Quote from: Grzrd on May 01, 2011, 03:17:30 PM
Here is a link to NCDOT's I-74 Feasibility Study for this area (click on the I-74 Feasibility Study Report pdf link toward the bottom of the page):
http://www.ncdot.org/projects/I74feasibility/
There are maps on pages 31/46 and 32/46 of the above pdf which shows how I-74 would fit into North Carolina's looooong-term transportation strategy. The maps include an extension of I-20 from Florence, SC to Wilmington; I-74 and I-20 multiplex for a relatively short distance, and then I-74 branches off and I-20 continues into Wilmington. Also, the maps assume I-74 will have a terminus in Myrtle Beach; I-74, after leaving I-20, goes down to the US 17 corridor and follows it to Myrtle Beach.
(above quote from Interstate 73/74 (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=18.msg99441#msg99441) thread)
Here is a snip of one of the above-referenced maps that shows the recommended extension of I-74 to Myrtle Beach:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2F59pUkL6.png&hash=7167fdb7f7e9ae25fe0a18be8315b00078d8befd)
North Carolina is waaaay ahead of South Carolina in regard to I-73 and I-74. The "Interstate 73/74" thread primarily receives posts about North Carolina developments. I decided to start this thread in order to have a separate place for South Carolina's early stage developments (it should be similar to the "I-73 in VA" thread in that developments will be relatively few and far between).
Above said, this Oct. 22 article (http://www.thestate.com/2013/10/22/3052588/haley-touts-i-73-project-as-way.html) caught my eye. It primarily has no real news about I-73: a governor running for re-election tells Myrtle Beach constituents that she supports I-73 as long as the feds pay for it (dog bites man). However, the article also mentions that the governor had to field a question about "a connector with Interstate 74 in North Carolina.":
Quote
Bringing Interstate 73 to the Grand Strand would help increase business opportunities and jobs, Gov. Nikki Haley told constituents in Myrtle Beach on Monday ....
Connie Starner of Murrells Inlet said she told Haley that many people don't even want to vacation on the Grand Strand because they don't want to drive here on the smaller roads.
"We really need an interstate," she said.
Starner said Haley told her that while she supports the construction of I-73, funding the project is something that needs to be done by the U.S. Congress, something she also told those at the Realtors conference about the suggestion of constructing a connector with Interstate 74 in North Carolina.
Starner was one of about six constituents who scored one-on-one meetings with the governor Monday in Myrtle Beach. Those interested in sharing concerns with Haley had to schedule appointments Friday at 9 a.m. and the spots were filled within 10 minutes, according to callers who weren't able to get an appointment with Haley but showed up to the Myrtle Beach Area Chamber of Commerce for a chance to share a word with the governor.
I know an extension of I-74 comes up every so often in roadgeek circles, but I was surprised that the governor received a question about it.
Since both I-73 and I-74 were mentioned in the article, so begins a new thread (unless the mods want to merge it into the larger thread).
Or, maybe this post should somehow be merged into the recent Status on Interstate entering Myrtle Beach area (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=10613.msg251939#msg251939), with that thread being moved to the "Southeast" page (although the intent of this thread is to cover both corridors throughout their entirety in South Carolina).
Is that a multiplexing with I-20/US 74 I see on that map? Is SC down with that (I'm sure Wilmington would be)?
Quote from: DeaconG on October 23, 2013, 03:57:27 PM
Is that a multiplexing with I-20/US 74 I see on that map? Is SC down with that (I'm sure Wilmington would be)?
http://people.duke.edu/~rmalme/i74seg18.html
Quote
As part of Gov. Easley's 2003 proposal (see text and map link above), US 74-76 from Whiteville to Wilmington would be upgraded to an interstate, and be designated as part of an extension of I-20 from Florence, SC to the Wilmington Outer Loop (I-140) (As of now there is no proposal for I-20 to take over I-140's route to I-40, I-20 may continue, however along US 74-76 to downtown Wilmington as shown on a Strategic Highway Corridors map of the area). I-20 would total about 60 miles in NC and I-74 and I-20 would be routed together for 22 miles from just west of Whiteville to near Bolton. There does not appear to be much support for this plan in South Carolina, however. On March 22, 2004 Rep. Mike McIntyre held a series of "I-74/I-20 Rallies" in his district, which includes Wilmington, to help jump start lobbying efforts for building I-20. According to an article written covering the event, the I-20 proposal was losing steam due to SC's determined efforts to get funds for I-73, a road that would parallel much of the proposed I-20 routing. An SCDOT spokesman is quoted in the same article as confirming I-73 is the top priority and saying "(t)here are no plans or thoughts of the I-20 extension." (13) NCDOT at the SCDOT I-73 Summit in February 2005 gave in on having I-20 be part of the discussions about final routing for I-73 and I-74, allowing for an agreement on border routings to occur, see I-74 Segment 19 and I-73 Segment 13. (14) Though some officials are still optimistic. (17) The new SAFETEA-LU transportation act signed by President Bush in August 2005 contains $5 million for NC to study extending the I-20 route to Wilmington. SC did not request similar moneys, however. As it looks now, I-20 will not be routed east of Florence any time soon.
Why don't they just truncate U.S. 74/76?
I don't know. this is NC we are talking about.
But, I am glad SCDOT is focusing on I-73 first as they should be doing. I-74 is not going to get extended through southeast NC anytime soon due to its proposed routing goes across awfully a lot of wetlands (as you see on the proposed routing map).
But Myrtle Beach doesn't need 2 interstates going there. I would keep I-73 and forget I-74. I also heard they are planning to have another road built going west of SC 22 and US 501 interchange as "SELL" which it will form a beltway around the Myrtle Beach area.
Quote from: Grzrd on October 23, 2013, 09:39:42 AM
Here is a snip of one of the above-referenced maps that shows the recommended extension of I-74 to Myrtle Beach .... this Oct. 22 article (http://www.thestate.com/2013/10/22/3052588/haley-touts-i-73-project-as-way.html) ... mentions that the governor had to field a question about "a connector with Interstate 74 in North Carolina".
This TV video report (http://www.wmbfnews.com/story/23761570/governor-nikki-haley-makes-a-push-for-i-73) is primarily about Gov. Haley's support for I-73, but it also includes a map that shows US 74 ending in Wilmington:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FYX76Vfm.jpg&hash=4e2b26adc0b40bf053ef054cce6109d5bb335b47)
Although the map does label the route to Wilmington as US 74 instead of I-74, maybe the mapmaker intended an I-74 label and this map explains why Gov. Haley had to field a question about a "connector" to I-74 instead of I-74 itself (I-73 is not expressly labeled in South Carolina, either)?
Quote from: Strider on October 23, 2013, 08:13:17 PMBut Myrtle Beach doesn't need 2 interstates going there. I would keep I-73 and forget I-74.
I-74 is a crappy number, and the route in NC is stupid, but a freeway along the coast towards Wilmington, while not as important as I-95 to Myrtle Beach, is probably more important for SC than I-73 north of I-95.
I-20 to Wilmington via Myrtle Beach! I-73 can just end at I-95 when it's done.
Quote from: english si on October 24, 2013, 08:16:48 AM
Quote from: Strider on October 23, 2013, 08:13:17 PMBut Myrtle Beach doesn't need 2 interstates going there. I would keep I-73 and forget I-74.
I-74 is a crappy number, and the route in NC is stupid, but a freeway along the coast towards Wilmington, while not as important as I-95 to Myrtle Beach, is probably more important for SC than I-73 north of I-95.
I-20 to Wilmington via Myrtle Beach! I-73 can just end at I-95 when it's done.
Yes, a freeway along the coast is important. That's US 17, not I-74.
Quote from: Steve on October 24, 2013, 08:31:33 AMYes, a freeway along the coast is important. That's US 17, not I-74.
However the US17 freeway project in SC is currently called I-74.
Also, I'm pretty sure I stated that the number is crap, and the I-74 route in NC is stupid, and that I'm thinking of a freeway from Myrtle Beach towards/to Wilmington...
That I didn't use the phrase US17 is neither here nor there - I described a US17 freeway in all but number (I gave it I-20).
Which is not needed really. just US 17 works just fine. SCDOT can build a expressway along SC 31/US 17 and move US 17 to replace SC 31.
I agree that despite me from NC, the routing of I-74 is stupid. However, I don't see I-74 being extended east of I-95 officially anytime soon (despite NCDOT already updating exit numbers near Whiteville area).
I care more about SCDOT finishing up I-73 as it is their important route (it should still have extended I-20 at the first place).
Quote from: Strider on October 24, 2013, 12:08:10 PM
just US 17 works just fine.
FWIW I checked the National I-73/I-74/I-75 Corridor Association (http://www.i73.com/) website to see what version of I-74 they are currently promoting. In looking at their South Carolina map (http://www.i73.com/docs/southcarolina.pdf) and their North Carolina map (http://www.i73.com/images/NC_sm.jpg), it looks like they are
not promoting the notion of I-74 in South Carolina. Instead they have the eastern terminus of I-74 being at US 17 approximately halfway between Wilmington and the state line.
South Carolina:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FRadW07V.png&hash=70832d7a7586b134c0af081870336f28b6c33d50)
North Carolina:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FSBFQnLS.jpg&hash=ea05bca186958467be27e2ded215adeab80c5fcb)
So, maybe the "I-74 Connector" would simply be an upgrade to US 17?
edit
Quote from: Grzrd on October 23, 2013, 09:56:54 PM
This TV video report (http://www.wmbfnews.com/story/23761570/governor-nikki-haley-makes-a-push-for-i-73) is primarily about Gov. Haley's support for I-73, but it also includes a map that shows US 74 ending in Wilmington
It looks like the map in the story is the National I-73/I-74/I-75 Corridor Association's North Carolina construction progress map (http://www.i73.com/docs/construction_map_northcarolina.pdf).
Quote from: Grzrd on October 24, 2013, 01:20:40 PM
I checked the National I-73/I-74/I-75 Corridor Association (http://www.i73.com/) website ... they have the eastern terminus of I-74 being at US 17 approximately halfway between Wilmington and the state line.
On the other hand, this October 12, 2013 article (http://www.starnewsonline.com/article/20131012/ARTICLES/131019888?p=1&tc=pg) reports on a local Brunswick County N.C. official's description of "current plans" for the I-74 corridor as having I-74 go "into South Carolina":
Quote
Jim Bradshaw, executive director of the Brunswick County Economic Development Commission, said a new I-74 would "make it easier and less expensive for new and existing industries from other parts of North Carolina" to truck freight to and from the Port of Wilmington ....
One of the goals of the 74 Economic Development Corridor Alliance is to enlist state and federal officials and all counties along U.S. 74 to promote building of the interstate.
Current plans are to route I-74 through Whiteville east to Bolton, and then south toward Supply running along N.C. 211. From there it would go southwest through Shallotte and on into South Carolina.
Bradshaw said he would like to see the interstate continue east from Bolton to the new Wilmington Bypass first, and later go southwest to South Carolina.
According to the state Department of Transportation, there is no funding or construction date for any additional work on the I-74 corridor.
Lots of plans and not a lot of money..................
Which is why SCDOT should just focus on I-73 first. Building a connection to Myrtle Beach from I-95 is the most important section that needs to happen. I-74 can come in later.
I-74 southeast of Bolton is currently on ice, but the plan is to connect with South Carolina along or parallel to US 17.
There is no plans to extend I-20 to Wilmington, NC; the map at the top of the thread is nearly a decade old, NCDOT has no projects or maps currently on site that mention I-20.
Yes, I-73 is a main focus for South Carolina, it has an obvious impact to the state compared to I-74.
Quote from: english si on October 24, 2013, 08:36:55 AM
Quote from: Steve on October 24, 2013, 08:31:33 AMYes, a freeway along the coast is important. That's US 17, not I-74.
However the US17 freeway project in SC is currently called I-74.
Also, I'm pretty sure I stated that the number is crap, and the I-74 route in NC is stupid, and that I'm thinking of a freeway from Myrtle Beach towards/to Wilmington...
That I didn't use the phrase US17 is neither here nor there - I described a US17 freeway in all but number (I gave it I-20).
Welcome to the real world of roading! Many of us here in other posts detest the number I-74 altogether, but we do appreciate the freeways being created by it.
For example the US 52 freeway from Winston- Salem to Mount Airy could have been a x77 or x40. I-28, I-32,..., up to I-38 could be used from Rockingham eastward. Yeah you are right about it being stupid as the whole master plan has I-73 or I-74 meeting and intertwining several times. Considering that one road is N-S and the other is E-W as well is very strange. Then both ending up at Myrtle Beach to boot!
This article (http://www.therepublic.com/w/SC--Interstate-73-Tolls) reports that SCDOT may be soliciting proposals for a new I-73 toll study in the relatively near future:
Quote
It appears the state Transportation Commission will again study whether to use tolls to pay for building Interstate 73 through northeastern South Carolina.
Transportation Commissioner Mike Wooten represents the state's 7th Congressional District where the interstate is planned and says he will ask for a study next month. The Department of Transportation staff is preparing a request for proposals for the study expected to cost as much as $200,000.
Wooten said tolls would probably be combined with other funding to pay for the road.
"Tolling is not going to be enough to pay for it," he said.
A smaller, less extensive study of using tolls was done in the last decade.
Two other articles:
http://www.myrtlebeachonline.com/2014/03/26/4123172/dot-to-study-impact-tolls-could.html
http://www.wbtw.com/story/25094159/transportation-officials-consider-study
If it is any means to get I-73 built in SC, I am for it. I know we all hate tolls, but sometime in the future every road might be tolled. We might as well have to get used to it.
I think they would save money if they build the road, then add jersey barrier median instead of grass median. that's my opinion. (for example, look at I-76 in PA (the turnpike), but of course in modern interstate standards.
Quote from: Strider on March 30, 2014, 01:36:29 AM
I think they would save money if they build the road, then add jersey barrier median instead of grass median. that's my opinion. (for example, look at I-76 in PA (the turnpike), but of course in modern interstate standards.
Well, for various reasons (like safety and ease of expansion) they don't build them like that anymore. Today, regardless the funding model, they have to follow interstate standards (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interstate_Highway_standards) defined by AASHTO.
Quote from: WashuOtaku on March 30, 2014, 10:55:15 AM
Quote from: Strider on March 30, 2014, 01:36:29 AM
I think they would save money if they build the road, then add jersey barrier median instead of grass median. that's my opinion. (for example, look at I-76 in PA (the turnpike), but of course in modern interstate standards.
Well, for various reasons (like safety and ease of expansion) they don't build them like that anymore. Today, regardless the funding model, they have to follow interstate standards (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interstate_Highway_standards) defined by AASHTO.
Yeah I agree. Which is why they should have various alternatives listed for building interstates. I-85 is being widening to 8-12 lanes near Charlotte (between the Northeast I-485 interchange and exit 55) that uses jersey median.. I-73/74 through Asheboro is already done using jersey median and is already widening to modern standards. Look at I-40/85 between both splits (Greensboro & Hillsborough). Many places are doing it. I don't see what's the issue of having different options. A interstate doesn't have to be "shoulder, road, shoulder, (wide grassy median), shoulder, road, shoulder."
Quote from: Strider on March 30, 2014, 03:10:41 PM
Quote from: WashuOtaku on March 30, 2014, 10:55:15 AM
Quote from: Strider on March 30, 2014, 01:36:29 AM
I think they would save money if they build the road, then add jersey barrier median instead of grass median. that's my opinion. (for example, look at I-76 in PA (the turnpike), but of course in modern interstate standards.
Well, for various reasons (like safety and ease of expansion) they don't build them like that anymore. Today, regardless the funding model, they have to follow interstate standards (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interstate_Highway_standards) defined by AASHTO.
Yeah I agree. Which is why they should have various alternatives listed for building interstates. I-85 is being widening to 8-12 lanes near Charlotte (between the Northeast I-485 interchange and exit 55) that uses jersey median.. I-73/74 through Asheboro is already done using jersey median and is already widening to modern standards. Look at I-40/85 between both splits (Greensboro & Hillsborough). Many places are doing it. I don't see what's the issue of having different options. A interstate doesn't have to be "shoulder, road, shoulder, (wide grassy median), shoulder, road, shoulder."
Goes back to ease of expansion, because the median is already on by NCDOT, allowing them to widen those freeways like in I-85. The section in Asheboro pre-dates I-73/I-74, which is why it is what it is and simply widen it enough to give it real shoulders and such; if they decide one day that Asheboro needs six-lanes there, they would have to buy a lot of right-of-way and possibly rebuild the bridges.
What I am getting at is that it allows future expansion, if needed, at a lower cost.
What I am getting at this one is that it does not have to be grassy median, whether it is for future expansion or not. There should be choices. If we are keen on one choice for modern interstate design, the cost is going to increase and it is going to be awfully expensive to build a new interstate. There is always a choice.
If it is up to me, I'd build it just like an turnpike.
Quote from: Grzrd on October 23, 2013, 09:39:42 AM
this Oct. 22 article (http://www.thestate.com/2013/10/22/3052588/haley-touts-i-73-project-as-way.html) caught my eye ... the article also mentions that the governor had to field a question about "a connector with Interstate 74 in North Carolina."
Quote from: Grzrd on November 08, 2013, 03:09:48 PM
This article (http://www.myhorrynews.com/news/local/horry_county/article_210b6b7c-47fb-11e3-b143-001a4bcf6878.html) reports that contracts will soon be let for "the final phase of S.C. 31", which is an extension of the southern (non-N.C. state line) end of S.C. 31 (https://maps.google.com/maps?q=north+Moss+Creek+Road,+Myrtle+Beach,+SC,+North+America&hl=en&ll=33.67264,-79.020538&spn=0.211718,0.41851&sll=33.647243,-79.015732&sspn=0.026473,0.052314&t=h&hnear=Moss+Creek+Rd,+Myrtle+Beach,+Horry,+South+Carolina+29588&z=12) :
Quote
S.C. 31 will be extended from its current stopping point at S.C. 544 to S.C. 707 just north of Moss Creek Road, covering almost four miles .... The cost for this segment will be close to $230 million
(bottom quote from South Carolina (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=4088.msg258410#msg258410) thread)
This article (http://www.myrtlebeachonline.com/2014/04/12/4160837/horry-county-to-try-to-claim-surplus.html) reports that savings resulting from construction on the "southern end" may allow for an extension of S.C. 31 to the North Carolina state line, which may in turn encourage North Carolina to build the final piece of an eventual "link" to I-74:
Quote
S.C. 31 could be extended to the North Carolina line if Horry County leaders can use proposed surplus funds from the current extension project on the south end of the county.
Horry County leaders are hoping to convince State Infrastructure Bank officials to let them use a planned $50 million savings from the southern extension of S.C. 31 on a proposed project to extend the road to the North Carolina state line.
A North Carolina transportation official said that move just may bump up North Carolina's plans to connect that highway to U.S. 17 near Shallotte, N.C., creating a highway connection from Georgetown County to the middle of Brunswick County, N.C. ....
Construction is underway to extend S.C. 31 by 3.8 miles from its current south end to S.C. 707, which will include a bridge over the Intracoastal Waterway, was estimated to cost $237 million. Most recent cost estimates have come in between $187 million and $197 million, a savings of $39 million to $49 million.
It was music to Councilman Harold Worley's ears. Worley has been working to get S.C. 31 extended to the north — which officials say will eventually link into Interstate 74 in North Carolina — since 1994. ....
Patrick Riddle, division 3 planning engineer for the N.C. Department of Transportation, said the S.C. 31 connector project is currently listed as a Priority 3, which means it's unfunded. However, he said, if South Carolina were to get the ball rolling, there's no telling how quick the project can move up the priority list.
"If South Carolina were to come up with the money, what would happen in North Carolina? Who knows," Riddle said. "North Carolina may be able to move to do something and vice versa. It's a very wide open plain. There just so many different options out there. You could free something up, but who knows. It's just broad."
The question remains, will this become I-74 or a spur off it? I've read about arguments that I-74 should go to Wilmington, but this will be interesting.
Quote from: Henry on April 15, 2014, 02:38:06 PM
The question remains, will this become I-74 or a spur off it? I've read about arguments that I-74 should go to Wilmington, but this will be interesting.
The law, written by the U.S. Congress, states that I-73/I-74 goes into South Carolina; there is also a compact between the two states agreeing where the interstates will cross and both DOTs have documents and maps showing the possible routing of Interstate (NCDOT even has it ranked on its new fund model, which doesn't look good for it). There is no official documentation that say contrary to this routing. So there is no argument here, except with the people in Wilmington that want a second interstate to the city.
QuoteWell, for various reasons (like safety and ease of expansion) they don't build them like that anymore. Today, regardless the funding model, they have to follow interstate standards defined by AASHTO.
Going back to this argument from a couple weeks ago, Interstate standards (which are actually defined by FHWA, not AASHTO) do allow for a paved median with median barrier.
Quote from: Grzrd on March 28, 2014, 08:35:02 AM
This article (http://www.therepublic.com/w/SC--Interstate-73-Tolls) reports that SCDOT may be soliciting proposals for a new I-73 toll study in the relatively near future
This article (http://www.carolinalive.com/news/spotlighton/story.aspx?id=1032771#.U1GS7fldVpU) reports that SCDOT has approved going forward with the I-73 toll study and that supporters of tolls anticipate that the study will show that tourists will pay most of the tolls:
Quote
The South Carolina Department of Transportation Commissioners agreed unanimously Thursday afternoon to move ahead with a study to see if Interstate 73 should be a toll road to help pay for the interstate.
The tolls would be collected where the new interstate would intersect with I-95, so supporters say it would be mostly tourists who pay the tolls. ....
Brad Dean with the Myrtle Beach Area Chamber of Commerce says I-73 has been a top priority.
"We've had over $100 million secured for I-73 up to this date, both in Federal Highway Bill, federal Tiger Grants, and also state funding," said Dean.
However, much more money is needed to build the interstate.
"Still the question remains though how do you pay for I-73 and whether or not tolls are a part of that. We don't know, but the study will tell us," said Dean.
One criteria of the approved study will show how much the tolls should be.
"Presumably this would be tolls paid for people coming down I-95 who would connect with I -73," said Dean ....
Dean wanted to be sure to point out, the tolls would only be on I-73 and would not affect traffic on I-95.
The DOT commissioners also decided Thursday to request a $30 million Tiger Grant from the federal government to help pay for the interstate.
If using tolls is the only way a interstate can be built, then do it. I'm curious about how much the toll would cost per car/truck/axle.
Quote from: Strider on April 18, 2014, 10:56:41 PM
If using tolls is the only way a interstate can be built, then do it. I'm curious about how much the toll would cost per car/truck/axle.
You can probably look to the per-mile toll rates on roads like Triangle Expressway (N.C. 540) or the InterCounty Connector (Md. 200) for some idea as to what the tolls might be.
cpzilliacus, you might be right. I believe the tolls would also be collected electronically.. just like these toll roads you just mentioned.
Quote from: Strider on April 20, 2014, 01:40:28 PM
cpzilliacus, you might be right. I believe the tolls would also be collected electronically.. just like these toll roads you just mentioned.
No doubt that electronic tolling is where all toll roads are going towards. Eventually the toll plazas on I-185 and US 278 will likely go away too.
Quote from: Henry on April 15, 2014, 02:38:06 PM
The question remains, will this become I-74 or a spur off it? I've read about arguments that I-74 should go to Wilmington, but this will be interesting.
This May 1 article (http://www.nmbtimes.com/nm/publish/news_892.html) does not definitively answer Henry's question because it reports that the Carolina Bays Parkway/S.C 31 may become part of the "I-74 system" in the foreseeable future and that it, not I-73, would be Horry County's first interstate highway:
Quote
State Representative Tracy Edge, Horry County Council Chairman Mark Lazarus and Horry County Councilman Harold Worley have been working to make Interstate 74 a reality for Horry County and the North Strand area....
By 2002 The Carolina Bays Parkway opened from Highway 9 on the north end to Highway 501 at the southern end. Representative Edge, who has been the strongest advocate of Interstate 74, then began working on efforts to designate Carolina Bays Parkway as part of the Interstate 74 network and also began pushing to expand the Carolina Bays Parkway northward into North Carolina to link with Interstate 74 which was being built at that time in North Carolina.
In 2006 the North Carolina Department of Transportation met with the South Carolina Department of Transportation and jointly agreed that each state would cooperate with each other on I-73 and I-74 with North Carolina demanding that we meet them at I-74 in order for them to give their cooperation for I-73. In the latter part of the decade Horry County Council and the legislative delegation began focusing efforts for the Carolina Bays Parkway by pushing it further south past Highway 544 and ultimately connecting back to Highway 17 bypass.
Now, with more than $50 million left from the latest ride projects Horry County Council Chairman Mark Lazarus, Councilman Harold Worley and Representative Tracy Edge are calling for the surplus to be allocated to extend the Carolina Bays Parkway northward into North Carolina to link with Interstate 74.
As a result of Edge's legislation the Carolina Bays Parkway would become part of the I-74 system thus giving Horry County it's first interstate highway as well as provide traffic congestion relief for the Little River area ...
If it could simply become a Spur that would be awesome. It's so un-natural for an E-W interstate to turn SW to truncate. I hope it ends up as maybe "I-174" (granted it wont eventually meet an I-73 in M.B.)
Quote from: jcarte29 on May 12, 2014, 10:39:04 PM
If it could simply become a Spur that would be awesome. It's so un-natural for an E-W interstate to turn SW to truncate. I hope it ends up as maybe "I-174" (granted it wont eventually meet an I-73 in M.B.)
You are wishing for something that will not happen, it will likely be I-74... why would South Carolina settle for a 3di instead? Also, what will likely happen is that the east-west routing will reverse when entering South Carolina, thus east end is at the NC state line and west end on US 17; this would be similar to I-64 in the Hampton Roads area, but have the benefit of a state line to partition it.
Quote from: WashuOtaku on May 12, 2014, 11:08:58 PM
You are wishing for something that will not happen, it will likely be I-74... why would South Carolina settle for a 3di instead? Also, what will likely happen is that the east-west routing will reverse when entering South Carolina, thus east end is at the NC state line and west end on US 17; this would be similar to I-64 in the Hampton Roads area, but have the benefit of a state line to partition it.
Note that in the case of I-64 in Hampton Roads, while it does physically change direction as you describe, it is posted without direction at all from I-264 Virginia Beach Expwy southwest to Bowers Hill. I think it may have been posted as far as Indian River Rd when I lived there in the early 90s but further southwest through I-464, US 17 Deep Creek and to Bowers Hill have never had directional banners posted...
Mapmikey
Still is out to Indian River Rd.
It's been a decade since I last been in the Hampton Roads area, but one of the first things I noticed when US 58 connected with I-64 was the directional change of the interstate and lasted till Virginia Beach. This probably changed since the loop was completed.
Yeah, froggie is correct, the "E-W" directional banners stopped at Indian River Rd. and after that road, there is no directional banners, just I-64 with cities that the highway goes.
Quote from: WashuOtaku on May 12, 2014, 11:08:58 PM
You are wishing for something that will not happen, it will likely be I-74... why would South Carolina settle for a 3di instead? Also, what will likely happen is that the east-west routing will reverse when entering South Carolina, thus east end is at the NC state line and west end on US 17; this would be similar to I-64 in the Hampton Roads area, but have the benefit of a state line to partition it.
There isn't going to be a I-74 or I-x74 in SC until NC decides upon a final route and decides to fund it. NCDOT started an I-74 routing feasibility study several years ago that was never completed because the funds ran out and the agency chose not to spend any more money on it. NCDOT currently is funding a study that is looking at the costs to upgrade US 74 to an interstate from NC 41 to the US 74/76 Whiteville Bypass. Maybe when that gets done, NCDOT will revisit how to get I-74 to SC. The least costly alternative, as of now, is to upgrade US 74/76 to an interstate all the way to Wilmington. If so, it would make more sense to send a spur route along US 17 to the Carolina Bays Parkway.
Quote from: bob7374 on May 13, 2014, 10:03:59 PM
There isn't going to be a I-74 or I-x74 in SC until NC decides upon a final route and decides to fund it. NCDOT started an I-74 routing feasibility study several years ago that was never completed because the funds ran out and the agency chose not to spend any more money on it. NCDOT currently is funding a study that is looking at the costs to upgrade US 74 to an interstate from NC 41 to the US 74/76 Whiteville Bypass. Maybe when that gets done, NCDOT will revisit how to get I-74 to SC. The least costly alternative, as of now, is to upgrade US 74/76 to an interstate all the way to Wilmington. If so, it would make more sense to send a spur route along US 17 to the Carolina Bays Parkway.
Though you are right that the routing isn't fixed yet, the corridors are and here's a link of a corridor map straight from NCDOT's website: https://connect.ncdot.gov/projects/planning/Planning%20Document%20Library/Proposed%20Interstate%2073%20and%2074%20Routes.pdf (https://connect.ncdot.gov/projects/planning/Planning%20Document%20Library/Proposed%20Interstate%2073%20and%2074%20Routes.pdf) and of course the moth-balled I-74 Feasibility Project site: http://www.ncdot.gov/projects/I74feasibility/ (http://www.ncdot.gov/projects/I74feasibility/)
So obviously, NCDOT doesn't think I-74 should go to Wilmington; it's probably have to do to the fact I-73/74 North-South Corridor was mandated by congress with specifics on how it will be routed, which are listed on FHWA's website: http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/planning/national_highway_system/high_priority_corridors/hpcor.cfm#l5 (http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/planning/national_highway_system/high_priority_corridors/hpcor.cfm#l5)
This is obviously a low-priority to North Carolina, but its still not going to Wilmington. :sombrero:
I still think that I-74 should go to Wilmington, however that is not going to be the case as the future US 74/76 interchange with future I-140 Wilmington outer Loop is now to be built as a folded diamond, from what I saw in the street view of Google Maps of that location.
This TV video (http://www.wmbfnews.com/story/28029569/local-leaders-and-community-members-bring-priorities-of-the-grand-strand-to-columbia) reports that Grand Strand leaders, led by the Myrtle Beach Chamber of Commerce, recently held a Legislative Reception in Columbia that had a strong I-73 theme and it appears that the current sales pitch is that 35 miles of I-73 asphalt will result in 29,000 jobs:
Quote
Local members and leaders of the Grand Strand met with state representatives during the 2015 Legislative Reception ....
"We've also had some constitutional officers like Alan Wilson who are coming here to find out what's happening in the Grand Strand," Brad Dean said.
Though put on by the Myrtle Beach Area Chamber of Commerce, the Chamber president said it's more about giving a voice to the entire Grand Strand.
South Carolina Attorney General Alan Wilson did want to catch up with what was happening on the Grand Strand, and said it was because of the crucial role it plays in the state's economy.
"I've gotten to speak with several members of the delegation on various pieces of legislation. Obviously we're standing here on a replica of I-73, I know that's very important to the industry out there," Wilson explained.
"I think because they're talking infrastructure this year, even though the priority is on maintenance, we don't want them to forget that if we could build 35 miles of asphalt - would create [twenty-nine] thousand jobs and that would lead to an economic explosion in the Grand Strand and Pee Dee," Dean said.
Here is a snip of a photo of the I-73 replica:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FxxOsUPZ.jpg&hash=27154e40415eae7071f04e7ec6d3239bf0f0ed06)
However, Gov. Haley says I-73 in South Carolina is "something that can wait" for funding.
http://www.wcnc.com/story/news/politics/2015/01/27/haley-opposed-to-any-gas-tax-hike-more-than-10-cents/22399607/
Quote from: Grzrd on April 18, 2014, 05:13:33 PM
This article (http://www.carolinalive.com/news/spotlighton/story.aspx?id=1032771#.U1GS7fldVpU) reports that SCDOT has approved going forward with the I-73 toll study and that supporters of tolls anticipate that the study will show that tourists will pay most of the tolls:
Quote
The tolls would be collected where the new interstate would intersect with I-95, so supporters say it would be mostly tourists who pay the tolls. ....
This article (http://www.fitsnews.com/2015/03/10/sc-highway-commissioners-bullish-interstate-73/) (from a website that tends to be anti-I-73) reports that I-73 in South Carolina is "on the verge of a major funding breakthrough", but that tolls may be part of the picture:
Quote
The $2.4 billion Interstate 73 boondoggle — South Carolina's poster child for totally unnecessary transportation projects — is reportedly on the verge of a "major funding breakthrough."
Working to secure that funding? U.S. Senator Lindsey Graham and State Senate president Hugh Leatherman.
At a recent gathering of S.C. Department of Transportation (SCDOT) commissioners, Leatherman's son-in-law John Hardee was overhead telling his fellow commissioner Mike Wooten that the project was moving forward.
"Not to worry," Hardee told "You're going to get I-73."
One of our SCDOT moles confirmed the conversation between the two appointees — but added the "funding breakthrough" was only going to be viable in the event both federal and state governments raised their gas taxes.
And in the event I-73 was a toll road ...
FITS has also confirmed with our sources in Washington, D.C. that Graham and U.S. Senator Tim Scott have been "working overtime" in recent weeks to secure funding for the road ...
I don't know if the I-73 toll study that was approved in April, 2014 has been completed; as a result, I don't know if the tolling on I-73 would be similar to the concept outlined in the April, 2014 article quoted above.
The toll idea is not new. They have suggested that for a decade now as a way to build the interstate... but it all talk and no action.
Quote from: WashuOtaku on March 11, 2015, 06:29:43 PM
The toll idea is not new. They have suggested that for a decade now as a way to build the interstate... but it all talk and no action.
And they still have yet to learn from the I-185 debacle, which is partly to blame for the current mess they're now in.
Quote from: Henry on March 13, 2015, 11:40:57 AM
Quote from: WashuOtaku on March 11, 2015, 06:29:43 PM
The toll idea is not new. They have suggested that for a decade now as a way to build the interstate... but it all talk and no action.
And they still have yet to learn from the I-185 debacle, which is partly to blame for the current mess they're now in.
I'm not aware of any 'I-185 debacle'.
^^^He's referring to the Southern Connector and the reason why it was built (developers! developers! developers!).
IIRC, this road along with the Pocahontas Parkway were built as non-profit toll roads and are both in bad shape financially.
Quote from: NE2 on March 13, 2015, 04:22:26 PM
I'm not aware of any 'I-185 debacle'.
The Toll section of I-185 (aka the Southern Connector) was suppose to spur new development in southern Greenville County and provide a short-cut between those driving to I-326 to I-85 to Atlanta. But that didn't happen, as most truckers needing to go to Atlanta from Columbia take I-20 and the development never happened either. Basically toll revenue never hit targets and they defaulted on their bond; causing a lot of heart-burn to the state to pay the gap and redo the bond.
It might have been something Greenville needed someday, but it's not today.
Ah. So I'm not sure what Henry's point is, given that he's an Interstate-everywhere guy. How would building it with tolls be worse than without finance-wise?
If I were the SC DOT, I would prioritize I-73 over any other major construction. There needs to be a major interstate connection between the Midwest and Myrtle Beach and right now, that doesn't exist. Once you hit SC from Michigan/Ohio/Indiana/Illinois, you're stuck on surface roads for quite a bit. If you're coming from the Northeast, you're stuck on US 501 once you get off I-95 in South Carolina. With I-73, you'd get off in Latta and have clear interstate the rest of the way.
I don't see why it's something that people are calling pointless and a waste of funding. I don't get why leaders down there are calling it something that "can wait for funding." Have they ever tried driving out of Myrtle Beach in the summer on US 501 and SC 9? It's a parking lot at best. I have friends who live in some of the small SC towns that tourists drive through to get to Myrtle Beach and the traffic even there is a nightmare in the summer. I call BS on Gov. Haley saying that "this can wait for funding." I-73 needed to be built 10 years ago.
The way that South Carolina is treating I-73 is a crock of BS.
Quote from: The Nature Boy on March 14, 2015, 10:18:41 AM
The way that South Carolina is treating I-73 is a crock of BS.
The whole Pee-Dee/Grand Strand area usually gets screwed when it comes to roads and infrastructure by the state.
This article (http://www.myrtlebeachonline.com/news/local/article18298637.html) reports on possible Presidential candidate Donald Trump providing some political theater (theater of the absurd?) regarding I-73 in South Carolina by quoting him saying that I-73 needs to be built and that "environmentalists' concerns" have delayed the construction of I-73:
Quote
Donald Trump swept through the Grand Strand Saturday showcasing his signature repertoire of barbs and bluster.
The real estate tycoon, who says he's considering a bid for the White House next year, blasted President Barack Obama, environmentalists and the Chinese — among other targets — during stops at the Myrtle Beach Area Chamber of Commerce and the Horry County Republican Party Convention, where he was the keynote speaker ....
Trump blamed environmentalists' concerns for delaying the construction of I-73, a proposed interstate that would run from Myrtle Beach to Michigan.
"China's building islands in the middle of the sea," he said. "You think they did an environmental impact study? They just dumped the [expletive] right there." ....
Trump said Myrtle Beach has a bright future but needs to improve access to the area, specifically by building I-73.
"Everything that I know about Myrtle Beach is that it's very hard to get to," he said, though he noted the community has some natural assets. "When you have ocean, you have a big advantage over everybody. I always say I've never lost money on an ocean, a lake or a river and oceans would be best." ....
On environmentalists: "Nobody believes this, but I get awards all the time for good environment deeds. ... I have a great relationship with some [environmentalists]. But a lot of these people are bad people. A lot of them are phonies. They make money off the environment. They fight you just to make fees."
On Myrtle Beach: "I always liked Myrtle Beach. ... I always had a great feeling for Myrtle Beach. And actually I feel that you don't get your just due. You're a little bit underrated. You really have a great place. You have incredible weather. You have some really good courses, not all. Because nobody has all good."
Quote from: Grzrd on April 12, 2015, 12:42:45 PM
This article (http://www.myrtlebeachonline.com/news/local/article18298637.html) reports on possible Presidential candidate Donald Trump providing some political theater (theater of the absurd?) regarding I-73 in South Carolina by quoting him saying that I-73 needs to be built and that "environmentalists' concerns" have delayed the construction of I-73:
Quote
Donald Trump swept through the Grand Strand Saturday showcasing his signature repertoire of barbs and bluster.
The real estate tycoon, who says he’s considering a bid for the White House next year, blasted President Barack Obama, environmentalists and the Chinese – among other targets – during stops at the Myrtle Beach Area Chamber of Commerce and the Horry County Republican Party Convention, where he was the keynote speaker ....
Trump blamed environmentalists’ concerns for delaying the construction of I-73, a proposed interstate that would run from Myrtle Beach to Michigan.
“China’s building islands in the middle of the sea,” he said. “You think they did an environmental impact study? They just dumped the [expletive] right there.” ....
Trump said Myrtle Beach has a bright future but needs to improve access to the area, specifically by building I-73.
“Everything that I know about Myrtle Beach is that it’s very hard to get to,” he said, though he noted the community has some natural assets. “When you have ocean, you have a big advantage over everybody. I always say I’ve never lost money on an ocean, a lake or a river and oceans would be best.” ....
On environmentalists: “Nobody believes this, but I get awards all the time for good environment deeds. … I have a great relationship with some [environmentalists]. But a lot of these people are bad people. A lot of them are phonies. They make money off the environment. They fight you just to make fees.”
On Myrtle Beach: “I always liked Myrtle Beach. … I always had a great feeling for Myrtle Beach. And actually I feel that you don’t get your just due. You’re a little bit underrated. You really have a great place. You have incredible weather. You have some really good courses, not all. Because nobody has all good.”
Those environmentalists need to be fired, and I-73 built ASAP.
Quote from: Grzrd on May 12, 2014, 09:20:43 PM
Quote from: Henry on April 15, 2014, 02:38:06 PM
The question remains, will this become I-74 or a spur off it? I've read about arguments that I-74 should go to Wilmington, but this will be interesting.
This May 1 article (http://www.nmbtimes.com/nm/publish/news_892.html) does not definitively answer Henry's question because it reports that the Carolina Bays Parkway/S.C 31 may become part of the "I-74 system" in the foreseeable future and that it, not I-73, would be Horry County's first interstate highway:
Quote... with more than $50 million left from the latest ride projects Horry County Council Chairman Mark Lazarus, Councilman Harold Worley and Representative Tracy Edge are calling for the surplus to be allocated to extend the Carolina Bays Parkway northward into North Carolina to link with Interstate 74.
As a result of Edge's legislation the Carolina Bays Parkway would become part of the I-74 system thus giving Horry County it's first interstate highway as well as provide traffic congestion relief for the Little River area ...
This April 9 article (http://www.scnow.com/news/business/article_7fb38e08-dea3-11e4-9c10-9b2db877222a.html) reports that Horry County's RIDE III committee has allocated about $89.8 million toward the 4 1/2-mile project to extend S.C. 31 to about Hickman Road in North Carolina (https://www.google.com/maps/place/Myrtle+Beach,+SC/@33.8781579,-78.6343617,12757m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m2!3m1!1s0x890068953b552101:0xbc0fb115b5d09618) if a sales tax referendum passes in 2016:
Quote
Horry County's RIDE III committee allocated its final $203 million toward road projects its committee members would like to see done if a sales tax referendum passes in 2016.
Now that list is sent to a six-member commission which will review the projects, prioritize them and send them to the full county council for a vote before it is sent to the voters. ....
The committee voted to allocate about $89.8 million toward the 4 1/2-mile project to extend S.C. 31 to about Hickman Road in North Carolina, but is riding on a 2005 commitment from the neighbors up north to do their part in connecting to S.C. 31, which worries Eddie Dyer, chairman of the committee.
"I still have reservations, as chair," Dyer said. "I believe that [commission] needs to get real serious to do everything they can to get North Carolina to make some kind of commitment before we put that on the ballot and roll the dice."
Departments of Transportation for South Carolina and North Carolina have an agreement dating back to the mid-2000s that states North Carolina will not participate in an I-73 project, which is a proposed interstate that would connect Myrtle Beach to Michigan, unless it sees progress on I-74.
The committee decided to place a caveat on S.C. 31 that if the commission realizes it cannot be done, the committee endorses replacing that project with widening S.C. 90 to four lanes from S.C. 22 to Robert Edge Parkway.
The present NC administration might be willing to talk about a connection between SC 31 and US 17 north, I think, although not necessarily as an I-74 project. I have a different question for SC folks: what, if anything is going on with the I-73 segment between I-95 and US 501 around Latta?
Quote from: wdcrft63 on April 17, 2015, 06:56:34 PM
The present NC administration might be willing to talk about a connection between SC 31 and US 17 north, I think, although not necessarily as an I-74 project. I have a different question for SC folks: what, if anything is going on with the I-73 segment between I-95 and US 501 around Latta?
State wants to build it, but needs money. State wants to raise taxes to get the money, but not on I-73. So nothing is being done.
Quote from: Grzrd on May 12, 2014, 09:20:43 PM
This May 1 article (http://www.nmbtimes.com/nm/publish/news_892.html) ... reports that the Carolina Bays Parkway/S.C 31 may become part of the "I-74 system" in the foreseeable future
Quote from: Grzrd on April 14, 2015, 01:33:20 PM
This April 9 article (http://www.scnow.com/news/business/article_7fb38e08-dea3-11e4-9c10-9b2db877222a.html) reports that Horry County's RIDE III committee has allocated about $89.8 million toward the 4 1/2-mile project to extend S.C. 31 to about Hickman Road in North Carolina (https://www.google.com/maps/place/Myrtle+Beach,+SC/@33.8781579,-78.6343617,12757m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m2!3m1!1s0x890068953b552101:0xbc0fb115b5d09618) if a sales tax referendum passes in 2016
This June 19, 2015 article (http://www.myrtlebeachonline.com/news/local/article25002589.html) reports that a committee of the Grand Strand Area Transportation Study has committed at least $779,000 to cover any shortfall in the environmental study to extend S.C. 31 into North Carolina and that Shallotte and Sunset Beach, N.C., have passed resolutions supporting the extension of S.C. 31 into Brunswick County, N.C.:
Quote
A committee of the Grand Strand Area Transportation Study pledged at least $779,000 Friday to partially or fully cover any shortfall in an environmental study needed to complete the northern extension of S.C. 31 into North Carolina.
The money comes from federal funds received since Brunswick County, N.C., moved into the metropolitan statistical area the includes the Grand Strand and is covered by GSATS. The statistical area is a demographic area used to assess regional growth and needs ....
Walter Eccard -- mayor of Shallotte, N.C., and chairman of GSATS transportation advisory committee for North Carolina ....
Shallotte and Sunset Beach, N.C., have passed resolutions supporting the extension of Carolina Bays Parkway, or S.C. 31, into Brunswick County. North Carolina has a provision to provide about $2.25 million over the next three fiscal years for the study, said Mark Hoeweler, assistant executive director at GSATS.
In 2016, Horry County plans to ask voters for a one-cent sales tax to fund $530 million in road improvements, including nearly $90 million for the northern extension of S.C. 31 to the North Carolina state line. That price tag includes potential land acquisition and construction.
The environmental impact study will provide options and help define the exact paths both states can build on. The southern extension of S.C. 31 is being built to extend to near the Georgetown County line, and if the northern extension is built, it would connect southern Horry County to the Shallotte area and allow north/south traffic that typically clogs U.S. 17 to flow more smoothly.
North Carolina recently released its State Transportation Improvement Program for 2016-2025, which does not include the S.C. 31 extension project. Eccard said he's not too discouraged because that document is updated frequently.
"You always like to have everything buttoned up. That's the ideal thing," Eccard said. "I think, however, once we spend 4, 5, $6 million, that creates its own momentum... South Carolina, depending on this referendum, is making a pretty significant statement. We've got to keep the momentum on the North Carolina side and work with our legislators." ....
Also, this May 29, 2015 article (http://www.myrtlebeachonline.com/news/local/article22616874.html) reports on construction progress for the S.C. 31 southern extension:
Quote
The S.C. 31 extension project is on schedule and construction into the summer includes continued progress on the Intracoastal Waterway bridge, beginning work on other bridges for the project, and more soil work on the east side of S.C. 707 for the new interchange.
"The project is progressing well and is on schedule," said Lisa Bourcier, spokeswoman for Horry County ....
The nearly four-mile extension will be a multi-lane highway that includes a bridge over the Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway. Construction is slated to be completed by the spring of 2017.
Here is a snip of a photo accompanying the article:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FxDKKPbb.jpg&hash=12003c9381bd6ab4d15a3726774141051745e525)
Quote from: Grzrd on September 07, 2015, 05:49:59 PM
Quote from: Grzrd on May 12, 2014, 09:20:43 PM
This May 1 article (http://www.nmbtimes.com/nm/publish/news_892.html) ... reports that the Carolina Bays Parkway/S.C 31 may become part of the "I-74 system" in the foreseeable future
Quote from: Grzrd on April 14, 2015, 01:33:20 PM
This April 9 article (http://www.scnow.com/news/business/article_7fb38e08-dea3-11e4-9c10-9b2db877222a.html) reports that Horry County’s RIDE III committee has allocated about $89.8 million toward the 4 1/2-mile project to extend S.C. 31 to about Hickman Road in North Carolina (https://www.google.com/maps/place/Myrtle+Beach,+SC/@33.8781579,-78.6343617,12757m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m2!3m1!1s0x890068953b552101:0xbc0fb115b5d09618) if a sales tax referendum passes in 2016
This June 19, 2015 article (http://www.myrtlebeachonline.com/news/local/article25002589.html) reports that a committee of the Grand Strand Area Transportation Study has committed at least $779,000 to cover any shortfall in the environmental study to extend S.C. 31 into North Carolina and that Shallotte and Sunset Beach, N.C., have passed resolutions supporting the extension of S.C. 31 into Brunswick County, N.C.
This September 10 article (http://www.myrtlebeachonline.com/news/business/article34819854.html) reports on the prioritization of projects that would be covered if the RIDE III sales tax referendum is approved by voters and it also describes the S.C. 31 extension project as linking S.C. 31 to "the I-74 network" in North Carolina; however, only $89.9 million of the $120+ million cost of the project would be covered by the sales tax increase:
Quote
How should $530 million of taxpayer money be spent?
For the six members of the RIDE III Sales Tax Commission, that's the question they will spend the next eight months answering.
The commission, which held its first meeting Thursday, must decide which infrastructure projects should be part of RIDE III, the county's next road building program. Once commissioners develop a list projects – their deadline for doing this is May 17 – Horry County Council will give an up-or-down vote on the list. If approved, the projects will then go to the voters, who have the final say on whether the one percent sales tax should pay for that work. Should the referendum pass, the tax collection would begin on May 1, 2017 ....
Here's a snapshot of those discussed Thursday ....
S.C. 31 extension to North Carolina
Description: RIDE III would not pay for the full cost of this construction, though it would cover most of it, officials said. The nearly 5-mile extension would take S.C. 31 to the North Carolina border. Dyer said local leaders have been in talks with North Carolina officials about what that state will do on its side of the line. The overall project tops $120 million. Officials said additional funding would have to be identified.
Cost: $89.9 million
Why it's needed: Leaders in northeastern Horry County insist this project could help alleviate traffic problems in Little River and North Myrtle Beach by linking S.C. 31 to the I-74 network in the Tar Heel state. Commission members also said fairness is another reason the project is a finalist for the list. "Everybody is in favor of that as the project for North Myrtle Beach," Dyer said. "We need to make sure that we try to make it happen for them."
Quote from: Grzrd on April 18, 2014, 05:13:33 PM
This article (http://www.carolinalive.com/news/spotlighton/story.aspx?id=1032771#.U1GS7fldVpU) reports that SCDOT has approved going forward with the I-73 toll study and that supporters of tolls anticipate that the study will show that tourists will pay most of the tolls:
Quote
The South Carolina Department of Transportation Commissioners agreed unanimously Thursday afternoon to move ahead with a study to see if Interstate 73 should be a toll road to help pay for the interstate.
The tolls would be collected where the new interstate would intersect with I-95, so supporters say it would be mostly tourists who pay the tolls ....
Brad Dean with the Myrtle Beach Area Chamber of Commerce says I-73 has been a top priority ....
One criteria of the approved study will show how much the tolls should be.
"Presumably this would be tolls paid for people coming down I-95 who would connect with I -73," said Dean ....
Dean wanted to be sure to point out, the tolls would only be on I-73 and would not affect traffic on I-95.
This September 19 blog (http://www.thestate.com/news/politics-government/politics-columns-blogs/the-buzz/article35848671.html) reports on an "incomplete" version of the I-73 toll study that estimates $5.2 million raised by a toll in 2025 and approximately $32.7 million per year by 2050 (2015 dollars):
Quote
S.C. Department of Transportation Commissioner Mike Wooten sent an email on Aug. 14 to Myrtle Beach Area Chamber of Commerce head Brad Dean requesting a private presentation Aug. 25 on the results of an Interstate 73 study.
The study analyzed how much money a toll on vehicles using the interstate, which would lead to Myrtle Beach, would raise over a 26-year period to help pay for the proposed road.
In the email, Wooten wrote he "really would like this to remain confidential until the final report is published." ....
Wooten said he requested the meeting be private because people read into reports what they want and the study was incomplete.
The minute the report is complete, it will be published, he said, adding it is a public document because it is being paid for by money for Interstate 73.
Last week, the state Transportation Department made a copy of the more than 250-page report available to The Buzz.
The study shows a toll would generate an estimated $5.2 million for the interstate in 2025, its first year, and produce $32.7 million a year by 2050. (Those figures are in 2015 dollars.)
South Carolina's portion of the Interstate 73 project is expected to cost about $2.4 billion.
The toll would be a tool in the toolbox to pay for the interstate, Wooten said, adding the study was conducted to find out how big that tool could be.
However, the study found a toll would not raise enough money to pay the state's portion of the interstate's costs. But the toll money could help offset some of those costs, Wooten said.
I remain utterly confused as to why SC is not trying to connect the Grand Strand to the interstate highway system.
Quote from: The Nature Boy on September 21, 2015, 03:00:08 PM
I remain utterly confused as to why SC is not trying to connect the Grand Strand to the interstate highway system.
South Carolina has a really long history with this...
https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=18.msg189609#msg189609
Mike
Extending I-20 to Myrtle Beach honestly seems like the best option. Multiplex it with US 501 east of Marion.
Quote from: The Nature Boy on September 21, 2015, 03:22:01 PM
Extending I-20 to Myrtle Beach honestly seems like the best option. Multiplex it with US 501 east of Marion.
I thought the idea was to get the Appalachian hillbillies a better way of getting to Myrtle Beach through I-73.
I suppose there were already good enough connections to the Redneck Riviera of the Florida Panhandle from Coal Country. :D
Quote from: The Nature Boy on September 21, 2015, 03:22:01 PM
Extending I-20 to Myrtle Beach honestly seems like the best option. Multiplex it with US 501 east of Marion.
The Feds aren't supporting that, they support I-73. :awesomeface:
Quote from: Grzrd on September 11, 2015, 03:32:48 PM
This September 10 article (http://www.myrtlebeachonline.com/news/business/article34819854.html) reports on the prioritization of projects that would be covered if the RIDE III sales tax referendum is approved by voters and it also describes the S.C. 31 extension project as linking S.C. 31 to "the I-74 network" in North Carolina; however, only $89.9 million of the $120+ million cost of the project would be covered by the sales tax increase
This November 10 article (http://www.myrtlebeachonline.com/news/local/article44216214.html) reports that the RIDE III sales tax is now projected to bring in $60 million more than previously expected, that the S.C. 31 northern extension to North Carolina topped the list of projects that could receive some of the extra money, and that North Carolina leaders have given their South Carolina counterparts assurances that they'll "find the money" when South Carolina is ready to build its section:
Quote
The cost of extending S.C. 31 to North Carolina could be completely covered in Horry County's next road-building program.
The RIDE III Sales Tax Commission on Tuesday discussed several options for paying for the project, including using some of the additional $60 million identified in the latest projections for the one percent sales tax proposal.
Until last month, the six-member commission was developing plans for $530 million worth of road work in RIDE III, including nearly $90 million for the extension of S.C. 31 to the I-74 network in North Carolina.
The problem was the 31 project would likely cost $120 million, and commissioners weren't sure where the final $30 million would come from.
But the most recent revenue projections show the tax should bring in about $60 million more than previously estimated. On Tuesday, commissioners talked about what to do with the additional money.
The northern construction of 31 topped the list.Local leaders insist this project could help alleviate traffic problems in Little River and North Myrtle Beach.
Commission Chairman Eddie Dyer stressed that North Carolina leaders support the project as much as their Horry counterparts do.
"The reason that all of us are so committed to figuring out everything we can about 31 is to make sure that the public going to the polls to vote knows that 31 is not going to dead end at the North Carolina line," he said. "We need to reassure people that 31 is not a loose end. It's going to happen."
Several local leaders met with Tar Heel officials last week to find out about their willingness to build the necessary infrastructure on that side of the state line.
"They don't have the same challenges getting highway money that we do in South Carolina," said state Sen. Greg Hembree, R-North Myrtle Beach. "All along they've said, "˜If you give us the green light, we'll find the money.'"
Steve Gosnell, the assistant county administrator for infrastructure and regulation, said there will be money leftover from the county's most recent road-building program, RIDE II. Horry County Council plans to use $16 million of that extra cash on a new radio system for public safety officials, but there could be millions more than that available for other road projects.
Dyer said he would speak with council members about using the leftover RIDE II money for 31.
Gosnell also said the southern extension of 31, which is underway now, may come in under budget. That project is being paid for with money from the state's Transportation Infrastructure Bank and any unused funding is required to go back to the bank. However, officials could request that money for the northern end of 31.
"There's nothing preventing them from giving it right back to us," Dyer said. "That money was already committed to 31 anyway. It's just a matter of moving it from the south end to the north end."
Quote from: Grzrd on October 23, 2013, 09:39:42 AM
Quote from: Grzrd on May 01, 2011, 03:17:30 PM
Here is a link to NCDOT's I-74 Feasibility Study for this area (click on the I-74 Feasibility Study Report pdf link toward the bottom of the page):
http://www.ncdot.org/projects/I74feasibility/
There are maps on pages 31/46 and 32/46 of the above pdf which shows how I-74 would fit into North Carolina's looooong-term transportation strategy.
(above quote from Interstate 73/74 (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=18.msg99441#msg99441) thread)
Here is a snip of one of the above-referenced maps that shows the recommended extension of I-74 to Myrtle Beach:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2F59pUkL6.png&hash=7167fdb7f7e9ae25fe0a18be8315b00078d8befd)
Quote from: Grzrd on October 24, 2013, 01:20:40 PM
FWIW I checked the National I-73/I-74/I-75 Corridor Association (http://www.i73.com/) website to see what version of I-74 they are currently promoting. In looking at their South Carolina map (http://www.i73.com/docs/southcarolina.pdf) and their North Carolina map (http://www.i73.com/images/NC_sm.jpg), it looks like they are not promoting the notion of I-74 in South Carolina. Instead they have the eastern terminus of I-74 being at US 17 approximately halfway between Wilmington and the state line.
North Carolina:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FSBFQnLS.jpg&hash=ea05bca186958467be27e2ded215adeab80c5fcb)
This November 4 TV video (http://www.wmbfnews.com/story/30436083/nc-sc-leaders-meet-to-talk-final-extension-of-highway-31) reports that the extension of S.C. 31 into North Carolina would end on U.S. 17 near N.C. 904 in Brunswick County (https://www.google.com/maps/@33.859395,-78.5838954,27612m/data=!3m1!1e3):
Quote
The northern end of Carolina Bays Parkway, or Highway 31, ends at Highway 9 in Little River. The fourth and final phase of the project would pick up there, and take the highway into North Carolina through Brunswick County for about 12 miles.
"It would end on Highway 17 near North Carolina route 904 in Brunswick County," explained Mike Barbee with SC DOT ....
it's expected to be between eight and ten years before the ribbon on the fourth phase is cut.
The current N.C. 904/ U.S. 17 intersection looks like it is relatively near the location of proposed new terrain I-74 going northward from U.S. 17; assuming interstate-grade construction of the fourth phase in both South Carolina and North Carolina, S.C. 31 could eventually either be part of I-74 as depicted in the top map or an I-x74 connecting to I-74's terminus at U.S. 17 in the bottom map. We should have more clarity in about a decade or so .......
NCDOT's current STIP plan does not contain any construction in Brunswick County on I-74 or on the SC 31 extension, which means that no construction (in fact, no detailed planning) is expected before 2025. That might change with respect to the SC 31 extension if SC really pushes it. But not I-74.
Now that the plans to finish I-526 in Charleston have been cancelled, perhaps some of that money will be redirected to fund I-73, but time will tell. And I still say that I-74 makes absolutely no sense being isolated down in the Southeast.
Quote from: Henry on November 19, 2015, 12:59:53 PM
Now that the plans to finish I-526 in Charleston have been cancelled, perhaps some of that money will be redirected to fund I-73, but time will tell. And I still say that I-74 makes absolutely no sense being isolated down in the Southeast.
Doesn't matter if it makes sense or not, it still exists. :colorful:
Quote from: Grzrd on April 12, 2015, 12:42:45 PM
This article (http://www.myrtlebeachonline.com/news/local/article18298637.html) reports on possible Presidential candidate Donald Trump providing some political theater (theater of the absurd?) regarding I-73 in South Carolina by quoting him saying that I-73 needs to be built and that "environmentalists' concerns" have delayed the construction of I-73:
Quote
Trump blamed environmentalists' concerns for delaying the construction of I-73, a proposed interstate that would run from Myrtle Beach to Michigan.
"China's building islands in the middle of the sea," he said. "You think they did an environmental impact study? They just dumped the [expletive] right there." ....
Trump said Myrtle Beach has a bright future but needs to improve access to the area, specifically by building I-73 ....
On environmentalists:"Nobody believes this, but I get awards all the time for good environment deeds. ...I have a great relationship with some [environmentalists]. But a lot of these people are bad people. A lot of them are phonies. They make money off the environment. They fight you just to make fees.
This December 3 article (http://www.myrtlebeachonline.com/news/local/article47887950.html) reports that, in an effort to appease environmental concerns about I-73, the S.C. Department of Transportation Commission has approved an environmental exchange, and that Donald Trump has recently re-emphasized the need to complete I-73:
Quote
The S.C. Department of Transportation Commission revived efforts Thursday to build Interstate 73, a controversial freeway long sought as a way to bring tourists to the Grand Strand.
The commission approved a new plan that members hope will appease environmental concerns about the project. The plan calls for preserving Gunter's Island in Horry County in exchange for wetlands that would be destroyed during construction of the interstate.
"This puts us directly on the path for construction," said Transportation Department commissioner Mike Wooten, who represents Horry and surrounding counties.
Huge hurdles, however, remain before construction can begin.
First, a federal wetlands permit must be approved. Even if the state gets that green light, paying for the project has yet to be resolved ....
In a recent visit to Myrtle Beach, GOP frontrunner Donald Trump emphasized the need to complete the project ....
All told, more than 340 acres of wetlands would be affected.
The wetlands package approved Thursday by the Transportation Department would be part of a federal application to construct the road.
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers could require extensive environmental studies before deciding on whether to approve filing wetlands. The S.C. Department of Health and Environmental Control also would have to issue a water-quality permit ....
Gunter's Island is an area of swamps, forests and streams along the Little Pee Dee River in Horry County. The nearly 7,000 acre tract is home to wild turkeys, black bears, white tailed deer and ducks ....
How the interstate would be paid for remains unknown ....
Will this exchange be viewed as a reasonable swap?
edit
This November 24 article (http://www.thestate.com/news/politics-government/election/article46360730.html) reports on Donald Trump's recent visit to Myrtle Beach referenced in the above article and notes that he "inadvertently" referred to Interstate 73 as Interstate 85:
Quote
"I love Myrtle Beach, I've been here many times, but we've got to get I-[73] built, it's time," Trump said. "It will bring a lot of business, and I guarantee you when I get in there, it's going to start pretty quickly."
Local leaders have lobbied for years to build Interstate 73 to Myrtle Beach, however Trump inadvertently referred to the proposed highway as Interstate 85 in his speech.
I don't think Trump can be accused of being a roadgeek.
I thought funding was in place to at least build 73 from 95 to the 301/501 split near latta. I know that the 301/501 split was redesigned and rebuilt as preparation for the 73 project.
Sorry it's been a few years since I followed this.
Quote from: CanesFan27 on December 05, 2015, 10:45:38 AM
I thought funding was in place to at least build 73 from 95 to the 301/501 split near latta. I know that the 301/501 split was redesigned and rebuilt as preparation for the 73 project.
Sorry it's been a few years since I followed this.
They did all the environmental stuff from the additional funds, but no funds to actually build the road yet. The state wants to build it, but it takes a back-seat on other priorities because they don't give enough funds to SCDOT.
Why does not Myrtle Beach itself get funding for the road? Just tax an extra penny or two on the many vacationers that make the area what it is to raise the money for the road in SC. With NC slowly getting it done in the Tar Heel State, by 2030 we should have it built between I-81 and the Ocean at least.
We all know that I-73 is dead north of I-81 as WV, OH, and MI could care less about the road just like WV and OH could give at rats ass about connecting the two I-74's as well.
I recently noticed that NCDOT updated all their county maps to August, 2015 and they include the proposed route of I-74: Columbus County Map (https://xfer.services.ncdot.gov/imgdot/DOTCountyMaps/PDFs/Columbus_CountyMap_Sheet01_Final_web.pdf), Brunswick County Map (https://xfer.services.ncdot.gov/imgdot/DOTCountyMaps/PDFs/Brunswick_CountyMap_Sheet01_Final_web.pdf).
Other county maps along the route also shoe routes of future I-74 around Rockingham and US 1, but oddly not future I-73. Regardless, if you got the time to browse, check'em out: State Mapping Resources (http://www.ncdot.gov/travel/statemapping/default.html).
Quote from: WashuOtaku on December 07, 2015, 07:06:35 PM
I recently noticed that NCDOT updated all their county maps to August, 2015 and they include the proposed route of I-74: Columbus County Map (https://xfer.services.ncdot.gov/imgdot/DOTCountyMaps/PDFs/Columbus_CountyMap_Sheet01_Final_web.pdf), Brunswick County Map (https://xfer.services.ncdot.gov/imgdot/DOTCountyMaps/PDFs/Brunswick_CountyMap_Sheet01_Final_web.pdf).
Other county maps along the route also shoe routes of future I-74 around Rockingham and US 1, but oddly not future I-73. Regardless, if you got the time to browse, check'em out: State Mapping Resources (http://www.ncdot.gov/travel/statemapping/default.html).
While the I-73/I-74 Bypass of Rockingham is not shown on the Richmond County map, the I-73 proposed path to SC is shown mostly paralleling NC 38. The Triad county maps also show the proposed I-73 and I-74 paths.
Quote from: bob7374 on December 08, 2015, 05:36:23 PM
Quote from: WashuOtaku on December 07, 2015, 07:06:35 PM
I recently noticed that NCDOT updated all their county maps to August, 2015 and they include the proposed route of I-74: Columbus County Map (https://xfer.services.ncdot.gov/imgdot/DOTCountyMaps/PDFs/Columbus_CountyMap_Sheet01_Final_web.pdf), Brunswick County Map (https://xfer.services.ncdot.gov/imgdot/DOTCountyMaps/PDFs/Brunswick_CountyMap_Sheet01_Final_web.pdf).
Other county maps along the route also shoe routes of future I-74 around Rockingham and US 1, but oddly not future I-73. Regardless, if you got the time to browse, check'em out: State Mapping Resources (http://www.ncdot.gov/travel/statemapping/default.html).
While the I-73/I-74 Bypass of Rockingham is not shown on the Richmond County map, the I-73 proposed path to SC is shown mostly paralleling NC 38. The Triad county maps also show the proposed I-73 and I-74 paths.
The I-73/I-74 bypass shows up in the insert maps for Richmond County, as well as future US 1 bypass.
Transportation commission approves step towards I-73
http://www.thestate.com/news/politics-government/politics-columns-blogs/the-buzz/article47851305.html
Does anyone see any Interstate 73 or 74 signs (excluding future signs) going up in South Carolina within the next 20 years? I sure don't.
These statements from politicians that "state money should pay for maintenance of existing highways, not new construction" are disheartening. North Carolina is building close to 100 miles of new highways, mostly freeways.
Quote from: Grzrd on April 27, 2011, 02:20:48 PM
Quote from: CanesFan27 on April 27, 2011, 01:48:47 PM
there are a few more steps to clear before dirt will fly.
http://www.thesunnews.com/2011/04/22/2116499/some-money-approved-for-interstate.html#storylink=misearch
"However, the funding still must clear several more hurdles before it becomes final. First, it must gain approval from the state's Joint Bond Review Committee and then it must be approved by the state's Budget and Control Board"
The I-73 project is one of several that SCDOT has approved in anticipation of the joint bond issue, and SCDOT is soliciting comments on these projects until May 26:
http://www.scdot.org/inside/public_comment_statewide_interstate.shtml
Quote from: CanesFan27 on April 27, 2011, 01:48:47 PM
it appears that there is no approval to build the five miles of highway that would link I-95 and US 501 via I-73.
Here is SCDOT's pdf of the project, which indicates that I-73 would tie into US 501:
http://www.scdot.org/inside/pdfs/public_comment_dillon_county.pdf
The pdf indicates that the project would need an additional $80.5 million in earmarks to meet its total $185.5 million price tag.
(above quote from Interstate 73/74 (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=18.msg98907;topicseen#msg98907) thread)
Quote from: CanesFan27 on December 05, 2015, 10:45:38 AM
I thought funding was in place to at least build 73 from 95 to the 301/501 split near latta. I know that the 301/501 split was redesigned and rebuilt as preparation for the 73 project.
Sorry it's been a few years since I followed this.
This article (http://www.greenvilleonline.com/story/news/2015/12/20/sc-senate-majority-leader-raises--73-concerns/77087286/) reports that the bond plan was abandoned in 2011 after controversy ensued:
Quote
Senate Majority Leader Harvey Peeler of Gaffney says he doesn't object to a $1.3 billion plan to build Interstate 73 from I-95 to the beach, a project the state's highway commissioners revived last week.
But Peeler said Thursday he does object to funding the project, even if most of the funding comes from federal and local sources, before lawmakers fund improvements to other interstates in South Carolina ....
The state Department of Transportation Commission last week approved a plan to purchase and preserve Gunter's Island in Horry County as mitigation for wetlands that would be destroyed in the project, action designed to advance the necessary environmental permit that must be approved before work can proceed ....
The commission's action is the latest chapter in a years-long and controversial project to build a more direct link for tourists from around the nation to get to the Grand Strand. The highway is designed to run from Michigan to Myrtle Beach ....
In 2011, the DOT board passed a bond proposal that included more than $100 million for an interchange on I-95 that could be used for I-73. But after some controversy ensued, the board abandoned the bond plan.
Quote from: Grzrd on December 20, 2015, 09:10:59 PM
This article (http://www.greenvilleonline.com/story/news/2015/12/20/sc-senate-majority-leader-raises--73-concerns/77087286/) reports that the bond plan was abandoned in 2011 after controversy ensued:
Quote
Senate Majority Leader Harvey Peeler of Gaffney says he doesn't object to a $1.3 billion plan to build Interstate 73 from I-95 to the beach, a project the state's highway commissioners revived last week.
But Peeler said Thursday he does object to funding the project, even if most of the funding comes from federal and local sources, before lawmakers fund improvements to other interstates in South Carolina ....
The state Department of Transportation Commission last week approved a plan to purchase and preserve Gunter's Island in Horry County as mitigation for wetlands that would be destroyed in the project, action designed to advance the necessary environmental permit that must be approved before work can proceed ....
The commission's action is the latest chapter in a years-long and controversial project to build a more direct link for tourists from around the nation to get to the Grand Strand. The highway is designed to run from Michigan to Myrtle Beach ....
In 2011, the DOT board passed a bond proposal that included more than $100 million for an interchange on I-95 that could be used for I-73. But after some controversy ensued, the board abandoned the bond plan.
It's sad really because they didn't resolve the budget issues with SCDOT and still haven't to this day. So, they canceled a bond package for a new interstate simply because they wanted to focus on repairing existing roads first and they have yet to do that. :pan:
Quote from: wdcrft63 on December 17, 2015, 06:14:15 PM
These statements from politicians that "state money should pay for maintenance of existing highways, not new construction" are disheartening. North Carolina is building close to 100 miles of new highways, mostly freeways.
This phrase is catching on amongst state officials everywhere. Shows ignorance on their part as to how much federal funding goes towards maintenance already and the fact that federal funding is a reimbursement program, anyway!
Quote from: Grzrd on March 28, 2014, 08:35:02 AM
This article (http://www.therepublic.com/w/SC--Interstate-73-Tolls) reports that SCDOT may be soliciting proposals for a new I-73 toll study in the relatively near future:
It appears the state Transportation Commission will again study whether to use tolls to pay for building Interstate 73 through northeastern South Carolina.
Transportation Commissioner Mike Wooten represents the state's 7th Congressional District where the interstate is planned and says he will ask for a study next month. The Department of Transportation staff is preparing a request for proposals for the study expected to cost as much as $200,000.
Wooten said tolls would probably be combined with other funding to pay for the road.
"Tolling is not going to be enough to pay for it," he said.
A smaller, less extensive study of using tolls was done in the last decade.
C&M Associates, Inc. was contracted to do the $200,000 toll study. Wooten must not have been happy.
http://www.myrtlebeachsc.com/nmb-myrtle-beach-battle-is-holding-up-i-73-route/
Did no one other than me check the math on the original Economic Impact of I-73 in South Carolina study done be Chmura Economics & Analytics in March 2011 for the North Eastern Strategic Alliance? Unfortunately, I was not aware of that study until September of 2011, and by then the claims of "29,000" jobs had been spread far and wide. The 18,856 tourism-related jobs could never be more than 1,305 after corecting for aall the erroneous assumptions and faulty calculations made by Chmura.
To make matters worse, C&M accepted these bogus numbers in the draft report and had also hired Chmura to make more projections.
Quote from: CanesFan27 on December 05, 2015, 10:45:38 AM
I thought funding was in place to at least build 73 from 95 to the 301/501 split near latta. I know that the 301/501 split was redesigned and rebuilt as preparation for the 73 project.
Sorry it's been a few years since I followed this.
This article (http://www.greenvilleonline.com/story/news/politics/2016/02/18/senator-throws-monkey-wrench--73/80548832/) reports that federal earmarked funds held by the state for Interstate 73 may possibly now be used on other roads:
Quote
A state senator filibustering a roads bill says that federal earmarked funds held by the state for Interstate 73 can now be used on other roads.
Sen. Tom Davis, a Beaufort Republican who for a second day held the Senate podium to talk about accountability at the state Department of Transportation, argued that DOT holds millions of dollars in federal earmarked funds that can be used on highway projects different than those the money was received for if the earmarks are 10 years or older.
Davis said the commission's chairman has said that about $50 million in federal earmarks and grants received for I-73 is escrowed by the state Department of Transportation and can only be used on that project.
"That's not true," Davis told the Senate.
He said because of action by Congress late last year, any earmarks at least 10 years old that do not have significant amounts obligated for construction are freed to be used for other purposes.
That totals $96 million in South Carolina, he said, $36 million of it earmarked for I-73. Davis said he learned of the congressional action through his own research, not from anything DOT had told him ....
DOT Chairman Mike Wooten, who lives in Horry County, told The Greenville News Thursday it was his understanding that the federal legislation passed last year would not impact the I-73 funds.
"Sen. Davis may be right," he said. "I hope that is not the case. We went up there and worked hard for that money. I would hate to think it could be reallocated to anything else."
A spokesman for DOT said the agency is still awaiting guidance on the issue from the Federal Highway Administration. ....
Wooten has said repeatedly that the controversial project, which could cost between $1 billion and $2 billion, would not use any state funds. He said it would be paid for with tolls and money raised by Horry County, in addition to the federal funds already received and possible future federal monies ....
Complicating the debate is about $1.3 billion in new money this year from budget surpluses.
Once again, it may be hurry up and wait .........
How long before we see Interstate 73/74 signs in South Carolina (excluding future signs)? It seems like it will be a while.
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on February 19, 2016, 05:10:18 PM
How long before we see Interstate 73/74 signs in South Carolina (excluding future signs)? It seems like it will be a while.
You just answered your own question.
Quote from: Grzrd on February 18, 2016, 11:12:57 PM
Quote from: CanesFan27 on December 05, 2015, 10:45:38 AM
I thought funding was in place to at least build 73 from 95 to the 301/501 split near latta. I know that the 301/501 split was redesigned and rebuilt as preparation for the 73 project.
Sorry it's been a few years since I followed this.
This article (http://www.greenvilleonline.com/story/news/politics/2016/02/18/senator-throws-monkey-wrench--73/80548832/) reports that federal earmarked funds held by the state for Interstate 73 may possibly now be used on other roads:
Quote
A state senator filibustering a roads bill says that federal earmarked funds held by the state for Interstate 73 can now be used on other roads.
Sen. Tom Davis, a Beaufort Republican who for a second day held the Senate podium to talk about accountability at the state Department of Transportation, argued that DOT holds millions of dollars in federal earmarked funds that can be used on highway projects different than those the money was received for if the earmarks are 10 years or older.
Davis said the commission's chairman has said that about $50 million in federal earmarks and grants received for I-73 is escrowed by the state Department of Transportation and can only be used on that project.
"That's not true," Davis told the Senate.
He said because of action by Congress late last year, any earmarks at least 10 years old that do not have significant amounts obligated for construction are freed to be used for other purposes.
That totals $96 million in South Carolina, he said, $36 million of it earmarked for I-73. Davis said he learned of the congressional action through his own research, not from anything DOT had told him ....
DOT Chairman Mike Wooten, who lives in Horry County, told The Greenville News Thursday it was his understanding that the federal legislation passed last year would not impact the I-73 funds.
"Sen. Davis may be right," he said. "I hope that is not the case. We went up there and worked hard for that money. I would hate to think it could be reallocated to anything else."
A spokesman for DOT said the agency is still awaiting guidance on the issue from the Federal Highway Administration. ....
Wooten has said repeatedly that the controversial project, which could cost between $1 billion and $2 billion, would not use any state funds. He said it would be paid for with tolls and money raised by Horry County, in addition to the federal funds already received and possible future federal monies ....
Complicating the debate is about $1.3 billion in new money this year from budget surpluses.
Once again, it may be hurry up and wait .........
Quote from: Strider on October 23, 2013, 08:13:17 PM
I don't know. this is NC we are talking about.
But, I am glad SCDOT is focusing on I-73 first as they should be doing. I-74 is not going to get extended through southeast NC anytime soon due to its proposed routing goes across awfully a lot of wetlands (as you see on the proposed routing map).
But Myrtle Beach doesn't need 2 interstates going there. I would keep I-73 and forget I-74. I also heard they are planning to have another road built going west of SC 22 and US 501 interchange as "SELL" which it will form a beltway around the Myrtle Beach area.
It is necessary to upgrade Grand Strand Expressway rather than building a new highway! There are more roads that need upgrades!! I-85 in SC should be a 6-8 lane highway!!
Quote from: ReeseFerlautoI74/85 on February 24, 2016, 05:58:56 AM
It is necessary to upgrade Grand Strand Expressway rather than building a new highway! There are more roads that need upgrades!! I-85 in SC should be a 6-8 lane highway!!
Agreed, because the current setup is an insult to the main route from Charlotte to Atlanta. I-73 and I-74 can wait a bit longer, since those upgrades are long overdue.
Quote from: Grzrd on February 18, 2016, 11:12:57 PM
This article (http://www.greenvilleonline.com/story/news/politics/2016/02/18/senator-throws-monkey-wrench--73/80548832/) reports that federal earmarked funds held by the state for Interstate 73 may possibly now be used on other roads:
Quote
A state senator filibustering a roads bill says that federal earmarked funds held by the state for Interstate 73 can now be used on other roads.
Sen. Tom Davis, a Beaufort Republican who for a second day held the Senate podium to talk about accountability at the state Department of Transportation, argued that DOT holds millions of dollars in federal earmarked funds that can be used on highway projects different than those the money was received for if the earmarks are 10 years or older .... That totals $96 million in South Carolina, he said, $36 million of it earmarked for I-73.
This February 23 article (http://www.myrtlebeachonline.com/news/local/article62048872.html) reports that Myrtle Beach's U.S. Representative, Tom Rice, is convinced that I-73 does not qualify for the federal earmark rerouting provision that Congress added to the omnibus spending bill in December:
Quote
U.S. Rep. Tom Rice on Tuesday disputed claims by a state lawmaker that congressional earmarks to fund Interstate 73 could be redirected to pay for other road repairs in the state.
State Sen. Tom Davis, a Beaufort Republican, is filibustering a road funding bill in the state legislature and said last week that millions set aside to construct the interstate to connect with Myrtle Beach could be rerouted because it had not been used.
However, Rice, the Republican congressman from Myrtle Beach, said I-73 does not qualify for the rerouting provision that Congress added to the omnibus spending bill in December, to which Davis was referring.
"The provision in the law prevents old earmarks from hanging out there forever, but the key provision is that at least 10 percent of the funds have not been obligated, and here, much more than 10 percent has been obligated," Rice said.
Congress created two earmarks for the construction of I-73. The first amounted to more than $10 million, of which all but an estimated $200,000 has been spent. Of the second earmark for $76 million, about $39 million has been spent, Rice said ....
we've been working steadily on I-73, buying right-of-ways, moving utilities, working on mitigation, and that costs money," Rice said ....
a significant portion of the remaining funding for I-73 is also obligated to pay for Gunter's Island, mitigation property that is intended to offset the impact of the new highway on wetlands.
The funding to construct I-73, estimated to cost more than $1 billion, would not come from state funding but continued federal funding. Additional revenues could also be raised from a new sales tax or tolls, according to Mike Wooten, chairman of the South Carolina Department of Transportation commission.
Very interesting. Never heard the 10% rule invoked before, especially by a politician.
Around these parts, we love being able to sweep up old, useless earmarks -- earmarks far too small to actually fulfill their intended purpose -- and re-purpose them within the legal radius.
If SC wants I-73, The Grand Strand Expressway is a much better alternative!!
Quote from: ReeseFerlautoI74/85 on February 24, 2016, 07:44:35 PM
If SC wants I-73, The Grand Strand Expressway is a much better alternative!!
South Carolina wants "INTERSTATE" 73, they are not going to settle for a super-street design on existing highways nor build a transit line. The problem is that others in the state want the money to repair existing roads and "maybe" expand them. The reality is that South Carolina legislators are tight on money spending to a fault.
Quote from: ReeseFerlautoI74/85 on February 24, 2016, 07:44:35 PM
If SC wants I-73, The Grand Strand Expressway is a much better alternative!!
I think one of the arguments for the GSX is that I-73 is redundant, because it parallels the proposed I-74. This amounts to saying, "SC doesn't have to build a freeway to Myrtle Beach because NC will be generous enough to build one for us." That's not going to happen, folks. If SC backs out of building I-73, you can bet that I-74 is going straight in to Wilmington.
Quote from: wdcrft63 on February 25, 2016, 06:53:43 PM
Quote from: ReeseFerlautoI74/85 on February 24, 2016, 07:44:35 PM
If SC wants I-73, The Grand Strand Expressway is a much better alternative!!
I think one of the arguments for the GSX is that I-73 is redundant, because it parallels the proposed I-74. This amounts to saying, "SC doesn't have to build a freeway to Myrtle Beach because NC will be generous enough to build one for us." That's not going to happen, folks. If SC backs out of building I-73, you can bet that I-74 is going straight in to Wilmington.
I-73 should end at Wilmington!
SM-G360T1
Quote from: ReeseFerlautoI74/85 on February 25, 2016, 07:07:18 PM
Quote from: wdcrft63 on February 25, 2016, 06:53:43 PM
Quote from: ReeseFerlautoI74/85 on February 24, 2016, 07:44:35 PM
If SC wants I-73, The Grand Strand Expressway is a much better alternative!!
I think one of the arguments for the GSX is that I-73 is redundant, because it parallels the proposed I-74. This amounts to saying, "SC doesn't have to build a freeway to Myrtle Beach because NC will be generous enough to build one for us." That's not going to happen, folks. If SC backs out of building I-73, you can bet that I-74 is going straight in to Wilmington.
I-73 should end at Wilmington!
SM-G360T1
Why do you say that if I may ask?
I-74 was to end at Wilmington, not 73
SM-G360T1
But why change the numbers though?
Plus its not official that it will end there as still I-74 is still to go to Myrtle Beach.
Quote from: roadman65 on February 25, 2016, 07:14:55 PM
But why change the numbers though?
Plus its not official that it will end there as still I-74 is still to go to Myrtle Beach.
Right. But NCDOT isn't excited about that connection. If SC backs out of the overall I-73/74 plan, I think NC will do the same.
NC would rather have SC extend I-20 east of Florence so that they could connect it to Wilmington, but SC will not budge on that one.
I-74 will be built in 2020 from Rockingham to the north connecting it to the I-73/I-74 freeway already built northward and upgrade arterial US 74 from Hamlett to Laurinburg to interstate standards. So they do have at least the High Point to Lumberton freeway as part of the interstate network in stone anyway.
Quote from: roadman65 on February 27, 2016, 07:40:20 PM
NC would rather have SC extend I-20 east of Florence so that they could connect it to Wilmington, but SC will not budge on that one.
Really? That would be a lot of construction for minimal distance savings over 20-95-74.
And 2020? Dang that is long
SM-G360T1
Quote from: ReeseFerlautoI74/85 on February 27, 2016, 11:03:03 PM
And 2020? Dang that is long
SM-G360T1
I didn't say it would be quick.
Quote from: NE2 on February 27, 2016, 10:51:11 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on February 27, 2016, 07:40:20 PM
NC would rather have SC extend I-20 east of Florence so that they could connect it to Wilmington, but SC will not budge on that one.
Really? That would be a lot of construction for minimal distance savings over 20-95-74.
I don't think the idea of extending I-20 is active in either NC or SC.
Quote from: wdcrft63 on February 28, 2016, 06:46:15 PM
Quote from: NE2 on February 27, 2016, 10:51:11 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on February 27, 2016, 07:40:20 PM
NC would rather have SC extend I-20 east of Florence so that they could connect it to Wilmington, but SC will not budge on that one.
Really? That would be a lot of construction for minimal distance savings over 20-95-74.
I don't think the idea of extending I-20 is active in either NC or SC.
It's just an idea that is popular in the Fictional Highways realm, and will never happen here for the reason stated above.
Quote from: Henry on March 04, 2016, 10:32:42 AM
Quote from: wdcrft63 on February 28, 2016, 06:46:15 PM
Quote from: NE2 on February 27, 2016, 10:51:11 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on February 27, 2016, 07:40:20 PM
NC would rather have SC extend I-20 east of Florence so that they could connect it to Wilmington, but SC will not budge on that one.
Really? That would be a lot of construction for minimal distance savings over 20-95-74.
I don't think the idea of extending I-20 is active in either NC or SC.
It's just an idea that is popular in the Fictional Highways realm, and will never happen here for the reason stated above.
Mike Easley posts in the Fictional Highways board?
Yes according to Wikipedia it was considered but never brought to AASHTO for consideration. It was the idea to connect Atlanta to the Port of Wilmington and it was not to keen with SC and also dropped in 2005 after Easley left office.
So here is a rare update: Study links SC 22, southern evacuation route, to build I-73 (http://www.thestate.com/news/state/south-carolina/article67975677.html).
Highlight from the article:
- Tolls would raise $2.3 billion over 40 years
- 85 mph speed limit would be allowed
- I-73 would connect with I-95 near Dillon
My opinion on it, I question the speed limit, which is 15mph higher than the top speed in the state. A similar sales pitch was done in North Carolina raising speeds to only 75mph if I-95 becomes a toll road and that fell flat in the General Assembly. I expect no different in South Carolina, especially since they have legislators kicking and screaming all they can to keep road funding grossly underfunded to maintain a low gasoline tax.
Quote from: WashuOtaku on March 26, 2016, 06:08:29 PM
So here is a rare update: Study links SC 22, southern evacuation route, to build I-73 (http://www.thestate.com/news/state/south-carolina/article67975677.html).
Maybe that bit at the end of the article about requiring opponents of the ACOE permit to post bond should be considered at the national level.
Yes, 85 is too much for a speed limit in SC. I could see it work in any of the Western states, but not in the East.
I doubt construction on any more of Interstate 73 & 74 in South Carolina will begin for at least 10 years if not longer.
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on March 28, 2016, 03:55:13 PM
I doubt construction on any more of Interstate 73 & 74 in South Carolina will begin for at least 10 years if not longer.
We'll see what will be done to I-74 in NC before we can speculate on construction in SC. IIRC, there are arguments that I-74 should go to Wilmington, while the original plans have it curving back to the SW, a la I-64, towards Myrtle Beach.
I agree. Interstate 74 in North Carolina should be completed first.
Quote from: Henry on March 28, 2016, 10:44:26 AM
Yes, 85 is too much for a speed limit in SC. I could see it work in any of the Western states, but not in the East.
Why? There are areas in the Carolinas (coastal plain especially) that are as flat as a pancake with almost unlimited viability. Think west Texas with grass. 80+ would not be an issue on a properly designed road in those areas.
Quote from: slorydn1 on April 06, 2016, 07:33:03 AM
Quote from: Henry on March 28, 2016, 10:44:26 AM
Yes, 85 is too much for a speed limit in SC. I could see it work in any of the Western states, but not in the East.
Why? There are areas in the Carolinas (coastal plain especially) that are as flat as a pancake with almost unlimited viability. Think west Texas with grass. 80+ would not be an issue on a properly designed road in those areas.
The political will isn't there is all. North Carolina recently struck down 75mph for tolls and Pennsylvania passed a law several years ago for 70mph and just now getting the Turnpike Authority to raise the limits. Can the roads handle it, sure; but if the state cap is 70mph, then it goes no faster than that.
Quote from: slorydn1 on April 06, 2016, 07:33:03 AM
Quote from: Henry on March 28, 2016, 10:44:26 AM
Yes, 85 is too much for a speed limit in SC. I could see it work in any of the Western states, but not in the East.
Why? There are areas in the Carolinas (coastal plain especially) that are as flat as a pancake with almost unlimited viability. Think west Texas with grass. 80+ would not be an issue on a properly designed road in those areas.
Think west Texas with trees and with numerous shoulder-less bridges. Also the only interstates in SC that are flat are 95 (fairly busy) and 26 is flat only east of Orangeburg.
Quote from: WashuOtaku on April 06, 2016, 12:20:59 PM
Quote from: slorydn1 on April 06, 2016, 07:33:03 AM
Quote from: Henry on March 28, 2016, 10:44:26 AM
Yes, 85 is too much for a speed limit in SC. I could see it work in any of the Western states, but not in the East.
Why? There are areas in the Carolinas (coastal plain especially) that are as flat as a pancake with almost unlimited viability. Think west Texas with grass. 80+ would not be an issue on a properly designed road in those areas.
The political will isn't there is all. North Carolina recently struck down 75mph for tolls and Pennsylvania passed a law several years ago for 70mph and just now getting the Turnpike Authority to raise the limits. Can the roads handle it, sure; but if the state cap is 70mph, then it goes no faster than that.
Oh I agree. I was basically commenting on the blanket statement that it can work in western states but not in the east-I should have been more clear.
There are areas in the east-NC, SC, GA, FL especially, where 80+ would work on
properly designed roads. I understand that the various state governments would have to pass laws to raise the maximum but I thought that was so self evident that I didn't need to comment on it. I understand that I-95 and I-26 wouldn't fit the standard of properly designed, at least not yet. There are other Interstates being built (and several non-Interstate freeways) that already do, or would in the future.
Quote from: slorydn1 on April 08, 2016, 10:36:43 AM
Quote from: WashuOtaku on April 06, 2016, 12:20:59 PM
Quote from: slorydn1 on April 06, 2016, 07:33:03 AM
Quote from: Henry on March 28, 2016, 10:44:26 AM
Yes, 85 is too much for a speed limit in SC. I could see it work in any of the Western states, but not in the East.
Why? There are areas in the Carolinas (coastal plain especially) that are as flat as a pancake with almost unlimited viability. Think west Texas with grass. 80+ would not be an issue on a properly designed road in those areas.
The political will isn't there is all. North Carolina recently struck down 75mph for tolls and Pennsylvania passed a law several years ago for 70mph and just now getting the Turnpike Authority to raise the limits. Can the roads handle it, sure; but if the state cap is 70mph, then it goes no faster than that.
Oh I agree. I was basically commenting on the blanket statement that it can work in western states but not in the east-I should have been more clear.
There are areas in the east-NC, SC, GA, FL especially, where 80+ would work on properly designed roads. I understand that the various state governments would have to pass laws to raise the maximum but I thought that was so self evident that I didn't need to comment on it. I understand that I-95 and I-26 wouldn't fit the standard of properly designed, at least not yet. There are other Interstates being built (and several non-Interstate freeways) that already do, or would in the future.
My mom said she remembers the speed limit being 80 on I-95 in Florida back in the 1960s I'm not sure I believe her
A progress is made on I-73 in SC. From the looks of it.. if the project is a go (pending review from environmentalists, the Corp of Engineers and public comments) it will more likely to be built as a toll road. There are a few links regarding the I-73 in SC:
http://www.myrtlebeachonline.com/news/local/article88592432.html
http://www.thestate.com/news/local/article89074942.html
http://www.myrtlebeachonline.com/news/local/article89157212.html
http://wbtw.com/2016/07/12/commission-board-says-i-73-will-be-built/
I hope Interstate 73 is built in South Carolina, as well as Interstate 74. Otherwise, North Carolina will have a lot of explaining to do to future generations why they picked such hair-brained numbers.
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on July 13, 2016, 04:51:31 PM
I hope Interstate 73 is built in South Carolina, as well as Interstate 74. Otherwise, North Carolina will have a lot of explaining to do to future generations why they picked such hair-brained numbers.
Blame Congress. They're the ones responsible for the numbers, not NC.
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on July 13, 2016, 04:51:31 PM
I hope Interstate 73 is built in South Carolina, as well as Interstate 74. Otherwise, North Carolina will have a lot of explaining to do to future generations why they picked such hair-brained numbers.
I hope Interstate 73 is built too, but not so much about I-74 though, and again... Congress chose the numbers, not NC. NC had nothing to do with it in 1990's.
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on July 13, 2016, 04:51:31 PM
I hope Interstate 73 is built in South Carolina, as well as Interstate 74. Otherwise, North Carolina will have a lot of explaining to do to future generations why they picked such hair-brained numbers.
My three year old son (future generation) loves I-73. He thinks it's neat.
Quote from: CanesFan27 on July 13, 2016, 07:26:17 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on July 13, 2016, 04:51:31 PM
I hope Interstate 73 is built in South Carolina, as well as Interstate 74. Otherwise, North Carolina will have a lot of explaining to do to future generations why they picked such hair-brained numbers.
My three year old son (future generation) loves I-73. He thinks it's neat.
I think I loved the I-73 and I-74 numbers until the adult world took a hold on my mind. :-D
Thinking about it though, the plans for I-73 in SC (combined with SELL (Southern Evacuation Lifeline)) will not truly fix US 501 from Conway to Myrtle Beach itself. For the record, how used is SC 22 at this point? (considering I have only traveled the eastern part from SC 31 to US 17)
Quote from: 74/171FAN on July 13, 2016, 08:22:55 PM
Quote from: CanesFan27 on July 13, 2016, 07:26:17 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on July 13, 2016, 04:51:31 PM
I hope Interstate 73 is built in South Carolina, as well as Interstate 74. Otherwise, North Carolina will have a lot of explaining to do to future generations why they picked such hair-brained numbers.
My three year old son (future generation) loves I-73. He thinks it's neat.
I think I loved the I-73 and I-74 numbers until the adult world took a hold on my mind. :-D
Thinking about it though, the plans for I-73 in SC (combined with SELL (Southern Evacuation Lifeline)) will not truly fix US 501 from Conway to Myrtle Beach itself. For the record, how used is SC 22 at this point? (considering I have only traveled the eastern part from SC 31 to US 17)
I don't know because I have not traveled in SC 22 for like a decade. But, I don't understand where the SELL came in? The point of I-73 in SC is to connect Myrtle Beach to the interstate system. But, where does SELL come in?
Quote from: CanesFan27 on July 13, 2016, 07:26:17 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on July 13, 2016, 04:51:31 PM
I hope Interstate 73 is built in South Carolina, as well as Interstate 74. Otherwise, North Carolina will have a lot of explaining to do to future generations why they picked such hair-brained numbers.
My three year old son (future generation) loves I-73. He thinks it's neat.
He loves it because he can't wait to show
his great-grandchildren its construction. :bigass:
Quote from: Strider on July 13, 2016, 08:29:55 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on July 13, 2016, 08:22:55 PM
Quote from: CanesFan27 on July 13, 2016, 07:26:17 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on July 13, 2016, 04:51:31 PM
I hope Interstate 73 is built in South Carolina, as well as Interstate 74. Otherwise, North Carolina will have a lot of explaining to do to future generations why they picked such hair-brained numbers.
My three year old son (future generation) loves I-73. He thinks it's neat.
I think I loved the I-73 and I-74 numbers until the adult world took a hold on my mind. :-D
Thinking about it though, the plans for I-73 in SC (combined with SELL (Southern Evacuation Lifeline)) will not truly fix US 501 from Conway to Myrtle Beach itself. For the record, how used is SC 22 at this point? (considering I have only traveled the eastern part from SC 31 to US 17)
I don't know because I have not traveled in SC 22 for like a decade. But, I don't understand where the SELL came in? The point of I-73 in SC is to connect Myrtle Beach to the interstate system. But, where does SELL come in?
This link (see map on page) (http://www.wmbfnews.com/story/31308606/southern-evacuation-lifeline-funds-awaiting-horry-county-council-approval) shows the western endpoint at the current US 501/SC 22 interchange. It seems to be mainly geared towards areas south of Myrtle Beach though the way I see it. (Garden City, Surfside Beach, Murrells Inlet, etc.)
Quote from: 74/171FAN on July 13, 2016, 09:27:27 PM
Quote from: Strider on July 13, 2016, 08:29:55 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on July 13, 2016, 08:22:55 PM
Quote from: CanesFan27 on July 13, 2016, 07:26:17 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on July 13, 2016, 04:51:31 PM
I hope Interstate 73 is built in South Carolina, as well as Interstate 74. Otherwise, North Carolina will have a lot of explaining to do to future generations why they picked such hair-brained numbers.
My three year old son (future generation) loves I-73. He thinks it's neat.
I think I loved the I-73 and I-74 numbers until the adult world took a hold on my mind. :-D
Thinking about it though, the plans for I-73 in SC (combined with SELL (Southern Evacuation Lifeline)) will not truly fix US 501 from Conway to Myrtle Beach itself. For the record, how used is SC 22 at this point? (considering I have only traveled the eastern part from SC 31 to US 17)
I don't know because I have not traveled in SC 22 for like a decade. But, I don't understand where the SELL came in? The point of I-73 in SC is to connect Myrtle Beach to the interstate system. But, where does SELL come in?
This link (see map on page) (http://www.wmbfnews.com/story/31308606/southern-evacuation-lifeline-funds-awaiting-horry-county-council-approval) shows the western endpoint at the current US 501/SC 22 interchange. It seems to be mainly geared towards areas south of Myrtle Beach though the way I see it. (Garden City, Surfside Beach, Murrells Inlet, etc.)
Oh i see.. thanks for posting the link. SC 22 extension maybe?
This July 11 article (http://www.starnewsonline.com/news/20160711/remember-carolina-bays-parkway-extension-it-might-be-back) reports that NCDOT has selected an environmental engineering firm to conduct an environmental study of a an extension of the Carolina Bays Parkway in Brunswick County:
Quote
The proposed Carolina Bays Parkway extension has been talked about for more than a decade, but recent progress could expedite the project in coming months. Last month the N.C. Department of Transportation selected an engineering firm to complete the environmental study for the portion of the roadway in North Carolina.
According to the DOT, the extension would link the Carolina Bays Parkway -- also known as S.C. 31 -- from S.C. 9 in Horry County, S.C., to U.S. 17 in Brunswick County. The parkway -- a six-lane, limited-access highway that parallels the Grand Strand -- ends a few miles before the North Carolina line, causing motorists to use two-lane Hickman Road to access U.S. 17.
The proposed project would provide a more direct connection between U.S. 17 and S.C. 31. The hope is that the parkway would relieve traffic congestion in southwestern Brunswick County -- particularly around Hickman Road.
The environmental study will examine areas proposed highway routes would cross and will push the project closer to state funding, said Jay McInnis, DOT project engineer.
"We want to know what we should take into account when planning the project," he said, "The result of that will be where we go."
Once the study is complete, the project -- estimated to cost anywhere from $202 million to $280 million -- will be reviewed by the state and may or may not be granted funding based on a cost-benefit analysis.
Eventually, the linked roadways could become a part of the proposed Interstate 74, which is planned to run from the upper Midwest through North Carolina into South Carolina.
Here's a map of the various routes being studied:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/gallery/1615_14_07_16_6_39_24.jpeg)
Wilmington is the red-headed stepchild. SC refused NC's request to extend I-20 from Florence to Wilmington and yet they expect NC to extend I-74 to Myrtle Beach. The Carolina Bays Parkway should be an I-x74, not I-74, but I digress...
Quote from: Grzrd on July 14, 2016, 06:50:48 PM
This July 11 article (http://www.starnewsonline.com/news/20160711/remember-carolina-bays-parkway-extension-it-might-be-back) reports that NCDOT has selected an environmental engineering firm to conduct an environmental study of a an extension of the Carolina Bays Parkway in Brunswick County:
Quote
The proposed Carolina Bays Parkway extension has been talked about for more than a decade, but recent progress could expedite the project in coming months. Last month the N.C. Department of Transportation selected an engineering firm to complete the environmental study for the portion of the roadway in North Carolina.
According to the DOT, the extension would link the Carolina Bays Parkway -- also known as S.C. 31 -- from S.C. 9 in Horry County, S.C., to U.S. 17 in Brunswick County. The parkway -- a six-lane, limited-access highway that parallels the Grand Strand -- ends a few miles before the North Carolina line, causing motorists to use two-lane Hickman Road to access U.S. 17.
The proposed project would provide a more direct connection between U.S. 17 and S.C. 31. The hope is that the parkway would relieve traffic congestion in southwestern Brunswick County -- particularly around Hickman Road.
The environmental study will examine areas proposed highway routes would cross and will push the project closer to state funding, said Jay McInnis, DOT project engineer.
"We want to know what we should take into account when planning the project," he said, "The result of that will be where we go."
Once the study is complete, the project -- estimated to cost anywhere from $202 million to $280 million -- will be reviewed by the state and may or may not be granted funding based on a cost-benefit analysis.
Eventually, the linked roadways could become a part of the proposed Interstate 74, which is planned to run from the upper Midwest through North Carolina into South Carolina.
Here's a map of the various routes being studied:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/gallery/1615_14_07_16_6_39_24.jpeg)
Awesome. it could become I-x74. I still think I-74 should just end in Wilmington, but oh well. Looking at the diagram, looks like Alternative "A" is the best choice, but Alternative "F" is shorter and maybe least expensive?
Quote from: LM117 on July 14, 2016, 10:35:39 PM
Wilmington is the red-headed stepchild. SC refused NC's request to extend I-20 from Florence to Wilmington and yet they expect NC to extend I-74 to Myrtle Beach. The Carolina Bays Parkway should be an I-x74, not I-74, but I digress...
Well of course, U.S. Congress mandate it to go into South Carolina.
Quote from: WashuOtaku on July 15, 2016, 07:55:52 PM
Quote from: LM117 on July 14, 2016, 10:35:39 PM
Wilmington is the red-headed stepchild. SC refused NC's request to extend I-20 from Florence to Wilmington and yet they expect NC to extend I-74 to Myrtle Beach. The Carolina Bays Parkway should be an I-x74, not I-74, but I digress...
Well of course, U.S. Congress mandate it to go into South Carolina.
True, but it still doesn't make any sense. Nobody would use I-74 to go to Myrtle Beach except for those coming from Wilmington and points north on US-17. Everybody else would come in on I-73. Congress really screwed this one up.
Quote from: LM117 on July 15, 2016, 09:52:51 PM
Quote from: WashuOtaku on July 15, 2016, 07:55:52 PM
Quote from: LM117 on July 14, 2016, 10:35:39 PM
Wilmington is the red-headed stepchild. SC refused NC's request to extend I-20 from Florence to Wilmington and yet they expect NC to extend I-74 to Myrtle Beach. The Carolina Bays Parkway should be an I-x74, not I-74, but I digress...
Well of course, U.S. Congress mandate it to go into South Carolina.
True, but it still doesn't make any sense. Nobody would use I-74 to go to Myrtle Beach except for those coming from Wilmington and points north on US-17. Everybody else would come in on I-73. Congress really screwed this one up.
Exactly. Congress really screwed this I-74 fiasco up. Not sure why they want I-74 to go to Myrtle Beach.
They wanted I-74 to go to (or pass) Myrtle Beach not primarily for access to that resort area itself, but because it, in both its first 1991 ISTEA HPC-5 iteration and the first draft of the later "Interstate-ized" edition, provided a continuous corridor for the entire length of US 17 (and/or parts of US 701) from Charleston north to Myrtle Beach and environs. The problem was it turned inland more or less along US 501 from the Myrtle Beach area, which originally left the coastal section north of US 501 off the corridor map. When I-73 was initially proposed, it would have used the 1991 corridor definition as its route, turning NW at Myrtle Beach. When the 73/74 "split but sometimes together" concept was developed and subsequently included in the NHS legislation of 1995, the opportunity to fill this gap presented itself -- so the awkward turn of I-74 from east to southeast to southwest in the SE corner of NC was instituted.
Since the corridor was truncated to Georgetown (but will likely never extend past the present south end of SC 31), the whole mis-shapen I-74 corridor has become even more absurd! (The following is a quick "big-toe" dip into the quasi-fictional realm): IMO, a logical solution (assuming the present numbering system remains with us) is this: (1) [eventually] deploy 73 as currently planned NW from Myrtle Beach, (2) take 74 east toward Wilmington along US 74, ending it at the under-construction I-140 junction, (3) re-designate the SC31/Carolina Bays parkway, its planned extension to the NC line, and US 17 north to and around Wilmington via I-140. One would have to strike some legislative language and add others, but, hey, HPC 5's a piece of amendable legislation, not the revealed word of God (any sneaky congressperson worth his/her salary could do this and be in & out with barely a trace!). Make (3) an extension of I-140, a 2nd section of I-97, a x73 -- whatever works & looks good on paper. And that swamp-ridden section of I-74 along NC 211? If possible, kick it to the curb, or, if enough whining occurs from the gallery, make it a x74 and keep it bottled up in environmental studies for the foreseeable future!
Back to reality -- the whole 73/74 scheme is a combination of local political will and effective initial PR work -- though not particularly effective follow-up; although it worked on NCDOT, they were likely predisposed to such a concept -- willing partners in what, overall, was & is a premise with a decidedly shaky foundation. Like its I-69 "cousin" to the west, it's being addressed as a series of SIU's -- actually delineated as such within NC, and effectively so in the other traversed areas. And that's the sole way that it'll get done at all -- and while it now seems that there's at least a faint glimmer of hope for the SC I-73 segment (although this project always seems like it's on life support, with its longtime backers always making a big deal whenever a pulse can be felt), attempting to extend this possibly renewed momentum to the other "twin" is a bit of a reach. The portion of the route paralleling the shore, regardless of which of the two states contains the more active of the SIU's, has always been a product of localized Gordon Gekko-esque avarice; ensuring that the linear length of the Stupid Slogan T-shirt Capital of the Southern World is fully served by an equitable traffic distribution apparatus, independent from but readily serving the masses fed to it by the inland connectors, is the goal here for both the short & long term. But the coastal SC interests that have always functioned as the "founding fathers" of the whole HPC 5 concept may have made a judgmental error in attempting to be the main, if not sole, recipients of the overall benefits of the twinned corridor. It's not that it's (just) ethically wrong to exclude the Wilmington area from the corridor concept's benefits -- it's politically misguided, given that NC actually wants to construct Interstate freeways. While in SC the will might be there -- although even that is in constant danger of flatlining -- the means to do so are dicey at best. NC certainly doesn't seem to have any qualms about expediting corridors serving its coastal areas -- so it would seem logical to calculate that an extension of the Carolina Bays parkway corridor into NC would be more useful extending north to, let's say, the southern end of I-140 than waiting for a NC 211 upgrade that may be the proverbial bridge too far. If one requires or even wants a 2nd corridor feeding one's constant need for those tourist dollars, let I-40 (via 140) be that corridor -- it'll draw a separate tourist base from I-73, even providing a more efficient pathway for potential customers from Virginia and beyond!
Sure, the Myrtle Beach contingent will have to suck it up and share some of the influx with Wilmington and the more nascent Cape Fear resort facilities -- but I've been in retail before, and 50-60% of something is far superior to 100% of nothing! SC may not have their full-length coastal Interstate any more -- but they can at least make a reasonable amount of lemonade from the lemon that characterizes their section of the 73/74 corridor -- if they play their cards correctly!
Quote from: LM117 on July 15, 2016, 09:52:51 PM
Quote from: WashuOtaku on July 15, 2016, 07:55:52 PM
Quote from: LM117 on July 14, 2016, 10:35:39 PM
Wilmington is the red-headed stepchild. SC refused NC's request to extend I-20 from Florence to Wilmington and yet they expect NC to extend I-74 to Myrtle Beach. The Carolina Bays Parkway should be an I-x74, not I-74, but I digress...
Well of course, U.S. Congress mandate it to go into South Carolina.
True, but it still doesn't make any sense. Nobody would use I-74 to go to Myrtle Beach except for those coming from Wilmington and points north on US-17. Everybody else would come in on I-73. Congress really screwed this one up.
To Myrtle Beach from within North Carolina, no and I'm sure (when constructed) it will not be signed that (or possibly Georgetown) till the split around Bolton; current I-74 shows Rockingham/Wilmington along US 74. Like some interstates, it will serve different purposes in different ways: by giving probably the best access to Brunswick County beaches for those in North Carolina while providing an interstate route between Georgetown and Wilmington.
All honestly, I-74 shouldn't really exist in the Carolinas. Could easily redesignate the section Triad to something else, make Carolina Bays Parkway a spur of I-73 and convert the Rockingham-Bolton route into part of an interstate between Charlotte and Wilmington which people really wants. But this is something everyone on this board has mention as well, so nothing new.
Quote from: Grzrd on July 14, 2016, 06:50:48 PM
This July 11 article (http://www.starnewsonline.com/news/20160711/remember-carolina-bays-parkway-extension-it-might-be-back) reports that NCDOT has selected an environmental engineering firm to conduct an environmental study of a an extension of the Carolina Bays Parkway in Brunswick County:
Here's a map of the various routes being studied:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/gallery/1615_14_07_16_6_39_24.jpeg)
If you want to bet, bet on route B. There's been major development including two golf courses along Hickman Road on the NC side of the border, and most of these proposed routes blast right through those developments. The only option is going to be to swing way to the north.
Quote from: LM117 on July 14, 2016, 10:35:39 PM
Wilmington is the red-headed stepchild. SC refused NC's request to extend I-20 from Florence to Wilmington and yet they expect NC to extend I-74 to Myrtle Beach. The Carolina Bays Parkway should be an I-x74, not I-74, but I digress...
I-20 to Myrtle Beach makes more sense to me than I-74 that will never be completed between NC and Cincinnati.
With that being said the US74 corridor should be an interstate from I-26 to Wilmington... but this is getting into fantasy territory
Quote from: jwolfer on July 16, 2016, 11:08:39 AM
Quote from: LM117 on July 14, 2016, 10:35:39 PM
Wilmington is the red-headed stepchild. SC refused NC's request to extend I-20 from Florence to Wilmington and yet they expect NC to extend I-74 to Myrtle Beach. The Carolina Bays Parkway should be an I-x74, not I-74, but I digress...
With that being said the US74 corridor should be an interstate from I-26 to Wilmington... but this is getting into fantasy territory
Not exactly. It's on NC's radar.
http://www.charlotteobserver.com/news/local/article9166415.html (http://www.charlotteobserver.com/news/local/article9166415.html)
QuoteMcCrory also targeted two other highways to be upgraded to interstate standards: U.S. 74 from Asheville through Charlotte to Wilmington, and U.S. 70 in the eastern part of the state.
The whole route from Wilmington to I-26 would nost likely carry multiple designations due to I-74's routing. Other than I-74 from somewhere near Bolton where it turns towards Shallotte and SC to Rockingham, it would have to be an I-x74 from Bolton to Wilmington, another I-x74 from Rockingham to I-277 in Charlotte using the Monroe Bypass and an upgraded US-74/Independence Blvd, and an I-x26 from I-26 in Columbus to I-85 near Kings Mountain. Traffic would have to use I-485 to get from one half of the corridor to the other (except for those whose destination is Charlotte).
The biggest hangup is whether or not FHWA would approve the Monroe Bypass as an interstate since it's being built as a toll road. I believe that's why NC-540 around Raleigh isn't I-540.
If there are measures in place with the Monroe Bypass to make it toll-free once the facility's financing has been paid off, it likely would gain FHWA approval as a part of an Interstate corridor. Since I for one haven't seen the authorizing legislation, I have no idea if this is the case or not. Maybe one of you more local/NC posters can enlighten?
Quote from: LM117 on July 16, 2016, 11:42:59 AM
Quote from: jwolfer on July 16, 2016, 11:08:39 AM
Quote from: LM117 on July 14, 2016, 10:35:39 PM
Wilmington is the red-headed stepchild. SC refused NC's request to extend I-20 from Florence to Wilmington and yet they expect NC to extend I-74 to Myrtle Beach. The Carolina Bays Parkway should be an I-x74, not I-74, but I digress...
With that being said the US74 corridor should be an interstate from I-26 to Wilmington... but this is getting into fantasy territory
Not exactly. It's on NC's radar.
http://www.charlotteobserver.com/news/local/article9166415.html (http://www.charlotteobserver.com/news/local/article9166415.html)
QuoteMcCrory also targeted two other highways to be upgraded to interstate standards: U.S. 74 from Asheville through Charlotte to Wilmington, and U.S. 70 in the eastern part of the state.
The whole route from Wilmington to I-26 would nost likely carry multiple designations due to I-74's routing. Other than I-74 from somewhere near Bolton where it turns towards Shallotte and SC to Rockingham, it would have to be an I-x74 from Bolton to Wilmington, another I-x74 from Rockingham to I-277 in Charlotte using the Monroe Bypass and an upgraded US-74/Independence Blvd, and an I-x26 from I-26 in Columbus to I-85 near Kings Mountain. Traffic would have to use I-485 to get from one half of the corridor to the other (except for those whose destination is Charlotte).
The biggest hangup is whether or not FHWA would approve the Monroe Bypass as an interstate since it's being built as a toll road. I believe that's why NC-540 around Raleigh isn't I-540.
I like I-28 better than 74.. but I am not gonna loose sleep over it.
As was disclosed in the (eventually) I-42/I-87 numbering circus, there is currently no NC 36 state route. Given NCDOT's particular priorities, and the fact that 36 is an entirely appropriate number for this location within the I-grid, I'd be willing to bet that if & when the dust clears regarding a I-26-to-Rockingham corridor, they'll submit I-36 as their preferred designation.
Quote from: sparker on July 16, 2016, 04:34:58 AM
They wanted I-74 to go to (or pass) Myrtle Beach not primarily for access to that resort area itself, but because it, in both its first 1991 ISTEA HPC-5 iteration and the first draft of the later "Interstate-ized" edition, provided a continuous corridor for the entire length of US 17 (and/or parts of US 701) from Charleston north to Myrtle Beach and environs. The problem was it turned inland more or less along US 501 from the Myrtle Beach area, which originally left the coastal section north of US 501 off the corridor map. When I-73 was initially proposed, it would have used the 1991 corridor definition as its route, turning NW at Myrtle Beach. When the 73/74 "split but sometimes together" concept was developed and subsequently included in the NHS legislation of 1995, the opportunity to fill this gap presented itself -- so the awkward turn of I-74 from east to southeast to southwest in the SE corner of NC was instituted.
Since the corridor was truncated to Georgetown (but will likely never extend past the present south end of SC 31), the whole mis-shapen I-74 corridor has become even more absurd! (The following is a quick "big-toe" dip into the quasi-fictional realm): IMO, a logical solution (assuming the present numbering system remains with us) is this: (1) [eventually] deploy 73 as currently planned NW from Myrtle Beach, (2) take 74 east toward Wilmington along US 74, ending it at the under-construction I-140 junction, (3) re-designate the SC31/Carolina Bays parkway, its planned extension to the NC line, and US 17 north to and around Wilmington via I-140. One would have to strike some legislative language and add others, but, hey, HPC 5's a piece of amendable legislation, not the revealed word of God (any sneaky congressperson worth his/her salary could do this and be in & out with barely a trace!). Make (3) an extension of I-140, a 2nd section of I-97, a x73 -- whatever works & looks good on paper. And that swamp-ridden section of I-74 along NC 211? If possible, kick it to the curb, or, if enough whining occurs from the gallery, make it a x74 and keep it bottled up in environmental studies for the foreseeable future!
Back to reality -- the whole 73/74 scheme is a combination of local political will and effective initial PR work -- though not particularly effective follow-up; although it worked on NCDOT, they were likely predisposed to such a concept -- willing partners in what, overall, was & is a premise with a decidedly shaky foundation. Like its I-69 "cousin" to the west, it's being addressed as a series of SIU's -- actually delineated as such within NC, and effectively so in the other traversed areas. And that's the sole way that it'll get done at all -- and while it now seems that there's at least a faint glimmer of hope for the SC I-73 segment (although this project always seems like it's on life support, with its longtime backers always making a big deal whenever a pulse can be felt), attempting to extend this possibly renewed momentum to the other "twin" is a bit of a reach. The portion of the route paralleling the shore, regardless of which of the two states contains the more active of the SIU's, has always been a product of localized Gordon Gekko-esque avarice; ensuring that the linear length of the Stupid Slogan T-shirt Capital of the Southern World is fully served by an equitable traffic distribution apparatus, independent from but readily serving the masses fed to it by the inland connectors, is the goal here for both the short & long term. But the coastal SC interests that have always functioned as the "founding fathers" of the whole HPC 5 concept may have made a judgmental error in attempting to be the main, if not sole, recipients of the overall benefits of the twinned corridor. It's not that it's (just) ethically wrong to exclude the Wilmington area from the corridor concept's benefits -- it's politically misguided, given that NC actually wants to construct Interstate freeways. While in SC the will might be there -- although even that is in constant danger of flatlining -- the means to do so are dicey at best. NC certainly doesn't seem to have any qualms about expediting corridors serving its coastal areas -- so it would seem logical to calculate that an extension of the Carolina Bays parkway corridor into NC would be more useful extending north to, let's say, the southern end of I-140 than waiting for a NC 211 upgrade that may be the proverbial bridge too far. If one requires or even wants a 2nd corridor feeding one's constant need for those tourist dollars, let I-40 (via 140) be that corridor -- it'll draw a separate tourist base from I-73, even providing a more efficient pathway for potential customers from Virginia and beyond!
Sure, the Myrtle Beach contingent will have to suck it up and share some of the influx with Wilmington and the more nascent Cape Fear resort facilities -- but I've been in retail before, and 50-60% of something is far superior to 100% of nothing! SC may not have their full-length coastal Interstate any more -- but they can at least make a reasonable amount of lemonade from the lemon that characterizes their section of the 73/74 corridor -- if they play their cards correctly!
Good words.
I only support I-73 because I know that building one interstate will connect MB with the Triad and Roanoke Valley. That is the only section of I-73 I want to see being built. I don't really want I-74 around. I agree they should just end I-74 in Wilmington like others mention/suggested, or just eliminate I-74 and keep I-73. Myrtle Beach does not need two interstates to end at the same place. That is what bothers me about I-74 routing.
SC has been attempting to build I-73 and lately they seemed to get it going, as of last week or two, I-73 Permit is ready to be issued from the US Corps of Engineering, and if the environmentalists are fine with it.. they are going to try to build it as a toll road because that is what it seems likely to be heading that direction.
I just hope I-74 just ends in Wilmington and the Bays Parkway Extension is designed I-x74, or US 17.
Quote from: Strider on July 16, 2016, 04:47:48 PM
I only support I-73 because I know that building one interstate will connect MB with the Triad and Roanoke Valley. That is the only section of I-73 I want to see being built. I don't really want I-74 around. I agree they should just end I-74 in Wilmington like others mention/suggested, or just eliminate I-74 and keep I-73. Myrtle Beach does not need two interstates to end at the same place. That is what bothers me about I-74 routing.
SC has been attempting to build I-73 and lately they seemed to get it going, as of last week or two, I-73 Permit is ready to be issued from the US Corps of Engineering, and if the environmentalists are fine with it.. they are going to try to build it as a toll road because that is what it seems likely to be heading that direction.
I just hope I-74 just ends in Wilmington and the Bays Parkway Extension is designed I-x74, or US 17.
If I-74 ends at Wilmington, then an upgrade of US 17 could be an extension of I-140.
Quote from: jwolfer on July 16, 2016, 11:08:39 AM
Quote from: LM117 on July 14, 2016, 10:35:39 PM
Wilmington is the red-headed stepchild. SC refused NC's request to extend I-20 from Florence to Wilmington and yet they expect NC to extend I-74 to Myrtle Beach. The Carolina Bays Parkway should be an I-x74, not I-74, but I digress...
I-20 to Myrtle Beach makes more sense to me than I-74 that will never be completed between NC and Cincinnati.
With that being said the US74 corridor should be an interstate from I-26 to Wilmington... but this is getting into fantasy territory
Anytime someone mentions the whole "never connect to Cincinnati" my response is so what? Do you really think the Carolinas care if it connects there or not? If this is an issue, contact your local congressman to change it.
As for US 74 corridor, that has been on North Carolina sights for many years, which is why it is already a four-lane divided highway. The highway has progressed to what is needed for now and immediate future, and unless they can also get Congress to set it up as an Interstate corridor, it will continue to chug-along along the slow lane.
Quote from: LM117 on July 16, 2016, 11:42:59 AM
The whole route from Wilmington to I-26 would nost likely carry multiple designations due to I-74's routing. Other than I-74 from somewhere near Bolton where it turns towards Shallotte and SC to Rockingham, it would have to be an I-x74 from Bolton to Wilmington, another I-x74 from Rockingham to I-277 in Charlotte using the Monroe Bypass and an upgraded US-74/Independence Blvd, and an I-x26 from I-26 in Columbus to I-85 near Kings Mountain. Traffic would have to use I-485 to get from one half of the corridor to the other (except for those whose destination is Charlotte).
The biggest hangup is whether or not FHWA would approve the Monroe Bypass as an interstate since it's being built as a toll road. I believe that's why NC-540 around Raleigh isn't I-540.
US 74 between I-277 and I-485 is mostly an expressway and current construction jobs are building interchanges but also do not have control access along the route. NCDOT is not going to convert that section to a full freeway. So any interstate designation would begin, end or continue along I-485 in Charlotte.
I believe exceptions can be made like I-185 in South Carolina in regards of any interstate being overlapped on a toll road, but why fight that battle.
Quote from: wdcrft63 on July 16, 2016, 06:55:21 PM
Quote from: Strider on July 16, 2016, 04:47:48 PM
I only support I-73 because I know that building one interstate will connect MB with the Triad and Roanoke Valley. That is the only section of I-73 I want to see being built. I don't really want I-74 around. I agree they should just end I-74 in Wilmington like others mention/suggested, or just eliminate I-74 and keep I-73. Myrtle Beach does not need two interstates to end at the same place. That is what bothers me about I-74 routing.
SC has been attempting to build I-73 and lately they seemed to get it going, as of last week or two, I-73 Permit is ready to be issued from the US Corps of Engineering, and if the environmentalists are fine with it.. they are going to try to build it as a toll road because that is what it seems likely to be heading that direction.
I just hope I-74 just ends in Wilmington and the Bays Parkway Extension is designed I-x74, or US 17.
If I-74 ends at Wilmington, then an upgrade of US 17 could be an extension of I-140.
You forgot about the Cape Fear Crossing (https://www.ncdot.gov/projects/capefear/).
Don't see NCDOT converting US 17 to interstate, no need; but I can see US 74/US 76 converting to full interstate and maybe getting a spur designation (which makes more sense).
Quote from: WashuOtaku on July 17, 2016, 11:14:52 AM
Quote from: wdcrft63 on July 16, 2016, 06:55:21 PM
Quote from: Strider on July 16, 2016, 04:47:48 PM
I only support I-73 because I know that building one interstate will connect MB with the Triad and Roanoke Valley. That is the only section of I-73 I want to see being built. I don't really want I-74 around. I agree they should just end I-74 in Wilmington like others mention/suggested, or just eliminate I-74 and keep I-73. Myrtle Beach does not need two interstates to end at the same place. That is what bothers me about I-74 routing.
SC has been attempting to build I-73 and lately they seemed to get it going, as of last week or two, I-73 Permit is ready to be issued from the US Corps of Engineering, and if the environmentalists are fine with it.. they are going to try to build it as a toll road because that is what it seems likely to be heading that direction.
I just hope I-74 just ends in Wilmington and the Bays Parkway Extension is designed I-x74, or US 17.
If I-74 ends at Wilmington, then an upgrade of US 17 could be an extension of I-140.
You forgot about the Cape Fear Crossing (https://www.ncdot.gov/projects/capefear/).
Don't see NCDOT converting US 17 to interstate, no need; but I can see US 74/US 76 converting to full interstate and maybe getting a spur designation (which makes more sense).
NCDOT's list of potential 2018-2027 STIP projects seem to confirm your view. There are projects to upgrade portions of US 74-76 to interstate status (as well as US 74 between the Monroe Connector and Rockingham) while for US 17 between Wilmington and the SC Border the projects listed are for mainly closing off some cross streets and/or creating more Superstreet intersections. The list also makes no mention of any project that would build I-74 through Brunswick County from Whiteville to US 17, seemingly creating more incentive to end I-74 in Wilmington.
Quote from: bob7374 on July 17, 2016, 02:35:08 PM
Quote from: WashuOtaku on July 17, 2016, 11:14:52 AM
Quote from: wdcrft63 on July 16, 2016, 06:55:21 PM
Quote from: Strider on July 16, 2016, 04:47:48 PM
I only support I-73 because I know that building one interstate will connect MB with the Triad and Roanoke Valley. That is the only section of I-73 I want to see being built. I don't really want I-74 around. I agree they should just end I-74 in Wilmington like others mention/suggested, or just eliminate I-74 and keep I-73. Myrtle Beach does not need two interstates to end at the same place. That is what bothers me about I-74 routing.
SC has been attempting to build I-73 and lately they seemed to get it going, as of last week or two, I-73 Permit is ready to be issued from the US Corps of Engineering, and if the environmentalists are fine with it.. they are going to try to build it as a toll road because that is what it seems likely to be heading that direction.
I just hope I-74 just ends in Wilmington and the Bays Parkway Extension is designed I-x74, or US 17.
If I-74 ends at Wilmington, then an upgrade of US 17 could be an extension of I-140.
You forgot about the Cape Fear Crossing (https://www.ncdot.gov/projects/capefear/).
Don't see NCDOT converting US 17 to interstate, no need; but I can see US 74/US 76 converting to full interstate and maybe getting a spur designation (which makes more sense).
The list also makes no mention of any project that would build I-74 through Brunswick County from Whiteville to US 17, seemingly creating more incentive to end I-74 in Wilmington.
Good.
Quote from: LM117 on July 17, 2016, 03:22:14 PM
Quote from: bob7374 on July 17, 2016, 02:35:08 PM
Quote from: WashuOtaku on July 17, 2016, 11:14:52 AM
Quote from: wdcrft63 on July 16, 2016, 06:55:21 PM
Quote from: Strider on July 16, 2016, 04:47:48 PM
I only support I-73 because I know that building one interstate will connect MB with the Triad and Roanoke Valley. That is the only section of I-73 I want to see being built. I don't really want I-74 around. I agree they should just end I-74 in Wilmington like others mention/suggested, or just eliminate I-74 and keep I-73. Myrtle Beach does not need two interstates to end at the same place. That is what bothers me about I-74 routing.
SC has been attempting to build I-73 and lately they seemed to get it going, as of last week or two, I-73 Permit is ready to be issued from the US Corps of Engineering, and if the environmentalists are fine with it.. they are going to try to build it as a toll road because that is what it seems likely to be heading that direction.
I just hope I-74 just ends in Wilmington and the Bays Parkway Extension is designed I-x74, or US 17.
If I-74 ends at Wilmington, then an upgrade of US 17 could be an extension of I-140.
You forgot about the Cape Fear Crossing (https://www.ncdot.gov/projects/capefear/).
Don't see NCDOT converting US 17 to interstate, no need; but I can see US 74/US 76 converting to full interstate and maybe getting a spur designation (which makes more sense).
The list also makes no mention of any project that would build I-74 through Brunswick County from Whiteville to US 17, seemingly creating more incentive to end I-74 in Wilmington.
Good.
Let's not put the cart before the horse here. I don't see an incentive as Bob is just speculating. I can easily counter and say that 17 is the last piece of the puzzle, that the movement on the Carolina Bays parkway "seemingly creates more incentive to end I-74 in Myrtle Beach."
Quote from: bob7374 on July 17, 2016, 02:35:08 PM
NCDOT's list of potential 2018-2027 STIP projects seem to confirm your view. There are projects to upgrade portions of US 74-76 to interstate status (as well as US 74 between the Monroe Connector and Rockingham) while for US 17 between Wilmington and the SC Border the projects listed are for mainly closing off some cross streets and/or creating more Superstreet intersections. The list also makes no mention of any project that would build I-74 through Brunswick County from Whiteville to US 17, seemingly creating more incentive to end I-74 in Wilmington.
Just because NCDOT confirms my point of view doesn't mean they are also going reroute I-74 to Wilmington. The route through the Green Swamp is likely going to be the last segment to be built of I-74 in North Carolina and I'm sure it ranks too low to bother trying to get funding the next few years.
A reminder, unless South Carolina gives up on I-74 or Congress changes everything, I-74 is
NOT going to Wilmington.
I-74 is not going to Myrtle Beach either :D
Quote from: WashuOtaku on July 17, 2016, 09:46:18 PM
Quote from: bob7374 on July 17, 2016, 02:35:08 PM
NCDOT's list of potential 2018-2027 STIP projects seem to confirm your view. There are projects to upgrade portions of US 74-76 to interstate status (as well as US 74 between the Monroe Connector and Rockingham) while for US 17 between Wilmington and the SC Border the projects listed are for mainly closing off some cross streets and/or creating more Superstreet intersections. The list also makes no mention of any project that would build I-74 through Brunswick County from Whiteville to US 17, seemingly creating more incentive to end I-74 in Wilmington.
Just because NCDOT confirms my point of view doesn't mean they are also going reroute I-74 to Wilmington. The route through the Green Swamp is likely going to be the last segment to be built of I-74 in North Carolina and I'm sure it ranks too low to bother trying to get funding the next few years.
A reminder, unless South Carolina gives up on I-74 or Congress changes everything, I-74 is NOT going to Wilmington.
Well, remember SC signed an agreement with NC more than 10 years ago that states SC will fund the building of their portion of the Carolina Bays Parkway extension to the NC border that can either be I-74 or a spur of I-74, depending on where NC decides to ultimately route it. I don't recall any federal objection to that agreement.
Quote from: bob7374 on July 17, 2016, 11:32:29 PM
Well, remember SC signed an agreement with NC more than 10 years ago that states SC will fund the building of their portion of the Carolina Bays Parkway extension to the NC border that can either be I-74 or a spur of I-74, depending on where NC decides to ultimately route it. I don't recall any federal objection to that agreement.
Source?
Quote from: WashuOtaku on July 18, 2016, 04:46:34 PM
Quote from: bob7374 on July 17, 2016, 11:32:29 PM
Well, remember SC signed an agreement with NC more than 10 years ago that states SC will fund the building of their portion of the Carolina Bays Parkway extension to the NC border that can either be I-74 or a spur of I-74, depending on where NC decides to ultimately route it. I don't recall any federal objection to that agreement.
Source?
Yeah, he is right. SC and NC did have a agreement on where I-74 (and I-73) would cross the state. I believe the agreement is that if
SCDOT builds Carolina Bays Parkway Extension to connect with US 17 (or I-74) in NC, NCDOT will build the first 5 miles of I-73 from NC line to I-74/US 74. I cannot find the information in regarding to that. I tried NCDOT's page, it seems like it get taken down. If I can find a link or attachment, I will post it here.
Found the link. here it is: http://www.i73.com/pdf/CarolinasReach021205.pdf
Quote from: Strider on July 18, 2016, 06:28:30 PM
Quote from: WashuOtaku on July 18, 2016, 04:46:34 PM
Quote from: bob7374 on July 17, 2016, 11:32:29 PM
Well, remember SC signed an agreement with NC more than 10 years ago that states SC will fund the building of their portion of the Carolina Bays Parkway extension to the NC border that can either be I-74 or a spur of I-74, depending on where NC decides to ultimately route it. I don't recall any federal objection to that agreement.
Source?
Yeah, he is right. SC and NC did have a agreement on where I-74 (and I-73) would cross the state. I believe the agreement is that if
SCDOT builds Carolina Bays Parkway Extension to connect with US 17 (or I-74) in NC, NCDOT will build the first 5 miles of I-73 from NC line to I-74/US 74. I cannot find the information in regarding to that. I tried NCDOT's page, it seems like it get taken down. If I can find a link or attachment, I will post it here.
Found the link. here it is: http://www.i73.com/pdf/CarolinasReach021205.pdf
The dispute isn't the agreement it is whether it is 74 or x74. I recall the agreement - I even blogged about it. Conversely on our blog, Bob has been consistent in saying 74 should go to Wilmington ; whereas, I have taken the approach of unless it changes its's I-74 and since there's no formal push by NC to move 74 to Wilmington - I don't see the reason to speculate.
That's me personally. And the fun part of the blog.
Quote from: CanesFan27 on July 18, 2016, 08:11:20 PM
Quote from: Strider on July 18, 2016, 06:28:30 PM
Quote from: WashuOtaku on July 18, 2016, 04:46:34 PM
Quote from: bob7374 on July 17, 2016, 11:32:29 PM
Well, remember SC signed an agreement with NC more than 10 years ago that states SC will fund the building of their portion of the Carolina Bays Parkway extension to the NC border that can either be I-74 or a spur of I-74, depending on where NC decides to ultimately route it. I don't recall any federal objection to that agreement.
Source?
Yeah, he is right. SC and NC did have a agreement on where I-74 (and I-73) would cross the state. I believe the agreement is that if
SCDOT builds Carolina Bays Parkway Extension to connect with US 17 (or I-74) in NC, NCDOT will build the first 5 miles of I-73 from NC line to I-74/US 74. I cannot find the information in regarding to that. I tried NCDOT's page, it seems like it get taken down. If I can find a link or attachment, I will post it here.
Found the link. here it is: http://www.i73.com/pdf/CarolinasReach021205.pdf
The dispute isn't the agreement it is whether it is 74 or x74. I recall the agreement - I even blogged about it. Conversely on our blog, Bob has been consistent in saying 74 should go to Wilmington ; whereas, I have taken the approach of unless it changes its's I-74 and since there's no formal push by NC to move 74 to Wilmington - I don't see the reason to speculate.
That's me personally. And the fun part of the blog.
No, the agreement about whether it is 74 or x74 did not come in play during the meetings, not what I know of. Bob probably have his reasons and evidences and know of something that I don't. You can only take that up with him. There were only specifications that which interstate number it would be.
For me, I'd prefer I-74 end at I-73 back in Randleman.
Quote from: CanesFan27 on July 18, 2016, 08:11:20 PM
Quote from: Strider on July 18, 2016, 06:28:30 PM
Quote from: WashuOtaku on July 18, 2016, 04:46:34 PM
Quote from: bob7374 on July 17, 2016, 11:32:29 PM
Well, remember SC signed an agreement with NC more than 10 years ago that states SC will fund the building of their portion of the Carolina Bays Parkway extension to the NC border that can either be I-74 or a spur of I-74, depending on where NC decides to ultimately route it. I don't recall any federal objection to that agreement.
Source?
Yeah, he is right. SC and NC did have a agreement on where I-74 (and I-73) would cross the state. I believe the agreement is that if
SCDOT builds Carolina Bays Parkway Extension to connect with US 17 (or I-74) in NC, NCDOT will build the first 5 miles of I-73 from NC line to I-74/US 74. I cannot find the information in regarding to that. I tried NCDOT's page, it seems like it get taken down. If I can find a link or attachment, I will post it here.
Found the link. here it is: http://www.i73.com/pdf/CarolinasReach021205.pdf
The dispute isn't the agreement it is whether it is 74 or x74. I recall the agreement - I even blogged about it. Conversely on our blog, Bob has been consistent in saying 74 should go to Wilmington ; whereas, I have taken the approach of unless it changes its's I-74 and since there's no formal push by NC to move 74 to Wilmington - I don't see the reason to speculate.
That's me personally. And the fun part of the blog.
I agree, this is all a fun, and hopefully harmless, conversation about a future route number. We'll find out down the road (sorry) what both SCDOT and NCDOT are up to and go from there.
Quote from: bob7374 on July 18, 2016, 10:32:35 PM
... this is all a fun, and hopefully harmless, conversation about a future route number. We'll find out down the road (sorry) what both SCDOT and NCDOT are up to and go from there.
NCDOT now has a Project Page (https://www.ncdot.gov/projects/CBP/) devoted to the Carolina Bays Parkway Extension and public involvement should start by the end of the year. Here is the logo for the project:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/gallery/1615_23_10_16_9_35_34.jpeg)
No hints as to I-74 or I-x74, unless a "multi-lane expressway" indicates a non-interstate grade facility.
If the RIDE III bill passes in Horry County, funding could start coming in for the SC 31 extension to the State Line.
http://www.horrycounty.org/portals/0/Docs/council/Ride%20III/RIDE%203%20PI%20Brochure%20FInal%20Draft.pdf
The link is to a PDF for the RIDE III brochure. (SLOW PDF)
The RIDE bills in Horry County helped build A LOT of roads here, including SC 22, SC 31, and Fantasy Harbour Bridge.
Quote from: PColumbus73 on October 26, 2016, 06:07:06 PM
If the RIDE III bill passes in Horry County, funding could start coming in for the SC 31 extension to the State Line.
This Nov. 8 article (http://www.myrtlebeachonline.com/news/local/article113467878.html) reports that RIDE III passed overwhelmingly and that it will fund the S.C. 31 extension to the North Carolina state line:
Quote
Horry County residents voted in favor of the RIDE III ballot referendum by a wide margin to raise some sales taxes by one percent in order to fund $600 million in road construction projects.
With all 131 precincts reporting by press time, 82,126 voted yes, while 36,669 voted no.
"The voters have spoken loud and clear – we want more roads and better roads," said Brad Dean, executive director of the Myrtle Beach Area Chamber of Commerce. "Let the construction begin." ....
RIDE III also will provide funding for environmental studies to build the Southern Evacuation Lifeline and construction of S.C. 31 to the North Carolina state line.
The whole 73/74 thing is a mess.. Realisticlly it will never be complete outside NC. As it is now its mostly multiplexed and in the grid 74 should be i28 or i3x.. Us74 from i26 to Wilmington i think should be i28...i20 should be extended to Myrtle Beach.
The Carolina Bays should be signed as us17 or stay SR31 and hell add some tolls. It be extented to at least Georgetown, ideally with a bypass of Georgetown. I read that an extention of 31 across ICW to us 701 was shot down for environmental reasons. So put all the traffic back onto congested U.S. 17 south of Myrtle Beach.. Not good for environment, economy, tourism or hurricane evacuations.
The way NC gets interstates; us17 is likely to be an interstate highway in 50 years. i think much more likely than i74 through WV and OH.. It would make sense for eastern NC and coastal SC tourism and give another alternate to i95.
LGMS428
I don't understand why SC is focused on the SC-31 extension. As far as I know, NC's section of the parkway did not even make it in NCDOT's draft 2018-2027 STIP.
Without NC's part, the extension will be useless and a big waste of money. SC needs to forget about I-74 and focus on I-73, which will be much more useful since the majority of tourist traffic comes from I-95 via US-501.
Quote from: LM117 on November 26, 2016, 05:38:12 PM
I don't understand why SC is focused on the SC-31 extension. As far as I know, NC's section of the parkway did not even make it in NCDOT's draft 2018-2027 STIP.
Without NC's part, the extension will be useless and a big waste of money. SC needs to forget about I-74 and focus on I-73, which will be much more useful since the majority of tourist traffic comes from I-95 via US-501.
They want a freeway bypass of Myrtle Beach and environs.. But on the South en2s it dumps you right back on 17 for ~15 miles of traffic light hell and 45 mph.
I drove from Myrtle Beach to Jacksonville FL. On paper it look like 17 should be the best way. And most of it is not too bad. Other than the mess around Pawleys Island and Murrels Inlet and some of suburban Charleston (SC come on and allow 65 mph on 4 lane rural divided highways like GA and FL)
So if it ever come to fruition i73 should logically go down the coast thru Charleston area use 526 and repurpose us17 from there to Point South(exit 33 on i95.
Don't have i73 just peter out in Horry County. Charleston metro and the entire coast of SC are growing.. And Myrtle Beach is "the beach" for growing cities such as Charlotte, Columbia, and to some extent Atlanta. Make i73 actually useful
LGMS428
Quote from: LM117 on November 26, 2016, 05:38:12 PM
I don't understand why SC is focused on the SC-31 extension. As far as I know, NC's section of the parkway did not even make it in NCDOT's draft 2018-2027 STIP.
Without NC's part, the extension will be useless and a big waste of money. SC needs to forget about I-74 and focus on I-73, which will be much more useful since the majority of tourist traffic comes from I-95 via US-501.
NCDOT has a project started to design its section of the Carolina Bays Parkway extension:
https://www.ncdot.gov/projects/CBP/
NCDOT and SCDOT are communicating on this project, and if SC sets a definite timetable for design and construction, NC will probably cooperate so that the extension can be completed in both states at the same time. NC actually did a feasibility study that identified several possible routes back in 2006, but recent development has made several of these routes look pretty unlikely.
So the ball is in SCDOT's court on this.
Quote from: Grzrd on April 12, 2015, 12:42:45 PM
This article (http://www.myrtlebeachonline.com/news/local/article18298637.html)
Quote
Trump said Myrtle Beach has a bright future but needs to improve access to the area, specifically by building I-73.
This TV video (http://www.wmbfnews.com/story/35181078/sen-graham-talks-beach-renourishment-i-73-tax-reform-at-mbacc) quotes South Carolina U.S. Senator Lindsey Graham as saying that, if Trump's infrastructure plan is at a minimum of $400 billion - $500 billion, he will vote against it unless it contains $1 billion for I-73:
Quote
U.S. Sen. Lindsey Graham said he's prioritizing major projects for Horry County, such as beach renourishment and Interstate 73, while debating bills and voting on Capitol Hill.
He talked with business people and politicians at the Myrtle Beach Area Chamber of Commerce Tuesday morning ....
As far as I-73 is concerned, Graham said he knows how important it is to Horry County.
"Wouldn't it be great to have an interstate from 95 down here to the Grand Strand and everything in the middle would have an opportunity to grow their economy as well as for you to have people come here? This is so important for rural South Carolina to build this road," he said.
He hopes permitting for the project could be finished within the year.
"We are dealing with every group known to mankind in the conservation world to make this project hard. We're beginning to turn a corner," Graham said. "I've been on two conference calls where it was very easy to understand what Tom [Rice] and I had to say. The answer is yes when it comes to I-73."
However, the senator said the project needs $1 billion and the money isn't there right now. He proposes using repatriation to fund it, along with other projects in an infrastructure bill.
"The key to paying for it is to lower corporate taxes to get the money back into the country, dedicate the revenue to pay for the infrastructure bill," Graham said.
He said he hopes an infrastructure bill can pass that sets aside money for roads of national significance. I-73 is one of them.
"I will not vote for an infrastructure bill that doesn't take care of I-73," Graham said.
If the infrastructure bill comes to fruition, then I-73 has a real shot because Trump has expressed interest in it and Graham is behind it.
Quote from: Grzrd on April 20, 2017, 01:15:35 PM
If the infrastructure bill comes to fruition, then I-73 has a real shot because Trump has expressed interest in it and Graham is behind it.
Considering the enmity between Graham and the Trump camp, if
those two can concur on anything, then it's likely that some progress will be made on the I-73 project -- although with the Trump/Chao frame of mind, don't be surprised if the prospect of a tolled facility re-emerges.
I'll believe it when I see it.
Quote from: LM117 on April 20, 2017, 04:49:29 PM
I'll believe it when I see it.
It will be the only way I-73 will get built in the state, since the South Carolina legislators bitch about a few pennies while their infrastructure collapses around them.
I-73 permit approved by U.S. Corp of Engineers. If money is collected, construction could begin as soon as possible.
http://www.myrtlebeachonline.com/news/local/article157155109.html
http://www.wltx.com/news/local/permit-approved-for-i-73-construction-in-south-carolina/450635873
Quote from: Strider on June 20, 2017, 07:00:56 PM
I-73 permit approved by U.S. Corp of Engineers. If money is collected, construction could begin as soon as possible.
http://www.myrtlebeachonline.com/news/local/article157155109.html
http://www.wltx.com/news/local/permit-approved-for-i-73-construction-in-south-carolina/450635873
About time.
Quote from: LM117 on June 20, 2017, 10:52:26 PM
Quote from: Strider on June 20, 2017, 07:00:56 PM
I-73 permit approved by U.S. Corp of Engineers. If money is collected, construction could begin as soon as possible.
http://www.myrtlebeachonline.com/news/local/article157155109.html
http://www.wltx.com/news/local/permit-approved-for-i-73-construction-in-south-carolina/450635873
About time.
I agree with it. About time. Now let's get it built.
Quote from: Strider on June 20, 2017, 11:20:56 PM
Quote from: LM117 on June 20, 2017, 10:52:26 PM
Quote from: Strider on June 20, 2017, 07:00:56 PM
I-73 permit approved by U.S. Corp of Engineers. If money is collected, construction could begin as soon as possible.
http://www.myrtlebeachonline.com/news/local/article157155109.html
http://www.wltx.com/news/local/permit-approved-for-i-73-construction-in-south-carolina/450635873
About time.
I agree with it. About time. Now let's get it built.
The sooner, the better.
Why can't they extend the plans for I-74 south to Georgetown or Charleston? It doesn't look like there's too much in the way, and the portion of US 17 in this area has some of the worst congestion I have ever seen.
Alternatively, maybe US-17 could be fully grade separated instead, with frontage roads for business access.
Quote from: roadguy2 on June 21, 2017, 01:10:01 PM
Why can't they extend the plans for I-74 south to Georgetown or Charleston? It doesn't look like there's too much in the way, and the portion of US 17 in this area has some of the worst congestion I have ever seen.
Alternatively, maybe US-17 could be fully grade separated instead, with frontage roads for business access.
Circa 1995, the HPC-5 corridor definition was pulled back from a terminus at Charleston to Georgetown; the impetus for this truncation was a cohort of the usual suspects: environmental activists, who opposed a new freeway down the strip between the wetlands and the shore, and property-owner NIMBY's who didn't want (a) to have their access to the main highway through the area limited, (b) would rather not cede part of their properties for construction, and (c) would rather not encourage additional traffic through their area. A few years later a western connection from Georgetown to I-95 and on to Camden, SC was added to the corridor definition to give it an outlet (albeit a bit awkward) at its southern end (and as a sop to SC congressional types).
These same NIMBYs are still around; with or without an Interstate designation, don't expect much in the way of US 17 improvements south of Georgetown, congestion or not.
Quote from: roadguy2 on June 21, 2017, 01:10:01 PM
Why can't they extend the plans for I-74 south to Georgetown or Charleston? It doesn't look like there's too much in the way, and the portion of US 17 in this area has some of the worst congestion I have ever seen.
Alternatively, maybe US-17 could be fully grade separated instead, with frontage roads for business access.
As someone who lives in the Myrtle Beach area, I can tell you that traffic between Georgetown and Charleston is generally pretty light. Except for the speed drop in McClellanville, traffic stays at least 60 MPH.
I think once US 521 is widened completely between Andrews and Manning, it'll make a pretty good alternative to an actual interstate. Currently, traffic is pretty light on US 521, like US 17. It will be great when SCDOT completes the Andrews bypass.
Quote from: roadguy2 on June 21, 2017, 01:10:01 PM
Why can't they extend the plans for I-74 south to Georgetown or Charleston? It doesn't look like there's too much in the way, and the portion of US 17 in this area has some of the worst congestion I have ever seen.
Alternatively, maybe US-17 could be fully grade separated instead, with frontage roads for business access.
There's no need for I-74 to go that far. Hell, I-74 shouldn't even be going to SC in the first place.
Quote from: LM117 on June 21, 2017, 04:19:31 PM
Quote from: roadguy2 on June 21, 2017, 01:10:01 PM
Why can't they extend the plans for I-74 south to Georgetown or Charleston? It doesn't look like there's too much in the way, and the portion of US 17 in this area has some of the worst congestion I have ever seen.
Alternatively, maybe US-17 could be fully grade separated instead, with frontage roads for business access.
There's no need for I-74 to go that far. Hell, I-74 shouldn't even be going to SC in the first place.
I agree! Much of the I-74 ISTEA routing is a case of "diarrhea of the Interstates".
Quote from: Beltway on June 21, 2017, 04:23:11 PM
Quote from: LM117 on June 21, 2017, 04:19:31 PM
Quote from: roadguy2 on June 21, 2017, 01:10:01 PM
Why can't they extend the plans for I-74 south to Georgetown or Charleston? It doesn't look like there's too much in the way, and the portion of US 17 in this area has some of the worst congestion I have ever seen.
Alternatively, maybe US-17 could be fully grade separated instead, with frontage roads for business access.
There's no need for I-74 to go that far. Hell, I-74 shouldn't even be going to SC in the first place.
I agree! Much of the I-74 ISTEA routing is a case of "diarrhea of the Interstates".
That, and attempting to please each & every Congressperson along (or anywhere near, for that matter!) the original basic (circa 1991) corridor. Prior to that, pretty much everyone who engaged in future Interstate speculation had
something extending from around Asheville to Wilmington along US 74 (I know I did), but dragging something down from southern Ohio wasn't ever part of any rational equation. The bright side of political injection into highway matters is that in the post-block-grant days,
something actually needed often gets built (I-49, I-22); the convolution of I-73 and I-74 is part & parcel of the "dark side" of this particular calculus. Yeah, Myrtle Beach is a major regional destination/attractant -- but
two separate servers?
Please! That whole dual concept was merely to let politicos on both sides of the state line gloat over
their particular project -- nothing more, nothing less. Anything using US 74 as an alignment, regardless of actual designation, needs to go to Wilmington; Myrtle Beach is a ridiculous "Bizarro World" pipedream -- let I-73 handle that aspect of the regional needs, which it will be more than capable of doing!
Quote from: sparker on June 21, 2017, 05:44:52 PM
Quote from: Beltway on June 21, 2017, 04:23:11 PM
Quote from: LM117 on June 21, 2017, 04:19:31 PM
Quote from: roadguy2 on June 21, 2017, 01:10:01 PM
Why can't they extend the plans for I-74 south to Georgetown or Charleston? It doesn't look like there's too much in the way, and the portion of US 17 in this area has some of the worst congestion I have ever seen.
Alternatively, maybe US-17 could be fully grade separated instead, with frontage roads for business access.
There's no need for I-74 to go that far. Hell, I-74 shouldn't even be going to SC in the first place.
I agree! Much of the I-74 ISTEA routing is a case of "diarrhea of the Interstates".
That, and attempting to please each & every Congressperson along (or anywhere near, for that matter!) the original basic (circa 1991) corridor. Prior to that, pretty much everyone who engaged in future Interstate speculation had something extending from around Asheville to Wilmington along US 74 (I know I did), but dragging something down from southern Ohio wasn't ever part of any rational equation. The bright side of political injection into highway matters is that in the post-block-grant days, something actually needed often gets built (I-49, I-22); the convolution of I-73 and I-74 is part & parcel of the "dark side" of this particular calculus. Yeah, Myrtle Beach is a major regional destination/attractant -- but two separate servers? Please! That whole dual concept was merely to let politicos on both sides of the state line gloat over their particular project -- nothing more, nothing less. Anything using US 74 as an alignment, regardless of actual designation, needs to go to Wilmington; Myrtle Beach is a ridiculous "Bizarro World" pipedream -- let I-73 handle that aspect of the regional needs, which it will be more than capable of doing!
Yes, there were several new Interstate highways in ISTEA of 1991, that for some reason had to be "coast to coast" or close to it to justify that highway.
I-73 from SC coast to northern MI.
I-69 from southern TX to eastern MI.
I-74 from NC coast to central OH.
All three have at least some boondoggle components.
It's ridiculous, they should have done something like when they added 1,500 miles in 1968 and tried to distribute them thru most of the states, although in 1991 it should have been more like adding 3,000 miles.
Quote from: Beltway on June 21, 2017, 08:13:27 PM
Yes, there were several new Interstate highways in ISTEA of 1991, that for some reason had to be "coast to coast" or close to it to justify that highway.
I-73 from SC coast to northern MI.
I-69 from southern TX to eastern MI.
I-74 from NC coast to central OH.
All three have at least some boondoggle components.
It's ridiculous, they should have done something like when they added 1,500 miles in 1968 and tried to distribute them thru most of the states, although in 1991 it should have been more like adding 3,000 miles.
The 1968 additions started out as about 4500 miles (including some routes added later like I-49, I-22, and the Brownsville-Shreveport section of I-69) -- this based on large-scale troop withdrawals from Vietnam resulting in less $$ outlay there -- a concept dashed by the Tet offensive that had diametrically the opposite effect (and prompted Lyndon Johnson to abandon his re-election plans). Cut back to 1500 miles, some of the selected remaining corridors were purely politically motivated (I-72 in Illinois, referred to at the time as [Sen.] "Everett Dirksen's Retirement Present" -- his hometown was Decatur! -- and I-88 in upstate NY, a sop to Jake Javits). The rest were spread around the country -- the I-15 San Diego extension in CA, the I-75 extension in FL, I-27 in TX, the rerouting of I-82 to the "Quad Cities" in eastern WA, I-40 east to Selma, NC (Wilmington came later), and what eventually became I-43 north to Green Bay, WI. Plus there were numerous urban/interurban loops & spurs (including I-380 in IA). In retrospect, 1968 was a case of "what might have been if only..............."
1991/ISTEA seemed to be a case of "corridor fever"; the HPC concept (pre-designate but don't fund) took root then and now has expanded as the methodology of choice when states/local interests want to deploy a new Interstate.
Quote from: sparker on June 21, 2017, 09:30:42 PM
Quote from: Beltway on June 21, 2017, 08:13:27 PM
Yes, there were several new Interstate highways in ISTEA of 1991, that for some reason had to be "coast to coast" or close to it to justify that highway.
I-73 from SC coast to northern MI.
I-69 from southern TX to eastern MI.
I-74 from NC coast to central OH.
All three have at least some boondoggle components.
It's ridiculous, they should have done something like when they added 1,500 miles in 1968 and tried to distribute them thru most of the states, although in 1991 it should have been more like adding 3,000 miles.
The 1968 additions started out as about 4500 miles (including some routes added later like I-49, I-22, and the Brownsville-Shreveport section of I-69) -- this based on large-scale troop withdrawals from Vietnam resulting in less $$ outlay there -- a concept dashed by the Tet offensive that had diametrically the opposite effect (and prompted Lyndon Johnson to abandon his re-election plans). Cut back to 1500 miles, some of the selected remaining corridors were purely politically motivated (I-72 in Illinois, referred to at the time as [Sen.] "Everett Dirksen's Retirement Present" -- his hometown was Decatur! -- and I-88 in upstate NY, a sop to Jake Javits). The rest were spread around the country -- the I-15 San Diego extension in CA, the I-75 extension in FL, I-27 in TX, the rerouting of I-82 to the "Quad Cities" in eastern WA, I-40 east to Selma, NC (Wilmington came later), and what eventually became I-43 north to Green Bay, WI. Plus there were numerous urban/interurban loops & spurs (including I-380 in IA). In retrospect, 1968 was a case of "what might have been if only..............."
I-88 in upstate NY seemed a worthy addition, connecting the Albany area and Northway to I-81 to the south.
The 1968 additions is where VA I-195 and I-664 came from. Short but very expensive and vital urban Interstate highways.
The tolled Beltline Expressway was already being designed when it got the I-195 funding to build it as a toll-free Interstate.
A planning study in 1966 first proposed what later became I-664.
I-88 still has its detractors at NYSDOT. A lot of people still wonder if the investment was worth the benefit. It is also still seen as an inappropriate manhandling of funding by Senator Anderson.
Quote from: Rothman on June 21, 2017, 10:31:16 PM
I-88 still has its detractors at NYSDOT. A lot of people still wonder if the investment was worth the benefit. It is also still seen as an inappropriate manhandling of funding by Senator Anderson.
Interesting, Wiki says it was completed in 1989, that it is still being questioned.
I see a major function of I-81 as a "super bypass" of the Northeast, with connector Interstates I-90, I-88, I-84, I-80, I-78, I-76, I-70/I-270, I-66 and I-64, that connect to the major cities.
Later I-86 was designated and I-88 forms a corridor with western I-86.
Quote from: Beltway on June 21, 2017, 08:13:27 PM
Yes, there were several new Interstate highways in ISTEA of 1991, that for some reason had to be "coast to coast" or close to it to justify that highway.
I-73 from SC coast to northern MI.
I-69 from southern TX to eastern MI.
I-74 from NC coast to central OH.
The 1991 ISTEA text only has Corridor 18 from Indy to Memphis (and 20 from Texarkana to Laredo). Nothing in between. And I-73/I-74 were a single route from Charleston, SC to Portsmouth, OH.
Quote from: NE2 on June 22, 2017, 12:32:26 AM
Quote from: Beltway on June 21, 2017, 08:13:27 PM
Yes, there were several new Interstate highways in ISTEA of 1991, that for some reason had to be "coast to coast" or close to it to justify that highway.
I-73 from SC coast to northern MI.
I-69 from southern TX to eastern MI.
I-74 from NC coast to central OH.
The 1991 ISTEA text only has Corridor 18 from Indy to Memphis (and 20 from Texarkana to Laredo). Nothing in between. And I-73/I-74 were a single route from Charleston, SC to Portsmouth, OH.
Then how about 'stemming from ISTEA of 1991' and finally approved in 1995 and 1998?
http://www.i73.com/aboutus.html
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interstate_69#Extended_route
My same basic point remains.
I think even if one or both of these Interstates reaches Myrtle Beach, I'll continue using the slower routes.
Quote from: epzik8 on June 25, 2017, 07:52:59 PM
I think even if one or both of these Interstates reaches Myrtle Beach, I'll continue using the slower routes.
If you've ever been to the Myrtle Beach area during the summer, pretty much
all the surface routes could be classified as
slower! Snail-like would not be an inaccurate description. If I-73 and possibly I-74 (or whatever the SC 31-based coastal route coming in from NC ends up being designated) are built out to 4 lanes only, the congestion will likely spread to those new facilities as well -- at least for the 20-30 miles outward or past the central portion of Myrtle Beach. I don't think the proprietors of the local tourist businesses mind the congestion that much -- I suppose they figure
someone will jump out of a car that's going about 5
blocks per hour and buy a few stupid-ass T-shirts! :D
I completely disagree with I-74 going into SC, it should go end in Wilmington. Myrtle Beach should be grateful that they are receiving I-73, which is enough. Wilmington, a port city, needs an interstate to/from I-95 south.
Quote from: 21stCenturyRoad on June 28, 2017, 10:48:55 AM
I completely disagree with I-74 going into SC, it should go end in Wilmington. Myrtle Beach should be grateful that they are receiving I-73, which is enough. Wilmington, a port city, needs an interstate to/from I-95 south.
I don't disagree with you regarding I-74 ending at Wilmington but I-40 connects Wilmington to I-95.
Quote from: The Nature Boy on June 28, 2017, 11:13:33 AM
Quote from: 21stCenturyRoad on June 28, 2017, 10:48:55 AM
I completely disagree with I-74 going into SC, it should go end in Wilmington. Myrtle Beach should be grateful that they are receiving I-73, which is enough. Wilmington, a port city, needs an interstate to/from I-95 south.
I don't disagree with you regarding I-74 ending at Wilmington but I-40 connects Wilmington to I-95.
He's referring to points south of Wilmington along I-95, which would be served by the existing I-74/I-95 interchange in Lumberton if I-74 ended in Wilmington.
I-40's connection to I-95 from Wilmington is only good for those heading to points north on I-95 and even then, nobody in their right mind would take I-40 all the way to Benson to pick up I-95 North when they could get off at Exit 355 near Faison and take the US-117/I-795 shortcut to Wilson.
Quote from: LM117 on June 28, 2017, 12:47:23 PM
Quote from: The Nature Boy on June 28, 2017, 11:13:33 AM
Quote from: 21stCenturyRoad on June 28, 2017, 10:48:55 AM
I completely disagree with I-74 going into SC, it should go end in Wilmington. Myrtle Beach should be grateful that they are receiving I-73, which is enough. Wilmington, a port city, needs an interstate to/from I-95 south.
I don't disagree with you regarding I-74 ending at Wilmington but I-40 connects Wilmington to I-95.
He's referring to points south of Wilmington along I-95, which would be served by the existing I-74/I-95 interchange in Lumberton if I-74 ended in Wilmington.
I-40's connection to I-95 from Wilmington is only good for those heading to points north on I-95 and even then, nobody in their right mind would take I-40 all the way to Benson to pick up I-95 North when they could get off at Exit 355 near Faison and take the US-117/I-795 shortcut to Wilson.
Wilmington, NC is a small city and I disagree with the idea that it needs more than one Interstate. It needs a southerly 4-lane connector but that highway does not warrant being a freeway.
How much shipping traffic does the port handle? Their website does not say, so that indirectly indicates that it is likely fairly low traffic.
Quote from: Beltway on June 28, 2017, 01:15:32 PM
Quote from: LM117 on June 28, 2017, 12:47:23 PM
Quote from: The Nature Boy on June 28, 2017, 11:13:33 AM
Quote from: 21stCenturyRoad on June 28, 2017, 10:48:55 AM
I completely disagree with I-74 going into SC, it should go end in Wilmington. Myrtle Beach should be grateful that they are receiving I-73, which is enough. Wilmington, a port city, needs an interstate to/from I-95 south.
I don't disagree with you regarding I-74 ending at Wilmington but I-40 connects Wilmington to I-95.
He's referring to points south of Wilmington along I-95, which would be served by the existing I-74/I-95 interchange in Lumberton if I-74 ended in Wilmington.
I-40's connection to I-95 from Wilmington is only good for those heading to points north on I-95 and even then, nobody in their right mind would take I-40 all the way to Benson to pick up I-95 North when they could get off at Exit 355 near Faison and take the US-117/I-795 shortcut to Wilson.
Wilmington, NC is a small city and I disagree with the idea that it needs more than one Interstate. It needs a southerly 4-lane connector but that highway does not warrant being a freeway.
How much shipping traffic does the port handle? Their website does not say, so that indirectly indicates that it is likely fairly low traffic.
At this point in time, the Cape Fear River is undergoing significant dredging in order to make the Port of Wilmington more attractive to shipping lines; the development of a new major CSX hub in Rocky Mount (just north of where the Wilmington branch merges with the main line that follows US 301) is largely predicated upon increased inbound cargo intended for Northeast and Great Lakes markets. All this port activity (Savannah is dredging their port facilities as well) is due to "Panamax" (the canal, not the brand of audio/video line conditioners!) being fully operational by 2019 or at latest 2020. Besides Wilmington and Savannah, Charleston (which dredged over a decade ago), Brunswick (GA), and Morehead City all are contending for what they see as vastly increased sea-to-land transfer traffic. Both CSX and NS have beefed up their lines' capacities (passing sidings and/or enhanced CTC signaling systems) in the region; the gist of this is that multiple parties in both the public and private sectors are "doubling down" on this actually coming to pass.
Let's just clean up North Carolina's interstate mess a bit. Let's do away with I-42 and move I-40 over to it, since it makes more sense that an east/west interstate would go to Virginia Beach rather than Wilmington from Raleigh. What do we do with I-40? Just make it I-73. You would then get rid of the multiplex south of Greensboro (make the current I-73 south that's by itself a 3-d) and it actually could bend about back to Myrtle Beach (if they wanted it to).
For South Carolina, you could route I-20 around Florence and dead end it at Myrtle Beach, and you could have a 3-d as a spur.
There. North Carolina can continue to build I-74 to Wilmington if they want. I-73 doesn't have to be constructed except north of Greensboro and into Virginia. I-40 can actually go east/west instead of far south. I-42 does not have to exist. With the extension of I-20, that eliminates the building of I-73 from I-95 to the North Carolina state line.
Quote from: Life in Paradise on June 28, 2017, 04:23:12 PM
Let's just clean up North Carolina's interstate mess a bit. Let's do away with I-42 and move I-40 over to it, since it makes more sense that an east/west interstate would go to Virginia Beach rather than Wilmington from Raleigh. What do we do with I-40? Just make it I-73. You would then get rid of the multiplex south of Greensboro (make the current I-73 south that's by itself a 3-d) and it actually could bend about back to Myrtle Beach (if they wanted it to).
For South Carolina, you could route I-20 around Florence and dead end it at Myrtle Beach, and you could have a 3-d as a spur.
There. North Carolina can continue to build I-74 to Wilmington if they want. I-73 doesn't have to be constructed except north of Greensboro and into Virginia. I-40 can actually go east/west instead of far south. I-42 does not have to exist. With the extension of I-20, that eliminates the building of I-73 from I-95 to the North Carolina state line.
All well & good, except (a) I-42 is written into law within HPC designation, and Wilmington will give up their I-40 terminus only as a city corpse! Also, SC has indicated over the past 20 years zero interest in extending I-20; they're more than happy with I-73 going down SC 38 and paralleling US 501; that provides the potential for NC tourists spending gas and snack money within SC. Besides, as with I-42, all of the 73/74 complex is likewise written into federal law -- and that forms the basis for any federal funding contribution. Since actually securing funds is presently worse than pulling teeth, not too many corridor proponents at any jurisdictional level want to "rock the boat", so to speak -- although the I-74 portion following NC 211 is probably -- and justifiably -- dead in the water (or swamp!). Things will probably proceed more or less as presently planned; either the legislation will be "tweaked" to allow I-74 into Wilmington (and something else deployed along the coast) or an x74 will do the trick.
The regional Interstates are convoluted because the locals certainly don't mind them that way, as long as they do the job in terms of local service and transporting folks with disposable income to the coasts for the ritual de-funding! Not ideal, but serviceable!
If/when I-74 is completed in North Carolina, it might as well be signed as a North/South Interstate.
Quote from: sparker on June 28, 2017, 04:50:19 PM
I-42 is written into law within HPC designation
While US-70 was indeed written into law as a HPC and future interstate, the I-42 number itself came from AASHTO, not Congress. NCDOT initially requested I-36, but AASHTO rejected it since it violated the numbering grid and changed it I-42 and told NCDOT to take it or leave it. NCDOT took it.
http://route.transportation.org/Documents/2016%20SM%20Des%20Moines%2c%20IA/USRN%20Meeting%20Minutes%20May25%2c2016.pdf (http://route.transportation.org/Documents/2016%20SM%20Des%20Moines%2c%20IA/USRN%20Meeting%20Minutes%20May25%2c2016.pdf)
All the same, I-42 is staying put.
You are, of course, correct -- the I-42 selection was via AASHTO, not via direct congressional direction. That is a reasonable number for that corridor -- unlike its neighbor to the north (87), selected alongside 42 -- but I won't rant about that issue here, except to say that by choosing 42 for US 70, it leaves enough qualified designations available above that number to use if & when everyone involved comes to their senses.
Quote from: LM117 on June 28, 2017, 06:18:03 PM
Quote from: sparker on June 28, 2017, 04:50:19 PM
I-42 is written into law within HPC designation
While US-70 was indeed written into law as a HPC and future interstate, the I-42 number itself came from AASHTO, not Congress. NCDOT initially requested I-36, but AASHTO rejected it since it violated the numbering grid and changed it I-42 and told NCDOT to take it or leave it. NCDOT took it.
http://route.transportation.org/Documents/2016%20SM%20Des%20Moines%2c%20IA/USRN%20Meeting%20Minutes%20May25%2c2016.pdf (http://route.transportation.org/Documents/2016%20SM%20Des%20Moines%2c%20IA/USRN%20Meeting%20Minutes%20May25%2c2016.pdf)
All the same, I-42 is staying put.
Since when does AASHTO care about the numbering systems? Look at I-11, I-69, and US 400, 412, and 425, to name a few.
Quote from: roadguy2 on June 29, 2017, 12:12:55 AM
Quote from: LM117 on June 28, 2017, 06:18:03 PM
Quote from: sparker on June 28, 2017, 04:50:19 PM
I-42 is written into law within HPC designation
While US-70 was indeed written into law as a HPC and future interstate, the I-42 number itself came from AASHTO, not Congress. NCDOT initially requested I-36, but AASHTO rejected it since it violated the numbering grid and changed it I-42 and told NCDOT to take it or leave it. NCDOT took it.
http://route.transportation.org/Documents/2016%20SM%20Des%20Moines%2c%20IA/USRN%20Meeting%20Minutes%20May25%2c2016.pdf (http://route.transportation.org/Documents/2016%20SM%20Des%20Moines%2c%20IA/USRN%20Meeting%20Minutes%20May25%2c2016.pdf)
All the same, I-42 is staying put.
Since when does AASHTO care about the numbering systems? Look at I-11, I-69, and US 400, 412, and 425, to name a few.
I-11 and I-69 were made into law by Congress. AASHTO couldn't reject those.
I-11 and I-69 aren't too bad (I-69 suffixes aside, which they probably could have fought over what was meant with the corridor naming, but I imagine that few outside of the roadgeek community would feel like doing that), but I agree about those US routes.
If they're really insistent about an interstate going from Wilmington to Myrtle Beach and Charleston, they should designate an I-18 to roughly parallel US 17 between those cities. Just let I-74 end at Wilmington.
Quote from: wriddle082 on June 29, 2017, 06:16:09 PM
If they're really insistent about an interstate going from Wilmington to Myrtle Beach and Charleston, they should designate an I-18 to roughly parallel US 17 between those cities. Just let I-74 end at Wilmington.
I-18 belongs on the West Coast and would be an east-west interstate.
A US 17 corridor interstate would ideally be I-97 or 99 but that can't happen because of reasons.
Quote from: The Nature Boy on June 29, 2017, 06:59:55 PM
Quote from: wriddle082 on June 29, 2017, 06:16:09 PM
If they're really insistent about an interstate going from Wilmington to Myrtle Beach and Charleston, they should designate an I-18 to roughly parallel US 17 between those cities. Just let I-74 end at Wilmington.
I-18 belongs on the West Coast and would be an east-west interstate.
A US 17 corridor interstate would ideally be I-97 or 99 but that can't happen because of reasons.
I-18? Where on the West Coast; an L.A. outer desert-based bypass? That number, as the I-14 scenario has shown, could show up anywhere between Georgia and Texas as well. A 2nd/southern section of I-97 wouldn't be completely awful; at least there's a miniscule chance of it ever connecting to the existing I-97 in MD. I'd leave 99 alone; it's got enough problems without a southern clone!
Quote from: Grzrd on April 20, 2017, 01:15:35 PM
Quote from: Grzrd on April 12, 2015, 12:42:45 PM
This article (http://www.myrtlebeachonline.com/news/local/article18298637.html)
Quote
Trump said Myrtle Beach has a bright future but needs to improve access to the area, specifically by building I-73.
This TV video (http://www.wmbfnews.com/story/35181078/sen-graham-talks-beach-renourishment-i-73-tax-reform-at-mbacc) quotes South Carolina U.S. Senator Lindsey Graham as saying that, if Trump's infrastructure plan is at a minimum of $400 billion - $500 billion, he will vote against it unless it contains $1 billion for I-73
This June 27 article (http://www.miamiherald.com/news/business/article158491594.html) reports that Graham and U.S. Rep. Tom Rice recently directly lobbied Elaine Chao for I-73 funding:
Quote
Two South Carolina congressmen are asking top federal transportation officials for help finding money to build a new interstate to the coast.
U.S. Rep. Tom Rice and U.S. Sen. Lindsey Graham met Tuesday with Department of Transportation Secretary Elaine Chao to discuss potential federal funding for Interstate 73.
The Army Corps of Engineers approved a permit last week to build an 80-mile (130-kilometer) interstate to Myrtle Beach. But turning the decades-long proposal into reality requires money, and state officials promise funding won't come from state taxes.
The 42-mile (70-kilometer) section that's the priority of proponents is expected to cost more than $1 billion. State transportation officials say less than $50 million remains from prior earmarks.
Rice says it was crucial to make their case to Chao directly.
If the infrastructure bill comes to fruition, then I-73 in South Carolina has a good chance of finally getting started.
Looks like the portion of I-73 from I-95 to Myrtle Beach has passed environmental review:
https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2017-08-01/html/2017-16140.htm
Apparently the segment from I-95 NW to I-74 near Hamlet, NC is presently undergoing a similar review process, with the outcome TBD.
Quote from: sparker on June 29, 2017, 08:22:23 PM
Quote from: The Nature Boy on June 29, 2017, 06:59:55 PM
Quote from: wriddle082 on June 29, 2017, 06:16:09 PM
If they're really insistent about an interstate going from Wilmington to Myrtle Beach and Charleston, they should designate an I-18 to roughly parallel US 17 between those cities. Just let I-74 end at Wilmington.
I-18 belongs on the West Coast and would be an east-west interstate.
A US 17 corridor interstate would ideally be I-97 or 99 but that can't happen because of reasons.
I-18? Where on the West Coast; an L.A. outer desert-based bypass? That number, as the I-14 scenario has shown, could show up anywhere between Georgia and Texas as well. A 2nd/southern section of I-97 wouldn't be completely awful; at least there's a miniscule chance of it ever connecting to the existing I-97 in MD. I'd leave 99 alone; it's got enough problems without a southern clone!
Besides, I-28 is not in use yet! Since there's already an I-20 and an I-26 within the state, that number would make a lot of sense. IMHO, I-97 should've gone to the section of I-40 that runs from Raleigh/Durham to Wilmington, and I designated it as such back in the day, with I-40 turning on what will be I-42 and following that to New Bern. The MD I-97 would simply be an extension of either I-70 or I-83 after their failures to be completed inside Baltimore, and I-99 would be a coastal alternative to I-95, going from Savannah to New York. Guess we'll never know that now...
Myrtle Beach Area Chamber of Commerce CEO Brad Dean met with Trump to discuss funding for I-73.
http://m.wmbfnews.com/wmbfnews/db_330822/contentdetail.htm?contentguid=U9bhOFwE (http://m.wmbfnews.com/wmbfnews/db_330822/contentdetail.htm?contentguid=U9bhOFwE)
QuoteIt's taken decades to work on getting the Interstate 73 permit and now the federal government is saying the road can finally be constructed.
The question now is how to fund it.
Local organizations such as the Myrtle Beach Area Chamber of Commerce want to help push it forward. The I-73 permit was issued back in June and not much has been done to construct the southern part linking S.C. 22 and Interstate 95, leading MBACC president and CEO Brad Dean to say some people thought the project was at a standstill.
Dean had the chance to discuss the project with President Donald Trump face-to-face for the first time on Monday, during the president's stop in Greenville.
The southern portion would cost nearly $1.4 billion and Dean said Trump is supportive.
"Now that President Trump is in office, he is talking about an infrastructure package unlike any that we have ever seen. It's a $1 trillion proposal, so it opens up the potential for projects like I-73," Dean said. "When candidate Trump came through, he said he wanted to build I-73. Now we need to position this as a priority for President Trump and make it a reality soon."
Though the project is a plus for tourism, Dean said I-73 represents more than just an increase in tourism.
"It's about creating higher-paying jobs throughout our region," he said. "Economists are estimating 7,000 jobs during construction and 22,000 after construction and that could be an economic explosion for the Grand Strand and Pee Dee."
On Friday morning, Congressman Tom Rice took a helicopter flyover with a representative from California who sits on the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, the committee that will help craft the infrastructure package.
"Here in South Carolina, we know I-73 is an important priority, but there are 49 other states with lots of legislators that aren't familiar with that. What Congressman Rice has done in bringing people like Rep. Denham and Rep. Walker to the Grand Strand is to not only talk about building roads but actually see the routes," Dean said.
It will hopefully become a reality soon.
"Horry County has stepped forward with a commitment for the local community and the tolling study has been done by DOT and they'll have to further expand that," Dean said.
President Trump told Dean he hopes to break ground on I-73 during his presidency, so Dean said he is hopeful Congress will pass the funding.
Right now the labor market is so tight in Columbia, that fast food and low level retail chains are busing in crew from as far away as Tampa to staff for weeks at a time in Hotel rooms rather than god forbid, raise pay scales. I wonder how many of these jobs will actually go to residents of SC
Quote from: ARMOURERERIC on October 25, 2017, 08:22:55 PM
Right now the labor market is so tight in Columbia, that fast food and low level retail chains are busing in crew from as far away as Tampa to staff for weeks at a time in Hotel rooms rather than god forbid, raise pay scales. I wonder how many of these jobs will actually go to residents of SC
Absolutely spot-on; corporate management in fungible-worker fields such as you describe functionally collude to maintain low wages (which they can readily do in some states, particularly in the "Deep South"). The last thing they want to see is one or another firm within their ranks breaking precedent and offer even marginally higher pay rates for fear that workers across the field will get wind of such and press for the like; they'd rather spend the money on non-wage expenses that can be easily hidden in their yearlies.
The mayor of Dillon, Todd Davis, wrote an op-ed about his opposition to I-73.
http://www.scnow.com/opinion/columns/article_1099619e-bf5d-11e7-8191-3b9d2944a107.html (http://www.scnow.com/opinion/columns/article_1099619e-bf5d-11e7-8191-3b9d2944a107.html)
QuoteIt's no secret that I am an outspoken advocate for creating a thriving downtown in Dillon.
Our city is poised for both an economic surge and a big boost in the quality of life for families. The planned inland port will bring jobs and prosperity. At the same time, a redevelopment of our historic downtown hopefully will breathe new life into the city.
Our efforts to improve downtown electrical service and to plant attractive landscaping are vital in bringing in new retail stores. We're providing matching funds for businesses to improve their historic facades. Dillon is moving aggressively to fill the empty storefronts with retailers and restaurants that will make our downtown a destination once again.
We've worked hard to keep our golf course in shape and even harder to make our wellness center a vital part of life here.
And finally, we're pushing for both a hotel and new apartments in downtown to bring back to the district what it once had: a vibrant population of neighbors and visitors who, in turn, spend the kind of money we need to keep moving forward.
With all of this on Dillon's horizon, it is not the time to support any effort that jeopardizes our future.
That's why I am opposed to plans pushed by the Myrtle Beach Area Chamber of Commerce to build Interstate 73 and connect it to I-95. There is no purpose for this interstate other than to funnel travelers and their wallets directly to Myrtle Beach and bypass so many of the local communities — Dillon, Latta, Sellers — that rely on visitors' dollars to meet our budgets.
If I-73 becomes a reality, Dillon businesses along U.S. 301 and Radford Boulevard will take a hit. That means less tax money to continue the improvements we've worked on so diligently. It would mean a step back, just as we're moving forward. I would doubt the new Cookout restaurant would be planting off Radford Boulevard right now if company officials knew traffic would be diverted miles from their location.
For obvious reasons, Myrtle Beach businesses have latched onto a prohibitively expensive, decades-old plan for I-73 that most other states have long abandoned. The I-73 proposal for South Carolina is expected to cost anywhere between $2 billion and $4 billion, depending on the length of the pavement. The only plan to pay for it so far is an extension of taxes, plus tolls.
Myrtle Beach business leaders are refusing to consider a better solution only because it won't have a shiny "interstate" designation.
What the Dillon Town Council supports — and what our Chamber of Commerce supports — is a more efficient and more economical plan to widen existing routes S.C. 38 and U.S. 501 to highway standards. That could meet the same objective, at a fraction of the cost.
That plan, called the "Grand Strand Expressway," also supports enhancements to S.C. 9 as part of what the experts call a "well-connected multi-lane highway network" that would be a winning proposal for everyone.
This solution delivers visitors to the coast quickly and efficiently, and without strangling the economies of small cities and towns along the way.
The economies of South Carolina and of Dillon have come a long way in the past few years, but not far enough to spend billions of dollars on an unneeded interstate, and certainly not far enough that the businesses in Dillon could absorb a hit.
So for the sake of cities like Dillon, I will vigorously oppose any efforts to build I-73. And I will wholeheartedly support all efforts to keep our economy moving forward with innovative solutions like the "Grand Strand Expressway."
I could not be more proud of what Dillon's committed citizens, businesses and civic leaders have done to begin restoring this gem of a city. There is a lot more in store for us. I'm going to work every day to make sure our progress isn't thwarted and our citizens aren't shortchanged.
Dillon deserves a voice in South Carolina's transportation future. The "Grand Strand Expressway" solution is one that must be considered.
Quote from: LM117 on November 12, 2017, 03:36:27 PM
The mayor of Dillon, Todd Davis, wrote an op-ed about his opposition to I-73.
http://www.scnow.com/opinion/columns/article_1099619e-bf5d-11e7-8191-3b9d2944a107.html (http://www.scnow.com/opinion/columns/article_1099619e-bf5d-11e7-8191-3b9d2944a107.html)
QuoteIt's no secret that I am an outspoken advocate for creating a thriving downtown in Dillon.
Our city is poised for both an economic surge and a big boost in the quality of life for families. The planned inland port will bring jobs and prosperity. At the same time, a redevelopment of our historic downtown hopefully will breathe new life into the city.
Our efforts to improve downtown electrical service and to plant attractive landscaping are vital in bringing in new retail stores. We're providing matching funds for businesses to improve their historic facades. Dillon is moving aggressively to fill the empty storefronts with retailers and restaurants that will make our downtown a destination once again.
We've worked hard to keep our golf course in shape and even harder to make our wellness center a vital part of life here.
And finally, we're pushing for both a hotel and new apartments in downtown to bring back to the district what it once had: a vibrant population of neighbors and visitors who, in turn, spend the kind of money we need to keep moving forward.
With all of this on Dillon's horizon, it is not the time to support any effort that jeopardizes our future.
That's why I am opposed to plans pushed by the Myrtle Beach Area Chamber of Commerce to build Interstate 73 and connect it to I-95. There is no purpose for this interstate other than to funnel travelers and their wallets directly to Myrtle Beach and bypass so many of the local communities — Dillon, Latta, Sellers — that rely on visitors' dollars to meet our budgets.
If I-73 becomes a reality, Dillon businesses along U.S. 301 and Radford Boulevard will take a hit. That means less tax money to continue the improvements we've worked on so diligently. It would mean a step back, just as we're moving forward. I would doubt the new Cookout restaurant would be planting off Radford Boulevard right now if company officials knew traffic would be diverted miles from their location.
For obvious reasons, Myrtle Beach businesses have latched onto a prohibitively expensive, decades-old plan for I-73 that most other states have long abandoned. The I-73 proposal for South Carolina is expected to cost anywhere between $2 billion and $4 billion, depending on the length of the pavement. The only plan to pay for it so far is an extension of taxes, plus tolls.
Myrtle Beach business leaders are refusing to consider a better solution only because it won't have a shiny "interstate" designation.
What the Dillon Town Council supports — and what our Chamber of Commerce supports — is a more efficient and more economical plan to widen existing routes S.C. 38 and U.S. 501 to highway standards. That could meet the same objective, at a fraction of the cost.
That plan, called the "Grand Strand Expressway," also supports enhancements to S.C. 9 as part of what the experts call a "well-connected multi-lane highway network" that would be a winning proposal for everyone.
This solution delivers visitors to the coast quickly and efficiently, and without strangling the economies of small cities and towns along the way.
The economies of South Carolina and of Dillon have come a long way in the past few years, but not far enough to spend billions of dollars on an unneeded interstate, and certainly not far enough that the businesses in Dillon could absorb a hit.
So for the sake of cities like Dillon, I will vigorously oppose any efforts to build I-73. And I will wholeheartedly support all efforts to keep our economy moving forward with innovative solutions like the "Grand Strand Expressway."
I could not be more proud of what Dillon's committed citizens, businesses and civic leaders have done to begin restoring this gem of a city. There is a lot more in store for us. I'm going to work every day to make sure our progress isn't thwarted and our citizens aren't shortchanged.
Dillon deserves a voice in South Carolina's transportation future. The "Grand Strand Expressway" solution is one that must be considered.
Towns that would be bypassed always oppose a new expressway. No surprise. I can't blame them.
Quote from: wdcrft63 on November 12, 2017, 06:23:39 PM
Quote from: LM117 on November 12, 2017, 03:36:27 PM
Quote
[op-ed]
So for the sake of cities like Dillon, I will vigorously oppose any efforts to build I-73. And I will wholeheartedly support all efforts to keep our economy moving forward with innovative solutions like the "Grand Strand Expressway."
I could not be more proud of what Dillon's committed citizens, businesses and civic leaders have done to begin restoring this gem of a city. There is a lot more in store for us. I'm going to work every day to make sure our progress isn't thwarted and our citizens aren't shortchanged.
Dillon deserves a voice in South Carolina's transportation future. The "Grand Strand Expressway" solution is one that must be considered.
Towns that would be bypassed always oppose a new expressway. No surprise. I can't blame them.
Sounds like Whoville, VA, "We've got our Interstate highway, so phooey on the proposal to build a full US-29 bypass to help that corridor".
Quote from: Beltway on November 12, 2017, 08:46:49 PM
Quote from: wdcrft63 on November 12, 2017, 06:23:39 PM
Quote from: LM117 on November 12, 2017, 03:36:27 PM
Quote
[op-ed]
So for the sake of cities like Dillon, I will vigorously oppose any efforts to build I-73. And I will wholeheartedly support all efforts to keep our economy moving forward with innovative solutions like the "Grand Strand Expressway."
I could not be more proud of what Dillon's committed citizens, businesses and civic leaders have done to begin restoring this gem of a city. There is a lot more in store for us. I'm going to work every day to make sure our progress isn't thwarted and our citizens aren't shortchanged.
Dillon deserves a voice in South Carolina's transportation future. The "Grand Strand Expressway" solution is one that must be considered.
Towns that would be bypassed always oppose a new expressway. No surprise. I can't blame them.
Sounds like Whoville, VA, "We've got our Interstate highway, so phooey on the proposal to build a full US-29 bypass to help that corridor".
The most efficient way from I-95 to Myrtle Beach is from the SC 38 interchange and then onto US 501 around Marion en route to the beach. Even though it's right on US 501 within that route's multiplex with US 301, travelers along I-95 generally don't choose to slog through Dillon and Latta on their way to the beach; they want to get to the shore with as few obstacles as possible. I-73 for all intents & purposes follows the presently used path -- neither of which directly involves Dillon. The mayor's entreaties sound like an attempt to divert funds to their pet project to redirect traffic away from the SC 38 routing and back onto US 501 (or even SC 9, which also goes right through Dillon). But regardless of whether the current SC 38 alignment or a future I-73 is utilized, it's likely Dillon (and the other towns in the vicinity) will still be bypassed by folks not willing to take the extra time required to go through the local towns.
I can't blame them for trying, though -- as Mayor Davis states, they lost a lot of business to I-95 decades ago, and are obviously trying to lure some of it back. But stopping I-73 won't accomplish that; they'll have to do that themselves by making what they have to offer seem attractive enough to offset the difference in travel time to and from the primary regional destination along the coast.
A lawsuit has been filed by the Coastal Conservation league.
http://www.scnow.com/news/local/article_47bafce8-e5e4-11e7-a760-33353436d1fa.html (http://www.scnow.com/news/local/article_47bafce8-e5e4-11e7-a760-33353436d1fa.html)
QuoteA Charleston environmental group has filed a lawsuit challenging the federal government's stamp of approval to construct Interstate 73 all the way to Myrtle Beach, arguing that a less costly alternative should first be considered.
The Coastal Conservation League (CCL) says building a Grand Strand Expressway (GSX) by upgrading the current route along U.S. 501 would save taxpayers $2 billion.
The estimated cost to build the interstate is $2.4 billion. The league did not state how much money it would cost to upgrade the current route to handle upwards of 30,000 vehicles a day, except to estimate it at one-tenth of the cost.
Not only would the environment be protected, but so would businesses along the current route, the group argued.
"An interstate that bypasses the region would be devastating to this business and dozens of others," said Alex Small, manager of Sparky's, a fireworks store and iconic tourist attraction on U.S. 501. "Our livelihood and the paychecks of the local workers we hire depend on attracting travelers passing through. Losing that steady stream of visitors would be a significant setback."
The lawsuit, filed Tuesday, essentially asks the federal court to require that the environmentalists' alternative be considered before construction proceeds. It argues that an interstate constructed several miles away from the current route would rob the rest of the state from possibly obtaining federal tax dollars.
"This is about giving all of the people of South Carolina a voice and a choice," said Erin Pate Pate, a spokeswoman for the league. "We support the Myrtle Beach tourism economy. The GSX would get tourists to Myrtle Beach faster and cheaper than I-73, which will take at least a decade to build."
Supporters of building the interstate to Myrtle Beach, including U.S. Rep. Tom Rice, say the interstate project is a shovel-ready project that already meets federal requirements to obtain funding.
Brad Dean, president and chief executive officer of the Myrtle Beach Area Chamber of Commerce, said the chamber is disappointed that this same group that blocked construction of International Drive through the courts was pursuing another legal challenge to block road construction.
Dean said the action also contradicts an earlier pledge by the environmental group that it would not block interstate construction as long as it is located north of U.S. 501.
"Like they did with International Drive, the CCL ignores the needs of the region by pushing its self-serving agenda with no regard for the economic growth, job creation and enhanced safety Interstate 73 will bring," Dean said.
"Interstate 73 is too important to our community to back down, so we will continue our efforts to make Interstate 73 our pathway of progress, in spite of this ridiculous legal challenge."
I'm a little fuzzy on how US 501 businesses will be impacted since the SC 22 freeway already exists from west of Conway to US 17 and would be part of I-73...
What would the right-of-way impacts of upgrading US 501 compared to building a new Interstate 73 alignment be? And would it really save that much money?
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on December 22, 2017, 05:24:06 PM
What would the right-of-way impacts of upgrading US 501 compared to building a new Interstate 73 alignment be? And would it really save that much money?
I'm afraid that what the GSX people have in mind is a "smart street" like that stretch of US 17 south coming out of Wilmington (now bypassed, thank goodness, by the new I-140). That would be a really, really bad idea.
The state House is considering a tolling bill to pay for I-73.
http://m.wmbfnews.com/story/37746690/leaders-say-bill-is-important-part-of-moving-i-73-forward (http://m.wmbfnews.com/story/37746690/leaders-say-bill-is-important-part-of-moving-i-73-forward)
QuoteToll funding for I-73 could depend on whether a bill in the South Carolina House gets passed, according to former chair of the SCDOT Mike Wooten.
Wooten said in order for the state to legally charge tolls on that route, this bill in the House needs to pass.
"It would be impossible for us to build I-73 we believe without having a toll component," said Rep. Alan Clemmons. This piece of legislation would allow for SC 22 to become part of I-73 once it's built and be tolled as well.
"Not being apart of the interstate highway, that portion of the interstate could not be apart of a toll system," said Clemmons.
The South Carolina Trucking Association testified against this bill, but they said they are not opposed to the I-73 project itself. "Because I-73 is the mainline corridor, not SC 22. But the mainline, new greenfield part of I-73.. tolling that, we do not have a problem with it," said President of the SCTA Rick Todd.
He said the reason truck companies are not in favor of tolls is because there are so many other fees they have to pay. "Businesses that operate trucks oppose tolling because commercial vehicles by and large already pay a fuel tax, a registration fee and a property tax apportioned to every state they run in," said Todd.
Clemmons said some concerns that were brought up had to do with this bill leading to the tolling of other roads in the state.
Wooten said the bill has since been rewritten to respond to those concerns heard during the testimony, it just hasn't been reintroduced yet.
"The current bill, in its current form is pending before the committee specifies that only those roads that have been built to interstate standards since 1998," said Clemmons. He said in the state of South Carolina, SC 22 and SC 31 are the only roadways that all under those standards, and SC 31 is not being considered as part of I-73 tolling.
Todd said the trucking association isn't opposed to getting I-73 done, they just want to make sure they're asking questions.
Without I-73 we'll never be able to broaden our tourism economy to a manufacturing economy, which is a long-term goal for the area, according to Clemmons.
I would be glad to see I-73 built to Myrtle Beach. But if it's a toll road, I would expect a lot heavier traffic going to MB via I-40 and US 17.
Quote from: wdcrft63 on March 23, 2018, 06:48:03 PM
I would be glad to see I-73 built to Myrtle Beach. But if it's a toll road, I would expect a lot heavier traffic going to MB via I-40 and US 17.
I agree that if I-73 is tolled, it will most likely be shunpiked. However, I would argue that traffic on I-40 & US-17 will get heavier beginning as soon as this summer, now that I-140 around Wilmington is finally complete. This will also mean heavier traffic on the I-795/US-117 corridor between Wilson and Faison.
Given that I-795's new alignment in Goldsboro has not been built yet, the two interchange projects on US-117 near Mount Olive currently underway, and the recent increase in truck traffic due to the Enviva plant next to the I-40 interchange (Exit 355), this should make US-117 real interesting this summer...
Quote from: LM117 on March 23, 2018, 10:06:23 PM
Quote from: wdcrft63 on March 23, 2018, 06:48:03 PM
I would be glad to see I-73 built to Myrtle Beach. But if it's a toll road, I would expect a lot heavier traffic going to MB via I-40 and US 17.
I agree that if I-73 is tolled, it will most likely be shunpiked. However, I would argue that traffic on I-40 & US-17 will get heavier beginning as soon as this summer, now that I-140 around Wilmington is finally complete. This will also mean heavier traffic on the I-795/US-117 corridor between Wilson and Faison.
Given that I-795's new alignment in Goldsboro has not been built yet, the two interchange projects on US-117 near Mount Olive currently underway, and the recent increase in truck traffic due to the Enviva plant next to the I-40 interchange (Exit 355), this should make US-117 real interesting this summer...
If NC proceeds steadily with the extension of I-74 along US 74 toward Wilmington,
that route would likely also serve as a "shunpiking" choice. Ironically, the much-derided NC 211 "swamp" proposed I-74 portion, built out or not, may see additional traffic as a shunt between the "74" corridor and the Myrtle Beach area, along with the mostly parallel NC 410 and/or US 701. Those 2-lane connectors might eventually be packed on summer weekends by thrifty folks heading to & from the Strand -- prompting a freeway build-out of NC 211/I-74 or an alternative TBD; this particular scenario might be the only way the I-74 segment along 211 ever gets built (and the irony continues!).
Quote from: sparker on March 24, 2018, 03:51:39 AM
If NC proceeds steadily with the extension of I-74 along US 74 toward Wilmington, that route would likely also serve as a "shunpiking" choice. Ironically, the much-derided NC 211 "swamp" proposed I-74 portion, built out or not, may see additional traffic as a shunt between the "74" corridor and the Myrtle Beach area, along with the mostly parallel NC 410 and/or US 701. Those 2-lane connectors might eventually be packed on summer weekends by thrifty folks heading to & from the Strand -- prompting a freeway build-out of NC 211/I-74 or an alternative TBD; this particular scenario might be the only way the I-74 segment along 211 ever gets built (and the irony continues!).
And that's fine. As more people live on the coast and people visiting it, there needs to be more roads to handle them all when they need to get the hell out of there when a Hurricane comes.
Quote from: sparker on March 24, 2018, 03:51:39 AM
If NC proceeds steadily with the extension of I-74 along US 74 toward Wilmington, that route would likely also serve as a "shunpiking" choice. Ironically, the much-derided NC 211 "swamp" proposed I-74 portion, built out or not, may see additional traffic as a shunt between the "74" corridor and the Myrtle Beach area, along with the mostly parallel NC 410 and/or US 701. Those 2-lane connectors might eventually be packed on summer weekends by thrifty folks heading to & from the Strand -- prompting a freeway build-out of NC 211/I-74 or an alternative TBD; this particular scenario might be the only way the I-74 segment along 211 ever gets built (and the irony continues!).
If you're EB on US 74, the best route to Myrtle Beach is via NC 410/US 701/SC 9. This is much shorter than going to Wilmington or NC 211. I used this route for years before I-40 was completed.
Quote from: LM117 on March 19, 2018, 07:12:11 AM
The state House is considering a tolling bill to pay for I-73.
http://m.wmbfnews.com/story/37746690/leaders-say-bill-is-important-part-of-moving-i-73-forward (http://m.wmbfnews.com/story/37746690/leaders-say-bill-is-important-part-of-moving-i-73-forward)
QuoteToll funding for I-73 could depend on whether a bill in the South Carolina House gets passed, according to former chair of the SCDOT Mike Wooten.
Wooten said in order for the state to legally charge tolls on that route, this bill in the House needs to pass.
"It would be impossible for us to build I-73 we believe without having a toll component," said Rep. Alan Clemmons. This piece of legislation would allow for SC 22 to become part of I-73 once it's built and be tolled as well.
"Not being apart of the interstate highway, that portion of the interstate could not be apart of a toll system," said Clemmons.
The South Carolina Trucking Association testified against this bill, but they said they are not opposed to the I-73 project itself. "Because I-73 is the mainline corridor, not SC 22. But the mainline, new greenfield part of I-73.. tolling that, we do not have a problem with it," said President of the SCTA Rick Todd.
He said the reason truck companies are not in favor of tolls is because there are so many other fees they have to pay. "Businesses that operate trucks oppose tolling because commercial vehicles by and large already pay a fuel tax, a registration fee and a property tax apportioned to every state they run in," said Todd.
Clemmons said some concerns that were brought up had to do with this bill leading to the tolling of other roads in the state.
Wooten said the bill has since been rewritten to respond to those concerns heard during the testimony, it just hasn't been reintroduced yet.
"The current bill, in its current form is pending before the committee specifies that only those roads that have been built to interstate standards since 1998," said Clemmons. He said in the state of South Carolina, SC 22 and SC 31 are the only roadways that all under those standards, and SC 31 is not being considered as part of I-73 tolling.
Todd said the trucking association isn't opposed to getting I-73 done, they just want to make sure they're asking questions.
Without I-73 we'll never be able to broaden our tourism economy to a manufacturing economy, which is a long-term goal for the area, according to Clemmons.
Whatever happened to the policy, the federal government would provide 90% of funding and the state provides the rest, for the interstate system. Nowadays, if we want to build a new interstate, even as little as 200 miles long, it either has to be tolled, or built over 15-25+ years. Back in the day, the system was unveiled, the government funded it, and 20+ years later, we have 1,000+ mile interstates completed, with no tolling (except on previous turnpikes). If this interstate was one of the original ones, it most likely would've been done in 20 years from Michigan to Myrtle Beach, no tolls.
The laws that created the 90-10 formula and the late 1960s additions with same had mileage ceilings which have been reached.
The 1968 additional mileage law had far more requests from the states than the ~1000 miles that were ultimately funded that way. Thus, states that wanted to build these extra miles of interstate beyond the 1968 mileage cap had to foot the whole bill.
It would require new congressional action to have another 90-10 (or any other fraction) split. Note Congress could do this as a blanket mileage thing or even on a specific project - I-95 (now I-395) in the area of the Pentagon was funded at a 95-5 ratio by specific congressional action so that Virginia would take over this highway from the Bureau of Public Roads which built the roads in the vicinity of the Pentagon originally in the 1940s.
Quote from: Mapmikey on April 01, 2018, 03:16:58 PM
The laws that created the 90-10 formula and the late 1960s additions with same had mileage ceilings which have been reached.
The 1968 additional mileage law had far more requests from the states than the ~1000 miles that were ultimately funded that way. Thus, states that wanted to build these extra miles of interstate beyond the 1968 mileage cap had to foot the whole bill.
It would require new congressional action to have another 90-10 (or any other fraction) split. Note Congress could do this as a blanket mileage thing or even on a specific project - I-95 (now I-395) in the area of the Pentagon was funded at a 95-5 ratio by specific congressional action so that Virginia would take over this highway from the Bureau of Public Roads which built the roads in the vicinity of the Pentagon originally in the 1940s.
The original '68 addition legislation funded 4500 miles and was introduced at the beginning of the Congressional session that year. But the "Tet offensive" of the Vietnam conflict happened in the interim, so domestic funding was curtailed and shunted over to DOD for counteroffensive purposes. That left states scrambling for the (eventually) 1500 miles authorized that year, so a number of proposals (including among others the now-I-49 corridor & an I-40 west extension in CA) were cut loose. And 5 years later the rules were changed, prompted by the Nixonian "block grant" approach that relocated both impetus and responsibility to the individual states, effectively blocking the possibility of future "omnibus" Interstate legislation authorizing a 90% Federal share of the costs. And successive Congresses, regardless of which party is in control, haven't seen fit to change that system. There isn't a specific "mileage cap" beyond the original 42.5K (with the '68 additions) authorized to receive the 90/10 split; the system now sits at around 47K -- but absent any guaranteed funding pool, proposals for additions are at state/local option, presently capped (unless specific legislation indicates otherwise) at 80/20. And both portions of that fraction are troublesome -- getting the 80 through Congress is no picnic, while the problems endemic to raising the remaining 20 has crashed many a corridor concept. Given present Federal circumstances, it's difficult to see a "blanket" reiteration of anything resembling the original Interstate authorizing legislation or even the additions 12 years down the line happening anytime soon.
This July 24 article (https://www.myhorrynews.com/news/local/horry_county/horry-county-council-pledges-million-per-year-for-i/article_d32c5d02-8f81-11e8-b300-3f8def3e6e4c.html) reports that Horry County has pledged $23 million per year for 20 years to help pay for I-73, partially in anticipation of the Trump infrastructure plan:
Quote
Horry County Council plans to annually set aside at least $23 million for Interstate 73 over the next two decades ....
Local officials stressed that timing is critical with federal lawmakers planning to focus on an infrastructure bill next year. President Donald Trump's $200 billion infrastructure plan prioritizes projects with greater local and state investment, and county leaders want to secure federal funds to match their contribution. They hope the matching money could be used to build the road to I-95.
"All the stars are lined up to move this forward," Lazarus said. "They're going to be debating this this coming year. ... It is an important piece for us to move forward, to put our money where our mouth is and to show that we are in favor of I-73 and that we're ready to move forward with this. ... This is the time to make that happen." ....
SCDOT already has the permits for the state's portion of I-73, though the project is being challenged in federal court by environmentalists.
I don't think this will go anywhere, but...
https://www.thestate.com/news/politics-government/article218999470.html (https://www.thestate.com/news/politics-government/article218999470.html)
https://www.wbtw.com/news/grand-strand/federal-judge-rules-conservation-group-s-claims-against-i-73-project-will-stay/1754408163 (https://www.wbtw.com/news/grand-strand/federal-judge-rules-conservation-group-s-claims-against-i-73-project-will-stay/1754408163)
Quote from: LM117 on February 05, 2019, 03:03:22 PM
https://www.wbtw.com/news/grand-strand/federal-judge-rules-conservation-group-s-claims-against-i-73-project-will-stay/1754408163 (https://www.wbtw.com/news/grand-strand/federal-judge-rules-conservation-group-s-claims-against-i-73-project-will-stay/1754408163)
Nothing but obstruction, obstruction, obstruction. These environmental groups will hopefully be defeated eventually. They only help to ruin needed projects, so the little swamp survives, even though a sliver of it will be crossed. Even after permits are issued, they still try. It's really sad.
Quote from: sprjus4 on February 05, 2019, 04:24:24 PM
Quote from: LM117 on February 05, 2019, 03:03:22 PM
https://www.wbtw.com/news/grand-strand/federal-judge-rules-conservation-group-s-claims-against-i-73-project-will-stay/1754408163 (https://www.wbtw.com/news/grand-strand/federal-judge-rules-conservation-group-s-claims-against-i-73-project-will-stay/1754408163)
Nothing but obstruction, obstruction, obstruction. These environmental groups will hopefully be defeated eventually. They only help to ruin needed projects, so the little swamp survives, even though a sliver of it will be crossed. Even after permits are issued, they still try. It's really sad.
Radical environmentalist/transit groups (RE/T Groups) tend to be obstructionists. Groups like the Sierra KKKlub tend to think that humans are cancer and that many should be eradicated from the Earth.
Quote from: Beltway on February 05, 2019, 06:59:47 PM
Quote from: sprjus4 on February 05, 2019, 04:24:24 PM
Quote from: LM117 on February 05, 2019, 03:03:22 PM
https://www.wbtw.com/news/grand-strand/federal-judge-rules-conservation-group-s-claims-against-i-73-project-will-stay/1754408163 (https://www.wbtw.com/news/grand-strand/federal-judge-rules-conservation-group-s-claims-against-i-73-project-will-stay/1754408163)
Nothing but obstruction, obstruction, obstruction. These environmental groups will hopefully be defeated eventually. They only help to ruin needed projects, so the little swamp survives, even though a sliver of it will be crossed. Even after permits are issued, they still try. It's really sad.
Radical environmentalist/transit groups (RE/T Groups) tend to be obstructionists. Groups like the Sierra KKKlub tend to think that humans are cancer and that many should be eradicated from the Earth.
Army Corps already issue a permit back in Summer 2017, and they still think their "expressway" upgrade would be adequate, and will stop at nothing to prevent a freeway. Hopefully I-73 gets built eventually. https://www.postandcourier.com/news/interstate-permits-challenged-by-south-carolina-environmentalists-in-federal-filing/article_bd3b6fe8-e1d4-11e7-aa6c-83a4720e74f5.html
The new interstate would be built with a 94 foot median, wide enough to accommodate a 6th lane in the future (when traffic warrants), and still have a 70 foot median.
The existing highway is inadequate, most of it carries 20,000 AADT, around 30,000 AADT before the Conway Bypass. Factor summer weekend traffic, that's likely higher. The traffic is around 12,000 AADT on the bypass, and 50,000 through Conway. This is because most traffic is heading towards the heart of Myrtle Beach, and the bypass is out of the way. I-73 would be located north of the existing corridor though, and would tie into the bypass, making it more direct for those southern Myrtle Beach bound folks, significantly relieving congestion inside Conway, and on the existing US 501 corridor itself.
An "expressway" upgrade would be a waste of money and not solve any of the issues, especially through Conway. There's also flooding issues on the highway, which was underwater during Hurricane Florence. The highway would have a higher elevation, would less likely flood as severely (then again, the newer 1990s portion of I-40 was a river outside Wilmington), and provide a better evacuation route. Not to mention, the I-73 concept goes beyond I-95 to Myrtle Beach. It would tie into North Carolina's I-73, and eventually Virginia's, creating an interstate corridor from Myrtle Beach / I-95 to Roanoke / I-81. An expressway upgrade would not do any of this.
Editorial: South Carolina doesn't need any new interstates (https://www.postandcourier.com/opinion/editorials/editorial-south-carolina-doesn-t-need-any-new-interstates/article_4897431a-a4d3-11e9-ad9c-5faea98e3a93.html)
QuoteThe Myrtle Beach Area Chamber of Commerce sent out a news release recently touting the not-particularly surprising news that Horry County residents and chamber members support the chamber's top legislative priority: squandering billions of mostly federal dollars on a new interstate to the beach that would destroy sensitive wetlands and run parallel to an existing freeway.
Of course, the chamber didn't describe the long-fantasized Interstate 73 that way. And touting the local support seems a little less bizarre in light of the fight that's playing out between the Horry County Council and the cities of Myrtle Beach, North Myrtle Beach and Surfside Beach over whether they'll continue to pledge $23 million a year in hospitality tax revenue to the project. The cities say they still support the project but have better uses for their tax money.
And that's one of the points: Just as the cities are happy to have a new interstate if someone else pays for it, we suspect that you'd find less support among residents – and even among businesses – if you asked them to underwrite the entire cost of running a new interstate 75 miles from the North Carolina border to Myrtle Beach, set by some projections as high as $4 billion. (We suspect that if you asked those same residents if the chamber's members should pay all of the taxes for local government services, they'd support that idea as well.)
Currently, there are no plans to spend state funds on I-73. But the local governments are feuding over how to come up with annual payments that are less than 1 percent of the projected cost in current dollars – which suggests that state funds eventually will be expected. And of course the project relies heavily on federal funds, which we all help pay for.
The fact that 80 percent or even 100 percent of Horry County residents want the rest of us to pay for an unnecessarily expensive and environmentally destructive highway is not particularly relevant to whether the state Transportation Department should continue to facilitate the plan. The question isn't whether locals like the idea but whether it's a good investment for our state.
It's probably true that Horry County could use better evacuation routes. But just as Charleston County could get a lot more bang for its buck by investing in, say, flood mitigation, instead of the similarly unnecessary and expensive I-526 extension, Horry County could upgrade the S.C. 38-U.S. 501 corridor to be as useful as an interstate for $147 million to $428 million, according to 2011 projections. Even if you figure the cost has possibly doubled in the past eight years, that's still just a fraction of the cost of the interstate.
Those savings would be reason enough to abandon the interstate dream even if that were the only consideration. It's not. Like I-526, the proposed I-73 carries a huge environmental cost.
Environmentalists say construction would impact 324 acres of wetlands and other protected aquatic areas, including the Little Pee Dee Heritage Preserve and Wildlife Management Area, which includes land along the Little Pee Dee River in Marion and Horry counties; it would cut off an important corridor for black bears and fragment other valuable wildlife habitat.
And with a decades-long backlog of crumbling roads and bridges, our state has more crucial uses for our limited road funds, which already are spread too thin because we've spent decades building new roads without considering how to come up with the money to keep them in safe working order.
I put everything in the article that is false in bold text. Just another RE/T obstructionist. The amount of false information they've provided and believe from other RE/T obstructionists is quite sad. Maybe if they actually stuck with the facts and not low-balled cost estimates from a RE/T group, they'd see how their claims are quickly killed. Like for instance, their claim that US-501 is a freeway. If that was actually true, I wouldn't support building a new interstate either. But the fact is, US-501 is a non-limited-access arterial highway with congestion issues, and substandard design. An interstate highway is warranted, especially during peak weekends.
It's even better how the picture in the article shows a freeway-like section of roadway with an exit sign and shows traffic backed up and pushes the claim -
"Afternoon traffic backs up on U.S. 501 headed into Myrtle Beach. Local business leaders and politicians want to build a new Interstate 73 to the beach rather than upgrade existing freeways to alleviate traffic." Again, they want people to believe it's an existing freeway when in fact it's -not-.
The author of this editorial must have never been to Myrtle Beach via US 501.
Quote from: wdcrft63 on July 24, 2019, 06:58:32 PM
The author of this editorial must have never been to Myrtle Beach via US 501.
Exactly my thoughts. Most of the opponents have not driven on US 501 during beach rush hour. They just don't know that if SCDOT just widen its current routing, the traffic nightmare will still remain. Building I-73 will do wonders.
Quote from: sprjus4 on July 24, 2019, 10:48:42 AM
Just another RE/T obstructionist. The amount of false information they've provided and believe from other RE/T obstructionists is quite sad. Maybe if they actually stuck with the facts and not low-balled cost estimates from a RE/T group, they'd see how their claims are quickly killed.
What about the Sierra KKKlub ... do you think that they are involved with the obsties? Does the Sierra KKKlub really believe that human beings are cancer? If man went to Mars, does the Sierra KKKlub think that humans would destroy Mars like they destroyed the Earth and Venus?
Somebody call Beltway's nurse and tell her he's gotten into the liquor cabinet again.
xxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxx xxxx xxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxx xxxxxx
Belay that. My questions were directed to Sprjus4, not to Rothman.
KKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKK
Quote from: Beltway on July 24, 2019, 10:56:45 PM
xxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxx xxxx xxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxx xxxxxx
Belay that. My questions were directed to Sprjus4, not to Rothman.
Hm. I thought it was a fun rebuttal.
I-73 would be used as a nice hurricane evacuation route. I-74, dunno. I guess it's just an extra interstate in South Carolina.
Quote from: mrhappy1261 on July 28, 2019, 01:50:56 AM
I-73 would be used as a nice hurricane evacuation route. I-74, dunno. I guess it's just an extra interstate in South Carolina.
I-74 in South Carolina is a joke IMO. To be fair, the whole I-74 numbering is a joke, but if it's going to go anywhere, it should be Wilmington, not some last minute right angle dip down to Myrtle Beach.
Quote from: sprjus4 on July 28, 2019, 01:54:42 AM
Quote from: mrhappy1261 on July 28, 2019, 01:50:56 AM
I-73 would be used as a nice hurricane evacuation route. I-74, dunno. I guess it's just an extra interstate in South Carolina.
I-74 in South Carolina is a joke IMO. To be fair, the whole I-74 numbering is a joke, but if it's going to go anywhere, it should be Wilmington, not some last minute right angle dip down to Myrtle Beach.
Yeah. I-74 goes in a weird direction. What is NCDOT thinking?
Quote from: mrhappy1261 on July 28, 2019, 10:29:21 AM
Quote from: sprjus4 on July 28, 2019, 01:54:42 AM
Quote from: mrhappy1261 on July 28, 2019, 01:50:56 AM
I-73 would be used as a nice hurricane evacuation route. I-74, dunno. I guess it's just an extra interstate in South Carolina.
I-74 in South Carolina is a joke IMO. To be fair, the whole I-74 numbering is a joke, but if it's going to go anywhere, it should be Wilmington, not some last minute right angle dip down to Myrtle Beach.
Yeah. I-74 goes in a weird direction. What is NCDOT thinking?
They were probably thinking "what the heck was Congress thinking when they assigned this completely illogical route for the end of I-74?".
Quote from: vdeane on July 28, 2019, 09:07:18 PM
Quote from: mrhappy1261 on July 28, 2019, 10:29:21 AM
Quote from: sprjus4 on July 28, 2019, 01:54:42 AM
Quote from: mrhappy1261 on July 28, 2019, 01:50:56 AM
I-73 would be used as a nice hurricane evacuation route. I-74, dunno. I guess it's just an extra interstate in South Carolina.
I-74 in South Carolina is a joke IMO. To be fair, the whole I-74 numbering is a joke, but if it's going to go anywhere, it should be Wilmington, not some last minute right angle dip down to Myrtle Beach.
Yeah. I-74 goes in a weird direction. What is NCDOT thinking?
They were probably thinking "what the heck was Congress thinking when they assigned this completely illogical route for the end of I-74?".
Just put it in Wilmington. South Carolina is already getting I-73, no need for that state to have two interstates. I have no problem with Wilmington getting two interstates.
The number and corridor were set in federal law by Congress. Congress would have to change the law to send I-74 to Wilmington.
Quote from: vdeane on July 28, 2019, 09:44:19 PM
The number and corridor were set in federal law by Congress. Congress would have to change the law to send I-74 to Wilmington.
Let's hope that would happen at least. It isn't really a freeway at the 140 interchange so they would need to fix that part.
Quote from: vdeane on July 28, 2019, 09:07:18 PM
Quote from: mrhappy1261 on July 28, 2019, 10:29:21 AM
Quote from: sprjus4 on July 28, 2019, 01:54:42 AM
Quote from: mrhappy1261 on July 28, 2019, 01:50:56 AM
I-73 would be used as a nice hurricane evacuation route. I-74, dunno. I guess it's just an extra interstate in South Carolina.
I-74 in South Carolina is a joke IMO. To be fair, the whole I-74 numbering is a joke, but if it's going to go anywhere, it should be Wilmington, not some last minute right angle dip down to Myrtle Beach.
Yeah. I-74 goes in a weird direction. What is NCDOT thinking?
They were probably thinking "what the heck was Congress thinking when they assigned this completely illogical route for the end of I-74?".
NC's congressional delegation back in 1995 -- or at least those from some coastal districts -- were probably thinking "why don't we get in on the Myrtle Beach action and try to develop
our coastline from Sunset Beach to Southport just like the guys down across the line" -- and they wanted a direct Interstate corridor, which ended up being along NC 211 -- to expedite all this. Of course, they needed some level of cooperation from their SC cohorts, so they simply did the 90-degree turn at Supply and headed toward Myrtle.
Quote from: mrhappy1261 on July 28, 2019, 09:49:16 PM
Quote from: vdeane on July 28, 2019, 09:44:19 PM
The number and corridor were set in federal law by Congress. Congress would have to change the law to send I-74 to Wilmington.
Let's hope that would happen at least. It isn't really a freeway at the 140 interchange so they would need to fix that part.
During the ensuing years, that particular corridor concept has gotten the "WTF?" treatment from several directions, not the least of whom are Green Swamp-saving environmentalists. The scenario that's likely to happen is this: NCDOT will build the freeway east along US 74 to Bolton and simply stop it there. Then they'll wait until public outcry from Wilmington interests to "finish the job" reaches a high level, then by hook or crook sneak a HPC #5 route revision into Federal legislation within an annual funding bill (S.O.P. these days!), and,
presto, I-74 will terminate at either I-140 or the Cape Fear River bridge. SC will piss & moan, of course, so US 17 from Wilmington down to SC 31, and that route itself, will receive another designation (my money's on a southern I-97, which would remain in "future" status for the near term). The southern NC coast will remain as is -- it isn't a continuous beach anyway, so Myrtle-type development wouldn't likely have occurred. Just as well -- the world doesn't need another 150 shops selling graphic T-shirts!
Quote from: Beltway on July 24, 2019, 10:51:17 PM
Quote from: sprjus4 on July 24, 2019, 10:48:42 AM
Just another RE/T obstructionist. The amount of false information they've provided and believe from other RE/T obstructionists is quite sad. Maybe if they actually stuck with the facts and not low-balled cost estimates from a RE/T group, they'd see how their claims are quickly killed.
What about the Sierra KKKlub ... do you think that they are involved with the obsties? Does the Sierra KKKlub really believe that human beings are cancer? If man went to Mars, does the Sierra KKKlub think that humans would destroy Mars like they destroyed the Earth and Venus?
Venus? What have we done to Venus?
Quote from: VTGoose on August 08, 2019, 09:05:48 AM
Quote from: Beltway on July 24, 2019, 10:51:17 PM
Quote from: sprjus4 on July 24, 2019, 10:48:42 AM
Just another RE/T obstructionist. The amount of false information they've provided and believe from other RE/T obstructionists is quite sad. Maybe if they actually stuck with the facts and not low-balled cost estimates from a RE/T group, they'd see how their claims are quickly killed.
What about the Sierra KKKlub ... do you think that they are involved with the obsties? Does the Sierra KKKlub really believe that human beings are cancer? If man went to Mars, does the Sierra KKKlub think that humans would destroy Mars like they destroyed the Earth and Venus?
Venus? What have we done to Venus?
Turned it from a rainy forested planet to a runaway greenhouse effect and barrenness, with 600 F temperatures at the surface, enough to melt lead.
Quote from: Beltway on August 08, 2019, 09:32:23 AM
Quote from: VTGoose on August 08, 2019, 09:05:48 AM
Quote from: Beltway on July 24, 2019, 10:51:17 PM
Quote from: sprjus4 on July 24, 2019, 10:48:42 AM
Just another RE/T obstructionist. The amount of false information they've provided and believe from other RE/T obstructionists is quite sad. Maybe if they actually stuck with the facts and not low-balled cost estimates from a RE/T group, they'd see how their claims are quickly killed.
What about the Sierra KKKlub ... do you think that they are involved with the obsties? Does the Sierra KKKlub really believe that human beings are cancer? If man went to Mars, does the Sierra KKKlub think that humans would destroy Mars like they destroyed the Earth and Venus?
Venus? What have we done to Venus?
Turned it from a rainy forested planet to a runaway greenhouse effect and barrenness, with 600 F temperatures at the surface, enough to melt lead.
That's Earth in 12 years :-o :no:
Quote from: sprjus4 on August 08, 2019, 10:52:58 AM
Quote from: Beltway on August 08, 2019, 09:32:23 AM
Quote from: VTGoose on August 08, 2019, 09:05:48 AM
Quote from: Beltway on July 24, 2019, 10:51:17 PM
Quote from: sprjus4 on July 24, 2019, 10:48:42 AM
Just another RE/T obstructionist. The amount of false information they've provided and believe from other RE/T obstructionists is quite sad. Maybe if they actually stuck with the facts and not low-balled cost estimates from a RE/T group, they'd see how their claims are quickly killed.
What about the Sierra KKKlub ... do you think that they are involved with the obsties? Does the Sierra KKKlub really believe that human beings are cancer? If man went to Mars, does the Sierra KKKlub think that humans would destroy Mars like they destroyed the Earth and Venus?
Venus? What have we done to Venus?
Turned it from a rainy forested planet to a runaway greenhouse effect and barrenness, with 600 F temperatures at the surface, enough to melt lead.
That's Earth in 12 years :-o :no:
LOL!!! Remember, we can always land on the Sun, we'll just do it at night, :D.
Quote from: Beltway on August 08, 2019, 09:32:23 AM
Quote from: VTGoose on August 08, 2019, 09:05:48 AM
Quote from: Beltway on July 24, 2019, 10:51:17 PM
Quote from: sprjus4 on July 24, 2019, 10:48:42 AM
Just another RE/T obstructionist. The amount of false information they've provided and believe from other RE/T obstructionists is quite sad. Maybe if they actually stuck with the facts and not low-balled cost estimates from a RE/T group, they'd see how their claims are quickly killed.
What about the Sierra KKKlub ... do you think that they are involved with the obsties? Does the Sierra KKKlub really believe that human beings are cancer? If man went to Mars, does the Sierra KKKlub think that humans would destroy Mars like they destroyed the Earth and Venus?
Venus? What have we done to Venus?
Turned it from a rainy forested planet to a runaway greenhouse effect and barrenness, with 600 F temperatures at the surface, enough to melt lead.
OK, I must have missed that news from NASA -- or was it a story in the Weekly World News?
Getting back to the thread's title, I would actually be very surprised if North Carolina's Interstate 73 or Interstate 74 ever gets into South Carolina (or Virginia, or anywhere else for that manner).
Quote from: goobnav on August 08, 2019, 01:50:50 PM
Quote from: sprjus4 on August 08, 2019, 10:52:58 AM
Quote from: Beltway on August 08, 2019, 09:32:23 AM
Quote from: VTGoose on August 08, 2019, 09:05:48 AM
Quote from: Beltway on July 24, 2019, 10:51:17 PM
Quote from: sprjus4 on July 24, 2019, 10:48:42 AM
Just another RE/T obstructionist. The amount of false information they've provided and believe from other RE/T obstructionists is quite sad. Maybe if they actually stuck with the facts and not low-balled cost estimates from a RE/T group, they'd see how their claims are quickly killed.
What about the Sierra KKKlub ... do you think that they are involved with the obsties? Does the Sierra KKKlub really believe that human beings are cancer? If man went to Mars, does the Sierra KKKlub think that humans would destroy Mars like they destroyed the Earth and Venus?
Venus? What have we done to Venus?
Turned it from a rainy forested planet to a runaway greenhouse effect and barrenness, with 600 F temperatures at the surface, enough to melt lead.
That's Earth in 12 years :-o :no:
... according to the RE/T groups.
Quote from: goobnav on August 08, 2019, 01:50:50 PM
LOL!!! Remember, we can always land on the Sun, we'll just do it at night, :D.
No, just land on the far side of the Sun! :spin:
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on August 08, 2019, 03:49:55 PM
Getting back to the thread's title, I would actually be very surprised if North Carolina's Interstate 73 or Interstate 74 ever gets into South Carolina (or Virginia, or anywhere else for that manner).
I-73 will be knocking on VA and SC's borders in less than 20 years. I-74 is technically at the VA border, SC might never come to fruition.
Quote from: goobnav on August 08, 2019, 04:17:22 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on August 08, 2019, 03:49:55 PM
Getting back to the thread's title, I would actually be very surprised if North Carolina's Interstate 73 or Interstate 74 ever gets into South Carolina (or Virginia, or anywhere else for that manner).
I-73 will be knocking on VA and SC's borders in less than 20 years. I-74 is technically at the VA border, SC might never come to fruition.
I-74 is technically complete in Virginia, although they might want to leverage that toward getting extra FHWA funding to widen I-77 thruout the state, it will need it by 2040.
Quote from: Beltway on August 08, 2019, 04:19:12 PM
Quote from: goobnav on August 08, 2019, 04:17:22 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on August 08, 2019, 03:49:55 PM
Getting back to the thread's title, I would actually be very surprised if North Carolina's Interstate 73 or Interstate 74 ever gets into South Carolina (or Virginia, or anywhere else for that manner).
I-73 will be knocking on VA and SC's borders in less than 20 years. I-74 is technically at the VA border, SC might never come to fruition.
I-74 is technically complete in Virginia, although they might want to leverage that toward getting extra FHWA funding to widen I-77 thruout the state, it will need it by 2040.
If a condition for such funding was the posting of I-74 shields in VA, then that would seem to be something of a bargain. Still won't prompt any 73/74 corridor development past the VA/WV line, though; that's a ship that just can't seem to get out of port!
So the general consensus seems to be that I-73 in SC is necessary, whereas I-74 in SC is strange and unwarranted, and would be better suited serving Wilmington..
I agree.
Quote from: Beltway on August 08, 2019, 04:19:12 PM
Quote from: goobnav on August 08, 2019, 04:17:22 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on August 08, 2019, 03:49:55 PM
Getting back to the thread's title, I would actually be very surprised if North Carolina's Interstate 73 or Interstate 74 ever gets into South Carolina (or Virginia, or anywhere else for that manner).
I-73 will be knocking on VA and SC's borders in less than 20 years. I-74 is technically at the VA border, SC might never come to fruition.
I-74 is technically complete in Virginia, although they might want to leverage that toward getting extra FHWA funding to widen I-77 thruout the state, it will need it by 2040.
Agreed it'll eventually need it, but I think it's safe to say I-81 should come first, especially when federal funding is offered.
Quote from: sprjus4 on August 08, 2019, 11:25:10 PM
Quote from: Beltway on August 08, 2019, 04:19:12 PM
I-74 is technically complete in Virginia, although they might want to leverage that toward getting extra FHWA funding to widen I-77 thruout the state, it will need it by 2040.
Agreed it'll eventually need it, but I think it's safe to say I-81 should come first, especially when federal funding is offered.
The West Virginia Turnpike will serve as a limiting valve as long as it remains 4 lanes.
Expensive as it will be, the day will come when it needs to be widened to 6 lanes.
Quote from: Beltway on August 08, 2019, 11:38:28 PM
Quote from: sprjus4 on August 08, 2019, 11:25:10 PM
Quote from: Beltway on August 08, 2019, 04:19:12 PM
I-74 is technically complete in Virginia, although they might want to leverage that toward getting extra FHWA funding to widen I-77 thruout the state, it will need it by 2040.
Agreed it'll eventually need it, but I think it's safe to say I-81 should come first, especially when federal funding is offered.
The West Virginia Turnpike will serve as a limiting valve as long as it remains 4 lanes.
Expensive as it will be, the day will come when it needs to be widened to 6 lanes.
The West Virginia Turnpike is not in Virginia. West Virginia could look at I-77 as a priority, but it's certainly not one in Virginia. I-81, I-95, and I-64 should be priorities for Virginia.
Quote from: sprjus4 on August 09, 2019, 12:51:24 AM
Quote from: Beltway on August 08, 2019, 11:38:28 PM
The West Virginia Turnpike will serve as a limiting valve as long as it remains 4 lanes.
Expensive as it will be, the day will come when it needs to be widened to 6 lanes.
The West Virginia Turnpike is not in Virginia. West Virginia could look at I-77 as a priority, but it's certainly not one in Virginia. I-81, I-95, and I-64 should be priorities for Virginia.
Notice what I said would reduce / delay the need to widen VA I-77.
KKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKK
Quote from: Beltway on August 08, 2019, 11:38:28 PM
Quote from: sprjus4 on August 08, 2019, 11:25:10 PM
Quote from: Beltway on August 08, 2019, 04:19:12 PM
I-74 is technically complete in Virginia, although they might want to leverage that toward getting extra FHWA funding to widen I-77 thruout the state, it will need it by 2040.
Agreed it'll eventually need it, but I think it's safe to say I-81 should come first, especially when federal funding is offered.
The West Virginia Turnpike will serve as a limiting valve as long as it remains 4 lanes.
Expensive as it will be, the day will come when it needs to be widened to 6 lanes.
Ah, there's another issue for a bottleneck and it is majority on the VA side of I-77, the Big Walker Mountain and East River Mountain tunnels are only 4 lanes, they would need to be widened and that will significantly raise the cost to widen I-77 in VA. That can also be an issue of contention of signing I-74 concurrent with I-77 in VA.
IF I-77 through the tunnels in VA ever becomes an issue, which is cheaper: Widening the tunnels of building 73 between 77 and 81?
Quote from: ARMOURERERIC on August 13, 2019, 08:03:37 AM
IF I-77 through the tunnels in VA ever becomes an issue, which is cheaper: Widening the tunnels of building 73 between 77 and 81?
Not a good alternate route to I-77, very circuitous.
Quote from: ARMOURERERIC on August 13, 2019, 08:03:37 AM
IF I-77 through the tunnels in VA ever becomes an issue, which is cheaper: Widening the tunnels of building 73 between 77 and 81?
Expensive as it may be, adding more lanes to the tunnels would be about the only way to go. There just isn't a good way to get from the end of U.S. 460 in Blacksburg to the almost-interstate section of U.S. 460 in West Virginia (if this is the preferred route). The alternative is to move southwest and use the VA 100 corridor to get close, but the same problem exists there -- getting from Pearisburg to Glen Lyn. The Narrows of the New River is the only easy way through and that would require quite a bit of earthmoving to widen the passage for four lanes. The current westbound lanes of 460 are on the original alignment from decades ago and are perched on a ledge high above the river, they follow the curves and contours, and are wholly inadequate for today's traffic, let alone having an interstate designation. The alternative is a new mountain crossing or two, which won't fly in an area that is already fighting hard against the Mountain Valley pipeline. Even if the Virginia route were possible, West Virginia would have to upgrade its section of U.S. 460 to eliminate side roads and cross traffic, in addition to whatever interchange (existing or new) that connects the road into I-77.
In the scheme of things, neither scenario will probably be seen anytime in the near (or even distant) future.
Quote from: VTGoose on August 13, 2019, 10:32:19 AM
Quote from: ARMOURERERIC on August 13, 2019, 08:03:37 AM
IF I-77 through the tunnels in VA ever becomes an issue, which is cheaper: Widening the tunnels of building 73 between 77 and 81?
Expensive as it may be, adding more lanes to the tunnels would be about the only way to go. There just isn't a good way to get from the end of U.S. 460 in Blacksburg to the almost-interstate section of U.S. 460 in West Virginia (if this is the preferred route). The alternative is to move southwest and use the VA 100 corridor to get close, but the same problem exists there -- getting from Pearisburg to Glen Lyn. The Narrows of the New River is the only easy way through and that would require quite a bit of earthmoving to widen the passage for four lanes. The current westbound lanes of 460 are on the original alignment from decades ago and are perched on a ledge high above the river, they follow the curves and contours, and are wholly inadequate for today's traffic, let alone having an interstate designation. The alternative is a new mountain crossing or two, which won't fly in an area that is already fighting hard against the Mountain Valley pipeline. Even if the Virginia route were possible, West Virginia would have to upgrade its section of U.S. 460 to eliminate side roads and cross traffic, in addition to whatever interchange (existing or new) that connects the road into I-77.
In the scheme of things, neither scenario will probably be seen anytime in the near (or even distant) future.
I have only seen one instance where existing interstate tunnels were actually widened: I-70 east of Idaho Springs, CO, where the twin two-lane tubes were somehow wallowed out into three lane tubes. And those were less than a half mile long. Come to think of it, I can't really think of any long mountain tunnels with greater than two lanes. East River Mountain Tunnel, I believe, is over a mile long. Might be a lot more feasible to build two more tubes here, possibly both to the east, and one on either side at Big Walker Mountain.
Quote from: wriddle082 on August 13, 2019, 08:21:27 PM
I have only seen one instance where existing interstate tunnels were actually widened: I-70 east of Idaho Springs, CO, where the twin two-lane tubes were somehow wallowed out into three lane tubes. And those were less than a half mile long. Come to think of it, I can't really think of any long mountain tunnels with greater than two lanes. East River Mountain Tunnel, I believe, is over a mile long. Might be a lot more feasible to build two more tubes here, possibly both to the east, and one on either side at Big Walker Mountain.
VDOT is getting ready to add 2 more 2-lane tubes to the I-64 Hampton Roads Bridge-Tunnel, and they are over 7,000 feet long.
Even if I-77 doesn't need more than 6 lanes, which would be the case anytime soon, it would probably be the most feasible to do the same, add 2 more 2-lane tubes and have an 8-lane facility.
Replacing the tunnels with open cuts wouldn't work. That was considered at Big Walker Mountain in the 1960s, and it would have been 500 feet deep with 10 million cubic yards of excavation.
Grand Strand lawmakers propose bill to use hospitality tax money for I-73 (https://www.wbtw.com/news/grand-strand/grand-strand-lawmakers-propose-bill-to-use-hospitality-tax-money-for-i-73/)
QuoteCOLUMBIA, SC (WBTW) — Four Grand Strand lawmakers are trying to resolve the hospitality tax legal battle in Horry County and secure funding for Interstate 73.
The county, its cites and towns have fought for almost a year over control of tourist tax money, so some lawmakers are trying to force them to make a deal.
"We don't want to have to do this in Columbia," said Rep. Russell Fry, R-Surfside Beach. "We hope that the locals can figure it out amongst themselves."
Rep. Fry is co-sponsoring a bill, which would put that money from cities, towns and the county towards building I-73. The bill was introduced Tuesday and is in the House's ways and means committee.
Rep. Fry says they need to contribute enough money to get help from the state and federal governments.
"It's going to require a local match," he said. "You look at Charleston as an example. I-526 is being built with predominantly local money through a local sales tax initiative. Here, it's maybe a third."
Before the cities and towns filed the lawsuit, Horry County Council pledged up to $25 million in hospitality taxes towards I-73. Council voted to leave that agreement in November.
"They need to honor that promise, have that local match, allow us in Columbia and Rep. Tom Rice (R-S.C.) in D.C. to go advocate for the road on our levels," said Rep. Fry.
Under this bill, tourist tax revenue not put towards I-73 would be given back to the municipality where it was generated.
Rep. Fry says he hopes both sides reach an agreement soon.
"It's very silent and that's concerning to me because, at the end of the day, leaders need to lead," he said. "They need to sit down together. They need to figure this out."
County council is expected to get more legal advice on the lawsuit Tuesday.
While they're fighting down here, I still think the Northern corridor should be built first. It would enable I-73 to be built from NC line to I-95, serving the small cities along the way. Oh well. Let's see if this one works out.
Quote from: Strider on January 19, 2020, 01:59:11 AM
While they're fighting down here, I still think the Northern corridor should be built first. It would enable I-73 to be built from NC line to I-95, serving the small cities along the way. Oh well. Let's see if this one works out.
More than likely, that segment will be last to get to built. Right now, the major push is that connection to Myrtle Beach, and if any limited funding is identified, that's going to be where politics drives the money.
I went on a Myrtle Beach vacation in my teens but cant remember what Highways we took all I remember is we went through TN NC and SC
Quote from: doglover44 on January 19, 2020, 05:27:19 PM
I went on a Myrtle Beach vacation in my teens but cant remember what Highways we took all I remember is we went through TN NC and SC
Sounds about right. There's a million ways to get there.
Quote from: Strider on January 19, 2020, 01:59:11 AM
While they're fighting down here, I still think the Northern corridor should be built first. It would enable I-73 to be built from NC line to I-95, serving the small cities along the way. Oh well. Let's see if this one works out.
Since I-74 (and US 74 for that matter) is only 30-odd miles north of the projected northern I-73 corridor segment along SC 38 (at least at I-95), there is likely to be less perceived need to complete that segment. The portion from I-95 southeast to Myrtle diverges from the US/I-74 path, so it presents a more direct as well as independent access facility to that recreational area than does the I-74 routing in NC (one of the things that have over the years caused many of us to wonder what the planners were smoking!). The northern part will likely be built later simply to close the gap on a continuous route down from central NC and to avoid an annoying "zig-zag" over I-95 between the two corridor segments. To Myrtle Beach interests, getting to I-95 is Job #1; expediting traffic northwest of there will come later.
I-74 in South Carolina is a little unnecessary, my opinion, because there would be no need for it if the have I-73 and they both are coming from the same city, Rockingham, High Point!
Quote from: AcE_Wolf_287 on March 21, 2020, 04:37:06 PM
I-74 in South Carolina is a little unnecessary, my opinion, because there would be no need for it if the have I-73 and they both are coming from the same city, Rockingham, High Point!
Well the part of the road being built in SC is perfectly fine, it's just that having the I-74 designation head toward Wilmington and then turn through the middle of nowhere down to Myrtle Beach is extremely dumb.
Quote from: Roadsguy on March 21, 2020, 04:45:50 PM
Quote from: AcE_Wolf_287 on March 21, 2020, 04:37:06 PM
I-74 in South Carolina is a little unnecessary, my opinion, because there would be no need for it if the have I-73 and they both are coming from the same city, Rockingham, High Point!
Well the part of the road being built in SC is perfectly fine, it's just that having the I-74 designation head toward Wilmington and then turn through the middle of nowhere down to Myrtle Beach is extremely dumb.
I-20 should get extended to Wilmington, it could relieve traffic and Truckers from Memphis to Wilmington. as a native to south Carolina, i visit Myrtle beach 2 times a year and I see stuff for I-73 and i Believe it'll help out from people on the other side of the state to MB, but I-74 makes a Dead's man Curve for no reason.
Quote from: AcE_Wolf_287 on March 21, 2020, 04:48:59 PM
Quote from: Roadsguy on March 21, 2020, 04:45:50 PM
Quote from: AcE_Wolf_287 on March 21, 2020, 04:37:06 PM
I-74 in South Carolina is a little unnecessary, my opinion, because there would be no need for it if the have I-73 and they both are coming from the same city, Rockingham, High Point!
Well the part of the road being built in SC is perfectly fine, it's just that having the I-74 designation head toward Wilmington and then turn through the middle of nowhere down to Myrtle Beach is extremely dumb.
I-20 should get extended to Wilmington, it could relieve traffic and Truckers from Memphis to Wilmington. as a native to south Carolina, i visit Myrtle beach 2 times a year and I see stuff for I-73 and i Believe it'll help out from people on the other side of the state to MB, but I-74 makes a Dead's man Curve for no reason.
NCDOT wanted to extend I-20, but SC wasn't having it. I-74 going to Wilmington is adequate anyway since I-95 to I-74 from Florence isn't all that out of the way. It's already the quickest way according to Google Maps, and cutting that off by extending I-20 likely wouldn't save enough time to be worthwhile.
Quote from: Roadsguy on March 21, 2020, 04:54:30 PM
Quote from: AcE_Wolf_287 on March 21, 2020, 04:48:59 PM
Quote from: Roadsguy on March 21, 2020, 04:45:50 PM
Quote from: AcE_Wolf_287 on March 21, 2020, 04:37:06 PM
I-74 in South Carolina is a little unnecessary, my opinion, because there would be no need for it if the have I-73 and they both are coming from the same city, Rockingham, High Point!
Well the part of the road being built in SC is perfectly fine, it's just that having the I-74 designation head toward Wilmington and then turn through the middle of nowhere down to Myrtle Beach is extremely dumb.
SCDOT probably either didn't want to waste money, or didn't wanna run a Highway through Florence which i respect
I-20 should get extended to Wilmington, it could relieve traffic and Truckers from Memphis to Wilmington. as a native to south Carolina, i visit Myrtle beach 2 times a year and I see stuff for I-73 and i Believe it'll help out from people on the other side of the state to MB, but I-74 makes a Dead's man Curve for no reason.
NCDOT wanted to extend I-20, but SC wasn't having it. I-74 going to Wilmington is adequate anyway since I-95 to I-74 from Florence isn't all that out of the way. It's already the quickest way according to Google Maps, and cutting that off by extending I-20 likely wouldn't save enough time to be worthwhile.
Here's my thoughts on the situation, though this is getting fictional...
I-20 - Any extension east of I-95 is unrealistic in today's environment. Two existing / planned interstate highway corridors (I-95 and I-74) already serve this movement adequately, and an extension would at best shave 5-10 minutes off the current trip at the cost of a few billion dollars, as if South Carolina isn't already struggling to fund the $2+ billion I-73 between the North Carolina border and Myrtle Beach. If no interstate highway corridor existed between I-20 and US-74, I could see more of a desire for this, however one already does (I-95) and the only improvements needed are widening along I-95.
I-73 - Should be completed as currently planned between Roanoke, VA and Myrtle Beach.
I-74 - Designation needs to be fully deleted from North Carolina. The segment of I-73 that I-74 overlaps between Asheboro and Rockingham becomes solely I-73, the segment between Asheboro and I-77 becomes I-x73 / I-x77 / I-4x. The segment along US-74 becomes apart of a new cross-state interstate (see below). The segment through the Green Swamp is not constructed.
US-74 Corridor - New interstate designation between I-26 southeast of Asheville and Downtown Wilmington along the US-74 via Charlotte and Rockingham. Likely an I-3x.
Carolina Bays Pkwy / US-17 Corridor - The road should be completed to Shallote as currently proposed, and further extended to I-140 at Wilmington built to full interstate standards. Tying into the existing Carolina Bays Pkwy to the south, the existing I-140 to the north, and also to the proposed Hampstead bypass on the northern end of I-140, this would complete around 100 miles of freeway along the US-17 corridor. This could either become an extension of I-140, or apart of a new interstate designation (i.e. I-99) in the future for the US-17 corridor between Myrtle Beach and I-87 (proposed Norfolk <-> Raleigh corridor) at Williamston.
Quote from: sprjus4 on March 21, 2020, 05:45:12 PM
Here's my thoughts on the situation, though this is getting fictional...
I-20 - Any extension east of I-95 is unrealistic in today's environment. Two existing / planned interstate highway corridors (I-95 and I-74) already serve this movement adequately, and an extension would at best shave 5-10 minutes off the current trip at the cost of a few billion dollars, as if South Carolina isn't already struggling to fund the $2+ billion I-73 between the North Carolina border and Myrtle Beach. If no interstate highway corridor existed between I-20 and US-74, I could see more of a desire for this, however one already does (I-95) and the only improvements needed are widening along I-95.
I-73 - Should be completed as currently planned between Roanoke, VA and Myrtle Beach.
I-74 - Designation needs to be fully deleted from North Carolina. The segment of I-73 that I-74 overlaps between Asheboro and Rockingham becomes solely I-73, the segment between Asheboro and I-77 becomes I-x73 / I-x77 / I-4x. The segment along US-74 becomes apart of a new cross-state interstate (see below). The segment through the Green Swamp is not constructed.
US-74 Corridor - New interstate designation between I-26 southeast of Asheville and Downtown Wilmington along the US-74 via Charlotte and Rockingham. Likely an I-3x.
Carolina Bays Pkwy / US-17 Corridor - The road should be completed to Shallote as currently proposed, and further extended to I-140 at Wilmington built to full interstate standards. Tying into the existing Carolina Bays Pkwy to the south, the existing I-140 to the north, and also to the proposed Hampstead bypass on the northern end of I-140, this would complete around 100 miles of freeway along the US-17 corridor. This could either become an extension of I-140, or apart of a new interstate designation (i.e. I-99) in the future for the US-17 corridor between Myrtle Beach and I-87 (proposed Norfolk <-> Raleigh corridor) at Williamston.
thats what i thought, i knew SCDOT was struggling with Funds especially since living here, most roads look like shit, but SC should just have their main focus be I-73, then they can talke about anything else, and I-74 Should end at I-73 in Portsmouth, OH because I-74 is Completely Usless in NC, and the I-74 between Mt Airy and Winston Salem is a Extended I-285. I-640 would be the Winston-Salem Beltway, but NCDOT Loves Interstates so let them have it!
Thread resurrected. A update:
A court ruled against the environmental groups who sued to block the construction of I-73 due to permit arguments, so Horry County and the city of Myrtle Beach (and SCDOT) can proceed with securing the funding for I-73 (if they can manage to find money for it):
https://www.myrtlebeachonline.com/news/local/article253947153.html
Quote from: Strider on September 08, 2021, 04:28:01 PM
Thread resurrected. A update:
A court ruled against the environmental groups who sued to block the construction of I-73 due to permit arguments, so Horry County and the city of Myrtle Beach (and SCDOT) can proceed with securing the funding for I-73 (if they can manage to find money for it):
https://www.myrtlebeachonline.com/news/local/article253947153.html
Finally!! It's about time that something gets done. Traffic here is horrendous with the amount of cars coming through rural/inland Horry County
Quote from: chrisdiaz on September 08, 2021, 08:55:08 PM
Quote from: Strider on September 08, 2021, 04:28:01 PM
Thread resurrected. A update:
A court ruled against the environmental groups who sued to block the construction of I-73 due to permit arguments, so Horry County and the city of Myrtle Beach (and SCDOT) can proceed with securing the funding for I-73 (if they can manage to find money for it):
https://www.myrtlebeachonline.com/news/local/article253947153.html
Finally!! It's about time that something gets done. Traffic here is horrendous with the amount of cars coming through rural/inland Horry County
That's the only reason why I have not been down there these years. They better get to get I-73 built fast.
Quote from: chrisdiaz on September 08, 2021, 08:55:08 PM
Quote from: Strider on September 08, 2021, 04:28:01 PM
Thread resurrected. A update:
A court ruled against the environmental groups who sued to block the construction of I-73 due to permit arguments, so Horry County and the city of Myrtle Beach (and SCDOT) can proceed with securing the funding for I-73 (if they can manage to find money for it):
https://www.myrtlebeachonline.com/news/local/article253947153.html
Finally!! It's about time that something gets done. Traffic here is horrendous with the amount of cars coming through rural/inland Horry County
I was down in Myrtle Beach earlier this year in March and I couldn't believe the traffic coming into Myrtle Beach from Conway was backed up over a mile and this was on a Monday around 10 in the morning!!!! They need to widen US 501 to 6 lanes and convert the traffic lights to interchanges between Conway and SC 31.
I'm not sure if I-73 is going to solve the US 501 traffic congestion because it's just going to follow the Conway Bypass (SC 22) for half of it's route and nobody uses SC 22 because it goes too far north from Central M.B. (except me and a few others)
Quote from: Strider on September 09, 2021, 11:03:59 AM
Quote from: chrisdiaz on September 08, 2021, 08:55:08 PM
Quote from: Strider on September 08, 2021, 04:28:01 PM
Thread resurrected. A update:
A court ruled against the environmental groups who sued to block the construction of I-73 due to permit arguments, so Horry County and the city of Myrtle Beach (and SCDOT) can proceed with securing the funding for I-73 (if they can manage to find money for it):
https://www.myrtlebeachonline.com/news/local/article253947153.html
Finally!! It's about time that something gets done. Traffic here is horrendous with the amount of cars coming through rural/inland Horry County
That's the only reason why I have not been down there these years. They better get to get I-73 built fast.
Before the environmental groups appeal the judge's ruling to the Circuit Court of Appeals.
Quote from: RoadPelican on September 09, 2021, 12:42:54 PM
Quote from: chrisdiaz on September 08, 2021, 08:55:08 PM
Quote from: Strider on September 08, 2021, 04:28:01 PM
Thread resurrected. A update:
A court ruled against the environmental groups who sued to block the construction of I-73 due to permit arguments, so Horry County and the city of Myrtle Beach (and SCDOT) can proceed with securing the funding for I-73 (if they can manage to find money for it):
https://www.myrtlebeachonline.com/news/local/article253947153.html
Finally!! It's about time that something gets done. Traffic here is horrendous with the amount of cars coming through rural/inland Horry County
I was down in Myrtle Beach earlier this year in March and I couldn't believe the traffic coming into Myrtle Beach from Conway was backed up over a mile and this was on a Monday around 10 in the morning!!!! They need to widen US 501 to 6 lanes and convert the traffic lights to interchanges between Conway and SC 31.
I'm not sure if I-73 is going to solve the US 501 traffic congestion because it's just going to follow the Conway Bypass (SC 22) for half of it's route and nobody uses SC 22 because it goes too far north from Central M.B. (except me and a few others)
It took me 10 minutes to go a half mile on 501 this morning so I completely feel your pain. Eventually (hopefully) the SELL will be built and take traffic away from 544 and 501. I do agree with you on the lanes perspective. 501 needs to be made 6 lanes immediately, and SCDOT should seriously consider making it a Texas style expressway with frontage roads, especially in Carolina Forest.
Quote from: RoadPelican on September 09, 2021, 12:42:54 PM
I'm not sure if I-73 is going to solve the US 501 traffic congestion because it's just going to follow the Conway Bypass (SC 22) for half of it's route and nobody uses SC 22 because it goes too far north from Central M.B. (except me and a few others)
I-73 will tie into SC-22 more directly than US-501 currently does, so there would be more incentive to simply stay on it until SC-31.
I have lost many hours of my life in Myrtle Beach sitting in the endless traffic that plagues US 17. Did not realize those issues also extended to 501.
Wow, that took a long time to resolve. But hopefully what state funds were originally apportioned toward the project haven't all been redirected elsewhere, so the initial processes can begin. And it looks like Lindsey Graham's actually good for something after all (yeah, this from a nominally liberal CA guy!), although I have my doubts about what $12M will buy in ROW parcels (not much out here except in the non-Palm-Springs desert!). Obviously, job #1 is the section from I-95 to MB; wonder if the northern section to the state line will be somehow expedited; it's been 26 years since the I-73 corridor inception; let's hope full SC completion doesn't take another 26!
Quote from: abqtraveler on September 09, 2021, 03:05:02 PM
Quote from: Strider on September 09, 2021, 11:03:59 AM
Quote from: chrisdiaz on September 08, 2021, 08:55:08 PM
Quote from: Strider on September 08, 2021, 04:28:01 PM
Thread resurrected. A update:
A court ruled against the environmental groups who sued to block the construction of I-73 due to permit arguments, so Horry County and the city of Myrtle Beach (and SCDOT) can proceed with securing the funding for I-73 (if they can manage to find money for it):
https://www.myrtlebeachonline.com/news/local/article253947153.html
Finally!! It's about time that something gets done. Traffic here is horrendous with the amount of cars coming through rural/inland Horry County
That's the only reason why I have not been down there these years. They better get to get I-73 built fast.
Before the environmental groups appeal the judge's ruling to the Circuit Court of Appeals.
I won't be surprised if they decide to appeal to try to force settlement... however, they're going to lose again. They have been losing these days.
Quote from: Strider on September 09, 2021, 10:40:21 PM
Quote from: abqtraveler on September 09, 2021, 03:05:02 PM
Quote from: Strider on September 09, 2021, 11:03:59 AM
Quote from: chrisdiaz on September 08, 2021, 08:55:08 PM
Quote from: Strider on September 08, 2021, 04:28:01 PM
Thread resurrected. A update:
A court ruled against the environmental groups who sued to block the construction of I-73 due to permit arguments, so Horry County and the city of Myrtle Beach (and SCDOT) can proceed with securing the funding for I-73 (if they can manage to find money for it):
https://www.myrtlebeachonline.com/news/local/article253947153.html
Finally!! It's about time that something gets done. Traffic here is horrendous with the amount of cars coming through rural/inland Horry County
That's the only reason why I have not been down there these years. They better get to get I-73 built fast.
Before the environmental groups appeal the judge's ruling to the Circuit Court of Appeals.
I won't be surprised if they decide to appeal to try to force settlement... however, they're going to lose again. They have been losing these days.
The attorneys for the South Carolina Coastal Environmental League, who brought the suit in the first place, are stating that they accept the court decision -- but broadly hinted that their clients would likely try to exert political pressure to ensure I-73 state funding remains on the back burner. It's equally likely such an effort will fall short; except for generally anti-freeway activists it appears that both the state legislature and the individual county jurisdictions are on board with this corridor project. Another contributing factor may be the perception that I-74, over the state line, is only being improved incrementally, with that corridor portion having no hard and fast ETA (particularly the "cutoff" along NC 211) with the bottom line that they can't depend upon NC to expedite building a corridor that funnels traffic to a SC recreational zone; it's more a matter of doing it themselves.
Despite the holdup, I wouldn't be surprised if I-73 in SC were completed first, especially given the slower and far more painful process that I-74 is going through. Then again, Roanoke is playing the waiting game as well, which puts VA in the same boat.
Quote from: Henry on September 10, 2021, 12:19:09 PM
Despite the holdup, I wouldn't be surprised if I-73 in SC were completed first, especially given the slower and far more painful process that I-74 is going through. Then again, Roanoke is playing the waiting game as well, which puts VA in the same boat.
I don't think Myrtle Beach gives a shit about I-74 anymore. Wilmington, on the other hand...
Quote from: LM117 on September 10, 2021, 12:42:17 PM
Quote from: Henry on September 10, 2021, 12:19:09 PM
Despite the holdup, I wouldn't be surprised if I-73 in SC were completed first, especially given the slower and far more painful process that I-74 is going through. Then again, Roanoke is playing the waiting game as well, which puts VA in the same boat.
I don't think Myrtle Beach gives a shit about I-74 anymore. Wilmington, on the other hand...
The original HPC #5 authorizing legislation, along with the dual Interstate designations four years later, were promulgated by developmental interests in the SC coastal area; Wilmington, while nearby, wasn't even part of the initial equation. The purpose was a corridor which would funnel midwest folks directly to Myrtle Beach, Georgetown, and, originally, Charleston. NC was just another state to traverse, not a destination. Of course, environmental and/or NIMBY concerns eliminated the Georgetown-Charleston section, leaving the coastline north of there as the target. NCDOT went along with this concept because it fit into their plans for upgrades of US 74 east of Rockingham -- but it seems they had scant interest in the connector down NC 211 that diverted I-74 to US 17 and hence south into SC. So a while back they cobbled up the I-20 extension proposal along US 76 as a way to include Wilmington in the plan, but SC would have none of it. But, according to the authorizing legislation, I-74 is still supposed to head south down the coast into SC to serve the Myrtle Beach area. It's surprising, at least to me, that to date there hasn't been an effort within NC and involving NCDOT as well as the state's congressional delegation to amend the HPC #5 legislation to take I-74 directly east into Wilmington, with the coastal corridor along US 17 being either an extension of I-140 or, fancifully, a 2di (a southern I-97?), with the NC 211-following portion simply deleted. In any case, it's unlikely that the original plans will be followed; a more realistic configuration that serves more than just the MB area will eventually emerge and be implemented.
Quote from: LM117 on September 10, 2021, 12:42:17 PM
Quote from: Henry on September 10, 2021, 12:19:09 PM
Despite the holdup, I wouldn't be surprised if I-73 in SC were completed first, especially given the slower and far more painful process that I-74 is going through. Then again, Roanoke is playing the waiting game as well, which puts VA in the same boat.
I don't think Myrtle Beach gives a shit about I-74 anymore. Wilmington, on the other hand...
Exactly. They only want I-73 to go there. I-74 should just go to Wilmington and end there.
Quote from: sparker on September 10, 2021, 06:56:56 PM
Quote from: LM117 on September 10, 2021, 12:42:17 PM
Quote from: Henry on September 10, 2021, 12:19:09 PM
Despite the holdup, I wouldn't be surprised if I-73 in SC were completed first, especially given the slower and far more painful process that I-74 is going through. Then again, Roanoke is playing the waiting game as well, which puts VA in the same boat.
I don't think Myrtle Beach gives a shit about I-74 anymore. Wilmington, on the other hand...
It's surprising, at least to me, that to date there hasn't been an effort within NC and involving NCDOT as well as the state's congressional delegation to amend the HPC #5 legislation to take I-74 directly east into Wilmington, with the coastal corridor along US 17 being either an extension of I-140 or, fancifully, a 2di (a southern I-97?), with the NC 211-following portion simply deleted.
Wilmington has definitely been lobbying NCDOT in recent years for I-74 to go to the city, and NCDOT seems very receptive to it. However, there's been no word from the Congressional delegation so far. I'd bet my house that if Congress wasn't an issue, NCDOT would send I-74 to Wilmington.
QuoteIn any case, it's unlikely that the original plans will be followed; a more realistic configuration that serves more than just the MB area will eventually emerge and be implemented.
Agreed. Nobody in their right mind heading to Myrtle Beach from Rockingham and points west and north is gonna follow I-74's crooked path to get there. They're gonna take I-73, and if they're coming from Lumberton and points north along I-95, safe bet is they're taking I-95 to I-73, and NCDOT appears to realize that. I also have a hard time believing that the Army Corps of Engineers will sign off on the proposed route south of Bolton, not only because of the sensitive wetlands, but because it's simply not needed, for the reason I just mentioned.
I'd like to know what the idiots who came up with the original idea were smoking.
I didn't realize this had been held up in litigation for so long. I just assumed it was moving forward at South Carolina speed.
While I-73 and I-74 each serve their purpose of reaching popular destinations, you have to admit it's rather redundant having two rural interstates running parallel to each other only 20-40 miles apart for the majority of the way. That's hard to sell with today's costs. I'd personally have I-73 hook towards Cheraw, Darlington and Florence before heading for Myrtle, but they're probably trying to avoid crossing the Pee Dee. I wouldn't be surprised if it never makes it north of I-95.
Quote from: cowboy_wilhelm on September 11, 2021, 08:46:22 AM
I didn't realize this had been held up in litigation for so long. I just assumed it was moving forward at South Carolina speed.
While I-73 and I-74 each serve their purpose of reaching popular destinations, you have to admit it's rather redundant having two rural interstates running parallel to each other only 20-40 miles apart for the majority of the way. That's hard to sell with today's costs. I'd personally have I-73 hook towards Cheraw, Darlington and Florence before heading for Myrtle, but they're probably trying to avoid crossing the Pee Dee. I wouldn't be surprised if it never makes it north of I-95.
Oh, I-73 will be built north of I-95. There are a little to no wetlands along that route up to Rockingham, NC. The only reason they want to build I-73 south of I-95 is to connect MB with the rest of the interstate system (that's understandable). I have been saying for a long time that they should have built I-73 from NC border to I-95 first so that they would have the route already set while being held up by environmental lawsuits. But it didn't happen, so that's why the route have not been built for so many years.
I don't see a problem with I-73/I-74 paralleling each other. Other interstates do that. (see Chicago, NYC, LA and San Francisco area). I just don't see the reason for I-74 to head to MB area since I-73 is going there. IMO, I-74 shouldn't exist in NC but we all know that.
MB, Horry County and the surrounding towns/countries are not going to waste their time planning to find money for I-73. I, for one, am very happy because this route should have already been built if it isn't for these environmentalists holding things up.
https://www.wmbfnews.com/2021/09/09/grand-strand-leaders-planning-ways-fund-interstate-73/
Quote from: Strider on September 11, 2021, 03:55:17 PM
MB, Horry County and the surrounding towns/countries are not going to waste their time planning to find money for I-73. I, for one, am very happy because this route should have already been built if it isn't for these environmentalists holding things up.
https://www.wmbfnews.com/2021/09/09/grand-strand-leaders-planning-ways-fund-interstate-73/
A nice healthy excise tax on the sales of graphic T-shirts might go a long way to getting the project funded! :hyper:
Quote from: sparker on September 11, 2021, 04:09:22 PM
Quote from: Strider on September 11, 2021, 03:55:17 PM
MB, Horry County and the surrounding towns/countries are not going to waste their time planning to find money for I-73. I, for one, am very happy because this route should have already been built if it isn't for these environmentalists holding things up.
https://www.wmbfnews.com/2021/09/09/grand-strand-leaders-planning-ways-fund-interstate-73/
A nice healthy excise tax on the sales of graphic T-shirts might go a long way to getting the project funded! :hyper:
lol that could work. :-D
Quote from: Strider on September 11, 2021, 03:53:14 PM
I don't see a problem with I-73/I-74 paralleling each other. Other interstates do that. (see Chicago, NYC, LA and San Francisco area). I just don't see the reason for I-74 to head to MB area since I-73 is going there. IMO, I-74 shouldn't exist in NC but we all know that.
Slight differences in population between the country's largest metros and northeastern SC/southeastern NC....
I know the routing is unlikely to change at this point, but it seems like they could have overlapped for a bit longer before splitting to Myrtle Beach and Wilmington to save on costs and impacts. I'm just imagining a scenario where I-73 is finished from I-95 to Myrtle. How many citizens of South Carolina do you think will support building a $1 billion+ highway to connect Rockingham and Bennettsville to I-95 when they're still trying to catch up on improving I-20, I-26, I-85 and every other road they've neglected over the past 30 years? How much will the feds be willing to contribute? If the section from I-95 to Myrtle is completed first, South Carolina legislative support for the rest of the highway will drop immensely afterwards since travelers from the Upstate and the Midlands will have the only section of the highway they need.
Quote from: cowboy_wilhelm on September 14, 2021, 07:57:25 AM
Quote from: Strider on September 11, 2021, 03:53:14 PM
I don't see a problem with I-73/I-74 paralleling each other. Other interstates do that. (see Chicago, NYC, LA and San Francisco area). I just don't see the reason for I-74 to head to MB area since I-73 is going there. IMO, I-74 shouldn't exist in NC but we all know that.
Slight differences in population between the country's largest metros and northeastern SC/southeastern NC....
I know the routing is unlikely to change at this point, but it seems like they could have overlapped for a bit longer before splitting to Myrtle Beach and Wilmington to save on costs and impacts. I'm just imagining a scenario where I-73 is finished from I-95 to Myrtle. How many citizens of South Carolina do you think will support building a $1 billion+ highway to connect Rockingham and Bennettsville to I-95 when they're still trying to catch up on improving I-20, I-26, I-85 and every other road they've neglected over the past 30 years? How much will the feds be willing to contribute? If the section from I-95 to Myrtle is completed first, South Carolina legislative support for the rest of the highway will drop immensely afterwards since travelers from the Upstate and the Midlands will have the only section of the highway they need.
Don't give me "oh, there is a slight difference between..." argument. That kind of argument is overrated. and no, I-73 is not going to be concurrent with I-95. and the support for the rest of the highway isn't going to drop. The whole thing will eventually be built.
Quote from: Strider on September 14, 2021, 12:12:17 PM
Quote from: cowboy_wilhelm on September 14, 2021, 07:57:25 AM
Quote from: Strider on September 11, 2021, 03:53:14 PM
I don't see a problem with I-73/I-74 paralleling each other. Other interstates do that. (see Chicago, NYC, LA and San Francisco area). I just don't see the reason for I-74 to head to MB area since I-73 is going there. IMO, I-74 shouldn't exist in NC but we all know that.
Slight differences in population between the country's largest metros and northeastern SC/southeastern NC....
I know the routing is unlikely to change at this point, but it seems like they could have overlapped for a bit longer before splitting to Myrtle Beach and Wilmington to save on costs and impacts. I'm just imagining a scenario where I-73 is finished from I-95 to Myrtle. How many citizens of South Carolina do you think will support building a $1 billion+ highway to connect Rockingham and Bennettsville to I-95 when they're still trying to catch up on improving I-20, I-26, I-85 and every other road they've neglected over the past 30 years? How much will the feds be willing to contribute? If the section from I-95 to Myrtle is completed first, South Carolina legislative support for the rest of the highway will drop immensely afterwards since travelers from the Upstate and the Midlands will have the only section of the highway they need.
Don't give me "oh, there is a slight difference between..." argument. That kind of argument is overrated. and no, I-73 is not going to be concurrent with I-95. and the support for the rest of the highway isn't going to drop. The whole thing will eventually be built.
Can we start with something easy, like the Latta bypass? I believe the plans for that are on the shelf.
I don't see SC ever building a US 501 bypass around Latta. SC 38 is a good 4 lane 60 MPH expressway that passes just to the south of Latta and connects directly with I-95 and US 501.
^ All of I-73 in South Carolina is proposed on new location, so yes it would be realigned.
Quote from: RoadPelican on September 14, 2021, 07:09:52 PM
I don't see SC ever building a US 501 bypass around Latta. SC 38 is a good 4 lane 60 MPH expressway that passes just to the south of Latta and connects directly with I-95 and US 501.
Ten years ago SCDOT had this to say:
"Final design for the section of I-73 from I-95 to US Route 501 began in July 2011. This design includes 10 bridges, as well as drainage, geotechnical, maintenance of traffic and traffic control, signage, pavement marking, erosion control and utility plans. Other services included in the contract are final surveys, utility coordination, railroad coordination and construction support. Anticipated completion of the final construction plans is in mid April 2012. Depending on available funding and the receipt of the Clean Water Act Section 401/404 permit, construction could begin by the end of 2012.
This will be the first section of I-73 to be designed and constructed in South Carolina, and will ultimately provide a vital link between I-95 and the Grand Strand/Myrtle Beach area."
http://www.i73insc.com
http://www.i73insc.com/images/home_page_figures/I-73_South_between_I-95_and_U.S.501.jpg
Maybe that's all obsolete by now. But my point is: the only way to begin is to begin. I-73 will never be built unless some piece of it is built. Building
something makes the road real and creates some interest in building additional segments.
What's the Current Timeline of I-73 Construction in SC? when sill it start or is something blocking that process?
^ $$$$
Did anyone ever propose building Interstate 73 as a toll road, in case funding of any other type never materializes?
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on September 21, 2021, 09:10:18 PM
Did anyone ever propose building Interstate 73 as a toll road, in case funding of any other type never materializes?
Back in the day something like that would seem more feasible, given that such a road would almost guarantee to be a worthwhile investment. But in today's climate, I wouldn't be too sure. Too much uncertainty in being able to get your money back from such a lengthy road, let alone see a profit. And this road would be largely seasonal (Myrtle Beach's metro isn't quite as big as Charleston's for example). Maybe if SC's portion wasn't so long then it would be an option.
What if I-73 were to stay multiplexed with I-74 :rolleyes: until somewhere SE of I-95, then drop down to Myrtle Beach? It wouldn't be as long and someone thinking about investing in a toll road may be more inclined to do so.
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on September 21, 2021, 09:10:18 PM
Did anyone ever propose building Interstate 73 as a toll road, in case funding of any other type never materializes?
You mean like Ohio once did?
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on September 21, 2021, 09:10:18 PM
Did anyone ever propose building Interstate 73 as a toll road, in case funding of any other type never materializes?
See reply #217 in this thread
Gov. McMaster pledges $300 million for I-73, pending approval by the state legislature...
https://www.thestate.com/news/state/south-carolina/article254683167.html
How much road will that get you.
Quote from: ARMOURERERIC on October 05, 2021, 06:17:05 PM
How much road will that get you.
Maybe 10 miles if you have some ROW already. The story says they'll start with the Latta segment, I-95 to US 501. Plans for that are on the shelf; I'm not sure if they have the ROW.
Quote from: wdcrft63 on October 05, 2021, 08:48:22 PM
Quote from: ARMOURERERIC on October 05, 2021, 06:17:05 PM
How much road will that get you.
Maybe 10 miles if you have some ROW already. The story says they'll start with the Latta segment, I-95 to US 501. Plans for that are on the shelf; I'm not sure if they have the ROW.
I viewed the ancient video of this segment, then went to Google satellite. I see what looks like a discernable ROW.
Quote from: ARMOURERERIC on October 06, 2021, 08:31:49 AM
Quote from: wdcrft63 on October 05, 2021, 08:48:22 PM
Quote from: ARMOURERERIC on October 05, 2021, 06:17:05 PM
How much road will that get you.
Maybe 10 miles if you have some ROW already. The story says they'll start with the Latta segment, I-95 to US 501. Plans for that are on the shelf; I'm not sure if they have the ROW.
I viewed the ancient video of this segment, then went to Google satellite. I see what looks like a discernable ROW.
I agree, they should get the coastal segment out of the way first, then work their way back to Rockingham after that. That way, the Piedmont Triad will have a more direct connection to Myrtle Beach, something I-74 will never give them.
Quote from: Henry on October 06, 2021, 10:28:59 AM
I agree, they should get the coastal segment out of the way first, then work their way back to Rockingham after that. That way, the Piedmont Triad will have a more direct connection to Myrtle Beach, something I-74 will never give them.
The Piedmont Triad already has a good route to the beach, as I-40 gets you headed towards Morehead City and Wilmington. I-74/I-73 is along the traditional route that folks from the Great Lakes and West Virginia take to get to the beach. From what I've seen at North Carolina beaches like Atlantic Beach/Emerald Isle, Topsail, Surf City, Wrightsville, Carolina Beach, Kure Beach and Oak Island,, they are all getting more folks from Michigan/Ohio/West Virginia because of faster speed routes in North Carolina. South Carolina is needing to catch up, but I'm starting to wonder if North Carolina would ever bother to build the final short stretch from Rockingham to the border.
Quote from: Dirt Roads on October 06, 2021, 01:51:40 PM
Quote from: Henry on October 06, 2021, 10:28:59 AM
I agree, they should get the coastal segment out of the way first, then work their way back to Rockingham after that. That way, the Piedmont Triad will have a more direct connection to Myrtle Beach, something I-74 will never give them.
The Piedmont Triad already has a good route to the beach, as I-40 gets you headed towards Morehead City and Wilmington. I-74/I-73 is along the traditional route that folks from the Great Lakes and West Virginia take to get to the beach. From what I've seen at North Carolina beaches like Atlantic Beach/Emerald Isle, Topsail, Surf City, Wrightsville, Carolina Beach, Kure Beach and Oak Island,, they are all getting more folks from Michigan/Ohio/West Virginia because of faster speed routes in North Carolina. South Carolina is needing to catch up, but I'm starting to wonder if North Carolina would ever bother to build the final short stretch from Rockingham to the border.
North Carolina will build the final short stretch from Rockingham to the border.... when SC is extending their part of I-73 from I-95 to the NC border. NC has a habit of waiting for another states to finish building their section of the interstate before they can proceed.
Quote from: Henry on October 06, 2021, 10:28:59 AM
I agree, they should get the coastal segment out of the way first, then work their way back to Rockingham after that. That way, the Piedmont Triad will have a more direct connection to Myrtle Beach, something I-74 will never give them.
Quote from: Dirt Roads on October 06, 2021, 01:51:40 PM
The Piedmont Triad already has a good route to the beach, as I-40 gets you headed towards Morehead City and Wilmington. I-74/I-73 is along the traditional route that folks from the Great Lakes and West Virginia take to get to the beach. From what I've seen at North Carolina beaches like Atlantic Beach/Emerald Isle, Topsail, Surf City, Wrightsville, Carolina Beach, Kure Beach and Oak Island,, they are all getting more folks from Michigan/Ohio/West Virginia because of faster speed routes in North Carolina. South Carolina is needing to catch up, but I'm starting to wonder if North Carolina would ever bother to build the final short stretch from Rockingham to the border.
Quote from: Strider on October 06, 2021, 03:55:55 PM
North Carolina will build the final short stretch from Rockingham to the border.... when SC is extending their part of I-73 from I-95 to the NC border. NC has a habit of waiting for another states to finish building their section of the interstate before they can proceed.
The nice thing about the I-74 extension from Rockingham into South Carolina is that it will also improve US-1 heading toward Columbia.
Quote from: Dirt Roads on October 06, 2021, 11:01:29 PM
Quote from: Henry on October 06, 2021, 10:28:59 AM
I agree, they should get the coastal segment out of the way first, then work their way back to Rockingham after that. That way, the Piedmont Triad will have a more direct connection to Myrtle Beach, something I-74 will never give them.
Quote from: Dirt Roads on October 06, 2021, 01:51:40 PM
The Piedmont Triad already has a good route to the beach, as I-40 gets you headed towards Morehead City and Wilmington. I-74/I-73 is along the traditional route that folks from the Great Lakes and West Virginia take to get to the beach. From what I've seen at North Carolina beaches like Atlantic Beach/Emerald Isle, Topsail, Surf City, Wrightsville, Carolina Beach, Kure Beach and Oak Island,, they are all getting more folks from Michigan/Ohio/West Virginia because of faster speed routes in North Carolina. South Carolina is needing to catch up, but I'm starting to wonder if North Carolina would ever bother to build the final short stretch from Rockingham to the border.
Quote from: Strider on October 06, 2021, 03:55:55 PM
North Carolina will build the final short stretch from Rockingham to the border.... when SC is extending their part of I-73 from I-95 to the NC border. NC has a habit of waiting for another states to finish building their section of the interstate before they can proceed.
The nice thing about the I-74 extension from Rockingham into South Carolina is that it will also improve US-1 heading toward Columbia.
The
I-73 extension would follow NC/SC-38, not US-1.
Either way, once I-73 is complete between Rockingham and I-95, travel times would be around 10-15 minutes faster than current, and I-73/I-95/I-20 could be a viable, all freeway route over US-1.
Quote from: Henry on October 06, 2021, 10:28:59 AM
I agree, they should get the coastal segment out of the way first, then work their way back to Rockingham after that. That way, the Piedmont Triad will have a more direct connection to Myrtle Beach, something I-74 will never give them.
Quote from: Dirt Roads on October 06, 2021, 01:51:40 PM
The Piedmont Triad already has a good route to the beach, as I-40 gets you headed towards Morehead City and Wilmington. I-74/I-73 is along the traditional route that folks from the Great Lakes and West Virginia take to get to the beach. From what I've seen at North Carolina beaches like Atlantic Beach/Emerald Isle, Topsail, Surf City, Wrightsville, Carolina Beach, Kure Beach and Oak Island,, they are all getting more folks from Michigan/Ohio/West Virginia because of faster speed routes in North Carolina. South Carolina is needing to catch up, but I'm starting to wonder if North Carolina would ever bother to build the final short stretch from Rockingham to the border.
Quote from: Strider on October 06, 2021, 03:55:55 PM
North Carolina will build the final short stretch from Rockingham to the border.... when SC is extending their part of I-73 from I-95 to the NC border. NC has a habit of waiting for another states to finish building their section of the interstate before they can proceed.
Quote from: Dirt Roads on October 06, 2021, 11:01:29 PM
The nice thing about the I-74 extension from Rockingham into South Carolina is that it will also improve US-1 heading toward Columbia.
Quote from: sprjus4 on October 07, 2021, 01:38:42 AM
Either way, once I-73 is complete between Rockingham and I-95, travel times would be around 10-15 minutes faster than current, and I-73/I-95/I-20 could be a viable, all freeway route over US-1.
The I-73 extension would follow NC/SC-38, not US-1.
That makes sense. But I haven't seen anything formal indicating how North Carolina and South Carolina will make the connection at the border. I would anticipate that NCDOT will pressure South Carolina to bring the connection as far west as possible. Regardless, whenever I-73 does ever get completed it won't make any sense to use US-1 to Cheraw if you can use the SC-38 corridor and cut over to Wallace/Cheraw using the faster route. Unless your GPS is set for shortest route.
Quote from: Dirt Roads on October 07, 2021, 08:22:22 AM
Quote from: Henry on October 06, 2021, 10:28:59 AM
I agree, they should get the coastal segment out of the way first, then work their way back to Rockingham after that. That way, the Piedmont Triad will have a more direct connection to Myrtle Beach, something I-74 will never give them.
Quote from: Dirt Roads on October 06, 2021, 01:51:40 PM
The Piedmont Triad already has a good route to the beach, as I-40 gets you headed towards Morehead City and Wilmington. I-74/I-73 is along the traditional route that folks from the Great Lakes and West Virginia take to get to the beach. From what I've seen at North Carolina beaches like Atlantic Beach/Emerald Isle, Topsail, Surf City, Wrightsville, Carolina Beach, Kure Beach and Oak Island,, they are all getting more folks from Michigan/Ohio/West Virginia because of faster speed routes in North Carolina. South Carolina is needing to catch up, but I'm starting to wonder if North Carolina would ever bother to build the final short stretch from Rockingham to the border.
Quote from: Strider on October 06, 2021, 03:55:55 PM
North Carolina will build the final short stretch from Rockingham to the border.... when SC is extending their part of I-73 from I-95 to the NC border. NC has a habit of waiting for another states to finish building their section of the interstate before they can proceed.
Quote from: Dirt Roads on October 06, 2021, 11:01:29 PM
The nice thing about the I-74 extension from Rockingham into South Carolina is that it will also improve US-1 heading toward Columbia.
Quote from: sprjus4 on October 07, 2021, 01:38:42 AM
Either way, once I-73 is complete between Rockingham and I-95, travel times would be around 10-15 minutes faster than current, and I-73/I-95/I-20 could be a viable, all freeway route over US-1.
The I-73 extension would follow NC/SC-38, not US-1.
That makes sense. But I haven't seen anything formal indicating how North Carolina and South Carolina will make the connection at the border. I would anticipate that NCDOT will pressure South Carolina to bring the connection as far west as possible. Regardless, whenever I-73 does ever get completed it won't make any sense to use US-1 to Cheraw if you can use the SC-38 corridor and cut over to Wallace/Cheraw using the faster route. Unless your GPS is set for shortest route.
Bob Malme has some renders of the proposed alignment on his I-73 segment 13 (https://malmeroads.net/i7374nc/i73seg13.html) page. It'll be a semi-directional T interchange (with the existing US 74/future I-74 bypass as the mainline, not I-73) just east of the NC 38 interchange, with that reconfigured to tie into all the ramps. I don't know how old this design is, or whether it will be changed at all by the time SC builds their segment.
Earlier this year, I was interviewed by the Myrtle Beach Sun News about Interstate 73. It goes through a thorough history of the proposed highway, and also really digs into whether or not the Interstate will bring promised economic growth or not.
It is paywalled - so not sure if everyone will have access.
https://www.myrtlebeachonline.com/news/politics-government/article260129435.html
We created a word doc file that contains the text of the article. Follow the link below to read the above-linked article:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/wiq6fw6cbhfn584/I-73.docx?dl=0
Quote from: CanesFan27 on July 23, 2022, 06:12:53 PM
Earlier this year, I was interviewed by the Myrtle Beach Sun News about Interstate 73. It goes through a thorough history of the proposed highway, and also really digs into whether or not the Interstate will bring promised economic growth or not.
It is paywalled - so not sure if everyone will have access.
https://www.myrtlebeachonline.com/news/politics-government/article260129435.html
We created a word doc file that contains the text of the article. Follow the link below to read the above-linked article:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/wiq6fw6cbhfn584/I-73.docx?dl=0
I could see I-73 happening in MB one day. With the way things go lately, it is not going to be built in our lifetime. I have repeatedly mentioned in my previous posts (years ago, I believe) that SCDOT should just build I-73 from NC line to I-95 first then deal with the rest. Oh well. I have not lost hope... yet. lol
Just ran across this video randomly on YouTube.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FSP92k-DAgM
Maybe SCDOT can pull an NCDOT move, build I-73 from I-95 to Myrtle Beach and sign it as I-195 until they decide to build it all the way to Rockingham.
I doubt that would happen, although I wouldn't mind seeing an Interstate 195 constructed somewhere in South Carolina.
Quote from: PColumbus73 on July 28, 2023, 12:41:35 PM
Maybe SCDOT can pull an NCDOT move, build I-73 from I-95 to Myrtle Beach and sign it as I-195 until they decide to build it all the way to Rockingham.
How is this an NCDOT move?
Quote from: Strider on July 24, 2022, 05:09:26 PM
Quote from: CanesFan27 on July 23, 2022, 06:12:53 PM
Earlier this year, I was interviewed by the Myrtle Beach Sun News about Interstate 73. It goes through a thorough history of the proposed highway, and also really digs into whether or not the Interstate will bring promised economic growth or not.
It is paywalled - so not sure if everyone will have access.
https://www.myrtlebeachonline.com/news/politics-government/article260129435.html
We created a word doc file that contains the text of the article. Follow the link below to read the above-linked article:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/wiq6fw6cbhfn584/I-73.docx?dl=0
I could see I-73 happening in MB one day. With the way things go lately, it is not going to be built in our lifetime. I have repeatedly mentioned in my previous posts (years ago, I believe) that SCDOT should just build I-73 from NC line to I-95 first then deal with the rest. Oh well. I have not lost hope... yet. lol
I'm not sure building to North Carolina would be in South Carolina's best interests... at least first. The segment from I-95 to Myrtle Beach is their highest priority, trying to route traffic off of US-501, specifically tourists connecting from the north.
The portion north of I-73 to Rockingham would be second. SC-38 and SC-9 is all four lanes to US-1, with that US-1 portion up to North Carolina being the only real gap. That is likely to handle the lesser traffic volumes for a longer period of time than the busier US-501 can handle.
Quote from: sprjus4 on July 28, 2023, 08:46:15 PM
Quote from: PColumbus73 on July 28, 2023, 12:41:35 PM
Maybe SCDOT can pull an NCDOT move, build I-73 from I-95 to Myrtle Beach and sign it as I-195 until they decide to build it all the way to Rockingham.
How is this an NCDOT move?
The reference is probably to how I-495 to Raleigh was changed to I-87 when plans were first made to continue to Norfolk.
Quote from: Henry on July 28, 2023, 11:47:41 PM
Quote from: sprjus4 on July 28, 2023, 08:46:15 PM
Quote from: PColumbus73 on July 28, 2023, 12:41:35 PM
Maybe SCDOT can pull an NCDOT move, build I-73 from I-95 to Myrtle Beach and sign it as I-195 until they decide to build it all the way to Rockingham.
How is this an NCDOT move?
The reference is probably to how I-495 to Raleigh was changed to I-87 when plans were first made to continue to Norfolk.
I-73 is authorized by act of Congress and SCDOT has an approved environmental impact statement pinning down the route between I-95 and SC 22. If any of this road is finally built it will have to be signed I-73 or maybe Future I73.
Quote from: Henry on July 28, 2023, 11:47:41 PM
Quote from: sprjus4 on July 28, 2023, 08:46:15 PM
Quote from: PColumbus73 on July 28, 2023, 12:41:35 PM
Maybe SCDOT can pull an NCDOT move, build I-73 from I-95 to Myrtle Beach and sign it as I-195 until they decide to build it all the way to Rockingham.
How is this an NCDOT move?
The reference is probably to how I-495 to Raleigh was changed to I-87 when plans were first made to continue to Norfolk.
Except that NCDOT requested it as I-44 from the FHWA before they requested I-495.