North Carolina

[sprjus4]

NCDOT route changes page has a diagram that refers to the bypass as NC 11-903 bypass.

If NC 903 made it on there, I would think also US-13 would, interesting.

Do you have a link?

[LM117]

NCDOT route changes page has a diagram that refers to the bypass as NC 11-903 bypass.

If NC 903 made it on there, I would think also US-13 would, interesting.

Do you have a link?

https://connect.ncdot.gov/resources/safety/Route%20Changes/R-2250%20Diagram.pdf

[sprjus4]

NCDOT route changes page has a diagram that refers to the bypass as NC 11-903 bypass.

If NC 903 made it on there, I would think also US-13 would, interesting.

Do you have a link?

https://connect.ncdot.gov/resources/safety/Route%20Changes/R-2250%20Diagram.pdf

Thank you. My question now is where do they want to send NC-903? The location it crosses the bypass on the southern end is grade-separated with no interchange access. Looks like they'd have to re-route it down NC-102 to meet back up with NC-903.

[slorydn1]

Heads up to anyone travelling the US-17 corridor in the New Bern area the next 3 months:


https://www.witn.com/content/news/US-17-Bypass-closing-for-three-months-504544821.html


I really don't think it will be a big deal, they really hadn't made any changes to the old road except for 1 new shopping center (meaning one new stoplight) since the bypass had opened, and there isn't a lot of traffic at any given time of the day on the bypass during the winter anyway.

[sprjus4]

Heads up to anyone travelling the US-17 corridor in the New Bern area the next 3 months:


https://www.witn.com/content/news/US-17-Bypass-closing-for-three-months-504544821.html


I really don't think it will be a big deal, they really hadn't made any changes to the old road except for 1 new shopping center (meaning one new stoplight) since the bypass had opened, and there isn't a lot of traffic at any given time of the day on the bypass during the winter anyway.

I imagine after the closure is completed southbound US-17 bypass traffic will use the new ramps to exit onto existing 17 until the new bypass finally opens.

[cowboy_wilhelm]

The westbound signage for I-26 Exit 67 was finally updated to remove reference to US 74 east. I didn't travel eastbound to see if any signage was changed or added to reference Exit 66 (doubtful, since it wasn't included in the plans). I guess US 74 east will have two exit numbers, depending on which direction you're going on I-26. I'm assuming there are no plans to add back the lane that was removed from US 74 east to make room for the ramp from I-26 west.



The ramp from US 74 west to I-26 east won't be finished until this spring. I-26 east lanes still needs to be shifted to make room for the on-ramp.

[sparker]

Heads up to anyone travelling the US-17 corridor in the New Bern area the next 3 months:


https://www.witn.com/content/news/US-17-Bypass-closing-for-three-months-504544821.html


I really don't think it will be a big deal, they really hadn't made any changes to the old road except for 1 new shopping center (meaning one new stoplight) since the bypass had opened, and there isn't a lot of traffic at any given time of the day on the bypass during the winter anyway.

I imagine after the closure is completed southbound US-17 bypass traffic will use the new ramps to exit onto existing 17 until the new bypass finally opens.

As I've surmised over in the I-87 (NC) thread, it seems like NCDOT is "piecemealing" the US 17 corridor into a 4-lane facility, potentially upgradeable to (dare I say it) Interstate standards in the future.  As they've presently got quite a bit on their plate, evidenced by the periodic shuffling of priorities (including let dates), it wouldn't be expected that they'd tackle US 17 in any more than "bite-size" projects, with high-cost segments such as a northern extension of the New Bern bypass over the Neuse River delayed until such time as funds can be freed up.   Right now it's a safe bet that they're not prepared to consider US 17 to be a comprehensive corridor (although it is within their state master plan) or to promote it as such for the time being -- although once the upgrades of the US 17 portion of the I-87 corridor are under way, it wouldn't be a surprise to see more and more "spot" development on US 17 south of Williamston.

[Roadsguy]

I contacted NCDOT and was told that the Greenville Southwest Bypass will be signed exclusively as NC 11 Bypass.

[froggie]

My response from NCDOT is that NC 903 will be rerouted, but not onto the bypass:

The current plans show a reroute of the NC 903 designation. Starting south of the proposed project NC 903 will be rerouted east along the current SR 1113 to intersect with existing NC 11. NC 903 will then turn north along NC 11 to its current intersection in Winterville. The existing NC 903 between SR 1113 and NC 11 will become a secondary road.

SR 1113 is Old Snow Hill Rd, which meets NC 11 in Ayden.  With it being nearby and parallel to NC 102, I've asked if that adjacent leg of 102 will remain.

[Roadsguy]

My response from NCDOT is that NC 903 will be rerouted, but not onto the bypass:

The current plans show a reroute of the NC 903 designation. Starting south of the proposed project NC 903 will be rerouted east along the current SR 1113 to intersect with existing NC 11. NC 903 will then turn north along NC 11 to its current intersection in Winterville. The existing NC 903 between SR 1113 and NC 11 will become a secondary road.

SR 1113 is Old Snow Hill Rd, which meets NC 11 in Ayden.  With it being nearby and parallel to NC 102, I've asked if that adjacent leg of 102 will remain.

Seems like an odd decision. Old Snow Hill Road still doesn't allow access to the bypass, runs parallel to NC 102 as you said (and that route does intersect the bypass), and is a much lower-traveled road than NC 102 or its current alignment. It will also end up turning off itself at the western end of Old Snow Hill Road.

[sprjus4]

As I've surmised over in the I-87 (NC) thread, it seems like NCDOT is "piecemealing" the US 17 corridor into a 4-lane facility, potentially upgradeable to (dare I say it) Interstate standards in the future.  As they've presently got quite a bit on their plate, evidenced by the periodic shuffling of priorities (including let dates), it wouldn't be expected that they'd tackle US 17 in any more than "bite-size" projects, with high-cost segments such as a northern extension of the New Bern bypass over the Neuse River delayed until such time as funds can be freed up.   Right now it's a safe bet that they're not prepared to consider US 17 to be a comprehensive corridor (although it is within their state master plan) or to promote it as such for the time being -- although once the upgrades of the US 17 portion of the I-87 corridor are under way, it wouldn't be a surprise to see more and more "spot" development on US 17 south of Williamston.

Agreed a US-17 interstate would be warranted if it was all built, it would get more traffic, especially if South Carolina played. There's a few things that go against this though - the 4-laning from Williamston to Washington is on existing-location with no frontage roads. A wide R/W, but the constant curves in the road will remain, it won't be straight. I've suggested before they build this project to the west on new location, limited-access, with future upgrades to interchanges when warranted. My concept would stretch from US-64 (I-87) freeway and tie into the Washington Bypass.

As for a New Bern Bypass, I hope it will happen eventually. The new location bypasses of Maysville and Pollocksville south of New Bern are being built to interstate standards, limited-access, interchanges or grade separations, no cross roads, etc. The stretch between the two bypasses is simply being dual-laned, though one side of it has essentially no buildings on it. They could construct a new northbound roadway, and convert the existing southbound roadway into a frontage road if a freeway is ever desired.

The real question is how to tackle Jacksonville. There's no good "direct" routing through the area. The only thing I could think is a 30 mile outer bypass, but that's pushing it. Or upgrade the arterial road on the north end to interstate standards by building frontage roads, urban interchanges, etc. That's happening on the southern end of the bypass.

There's also the Carolina Bays Parkway extension which will be built to interstate standards will extend from South Carolina to the Shallotte Bypass, but I think if they built another 15 miles to I-140, that would be a better solution. It would tie into to I-140 and the proposed Hampstead Bypass on the north end, and the Carolina Bays Parkway on the southern end, which would create about 100 miles of interstate-grade freeway between south of Myrtle Beach and north of Wilmington. Combined with I-40 to I-95, it would be an excellent connection.

[Roadsguy]

On a related note, have they ever given a timeframe on the northern half of the New Bern bypass? It seems odd that they built half of it so recently, complete with a stub at US 70, and have sooner extended it in the other direction than from where the stub is.

[LM117]

Apparently, the Greenville Southwest Bypass is ahead of schedule and will open this fall, weather permitting. Original completion date was June 2020. Also in the article are updates on other Greenville-related road projects, most notably the 10th Street Connector.

http://www.reflector.com/News/2019/01/23/Preliminary-work-to-widen-Old-Tar.html

[sparker]

On a related note, have they ever given a timeframe on the northern half of the New Bern bypass? It seems odd that they built half of it so recently, complete with a stub at US 70, and have sooner extended it in the other direction than from where the stub is.

North of US 70/future I-42 wetlands flanking the Neuse River constitute a pretty formidable obstacle to roadway development -- although I understand there are plans to do so in the not-too-distant future in much the same configuration found along the existing section to the south.  Like I've said upthread, US 17 is NCDOT's proverbial "elephant" -- upgraded one small bite at a time (referring, of course to the cliche' query "how do you eat an elephant?")   But since the Neuse River crossing won't come cheap, it'll likely be worked in after or possibly in between major projects elsewhere in the state.

[LM117]

NCDOT is holding a public meeting tomorrow in Hillsborough to discuss widening I-40 to 6 lanes between I-85 and the Durham County line, as well as improving the NC-86 interchange.

https://www.ncdot.gov/news/press-releases/Pages/2019/2019-01-23-orange-county-i-40-widening-public-meeting.aspx

[goobnav]

NCDOT is holding a public meeting tomorrow in Hillsborough to discuss widening I-40 to 6 lanes between I-85 and the Durham County line, as well as improving the NC-86 interchange.

https://www.ncdot.gov/news/press-releases/Pages/2019/2019-01-23-orange-county-i-40-widening-public-meeting.aspx

Yeah!!!  More traffic for South Durham.  SMH.  This plus the possibility of NC 54 being redone could lead to a disaster, hopefully, they'll do these projects at separate times.

[cowboy_wilhelm]

Regarding US 17 in New Bern, who decided to build a cloverleaf interchange at US 70 next to a quarry with no place to go on the other side?

[Mileage Mike]

As I've surmised over in the I-87 (NC) thread, it seems like NCDOT is "piecemealing" the US 17 corridor into a 4-lane facility, potentially upgradeable to (dare I say it) Interstate standards in the future.  As they've presently got quite a bit on their plate, evidenced by the periodic shuffling of priorities (including let dates), it wouldn't be expected that they'd tackle US 17 in any more than "bite-size" projects, with high-cost segments such as a northern extension of the New Bern bypass over the Neuse River delayed until such time as funds can be freed up.   Right now it's a safe bet that they're not prepared to consider US 17 to be a comprehensive corridor (although it is within their state master plan) or to promote it as such for the time being -- although once the upgrades of the US 17 portion of the I-87 corridor are under way, it wouldn't be a surprise to see more and more "spot" development on US 17 south of Williamston.

Agreed a US-17 interstate would be warranted if it was all built, it would get more traffic, especially if South Carolina played. There's a few things that go against this though - the 4-laning from Williamston to Washington is on existing-location with no frontage roads. A wide R/W, but the constant curves in the road will remain, it won't be straight. I've suggested before they build this project to the west on new location, limited-access, with future upgrades to interchanges when warranted. My concept would stretch from US-64 (I-87) freeway and tie into the Washington Bypass.

As for a New Bern Bypass, I hope it will happen eventually. The new location bypasses of Maysville and Pollocksville south of New Bern are being built to interstate standards, limited-access, interchanges or grade separations, no cross roads, etc. The stretch between the two bypasses is simply being dual-laned, though one side of it has essentially no buildings on it. They could construct a new northbound roadway, and convert the existing southbound roadway into a frontage road if a freeway is ever desired.

The real question is how to tackle Jacksonville. There's no good "direct" routing through the area. The only thing I could think is a 30 mile outer bypass, but that's pushing it. Or upgrade the arterial road on the north end to interstate standards by building frontage roads, urban interchanges, etc. That's happening on the southern end of the bypass.

There's also the Carolina Bays Parkway extension which will be built to interstate standards will extend from South Carolina to the Shallotte Bypass, but I think if they built another 15 miles to I-140, that would be a better solution. It would tie into to I-140 and the proposed Hampstead Bypass on the north end, and the Carolina Bays Parkway on the southern end, which would create about 100 miles of interstate-grade freeway between south of Myrtle Beach and north of Wilmington. Combined with I-40 to I-95, it would be an excellent connection.

For Jacksonville I wonder if it would be cheaper to just buy up the commercial property along the existing highway and upgrade that short section north of the current bypass rather than build a new bypass way out to the west of town that also has to go through wetlands areas and the New River. I suspect though they'll probably end up just building a western bypass as I could see there being heavy public opposition to disrupting the businesses along Marine Blvd.

[LM117]

Regarding US 17 in New Bern, who decided to build a cloverleaf interchange at US 70 next to a quarry with no place to go on the other side?

It's possible that the quarry went there after the interchange was built, though I agree that it does seem boneheaded to put the interchange there if the quarry was already there.

slorydn1 lives in New Bern, so he would probably know more about it.

[sparker]

Regarding US 17 in New Bern, who decided to build a cloverleaf interchange at US 70 next to a quarry with no place to go on the other side?

It's possible that the quarry went there after the interchange was built, though I agree that it does seem boneheaded to put the interchange there if the quarry was already there.

slorydn1 lives in New Bern, so he would probably know more about it.

Looking (GSV) at whatever's north of the US 17/70 cloverleaf, it certainly isn't a quarry as most of us know it; the elevation of the facility doesn't vary by more than 5 feet at any point.  It's just likely a rockyard or similar material storage location.  Not like I-80/294 south of Chicago, where they actually had to bridge an old quarry.  Clearing a ROW in the New Bern case shouldn't pose much of a physical problem

[cowboy_wilhelm]

Nope, the quarry was there first. Circa 2009:



Clarks Quarry

Either way, that's $$$$$ under the ground that they're not going to give up easily, or without DOT compensating for the loss of future earnings. They moved a road in Raleigh to expand a quarry. But I'm sure we'll pay extra one day for someone's stupid planning.

Looks like the quarry is about 40 to 70 feet below the surrounding ground (~26') based on bare-earth LiDAR.

[sprjus4]

NCDOT is proposing "improvements" on US-13 / NC 11 between north of Winton to south of Ahoskie. Unlike the previous widening of US-13 north of this location, this project will create 10 miles of limited-access freeway.

The existing Winton Bypass will be widened to 4 lanes, and about 3 miles of new location roadway will be constructed between the two. The new location segment will be constructed to full freeway standards, it will feature an overpass with a cross-road it meets. The project will tie into the Ahoskie NC-11 bypass where it will upgrade the bypass to freeway standards by constructing interchanges and overpasses.

The freeway will likely have a speed limit of 65 MPH and it will have a design speed of 70 MPH. The typical section proposed is the usual with 4 foot right and left shoulders, two 12 foot lanes in each direction, and divided by a 46 foot median.

A public hearing regarding this project will be held on Thursday, January 31 at the Ridgecroft School Media Center in Ahoskie.






Project R-5311B - https://www.ncdot.gov/news/public-meetings/Pages/R-5311B-2019-01-31.aspx

[NE2]

NC 11 south of Ahoskie seems to have been mostly built on a new right-of-way, possibly even controlled access ROW. Have any studies been done looking at making it I-87?

[sparker]

^^^^^^^^
Seems like GSV altitude/elevation readings only show what's at the surface, be it earth or water -- and the lower quarry elevations (presumably the pits) have been filled with water (actually, since it's quite white, some water-based mineral solution).  That's what threw me off; it showed little fluctuation between areas in the quarry grounds.  At that point, any US 17 extension to the north will require extensive fill or bridging (one would think it would veer to the left/west a bit to avoid the worst of it.  But it's always been clear this would be a costly section of road to build because of the Neuse river/wetlands to the north; dealing with the quarry just piles on additional expenses. 

One question: where does one access such a LiDAR app as displayed in the visual above? 

[slorydn1]

Yep the quarry has been there at least since the 80's when I first started visiting here. I believe (don't quote me on it though) that the section closest to US-70 (or south of the Norfolk Southern tracks) hasn't been in service for quite some time now. A lot of the stone for the concrete to build the Neuse River Bridge came from there back in the 90's

The proposed routing of the north of US-70 segment of US-17 displayed on the 2020-2029 Draft STIP has it going on right through it before curving NW a little before the train tracks:

http://ncdot.maps.arcgis.com/home/webmap/viewer.html?webmap=683e22735d324c89abe812d4db9d6838


Note: I tried to zoom it in before pasting the link but I guess it doesn't work like Google maps....