NC is requesting I-36 for US 70 East Corridor and I-89 for RDU to Norfolk corr

[wdcrft63]

I noticed that NC 54 isn't "widely" used...why not just renumber that?

First, thanks to froggie for getting this explanation from NCDOT. Good work!

Let's not assume that NC state highway numbers can be changed easily, because that is not the case. In North Carolina, the roads carrying state highway numbers often have no other name. That is true of NC 54: in all of Durham County and most of Orange County the road's official name is "Highway 54," and that's the street and postal address for hundreds, maybe several thousand, of homes and businesses along the road. Changing the name would upset every one of those landowners; it's a hornet's nest NCDOT wouldn't consider disturbing.

[74/171FAN]

I noticed that NC 54 isn't "widely" used...why not just renumber that?

First, thanks to froggie for getting this explanation from NCDOT. Good work!

Let's not assume that NC state highway numbers can be changed easily, because that is not the case. In North Carolina, the roads carrying state highway numbers often have no other name. That is true of NC 54: in all of Durham County and most of Orange County the road's official name is "Highway 54," and that's the street and postal address for hundreds, maybe several thousand, of homes and businesses along the road. Changing the name would upset every one of those landowners; it's a hornet's nest NCDOT wouldn't consider disturbing.

Apparently that is why US 202 Business exists now on the old alignment of US 202 that was bypassed via the new parkway from Montgomeryville to Doylestown.  From what I read, many businesses had Route 202 in their addresses and using the local road names must have somehow led to the lost of business there leading the businesses to want the business route.

[froggie]

Let's not assume that NC state highway numbers can be changed easily, because that is not the case. In North Carolina, the roads carrying state highway numbers often have no other name. That is true of NC 54: in all of Durham County and most of Orange County the road's official name is "Highway 54," and that's the street and postal address for hundreds, maybe several thousand, of homes and businesses along the road. Changing the name would upset every one of those landowners; it's a hornet's nest NCDOT wouldn't consider disturbing.

Not far from the mark.  I sent NCDOT a follow-up email inquiring if they considered renumbering an existing state route to free up an east-west number for the Raleigh-Norfolk corridor.  Also let some frustration about drivers confused by closely numbered routes adjacent to each other.  Here is the response:

We are not casting dispersions on any drivers within the region; however, we have received complaints about similar numbers in North Carolina.  I am unsure which region these drivers are originally from, they may be native to North Carolina or one of the millions that have moved to our state.  Either way, we see an opportunity to avoid a potential conflict.

As previously indicated, the Department did consider numerous scenarios.  One of the considerations was renumbering the effected state route; however, this path was not chosen.  This was due to the number of required address changes for those businesses that utilized the highway number as an address.

Concerning email correspondence from the State of Virginia, we will discuss with the State of Virginia to see if they have any concerns about us proving you a copy of the email.  If they have no concerns, we will send it to you.  If they have concerns, we will ask that you proceed through the public records request process.

Please realize that regardless of the specific number chosen, there will be people who disagree with the choice.  In this case, we reviewed the various options and chose from those that have the least impact on our citizens.  Which route would you have chosen?

So what wdcrft63 posted is EXACTLY why they didn't consider renumbering an existing state route.

[kkt]

Dear NCDOT, there are actually only 49 east-west interstate numbers potentially available, numbers 2 to 98, unless interstate numbering rules are revised to allow I-0 or I-100.

[mrose]

IMO they should both be east-west, grid appropriate, and not duplicates.

Everything even between 44 and 64 is wide open, so it should be a no-brainer to find two suitable numbers. The conflict arguments are weak IMO, considering the 74/74 mess.

I think 74 should be changed too since there's no chance it will ever touch the other one, but that's another argument.

[wdcrft63]

IMO they should both be east-west, grid appropriate, and not duplicates.

Everything even between 44 and 64 is wide open, so it should be a no-brainer to find two suitable numbers. The conflict arguments are weak IMO, considering the 74/74 mess.

I think 74 should be changed too since there's no chance it will ever touch the other one, but that's another argument.

I think we've been over this I-74 ground several times, but here's one more time. The routes of I-73 and I-74 are specified in the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21) passed by Congress in 1996. If you want to review the rather complicated history of this legislation as it applies in North Carolina, Wikipedia has a summary at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interstate_74_in_North_Carolina#History. The point is that NCDOT did not request the confusing concurrence of I-74 and US 74; it is something that Congress imposed, unwisely.

[CanesFan27]

IMO they should both be east-west, grid appropriate, and not duplicates.

Everything even between 44 and 64 is wide open, so it should be a no-brainer to find two suitable numbers. The conflict arguments are weak IMO, considering the 74/74 mess.

I think 74 should be changed too since there's no chance it will ever touch the other one, but that's another argument.

I think we've been over this I-74 ground several times, but here's one more time. The routes of I-73 and I-74 are specified in the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21) passed by Congress in 1996. If you want to review the rather complicated history of this legislation as it applies in North Carolina, Wikipedia has a summary at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interstate_74_in_North_Carolina#History. The point is that NCDOT did not request the confusing concurrence of I-74 and US 74; it is something that Congress imposed, unwisely.

Unfortunately - like MTR was with this route and I-99 - this forum is the sounding board for those unhappy with numbering and how designations of highways correspond to various grids. 

73/74, 99, 11, 14 are what they are. 

A tweet in response to my blog entry about the numbering has a different view:

https://twitter.com/leafstorm/status/730735412919013377

The response says the numbering grid is inadequate

[vdeane]

IMO they should both be east-west, grid appropriate, and not duplicates.

Everything even between 44 and 64 is wide open, so it should be a no-brainer to find two suitable numbers. The conflict arguments are weak IMO, considering the 74/74 mess.

I think 74 should be changed too since there's no chance it will ever touch the other one, but that's another argument.

I think we've been over this I-74 ground several times, but here's one more time. The routes of I-73 and I-74 are specified in the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21) passed by Congress in 1996. If you want to review the rather complicated history of this legislation as it applies in North Carolina, Wikipedia has a summary at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interstate_74_in_North_Carolina#History. The point is that NCDOT did not request the confusing concurrence of I-74 and US 74; it is something that Congress imposed, unwisely.

1. Who gave Congress the idea?  I doubt very much that it originated in a vacuum.  NC is gung ho about these roads, VA and SC are lukewarm, WV stopped being interested when the FHWA wouldn't let the coal miners grade the road, and OH (and MI for I-73) has never been interested.
2. Why has nobody either passed a law changing the number or decided to test how much Congress cared by numbering it something else and daring Congress to do something?

[The Ghostbuster]

To reply to the fact that the Interstate numbering grid is inadequate, I would add that the US Highway numbering grid is as well. Sure, US Highways don't have to be four-laned freeways like the Interstates, but there are plenty of US Highways out of numerical sequence. We all know what they are.

[kkt]

2. Why has nobody either passed a law changing the number or decided to test how much Congress cared by numbering it something else and daring Congress to do something?

Because roadgeeks are the only one who realize how important it is to follow the grid!

[froggie]

1. Who gave Congress the idea?  I doubt very much that it originated in a vacuum.

As I recall, it was business and industrial interests pushing the concept and the number who got Congress to buy in.

[wdcrft63]

1. Who gave Congress the idea?  I doubt very much that it originated in a vacuum.

As I recall, it was business and industrial interests pushing the concept and the number who got Congress to buy in.

It was business and industrial interests who wanted the highways, no doubt about that. I think the numbering is kind of accidental. As I understand the history, I-74 was originally supposed to end where it meets I-73 south of Greensboro. Then-senator Lauch Faircloth, who was from eastern NC, got the route from Rockingham east almost to Wilmington and then south to Myrtle Beach added to the legislation; that section was described as an extension of I-74 and nobody asked NCDOT what they thought of that idea.

I agree with CanesFan27 that these numbers are what they are, and we're going to have to live with them.

[Strider]

1. Who gave Congress the idea?  I doubt very much that it originated in a vacuum.

As I recall, it was business and industrial interests pushing the concept and the number who got Congress to buy in.

It was business and industrial interests who wanted the highways, no doubt about that. I think the numbering is kind of accidental. As I understand the history, I-74 was originally supposed to end where it meets I-73 south of Greensboro. Then-senator Lauch Faircloth, who was from eastern NC, got the route from Rockingham east almost to Wilmington and then south to Myrtle Beach added to the legislation; that section was described as an extension of I-74 and nobody asked NCDOT what they thought of that idea.

I agree with CanesFan27 that these numbers are what they are, and we're going to have to live with them.

Yeah that is correct, I-74 was supposed to end at I-73 and I-73 is supposed to run along US 74 east along the current proposed routing of I-74 to enter North Myrtle Beach. Should have kept that routing, would make it much easier.


but yeat the numbers are what they are. stinks we're going to have to live with I-74 in NC and a potiental Interstates 36 (which I am ok with) and 89 (in which I am not ok with..).

[bigdave]

What a wretched proposal, even the I-36. 

If NCDOT wants to use I-36, then redesignate existing I-40 as I-36 and use I-40 for the new route to Morehead City.

Yeah I know, won't happen.

David

[vdeane]

I say we lobby Congress to remove the number requirement and direct NC and FHWA to find a more logical number.  We must fight disorder in all its forms, road related or not.

[roadman65]

Yes we need to live with them. Even the Bud Schuster I-99 in another state.  Apparently some of us can't and will complain about the numbers, but then again we are also entitled to our own opinion as well.

Lets see, though, what AASHTO says about it.

[LM117]

How long does it usually take AASHTO to post their PDF binder of approvals and/or rejections once their meetings are done and over with? I was surprised they put up their list of applications this early.

[froggie]

Typically within a couple weeks to a month.

[Mapmikey]

I-73 as a concept was the brainchild of two West Virginia folks - a Bluefield College Professor and a Bluefield area businessman.

I-74 addition was pushed by the mayor of Portsmouth OH and another individual from Cincinnati.

I haven't seen anything explaining why the I-74 connection had to result in 74 then following 73 all the way to South Carolina.

The original 1991 bill defining the 73/74 corridor did not have any sponsors from NC.

Sens Robert Byrd and John Warner were big players, with Warner securing I-73 running from Roanoke to Greensboro after input from a separate advocacy group from NC and VA.  Sen Faircloth of NC got them to split 73 and 74 within NC to fulfill the ISTEA requirement of Winston-Salem while getting Greensboro its interstate.  So Faircloth is the reason there isn't a complete 73-74 overlay everywhere.

Sources: I-73 wikipedia page and nat'l I-73/74/75 association...

[CanesFan27]

I say we lobby Congress to remove the number requirement and direct NC and FHWA to find a more logical number.  We must fight disorder in all its forms, road related or not.

There is a little bit of Don Quixote in all of us.

[orulz]

Really though, how much of an impact does highway numbering have outside this forum? How many would be genuinely confused by the fact that I-89 travels more east/west than north/south, and that I-36 is in fact entirely north of I-40? How many people are even aware that an interstate numbering system exists at all?

Inconsistencies like this abound throughout the system. A segment of I-26 is north of I-40 and a segment is also south of I-20. It also travels farther north-south than east-west despite being an even number. I do not lose sleep over this.

I am fine with both proposals. The goal of reducing expense and inconvenience by not duplicating existing highway numbers and not renumbering existing NC highways seems reasonable to me.

I definitely agree that NC jumped the gun by going for I-495, and I will be quite glad to see that one go away.

[bob7374]

How long does it usually take AASHTO to post their PDF binder of approvals and/or rejections once their meetings are done and over with? I was surprised they put up their list of applications this early.

It may depend on the decisions the Committee makes. Given that NCDOT went to much effort to publicize the placement of a blank Future Interstate corridor sign on US 70, you would expect them to post a news release very quickly if AASHTO approves at least one of the two numbers. If not, it may be, as Froggie noted, a week or two before AASHTO posts their decisions.

[roadman65]

Are we talking about the section of US 70 through Selma as part of this?  If so then we obtain another Breezewood as the current US 70 (Bypass) does not connect directly to I-95.  I doubt NCDOT could easily connect the two freeways as a lot of development around Selma.  Plus the location of current Exit 97 would make that tricky to build as well.  If you did what they did in Lumberton with I-74 as the old US 74 alignment did not have the many motels that US 70 has.  I do not think the City of Selma would sacrifice their income for a direct connection.

[74/171FAN]

Are we talking about the section of US 70 through Selma as part of this?  If so then we obtain another Breezewood as the current US 70 (Bypass) does not connect directly to I-95.  I doubt NCDOT could easily connect the two freeways as a lot of development around Selma.  Plus the location of current Exit 97 would make that tricky to build as well.  If you did what they did in Lumberton with I-74 as the old US 74 alignment did not have the many motels that US 70 has.  I do not think the City of Selma would sacrifice their income for a direct connection.

Yes there was discussion about it in the NC thread.

[WashuOtaku]

I definitely agree that NC jumped the gun by going for I-495, and I will be quite glad to see that one go away.

Be mindful of the fact that the I-495 designation was in 2013 and the FAST Act, establishing an interstate highway between Raleigh and Norfolk, happened last December.  I do not believe they anticipated it happening so fast.