SCDOT held public hearings at Socastee High School on September 8, 2009 to discuss the final plans of the Carolina Bays Parkway extension from SC 544 to SC 707.
http://www.thesunnews.com/news/local/story/1058373.html (http://www.thesunnews.com/news/local/story/1058373.html)
South Carolina State Representative Tracy Edge will ask SCDOT to begin
planning for an environmental study of the alternative to extend the
Carolina Bays Parkway northwards into North Carolina.
The proposed extension would ultimately become part of Interstate 74.
The study would look at the six alternatives proposed by the North
Carolina Department of Transportation. Since 2002, the state has
reserved $500,000 per year for the I-74/Carolina Bays Parkway northern
extension. The funds come from the SC Department of Commerce. It is
estimated that the study would cost about $7 million to complete.
Though the study would be an important step in seeing Interstate 74
become a closer reality, funding for construction in either state is
currently not on schedule.
Story link: http://www.thesunnews.com/news/local/story/1248406.html
Quote from: CanesFan27 on September 20, 2009, 04:43:07 PM
SCDOT held public hearings at Socastee High School on September 8, 2009 to discuss the final plans of the Carolina Bays Parkway extension from SC 544 to SC 707.
http://www.thesunnews.com/news/local/story/1058373.html (http://www.thesunnews.com/news/local/story/1058373.html)
The SC 31 extension to SC 707 (https://www.wmbfnews.com/2019/11/07/scdot-announces-highway-extension-is-finally-open-drivers/) finally opened yesterday. I am surprised that this thread was barely used in regard to SC 31. (Yeah I bumped a thread from 10 years ago.) We will see if this becomes I-74.
Took long enough.
Quote from: 74/171FAN on November 08, 2019, 08:40:19 PM
Quote from: CanesFan27 on September 20, 2009, 04:43:07 PM
SCDOT held public hearings at Socastee High School on September 8, 2009 to discuss the final plans of the Carolina Bays Parkway extension from SC 544 to SC 707.
http://www.thesunnews.com/news/local/story/1058373.html (http://www.thesunnews.com/news/local/story/1058373.html)
It's more likely to become I-140 rather then I-74. But I can't be either until SC/NC extend it at the other end. Any guesses on when that might happen?
The SC 31 extension to SC 707 (https://www.wmbfnews.com/2019/11/07/scdot-announces-highway-extension-is-finally-open-drivers/) finally opened yesterday. I am surprised that this thread was barely used in regard to SC 31. (Yeah I bumped a thread from 10 years ago.) We will see if this becomes I-74.
Quote from: wdcrft63 on November 09, 2019, 06:43:17 PM
It's more likely to become I-140 rather then I-74. But I can't be either until SC/NC extend it at the other end. Any guesses on when that might happen?
NCDOT and SCDOT are currently producing an environmental study on the project expected to complete sometime next year.
https://www.ncdot.gov/projects/carolina-bays-parkway/Pages/default.aspx
Quote from: 74/171FAN on November 08, 2019, 08:40:19 PM
Quote from: CanesFan27 on September 20, 2009, 04:43:07 PM
SCDOT held public hearings at Socastee High School on September 8, 2009 to discuss the final plans of the Carolina Bays Parkway extension from SC 544 to SC 707.
http://www.thesunnews.com/news/local/story/1058373.html (http://www.thesunnews.com/news/local/story/1058373.html)
The SC 31 extension to SC 707 (https://www.wmbfnews.com/2019/11/07/scdot-announces-highway-extension-is-finally-open-drivers/) finally opened yesterday. I am surprised that this thread was barely used in regard to SC 31. (Yeah I bumped a thread from 10 years ago.) We will see if this becomes I-74.
I hope not. Aside from Congress's stupidity, there's absolutely no reason for I-74 to end anywhere else but Wilmington. I agree with wdcrft63. It should either be I-140 or an I-x74.
Is SC-31 planned to go beyond SC-707 and connect with US-17?
I wondered about that, given that the interchange ends at a trumpet with no obvious method to extend it without extensive reconstruction. The north end seemed similar but NCDOT has plans to connect to the north end of the Carolina Bays Parkway.
Reasonably, the parkway could be extended 2.5 miles southwards to US-17, then upgrade 5 miles of the pre-existing bypass down to the southern terminus to freeway standards, since it's limited-access but has intersections & frontage roads.
(https://i.ibb.co/C5hHLn6/Carolina-Bays-Pkwy.png)
This'll probably be the Triad/Rockingham's connection to Myrtle Beach, seeing as to how 73 is seemingly dead in SC. The Swamp Thing might actually see the light of day....Who'da thunk it?
Quote from: planxtymcgillicuddy on November 09, 2019, 10:36:19 PM
This'll probably be the Triad/Rockingham's connection to Myrtle Beach, seeing as to how 73 is seemingly dead in SC. The Swamp Thing might actually see the light of day....Who'da thunk it?
The only thing I feasibly see is US-74 getting upgraded to interstate standards between Bolton and the pre-existing US-74 freeway inside I-140, and the Carolina Bays Parkway being eventually extended to I-140.
The Triad's connection would then be I-40 to I-140 to the Parkway
(potentially extended I-140 designation to SC-707).
The Green Swamp Freeway is pointless and doesn't need to be built. The traffic counts are incredibly low (~2,000 AADT) and the existing two-lane road is adequate. The most I see necessary is widening the roadway to include paved shoulders and passing lanes if warranted.
And if traffic wanted an all-freeway connection, and upgraded US-74 and extended Carolina Bays Pkwy / I-140 would only be 8 minutes slower, 17 miles longer than taking NC-211 thru the Green Swamp. It's not the most direct, but if all-freeway connection was desired, a viable option would exist and it's not far enough out of the way that warrants NCDOT spending $1 billion for 2,000 AADT to build a parallel freeway, PLUS another $1 billion to extend I-140 and make US-74 a freeway.
I-73 will eventually get built in SC... one day.
Quote from: sprjus4 on November 09, 2019, 10:41:14 PM
Quote from: planxtymcgillicuddy on November 09, 2019, 10:36:19 PM
This'll probably be the Triad/Rockingham's connection to Myrtle Beach, seeing as to how 73 is seemingly dead in SC. The Swamp Thing might actually see the light of day....Who'da thunk it?
The only thing I feasibly see is US-74 getting upgraded to interstate standards between Bolton and the pre-existing US-74 freeway inside I-140, and the Carolina Bays Parkway being eventually extended to I-140.
The Triad's connection would then be I-40 to I-140 to the Parkway (potentially extended I-140 designation to SC-707).
The Green Swamp Freeway is pointless and doesn't need to be built. The traffic counts are incredibly low (~2,000 AADT) and the existing two-lane road is adequate. The most I see necessary is widening the roadway to include paved shoulders and passing lanes if warranted.
And if traffic wanted an all-freeway connection, and upgraded US-74 and extended Carolina Bays Pkwy / I-140 would only be 8 minutes slower, 17 miles longer than taking NC-211 thru the Green Swamp. It's not the most direct, but if all-freeway connection was desired, a viable option would exist and it's not far enough out of the way that warrants NCDOT spending $1 billion for 2,000 AADT to build a parallel freeway, PLUS another $1 billion to extend I-140 and make US-74 a freeway.
I-73 will eventually get built in SC... one day.
I still say 74 will get finished in NC (even the Mt. Airy-to-Winston-Salem portion, the 73/74 bypass of Rockingham and south of I-95) to Myrtle Beach before the first spade of dirt gets turned for I-73 in SC. SC's portion of 73 is so odd. Not for it's route, but for how the state is acting about it. I'm no expert by no means, and I dont know what all details are entailed, but it seems to be the only thing standing on the way of 73 in SC.....is the state. And they say they want to do it, yet haven't made the slightest effort to begin.
Quote from: planxtymcgillicuddy on November 09, 2019, 10:50:30 PM
Not for it's route, but for how the state is acting about it. I'm no expert by no means, and I dont know what all details are entailed, but it seems to be the only thing standing on the way of 73 in SC.....is the state. And they say they want to do it, yet haven't made the slightest effort to begin.
I-73 in South Carolina is ready to begin construction, it's been through the entire NEPA process, permits approved by the Army Corps, etc, the only thing that is stopping it's construction is the lack of funding.
There's an ongoing back and forth between Myrtle Beach and Horry County about the usage of hospitality fees to help fund it's construction. If they could get their mess together, those fees could go a long way to get a $348 million federal grant which would fund I-73 in Horry County. Not the entire connection to I-95, but it'd be a major step forward getting something built. That would allow for half of I-73 between I-95 and Myrtle Beach to be completed.
Quote from: sprjus4 on November 09, 2019, 06:50:43 PM
Quote from: wdcrft63 on November 09, 2019, 06:43:17 PM
It's more likely to become I-140 rather then I-74. But I can't be either until SC/NC extend it at the other end. Any guesses on when that might happen?
NCDOT and SCDOT are currently producing an environmental study on the project expected to complete sometime next year.
https://www.ncdot.gov/projects/carolina-bays-parkway/Pages/default.aspx
NCDOT will be holding 2 public hearings about the extension project in December:
https://www.ncdot.gov/news/public-meetings/Pages/P029554-2019-12-04.aspx (https://www.ncdot.gov/news/public-meetings/Pages/P029554-2019-12-04.aspx)
I don't think the Carolina Bays Parkway should become part of Interstate 74. I believe 74 should end in Wilmington and CBP should either remain SC-31 (and NC 31), or it should have a different Interstate designation, maybe as a southern Interstate 97 or a southern Interstate 99.
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on November 15, 2019, 01:48:40 PM
I don't think the Carolina Bays Parkway should become part of Interstate 74. I believe 74 should end in Wilmington and CBP should either remain SC-31 (and NC 31), or it should have a different Interstate designation, maybe as a southern Interstate 97 or a southern Interstate 99.
If the full length of U.S. 17 was up to freeway standards, I'd be for it, but the only freeway sections of 17 is the Jacksonville and Pollocksville bypasses, and the Elizabeth City section. Though I believe the full thing will be up to at least freeway standards before too many more years. Would create a seamless, high-speed connection from Norfolk to Wilmington
Quote from: planxtymcgillicuddy on November 15, 2019, 03:07:21 PM
the only freeway sections of 17 is the Jacksonville and Pollocksville bypasses, and the Elizabeth City section.
Except there's also the 3 mile segment of Dominion Blvd urban freeway, 10 mile Edenton Bypass, 6 mile Windsor Bypass, 2 mile Williamston bypass (the overlap with US-64 freeway), the 6 mile Washington Bypass, the 4 mile Maysville Bypass, the 26 mile I-140 loop around Wilmington which is essentially a US-17 bypass, the upcoming 7 mile Hampstead Bypass / extension of the I-140 freeway.
There's also over 100 miles slated to become freeway in the long term, the 80 mile segment between Williamston and the Virginia line (along with potentially 14 miles in Virginia), the 20 miles between SC-31 and Shallote, and likely eventually to I-140, and the 10 mile US-17 New Bern Northern bypass.
The only segment of US-17 not planned to eventually become a freeway are stretches between Wilmington to Pollocksville, and New Bern to Williamston, not including the existing freeway bypasses on the route. Those could be pursued reasonably though in the future should the state desire, though I'd imagine the highest priorities are on the existing planned freeway segments and I-87 before the remainder gets discussed.
Quote from: bob7374 on November 15, 2019, 12:08:02 PM
Quote from: sprjus4 on November 09, 2019, 06:50:43 PM
Quote from: wdcrft63 on November 09, 2019, 06:43:17 PM
It's more likely to become I-140 rather then I-74. But I can't be either until SC/NC extend it at the other end. Any guesses on when that might happen?
NCDOT and SCDOT are currently producing an environmental study on the project expected to complete sometime next year.
https://www.ncdot.gov/projects/carolina-bays-parkway/Pages/default.aspx
NCDOT will be holding 2 public hearings about the extension project in December:
https://www.ncdot.gov/news/public-meetings/Pages/P029554-2019-12-04.aspx (https://www.ncdot.gov/news/public-meetings/Pages/P029554-2019-12-04.aspx)
In North Carolina, all nine possible routes call for upgrading the existing US 17 to a freeway between Shallotte and NC 904, and most of them call for upgrading the existing US 17 to a freeway all the way from Shallotte to Hickman Road (that is, nearly to the SC line). On the other hand, all possible routes require one of five possible alignments on new location in South Carolina. Therefore, it's really South Carolina that's going to decide the route of this extension.
There is no NC 31, so the CBP can carry the same number when it crosses the state line. Until it becomes I-140.
In my opinion, I want the concepts to go north of Hickman Rd or on it.
Concept 1 - I think is the best.
Concept 2 - Pretty good
Concept 3 - Good, but i think it's better to try to avoid going through Ash Little and Calabash Rd.
Concept 4 - Just like concept 1. Very good!
Concept 5 - Pretty good
Concept 6 - Alright, but I don't like the curb at the border line.
Concept 7 - OK, but just like I said for concept 3.
Concept 8 - Satisfactory. It isn't the best to upgrade existing routes IMO.
Concept 9 - Worst. Curvy, and I'm sure it would cause a lot of impacts!
I say 1 and 4 are the best. 4 is probably better because it doesn't run through the little sewer on 111, plus churches.
The second best are 2, 3, 5, and 6. Not a fond of upgrading existing Hickman Rd. Maybe widen it to 4 lanes with a median and that's it. I think that's all it needs. Doesn't need a full freeway.
Don't really like 8 and 9... 8 may have a little chance though. Both run through a golf course, though.
Although I think 7 is in the best area even though i'm sure the impacts to houses are high, but it's to say like (Keep US 70 bypass near Kinston and not far when looking at alternatives 1 and 4 blah blah blah.)
I also wish the whole freeway was 6 lanes all the way to I-140 and US 17 split.
Quote from: tolbs17 on November 22, 2019, 11:32:15 PM
I also wish the whole freeway was 6 lanes all the way to I-140 and US 17 split.
That would be dependent on what traffic engineering studies indicate is needed. If traffic counts only warrant 4-lanes, they will probably only do 4-lanes. However, if there's a projected large influx of traffic, then 6-lanes would probably be the way to go.
Keep in mind, this extension is only to Shallote.
If they extended it 26 miles to I-140 in the future, roughly 10 miles of existing limited-access (at-grade) roadways could be incorporated. For 4-lanes, this would involve building a few interchanges and overpasses where necessary, and widen the shoulders to 10 feet. If you did 6-lanes though, you'd also need to widen these roadways to 6-lanes which could drive up costs significantly, and the other 16 miles on new locations would also need to be built to 6-lanes as opposed to 4-lanes, driving costs up further.
I'd say only do 6-lanes if it's truly needed, if 4-lanes will adequately perform in the future, then only do 4-lanes. Or do 4-lanes initially with the ability to easily expand to 6-lanes in the future (i.e. new bridges built with a "stealth" lane to the left, grading the inside median to accommodate a future lane, etc.)
Quote from: sprjus4 on November 23, 2019, 01:49:24 PM
Quote from: tolbs17 on November 22, 2019, 11:32:15 PM
I also wish the whole freeway was 6 lanes all the way to I-140 and US 17 split.
That would be dependent on what traffic engineering studies indicate is needed. If traffic counts only warrant 4-lanes, they will probably only do 4-lanes. However, if there's a projected large influx of traffic, then 6-lanes would probably be the way to go.
Keep in mind, this extension is only to Shallote.
If they extended it 26 miles to I-140 in the future, roughly 10 miles of existing limited-access (at-grade) roadways could be incorporated. For 4-lanes, this would involve building a few interchanges and overpasses where necessary, and widen the shoulders to 10 feet. If you did 6-lanes though, you'd also need to widen these roadways to 6-lanes which could drive up costs significantly, and the other 16 miles on new locations would also need to be built to 6-lanes as opposed to 4-lanes, driving costs up further.
I'd say only do 6-lanes if it's truly needed, if 4-lanes will adequately perform in the future, then only do 4-lanes. Or do 4-lanes initially with the ability to easily expand to 6-lanes in the future (i.e. new bridges built with a "stealth" lane to the left, grading the inside median to accommodate a future lane, etc.)
http://ncdot.maps.arcgis.com/home/webmap/viewer.html?webmap=b7a26d6d8abd419f8c27f58a607b25a1
When looking at this, the SC side is probably going to be 6 lanes and the NC side would most likely be 4. Even when AADT is 45,000, 4 lanes is enough.
Quote from: seicer on November 09, 2019, 09:16:33 PM
I wondered about that, given that the interchange ends at a trumpet with no obvious method to extend it without extensive reconstruction. The north end seemed similar but NCDOT has plans to connect to the north end of the Carolina Bays Parkway.
Quote from: sprjus4 on November 09, 2019, 09:53:48 PM
Reasonably, the parkway could be extended 2.5 miles southwards to US-17, then upgrade 5 miles of the pre-existing bypass down to the southern terminus to freeway standards, since it's limited-access but has intersections & frontage roads.
It certainly looks like the sort of thing that just beckons to be done.
Currently the overpass that carries traffic between 31 and northbound 707 is only striped with 3 travel lanes (2 for 707 north to 31 north, 1 for 31 south to 707 north), but the structure is about 80 feet wide so you could squeeze a fourth travel lane onto there by sacrificing a little bit of shoulder width.
The fact that it was only built that wide though, and wide enough to accommodate a fourth lane with standard width shoulders, does certainly speak to there not being any apparent provision in there for a future extension.
Quote from: bob7374 on November 15, 2019, 12:08:02 PM
Quote from: sprjus4 on November 09, 2019, 06:50:43 PM
Quote from: wdcrft63 on November 09, 2019, 06:43:17 PM
It's more likely to become I-140 rather then I-74. But I can't be either until SC/NC extend it at the other end. Any guesses on when that might happen?
NCDOT and SCDOT are currently producing an environmental study on the project expected to complete sometime next year.
https://www.ncdot.gov/projects/carolina-bays-parkway/Pages/default.aspx
NCDOT will be holding 2 public hearings about the extension project in December:
https://www.ncdot.gov/news/public-meetings/Pages/P029554-2019-12-04.aspx (https://www.ncdot.gov/news/public-meetings/Pages/P029554-2019-12-04.aspx)
Here's the press release:
https://www.ncdot.gov/news/press-releases/Pages/2019/2019-11-27-carolina-bays-parkway-extension-public-meetings.aspx (https://www.ncdot.gov/news/press-releases/Pages/2019/2019-11-27-carolina-bays-parkway-extension-public-meetings.aspx)
Does anyone know if the CBP will eventually receive exit numbers? The interchange at SC 707 would Exit 0 (or 1), and the present northern terminus at SC 9 would be Exit 30.
If US 17 upgrades continue to progress and I-74 is routed to end in Wilmington... clearly AASHTO could assign I-89 from south of Myrtle up to Wilmington and beyond. :) It "fits" with the "logic" of 85 and 87, right?
Quote from: sturmde on November 27, 2019, 01:55:51 PM
If US 17 upgrades continue to progress and I-74 is routed to end in Wilmington... clearly AASHTO could assign I-89 from south of Myrtle up to Wilmington and beyond. :) It "fits" with the "logic" of 85 and 87, right?
I-89 would be completely east of I-95, it wouldn't fit in the grid.
I-87 works because while a lot of the Norfolk-Raleigh highway is east of I-95, it's southern terminus is located east of I-85 and west of I-95, so it does fit.
Not to mention, Wilmington to Myrtle Beach wouldn't warrant a 2-d, at most an extension of I-140.
If an interstate was built between Norfolk and Myrtle Beach, then I-99 would be the appropriate designation.
What about I-173, would make more sense and explain the break between Wilmington and Myrtle.
Quote from: goobnav on November 27, 2019, 03:10:54 PM
What about I-173, would make more sense and explain the break between Wilmington and Myrtle.
Could be either really. A full build out (the existing parkway, the proposed extension, and future final phase to I-140) would link I-73 and I-40.
I suggested I-140 since it already exists for part of the corridor, and it'd be easier to extend that than introduce a new I-x73 designation.
Plus I-140 is essentially a southern extension of I-40, and would be a valuable connection for I-95 traffic bound to Myrtle Beach, especially since I-73 isn't getting built anytime soon. Both the existing I-95 -> I-795 -> I-40 -> I-140 -> US-17 and the I-95 -> SC-38 -> US-501 routings are about the same mileage, so having the former a full freeway with the latter still arterial would make the former more attractive and quicker with a 65-70 mph limit thruout, for long-distance tourist traffic, and bring some business thru Southeastern NC at the same time.
Quote from: sprjus4 on November 27, 2019, 03:29:14 PM
Both the existing I-95 -> I-795 -> I-40 -> I-140 -> US-17 and the I-95 -> SC-38 -> US-501 routings are about the same mileage, so having the former a full freeway with the latter still arterial would make the former more attractive and quicker with a 65-70 mph limit thruout, for long-distance tourist traffic, and bring some business thru Southeastern NC at the same time.
Slightly OT, but when I last drove I-795 two years ago, I was surprised at how much busier it was compared to a decade ago. Seemed like over half the traffic had out-of-state plates, mostly from the Northeast. I was living in Fremont when I-795 first opened in 2006 and for the first few years, traffic was very light.
Quote from: LM117 on November 27, 2019, 04:07:34 PM
Quote from: sprjus4 on November 27, 2019, 03:29:14 PM
Both the existing I-95 -> I-795 -> I-40 -> I-140 -> US-17 and the I-95 -> SC-38 -> US-501 routings are about the same mileage, so having the former a full freeway with the latter still arterial would make the former more attractive and quicker with a 65-70 mph limit thruout, for long-distance tourist traffic, and bring some business thru Southeastern NC at the same time.
Slightly OT, but when I last drove I-795 two years ago, I was surprised at how much busier it was compared to a decade ago. Seemed like over half the traffic had out-of-state plates, mostly from the Northeast. I was living in Fremont when I-795 first opened in 2006 and for the first few years, traffic was very light.
Could be also Wilmington bound, don't forget there's tourist beaches there too.
I-95 to I-40 was likely the standard routing, as US-117 was only a 2-lane road passing thru small towns where I-795 is now. The part south of there is 4-lane expressway, and now that a viable shortcut is opened, that likely explains the increase of traffic. There's also the completion of I-140 a couple years back, which opened up a new viable routing for Myrtle Beach traffic. A completed I-795 would likely bring more, especially if the Parkway gets extended to I-140.
Sunset Beach to consider submitting new concept for controversial Carolina Bays Parkway extension project (https://www.wect.com/2020/01/02/sunset-beach-consider-submitting-new-concept-controversial-carolina-bays-parkway-extension-project/)
QuoteSUNSET BEACH, N.C. (WECT) - Sunset Beach Town Council is expected Monday to consider submitting what would be the tenth concept for the Carolina Bays Parkway extension project planned by the N.C. and S.C. state transportation departments.
The project, which intends to extend Carolina Bays Parkway from S.C. 9 in Horry County, S.C., across the N.C. state line to U.S. 17 in Brunswick County, has faced backlash over concerns all nine concepts being considered would negatively impact residential and commercial areas.
Though the location of the tie-in to existing U.S. 17 varies by concept, each one would use existing U.S. 17 for approximately 6.3 miles between N.C. 904 (Longwood Road/Seaside Road) and N.C. 130 in Brunswick County.
Sunset Beach's concept differs from that common theme, instead proposing a route inland of and roughly parallel to U.S. 17, ultimately intersection U.S. 17 north of Shallotte.
"This tenth concept would explore a route inland of and roughly parallel to US 17, providing a second corridor alleviating congestion, minimizing impact on the growing commercial and residential US 17 corridor, and providing an additional evacuation route for the rapidly growing Brunswick County population," a staff report included in Town Council's agenda packet states. "Ideally, it would be designed to eventually connect with the I-140 bypass around Leland and Wilmington."
(https://html1-f.scribdassets.com/4czpbp0cxs7ia8o8/images/1-78bec6ca2e.jpg)
My opinion is that a northern route as they propose could work, but still could tie back into existing US-17 at the Shallote Bypass. In the future, a decent amount of the existing US-17 could be utilized for a freeway extension to I-140, notably the existing 7-mile limited-access portion north of Bolivia. Either way, the small Shallote Bypass should be attempted to be included in the parkway concept, as it's already limited-access, meets rural freeway standards, has an interchange and rest area, and another interchange upcoming.
Which concept is the best? I was thinking 7. when I looked at 1 and 4 again, i think those are a little too far, just in my opinion.
Honestly, I do NOT like the ones that parallel Hickman Rd.
EDIT: when looking at it again, when I saw a file saying "CONCEPT 10 ROUTE" That almost looks like this file where it's completely on a new location
https://connect.ncdot.gov/projects/planning/TPBCTP/Brunswick%20County/Brunswick_HighwayMap.pdf
So in that case, alternative 1 or 4 would have to be built.
Also, if it's on a new alignment, then it's definitely going to be 4 lanes.
https://www.ncdot.gov/projects/carolina-bays-parkway/Documents/carolina-bays-alternative-map.pdf
Forgot to mention about this project, some alternatives (such as concepts 3, 5, 6, and 9) have been removed and 1A and 4A have been added.
So I assume either 1A or 4A will be built?
7 would plow through a nice neighborhood that has been recently built (with more houses coming right now) so that's probably not the one that they will choose.
8 runs through a golf course and some wetlands so also doubtful.
Ultimately the goal should be to use as much of the US 17 Bypass as possible. Freeway conversion that includes the use of frontage roads as one way pairs is an underused/undervalued design in NC. Oftentimes to the detriment of existing businesses that lose significant revenue when greenfield routes are selected.
IMO I-99 should pursued to provide a continuous route number following I-795, I-40, I-140, The Carolina Bays Parkway extension, and SC 31. I-795, I-140, and SC 31 would be decommissioned along this new interstate. The ultimate goal would be to extend this new interstate to Charleston. This new route would alleviate I-95 and further boost economic development along the coast in NC and SC.
Alternatives 1A and 4A seem like the most likely. As for any potential "interstate" designation - we're now getting fictional here - it'd seem most logical to have such a corridor follow up US-17 to meet the proposed I-87 near Williamston, passing through Jacksonville, New Bern, and Washington.
Also, I'm pretty sure they didn't want to choose 1 or 4 because of the graveyard (Brunswick Memorial Gardens) that it might plow through.
If that's the case, 2 is also unlikely.
Yes, I-99 will be the number used for it.
I don't know if discussing an interstate designation ventures too far into fictional considering a majority of this new route will be built in North Carolina with a long term goal of connecting to I-140. NCDOT will undoubtably build this route to interstate standards.
Improving travel between the Northeast and Wilmington/Myrtle Beach should be a high priority. Having a single interstate corridor over 200 plus miles with improved travel times over the existing options seems more than logical especially when a large portion of this route exists today.
Quote from: tjcreasy on February 14, 2021, 07:15:45 PM
I don't know if discussing an interstate designation ventures too far into fictional considering a majority of this new route will be built in North Carolina with a long term goal of connecting to I-140. NCDOT will undoubtably build this route to interstate standards.
Improving travel between the Northeast and Wilmington/Myrtle Beach should be a high priority. Having a single interstate corridor over 200 plus miles with improved travel times over the existing options seems more than logical especially when a large portion of this route exists today.
Technically, it's certainly not fictional from SC 9 north past this particular study area all the way to the junction of US 17 and NC 211 at Supply, since after 1995 it's been part of the longstanding I-74/HPC #5 alignment. Although that route is supposed to turn inland along NC 211, there's been a general consensus that a corridor continuing north on US 17 to the I-140 bypass of Wilmington is by far a more useful idea than anything parallel to NC 211, since that routing generally duplicates the I-73 corridor within SC (if
that ever gets built!); a corresponding extension of I-74 all the way along US 74/76 into Wilmington has been posited as the 2nd leg of a Wilmington Interstate server.
But regardless of what happens in the Wilmington area, the study area depicted in the previous post's maps is hardly a fictional undertaking, although any extensions might be considered to be so. But given NC's proclivities toward establishing Interstate corridors, just about anything --especially along US 17 -- could be well within the realm of possibility.
Quote from: sparker on February 15, 2021, 04:37:53 AM
Quote from: tjcreasy on February 14, 2021, 07:15:45 PM
I don't know if discussing an interstate designation ventures too far into fictional considering a majority of this new route will be built in North Carolina with a long term goal of connecting to I-140. NCDOT will undoubtably build this route to interstate standards.
Improving travel between the Northeast and Wilmington/Myrtle Beach should be a high priority. Having a single interstate corridor over 200 plus miles with improved travel times over the existing options seems more than logical especially when a large portion of this route exists today.
A better plan for the Supply area would be a new route a little to the north tying into the existing Bolivia Bypass a mile or two farther north. The Bypass is expressway-grade, rather easy to upgrade to a freeway. This plus the SC 31 extension would create about half of a Myrtle Beach to Wilmington freeway connection.
Technically, it's certainly not fictional from SC 9 north past this particular study area all the way to the junction of US 17 and NC 211 at Supply, since after 1995 it's been part of the longstanding I-74/HPC #5 alignment. Although that route is supposed to turn inland along NC 211, there's been a general consensus that a corridor continuing north on US 17 to the I-140 bypass of Wilmington is by far a more useful idea than anything parallel to NC 211, since that routing generally duplicates the I-73 corridor within SC (if that ever gets built!); a corresponding extension of I-74 all the way along US 74/76 into Wilmington has been posited as the 2nd leg of a Wilmington Interstate server.
But regardless of what happens in the Wilmington area, the study area depicted in the previous post's maps is hardly a fictional undertaking, although any extensions might be considered to be so. But given NC's proclivities toward establishing Interstate corridors, just about anything --especially along US 17 -- could be well within the realm of possibility.
Quote from: wdcrft63 on February 15, 2021, 06:35:41 PM
Quote from: sparker on February 15, 2021, 04:37:53 AM
Quote from: tjcreasy on February 14, 2021, 07:15:45 PM
I don't know if discussing an interstate designation ventures too far into fictional considering a majority of this new route will be built in North Carolina with a long term goal of connecting to I-140. NCDOT will undoubtably build this route to interstate standards.
Improving travel between the Northeast and Wilmington/Myrtle Beach should be a high priority. Having a single interstate corridor over 200 plus miles with improved travel times over the existing options seems more than logical especially when a large portion of this route exists today.
A better plan for the Supply area would be a new route a little to the north tying into the existing Bolivia Bypass a mile or two farther north. The Bypass is expressway-grade, rather easy to upgrade to a freeway. This plus the SC 31 extension would create about half of a Myrtle Beach to Wilmington freeway connection.
Technically, it's certainly not fictional from SC 9 north past this particular study area all the way to the junction of US 17 and NC 211 at Supply, since after 1995 it's been part of the longstanding I-74/HPC #5 alignment. Although that route is supposed to turn inland along NC 211, there's been a general consensus that a corridor continuing north on US 17 to the I-140 bypass of Wilmington is by far a more useful idea than anything parallel to NC 211, since that routing generally duplicates the I-73 corridor within SC (if that ever gets built!); a corresponding extension of I-74 all the way along US 74/76 into Wilmington has been posited as the 2nd leg of a Wilmington Interstate server.
But regardless of what happens in the Wilmington area, the study area depicted in the previous post's maps is hardly a fictional undertaking, although any extensions might be considered to be so. But given NC's proclivities toward establishing Interstate corridors, just about anything --especially along US 17 -- could be well within the realm of possibility.
Quoting?
Is there any chance that a northern extension of the CBP might be canceled, with the northern terminus permanently ending at SC 9? If North and South Carolina can't come to a consensus on what route future Interstate 74 will take from Myrtle Beach to Wilmington, they might just scrap the whole extension plan. I'm not saying that is what is going to happen (I hope it doesn't), but it is possible.
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on February 15, 2021, 10:06:20 PM
Is there any chance that a northern extension of the CBP might be canceled, with the northern terminus permanently ending at SC 9? If North and South Carolina can't come to a consensus on what route future Interstate 74 will take from Myrtle Beach to Wilmington, they might just scrap the whole extension plan. I'm not saying that is what is going to happen (I hope it doesn't), but it is possible.
The CBP extension will likely see development sooner or later if only to serve as relief for the congestion on US 17 between Wilmington and Myrtle Beach, Interstate aspirations notwithstanding. Tourist-related interests in both states see benefit in improving the coastal connection; the tenets heading inland via I-74 and the perennially-postponed I-73 are ancillary to the localized push for an efficient way to move along the coast with, of course, numerous connecting pathways down to the beach and its associated means of separating tourists from their money! The traffic along that section of coast has gotten so bad that, even prior to the COVID situation, it was posing an obstacle to the overall tourist trade (if it's too much of a PITA to reach the beach, a lot of folks won't even try or go elsewhere on the coast). A completed freeway extending from north of Wilmington to south of Myrtle gives the commercialized area what it wants -- enhanced local circulation. Once
that has been achieved (or is in process) attention can be then turned to I-73 and I-74 as "feeders".
Quote from: sprjus4 on February 14, 2021, 06:33:07 PM
Alternatives 1A and 4A seem like the most likely. As for any potential "interstate" designation - we're now getting fictional here - it'd seem most logical to have such a corridor follow up US-17 to meet the proposed I-87 near Williamston, passing through Jacksonville, New Bern, and Washington.
.
Which is another rationale for having a Southern I-89. Consider I-95 to be farther west than it should be and out of the grid. Then you've got 85 - 87 - 89.
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on February 15, 2021, 10:06:20 PM
Is there any chance that a northern extension of the CBP might be canceled, with the northern terminus permanently ending at SC 9? If North and South Carolina can't come to a consensus on what route future Interstate 74 will take from Myrtle Beach to Wilmington, they might just scrap the whole extension plan. I'm not saying that is what is going to happen (I hope it doesn't), but it is possible.
The agreement between North and South Carolina dating back to 2005 is that I-74 or a spur of it will make it to Myrtle Beach. The concept of running I-74 directly to Wilmington and improving US 17 and the Carolina Bays Parkway into a spur of I-74 would certainly fit this agreement.
Quote from: sturmde on February 16, 2021, 05:35:46 PM
Quote from: sprjus4 on February 14, 2021, 06:33:07 PM
Alternatives 1A and 4A seem like the most likely. As for any potential "interstate" designation - we're now getting fictional here - it'd seem most logical to have such a corridor follow up US-17 to meet the proposed I-87 near Williamston, passing through Jacksonville, New Bern, and Washington.
.
Which is another rationale for having a Southern I-89. Consider I-95 to be farther west than it should be and out of the grid. Then you've got 85 - 87 - 89.
Why import another New England/Northeast Interstate designation hundreds of miles south? If NC elects to deploy an Interstate-grade freeway along US 17, Just make all of it,
including the portion of I-87 (gag!) planned along that US route, a southern I-97 (hey, it's all east of I-95) and give the US 64 portion of HPC #13 the even number it should have had to begin with. That number is the only one that would ever stand a snowball's chance in hell of connecting with an existing alignment.
Will SCDOT build their portion or are they trying to wait for NCDOT to start construction on it? This could easily tie onto Hickman Road until it gets extended again when NCDOT is ready to build it.
Quote from: tolbs17 on January 21, 2022, 09:11:25 AM
Will SCDOT build their portion or are they trying to wait for NCDOT to start construction on it? This could easily tie onto Hickman Road until it gets extended again when NCDOT is ready to build it.
it is a joint project. See this website (http://publicinput.com/carolina-bays-pkwy) for lots of good info. The draft EIS is due out in spring 2022. South Carolina is set to start ROW purchases in 2023.
Note that only 1 of the 7 alternate routes touches Hickman Rd on the SC side...
Quote from: Mapmikey on January 21, 2022, 10:28:45 AM
Quote from: tolbs17 on January 21, 2022, 09:11:25 AM
Will SCDOT build their portion or are they trying to wait for NCDOT to start construction on it? This could easily tie onto Hickman Road until it gets extended again when NCDOT is ready to build it.
it is a joint project. See this website (http://publicinput.com/carolina-bays-pkwy) for lots of good info. The draft EIS is due out in spring 2022. South Carolina is set to start ROW purchases in 2023.
Note that only 1 of the 7 alternate routes touches Hickman Rd on the SC side...
Done. And I voted for 1A because it appears to have the least impacts.
Quote from: sprjus4 on November 09, 2019, 09:53:48 PM
Reasonably, the parkway could be extended 2.5 miles southwards to US-17, then upgrade 5 miles of the pre-existing bypass down to the southern terminus to freeway standards, since it's limited-access but has intersections & frontage roads.
(https://i.ibb.co/C5hHLn6/Carolina-Bays-Pkwy.png)
From what I understand, there is no planned extension of SC 31 to US 17.
BUT... if the proposed Southern Evacuation Lifeline (SELL) highway, which is apart of Horry County's RIDE program, gets built, I believe there is a plan to extend SC 31 to meet the SELL highway, which itself would end at US 17.
For background, the SELL highway is a proposed toll highway that would begin at the interchange with US 501 and SC 22 and travel the southern portion of Horry County until it reached it's end at US 17 near Glenns Bay Road, combined with SC 22, it would create a beltway around Myrtle Beach, similar to I-526 in Charleston, but with a larger radius.
Right now I don't hear anyone in Wilmington or in Brunswick County advocating an interstate upgrade from I-140 to the SC line. However, if the CBP is extended interstate quality to Supply, then the issue is bound to come up. The Bolivia Bypass can easily be upgraded to interstate status and that would leave only two relative short pieces north and south of Bolivia to be upgraded or replaced.
Quote from: wdcrft63 on February 15, 2022, 06:24:48 PM
Right now I don't hear anyone in Wilmington or in Brunswick County advocating an interstate upgrade from I-140 to the SC line. However, if the CBP is extended interstate quality to Supply, then the issue is bound to come up. The Bolivia Bypass can easily be upgraded to interstate status and that would leave only two relative short pieces north and south of Bolivia to be upgraded or replaced.
The Carolina Bays Parkway extension would connect to the Shallote bypass only. It's not planned to continue to Supply or Bolivia at this point.
Logically though, once the extension to Shallote is constructed, and with ever increasing traffic volumes on US-17, it's inevitable that remaining segment north to I-140 be upgraded to limited access.