North Carolina wants to extend US 311 to US 58
http://www.ncdot.gov/doh/preconstruct/traffic/safety/Programs/data/route_change/proposed/US_311_Extension_Virginia_111110.pdf (http://www.ncdot.gov/doh/preconstruct/traffic/safety/Programs/data/route_change/proposed/US_311_Extension_Virginia_111110.pdf)
They want to use NC 770 and Virginia SR 863 where US 311 would end just inside the Danville Bypass.
I always thought US 360 should've been extended west like this to replace upper US 311 but this is an interesting development.
Mapmikey
Huh.
Won't be the first case of a U.S. Highway replacing a secondary route (the 1979 extension of US 190 replaced several Farm-to-Market Roads).
Perhaps Virginia will counter-propose extending US 360.
Here's a map (http://www.ncdot.gov/doh/preconstruct/traffic/safety/programs/data/route_change/proposed/US_311extRockinghamCounty_MAP.pdf) of the proposal.
Technically, this would end at BUSINESS US 58.
we would have a Virginia US 311 for the first time since 1934.
good luck getting VA to put up some cutouts.
Quote from: froggie on January 18, 2012, 01:06:10 PM
Here's a map (http://www.ncdot.gov/doh/preconstruct/traffic/safety/programs/data/route_change/proposed/US_311extRockinghamCounty_MAP.pdf) of the proposal.
Don't NCDOT have their own maps they can use? :bonk:
Now NC's extension of US 311 to Eden makes a little more sense.
US 311 makes a 90-degree change-of-direction in Winston-Salem. And the highway has a completely different character on opposite sides of the city: freeway to the southeast, surface highway to the northeast.
So I echo the thought below: I think it would make more sense for VA to counter-propose extending US 360 further southwest from Danville, entering NC and ending in Winston-Salem (at US 52's exit 110B).
US 311 could then be truncated, such that it begins at I-40's exit 196 in Winston-Salem, running southeastward to its current terminus. And isn't that entire segment part of future I-74? So US 311 could be completely decommissioned once that's completed.
Quote from: NE2 on January 18, 2012, 02:15:05 PM
Quote from: froggie on January 18, 2012, 01:06:10 PM
Here's a map (http://www.ncdot.gov/doh/preconstruct/traffic/safety/programs/data/route_change/proposed/US_311extRockinghamCounty_MAP.pdf) of the proposal.
Don't NCDOT have their own maps they can use? :bonk:
worse than that... it's PDF!
I made some interactive Google maps to illustrate the point about extending US 360, rather than extending US 311.
This one shows the current situation, as well as the proposed extension:
http://g.co/maps/4ydge
And this one shows the final result if it were US 360 that got extended, and US 311 got truncated instead:
http://g.co/maps/ggqpm
Better yet, extend US 311 along the remainder of US 360.
Extending US 360 over 311 makes more sense. Yes, 311 is older and would fix the "2 360s" issue, but 360 is over twice as long as 311. Also, there's no NC 360 to renumber, while any US 311 extension into Virginia would probably result in a renumbering of VA/WV 311.
VA and US 13 say hi, as do the previously mentioned VA and US 360.
That's why I said "probably".
Quote from: usends on January 19, 2012, 11:42:47 AM
This one shows the current situation, as well as the proposed extension:
http://g.co/maps/4ydge
One mistake with that. US-360 goes into Downtown Danville to end @ VA-360. It doesn't start/end @ the US-29/US-58 bypass.
Since its NC I'm surprised they don't ask to name the road "Future I-94".
Whole idea seems to serve no purpose at all. The route as outlined would not make much sense as a through highway and would consist of nice, but unspectacular, rural country roads. Other than allowing some NC towns to claim to be "on a US Highway" why bother?
US routes should be major through routes that interstate (as opposed to "Interstate") or significant intrastate traffic would use for long-distance travel. No one in Pikeville, Ky. would use US 460 to get from there to Frankfort or Louisville (where 460 used to run). However, they would use US 23 to get to Ashland or Columbus, US 119 to get to Charleston or Knoxville, or 460 to get to Bluefield or Roanoke.
How much through traffic is there from Winston-Salem to Danville or South Boston?
Not much. Plus US 158/US 29 is a more direct route (by about 8 miles) and has more 4-lane than US 311.
Quote from: rickmastfan67 on January 21, 2012, 12:24:15 AM
Quote from: usends on January 19, 2012, 11:42:47 AM
This one shows the current situation, as well as the proposed extension:
http://g.co/maps/4ydge
One mistake with that. US-360 goes into Downtown Danville to end @ VA-360. It doesn't start/end @ the US-29/US-58 bypass.
True, but all of that last mile-long segment is duplexed with Business 58, so I don't think there would be a need to come up with a new designation for it.
And it still won't connect to US 11 as proposed! I, for one, wouldn't mind having US 360 extended instead and US 311 decommissioned completely, seeing that the southern half is now routed onto I-74.
This is how twisted NCDOT is, honestly, US 311 should be decommissioned completely, especially since eventually I-74 will swallow most of it...
One alternative would be to make it NC 311 and put it on its old route through W-S before it followed I-40 to US 52...
Quote from: jcarte29 on February 03, 2012, 01:44:50 AM
This is how twisted NCDOT is, honestly, US 311 should be decommissioned completely, especially since eventually I-74 will swallow most of it...
One alternative would be to make it NC 311 and put it on its old route through W-S before it followed I-40 to US 52...
NO US routes should be decommissioned!
Quote from: bugo on February 03, 2012, 12:28:26 PM
Quote from: jcarte29 on February 03, 2012, 01:44:50 AM
This is how twisted NCDOT is, honestly, US 311 should be decommissioned completely, especially since eventually I-74 will swallow most of it...
One alternative would be to make it NC 311 and put it on its old route through W-S before it followed I-40 to US 52...
NO US routes should be decommissioned!
I'll trade you US 311 for US 666.
In the pdf which is linked in mapmikey's original post in this thread, there are a few specific DOT engineers mentioned. A couple weeks ago I sent a letter to each of them. Yesterday I received a reply from one of the NCDOT employees. If you wish to view the correspondence, here is a link to the pdf:
http://tinyurl.com/7gsxo3k
It's a 2-page document. The first page is the letter I sent, and the last page is the response from NCDOT.
Well it wasn't NC that initiated the hope for extending the route it came from Virginia and specifically boosters of a new development called MegaPark.
For more:
http://surewhynotnow.blogspot.com/2012/03/some-nc-future-interstate-and-us-route.html
Thanks for the updates about I-73/74 in Randolph County CanesFan27!! Great blog...
One small hitch is that Virginia cannot put SR 863 into its primary system in 2012 unless the state legislature actually does it. The CTB used up nearly all of the 50 miles per year it can legally add to the primary system when it created VA 286, VA 289 and VA 294.
Mapmikey
Can Virginia swap out primary for secondary? I can think of at least two primary routes in southwestern Virginia (VA 78 and VA 352) that could easily be turned into 600-series secondary routes if needed to gain mileage for the primary system. Neither are through connecting routes and actually lead into dead-end secondary highways.
Quote from: bugo on February 03, 2012, 12:28:26 PM
Quote from: jcarte29 on February 03, 2012, 01:44:50 AM
This is how twisted NCDOT is, honestly, US 311 should be decommissioned completely, especially since eventually I-74 will swallow most of it...
One alternative would be to make it NC 311 and put it on its old route through W-S before it followed I-40 to US 52...
NO US routes should be decommissioned!
Try telling that to the states out west.
Quote from: hbelkins on April 10, 2012, 10:59:37 AM
Can Virginia swap out primary for secondary? I can think of at least two primary routes in southwestern Virginia (VA 78 and VA 352) that could easily be turned into 600-series secondary routes if needed to gain mileage for the primary system. Neither are through connecting routes and actually lead into dead-end secondary highways.
The CTB can decommission 150 miles of primary mileage per year. However, I don't think they can use this to gain miles above the 50 mile limit of adding primary mileage. IIRC, throughout the 1940s-50s (which is how far back these two laws go), they always stayed below both...some years they would decommission right at 150 miles and add nearly 50. But if they needed to have more primary they still waited until the following year to do it.
I also believe the interstate system is exempt from the adding limitations and there is since 1980 a separate urban mileage law (where most of the 4xx routes came from) used in the independent cities.
Mapmikey
AASHTO SCOH's Special Committee on US Route Numbering (USRN) has released the agenda for their spring meeting next week in Traverse City, MI. The report is available here: http://www.transportation.org/sites/route/docs/Agenda%20USRN%20SM2012%20May%2018.pdf (http://www.transportation.org/sites/route/docs/Agenda%20USRN%20SM2012%20May%2018.pdf)
The report has a summary of this year's agenda starting on page 11. Under NC there is no listing for the US 311 extension, just an application for realignments to Bike Route 1. There are no applications listed from VA. Since, from the NCDOT correspondence posted on their route change site, NC was prepared to submit their materials to AASHTO, it appears that VADOT wasn't able to submit any materials in time or both states decided they were not ready to submit an application yet.
NCDOT will have to submit an application regarding the routing of 311 along the finished I-74 freeway route to US 220 which is to open this fall. Maybe they are considering the option of decommissioning the route at that time, and thus not applying to extend a route that won't exist in the future.
Virginia is taking up the subject of US 311 extension in this month's CTB workshop.
ppt available: http://www.ctb.virginia.gov/resources/2012/june/pre/CTB_Workshop_Meeting_June_Agenda.pdf (http://www.ctb.virginia.gov/resources/2012/june/pre/CTB_Workshop_Meeting_June_Agenda.pdf)
They appear to be in favor of doing this. They can't put SR 863 into the primary system until FY 2013 which starts July 1.
They also will talk about what to do with current VA 311.
My question is whether they would assign SR 863 as a VA 51 extension pending AASHTO approval of the US-designation.
Mapmikey
The audio of this workshop is available online: http://www.ctb.virginia.gov/podcasts/June2012CTBWorkshopWEB.mp3
It's about 5 hours long, but if anyone's interested in skipping to the presentation on the topic of US 311, go to about 3:44. This agenda item lasts for about 12 minutes.
One of the items listed in Mr. Hofrichter's powerpoint (which was available online prior to the meeting) was "decide what to do with existing state route 311". So I emailed him a week or two ago, and pointed out that this would not be an issue if Route 863 was designated as U.S. 360 (instead of U.S. 311), and went on to explain what I've already outlined upthread. He sent back a congenial reply, saying the suggestion had merit, and that he had passed it on to the Maintenance Division, which is responsible for actually numbering highways and for preparing requests to AASHTO regarding US route designations. He then pointed out that there is also a state route 360 in VA, and that this sometimes causes confusion for travelers. I replied that extending the US 360 designation could have the added benefit of actually helping this situation, at least on the Danville end. (Currently US 360 enters downtown Danville and connects with VA 360. But if US 360 were extended into North Carolina, it would bypass Danville to the south, and would therefore no longer directly connect with VA 360.)
Anyway, none of these numbering issues were discussed in the actual CTB workshop. There were some mildly interesting comments, with some promoting the merits of a US route designation, while others were of the opinion that the shape of the sign doesn't make any difference. Someone also pointed out the importance of helping out neighboring states with their highway initiatives.
Thoughts about renumbering VA 311 if they stick with the US 311 extension instead of US 360:
Option 1: change VA 311 to US 221 and remove the non-sensical US 221 designation east of Roanoke. US 221 between Bedford and Lynchburg can be VA 291, VA 297, extended VA 128 or VA 210, etc.
Option 2: change VA 311 to VA 18 and renumber VA 18 as VA 42. This would enable VA 42 to eliminate one of its gaps.
Option 3: change VA 311 to an extended VA 116 or VA 419. VA 311 from US 11 to VA 419 would need a new number.
Option 4: recognize (like VA 13) that VA 311 and US 311 are quite far apart and unlikely to cause confusion.
Troll option: renumber as an extension of WV 92, then renumber VA 92 as VA 311 or VA 360
Other sensible ideas?
Mapmikey
Option 5: renumber to SR 73 as an extension of I-73 :)
It could also simply be renumbered to a number that neither VA nor WV currently use. 167, 248, 317, etc.
Quote from: Mapmikey on June 28, 2012, 06:35:34 AM
Other sensible ideas?
Renumber as Alternate US 220; extend Alt 220 designation west on I-64 (since the WV 311 exit is only a partial exit) to turn around at the US 60/WV 92 White Sulphur Springs exit, then east on I-64 to meet US 220 at Covington.
This would provide the added benefit of having northbound and southbound Alt 220 running concurrently with I-64 west from the existing WV 311 exit to White Sulphur Springs, then east back to the existing WV 311 exit. That would be a true novelty.
QuoteBut if US 360 were extended into North Carolina, it would bypass Danville to the south, and would therefore no longer directly connect with VA 360.)
They'd still intersect at their junction northeast of South Boston, though that'd be alleviated by extending VA 344 along VA 360's routing.
This item appears on the agenda for the upcoming July 18 CTB Meeting:
"4. Action on Transfer of Route 863 in Pittsylvania County, Located in the Lynchburg District, From the Secondary Highway System to the Primary Highway System"
http://www.ctb.virginia.gov/resources/2012/july/CTB_Action_Meeting_July.pdf (http://www.ctb.virginia.gov/resources/2012/july/CTB_Action_Meeting_July.pdf)
Mapmikey