AARoads Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length

Author Topic: North Carolina  (Read 873475 times)

CanesFan27

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1332
  • Last Login: June 27, 2022, 10:59:42 PM
Re: North Carolina
« Reply #975 on: July 30, 2016, 07:01:20 PM »

^^^ You were one.
Logged

mvak36

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1169
  • Last Login: Today at 10:52:40 AM
Re: North Carolina
« Reply #976 on: July 30, 2016, 11:13:15 PM »

Logged
Counties: Counties visited
Travel Mapping: Summary

noelbotevera

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3306
  • Now at a Redbox kiosk near you!

  • Age: 18
  • Location: Chambersburg, Pennsylvania
  • Last Login: March 18, 2022, 09:56:27 PM
Re: North Carolina
« Reply #977 on: July 31, 2016, 01:54:27 AM »

^^^ You were one.
Hmm, not sure how to interpret this. Either you're calling me trash or very new news.
Logged
Doing things that nobody wants to do since 2004.
I was THE youngest forum member from May 14th, 2015 to September 25th, 2016.

I am the second Alex, since I currently use my father's name...

LM117

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3070
  • Age: 33
  • Location: Danville, VA 👎
  • Last Login: Today at 08:24:59 AM
Re: North Carolina
« Reply #978 on: July 31, 2016, 04:54:21 AM »

^^^ You were one.
Hmm, not sure how to interpret this. Either you're calling me trash or very new news.

He's referring to your age in 2005.
Logged
“I don’t know whether to wind my ass or scratch my watch!” - Jim Cornette

ARMOURERERIC

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1185
  • Age: 58
  • Location: Morganton NC
  • Last Login: Today at 10:31:24 AM
Re: North Carolina
« Reply #979 on: July 31, 2016, 10:33:52 PM »

Went from Morganton to Durham today via da 40.  First time on the highway east of Greensboro in 25 years.  Really hope some serious improvements are planned and soon.  When I entered to return at 15/501 to go west on 40 there was a volume congestion backup well before 15/501 that continued until Haw River.  40 needs widening to 6 lanes from US 601 to the US 64/NC 90 exit and from the NC 16 to Icard exit real bad.  and this was a Sunday.
Logged

wdcrft63

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 811
  • Location: Durham, NC
  • Last Login: June 27, 2022, 06:31:08 PM
Re: North Carolina
« Reply #980 on: August 01, 2016, 04:23:53 PM »

I-40 can be terrible, especially in the summer vacation season. Sadly, I don't think there's a lot of hope for improvements. The road is to be 6-laned between I-85 and US 15/501 in the Triangle area, but that's not scheduled until something like 2023. And I don't know of any plans for widening west of Winston-Salem. Maybe someone can correct me on that.
Logged

Strider

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 838
  • Location: Greensboro, NC
  • Last Login: June 25, 2022, 04:55:37 PM
Re: North Carolina
« Reply #981 on: August 01, 2016, 05:17:17 PM »

I-40 can be terrible, especially in the summer vacation season. Sadly, I don't think there's a lot of hope for improvements. The road is to be 6-laned between I-85 and US 15/501 in the Triangle area, but that's not scheduled until something like 2023. And I don't know of any plans for widening west of Winston-Salem. Maybe someone can correct me on that.


There is a plan to widen I-40 west of Winston Salem, from NC 801 exit to the section where 6 lanes end (at Harper Rd interchange) that will include replacing the Yadkin River Bridges, which should begin in 2018.

This is the link to article from 2015: http://www.bizjournals.com/triad/news/2015/12/09/50m-i-40-road-widening-project-will-move-forward.html


Logged

ARMOURERERIC

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1185
  • Age: 58
  • Location: Morganton NC
  • Last Login: Today at 10:31:24 AM
Re: North Carolina
« Reply #982 on: August 01, 2016, 05:40:51 PM »

Another mess I encountered yesterday in my travels was 15/501 from the end of the freeway section to I-40.  Waiting 3-4 signal phases on the mainline to get through the intersections.  Are there any plans to grade separate any of the intersections?
Logged

74/171FAN

  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2805
  • Age: 30
  • Location: Harrisburg, PA
  • Last Login: Today at 11:29:24 AM
Re: North Carolina
« Reply #983 on: August 01, 2016, 05:47:31 PM »

I-40 can be terrible, especially in the summer vacation season. Sadly, I don't think there's a lot of hope for improvements. The road is to be 6-laned between I-85 and US 15/501 in the Triangle area, but that's not scheduled until something like 2023. And I don't know of any plans for widening west of Winston-Salem. Maybe someone can correct me on that.


There is a plan to widen I-40 west of Winston Salem, from NC 801 exit to the section where 6 lanes end (at Harper Rd interchange) that will include replacing the Yadkin River Bridges, which should begin in 2018.

This is the link to article from 2015: http://www.bizjournals.com/triad/news/2015/12/09/50m-i-40-road-widening-project-will-move-forward.html


Speaking of I-40, there are also plans to widen it from I-440/Future I-87(Exit 301) to current NC 42(Exit 312) moving forward.  (NC 42 is the first interchange EB after US 70/Future I-42 (Clayton Bypass))
Logged
I am now a PennDOT employee.  My opinions/views do not necessarily reflect the opinions/views of PennDOT.

LM117

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3070
  • Age: 33
  • Location: Danville, VA 👎
  • Last Login: Today at 08:24:59 AM
Re: North Carolina
« Reply #984 on: August 03, 2016, 09:47:48 AM »

Greenville is renewing it's push to have US-264 become an interstate (presumably an I-x87 from Zebulon to Stantonsburg Road in Greenville).

http://wnct.com/2016/08/02/what-will-it-take-to-get-greenville-an-interstate/

Quote
GREENVILLE, N.C. (WNCT) – City leaders in Greenville say the absence of an interstate hampers its efforts to attract new businesses.

“How do we move forward on the interstate designation with 264,” asked Greenville Mayor Allen Thomas.

It’s a question he’s asked for years. An interstate highway to Greenville wouldn’t necessarily mean you’d have a shorter commute. What it would mean is more business opportunities in eastern North Carolina.

“As most know, I’m a core believer in infrastructure,” said Thomas. “Your highways, your roads, lighting and how all that fits together is not planned in months. It’s planned in decades. So from day one we’ve pushed very hard for our 264 corridor, pushing to get that for interstate designation.”

Greenville is the 10th largest city in North Carolina, the largest without an interstate.

So what does it take to change that? Unfortunately, it’s much more than putting up a new sign along the highway.

“I would like it to be,” said Kevin Mulligan, Dir. of Public Works – City of Greenville. “But we’d all like it to be, but it’s not. You get that designation, that shield, that interstate shield. It’s difficult to come by. But there’s a plan in place that we’ve been speaking with our local officials, both in D.C. and in Raleigh to have that happen.”

U.S. 264 from Raleigh to Greenville is a limited access freeway, meaning there are no stop lights. The speed limit is 70 miles an hour, just as you’d see on an interstate like I-95.

But it’s not an interstate. Interstate highways have to meet certain standards.

The good news, it wouldn’t take much to upgrade.

“And we have a road that’s almost built, 98% built to interstate standards so it would be the cheapest interstate in the country to do 30 miles at $30 million,” explained Mulligan.

Even if the upgrades were made, it’s up to the Federal Highway Administration to make the final call to officially make the stretch of road an interstate.

That’s why Mayor Thomas said he’ll continue to work with state and federal lawmakers to help make that happen, “We make our case that every part of this state needs to thrive for North Carolina thrive.”

There will soon be other interstate routes in the east.

In May the American Association of State and Transportation officials approved I-42 for the U.S. 70 corridor between I-40 and Morehead City, and I-87 for U.S. 64 & 17 between Raleigh and the Virginia state line.

I'm not opposed to it, since the road is already built (much like Kentucky's parkways that are planned to become either I-69 or I-x69's), but if Allen Thomas thinks it will easily pass Congress without scrutiny, he better think again. I-42, I-87 and the extension of I-795 easily passed Congress primarily due to the military presence on those corridors. Greenville has neither a port nor military presence. NCDOT would be better off doing it the old-fashioned way through FHWA. Their chances might be better, IMO.

Not to mention that I-87 will need to be finished to at least Zebulon in order for US-264 to become an I-x87. The best Greenville could hope for at the moment is for US-264 to become "Future I-x87". Has there been a case of a "Future" 3-di without the parent being complete? Wasn't I-269 in MS and TN signed as such? :hmmm:

Theoretically, US-264 could become an I-x95, but I doubt NCDOT would do that since they want northbound traffic from Raleigh to use I-87 to connect to I-95 in Rocky Mount, which is why I-495 is signed North-South.

NCDOT would also need to remove the signs on US-264 warning drivers of farm equipment using the highway. Farm equipment are forbidden from using Interstate Highways, IIRC. I think an exception was made for I-555 in Arkansas by Congress.
« Last Edit: August 03, 2016, 09:51:18 AM by LM117 »
Logged
“I don’t know whether to wind my ass or scratch my watch!” - Jim Cornette

wdcrft63

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 811
  • Location: Durham, NC
  • Last Login: June 27, 2022, 06:31:08 PM
Re: North Carolina
« Reply #985 on: August 03, 2016, 03:04:41 PM »

Greenville is renewing it's push to have US-264 become an interstate (presumably an I-x87 from Zebulon to Stantonsburg Road in Greenville).

http://wnct.com/2016/08/02/what-will-it-take-to-get-greenville-an-interstate/

I'm not opposed to it, since the road is already built (much like Kentucky's parkways that are planned to become either I-69 or I-x69's), but if Allen Thomas thinks it will easily pass Congress without scrutiny, he better think again. I-42, I-87 and the extension of I-795 easily passed Congress primarily due to the military presence on those corridors. Greenville has neither a port nor military presence. NCDOT would be better off doing it the old-fashioned way through FHWA. Their chances might be better, IMO.

Not to mention that I-87 will need to be finished to at least Zebulon in order for US-264 to become an I-x87. The best Greenville could hope for at the moment is for US-264 to become "Future I-x87". Has there been a case of a "Future" 3-di without the parent being complete? Wasn't I-269 in MS and TN signed as such? :hmmm:

Theoretically, US-264 could become an I-x95, but I doubt NCDOT would do that since they want northbound traffic from Raleigh to use I-87 to connect to I-95 in Rocky Mount, which is why I-495 is signed North-South.

NCDOT would also need to remove the signs on US-264 warning drivers of farm equipment using the highway. Farm equipment are forbidden from using Interstate Highways, IIRC. I think an exception was made for I-555 in Arkansas by Congress.

These are excellent answers to the mayor's question.

NC politics will probably cause something to happen here, either a request to AASHTO by NCDOT or some kind of Congressional effort. And I wouldn't assume Congress wouldn't cooperate, given some of the interstates it has called for in the past,
Logged

LM117

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3070
  • Age: 33
  • Location: Danville, VA 👎
  • Last Login: Today at 08:24:59 AM
Re: North Carolina
« Reply #986 on: August 03, 2016, 03:38:33 PM »

Greenville is renewing it's push to have US-264 become an interstate (presumably an I-x87 from Zebulon to Stantonsburg Road in Greenville).

http://wnct.com/2016/08/02/what-will-it-take-to-get-greenville-an-interstate/

I'm not opposed to it, since the road is already built (much like Kentucky's parkways that are planned to become either I-69 or I-x69's), but if Allen Thomas thinks it will easily pass Congress without scrutiny, he better think again. I-42, I-87 and the extension of I-795 easily passed Congress primarily due to the military presence on those corridors. Greenville has neither a port nor military presence. NCDOT would be better off doing it the old-fashioned way through FHWA. Their chances might be better, IMO.

Not to mention that I-87 will need to be finished to at least Zebulon in order for US-264 to become an I-x87. The best Greenville could hope for at the moment is for US-264 to become "Future I-x87". Has there been a case of a "Future" 3-di without the parent being complete? Wasn't I-269 in MS and TN signed as such? :hmmm:

Theoretically, US-264 could become an I-x95, but I doubt NCDOT would do that since they want northbound traffic from Raleigh to use I-87 to connect to I-95 in Rocky Mount, which is why I-495 is signed North-South.

NCDOT would also need to remove the signs on US-264 warning drivers of farm equipment using the highway. Farm equipment are forbidden from using Interstate Highways, IIRC. I think an exception was made for I-555 in Arkansas by Congress.

These are excellent answers to the mayor's question.

NC politics will probably cause something to happen here, either a request to AASHTO by NCDOT or some kind of Congressional effort. And I wouldn't assume Congress wouldn't cooperate, given some of the interstates it has called for in the past,

This isn't the first time Greenville tried to get US-264 upgraded. They tried around 2012-2013, and it pissed Kinston off since they didn't understand why Greenville should have an interstate and not them due to being on the heavily traveled US-70 corridor and having the Global TransPark, which has been failing miserably mainly due to a lack of interstate access, so they roped Greenville into agreeing to a "Quad East" interstate project, which took attention away from US-264.

I guess now that Kinston has I-42, Greenville feels that it's safe for another attempt at getting US-264 upgraded without interference from Kinston. I figured Greenville would try again after hearing the news of I-42 and I-87. I guess being a city of a little over 90,000 residents without interstate access while surrounding smaller cities and towns get put "on the map" so-to-speak didn't sit too well with Greenville.

I agree that an interstate upgrade will likely happen eventually for US-264. It would be relatively cheap to upgrade since all it would need is shoulder widening and US-264 already meets interstate standards between I-95 and the Wilson/Greene County line. Surprisingly, Wilson hasn't said anything about it.

I see your point about Congress. If I-99, I-74 and I-14 can get passed, then I reckon anything's possible. :pan:

Logged
“I don’t know whether to wind my ass or scratch my watch!” - Jim Cornette

mvak36

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1169
  • Last Login: Today at 10:52:40 AM
Re: North Carolina
« Reply #987 on: August 03, 2016, 05:32:22 PM »

Would they really need Congress to create this interstate? Couldn't they just make the necessary improvements and then petition FHWA and AASHTO to sign it as an interstate?
Logged
Counties: Counties visited
Travel Mapping: Summary

The Ghostbuster

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3491
  • Age: 37
  • Location: Madison, WI
  • Last Login: June 27, 2022, 01:39:42 PM
Re: North Carolina
« Reply #988 on: August 03, 2016, 05:57:04 PM »

If the US 264 corridor does get an Interstate designation, I'd number it Interstate 187. There is no State Highway 187 in North Carolina, so there would be no potential confusion.
Logged

LM117

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3070
  • Age: 33
  • Location: Danville, VA 👎
  • Last Login: Today at 08:24:59 AM
Re: North Carolina
« Reply #989 on: August 03, 2016, 06:12:52 PM »

Would they really need Congress to create this interstate? Couldn't they just make the necessary improvements and then petition FHWA and AASHTO to sign it as an interstate?

No, they don't need Congress. My guess is either Greenville is worried that AASHTO and/or FHWA would deny an interstate designation for US-264 or by having US-264 Congressionally designated, it would bump it up in funding and AASHTO/FHWA couldn't deny interstate status for US-264, since it would then be federal law. Perhaps a combination of both.

I don't think there would be much of an issue with going through AASHTO and FHWA. Greenville is certainly large enough to qualify as a termini for an interstate (90,000+ population) and is a (if not THE) major economic hub of eastern NC (besides Wilmington in southeastern NC) and the interstate would also serve Wilson. The worst AASHTO & FHWA could do is say no and if they do, then they could try the Congressional option if they're that determined to turn US-264 into an interstate, which obviously they are.
« Last Edit: August 03, 2016, 08:22:02 PM by LM117 »
Logged
“I don’t know whether to wind my ass or scratch my watch!” - Jim Cornette

CanesFan27

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1332
  • Last Login: June 27, 2022, 10:59:42 PM
Re: North Carolina
« Reply #990 on: August 03, 2016, 10:53:30 PM »

Another old website page moved to the blog - a feature on Charlotte's Independence Blvd I did in 2006 based on photos from Chris Curley.  Close to 50 photos of one of Charlotte's major thoroughfares.

http://surewhynotnow.blogspot.com/2016/08/independence-boulevard-charlottes-first.html
Logged

bob7374

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1679
  • Age: 57
  • Location: East Weymouth, Massachusetts
  • Last Login: June 26, 2022, 10:54:56 AM
    • Bob Malme's Road Pages
Re: North Carolina
« Reply #991 on: August 03, 2016, 11:13:21 PM »

If the US 264 corridor does get an Interstate designation, I'd number it Interstate 187. There is no State Highway 187 in North Carolina, so there would be no potential confusion.
NCDOT has potential 2018-2026 STIP projects to upgrade US 264 to interstate standards from the Wilson County line to the US 264 Greenville Bypass, and to upgrade US 13/NC 11 from the Bypass north to US 64. If the I-x87 were to follow this route, it would need an even number, and since I-87 is a recycled number, I have the perfect choice: I-287, for more info go to:http://gribblenation.net/ncfutints/ncfutintp.html

LM117

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3070
  • Age: 33
  • Location: Danville, VA 👎
  • Last Login: Today at 08:24:59 AM
Re: North Carolina
« Reply #992 on: August 04, 2016, 07:23:37 AM »

If the US 264 corridor does get an Interstate designation, I'd number it Interstate 187. There is no State Highway 187 in North Carolina, so there would be no potential confusion.
NCDOT has potential 2018-2026 STIP projects to upgrade US 264 to interstate standards from the Wilson County line to the US 264 Greenville Bypass, and to upgrade US 13/NC 11 from the Bypass north to US 64. If the I-x87 were to follow this route, it would need an even number, and since I-87 is a recycled number, I have the perfect choice: I-287, for more info go to:http://gribblenation.net/ncfutints/ncfutintp.html

That would be one weird looking route, at least for a single interstate designation. I know I'm gonna get flamed on a nuclear level for saying this, but if the Quad East concept is the goal here, I'd use I-287 for US-264 from I-87 in Zebulon to Stantonsburg Road/US-264 Bypass junction in Greenville and I-487 from I-87 near Bethel to I-42 in Kinston, roughly following US-13, the US-264 Greenville northwest bypass, the future Greenville Southwest Bypass, NC-11 and an upgraded CF Harvey Parkway to connect to I-42 in Kinston.

All that being said, Greenville should just focus on the Zebulon-Greenville route for now. I-87 isn't going to reach Bethel for a looong time and the Bethel-Kinston route would take much more work and part of the route between Greenville and Bethel will most likely need a new alignment. North Pitt High School sits right on US-13. I can't see Pitt County being in favor of bulldozing the school.

(Flames incoming in 3...2..1...)
Logged
“I don’t know whether to wind my ass or scratch my watch!” - Jim Cornette

LM117

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3070
  • Age: 33
  • Location: Danville, VA 👎
  • Last Login: Today at 08:24:59 AM
Re: North Carolina
« Reply #993 on: August 09, 2016, 01:28:33 PM »

Preparations are underway for rebuilding a 1.2-mile section of US-301 in Wilson between Lipscomb Road and Black Creek Road.

http://www.wilsontimes.com/stories/Mapping-project-sets-stage-for-301-work,70920

Quote
A consultant in Raleigh, Michael Baker International, was hired to survey the project, prepare necessary environmental documents and design the project. To do the latter, crews were in Wilson recently to map and create a model for the project with the help of an SUV equipped with mobile Lidar and cameras.

“The improvements will include curb and gutter, including storm drains,” Bass said. “It’ll have raised medians, sidewalks, multi-use paths and improvements to intersections such as signal upgrade for pedestrian and vehicular traffic.”

Late last year, the city was awarded $10 million in a Transportation Investment Generating Economic Recovery grant. The federal funding has to be leveraged with contributions from the state and the city to redo a 1.2-mile stretch of the old highway from Lipscomb Road to Black Creek Road.

Quote
Bass and Public Works Director Bryant Bunn, who have nearly four decades of experience combined working for the N.C. Department of Transportation, have used their expertise to cross some hurdles, cut through red tape and keep the project moving forward. The consultant work is anticipated to be finished next June, which will pave the way for bidding out the construction.

“Based on DOT’s information, they are talking about putting it for bids in September or October of 2017,” Bass said. “Construction will start in 2018 at the very earliest.”

The thoroughfare will not be shuttered for the two-to-three years of construction, but officials said inconvenience and detours might be necessary to do the work efficiently.

“U.S. 301 used to be the north-south connector, but the needs of the roadway have changed,” Bass said. “It is not really a capacity issue anymore as much as it is a project to get it to fit with the needs of the surrounding neighborhoods.”

For that reason, officials are hoping to include sidewalks and multi-use lanes along the route and to nearby schools and businesses to improve connectivity of the area. The precise routes, though, will not be announced until crews have designed the specifics of the project.
Logged
“I don’t know whether to wind my ass or scratch my watch!” - Jim Cornette

wdcrft63

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 811
  • Location: Durham, NC
  • Last Login: June 27, 2022, 06:31:08 PM
Re: North Carolina
« Reply #994 on: August 09, 2016, 06:36:17 PM »

Next week NCDOT will close Bragg Boulevard (NC 87) to through traffic where it passes through Fort Bragg. Southbound traffic will instead use NC 210 between Spring Lake and NC 295, and then 295 to return to Bragg Boulevard. (This section of NC 210 has been upgraded to a freeway to support this increase in traffic.)
http://taskandpurpose.com/bragg-boulevard-will-close-permanently-traffic-next-week/
Logged

LM117

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3070
  • Age: 33
  • Location: Danville, VA 👎
  • Last Login: Today at 08:24:59 AM
Re: North Carolina
« Reply #995 on: August 10, 2016, 11:08:39 AM »

The Quad East idea in eastern NC is being talked about again.

http://wnct.com/2016/08/09/how-quad-east-could-connect-four-of-eastern-carolinas-metro-areas/

Quote
KINSTON, N.C. (WNCT) – City leaders from all across the east are working together to make sure they’re prepared for anticipated growth.

Part of that is a plan to connect four of the larger metropolitan areas east of Interstate 95.

If their idea comes to fruition, your drive around eastern North Carolina could one day be just like the one around Raleigh, even Washington, D.C.

“It would be such a tremendous economic engine for our communities that I think in a decade or two we wouldn’t know where to put all the people,” said Kinston mayor BJ Murphy. He’s excited about the future.

Murphy along with other city and county leaders across eastern North Carolina are working on a plan called Quad-East.

Greenville mayor Allen Thomas spearheaded the concept two years ago.

“All working together, have formed an initiative called Quad-East,” said Greenville mayor Allen Thomas. “And what that means is how do we connect military, academic, medical and major manufacturing in this region together?’

The goal of Quad-East is to form an interstate quality loop from Greenville, Wilson, Goldsboro, Kinston and back to Greenville.

“Not only moves goods and services but helps increase the economic activity in these areas based on the uniqueness of each of the communities we’re talking about,” explained Murphy. “Goldsboro’s got a base. Greenville’s got Vidant and East Carolina. But Kinston’s got the Global Transpark. And tying all these pieces together.”

Part of that’s already done; I-795 connects Wilson and Goldsboro. US 70 between Goldsboro and Kinston is in the process of being upgraded to I-42.

Another part of the proposed loop is the Felix Harvey Parkway north of Kinston. Last month, DOT officials announced the parkway will extend from NC 58 to NC 11.

“The northern option for the Harvey Parkway extension from the Global Transpark to Highway 11,” said Murphy. “Just a few upgrades to Highway 11, maybe a few upgrades to Highway 70 and, folks, we’ve got us a controlled access freeway system here in eastern North Carolina.”

And in Pitt County, the NC 11 southwestern bypass construction just got underway, which is another key piece of the Quad-East puzzle.

Bringing it all together means working with other cities and counties and having a common goal. For these two mayors, that’s a win-win situation.

“We have to fit together as a region if we’re going to be able to recruit industry and to be able to bring opportunity here,” said Thomas. “It’s the eastern part of North Carolina. It’s not just one city. We’re all in this thing together.”

“It’s really important for rural eastern North Carolina to all be on the same page when it comes to transportation and economic development. And Quad-East is the epitome of what that cooperation could look like,” said Murphy.

The last leg of the Quad-East loop is NC 11 between the Harvey Parkway in Lenoir County and the southwestern bypass in Pitt County. As of now, there are no immediate plans to upgrade that stretch of road to interstate standards.
Logged
“I don’t know whether to wind my ass or scratch my watch!” - Jim Cornette

LM117

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3070
  • Age: 33
  • Location: Danville, VA 👎
  • Last Login: Today at 08:24:59 AM
Re: North Carolina
« Reply #996 on: August 10, 2016, 07:32:54 PM »

I just found this article. It's from 3 weeks ago, but still an interesting read. Try to keep a straight face when reading. I tried. I failed.

http://wnct.com/2016/07/19/pitt-co-commissioners-say-state-is-ignoring-eastern-nc-transportation-needs/

Quote
GREENVILLE, N.C. (WNCT) – Pitt County Commissioners say eastern North Carolina isn’t getting enough funding for transportation improvements from the state legislature, and now they’re taking action.

The Board of Commissioners passed a resolution Monday asking the General Assembly to take another look at how it funds transportation projects.

Highway 264 is just one area commissioners say needs some help. They say even just adding signs that say future interstate would do a lot for the economy.

Commissioners aren’t happy with the formula the Department of Transportation currently uses to allocate funding, factoring in things like congestion and population. They want it to change.

Commissioner Tom Coulson says more rural areas, even Pitt County, are often ignored.

“What we’re really trying to do is get collectively other counties that don’t have a lot of say… Pretty soon, if we could get everybody to join in, we’d have 75-80 counties that would be saying to the legislature, don’t forget about us too,” Coulson said.

A similar resolution has already been adopted by the Martin County Commissioners. Coulson hopes other counties in eastern and western North Carolina will follow.

Commissioner Coulson says more funding would bring more industry to the East.

“To get on 95, you’ve got to go all the way over to Wilson, either that or you have to go through back roads to get to Rocky Mount, or there are other ways you can get there but it’s not real easy. It would help eastern North Carolina, the entire eastern North Carolina, not just any individual county,” Coulson said.

Commissioner Coulson says the Connect NC bond initially looked promising for transportation in the East, but won’t actually help nearly as much as expected.
Logged
“I don’t know whether to wind my ass or scratch my watch!” - Jim Cornette

sparker

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 8495
  • Location: Bay Area, CA
  • Last Login: September 12, 2021, 12:44:33 AM
Re: North Carolina
« Reply #997 on: August 10, 2016, 08:53:49 PM »

So this Coulson fellow wants NCDOT to ignore traffic data and channel funds to rural areas just because he feels ignored (shades of the Glenn Close character in "Fatal Attraction")?  He's got a perfectly good 60+ miles of US 264 freeway to get to Wilson and beyond; all he & his buddies have to do is slide up US 13 a few miles to access US 64 if he needs to get to Rocky Mount that badly.  Something tells me that Greenville folks are simply envious of the neighboring areas to be served by I-87 and I-42, and merely want in on the action.  Considering the sense of entitlement shown here, I wouldn't put it past them to suggest a 2di for US 264 (I-46, anyone?).  In this respect, Greenville interests are acting like they're the Owensboro of North Carolina! 
Logged

LM117

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3070
  • Age: 33
  • Location: Danville, VA 👎
  • Last Login: Today at 08:24:59 AM
Re: North Carolina
« Reply #998 on: August 10, 2016, 09:48:28 PM »

So this Coulson fellow wants NCDOT to ignore traffic data and channel funds to rural areas just because he feels ignored (shades of the Glenn Close character in "Fatal Attraction")?  He's got a perfectly good 60+ miles of US 264 freeway to get to Wilson and beyond; all he & his buddies have to do is slide up US 13 a few miles to access US 64 if he needs to get to Rocky Mount that badly.  Something tells me that Greenville folks are simply envious of the neighboring areas to be served by I-87 and I-42, and merely want in on the action.  Considering the sense of entitlement shown here, I wouldn't put it past them to suggest a 2di for US 264 (I-46, anyone?).  In this respect, Greenville interests are acting like they're the Owensboro of North Carolina!

What's even more comical is that Coulson wants "Future Interstate" signs on US-264 despite the fact that I-87 doesn't even reach Zebulon yet! :banghead: Not to mention that I-87 has yet to replace I-495 (though I expect that will change during AASHTO's meeting in November). Coulson is just making the area look bad by running his mouth like this. Eastern NC just gained 2 future interstates (I-42, I-87) and a future extension of an existing one (I-795). The Goldsboro Bypass recently opened, the Greenville Southwest Bypass just begun and there are other projects in eastern NC either in the planning stages or under construction. I guess he expects everything to happen overnight.

That being said, Greenville has wanted US-264 upgraded long before the state announced their intention to have US-70 and US-64/US-17 become interstates, in which case it would've became an I-x95. Greenville didn't care about connecting to Kinston. When Kinston caught wind that Greenville was trying to get US-264 upgraded, they got pissed off since they were worried it would take attention away from US-70, which was planned to become a freeway without an interstate designation at the time. So, they came up with the Quad East idea and pitched it to Greenville. Greenville reluctantly went along with Quad East when they realized it was the only way they could get surrounding cities and counties to support upgrading US-264. So, if you want to know where the Quad East idea came from, look no further than Kinston.

Coulson is just coming off as an ungrateful prick, IMO. I'm not against upgrading US-264 (though as far as eastern NC projects goes, I'd rather see more of US-70 upgraded), but this isn't the way to go about it. I wouldn't necessarily blame the entire city of Greenville for this guy's comments. Years ago, I could sympathize with him. I'm having a hard time doing so now.
« Last Edit: August 10, 2016, 10:05:03 PM by LM117 »
Logged
“I don’t know whether to wind my ass or scratch my watch!” - Jim Cornette

amroad17

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1377
  • Age: 60
  • Location: Northern Kentucky
  • Last Login: Today at 05:05:15 AM
Re: North Carolina
« Reply #999 on: August 10, 2016, 10:28:09 PM »

The red, white, and blue shield is getting a lot of North Carolina cities up in arms, isn't it?  :hmmm:

After much thought about the new North Carolina interstate locations, I believe I-42 is legitimately needed because of the US 70 corridor going to the Port of Morehead City.  I-87, as planned, is not really needed.  This could just remain as US 64 and US 17.  Michigan has US numbered freeways throughout the state (23, part of 31, 127, and 131) and Ohio has a US 35 freeway and an OH 11 freeway that doesn't need an I-shield. 

I realize the I-shield, when posted, is supposed to "improve" business and commerce in those particular areas--which is what Greenville, Kinston, Goldsboro, and Wilson are striving for.  As of now, Goldsboro and Wilson have Interstate connctions and Kinston is slated to have one--which leaves Greenville without one for the time being.  This is the sole reason for their ranting and raving.  As a Kentucky resident looking on the outside of this, you can say that Greenvile is acting like Owensboro.

As a former truck driver, I am familiar with the areas discussed here.  I have driven on the US 64 freeway from Raleigh to Williamston and have seen the US 264 freeway built in stages from Wilson to Greenville.  Since US 264 has gone through this area for more than 70+ years, I see nothing wrong with keeping this freeway as US 264.  US 264 has been the way from Raleigh to Greenville for the past 20 years.  Adding I-shields along this route would add another number (as in I-87, I-x87) to the corridor instead of having just the one number for the corridor.
Logged
I don't need a GPS.  I AM the GPS! (for family and friends)

 


Opinions expressed here on belong solely to the poster and do not represent or reflect the opinions or beliefs of AARoads, its creators and/or associates.