Regional Boards > Southeast

Future Interstate 587 (Zebulon-Greenville)

<< < (79/91) > >>

bob7374:

--- Quote from: LM117 on August 18, 2021, 12:38:48 PM ---
--- Quote from: sprjus4 on August 10, 2021, 02:43:02 AM ---
--- Quote from: Rover_0 on August 09, 2021, 03:53:49 PM ---Iíve 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.

--- End quote ---
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.
--- End quote ---

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

--- End quote ---
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:

--- Quote from: LM117 on August 18, 2021, 12:38:48 PM ---
--- Quote from: sprjus4 on August 10, 2021, 02:43:02 AM ---
--- Quote from: Rover_0 on August 09, 2021, 03:53:49 PM ---Iíve 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.

--- End quote ---
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.
--- End quote ---

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

--- End quote ---

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

sparker:

--- Quote from: Interstate 69 Fan on August 18, 2021, 04:16:11 PM ---
--- Quote from: LM117 on August 18, 2021, 12:38:48 PM ---
--- Quote from: sprjus4 on August 10, 2021, 02:43:02 AM ---
--- Quote from: Rover_0 on August 09, 2021, 03:53:49 PM ---Iíve 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.

--- End quote ---
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.
--- End quote ---

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

--- End quote ---

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

--- End quote ---

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:

--- Quote from: sparker on August 18, 2021, 04:26:22 PM ---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.
--- End quote ---
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:

--- Quote from: sprjus4 on August 18, 2021, 05:44:33 PM ---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.

--- End quote ---

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. 

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page

Go to full version