News:

Thank you for your patience during the Forum downtime while we upgraded the software. Welcome back and see this thread for some new features and other changes to the forum.

Main Menu

Future Interstate 587 (Zebulon-Greenville)

Started by Interstate 69 Fan, November 15, 2016, 07:17:07 PM

Previous topic - Next topic




LM117

Aside from the current project between the Wilson/Greene county line and Greenville, no US-264 upgrade projects were included in the final draft 2020-2029 STIP.

https://www.ncdot.gov/initiatives-policies/Transportation/stip/development/Pages/draft-stip-map.aspx
“I don’t know whether to wind my ass or scratch my watch!” - Jim Cornette

tolbs17

Quote from: LM117 on August 22, 2019, 11:05:30 AM
Aside from the current project between the Wilson/Greene county line and Greenville, no US-264 upgrade projects were included in the final draft 2020-2029 STIP.

https://www.ncdot.gov/initiatives-policies/Transportation/stip/development/Pages/draft-stip-map.aspx

Ah that sucks

LM117

Quote from: LM117 on May 30, 2019, 10:10:06 AM
A contract was awarded for repaving US-264 in Greene and Pitt counties. The project includes shoulder widening, which will bring this stretch up to interstate standards, leaving only the stretch between Sims and Zebulon to contend with. That stretch will need increased bridge clearances in addition to wider shoulders.

https://www.ncdot.gov/news/press-releases/Pages/2019/2019-05-30-pavement-rehab-greene-pitt-counties.aspx

According to a tidbit from this morning's article, the work won't start until September 2020.

http://www.reflector.com/News/2019/09/03/Bypass-on-track-for-November-opening.html

QuoteNext year, DOT also is scheduled to begin work to bring U.S. 264 from Pitt to Wilson counties up to interstate standards as part of a project to establish the new I-587. That work is to begin in September 2020.
“I don’t know whether to wind my ass or scratch my watch!” - Jim Cornette

bob7374

Quote from: LM117 on September 03, 2019, 08:13:12 AM
Quote from: LM117 on May 30, 2019, 10:10:06 AM
A contract was awarded for repaving US-264 in Greene and Pitt counties. The project includes shoulder widening, which will bring this stretch up to interstate standards, leaving only the stretch between Sims and Zebulon to contend with. That stretch will need increased bridge clearances in addition to wider shoulders.

https://www.ncdot.gov/news/press-releases/Pages/2019/2019-05-30-pavement-rehab-greene-pitt-counties.aspx

According to a tidbit from this morning's article, the work won't start until September 2020.

http://www.reflector.com/News/2019/09/03/Bypass-on-track-for-November-opening.html

QuoteNext year, DOT also is scheduled to begin work to bring U.S. 264 from Pitt to Wilson counties up to interstate standards as part of a project to establish the new I-587. That work is to begin in September 2020.
According to the NCDOT Construction Progress Report listing, work on the US 264 upgrade project begins today (9/3/2019). However, it could be that like with the US 70 upgrade work that the shoulder widening work will occur after an initial paving of the existing route, so that may not start until next year. The official completion date for the project is March 2022.

The Ghostbuster

If Interstate 587 is designated as planned, I think US 264's western terminus should be truncated to Greenville, or at the very least, it should be moved back to its original alignment via Alternate US 264 between Zebulon and Greenville (like US 117 was when the freeway became Interstate 795).

sprjus4

Quote from: The Ghostbuster on September 03, 2019, 02:19:35 PM
If Interstate 587 is designated as planned, I think US 264's western terminus should be truncated to Greenville, or at the very least, it should be moved back to its original alignment via Alternate US 264 between Zebulon and Greenville (like US 117 was when the freeway became Interstate 795).
Ditto with US-64 when it's converted into I-87. Parts of US-17 should also be re-routed on their old alignments as well once I-87 upgrades are completed up that way as well.

tolbs17


bob7374


LM117

#211
Quote from: bob7374 on September 30, 2019, 11:56:57 AM
The project to widen the shoulders along US 264 in Pitt County to interstate standards began this morning:
https://www.ncdot.gov/news/press-releases/Pages/2019/2019-09-30-pitt-county-highway-upgrades.aspx

Good! Earlier articles made it sound like it wouldn't begin until late next year. Even if US-264 wasn't planned to become an interstate, I think having wide outside shoulders in case of an emergency is a very good thing, especially on a 70mph freeway.

This just leaves the section between Sims and Zebulon to contend with. The previous NCDOT secretary said that section would need increased overhead bridge clearances in addition to wider shoulders.
“I don’t know whether to wind my ass or scratch my watch!” - Jim Cornette

tolbs17

#212
Quote from: bob7374 on September 30, 2019, 11:56:57 AM
The project to widen the shoulders along US 264 in Pitt County to interstate standards began this morning:
https://www.ncdot.gov/news/press-releases/Pages/2019/2019-09-30-pitt-county-highway-upgrades.aspx
So does that mean I-587 shields can go up after the shoulders are widened? This is exciting. Maybe you can move 264 back on its old alignment (alternate) and it can come back on the freeway at Wilson. This is my temporary proposal.

Like this
http://prntscr.com/pek7vw

sprjus4

Quote from: mrhappy1261 on October 03, 2019, 05:41:46 PM
So does that mean I-587 shields can go up after the shoulders are widened?
Since US-264 would be completed to interstate standards between I-95 / I-795, yes, if NCDOT were to follow through. For the time being, it would only be from the I-795 split eastward, or maybe partially overlapping I-795 and ending at I-95. But it would not going further west than I-95 until the segment to Raleigh is upgradedz

bob7374

Quote from: sprjus4 on October 04, 2019, 06:05:33 AM
Quote from: mrhappy1261 on October 03, 2019, 05:41:46 PM
So does that mean I-587 shields can go up after the shoulders are widened?
Since US-264 would be completed to interstate standards between I-95 / I-795, yes, if NCDOT were to follow through. For the time being, it would only be from the I-795 split eastward, or maybe partially overlapping I-795 and ending at I-95. But it would not going further west than I-95 until the segment to Raleigh is upgraded.
Given what was done in Greensboro, with the signing of only I-795 along the future southeastern segment of I-840 between US 29 and I-40/85, waiting for the entire loop to be completed before adding I-840 signs, I would suspect they would, if they do sign I-587 at the conclusion of the shoulder upgrade work, only sign it to the east of I-795.

LM117

#215
Greenville has been very adamant for years about wanting an interstate connection to I-95. There's a good chance they may want NCDOT to sign I-587 as far as I-95 so that I-587 shields can be "advertised" on the BGS on I-95 at the interchange.
“I don’t know whether to wind my ass or scratch my watch!” - Jim Cornette

tolbs17

Also for Greenville's northern bypass, 264 would probably be moved on its old alighment (with the exception of the part from 11 to 264 "Martin Luther King Jr Highway") which is Greenville Blvd and you can have 13 and 11 run on the bypass when 264 gets moved off. I remember Google Maps saying that I-587 would go on there but it would look stupid if it really did.

Also for you LM117, One time it was proposed as I-595. I'm not sure if that number can be used before they try using I-587 because the part from Wendell to Zebulon is not up to interstate standards yet.

Roadsguy

Cross-posting from the main North Carolina thread, I obtained the signing plans for the Greenville Southwest Bypass (R-2250) from a public records request. The plans include future signs that will eventually completely replace existing signs for westbound 264 at the cloverleaf. Not only do the plans confirm again what we already knew about 587 ending at the cloverleaf, but they also reveal that the new Interstate will be signed north-south, with northbound following westbound 264. I don't think I ever saw this mentioned anywhere before. It seems... questionable.

Mileage-based exit numbering implies the existence of mileage-cringe exit numbering.

LM117

#218
Quote from: Roadsguy on December 02, 2019, 10:47:09 AM
Cross-posting from the main North Carolina thread, I obtained the signing plans for the Greenville Southwest Bypass (R-2250) from a public records request. The plans include future signs that will eventually completely replace existing signs for westbound 264 at the cloverleaf. Not only do the plans confirm again what we already knew about 587 ending at the cloverleaf, but they also reveal that the new Interstate will be signed north-south, with northbound following westbound 264. I don't think I ever saw this mentioned anywhere before. It seems... questionable.



"Questionable" is an understatement. This makes no sense at all.
“I don’t know whether to wind my ass or scratch my watch!” - Jim Cornette

tolbs17

Add Raleigh in there too!! And I hate how they concurrent 264 with 587. 264 should go back on its old route!! Make US 264 alt "US 264!"

I'm not sure how they were thinking!!

:banghead: :banghead:

sprjus4

#220
I-87 I can somewhat understand... but I-587?

The "northern" terminus is 15 miles north of the "southern" terminus, and about 50 miles west of the "southern" terminus.

On the other hand, I-87's "northern" terminus is 130 miles east of the "southern terminus", and 70 miles north of the "southern" terminus. Also, geographically, from either terminus (I-64 or I-40), you're going either "south" or "north" to the other state.

The only logical reason is because I-587 connects Greenville traffic directly to I-95 NORTH, but then it also connects to I-95 SOUTH, so that wouldn't make sense either.

EDIT - I tweeted NCDOT to see if I can get any response about why north-south is preferred over east-west, but doubt it. Might send an email directly to NCDOT if nothing comes of this.
EDIT #2 - Surprisingly got a response, they said they will get back with an answer tomorrow after "research".
https://twitter.com/NCDOT/status/1201620224954503174

tolbs17

Quote from: sprjus4 on December 02, 2019, 04:36:09 PM
I-87 I can somewhat understand... but I-587?

The "northern" terminus is 15 miles north of the "southern" terminus, and about 50 miles west of the "southern" terminus.

On the other hand, I-87's "northern" terminus is 130 miles east of the "southern terminus", and 70 miles north of the "southern" terminus. Also, geographically, from either terminus (I-64 or I-40), you're going either "south" or "north" to the other state.

The only logical reason is because I-587 connects Greenville traffic directly to I-95 NORTH, but then it also connects to I-95 SOUTH, so that wouldn't make sense either.

EDIT - I tweeted NCDOT to see if I can get any response about why north-south is preferred over east-west, but doubt it. Might send an email directly to NCDOT if nothing comes of this.
Honestly, I wish I-44 or even I-46 was planned so we can honestly fix that issue. Or are you trying to say it should say I-587 WEST and I-587 EAST?

Roadsguy

Quote from: sprjus4 on December 02, 2019, 04:36:09 PM
I-87 I can somewhat understand... but I-587?

The "northern" terminus is 15 miles north of the "southern" terminus, and about 50 miles west of the "southern" terminus.

On the other hand, I-87's "northern" terminus is 130 miles east of the "southern terminus", and 70 miles north of the "southern" terminus. Also, geographically, from either terminus (I-64 or I-40), you're going either "south" or "north" to the other state.

The only logical reason is because I-587 connects Greenville traffic directly to I-95 NORTH, but then it also connects to I-95 SOUTH, so that wouldn't make sense either.

EDIT - I tweeted NCDOT to see if I can get any response about why north-south is preferred over east-west, but doubt it. Might send an email directly to NCDOT if nothing comes of this.
EDIT #2 - Surprisingly got a response, they said they will get back with an answer tomorrow after "research".
https://twitter.com/NCDOT/status/1201620224954503174

I demand royalties for my screenshot. /s

Seriously, though, it'll be interesting to see if anything comes of that. Maybe it'll turn out to just be an error. (This is the first signing plan sheet I've seen that includes I-587, though I don't know if it's the first ever to have gone out to bid.)
Mileage-based exit numbering implies the existence of mileage-cringe exit numbering.

sprjus4

Quote from: Roadsguy on December 02, 2019, 05:33:31 PM
Seriously, though, it'll be interesting to see if anything comes of that. Maybe it'll turn out to just be an error. (This is the first signing plan sheet I've seen that includes I-587, though I don't know if it's the first ever to have gone out to bid.)
Well, it could indeed only be a few more years until we start seeing I-587 shields in person. Roughly 16 miles of US-264 is currently being upgraded to interstate standards between NC-11 Bypass and west of Farmville with a project resurfacing the highway and widening the outside shoulders from 4 feet to 10 feet full-depth paved shoulders, and the remaining 22 miles to I-95 already meets interstate standards. Once the upgrade project is completed, I-587 could be signed from I-95 eastward (or southward  :spin:).

LM117

#224
I hope it's just an error. No amount of "research" would justify signing I-587 N/S just because of the short dip between I-795 and Sims. Should I-85 be signed E/W because of it's alignment between Greensboro and Hillsborough? :pan:

There's been speculation on City-Data forum that NCDOT did it because it's an odd number and odd-numbered interstates are signed N/S. Problem with that theory is that rule only applies to 2-digit interstates. 3-digit interstates can be signed in any direction, no matter the number.
“I don’t know whether to wind my ass or scratch my watch!” - Jim Cornette



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.