $2.2 million. They also suggest the possible reconstruction of the NC 125 (Prison Camp Road) interchange which would add another $2.5 million to the total.

What is interesting is the fact that the portion of the US 64 freeway that was built to Interstate standards was constructed after the facility was designated a portion of High Priority Corridor #13 back in 1991.  One may take an educated guess that when that designation occurred someone at or with influence with NCDOT had the eventual Interstate designation in mind and revised the freeway plans accordingly.  It just took a quarter-century for such a designation to actually occur.

The old plan was to route it on NC 11 which is a forest and there's nothing there.

[sprjus4]

Likely just a minor error on his site. NCDOT's feasibility segment for US-64 did not recommend any needed upgrades for that portion east of Tarboro.

Additionally, a section added much later to his page, lists the following.

US 13/64 from Edgecombe/Martin County Line to US 17 in Williamston

Route Type: Interstate Standard Freeway    Length: 18.4 Miles    Status: Complete (signage could be updated)

The US 13/64 freeway from the Edgecombe/Martin County Line was built to interstate standards. The feasibility study only recommends possible signage updates and the addition of an ITS system costing $2.2 million. They also suggest the possible reconstruction of the NC 125 (Prison Camp Road) interchange which would add another $2.5 million to the total.

What is interesting is the fact that the portion of the US 64 freeway that was built to Interstate standards was constructed after the facility was designated a portion of High Priority Corridor #13 back in 1991.  One may take an educated guess that when that designation occurred someone at or with influence with NCDOT had the eventual Interstate designation in mind and revised the freeway plans accordingly.  It just took a quarter-century for such a designation to actually occur.

Also interestingly, the fact that the US-17 bypasses of Windsor, Edenton, and Elizabeth City, all built or upgraded after 1991, were not built to interstate standards.

Honestly, all new location freeway segments should be built to interstate standards by default - interstate designation or not. I believe this is the method that is finally happening on most new freeway bypasses in the state.

[tolbs17]

Likely just a minor error on his site. NCDOT's feasibility segment for US-64 did not recommend any needed upgrades for that portion east of Tarboro.

Additionally, a section added much later to his page, lists the following.

US 13/64 from Edgecombe/Martin County Line to US 17 in Williamston

Route Type: Interstate Standard Freeway    Length: 18.4 Miles    Status: Complete (signage could be updated)

The US 13/64 freeway from the Edgecombe/Martin County Line was built to interstate standards. The feasibility study only recommends possible signage updates and the addition of an ITS system costing $2.2 million. They also suggest the possible reconstruction of the NC 125 (Prison Camp Road) interchange which would add another $2.5 million to the total.

What is interesting is the fact that the portion of the US 64 freeway that was built to Interstate standards was constructed after the facility was designated a portion of High Priority Corridor #13 back in 1991.  One may take an educated guess that when that designation occurred someone at or with influence with NCDOT had the eventual Interstate designation in mind and revised the freeway plans accordingly.  It just took a quarter-century for such a designation to actually occur.

Also interestingly, the fact that the US-17 bypasses of Windsor, Edenton, and Elizabeth City, all built or upgraded after 1991, were not built to interstate standards.

Honestly, all new location freeway segments should be built to interstate standards by default - interstate designation or not. I believe this is the method that is finally happening on most new freeway bypasses in the state.

Like the Greenville Southwest Bypass and the CF Harvey Parkway ones.

[sprjus4]

Another thing I'll add - even divided highway widenings should feature full shoulders. That is still something NCDOT does not factor in on current and even future planned projects.

The only recent example I can think of was the US-17 Maysville and Pollocksville project, the segments constructed around the towns were built to full interstate standards, and the section of US-17 they widened between was also done with full outer shoulders - which is rare to see in North Carolina.

[tolbs17]

Another thing I'll add - even divided highway widenings should feature full shoulders. That is still something NCDOT does not factor in on current and even future planned projects.

The only recent example I can think of was the US-17 Maysville and Pollocksville project, the segments constructed around the towns were built to full interstate standards, and the section of US-17 they widened between was also done with full outer shoulders - which is rare to see in North Carolina.

There's another one here in Greenville!

https://www.google.com/maps/@35.6651323,-77.3616224,3a,75y,27.39h,75.1t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sIUKQeDmdmfc7ENXghw11JQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

[architect77]

Another thing I'll add - even divided highway widenings should feature full shoulders. That is still something NCDOT does not factor in on current and even future planned projects.

The only recent example I can think of was the US-17 Maysville and Pollocksville project, the segments constructed around the towns were built to full interstate standards, and the section of US-17 they widened between was also done with full outer shoulders - which is rare to see in North Carolina.

There's another one here in Greenville!

https://www.google.com/maps/@35.6651323,-77.3616224,3a,75y,27.39h,75.1t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sIUKQeDmdmfc7ENXghw11JQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

I thought the same thing about the US401 widening from Raleigh to Louisburg. The shoulder is only a 2' or so wide like a 2 lane highway. But then I remembered it's officially a superstreet design, so I guess they wouldn't.

But I'm sure every additional foot of width costs a lot of money. They have to make the underpinning or foundation wider too. All in all I guess you could calculate how much each foot of width costs and then it's like adding 30-40% more pavement and 25% more total cost of the project.

That's significant.

[tolbs17]

Another thing I'll add - even divided highway widenings should feature full shoulders. That is still something NCDOT does not factor in on current and even future planned projects.

The only recent example I can think of was the US-17 Maysville and Pollocksville project, the segments constructed around the towns were built to full interstate standards, and the section of US-17 they widened between was also done with full outer shoulders - which is rare to see in North Carolina.

There's another one here in Greenville!

https://www.google.com/maps/@35.6651323,-77.3616224,3a,75y,27.39h,75.1t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sIUKQeDmdmfc7ENXghw11JQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

I thought the same thing about the US401 widening from Raleigh to Louisburg. The shoulder is only a 2' or so wide like a 2 lane highway. But then I remembered it's officially a superstreet design, so I guess they wouldn't.

But I'm sure every additional foot of width costs a lot of money. They have to make the underpinning or foundation wider too. All in all I guess you could calculate how much each foot of width costs and then it's like adding 30-40% more pavement and 25% more total cost of the project.

That's significant.

That's prolly why they didn't do it. Same thing with rumble strips.

[architect77]

Shoulders aren't necessary anyway. Raleigh's beltline Westbound between Six Forks and Crabtree Valley made out just fine, lol.

Beltline_1967 by Stephen Edwards, on Flickr

[tolbs17]

Shoulders aren't necessary anyway. Raleigh's beltline Westbound between Six Forks and Crabtree Valley made out just fine, lol.

Beltline_1967 by Stephen Edwards, on Flickr

How about if one pulls to the side??

[D-Dey65]

I-95 South closed in Robeson County; Traffic detoured to U.S. 301 – Interstate 95 is closed at Exit 10 in Robeson County after a void was discovered under a section of roadway spanning Boyce Road. NCDOT crews will be working around the clock to perform emergency repairs. Traffic is being detoured to U.S. Highway 301, and reconnecting to I-95 at Exit 7

Looks like I-95 will be dealing with a MAJOR issue and will cause backups for days! Reopening date is Saturday! 
Source: https://drivenc.gov/?type=incident&id=606561

Glad I wasn't up there. I did a GSV scan, and I see that bridge is also for an abandoned railway line. Is there a plan to convert this into a rail trail,or something else? Because if not, maybe when it is rebuilt, it should be kept two lanes underneath.

Even if they leave the ROW for future use, they could probably just get longer beams that don't include those pylons on the sides.

[LM117]

A bill is brewing in the state House that would make the 'zipper merge' law.

https://www.wral.com/bill-would-make-zipper-merge-the-law-in-nc/19672570/

[sprjus4]

A bill is brewing in the state House that would make the 'zipper merge' law.

https://www.wral.com/bill-would-make-zipper-merge-the-law-in-nc/19672570/

Good, hopefully it passes.

[LM117]

Looks like the I-440 improvements project is halfway finished.

https://www.wral.com/i-440-widening-project-about-halfway-finished/19672774/

[tolbs17]

Looks like the I-440 improvements project is halfway finished.

https://www.wral.com/i-440-widening-project-about-halfway-finished/19672774/

Should take until 2023. Possibly sooner

[Dirt Roads]

A bill is brewing in the state House that would make the 'zipper merge' law.

https://www.wral.com/bill-would-make-zipper-merge-the-law-in-nc/19672570/

Not sure if it was already discussed, but NCDOT tested a zipper merge at the junction of the Durham Freeway with I-85 southbound [westbound] back in August 2016.  This only lasted a few months, and the original merge signage was restored.  This had only been a problem on I-40 until after school started back in 2015 and I-85 started getting worse congestion.  We usually use the back roads between Durham and Hillsborough in the afternoons (much shorter distance for our typical trips), so I tried the zipper merge once to "clinch" it.  It seemed to work a bit better, so I'm not sure why NCDOT reverted back.

There was some weird Zipper Merge signage in use:  https://www.newsobserver.com/news/local/community/durham-news/article92792737.html

[ran4sh]

I wonder what the actual law regarding zipper merge (in places where it is law) really is. For example, what are you supposed to do if your car is next to another car, you can't tell which of the two cars is in front, and there's no traffic in front of you so you have no idea if it's the left lane's turn or the right lane's turn. For this reason, the standard merge law (either left lane yields, or right lane yields, per signage) seems safer.