News:

Thank you for your patience during the Forum downtime while we upgraded the software. Welcome back and see this thread for some new features and other changes to the forum.

Main Menu

Interstate 42

Started by LM117, May 27, 2016, 11:39:37 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

Henry

Better to put off those plans now than to rush into it completely, like they did with I-73 and I-74.
Go Cubs Go! Go Cubs Go! Hey Chicago, what do you say? The Cubs are gonna win today!


LM117

Quote from: Henry on February 24, 2017, 09:17:27 AM
Better to put off those plans now than to rush into it completely, like they did with I-73 and I-74.

At least I-73 is consistent. I-74 just pops in and out between Mount Airy and Lumberton.
“I don’t know whether to wind my ass or scratch my watch!” - Jim Cornette

CanesFan27

Quote from: wdcrft63 on February 23, 2017, 06:00:33 PM
Quote from: LM117 on February 21, 2017, 12:49:52 PM
I just read an interesting tidbit from this morning's article in the Goldsboro News-Argus.

http://www.newsargus.com/news/archives/2017/02/21/council_approves_tiger_grant/

QuoteDuring the regular meeting, the council approved:

* A N.C. Department of Transportation request to rename U.S. 70 to U.S. 70 Business and the existing U.S. 70 Business to Ash Street inside the city limits.

If this happens, it would mean that the US-70 Bypass designation in Goldsboro won't be going away once I-42 gets signed...

IMO, I don't think the change is needed. The only change I'd be in favor of is decommissioning US-70 Bypass once I-42 takes over.

It's also another indication that NCDOT is not in a hurry to post I-42 signs on the completed sections.

Fixed quote. - rmf67

More than likely it is to appease the business owners along the old 70 bypass. 

LM117

Quote from: slorydn1 on February 23, 2017, 08:23:50 PMI also agree with your assessment. I don't see NCDOT signing the Goldsboro bypass as I-42 until the portion between the east end of the Clayton Bypass and the west end of the Goldsboro bypass is up to standards.

It would make sense. NCDOT's main focus on the corridor (other than James City & Havelock) seems to be on that section anyway.

The eastern end of the Goldsboro Bypass would easily serve as a logical temporary ending point since I-42 would then have connections to 3 existing interstates (I-40, I-95, I-795). It would also avoid possible driver confusion by I-42 appearing and disappearing otherwise.
“I don’t know whether to wind my ass or scratch my watch!” - Jim Cornette

LM117

#204
Quote from: CanesFan27 on February 24, 2017, 11:34:12 AM
Quote from: wdcrft63 on February 23, 2017, 06:00:33 PM
Quote from: LM117 on February 21, 2017, 12:49:52 PM
I just read an interesting tidbit from this morning's article in the Goldsboro News-Argus.

http://www.newsargus.com/news/archives/2017/02/21/council_approves_tiger_grant/

QuoteDuring the regular meeting, the council approved:

* A N.C. Department of Transportation request to rename U.S. 70 to U.S. 70 Business and the existing U.S. 70 Business to Ash Street inside the city limits.

If this happens, it would mean that the US-70 Bypass designation in Goldsboro won't be going away once I-42 gets signed...

IMO, I don't think the change is needed. The only change I'd be in favor of is decommissioning US-70 Bypass once I-42 takes over.

It's also another indication that NCDOT is not in a hurry to post I-42 signs on the completed sections.

Fixed quote. - rmf67

More than likely it is to appease the business owners along the old 70 bypass.

Changing the control city for US-70 West from La Grange to Goldsboro at the eastern end of the Goldsboro Bypass would do more for businesses on US-70 than changing US-70 to US-70 Business.

As it is now, Goldsboro, alongside Raleigh, is used as one of the control cities for US-70 Bypass West, essentially diverting Goldsboro-bound traffic away from Goldsboro. Smithfield should take Goldsboro's spot there.
“I don’t know whether to wind my ass or scratch my watch!” - Jim Cornette

CanesFan27

Quote from: LM117 on February 24, 2017, 11:43:26 AM
Quote from: CanesFan27 on February 24, 2017, 11:34:12 AM
Quote from: wdcrft63 on February 23, 2017, 06:00:33 PM
Quote from: LM117 on February 21, 2017, 12:49:52 PM
I just read an interesting tidbit from this morning's article in the Goldsboro News-Argus.

http://www.newsargus.com/news/archives/2017/02/21/council_approves_tiger_grant/

QuoteDuring the regular meeting, the council approved:

* A N.C. Department of Transportation request to rename U.S. 70 to U.S. 70 Business and the existing U.S. 70 Business to Ash Street inside the city limits.

If this happens, it would mean that the US-70 Bypass designation in Goldsboro won't be going away once I-42 gets signed...

IMO, I don't think the change is needed. The only change I'd be in favor of is decommissioning US-70 Bypass once I-42 takes over.

It's also another indication that NCDOT is not in a hurry to post I-42 signs on the completed sections.

Fixed quote. - rmf67

More than likely it is to appease the business owners along the old 70 bypass.

Changing the control city for US-70 West from La Grange to Goldsboro at the eastern end of the Goldsboro Bypass would do more for businesses on US-70 than changing US-70 to US-70 Business.

As it is now, Goldsboro, alongside Raleigh, is used as one of the control cities for US-70 Bypass West, essentially diverting Goldsboro-bound traffic away from Goldsboro. Smithfield should take Goldsboro's spot there.

Both are bones thrown at the businesses along the old bypass.  What actually is doing more for business is all the billboards along the highway and if any blue services signs are up.


As for the LaGrange/Goldsboro kerfuffle- most traffic along the bypass is thru traffic and most likely were already on US 70 heading east where the bypass begins just west of NC 581. A portion of travelers most likely did get on from 795. And at that Interchange signs along 795 South read Goldsboro.

I can argue that removing "bypass" from US 70 in Goldsboro is actually a step towards I-42.  I can't think of any "Bypass" US route signed along any current signed (not future) interstate in North Carolina.

NE2

Quote from: CanesFan27 on February 24, 2017, 12:19:52 PM
I can argue that removing "bypass" from US 70 in Goldsboro is actually a step towards I-42.  I can't think of any "Bypass" US route signed along any current signed (not future) interstate in North Carolina.
US 21 Bypass on I-77 at Elkin. US 158 Bypass on I-85 at Henderson.
pre-1945 Florida route log

I accept and respect your identity as long as it's not dumb shit like "identifying as a vaccinated attack helicopter".

CanesFan27

Quote from: NE2 on February 24, 2017, 02:55:08 PM
Quote from: CanesFan27 on February 24, 2017, 12:19:52 PM
I can argue that removing "bypass" from US 70 in Goldsboro is actually a step towards I-42.  I can't think of any "Bypass" US route signed along any current signed (not future) interstate in North Carolina.
US 21 Bypass on I-77 at Elkin. US 158 Bypass on I-85 at Henderson.

Thanks I am sure I had forgotten one or in this case two.  If I am not mistaken those bypasses date nearly 50 years. I don't think that having or not having a bypass is any sign that the state will or will not sign I-42.

North Carolina's more recent history shows that they will try to get an Interstate designation if it meets standards and connecting requirements. 

LM117

Quote from: CanesFan27 on February 24, 2017, 04:20:36 PMNorth Carolina's more recent history shows that they will try to get an Interstate designation if it meets standards and connecting requirements.

That's why I was puzzled when NCDOT didn't seek AASHTO/FHWA approval last November to put up I-42 shields on the Clayton and Goldsboro bypasses since they meet interstate standards. NCDOT mentioned in their applications to AASHTO last year that they would send additional requests to add segments to the Interstate system as the corridor is upgraded.

But on the other hand, I can also understand waiting to have an interstate grade connection to I-40, or at least I-95.

From what I can tell based on reading the US-70 Corridor Commission meeting minutes and recent minutes of the Wayne County Board of Commissioners, there has been no local push for NCDOT to attempt to add either bypass to the Interstate system. Wayne County seems to be more focused on I-795's extension.
“I don’t know whether to wind my ass or scratch my watch!” - Jim Cornette

froggie

Quote from: LM117That's why I was puzzled when NCDOT didn't seek AASHTO/FHWA approval last November to put up I-42 shields on the Clayton and Goldsboro bypasses since they meet interstate standards.

The bypasses as they currently stand do not meet FHWA criteria for "logical termini", at least not if the local FHWA office is paying attention to their own policies.  Except for I-95, there are no intermediate major road crossings or major points of interest that would serve as a logical termini.  You'd basically have to do this:

Designate Clayton bypass?  Extend Interstate-grade section to I-95
Designate Goldsboro bypass west of I-795?  Extend Interstate-grade section to I-95
Designate Goldsboro bypass east of I-795?  Extend Interstate-grade section to NC 148

The Ghostbuster

Maybe they should wait until the entire corridor (142 miles) is an Interstate-compatible freeway before posting Interstate 42 signs. Same with 87 and 587.

sparker

Quote from: The Ghostbuster on February 27, 2017, 06:44:30 PM
Maybe they should wait until the entire corridor (142 miles) is an Interstate-compatible freeway before posting Interstate 42 signs. Same with 87 and 587.

NCDOT will likely plaster all three corridors with "FUTURE" signs, whether with the shield format used for I-73/74 or smaller BGS's (isn't that an oxymoron?).  Otherwise, the US 70 corridor will likely need to be completed from I-40 to at least New Bern before it is posted with actual I-42 shields.

CanesFan27

Quote from: froggie on February 26, 2017, 07:59:10 AM
Quote from: LM117That's why I was puzzled when NCDOT didn't seek AASHTO/FHWA approval last November to put up I-42 shields on the Clayton and Goldsboro bypasses since they meet interstate standards.

The bypasses as they currently stand do not meet FHWA criteria for "logical termini", at least not if the local FHWA office is paying attention to their own policies.  Except for I-95, there are no intermediate major road crossings or major points of interest that would serve as a logical termini.  You'd basically have to do this:

Designate Clayton bypass?  Extend Interstate-grade section to I-95
Designate Goldsboro bypass west of I-795?  Extend Interstate-grade section to I-95
Designate Goldsboro bypass east of I-795?  Extend Interstate-grade section to NC 148


But there are examples within the state that show otherwise.

1. I-74 ends at NC 41 East of I-95. 
2. I -74 ends at where Business/Alternate US 74 crosses I-74 near Maxton
3. I-73/74 fizzles out at US 220 southof Ellerbe and will inch along as the Rockingham Bypass continues construction


LM117

Quote from: sparker on February 27, 2017, 07:52:09 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on February 27, 2017, 06:44:30 PM
Maybe they should wait until the entire corridor (142 miles) is an Interstate-compatible freeway before posting Interstate 42 signs. Same with 87 and 587.

NCDOT will likely plaster all three corridors with "FUTURE" signs, whether with the shield format used for I-73/74 or smaller BGS's (isn't that an oxymoron?).  Otherwise, the US 70 corridor will likely need to be completed from I-40 to at least New Bern before it is posted with actual I-42 shields.

Future I-42 BGS signs were posted along the US-70 corridor last summer.
“I don’t know whether to wind my ass or scratch my watch!” - Jim Cornette

CanesFan27

Quote from: LM117 on February 28, 2017, 09:31:53 AM
Quote from: sparker on February 27, 2017, 07:52:09 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on February 27, 2017, 06:44:30 PM
Maybe they should wait until the entire corridor (142 miles) is an Interstate-compatible freeway before posting Interstate 42 signs. Same with 87 and 587.

NCDOT will likely plaster all three corridors with "FUTURE" signs, whether with the shield format used for I-73/74 or smaller BGS's (isn't that an oxymoron?).  Otherwise, the US 70 corridor will likely need to be completed from I-40 to at least New Bern before it is posted with actual I-42 shields.

Future I-42 BGS signs were posted along the US-70 corridor last summer.

There is a difference- they should actually be future interstate corridor signs similar to what was/is up for 73 and 74 in the state.

These 42 and 87 signs (and the 87 signs have only been posted by division 1 and not division 4) are only at County lines or for the Goldsboro Bypass at the start of freeway sections.  In fact the Future sign at the Wayne/Johnston line is on a non freeway section of 70. So it should be Future Corridor.

In contrast, Future 495 shields are after every exit on US 64. 


LM117

Quote from: LM117 on October 02, 2016, 02:59:24 PM
I might've spoke too soon. Looks like NCDOT finally realized that they screwed up with the control cities for US-70 West at the eastern end of the Goldsboro Bypass.

According to the minutes from the August 16 meeting of the Wayne County Board of Commissioners, it appears Goldsboro will be added as a control city for US-70 West. No timetable was given for the change, so it may or may not already be fixed by now.

http://www.waynegov.com/AgendaCenter/ViewFile/Agenda/09062016-387

Page 13:

QuoteChairman Joe Daughtery stated the new US Highway 70 Goldsboro Bypass has new
billboards. The exit signs on US Highway 70 for LaGrange are being redesigned to include
this as an exit for Goldsboro.

According to the minutes from the February 21 meeting of the Wayne County Board of Commissioners, the signs have been changed...finally.

http://waynegov.com/AgendaCenter/ViewFile/Agenda/_03072017-416 

From page 6:

QuoteBoard of Commissioners Committee Reports and Comments

Commissioner Joe Daughtery stated the directional signs in LaGrange have been changed, reflecting the correct directions. He said he attended a good meeting with the North Carolina Legislative Delegation.
“I don’t know whether to wind my ass or scratch my watch!” - Jim Cornette

slorydn1

Quote from: LM117 on March 13, 2017, 11:42:33 AM
Quote from: LM117 on October 02, 2016, 02:59:24 PM
I might've spoke too soon. Looks like NCDOT finally realized that they screwed up with the control cities for US-70 West at the eastern end of the Goldsboro Bypass.

According to the minutes from the August 16 meeting of the Wayne County Board of Commissioners, it appears Goldsboro will be added as a control city for US-70 West. No timetable was given for the change, so it may or may not already be fixed by now.

http://www.waynegov.com/AgendaCenter/ViewFile/Agenda/09062016-387

Page 13:

QuoteChairman Joe Daughtery stated the new US Highway 70 Goldsboro Bypass has new
billboards. The exit signs on US Highway 70 for LaGrange are being redesigned to include
this as an exit for Goldsboro.

According to the minutes from the February 21 meeting of the Wayne County Board of Commissioners, the signs have been changed...finally.

http://waynegov.com/AgendaCenter/ViewFile/Agenda/_03072017-416 

From page 6:

QuoteBoard of Commissioners Committee Reports and Comments

Commissioner Joe Daughtery stated the directional signs in LaGrange have been changed, reflecting the correct directions. He said he attended a good meeting with the North Carolina Legislative Delegation.

I guess I am just getting to used to going through there, because I went through that area on Saturday (both directions) and I didn't even notice they were different. I guess I was too busy looking for troopers and not looking at the signs, LOL.
Please Note: All posts represent my personal opinions and do not represent those of any governmental agency, non-governmental agency, quasi-governmental agency or wanna be governmental agency

Counties: Counties Visited

LM117

#217
Quote from: slorydn1 on March 14, 2017, 02:51:17 AM
Quote from: LM117 on March 13, 2017, 11:42:33 AM
Quote from: LM117 on October 02, 2016, 02:59:24 PM
I might've spoke too soon. Looks like NCDOT finally realized that they screwed up with the control cities for US-70 West at the eastern end of the Goldsboro Bypass.

According to the minutes from the August 16 meeting of the Wayne County Board of Commissioners, it appears Goldsboro will be added as a control city for US-70 West. No timetable was given for the change, so it may or may not already be fixed by now.

http://www.waynegov.com/AgendaCenter/ViewFile/Agenda/09062016-387

Page 13:

QuoteChairman Joe Daughtery stated the new US Highway 70 Goldsboro Bypass has new
billboards. The exit signs on US Highway 70 for LaGrange are being redesigned to include
this as an exit for Goldsboro.

According to the minutes from the February 21 meeting of the Wayne County Board of Commissioners, the signs have been changed...finally.

http://waynegov.com/AgendaCenter/ViewFile/Agenda/_03072017-416 

From page 6:

QuoteBoard of Commissioners Committee Reports and Comments

Commissioner Joe Daughtery stated the directional signs in LaGrange have been changed, reflecting the correct directions. He said he attended a good meeting with the North Carolina Legislative Delegation.

I guess I am just getting to used to going through there, because I went through that area on Saturday (both directions) and I didn't even notice they were different. I guess I was too busy looking for troopers and not looking at the signs, LOL.

Brings back memories of me cruising I-795 during my last 2 years in high school (class of 2007) when I lived in Fremont. Granted, I was driving a 2005 Dodge Stratus and not a Mustang or Challenger, but I made do with what I had. :-D
“I don’t know whether to wind my ass or scratch my watch!” - Jim Cornette

LM117

The US-70 Corridor Commission has posted their minutes from the March 16 meeting, giving updates on various projects on US-70, as well as an update on CSX's future Carolina Connector terminal in Rocky Mount. The Commission has also approved a resolution to have US-70 in Wayne, Lenoir, and Craven counties designated as an Aerospace Corridor.

http://www.super70corridor.com/cms/lib04/NC01920485/Centricity/Domain/14/March_16_Meeting_Minutes.pdf

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

wdcrft63

Quote from: LM117 on April 06, 2017, 09:06:27 PM
The US-70 Corridor Commission has posted their minutes from the March 16 meeting, giving updates on various projects on US-70, as well as an update on CSX's future Carolina Connector terminal in Rocky Mount. The Commission has also approved a resolution to have US-70 in Wayne, Lenoir, and Craven counties designated as an Aerospace Corridor.

http://www.super70corridor.com/cms/lib04/NC01920485/Centricity/Domain/14/March_16_Meeting_Minutes.pdf

On the list of upgrade projects, I had to look up these locations where replacement of at-grade intersections with interchanges are planned:

"Willie Beasley Road": this is the first at-grade intersection east of existing Lagrange Bypass freeway.

"Taberna Way": This an intersection southeast of James City, on the way to Havelock.

"Slocum gate": this is near the Cherry Point Marine Corps air station.

Mr. ENC

Quote from: wdcrft63 on April 07, 2017, 06:58:20 PM
Quote from: LM117 on April 06, 2017, 09:06:27 PM
The US-70 Corridor Commission has posted their minutes from the March 16 meeting, giving updates on various projects on US-70, as well as an update on CSX's future Carolina Connector terminal in Rocky Mount. The Commission has also approved a resolution to have US-70 in Wayne, Lenoir, and Craven counties designated as an Aerospace Corridor.

http://www.super70corridor.com/cms/lib04/NC01920485/Centricity/Domain/14/March_16_Meeting_Minutes.pdf

On the list of upgrade projects, I had to look up these locations where replacement of at-grade intersections with interchanges are planned:

"Willie Beasley Road": this is the first at-grade intersection east of existing Lagrange Bypass freeway.

"Taberna Way": This an intersection southeast of James City, on the way to Havelock.

"Slocum gate": this is near the Cherry Point Marine Corps air station.

Actually the one in La Grange is called Willie Measly Road

slorydn1

Quote from: wdcrft63 on April 07, 2017, 06:58:20 PM
Quote from: LM117 on April 06, 2017, 09:06:27 PM
The US-70 Corridor Commission has posted their minutes from the March 16 meeting, giving updates on various projects on US-70, as well as an update on CSX's future Carolina Connector terminal in Rocky Mount. The Commission has also approved a resolution to have US-70 in Wayne, Lenoir, and Craven counties designated as an Aerospace Corridor.

http://www.super70corridor.com/cms/lib04/NC01920485/Centricity/Domain/14/March_16_Meeting_Minutes.pdf

On the list of upgrade projects, I had to look up these locations where replacement of at-grade intersections with interchanges are planned:

"Willie Beasley Road": this is the first at-grade intersection east of existing Lagrange Bypass freeway.

"Taberna Way": This an intersection southeast of James City, on the way to Havelock.

"Slocum gate": this is near the Cherry Point Marine Corps air station.


Slocum Gate is what we call the "Back Gate" to get onboard MCAS Cherry Point. It leads directly back into staff (senior enlisted) housing, and has been a real traffic problem at the west end of Havelock for as long as I can remember. Actually this interchange has been in the planning stages for years. They started talking about it around the same time they were building a similar interchange on NC-24 down in Jacksonville for Camp Lejune, some 20 years ago or so. It was going to get built regardless of what NCDOT eventually planned to do with a Havelock Bypass or the designation of Future I-42. This interchange will be on what I am guessing will eventually be called US-70 Business and not on the freeway corridor that will eventually be I-42.


Taberna Way didn't even exist when I started with the 911 center 20 years ago, but when they built the Taberna subdivision they added this outlet to US-70. It is the only true outlet to 70 for the people that live there. Traffic isn't that bad there to be honest. But, there seems to be a high incidence of T-Bone crashes here from people running the red on US-70, (as well as the next light to the east [south] at Thurman Road). It's like once people leave James City heading east [south] towards Havelock they make up their mind that they aren't stopping unless they absolutely have to.


Oh and LM117, although I didn't get any pictures on Saturady I can confirm that yes, the BGS's on the Goldsboro Bypass westbound have been fixed, and mainline US-70 West through town now has Goldsboro instead of La Grange.
Please Note: All posts represent my personal opinions and do not represent those of any governmental agency, non-governmental agency, quasi-governmental agency or wanna be governmental agency

Counties: Counties Visited

LM117

Quote from: slorydn1 on April 10, 2017, 07:38:06 PMOh and LM117, although I didn't get any pictures on Saturady I can confirm that yes, the BGS's on the Goldsboro Bypass westbound have been fixed, and mainline US-70 West through town now has Goldsboro instead of La Grange.

Cool! Thanks for the heads up. :thumbsup:

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

PColumbus73

Given the current and proposed Interstate network surrounding I-42, would a full direct interchange between I-42 & I-95 would be necessary? I think the only direct links between I-42 & I-95 needed would be NB to EB and WB to SB. For long distance traffic, all the other movements would be satisfied by I-40, Future I-87, and I-795. I think the existing interchange with I-95 and US 70 would be able to handle the rest of the traffic volume.

sparker

Quote from: PColumbus73 on April 11, 2017, 06:27:31 PM
Given the current and proposed Interstate network surrounding I-42, would a full direct interchange between I-42 & I-95 would be necessary? I think the only direct links between I-42 & I-95 needed would be NB to EB and WB to SB. For long distance traffic, all the other movements would be satisfied by I-40, Future I-87, and I-795. I think the existing interchange with I-95 and US 70 would be able to handle the rest of the traffic volume.

This interchange previously discussed in this thread: replies #6-8, #10-12, #93-94, #96, #103-104, #119-121, and #123; the coverage is quite exhaustive.



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.