South Carolina

[NJRoadfan]

There is still a left turn lane there. Kind of defeats the advantage of a jughandle.

[Mapmikey]

There is still a left turn lane there. Kind of defeats the advantage of a jughandle.

That's for traffic coming off the freeway.  They built the jughandle to stop people on US 52-78 from cutting across to the left turn lane, then later doubled the jughandle's length because traffic was backing up onto US 52-78.

Demerits to SCDOT for removing signage telling drivers on US 52-78 to not cross the double lines that separate the freeway lanes until very near the stoplight.

[NE2]

I did a quick export of proposed highways from NCDOT and SCDOT's GIS data: https://www.google.com/maps/d/viewer?mid=1Ln0FvUITN7_M18kVHbm-m3SVr76070k

[Plutonic Panda]

SCDOT completes 4 bridge replacements from the Hurricane Helene Emergency:

[Plutonic Panda]

Ground has broken on the Columbia Ave Corridor Project:

https://aashtojournal.transportation.org/scdot-breaks-ground-on-columbia-ave-corridor-project/

[roadman65]

https://maps.app.goo.gl/oZdowGJLXg22TKL29?g_st=ac

Is this the way to handle lane drops at interchanges by letting it end post exit instead of exit ramp default?

[sprjus4]

https://maps.app.goo.gl/oZdowGJLXg22TKL29?g_st=ac

Is this the way to handle lane drops at interchanges by letting it end post exit instead of exit ramp default?

Well, every situation is different. How much traffic volume in the area is exiting vs. continuing? In this case, you have a rest area coming in just before it, and making this an exit only lane would force all that traffic to change lanes twice to avoid the exit. By extending the lane beyond the exit, you provide more time to smoothly merge.

Also, for a low volume exit, in my opinion I wouldn't want an exit only since everyone would vacate the lane a mile or two before the exit, instead of using all 3 lanes until the merge point.

If it's a higher volume exit, and the highway can adequately handle just 2 lanes beyond it, then an exit only configuration could make sense. Provided there's not a rest area ramp entering immediately before it.

[Great Lakes Roads]

Senate Bill 831, signed into law by Governor Henry McMaster (R), is intended to allow the state to finance, plan, and construct infrastructure more quickly and efficiently. As WCSC News reports, "The new law will dissolve the nine-member S.C. Department of Transportation Commission in January and shift oversight to a single transportation secretary appointed by the governor. The secretary will serve in the governor's Cabinet; a change supporters say will make it clearer who is responsible for the state's roads."

The act also allows construction of tolled express lanes, while existing lanes would remain free. Three areas considered prime "choice lane" candidates are Charleston, Greenville, and the border region near Charlotte, North Carolina.

Charleston: I-26 or I-526
Greenville: I-85
Charlotte region (SC side): I-77

[PColumbus73]

Senate Bill 831, signed into law by Governor Henry McMaster (R), is intended to allow the state to finance, plan, and construct infrastructure more quickly and efficiently. As WCSC News reports, "The new law will dissolve the nine-member S.C. Department of Transportation Commission in January and shift oversight to a single transportation secretary appointed by the governor. The secretary will serve in the governor's Cabinet; a change supporters say will make it clearer who is responsible for the state's roads."

The act also allows construction of tolled express lanes, while existing lanes would remain free. Three areas considered prime "choice lane" candidates are Charleston, Greenville, and the border region near Charlotte, North Carolina.

Charleston: I-26 or I-526
Greenville: I-85
Charlotte region (SC side): I-77

Charleston: I think it would be difficult to add express lanes on I-26 between I-526 and the Ravenel Bridge. Best option would have I-26 express lanes connecting to I-526 express lanes. Express lanes on I-526 might be the most likely as SC is wanting to rebuild the Mark Clark Expressway anyway.

Greenville: I-85 was just rebuilt, would have a hard time justifying new widening there in the near future.

Charlotte: Issue here would be interoperability with NC/Cintra. If I were SCDOT, I wouldn't want to get sucked into a contract that prevents South Carolina from widening adjacent roads. Just by reading some other posts about I-77 Express Lanes north of Charlotte, it sounds like NC got a raw deal.

[WashuOtaku]

Charlotte: Issue here would be interoperability with NC/Cintra. If I were SCDOT, I wouldn't want to get sucked into a contract that prevents South Carolina from widening adjacent roads. Just by reading some other posts about I-77 Express Lanes north of Charlotte, it sounds like NC got a raw deal.

I-77 is already eight lanes to Rock Hill, so it would be questionable of what benefit the toll lanes on I-77 in South Carolina would bring.

[wriddle082]

Charlotte: Issue here would be interoperability with NC/Cintra. If I were SCDOT, I wouldn't want to get sucked into a contract that prevents South Carolina from widening adjacent roads. Just by reading some other posts about I-77 Express Lanes north of Charlotte, it sounds like NC got a raw deal.

I-77 is already eight lanes to Rock Hill, so it would be questionable of what benefit the toll lanes on I-77 in South Carolina would bring.

True, right now the only backups on 77 in SC northbound in the mornings usually begin past Carowinds Blvd., which has heavy merging from two on-ramps and then one lane dropping just over the state line at 485/Westinghouse.  If they extended the second on-ramp over the state line to be an aux/exit only lane, that might help a bit, but you would still have traffic wanting to get over to the left to stay on 77.

Southbound in the afternoons, same deal.  Backup from heavy 485 traffic merging onto 77.  Make it so the full two-lane off-ramp from 485 is added to 77, then drop the rightmost lane at Carowinds Blvd.

One railroad overpass may need to be rebuilt to make room, and it would require cooperation from both states to get that done.

[sprjus4]

Charlotte: Issue here would be interoperability with NC/Cintra. If I were SCDOT, I wouldn't want to get sucked into a contract that prevents South Carolina from widening adjacent roads. Just by reading some other posts about I-77 Express Lanes north of Charlotte, it sounds like NC got a raw deal.

I-77 is already eight lanes to Rock Hill, so it would be questionable of what benefit the toll lanes on I-77 in South Carolina would bring.

Does that part of I-77 even have congestion issues?

Also, with regards to NC I-77 and Cintra, are they also going to operate the proposed I-77 express lanes south of "uptown" Charlotte? I would've guessed that after the mess that happened with the current lanes, NCDOT was taking over any future express lanes projects, like they are with the I-485 lanes.

[wriddle082]

Charlotte: Issue here would be interoperability with NC/Cintra. If I were SCDOT, I wouldn't want to get sucked into a contract that prevents South Carolina from widening adjacent roads. Just by reading some other posts about I-77 Express Lanes north of Charlotte, it sounds like NC got a raw deal.

I-77 is already eight lanes to Rock Hill, so it would be questionable of what benefit the toll lanes on I-77 in South Carolina would bring.

Does that part of I-77 even have congestion issues?

Also, with regards to NC I-77 and Cintra, are they also going to operate the proposed I-77 express lanes south of "uptown" Charlotte? I would've guessed that after the mess that happened with the current lanes, NCDOT was taking over any future express lanes projects, like they are with the I-485 lanes.

I'm surprised no one else has mentioned anything in either the Charlotte or North Carolina threads...

The Charlotte City Council has rejected NCDOT's proposal with Cintra to construct the I-77 South Express Lanes, and directed their regional transportation board member to oppose it, citing further destruction of neighborhoods that were originally separated by I-77's original construction, as well as the aforementioned raw deal that NCDOT made with Cintra for the I-77 North Express Lanes.

Several news articles about it and the legislative aftermath, where the NC General Assembly is requiring Charlotte and neighboring cities to repay engineering costs to NCDOT (below is one).

https://www.qcnews.com/charlotte/charlotte-leaders-withdraw-support-of-i-77-expansion-project/

[I-55]

Charlotte: Issue here would be interoperability with NC/Cintra. If I were SCDOT, I wouldn't want to get sucked into a contract that prevents South Carolina from widening adjacent roads. Just by reading some other posts about I-77 Express Lanes north of Charlotte, it sounds like NC got a raw deal.

I-77 is already eight lanes to Rock Hill, so it would be questionable of what benefit the toll lanes on I-77 in South Carolina would bring.

Does that part of I-77 even have congestion issues?

Also, with regards to NC I-77 and Cintra, are they also going to operate the proposed I-77 express lanes south of "uptown" Charlotte? I would've guessed that after the mess that happened with the current lanes, NCDOT was taking over any future express lanes projects, like they are with the I-485 lanes.

I'm surprised no one else has mentioned anything in either the Charlotte or North Carolina threads...

The Charlotte City Council has rejected NCDOT's proposal with Cintra to construct the I-77 South Express Lanes, and directed their regional transportation board member to oppose it, citing further destruction of neighborhoods that were originally separated by I-77's original construction, as well as the aforementioned raw deal that NCDOT made with Cintra for the I-77 North Express Lanes.

Several news articles about it and the legislative aftermath, where the NC General Assembly is requiring Charlotte and neighboring cities to repay engineering costs to NCDOT (below is one).

https://www.qcnews.com/charlotte/charlotte-leaders-withdraw-support-of-i-77-expansion-project/

Regardless of whether NC builds the toll lanes south of Charlotte, there is no need for SC to add any lanes of their own. I-77 south of Carowinds Blvd sees 135,000 AADT. This is well within the serviceability of an 8-lane urban interstate. South of Cherry Rd (northern Rock Hill exit), the traffic drops below 90k AADT, which would be fine even for a 6-lane interstate.

SC would have to build elevated lanes which would be prohibitively expensive. There's 9 miles between Cherry Rd and the NC line. SC is in the middle of a massive interchange project at SC 160 that I don't think they'll want to modify again for express lanes. Realistically, the only interchanges could be at Cherry Rd (tandem parclos with C/D system) and Carowinds Blvd. South of Carowinds, there are no problems. No need to build express lanes at a 10-figure price tag which would likely never see enough volume to pay off within 100 years. I wouldn't revisit this idea unless York County doubles its population. The express lane issue is strictly an NC problem until then.


As for NC, Charlotte is right to be worried about the Cintra agreement. As for their other concerns: any improvements to I-77 will take land, though it's not going to be to the extent the city seems to make it out to be. Much of the area along 77 is not residential, and there seems to be adequate land to add lanes with minimal disturbances.