I saw there was no thread on this to-be bypass, so I decided to make one.
It is opening in 2018, and you can see the construction on google maps. I've saw some of it in person for myself. There's a really nice lane shift just before US 74 enters Union County that they constructed last January, to make room for the interchange where the bypass will begin.
There's quite a bit of roundabouts for its interchanges (saw this from looking on google maps), and I believe it'll end between Marshville and Wingate. This tollway received really bad opposition from NIMBYs.
I'm wondering a few things for this bypass: How much are the tolls, and how much did it cost? I remember it being somewhere in the low millions. (20 or so?)
NCDOT has a page on the project: https://www.ncdot.gov/projects/monroeconnector/
They call it the Monroe Connector, despite it bypassing Monroe and not actually connecting it with anything.
IIRC, we've discussed it in the regular North Carolina thread. There wasn't enough discussion (or material) to warrant a separate thread.
Hmm, well, okay then.. I had figured that after seeing other dedicated threads about major projects that didn't have much discussion that this would have been fine.
I suppose I could still make something out of this thread...
If you have a lot to add, go for it...
Quote from: index on October 31, 2017, 10:37:36 AM
I saw there was no thread on this to-be bypass, so I decided to make one.
It is opening in 2018, and you can see the construction on google maps. I've saw some of it in person for myself. There's a really nice lane shift just before US 74 enters Union County that they constructed last January, to make room for the interchange where the bypass will begin.
There's quite a bit of roundabouts for its interchanges (saw this from looking on google maps), and I believe it'll end between Marshville and Wingate. This tollway received really bad opposition from NIMBYs.
I'm wondering a few things for this bypass: How much are the tolls, and how much did it cost? I remember it being somewhere in the low millions. (20 or so?)
NCDOT has a page on the project: https://www.ncdot.gov/projects/monroeconnector/
They call it the Monroe Connector, despite it bypassing Monroe and not actually connecting it with anything.
I believe the new name is the Monroe Expressway, which makes more sense. I'm really interested in what the daily traffic count will be on this road, especially since Union County has some of the worst congestion in the metro. I'm also wondering if being a toll road will curtail the inevitable sprawl in that side of the county. Right now it's nothing but farmland.
Quote from: Third Strike on October 31, 2017, 06:04:08 PMI believe the new name is the Monroe Expressway, which makes more sense. I'm really interested in what the daily traffic count will be on this road, especially since Union County has some of the worst congestion in the metro. I'm also wondering if being a toll road will curtail the inevitable sprawl in that side of the county. Right now it's nothing but farmland.
I'm interested in the traffic counts, too. I can't help but wonder how many will shunpike the toll road by sticking with US-74.
The cost of the project is about $840M.
See page 141 of the 2017 STIP - https://connect.ncdot.gov/projects/planning/STIPDocuments1/2018-2027%20STIP%20-%20Divisions%208-14.pdf
Toll rates have not been released as best I can find...
Regarding the Toll Rates for the US 74 Monroe Bypass, I remember reading a couple years ago that the rate that NCDOT was targeting is 20 cents a mile and the new bypass would be 15 miles in length. So 20 cents X 15 miles = $3.00 each way.
Quote from: LM117 on November 01, 2017, 07:49:35 AM
Quote from: Third Strike on October 31, 2017, 06:04:08 PMI believe the new name is the Monroe Expressway, which makes more sense. I'm really interested in what the daily traffic count will be on this road, especially since Union County has some of the worst congestion in the metro. I'm also wondering if being a toll road will curtail the inevitable sprawl in that side of the county. Right now it's nothing but farmland.
I'm interested in the traffic counts, too. I can't help but wonder how many will shunpike the toll road by sticking with US-74.
Quite a few people initially tried that with the parallel routes for NC540 in western Wake County. Even though they widened NC55 in roughly 2004, Davis Drive in roughly 2008, opened 540 in 2013, and are currently working on Green Level Church as another parallel route, the TriEx has been soundly beating expectations. Basically what it comes down to is this: with so much growth, shunpikers will easily overwhelm the parallel free routes, especially during rush hour, leaving plenty of traffic to take the toll road. Is there any reason to expect Monroe won't be the same?
Question - Will US 74 itself be rerouted onto the Bypass? If so, what will it's old route become?
Quote from: Interstate 69 Fan on November 13, 2017, 10:09:39 AM
Question - Will US 74 itself be rerouted onto the Bypass? If so, what will it's old route become?
The bypass will be called US 74 Toll Bypass, while the old route will be just US 74, unless otherwise stated.
US 74 in Monroe is already a bypass. Why does NC like to spend so much money?
^ Because the initial "bypass" wasn't built as limited access.
Quote from: Avalanchez71 on November 13, 2017, 11:08:36 AM
US 74 in Monroe is already a bypass. Why does NC like to spend so much money?
It isn't really a bypass as it is filled with businesses along the route. That road where US 74 is currently on, was built to "bypass" the former 2 lane US 74 that goes through downtown.
Quote from: Strider on November 13, 2017, 12:07:44 PM
Quote from: Avalanchez71 on November 13, 2017, 11:08:36 AM
US 74 in Monroe is already a bypass. Why does NC like to spend so much money?
It isn't really a bypass as it is filled with businesses along the route. That road where US 74 is currently on, was built to "bypass" the former 2 lane US 74 that goes through downtown.
US 74 went through downtown Monroe? TIL. Do you know what route it took through downtown?
Guessing E Franklin Rd to Charlotte Ave.
Quote from: Avalanchez71 on November 13, 2017, 11:08:36 AM
US 74 in Monroe is already a bypass. Why does NC like to spend so much money?
Its like Kokomo, IN on US 31. Originally it went through Downtown Kokomo and then Indiana built the current IN 931 as a bypass for that which eventually opened the door for sprawl leading to strip malls and a bunch of big box retailers to congest that bypass. So IN built a freeway bypass of the 1955 arterial one a few years back. Of course the freeway won't get slammed with development, but of course the interchanges will soon boom with businesses, but that is for another story.
However, the same thing happened there.
IMO this is why I-74 should be part of an E-W interstate corridor along US 74 from Charlotte to Wilmington as with the need for the tolled Fulton Bypass shows that all of US 74 east of Charlotte is worthy of a continuous freeway. Being part of a diagonal NW to SE corridor with 2 other states not even planning to build their parts is helping a small section of a bigger piece that could use the whole 100 yards as per whatever purpose the N-S portion of I-74 ( redundant to I-73) will serve.
Quote from: Avalanchez71 on November 13, 2017, 01:28:02 PM
Guessing E Franklin Rd to Charlotte Ave.
It was more likely have followed E. Franklin Rd and Charlotte Ave. (at the eastern end of Franklin Rd, facing US 74 and US 601 Split), you can see the road curves to the north before ending at US 74, at the same time the current US 74 curves to the north.
Quote from: Strider on November 13, 2017, 03:23:07 PM
Quote from: Avalanchez71 on November 13, 2017, 01:28:02 PM
Guessing E Franklin Rd to Charlotte Ave.
It was more likely have followed E. Franklin Rd and Charlotte Ave. (at the eastern end of Franklin Rd, facing US 74 and US 601 Split), you can see the road curves to the north before ending at US 74, at the same time the current US 74 curves to the north.
If only there were a site to look these things up...
From http://vahighways.com/ncannex/route-log/us074.html
Through Monroe, US 74 followed Charlotte Rd, then Franklin St through downtown. US 74 then followed US 601 south to "Old 74" then east to current US 74 which it followed to Wingate. Here is a mapscan from when there was an inner bypass in the 1940s-52
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.vahighways.com%2Fncannex%2Fncscans%2F1949_74amonroe.jpg&hash=43e326e24eb33e23991cff4fc6c898e1439c4835)
That went away when the current US 74 bypass was opened in 1952. The primary designation through downtown went away by 1954...
Quote from: orulz on November 10, 2017, 08:58:09 PM
Quote from: LM117 on November 01, 2017, 07:49:35 AM
Quote from: Third Strike on October 31, 2017, 06:04:08 PMI believe the new name is the Monroe Expressway, which makes more sense. I'm really interested in what the daily traffic count will be on this road, especially since Union County has some of the worst congestion in the metro. I'm also wondering if being a toll road will curtail the inevitable sprawl in that side of the county. Right now it's nothing but farmland.
I'm interested in the traffic counts, too. I can't help but wonder how many will shunpike the toll road by sticking with US-74.
Quite a few people initially tried that with the parallel routes for NC540 in western Wake County. Even though they widened NC55 in roughly 2004, Davis Drive in roughly 2008, opened 540 in 2013, and are currently working on Green Level Church as another parallel route, the TriEx has been soundly beating expectations. Basically what it comes down to is this: with so much growth, shunpikers will easily overwhelm the parallel free routes, especially during rush hour, leaving plenty of traffic to take the toll road. Is there any reason to expect Monroe won't be the same?
I suspect the electronic tolling encourages traffic to use the TriEx and other toll roads. When you don't have to stop and dig change out of your pocket, it makes the toll seem a little less real or a little less burdensome.
I went up to Asheville about two weeks ago and caught some (mediocre) photos of bypass construction on my way there.
(https://image.prntscr.com/image/4bDcF94VQ0mT-T7Xpr24RQ.png)
(https://image.prntscr.com/image/Fw0JcsvMQwuBFJH9mYbP_w.png)
(https://image.prntscr.com/image/1G_WJdoET-Cx4s72RVR2jg.png)
(https://image.prntscr.com/image/HyIa2pXdQp_1BKh2-XbAIA.png)
Quote from: roadman65 on November 13, 2017, 02:21:09 PM
Quote from: Avalanchez71 on November 13, 2017, 11:08:36 AM
US 74 in Monroe is already a bypass. Why does NC like to spend so much money?
Its like Kokomo, IN on US 31. Originally it went through Downtown Kokomo and then Indiana built the current IN 931 as a bypass for that which eventually opened the door for sprawl leading to strip malls and a bunch of big box retailers to congest that bypass. So IN built a freeway bypass of the 1955 arterial one a few years back. Of course the freeway won't get slammed with development, but of course the interchanges will soon boom with businesses, but that is for another story.
However, the same thing happened there.
IMO this is why I-74 should be part of an E-W interstate corridor along US 74 from Charlotte to Wilmington as with the need for the tolled Fulton Bypass shows that all of US 74 east of Charlotte is worthy of a continuous freeway. Being part of a diagonal NW to SE corridor with 2 other states not even planning to build their parts is helping a small section of a bigger piece that could use the whole 100 yards as per whatever purpose the N-S portion of I-74 ( redundant to I-73) will serve.
When US-74 was extended from Asheville to Chattanooga in the early 1990's, it seemed like a prelude for an extension of I-24 across the mountains and down to Wilmington. That route number fits decently into the grid.
Quote from: hockeyjohn on December 19, 2017, 09:59:23 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on November 13, 2017, 02:21:09 PM
Quote from: Avalanchez71 on November 13, 2017, 11:08:36 AM
US 74 in Monroe is already a bypass. Why does NC like to spend so much money?
Its like Kokomo, IN on US 31. Originally it went through Downtown Kokomo and then Indiana built the current IN 931 as a bypass for that which eventually opened the door for sprawl leading to strip malls and a bunch of big box retailers to congest that bypass. So IN built a freeway bypass of the 1955 arterial one a few years back. Of course the freeway won't get slammed with development, but of course the interchanges will soon boom with businesses, but that is for another story.
However, the same thing happened there.
IMO this is why I-74 should be part of an E-W interstate corridor along US 74 from Charlotte to Wilmington as with the need for the tolled Fulton Bypass shows that all of US 74 east of Charlotte is worthy of a continuous freeway. Being part of a diagonal NW to SE corridor with 2 other states not even planning to build their parts is helping a small section of a bigger piece that could use the whole 100 yards as per whatever purpose the N-S portion of I-74 ( redundant to I-73) will serve.
When US-74 was extended from Asheville to Chattanooga in the early 1990's, it seemed like a prelude for an extension of I-24 across the mountains and down to Wilmington. That route number fits decently into the grid.
There's zero chance that US 74 would ever be upgraded to interstate standards between Asheville and Chattanooga. The cost is too great and the need too little. But there could be an interstate along US 74 from I-26 to Wilmington; I-36 would be a good number for that route.
(https://i.imgur.com/x7Oig8c.jpg)
https://apps.ncdot.gov/newsreleases/details.aspx?r=15280
QuoteINDIAN TRAIL— Crews working on the Monroe Expressway project will have temporary lane closures in place on Indian Trail-Fairview Road near Stinson Hartis Road in Indian Trail, starting Monday, June 4. Crews will be flagging traffic to tie in pavement at either end of a new bridge taking Indian Trail — Fairview Road over the expressway. Paving operations will be in place from 9 p.m. to 4 p.m. each day through Thursday, June 7. When work is completed, traffic will be shifted to a new section of Indian Trail-Fairview Road and the new bridge.
(https://i.imgur.com/6z9Dg0n.png)
http://www.co.union.nc.us/departments/planning-building-development/planning-zoning/calendar/secrest-short-cut-small-area-plan
QuoteUnion County and the Town of Indian Trail are developing a Small Area Plan for the Secrest Short Cut area to guide future growth near the Monroe Expressway interchange at Unionville-Indian Trail Road. The plan aims to reflect community priorities and economic development opportunities in the changing landscape.Growth pressures are evident in this area as development projects and potential rezoning petitions are being discussed. Currently, the Secrest Short Cut study area is approximately 1,323 acres and most of land is undeveloped. About 25% of land is used for agriculture and much of developed land is for residential purposes.The Town of Indian Trail and Union County will be asked to approve the plan in mid-2018.
An open house on this event occurred on May 31.
As for other events, I also believe that construction of flyovers is occurring near the Western terminus of the new bypass.
Quote from: wdcrft63 on December 19, 2017, 06:39:32 PM
Quote from: hockeyjohn on December 19, 2017, 09:59:23 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on November 13, 2017, 02:21:09 PM
Quote from: Avalanchez71 on November 13, 2017, 11:08:36 AM
US 74 in Monroe is already a bypass. Why does NC like to spend so much money?
Its like Kokomo, IN on US 31. Originally it went through Downtown Kokomo and then Indiana built the current IN 931 as a bypass for that which eventually opened the door for sprawl leading to strip malls and a bunch of big box retailers to congest that bypass. So IN built a freeway bypass of the 1955 arterial one a few years back. Of course the freeway won't get slammed with development, but of course the interchanges will soon boom with businesses, but that is for another story.
However, the same thing happened there.
IMO this is why I-74 should be part of an E-W interstate corridor along US 74 from Charlotte to Wilmington as with the need for the tolled Fulton Bypass shows that all of US 74 east of Charlotte is worthy of a continuous freeway. Being part of a diagonal NW to SE corridor with 2 other states not even planning to build their parts is helping a small section of a bigger piece that could use the whole 100 yards as per whatever purpose the N-S portion of I-74 ( redundant to I-73) will serve.
When US-74 was extended from Asheville to Chattanooga in the early 1990's, it seemed like a prelude for an extension of I-24 across the mountains and down to Wilmington. That route number fits decently into the grid.
There's zero chance that US 74 would ever be upgraded to interstate standards between Asheville and Chattanooga. The cost is too great and the need too little. But there could be an interstate along US 74 from I-26 to Wilmington; I-36 would be a good number for that route.
Then again, any other number in the 30s would also fit (32, 34 and 38), because it is completely south of I-40, and none of those numbers have ever been used before. If the Chattanooga extension were doable, then I-24 could be used here, but since it's impossible, then the 30s would be the next best thing.
Quote from: Henry on June 04, 2018, 10:24:26 AM
Quote from: wdcrft63 on December 19, 2017, 06:39:32 PM
Quote from: hockeyjohn on December 19, 2017, 09:59:23 AM
When US-74 was extended from Asheville to Chattanooga in the early 1990's, it seemed like a prelude for an extension of I-24 across the mountains and down to Wilmington. That route number fits decently into the grid.
There's zero chance that US 74 would ever be upgraded to interstate standards between Asheville and Chattanooga. The cost is too great and the need too little. But there could be an interstate along US 74 from I-26 to Wilmington; I-36 would be a good number for that route.
Then again, any other number in the 30s would also fit (32, 34 and 38), because it is completely south of I-40, and none of those numbers have ever been used before. If the Chattanooga extension were doable, then I-24 could be used here, but since it's impossible, then the 30s would be the next best thing.
That's correct. I suggested 36 because there is no NC 36.
This thing is super close to completion! I drove through Monroe yesterday, and new BGS were in place (and I finally understand the configuration at the western end...all traffic actually rides the new expressway off I-485 and where it feeds off now will be frontage roads)
Forgive me as I'm sure I should have figured it out long ago, but it's going to be sooooo convenient when finished!
Quote from: orulz on November 10, 2017, 08:58:09 PM
Quote from: LM117 on November 01, 2017, 07:49:35 AM
Quote from: Third Strike on October 31, 2017, 06:04:08 PMI believe the new name is the Monroe Expressway, which makes more sense. I'm really interested in what the daily traffic count will be on this road, especially since Union County has some of the worst congestion in the metro. I'm also wondering if being a toll road will curtail the inevitable sprawl in that side of the county. Right now it's nothing but farmland.
I'm interested in the traffic counts, too. I can't help but wonder how many will shunpike the toll road by sticking with US-74.
Quite a few people initially tried that with the parallel routes for NC540 in western Wake County. Even though they widened NC55 in roughly 2004, Davis Drive in roughly 2008, opened 540 in 2013, and are currently working on Green Level Church as another parallel route, the TriEx has been soundly beating expectations. Basically what it comes down to is this: with so much growth, shunpikers will easily overwhelm the parallel free routes, especially during rush hour, leaving plenty of traffic to take the toll road. Is there any reason to expect Monroe won't be the same?
I was surprised how much traffic was on 540 during the morning commute a couple of weeks ago. I was going the opposite direction, and while I wouldn't call it congested (by Triangle standards), it didn't look like there was a lot of mobility. Considering how fast that part of the county is growing, there may be people paying a toll to sit in traffic ten years from now.
Quote from: Henry on June 04, 2018, 10:24:26 AM
Quote from: wdcrft63 on December 19, 2017, 06:39:32 PM
Quote from: hockeyjohn on December 19, 2017, 09:59:23 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on November 13, 2017, 02:21:09 PM
Quote from: Avalanchez71 on November 13, 2017, 11:08:36 AM
US 74 in Monroe is already a bypass. Why does NC like to spend so much money?
Its like Kokomo, IN on US 31. Originally it went through Downtown Kokomo and then Indiana built the current IN 931 as a bypass for that which eventually opened the door for sprawl leading to strip malls and a bunch of big box retailers to congest that bypass. So IN built a freeway bypass of the 1955 arterial one a few years back. Of course the freeway won't get slammed with development, but of course the interchanges will soon boom with businesses, but that is for another story.
However, the same thing happened there.
IMO this is why I-74 should be part of an E-W interstate corridor along US 74 from Charlotte to Wilmington as with the need for the tolled Fulton Bypass shows that all of US 74 east of Charlotte is worthy of a continuous freeway. Being part of a diagonal NW to SE corridor with 2 other states not even planning to build their parts is helping a small section of a bigger piece that could use the whole 100 yards as per whatever purpose the N-S portion of I-74 ( redundant to I-73) will serve.
When US-74 was extended from Asheville to Chattanooga in the early 1990's, it seemed like a prelude for an extension of I-24 across the mountains and down to Wilmington. That route number fits decently into the grid.
There's zero chance that US 74 would ever be upgraded to interstate standards between Asheville and Chattanooga. The cost is too great and the need too little. But there could be an interstate along US 74 from I-26 to Wilmington; I-36 would be a good number for that route.
Then again, any other number in the 30s would also fit (32, 34 and 38), because it is completely south of I-40, and none of those numbers have ever been used before. If the Chattanooga extension were doable, then I-24 could be used here, but since it's impossible, then the 30s would be the next best thing.
This is a bit off topic, but something I've wondered about is what's going to happen when I-40 through the Pigeon River gorge reaches capacity? Even with relatively low volume now, congestion can be an issue due to the number of trucks, curves and grades. There's no room for expansion without blasting away 20 miles of mountain and rock and building as much retaining wall and fill. All while keeping the highway open. Yeah, right.
Does upgrading 74 then become more warranted and feasible? Would it make a difference? The I-26 extension was supposed to be an alternative, and it's barely used.
Quote from: cowboy_wilhelmConsidering how fast that part of the county is growing, there may be people paying a toll to sit in traffic ten years from now.
I doubt that. Especially now with electronic tolling technology, they can adjust tolls to nearly-guarantee** a minimum 45 MPH drive along a toll road. I can easily see NCDOT adjusting the tolls along 540 along the same lines as the DC area does to minimize congestion.
** - excluding crashes or significant weather events.
Quote from: froggie on August 19, 2018, 09:21:17 AM
Quote from: cowboy_wilhelmConsidering how fast that part of the county is growing, there may be people paying a toll to sit in traffic ten years from now.
I doubt that. Especially now with electronic tolling technology, they can adjust tolls to nearly-guarantee** a minimum 45 MPH drive along a toll road. I can easily see NCDOT adjusting the tolls along 540 along the same lines as the DC area does to minimize congestion.
** - excluding crashes or significant weather events.
IMHO, I think Monroe will be its own test case and can't closely be compared to NC 540.
While both roads are full toll and not managed HOT lanes, the majority of folks using 74 now are cross region/cross state commuters between Charlotte - Rockingham and points south and east. Take those vehicles off 74 mainline and on to the toll by-pass; it will help the locals who probably have no reason to use the toll.
I did see on Twitter yesterday that officials with NC Quick Pass had a booth set up at Wingate as the fall semester starts. That's smart, because I think both parents and students will use that road since it dumps right at Wingate.
I'm sure it can be subject to annual price increases, but I'm not sure the NC Turnpike Authority will spike them as they might in urban Raleigh and Charlotte.
I took a few pics around Stallings a couple of weeks ago. https://photos.app.goo.gl/x7C1wPYXMbGohxHq9
iPhone
Quote from: ccurley100 on August 24, 2018, 10:30:34 AM
I took a few pics around Stallings a couple of weeks ago. https://photos.app.goo.gl/x7C1wPYXMbGohxHq9
iPhone
Now that I've been able to see with my eyes how it will continue off I-485 (with the stallings road exit that for right now carries the traffic) it makes it seem a lot smoother than just looking at a map. It's going to be super super nice.
Update, a new section that US 74 main will be routed through has opened, (this, courtesy of ccurley https://photos.app.goo.gl/hJKFQqqg1SRsHofa9) and there are now fully signed, exit-only ramps to frontage roads going off of main 74.
The Monroe Expressway opens to traffic today: https://www.wsoctv.com/news/local/channel-9-tests-monroe-expressway/878868992
It is signed as the US 74 Bypass. Is it the first "bypass route" of a US Highway to be a toll road? I know tolled US Highways are rare to begin with...
Quote from: Chris on November 27, 2018, 08:54:12 AM
It is signed as the US 74 Bypass. Is it the first "bypass route" of a US Highway to be a toll road? I know tolled US Highways are rare to begin with...
That's interesting to learn. A couple other observations (simply from the news pictures, as I write this (9:14) we are still inside an hour of it's ceremony)
- It shows Rockingham *and* Wilmington as control cities, that's impressive (Monroe and Indian Trail for mainline US 74)
- Ground level signage will have the same white square "mini" advertising NC Quick Pass/Bill By Mail
- In difference with NC's other Toll Road (NC 540) the mileage posts on ME are not blue and do not state the road as "TOLL"
Any other observations? Who's going out there today?
Quote from: jcarte29 on November 27, 2018, 09:16:45 AM
Quote from: Chris on November 27, 2018, 08:54:12 AM
It is signed as the US 74 Bypass. Is it the first "bypass route" of a US Highway to be a toll road? I know tolled US Highways are rare to begin with...
That's interesting to learn. A couple other observations (simply from the news pictures, as I write this (9:14) we are still inside an hour of it's ceremony)
- It shows Rockingham *and* Wilmington as control cities, that's impressive (Monroe and Indian Trail for mainline US 74)
- Ground level signage will have the same white square "mini" advertising NC Quick Pass/Bill By Mail
- In difference with NC's other Toll Road (NC 540) the mileage posts on ME are not blue and do not state the road as "TOLL"
Any other observations? Who's going out there today?
I plan on driving out there and clinching the bypass today if I'm not tired by the time I get home. If I do I'll report back here, hopefully with some observations.
Quote from: Chris on November 27, 2018, 08:54:12 AM
It is signed as the US 74 Bypass. Is it the first "bypass route" of a US Highway to be a toll road? I know tolled US Highways are rare to begin with...
As a signed Bypass US route that happens to be tolled, it's either the first or the second. What is now US 3 around Nashua, NH was initially designated as BYPASS US 3 until the mid-1970s. As this is also part of the Everett Turnpike, it's possible it was tolled at the time, but I'll need to do more research in order to verify one way or the other.
I know it's well worth the wait! And I agree, it should become part of a new 2di connecting Rockingham to I-26, although I wouldn't hold my breath.
Quote from: froggie on November 27, 2018, 11:26:57 AM
Quote from: Chris on November 27, 2018, 08:54:12 AM
It is signed as the US 74 Bypass. Is it the first "bypass route" of a US Highway to be a toll road? I know tolled US Highways are rare to begin with...
As a signed Bypass US route that happens to be tolled, it's either the first or the second. What is now US 3 around Nashua, NH was initially designated as BYPASS US 3 until the mid-1970s. As this is also part of the Everett Turnpike, it's possible it was tolled at the time, but I'll need to do more research in order to verify one way or the other.
Does US 278 Hilton Head count for this discussion? Or does it have to be signed specifically with a BYPASS banner?
The 1961 Rand McN shows Everett Tpk as non-tolled from Exit 1 to Exit 3...
That APL is a very tall sign assembly.
I find it odd how (at least the northern one) the split between the toll road and the old road, the toll road is signed as an exit (Exit 255) whereas the old route has continuity. But then you hop on the bypass and the exit scheme continues (Exit 257, etc.)
I understand it is a "Bypass" route and a toll road, but usually it would still have continuity. At that split, U.S. 74 toward Monroe and Indian Trail should be Exit 255. Most bypasses in North Carolina are as such.
Just curious, how is it signed at the southern end?
Quote from: sprjus4 on November 28, 2018, 07:14:11 AM
I find it odd how (at least the northern one) the split between the toll road and the old road, the toll road is signed as an exit (Exit 255) whereas the old route has continuity. But then you hop on the bypass and the exit scheme continues (Exit 257, etc.)
I understand it is a "Bypass" route and a toll road, but usually it would still have continuity. At that split, U.S. 74 toward Monroe and Indian Trail should be Exit 255. Most bypasses in North Carolina are as such.
Just curious, how is it signed at the southern end?
By "northern" do you mean the one closer to I-485? US 74 is east-west.
That exit numbering is odd, especially with "old" 74 having no numbered exits, though it seems NCDOT is trending toward making new routes Bypass routes and leaving the originals where they are (e.g. Goldsboro) so that with an eventual Interstate designation, AASHTO can't deny them from moving the US route back to the inferior alignment. Can't imagine they'll be in much of a hurry to put an Interstate designation on this toll road, though.
Quote from: Roadsguy on November 28, 2018, 09:28:54 AMthough it seems NCDOT is trending toward making new routes Bypass routes and leaving the originals where they are (e.g. Goldsboro) so that with an eventual Interstate designation, AASHTO can't deny them from moving the US route back to the inferior alignment.
...except for the Clayton Bypass. Rather than signing it as US-70 Bypass, NCDOT just signed it as US-70 and changed it's old route through Clayton to US-70 Business. I never understood why they did that.
Anybody know how long it usually takes for Google to update their maps with major new road openings? As of this minute, no sign of the Monroe Expressway except for the new realignments of regular 74 at each end.
Quote from: wriddle082 on November 28, 2018, 01:45:21 PM
Anybody know how long it usually takes for Google to update their maps with major new road openings? As of this minute, no sign of the Monroe Expressway except for the new realignments of regular 74 at each end.
Waze had it updated last night.
iPhone
Quote from: ccurley100 on November 28, 2018, 01:48:01 PM
Quote from: wriddle082 on November 28, 2018, 01:45:21 PM
Anybody know how long it usually takes for Google to update their maps with major new road openings? As of this minute, no sign of the Monroe Expressway except for the new realignments of regular 74 at each end.
Waze had it updated last night.
iPhone
It takes them a long time. They still haven't updated Indiana 37 to I-69.
What's the speed limit on the expressway? Is it continuous to I-485?
Quote from: Roadsguy on November 28, 2018, 05:18:58 PM
What's the speed limit on the expressway? Is it continuous to I-485?
The speed limit on the rural portion is 65 MPH (wouldn't be surprised if it's raised to 70 MPH later on, similar to how NC 540 was), I do not know the speed limit on the elevated section near I-485, I would assume at least 55 MPH, maybe holds 65 MPH. At least hopefully not like the M.L.K. Freeway here in Hampton Roads, where 3 miles of limited-access road, built to interstate standards, and straight is 45 MPH.
Edit - I don't know how true this is, but Waze reports the speed limit on the elevated portion stays 65 MPH all the way to I-485, while the frontage roads have 35 MPH. The speed limit drops to 55 MPH after the first exit to I-485 (which takes both directions of traffic via the flyover), then back to 45 MPH after I-485.
Quote from: Roadsguy on November 28, 2018, 09:28:54 AM
Quote from: sprjus4 on November 28, 2018, 07:14:11 AM
I find it odd how (at least the northern one) the split between the toll road and the old road, the toll road is signed as an exit (Exit 255) whereas the old route has continuity. But then you hop on the bypass and the exit scheme continues (Exit 257, etc.)
I understand it is a "Bypass" route and a toll road, but usually it would still have continuity. At that split, U.S. 74 toward Monroe and Indian Trail should be Exit 255. Most bypasses in North Carolina are as such.
Just curious, how is it signed at the southern end?
By "northern" do you mean the one closer to I-485? US 74 is east-west.
That exit numbering is odd, especially with "old" 74 having no numbered exits, though it seems NCDOT is trending toward making new routes Bypass routes and leaving the originals where they are (e.g. Goldsboro) so that with an eventual Interstate designation, AASHTO can't deny them from moving the US route back to the inferior alignment. Can't imagine they'll be in much of a hurry to put an Interstate designation on this toll road, though.
Apologize about that, am referring to the western end (closer to I-485). I agree with the bypass designations as opposed to normal routing, and if interstate ever reaches, then it can be fully eliminated with no impacts. However, usually when a bypass is signed, it still holds continuity. Elizabeth City, Windsor, Goldsboro, etc. are all signed as "Bypass", however it is one continuous freeway, with the existing route referred to as an "Exit". I just find it weird how here, the "Bypass" is considered an "Exit", yet it's the one that has the exits, not the old road. At least the roads SHOWS continuity, with existing traffic still having to keep right to "exit", and free-flowing traffic in the left lanes.
Quote from: sprjus4At least hopefully not like the M.L.K. Freeway here in Hampton Roads, where 3 miles of limited-access road, built to interstate standards, and straight is 45 MPH.
The shoulders are not Interstate-standard, especially on the older section and underneath London Blvd.
Quote from: froggie on November 28, 2018, 05:55:45 PM
Quote from: sprjus4At least hopefully not like the M.L.K. Freeway here in Hampton Roads, where 3 miles of limited-access road, built to interstate standards, and straight is 45 MPH.
The shoulders are not Interstate-standard, especially on the older section and underneath London Blvd.
The part under London Blvd doesn't have shoulders because there is an ramp merge, and also not enough room. That is allowed to meet interstate standards, just look at any on/off ramp in North Carolina. The rest of the highway from the Midtown Tunnel to I-264 has fully paved shoulders. The highway should be posted at 55 MPH, not 45 MPH. I rarely see people on it actually doing below 50.
I don't disagree that it should be posted 55 MPH. But there are inside shoulder standards as well as outside shoulders. The inside shoulders especially are not I-spec.
And since you mention North Carolina...there's a reason why the completed portions of "I-295" around Fayetteville have not been fully accepted into the Interstate system. (hint: it's the bridge shoulders)
Quote from: froggie on November 28, 2018, 06:05:18 PM
I don't disagree that it should be posted 55 MPH. But there are inside shoulder standards as well as outside shoulders. The inside shoulders especially are not I-spec.
And since you mention North Carolina...there's a reason why the completed portions of "I-295" around Fayetteville have not been fully accepted into the Interstate system. (hint: it's the bridge shoulders)
Ah, you are right. An interstate with a barrier for a median should have a 10 foot shoulder. If it was grassy median, than 4 feet is acceptable with the rest graded. However, many interstates do not meet this requirement and are signed as interstates, including major 2-D routes. As for I-295, that is a full bridge, not an entrance merge. Plus, the proposed I-87 project in eastern North Carolina would allow the two major river crossings to retain the existing non-shoulder bridges and be exempt from requirements. I don't think the bridge is the reason, I think they're waiting for the entire beltway to be finished.
^ Keep in mind most of those are older Interstates that were built when standards were lower than today.
The 1967 Highway Act mandated that shoulder widths were to be carried across bridges. Thus, normal shoulder widths for Interstates also apply to bridges. The only way those I-87/US 17 bridges would be "exempt from requirements" is if FHWA approved such an exemption. I have not heard of them approving such. Given the I-295 Fayetteville precedent, they may well not approve it.
Quote from: LM117 on November 28, 2018, 01:04:48 PM
Quote from: Roadsguy on November 28, 2018, 09:28:54 AMthough it seems NCDOT is trending toward making new routes Bypass routes and leaving the originals where they are (e.g. Goldsboro) so that with an eventual Interstate designation, AASHTO can't deny them from moving the US route back to the inferior alignment.
...except for the Clayton Bypass. Rather than signing it as US-70 Bypass, NCDOT just signed it as US-70 and changed it's old route through Clayton to US-70 Business. I never understood why they did that.
At the time that decision was made, it wasn't known that the route was going to be an interstate. So I guess a different policy was in place.
Quote from: froggie on November 28, 2018, 06:15:58 PM
^ Keep in mind most of those are older Interstates that were built when standards were lower than today.
The 1967 Highway Act mandated that shoulder widths were to be carried across bridges. Thus, normal shoulder widths for Interstates also apply to bridges. The only way those I-87/US 17 bridges would be "exempt from requirements" is if FHWA approved such an exemption. I have not heard of them approving such. Given the I-295 Fayetteville precedent, they may well not approve it.
In the U.S. 17 Feasibility Study, multiple sections mention retaining the bridges
- "Additionally, some existing bridges with narrower shoulders may be retained and used with a design exception."
- The existing bridges over the Roanoke River and along existing US 17 through the Roanoke River NWR would be retained and used. Design exceptions would be required due to insufficient shoulder widths to meet interstate standards."
- "*Design exception may be required" (referring to bridges that do not meet standards but would be retained)
Yes, FHWA would have to approve such exemption, but as far as planned now, that is what is expected to happen.
Also, was the junction with I-485 given an exit number?
Quote from: Roadsguy on November 28, 2018, 06:51:32 PM
Also, was the junction with I-485 given an exit number?
I don't believe so, but signing it as Exit 253 would make sense.
Quote from: wdcrft63 on November 28, 2018, 06:29:26 PM
Quote from: LM117 on November 28, 2018, 01:04:48 PM
Quote from: Roadsguy on November 28, 2018, 09:28:54 AMthough it seems NCDOT is trending toward making new routes Bypass routes and leaving the originals where they are (e.g. Goldsboro) so that with an eventual Interstate designation, AASHTO can't deny them from moving the US route back to the inferior alignment.
...except for the Clayton Bypass. Rather than signing it as US-70 Bypass, NCDOT just signed it as US-70 and changed it's old route through Clayton to US-70 Business. I never understood why they did that.
At the time that decision was made, it wasn't known that the route was going to be an interstate. So I guess a different policy was in place.
The difference may be that in the Goldsboro example there are 3 US 70 routings a la Elizabeth City and US 17. Trying to think of recent bypass openings like Clayton which have only 2 routings...there is US 401 Business Rolesville, US 70 Business in Beaufort and US 421 Business Sanford (though NC 87 is signed as BYPASS and mainline). The upcoming US 64 in Asheboro will be a Business route.
Quote from: Roadsguy on November 28, 2018, 06:51:32 PM
Also, was the junction with I-485 given an exit number?
Quote from: ccurley100 on August 24, 2018, 10:30:34 AM
I took a few pics around Stallings a couple of weeks ago. https://photos.app.goo.gl/x7C1wPYXMbGohxHq9
There's pictures there from both directions on US-74 @ I-485 showing BGS's w/ exit numbers of 253(A&B) posted. Gore signs hadn't been updated yet.
Quote from: rickmastfan67 on November 28, 2018, 11:39:41 PM
Quote from: Roadsguy on November 28, 2018, 06:51:32 PM
Also, was the junction with I-485 given an exit number?
Quote from: ccurley100 on August 24, 2018, 10:30:34 AM
I took a few pics around Stallings a couple of weeks ago. https://photos.app.goo.gl/x7C1wPYXMbGohxHq9
There's pictures there from both directions on US-74 @ I-485 showing BGS's w/ exit numbers of 253(A&B) posted. Gore signs hadn't been updated yet.
In cases like the WB exit where a ramp diverges and then splits into two ramps (not a C/D road), does NCDOT usually not assign A-B exit numbers and instead just sign the first split with the straight number? This seems to be the case from your pictures.
Also interesting that they changed the control cities for I-485 to more local destinations. Are they doing that elsewhere too?
Quote from: Roadsguy on November 29, 2018, 01:06:29 AM
Quote from: rickmastfan67 on November 28, 2018, 11:39:41 PM
Quote from: Roadsguy on November 28, 2018, 06:51:32 PM
Also, was the junction with I-485 given an exit number?
Quote from: ccurley100 on August 24, 2018, 10:30:34 AM
I took a few pics around Stallings a couple of weeks ago. https://photos.app.goo.gl/x7C1wPYXMbGohxHq9
There's pictures there from both directions on US-74 @ I-485 showing BGS's w/ exit numbers of 253(A&B) posted. Gore signs hadn't been updated yet.
In cases like the WB exit where a ramp diverges and then splits into two ramps (not a C/D road), does NCDOT usually not assign A-B exit numbers and instead just sign the first split with the straight number? This seems to be the case from your pictures.
Also interesting that they changed the control cities for I-485 to more local destinations. Are they doing that elsewhere too?
Beats me, I didn't take those pictures.
Quote from: sprjus4 on November 28, 2018, 07:14:11 AM
I find it odd how (at least the northern one) the split between the toll road and the old road, the toll road is signed as an exit (Exit 255) whereas the old route has continuity. But then you hop on the bypass and the exit scheme continues (Exit 257, etc.)
I understand it is a "Bypass" route and a toll road, but usually it would still have continuity. At that split, U.S. 74 toward Monroe and Indian Trail should be Exit 255. Most bypasses in North Carolina are as such.
Just curious, how is it signed at the southern end?
The eastern terminus of the expressway has regular US 74 as the numbered exit, not the expressway, as seen in this video (https://youtu.be/FgXEE0B_p2c?t=54). I'd think it's an error if not for the fact that it has the yellow LEFT indicator.
Even more mysteriously, the eastbound sign approaching the expressway split seen at 1:48 in the video has no exit tab at all. Was the exit tab added later or is that set of signs in a different place from the pictures linked upthread?
Quote from: Roadsguy on December 03, 2018, 07:38:30 PM
The eastern terminus of the expressway has regular US 74 as the numbered exit, not the expressway, as seen in this video (https://youtu.be/FgXEE0B_p2c?t=54). I'd think it's an error if not for the fact that it has the yellow LEFT indicator.
That's really odd. Why would NCDOT sign it one way on the western end, and differently on the eastern end? Then again, at least it's not as bad as some bypasses which on one end have continuity, but on the other you have to use a ramp to access it.
Quote from: Roadsguy on December 03, 2018, 07:38:30 PM
Even more mysteriously, the eastbound sign approaching the expressway split seen at 1:48 in the video has no exit tab at all. Was the exit tab added later or is that set of signs in a different place from the pictures linked upthread?
That sign is from the frontage road before the split, the left lane slips onto the bypass, and the main lanes continue on U.S. 64. There would be no exit number on the frontage road. The one with the Exit 255 tab is on the mainline freeway.
Quote from: sprjus4 on December 03, 2018, 08:16:19 PM
Quote from: Roadsguy on December 03, 2018, 07:38:30 PM
Even more mysteriously, the eastbound sign approaching the expressway split seen at 1:48 in the video has no exit tab at all. Was the exit tab added later or is that set of signs in a different place from the pictures linked upthread?
That sign is from the frontage road before the split, the left lane slips onto the bypass, and the main lanes continue on U.S. 64. There would be no exit number on the frontage road. The one with the Exit 255 tab is on the mainline freeway.
Ah, the frontage road. That explains it.
Quote from: rickmastfan67 on November 29, 2018, 03:48:04 AM
Quote from: Roadsguy on November 29, 2018, 01:06:29 AM
Quote from: rickmastfan67 on November 28, 2018, 11:39:41 PM
Quote from: Roadsguy on November 28, 2018, 06:51:32 PM
Also, was the junction with I-485 given an exit number?
Quote from: ccurley100 on August 24, 2018, 10:30:34 AM
I took a few pics around Stallings a couple of weeks ago. https://photos.app.goo.gl/x7C1wPYXMbGohxHq9
There's pictures there from both directions on US-74 @ I-485 showing BGS's w/ exit numbers of 253(A&B) posted. Gore signs hadn't been updated yet.
In cases like the WB exit where a ramp diverges and then splits into two ramps (not a C/D road), does NCDOT usually not assign A-B exit numbers and instead just sign the first split with the straight number? This seems to be the case from your pictures.
Also interesting that they changed the control cities for I-485 to more local destinations. Are they doing that elsewhere too?
Beats me, I didn't take those pictures.
The control cities have been changed either Pineville, Matthews, or Huntersville on all of 485 but on the ramp from 74 Westbound to 485 in Matthews they are still Columbia and Greensboro. The cities are Statesville and Spartanburg at the Oakdale Rd exit (18) which is kind of strange since that exit didn't open until last year.
iPhone
Monroe Bypass Pics 12-2-18. I drove it Sunday morning but it was raining so some of the pics aren't that great. They were taken eastbound for the entire road and westbound from 601 to 485. https://photos.app.goo.gl/GobbqZpAwLNWfypv6
iPhone
Quote from: ccurley100 on December 05, 2018, 04:57:26 PM
Monroe Bypass Pics 12-2-18. I drove it Sunday morning but it was raining so some of the pics aren't that great. They were taken eastbound for the entire road and westbound from 601 to 485. https://photos.app.goo.gl/GobbqZpAwLNWfypv6
Still better than nothing for those of us hundreds of miles away. :P
It also settles the speed limit on the upgraded part of regular 74 between 485 and the new bypass: 55 mph. Where does the limit drop on the east end?
They must have some plans for US 601 considering that they widened it from two lanes to six in just the vicinity of the interchange with the bypass.
Quote from: Roadsguy on December 06, 2018, 11:19:02 AM
Where does the limit drop on the east end?
Pretty much right away down to 55 to 45 because it bumps against the town limit of Marshville.
Google Maps is now showing the bypass.
Quote from: LM117 on December 07, 2018, 08:48:41 AM
Google Maps is now showing the bypass.
There's still a lot of issues they need to fix. For routing, half the ramps aren't even correctly connected, nor is the bypass on either end connected to US 74 properly. I did a route from one end to another and it says it would take 40 minutes to traverse it. It doesn't even recommend as a route even when routing from two areas w/ routes connected. If I force it on there, it adds 10 minutes.
Hopefully they fix these issues, because as a 65 MPH freeway it should be the recommended route as opposed to back roads, toll or not.
I'm glad that a bypass of Monroe was built, but doesn't anybody think it's pretty cruel that when you travel from west to east via the bypass that you immediately get dumped onto a 45 then 35 MPH corridor in downtown Marshville with 5 traffic lights when the bypass ends.
There is not really a transition zone.
I think the bypass should have been extended to at least the east of Marshville and then go back to mainline US 74 on it's rural 55 MPH highway before going into the 7 traffic light trap known as "Wadesboro." The 55 MPH zone of the current US 74 would be a transition zone, until NCDOT can put 70 MPH bypasses around Marshville & Wadesboro.
Quote from: RoadPelican on December 07, 2018, 07:05:11 PM
I'm glad that a bypass of Monroe was built, but doesn't anybody think it's pretty cruel that when you travel from west to east via the bypass that you immediately get dumped onto a 45 then 35 MPH corridor in downtown Marshville with 5 traffic lights when the bypass ends.
There is not really a transition zone.
I think the bypass should have been extended to at least the east of Marshville and then go back to mainline US 74 on it's rural 55 MPH highway before going into the 7 traffic light trap known as "Wadesboro." The 55 MPH zone of the current US 74 would be a transition zone, until NCDOT can put 70 MPH bypasses around Marshville & Wadesboro.
More incentive to upgrade 74 to Rockingham? :bigass:
It's now fixed on Google Maps, it now properly routes on it, and all the ramps are connected properly.
When routing from end to end, the existing U.S. 74 doesn't even show up as an option. Google says the bypass takes 18 minutes, and when I force route onto the old route, it says 28 minutes (note, this is at 1 AM with traffic points just around the lights, green every else). I can only imagine during rush hour it actually is up to 20 or more minutes as NCDOT claims.
Quote from: sprjus4 on December 09, 2018, 01:22:22 AM
I can only imagine during rush hour it actually is up to 20 or more minutes as NCDOT claims.
No doubt it would/could!!
I drove old 74 for the first time about a month ago to see the newest location of my company at Monroe Crossing. It was a good 40 mins from 485 to the mall and it was a Sunday at 1 pm.
Quote from: ARMOURERERIC on December 09, 2018, 01:18:42 PM
I drove old 74 for the first time about a month ago to see the newest location of my company at Monroe Crossing. It was a good 40 mins from 485 to the mall and it was a Sunday at 1 pm.
I drove the bypass today from 485 to Marshville and got through in around 18 minutes. Drove back to 485 on the old US 74 and had a similar timing to yours of around 40 minutes. Also on a Sunday afternoon.
Quote from: Cemajr on December 16, 2018, 09:59:28 PM
Quote from: ARMOURERERIC on December 09, 2018, 01:18:42 PM
I drove old 74 for the first time about a month ago to see the newest location of my company at Monroe Crossing. It was a good 40 mins from 485 to the mall and it was a Sunday at 1 pm.
I drove the bypass today from 485 to Marshville and got through in around 18 minutes. Drove back to 485 on the old US 74 and had a similar timing to yours of around 40 minutes. Also on a Sunday afternoon.
I guess even with light traffic, the combination of stopping every few minutes, going 35-45 MPH, etc. makes the drive slow. On the flip side, you can drive 65 (I imagine the average is closer to 70 MPH), and no stopping once. I wonder the AADT is on the bypass and on the old route. Guess we'll have to wait until next November to see after a year has passed.
Bumping the thread...
Looks like street view from December 2018 and February 2019 has been posted down there... They've gone on the frontage road and elevated section, but in both instances they've exited onto existing US-74. There's still currently no street view on any of the new terrain part.
They've also gone over the new freeway on cross roads, but again have not entered it.
For those who can't drive it because living 6 hours away, this is extremely annoying :banghead: Would it kill them just to drive down it?
There likely aren't plans for this, but would it be possible to connect the Monroe Bypass with the existing Rockingham Bypass, as a way of providing a seemless freeway/tollway connection? Or would such a fictional proposal be overkill?
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on May 06, 2019, 01:31:07 PM
There likely aren't plans for this, but would it be possible to connect the Monroe Bypass with the existing Rockingham Bypass, as a way of providing a seemless freeway/tollway connection? Or would such a fictional proposal be overkill?
Probably overkill. The Monroe bypass lets travelers avoid an awful mess in downtown Monroe. No such mess between Monroe and Rockingham, as far as I can tell.
Quote from: oscar on May 06, 2019, 01:39:22 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on May 06, 2019, 01:31:07 PM
There likely aren't plans for this, but would it be possible to connect the Monroe Bypass with the existing Rockingham Bypass, as a way of providing a seemless freeway/tollway connection? Or would such a fictional proposal be overkill?
Probably overkill. The Monroe bypass lets travelers avoid an awful mess in downtown Monroe. No such mess between Monroe and Rockingham, as far as I can tell.
Agreed, at least a full new location. This study (https://connect.ncdot.gov/projects/planning/FeasibilityStudiesDocuments/R-4441_Feasibility-Study_Report_2003.pdf) was completed back in 2003 for the stretch between the (at the time proposed) Monroe Bypass and the Rockingham Bypass, and has a conceptual upgrade to the existing roadway with frontage roads, etc. The exceptions are bypasses of Marshville and Wadesboro. It's an interesting concept, and if this was indeed constructed, once the Shelby bypass is completed, there would be 210 miles of continuous freeway between Asheville and east of Rockingham. If you were to upgrade the 9 miles to the Laurinburg Bypass, that would expand that 210 miles of continuous freeway to 265 miles, and once the remaining interchanges are constructed near Whiteville and Bolton, 300 miles.
The study indicated that stretch would cost $300 million in 2003 dollars, likely around $800 million today using $25 million per mile average. If this was completed again, likely the 70 foot median on the new location would be reduced to 46 foot, as NCDOT hasn't really been building freeways with 70 foot medians for years. The upgrading existing portion was already 46 foot, and would likely remain that. The Monroe Expressway was built with a 46 foot median similarly.
Quote from: oscar on May 06, 2019, 01:39:22 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on May 06, 2019, 01:31:07 PM
There likely aren't plans for this, but would it be possible to connect the Monroe Bypass with the existing Rockingham Bypass, as a way of providing a seemless freeway/tollway connection? Or would such a fictional proposal be overkill?
I would split the difference and just extend it to beyond Marshville. The way it bottle necks in to town now just seems to kill the momentum you have coming from the West. lol From E of Marshville to Rockingham is just fine, maybe improve shoulders or a "Super 2."
Probably overkill. The Monroe bypass lets travelers avoid an awful mess in downtown Monroe. No such mess between Monroe and Rockingham, as far as I can tell.
Quote from: jcarte29 on May 06, 2019, 05:36:56 PM
I would split the difference and just extend it to beyond Marshville. The way it bottle necks in to town now just seems to kill the momentum you have coming from the West. lol From E of Marshville to Rockingham is just fine, maybe improve shoulders or a "Super 2."
Right now, the bypasses should be top priority. The rest should be upgraded in sections over time as needed. A seamless freeway is needed between Asheville / Charlotte and Wilmington in the long run. The 2018 Monroe Bypass in conjunction with I-485 constructed in the early 2000s has extended that freeway at least 50 miles in the past 20 years or so. Simply leaving an at-grade segment doesn't fulfill that. And I'd say no to a Super 2. Too much traffic issues would be developed if that was built. Roughly 16,000 - 17,000 people use US-74 daily, that many vehicles on a two-lane would choke it immediately.
Did not NCDot advance part of the Wadesboro bypass in the latest STIP.
Quote from: ARMOURERERIC on May 06, 2019, 07:57:19 PM
Did not NCDot advance part of the Wadesboro bypass in the latest STIP.
Looks like it actually. Construction starts in 2026.
https://www.ncdot.gov/initiatives-policies/Transportation/stip/development/Documents/2020-2029-stip-changes.pdf#search=Wadesboro
That could change though. Nothing beyond 2023 is locked in. US-17 was slated to upgraded to interstate standards in 2027 between VA and Elizabeth City in the 2018 - 2027 STIP, though it wasn't locked in, and was removed in the most recent one. Same could happen to here, though I would hope not.
This is just my opinion, but they need to upgrade the whole stretch of the road between Charlotte and Wilmington. Or, at the very least, make it four lanes all the way (I've never been on the road so I don't know how many lanes it has) so that it functions as an extra hurricane evacuation route (along with 40).
Quote from: Cemajr on December 16, 2018, 09:59:28 PM
Quote from: ARMOURERERIC on December 09, 2018, 01:18:42 PM
I drove old 74 for the first time about a month ago to see the newest location of my company at Monroe Crossing. It was a good 40 mins from 485 to the mall and it was a Sunday at 1 pm.
I drove the bypass today from 485 to Marshville and got through in around 18 minutes. Drove back to 485 on the old US 74 and had a similar timing to yours of around 40 minutes. Also on a Sunday afternoon.
How about taking the 1950 alignment through town. How long would that take?
Quote from: mvak36 on May 06, 2019, 11:04:20 PM
This is just my opinion, but they need to upgrade the whole stretch of the road between Charlotte and Wilmington. Or, at the very least, make it four lanes all the way (I've never been on the road so I don't know how many lanes it has) so that it functions as an extra hurricane evacuation route (along with 40).
It's already all four-lanes now thanks to projects completed in the early 2000s near I-95 to bypass the last stretch of two-lane with a four-lane freeway.
Now, the rest of the non-limited-access four-lane needs to be upgraded to interstate standards.
Quote from: mvak36 on May 06, 2019, 11:04:20 PM
This is just my opinion, but they need to upgrade the whole stretch of the road between Charlotte and Wilmington. Or, at the very least, make it four lanes all the way (I've never been on the road so I don't know how many lanes it has) so that it functions as an extra hurricane evacuation route (along with 40).
It is four lanes Charlotte to Wilmington
Quote from: sprjus4 on May 05, 2019, 04:32:51 PM
Bumping the thread...
Looks like street view from December 2018 and February 2019 has been posted down there... They've gone on the frontage road and elevated section, but in both instances they've exited onto existing US-74. There's still currently no street view on any of the new terrain part.
They've also gone over the new freeway on cross roads, but again have not entered it.
For those who can't drive it because living 6 hours away, this is extremely annoying :banghead: Would it kill them just to drive down it?
Now March 2019 imagery, going down US-74, on the new elevated portion (as Dec 2018 and Feb 2019 did), then got off on the old route (US-74). Still avoiding that expressway like the plague.
Same on the south end. Going up US-74 northbound, then exit onto the old route (US-74).
They must hate that expressway or something, if I was driving the car, I'd be up it instantly.
Interestingly enough - they've gone under / over the expressway at every single cross road, with only two exceptions. Even the minor streets, February - March 2019 imagery. But absolutely none on the expressway itself.
Quote from: sprjus4 on May 26, 2019, 12:39:46 AM
Quote from: sprjus4 on May 05, 2019, 04:32:51 PM
Bumping the thread...
Looks like street view from December 2018 and February 2019 has been posted down there... They've gone on the frontage road and elevated section, but in both instances they've exited onto existing US-74. There's still currently no street view on any of the new terrain part.
They've also gone over the new freeway on cross roads, but again have not entered it.
For those who can't drive it because living 6 hours away, this is extremely annoying :banghead: Would it kill them just to drive down it?
Now March 2019 imagery, going down US-74, on the new elevated portion (as Dec 2018 and Feb 2019 did), then got off on the old route (US-74). Still avoiding that expressway like the plague.
Same on the south end. Going up US-74 northbound, then exit onto the old route (US-74).
They must hate that expressway or something, if I was driving the car, I'd be up it instantly.
Interestingly enough - they've gone under / over the expressway at every single cross road, with only two exceptions. Even the minor streets, February - March 2019 imagery. But absolutely none on the expressway itself.
Perhaps Google's just toll-averse -- possibly for some reason their camera-car drivers don't figure they'll be compensated for the tolls, so they just avoid the situation -- or something equally stupid. Google should just call NDOT or the agency responsible for toll collection on that road, let them know about the camera-car working in that area, and arrange a "free run" for their vehicle over the new facility. :rolleyes:
I can't think of any other remotely major toll roads in the U.S. without Street View, though they never seemed to do toll roads early on when Street View was new around 2007-2008. I remember being disappointed as a kid that Google's new Street View feature couldn't be used on the Pennsylvania Turnpike.
Google has to pay the tolls to use the system. Hence no extensive mapping of tolled systems.
Quote from: Avalanchez71 on May 27, 2019, 07:28:10 PM
Google has to pay the tolls to use the system. Hence no extensive mapping of tolled systems.
You'd think that a company with a sky-high market cap could simply pull tolls out of petty cash! But maybe that's how the rich stay rich -- getting anal about such things! :poke:
Quote from: sparker on May 28, 2019, 01:44:28 AM
But maybe that's how the rich become and stay rich -- getting anal about such things!
FTFY :-D
Quote from: qguy on May 28, 2019, 06:13:41 AM
Quote from: sparker on May 28, 2019, 01:44:28 AM
But maybe that's how the rich become and stay rich -- getting anal about such things!
FTFY :-D
Yeah -- Google's gotta keep their cash flow unimpeded in order to be able to lure $250K/yr. coders away from other tech firms!
https://www.ncdot.gov/news/press-releases/Pages/2019/2019-05-28-monroe-expressway-six-month.aspx (https://www.ncdot.gov/news/press-releases/Pages/2019/2019-05-28-monroe-expressway-six-month.aspx)
Had to run over to Stallings earlier this morning for a few minutes. It looks like they still have a bit of work to do at the new 74 interchange with Stallings Rd, and they may have possibly forgotten about it. Anybody knows if the contractor has a hard completion date for all of the remaining work, or the intersection "enhancements" on regular 74 through Indian Trail? It also looks like they could use one more finishing layer of asphalt on some portions of 74 itself through this area.
NCDOT finally got around to approving the signing of US 74 Bypass along the Monroe Expressway in a May 21 ordinances post, almost 6 months after asking AASHTO for its approval:
https://connect.ncdot.gov/resources/safety/Ordinance%20Packages/2019/2019_05_21.pdf (https://connect.ncdot.gov/resources/safety/Ordinance%20Packages/2019/2019_05_21.pdf)
Quote from: bob7374 on June 06, 2019, 11:36:24 AM
NCDOT finally got around to approving the signing of US 74 Bypass along the Monroe Expressway in a May 21 ordinances post, almost 6 months after asking AASHTO for its approval:
https://connect.ncdot.gov/resources/safety/Ordinance%20Packages/2019/2019_05_21.pdf (https://connect.ncdot.gov/resources/safety/Ordinance%20Packages/2019/2019_05_21.pdf)
US-74 Bypass is already posted on the Monroe Expressway... it has been since November 27 when it opened.
^ What Bob is saying is that NCDOT's internal record keeping finally caught up.
Is the new bypass worth driving on since you have to pay tolls? I'm just asking.
Quote from: mrhappy1261 on July 27, 2019, 03:10:48 PM
Is the new bypass worth driving on since you have to pay tolls? I'm just asking.
Haven't been on it yet, but from what I've heard yes.
It's 15-30 minutes faster than the toll free route, and the toll is only $2.54 with an E-ZPass or NC Quick Pass for the entire 20 miles.
If my travels took me down the US-74 corridor, I'd definitely use it without question.
Quote from: sprjus4 on July 27, 2019, 03:13:21 PM
Quote from: mrhappy1261 on July 27, 2019, 03:10:48 PM
Is the new bypass worth driving on since you have to pay tolls? I'm just asking.
Haven't been on it yet, but from what I've heard yes.
It's 15-30 minutes faster than the toll free route, and the toll is only $2.54 with an E-ZPass or NC Quick Pass for the entire 20 miles.
If my travels took me down the US-74 corridor, I'd definitely use it without question.
I can do that. I can dig $2.54. If it's $10 then no.
Never been to Charlotte either, once I go there, I will tell you about it when I drive on that road.
Quote from: mrhappy1261 on July 27, 2019, 03:10:48 PM
Is the new bypass worth driving on since you have to pay tolls? I'm just asking.
Probably not. Better to stick to the old route, I guess.
Quote from: Verlanka on July 28, 2019, 05:15:42 AM
Quote from: mrhappy1261 on July 27, 2019, 03:10:48 PM
Is the new bypass worth driving on since you have to pay tolls? I'm just asking.
Probably not. Better to stick to the old route, I guess.
Yeah. I'm not sure why they want to toll routes in the first place. It won't take much traffic off the old route.
Quote from: mrhappy1261 on July 28, 2019, 10:31:50 AM
Quote from: Verlanka on July 28, 2019, 05:15:42 AM
Quote from: mrhappy1261 on July 27, 2019, 03:10:48 PM
Is the new bypass worth driving on since you have to pay tolls? I'm just asking.
Probably not. Better to stick to the old route, I guess.
Yeah. I'm not sure why they want to toll routes in the first place. It won't take much traffic off the old route.
They toll the routes because there's not enough funding to pay for it traditionally. They don't just toll routes for no reason. All of that toll revenue goes directly into paying the road off.
The Monroe Expressway hasn't had traffic counts released yet, but based on toll transactions, it's a very successful roadway and has drawn a significant amount of traffic onto it, especially long-distance traffic.
Quote from: sprjus4 on July 28, 2019, 12:23:53 PM
Quote from: mrhappy1261 on July 28, 2019, 10:31:50 AM
Quote from: Verlanka on July 28, 2019, 05:15:42 AM
Quote from: mrhappy1261 on July 27, 2019, 03:10:48 PM
Is the new bypass worth driving on since you have to pay tolls? I'm just asking.
Probably not. Better to stick to the old route, I guess.
Yeah. I'm not sure why they want to toll routes in the first place. It won't take much traffic off the old route.
They toll the routes because there's not enough funding to pay for it traditionally. They don't just toll routes for no reason. All of that toll revenue goes directly into paying the road off.
The Monroe Expressway hasn't had traffic counts released yet, but based on toll transactions, it's a very successful roadway and has drawn a significant amount of traffic onto it, especially long-distance traffic.
I didn't know many people like paying for tolls.
Quote from: mrhappy1261 on July 28, 2019, 12:42:19 PM
Quote from: sprjus4 on July 28, 2019, 12:23:53 PM
Quote from: mrhappy1261 on July 28, 2019, 10:31:50 AM
Quote from: Verlanka on July 28, 2019, 05:15:42 AM
Quote from: mrhappy1261 on July 27, 2019, 03:10:48 PM
Is the new bypass worth driving on since you have to pay tolls? I'm just asking.
Probably not. Better to stick to the old route, I guess.
Yeah. I'm not sure why they want to toll routes in the first place. It won't take much traffic off the old route.
They toll the routes because there's not enough funding to pay for it traditionally. They don't just toll routes for no reason. All of that toll revenue goes directly into paying the road off.
The Monroe Expressway hasn't had traffic counts released yet, but based on toll transactions, it's a very successful roadway and has drawn a significant amount of traffic onto it, especially long-distance traffic.
I didn't know many people like paying for tolls.
That's just not true.
For the Monroe, the incentive of bypassing heavy congestion on the old road and getting places 20 minutes faster outweighs the toll cost.
Quote from: sprjus4 on July 28, 2019, 12:46:03 PM
Quote from: mrhappy1261 on July 28, 2019, 12:42:19 PM
Quote from: sprjus4 on July 28, 2019, 12:23:53 PM
Quote from: mrhappy1261 on July 28, 2019, 10:31:50 AM
Quote from: Verlanka on July 28, 2019, 05:15:42 AM
Quote from: mrhappy1261 on July 27, 2019, 03:10:48 PM
Is the new bypass worth driving on since you have to pay tolls? I'm just asking.
Probably not. Better to stick to the old route, I guess.
Yeah. I'm not sure why they want to toll routes in the first place. It won't take much traffic off the old route.
They toll the routes because there's not enough funding to pay for it traditionally. They don't just toll routes for no reason. All of that toll revenue goes directly into paying the road off.
The Monroe Expressway hasn't had traffic counts released yet, but based on toll transactions, it's a very successful roadway and has drawn a significant amount of traffic onto it, especially long-distance traffic.
I didn't know many people like paying for tolls.
That's just not true.
For the Monroe, the incentive of bypassing heavy congestion on the old road and getting places 20 minutes faster outweighs the toll cost.
Yeah. Look at differences between toll and gas.
Quote from: sprjus4 on July 28, 2019, 12:23:53 PM
Quote from: mrhappy1261 on July 28, 2019, 10:31:50 AM
Quote from: Verlanka on July 28, 2019, 05:15:42 AM
Quote from: mrhappy1261 on July 27, 2019, 03:10:48 PM
Is the new bypass worth driving on since you have to pay tolls? I'm just asking.
Probably not. Better to stick to the old route, I guess.
Yeah. I'm not sure why they want to toll routes in the first place. It won't take much traffic off the old route.
They toll the routes because there's not enough funding to pay for it traditionally. They don't just toll routes for no reason. All of that toll revenue goes directly into paying the road off.
The Monroe Expressway hasn't had traffic counts released yet, but based on toll transactions, it's a very successful roadway and has drawn a significant amount of traffic onto it, especially long-distance traffic.
Despite this, I have seen a pretty considerable amount of shunpiking from locals around me, who are reluctant to start using the bypass.
Quote from: Verlanka on July 28, 2019, 05:15:42 AM
Quote from: mrhappy1261 on July 27, 2019, 03:10:48 PM
Is the new bypass worth driving on since you have to pay tolls? I'm just asking.
Probably not. Better to stick to the old route, I guess.
100% false
The bypass skips over 22 stoplights, and several more at-grade "superstreet" intersections. Monroe is a major choke point on the Asheville-Charlotte-Wilmington corridor. That $2.54 can easily save upwards of 45 minutes during peak times. I grew up driving through there on 74, and drove the bypass when it opened. Total game changer.
Now for local traffic, it may not make as much sense to use the bypass due to it being a bit outside of town, but US 74 has become a heavily traveled long distance route, so taking that traffic off the local road makes a lot of sense.
Quote from: mrhappy1261 on July 28, 2019, 12:42:19 PMI didn't know many people like paying for tolls.
A quote in the toll industry I've read is that 'people don't like paying tolls, but people like what toll roads provide'. In other words, the tolls must add value for people. Which the Monroe Expressway evidently does.
Quote from: Chris on July 31, 2019, 09:28:40 AM
Quote from: mrhappy1261 on July 28, 2019, 12:42:19 PMI didn't know many people like paying for tolls.
A quote in the toll industry I've read is that 'people don't like paying tolls, but people like what toll roads provide'. In other words, the tolls must add value for people. Which the Monroe Expressway evidently does.
One of the reasons roads like the New Jersey Turnpike are very successful.
Some toll roads here in Virginia like the VA-168 Chesapeake Expressway and the VA-895 Pocahontas Parkway on the other hand aren't that successful. They make enough to maintain the road
(mostly due to high toll rates for short distances) but they don't draw the traffic volumes that they could if they were toll free. More people shunpike the roads then actually use them.
Quote from: sprjus4 on July 31, 2019, 11:32:30 AM
Quote from: Chris on July 31, 2019, 09:28:40 AM
Quote from: mrhappy1261 on July 28, 2019, 12:42:19 PMI didn't know many people like paying for tolls.
A quote in the toll industry I've read is that 'people don't like paying tolls, but people like what toll roads provide'. In other words, the tolls must add value for people. Which the Monroe Expressway evidently does.
One of the reasons roads like the New Jersey Turnpike are very successful.
Some toll roads here in Virginia like the VA-168 Chesapeake Expressway and the VA-895 Pocahontas Parkway on the other hand aren't that successful. They make enough to maintain the road (mostly due to high toll rates for short distances) but they don't draw the traffic volumes that they could if they were toll free. More people shunpike the roads then actually use them.
Plus, the Chesapeake Expressway has a painfully slow 55 MPH, the same as the free US 17 a few miles west.
Quote from: RoadPelican on July 31, 2019, 12:19:25 PM
Plus, the Chesapeake Expressway has a painfully slow 55 MPH, the same as the free US 17 a few miles west.
Two issues with US-17 - It doesn't get you towards the Outer Banks and you have to take US-158 through Elizabeth City to cut over. Also, Dominion Blvd
(the northern part of US-17 between George Washington Hwy and I-64) was recently expanded into a 4-lane freeway / expressway with a high-rise fixed span toll bridge over the Elizabeth River. It's only $1.16 as of now though, so it's still cheaper than the Expressway, but not free.
The best way to shunpike the Expressway going south is to get off at Exit 8, then drive down VA-168 Business for about 6 miles, then you get back on. It's only 3-5 minutes slower without traffic, and for saving $3 or $8 on weekends, it's worth it.
I agree, the Expressway should be 65 mph
(or at minimum 60 mph) between south of Exit 11 and the end of the freeway. North of there is more urbanized and has some substandard design features, so 55 mph
(or maybe 60 mph) is reasonable. US-17 reasonable could be 65 mph as it's limited-access, is designed like a rural freeway, but due to the few intersections, it can only be 60 mph, but that's still higher than the current 55 mph. North Carolina raised their section to 60 mph, Chesapeake needs to do the same.
Quote from: sprjus4 on July 31, 2019, 12:38:08 PM
Quote from: RoadPelican on July 31, 2019, 12:19:25 PM
Plus, the Chesapeake Expressway has a painfully slow 55 MPH, the same as the free US 17 a few miles west.
Two issues with US-17 - It doesn't get you towards the Outer Banks and you have to take US-158 through Elizabeth City to cut over. Also, Dominion Blvd (the northern part of US-17 between George Washington Hwy and I-64) was recently expanded into a 4-lane freeway / expressway with a high-rise fixed span toll bridge over the Elizabeth River. It's only $1.16 as of now though, so it's still cheaper than the Expressway, but not free.
.
Using NC 343 shaves several minutes off of a US 17 to US 158 through Eliz City routing
Quote from: Mapmikey on July 31, 2019, 01:13:32 PM
Quote from: sprjus4 on July 31, 2019, 12:38:08 PM
Quote from: RoadPelican on July 31, 2019, 12:19:25 PM
Plus, the Chesapeake Expressway has a painfully slow 55 MPH, the same as the free US 17 a few miles west.
Two issues with US-17 - It doesn't get you towards the Outer Banks and you have to take US-158 through Elizabeth City to cut over. Also, Dominion Blvd (the northern part of US-17 between George Washington Hwy and I-64) was recently expanded into a 4-lane freeway / expressway with a high-rise fixed span toll bridge over the Elizabeth River. It's only $1.16 as of now though, so it's still cheaper than the Expressway, but not free.
.
Using NC 343 shaves several minutes off of a US 17 to US 158 through Eliz City routing
That is another option, but it's still slower than VA-168 overall.
Though now that US-158 is getting widened to 4-lanes all the way to NC-168, that will make that route more attractive.
If you're looking to avoid heavy weekend rush and the hefty toll, US-17 to NC-343 to US-158 may be a good alternative.
Years or even decades away, but long-range plans call for eliminating the intersection with US-17 / NC-343
(replacing it with an overpass over the highway then onto a new frontage road) when it's upgraded into I-87 - you'd have to get off at an interchange at Horseshoe Rd then travel through South Mills and over the drawbridge. That could change, but there's no good way to put an interchange at NC-343.
Bumping this thread, Street View from May / June 2019 has been added along the entire length of the Monroe Expressway.
From US-601 northwards, it's only in the southbound direction, and both directions from south of US-601.