North Carolina

[plain]

Also noticed the inconsistencies of the control cities on both US 52 ( Future I-285) and newly designated I-74 from US 421 in Winston-Salem.   Mounty Airy is used on US 52, but Wytheville is now being used for I-74 from the same route same direction.


Being both US 52 and I-74 converge at Rural Hall to the same freeway, it seems odd to have one signed for one and the other for the other.  Although Wytheville is okay as a destination being its where both I-77 and I-81 intersect, while Mount Airy too is a decent size city to be also used, it should be consistent for both freeways exits.

US-52 goes to Mt. Airy and through the city itself, which makes the control city signage correct. I-74 goes to Wytheville (bypasses Mt. Airy) due to I-77, and I-74 will eventually go through there in the future whenever VA decides to sign it along I-77. So, both control cities are correct. There are no inconsistencies like you mentioned. I'm not sure what you're trying to get yourself into....

Kinda like how on I-295 north of Richmond, I-95 is signed for Washington but US 1 is signed for Ashland. The interstate mostly bypasses the town (though not completely like this NC example) while US 1 goes through almost the middle of it.

[NE2]

Reminder that there's nothing wrong with a control city not being on the route.

[roadman65]

Also noticed the inconsistencies of the control cities on both US 52 ( Future I-285) and newly designated I-74 from US 421 in Winston-Salem.   Mounty Airy is used on US 52, but Wytheville is now being used for I-74 from the same route same direction.


Being both US 52 and I-74 converge at Rural Hall to the same freeway, it seems odd to have one signed for one and the other for the other.  Although Wytheville is okay as a destination being its where both I-77 and I-81 intersect, while Mount Airy too is a decent size city to be also used, it should be consistent for both freeways exits.

US-52 goes to Mt. Airy and through the city itself, which makes the control city signage correct. I-74 goes to Wytheville (bypasses Mt. Airy) due to I-77, and I-74 will eventually go through there in the future whenever VA decides to sign it along I-77. So, both control cities are correct. There are no inconsistencies like you mentioned. I'm not sure what you're trying to get yourself into....

Kinda like how on I-295 north of Richmond, I-95 is signed for Washington but US 1 is signed for Ashland. The interstate mostly bypasses the town (though not completely like this NC example) while US 1 goes through almost the middle of it.

Not exactly because US 1 and I-95 dont come together like US 52 and I-74 do ( or will) but they do become one freeway from Rural Hill to Mount Airy.



Strider Im not saying neither are wrong ( read the post) and dont jump to conclusions like people do on Social Media when someone posts something and another person takes it out of context.  Im just saying it seens inconsistent for two roads eventually on the same freeway.


Like I said ( which you didnt read) Wytheville is okay because I-77 intersects I-81.  FYI, I-74 defaults into I-77 that goes there.  Evidence, is any map.  US 52 goes to Mount Airy and that's okay too ( as hinted in my post before).

Hold your horses please.  Even if I did disagree with the control cities it doesn't mean for you to lose your temper over something so petty. 

Goodness sake, its not the end of the world!

[bob7374]

Also noticed the inconsistencies of the control cities on both US 52 ( Future I-285) and newly designated I-74 from US 421 in Winston-Salem.   Mounty Airy is used on US 52, but Wytheville is now being used for I-74 from the same route same direction.


Being both US 52 and I-74 converge at Rural Hall to the same freeway, it seems odd to have one signed for one and the other for the other.  Although Wytheville is okay as a destination being its where both I-77 and I-81 intersect, while Mount Airy too is a decent size city to be also used, it should be consistent for both freeways exits.

US-52 goes to Mt. Airy and through the city itself, which makes the control city signage correct. I-74 goes to Wytheville (bypasses Mt. Airy) due to I-77, and I-74 will eventually go through there in the future whenever VA decides to sign it along I-77. So, both control cities are correct. There are no inconsistencies like you mentioned. I'm not sure what you're trying to get yourself into....

Kinda like how on I-295 north of Richmond, I-95 is signed for Washington but US 1 is signed for Ashland. The interstate mostly bypasses the town (though not completely like this NC example) while US 1 goes through almost the middle of it.

Not exactly because US 1 and I-95 dont come together like US 52 and I-74 do ( or will) but they do become one freeway from Rural Hill to Mount Airy.



Strider Im not saying neither are wrong ( read the post) and dont jump to conclusions like people do on Social Media when someone posts something and another person takes it out of context.  Im just saying it seens inconsistent for two roads eventually on the same freeway.


Like I said ( which you didnt read) Wytheville is okay because I-77 intersects I-81.  FYI, I-74 defaults into I-77 that goes there.  Evidence, is any map.  US 52 goes to Mount Airy and that's okay too ( as hinted in my post before).

Hold your horses please.  Even if I did disagree with the control cities it doesn't mean for you to lose your temper over something so petty. 

Goodness sake, its not the end of the world!

Both cities are used when they meet at the end of the Beltway:

[yadkinv]

The sign to W-S will be replaced when I 74 to W-S is up to standard with W-S I 74 East and US 52 South (the latter numbering not to convention, of course)

[roadman65]

Also noticed the inconsistencies of the control cities on both US 52 ( Future I-285) and newly designated I-74 from US 421 in Winston-Salem.   Mounty Airy is used on US 52, but Wytheville is now being used for I-74 from the same route same direction.


Being both US 52 and I-74 converge at Rural Hall to the same freeway, it seems odd to have one signed for one and the other for the other.  Although Wytheville is okay as a destination being its where both I-77 and I-81 intersect, while Mount Airy too is a decent size city to be also used, it should be consistent for both freeways exits.

US-52 goes to Mt. Airy and through the city itself, which makes the control city signage correct. I-74 goes to Wytheville (bypasses Mt. Airy) due to I-77, and I-74 will eventually go through there in the future whenever VA decides to sign it along I-77. So, both control cities are correct. There are no inconsistencies like you mentioned. I'm not sure what you're trying to get yourself into....

Kinda like how on I-295 north of Richmond, I-95 is signed for Washington but US 1 is signed for Ashland. The interstate mostly bypasses the town (though not completely like this NC example) while US 1 goes through almost the middle of it.

Not exactly because US 1 and I-95 dont come together like US 52 and I-74 do ( or will) but they do become one freeway from Rural Hill to Mount Airy.



Strider Im not saying neither are wrong ( read the post) and dont jump to conclusions like people do on Social Media when someone posts something and another person takes it out of context.  Im just saying it seens inconsistent for two roads eventually on the same freeway.


Like I said ( which you didnt read) Wytheville is okay because I-77 intersects I-81.  FYI, I-74 defaults into I-77 that goes there.  Evidence, is any map.  US 52 goes to Mount Airy and that's okay too ( as hinted in my post before).

Hold your horses please.  Even if I did disagree with the control cities it doesn't mean for you to lose your temper over something so petty. 

Goodness sake, its not the end of the world!

Both cities are used when they meet at the end of the Beltway:

Im not upset at this.  Just pointing out an observation.  If I was upset I'd contact NCDOT like one user did for the state using I-87 as the Raleigh to Norfolk interstate instead of another number.

That is the issue with a few trolls on here, they get so bent out of shape they instigate like the ones who got upset over Beltway on the Key Bridge incident that got that thread locked by the administrator and not by the moderator.

There are a lot of other more important things to worry about than a petty opinion that means nothing.   This isn't second grade.  Just a discussion board that people try to converse is the nature here. 

My opinion doesn't mean anything as the signs will be as they are.   Just as my opinion is just that!  Plus, I actually think its kind of neat just as the three ramps to I-40 EB in Asheville all using different control cities.  The two ends of I-240 use Hickory on the west end while the east end uses Statesville.  Then the local roadway from Exit 55 connecting to Tunnel Road uses Black Mountain.

Just because I disagree with something dont mean I lose sleep over it. 

[Dirt Roads]

Both cities are used when they meet at the end of the Beltway:

The sign to W-S will be replaced when I 74 to W-S is up to standard with W-S I 74 East and US 52 South (the latter numbering not to convention, of course)

I'm not sure how the Western Beltway will connect from here, but until then the sign for US-52 South/Winston-Salem is permanent.  I can't imagine that NCDOT will ever get serious about extending I-285 through Winston-Salem any time in my lifelime.

[sturmde]

I'm not sure how the Western Beltway will connect from here, but until then the sign for US-52 South/Winston-Salem is permanent.  I can't imagine that NCDOT will ever get serious about extending I-285 through Winston-Salem any time in my lifelime.

Future "I-274" will exit along with the current ramp to US 52 S, and there will be a Y-fork with US 52 S taking the loop ramp to the right, and the lanes of 274 continuing along...
https://maps.app.goo.gl/QhhjhPHboM1K8fDj9

That exit also is the feeder to take the Bethania Station-Rural Hall exit for NC 65.  It's a dysfunction junction for sure.  Only when I-74 is finally able to take over 52 north from here is there a shot at I-285 extended... because at the same time, one wild idea is that NC would move US 52 over to take the place of US 601 between I-85 and Mount Airy.  Then the need to sign 52 alongside 85, 285, and 74 would be unneeded.  The spur into Mount Airy could become a Business Spur for 74, or perhaps a great throwback to have it signed as NC 752.

[Strider]

Also noticed the inconsistencies of the control cities on both US 52 ( Future I-285) and newly designated I-74 from US 421 in Winston-Salem.   Mounty Airy is used on US 52, but Wytheville is now being used for I-74 from the same route same direction.


Being both US 52 and I-74 converge at Rural Hall to the same freeway, it seems odd to have one signed for one and the other for the other.  Although Wytheville is okay as a destination being its where both I-77 and I-81 intersect, while Mount Airy too is a decent size city to be also used, it should be consistent for both freeways exits.

US-52 goes to Mt. Airy and through the city itself, which makes the control city signage correct. I-74 goes to Wytheville (bypasses Mt. Airy) due to I-77, and I-74 will eventually go through there in the future whenever VA decides to sign it along I-77. So, both control cities are correct. There are no inconsistencies like you mentioned. I'm not sure what you're trying to get yourself into....

Kinda like how on I-295 north of Richmond, I-95 is signed for Washington but US 1 is signed for Ashland. The interstate mostly bypasses the town (though not completely like this NC example) while US 1 goes through almost the middle of it.

Not exactly because US 1 and I-95 dont come together like US 52 and I-74 do ( or will) but they do become one freeway from Rural Hill to Mount Airy.



Strider Im not saying neither are wrong ( read the post) and dont jump to conclusions like people do on Social Media when someone posts something and another person takes it out of context.  Im just saying it seens inconsistent for two roads eventually on the same freeway.


Like I said ( which you didnt read) Wytheville is okay because I-77 intersects I-81.  FYI, I-74 defaults into I-77 that goes there.  Evidence, is any map.  US 52 goes to Mount Airy and that's okay too ( as hinted in my post before).

Hold your horses please.  Even if I did disagree with the control cities it doesn't mean for you to lose your temper over something so petty. 

Goodness sake, its not the end of the world!

You "asked". I responded. That was all it is. Nothing more, nothing less. Don't take it too personal. Moving on.

[bob7374]

I'm not sure how the Western Beltway will connect from here, but until then the sign for US-52 South/Winston-Salem is permanent.  I can't imagine that NCDOT will ever get serious about extending I-285 through Winston-Salem any time in my lifelime.

Future "I-274" will exit along with the current ramp to US 52 S, and there will be a Y-fork with US 52 S taking the loop ramp to the right, and the lanes of 274 continuing along...
https://maps.app.goo.gl/QhhjhPHboM1K8fDj9

That exit also is the feeder to take the Bethania Station-Rural Hall exit for NC 65.  It's a dysfunction junction for sure.  Only when I-74 is finally able to take over 52 north from here is there a shot at I-285 extended... because at the same time, one wild idea is that NC would move US 52 over to take the place of US 601 between I-85 and Mount Airy.  Then the need to sign 52 alongside 85, 285, and 74 would be unneeded.  The spur into Mount Airy could become a Business Spur for 74, or perhaps a great throwback to have it signed as NC 752.

The future signage at the NC 66 exit on I-74 West:

[Rothman]

Ugh...another main thread derailed by control city blabber.

*reaches for his revolver*

[ElishaGOtis]

Ok, to get this thread a bit more under control... 

...this is happening:

https://www.ncdot.gov/divisions/ferry/Pages/ferry-tolls.aspx

All currently-free ferries in NC will become tolled on 1/1/2027. This was due to a legislative mandate and not due to NCDOT action (I think).

Anyone want to recommend NC QuickPass as a payment method in the survey?

[brian440i]

Regarding the Comment of US52 to I-285 in Winston Salem:
STIP Includes: HP-0027  for Preliminary Engineering at 337 Million  North of Salem Parkway till Airport Exit.

Q: Has the NC DOT Division considered shutting down US52 Completely to Modernize/Update to Interstate Standards once I-74 is Opened? 

Winston Salem was so successful at reducing the timeline/cost when they Modernized Salem Parkway (Old i40) by shutting down the Route Completely.

I believe Modernizing South of Salem Parkway and North of I-40  was under "discussion" for closing the Route Completely to Modernize.  But the Southern Portion will have I-74 for Thru Traffic and Peters Creek Parkway for City Center Traffic or Detour to Salem Parkway from I74 and I40.

It seems Rare for complete closure but Winston Salem has proven it a successful model for road improvement. 

PS (Complete Closure Northbound Makes Sense to me) Southbound not so much... Routing truck on I-74 to I-40W to the Cloverleaf Exit South onto I-285 would bottle neck...  I would have been in favor on modernizing US52/I40 and Southern Portion before Northern Section but question stands based on STIP that Northern portion of US52 is first)

[sprjus4]

It seems Rare for complete closure but Winston Salem has proven it a successful model for road improvement. 

Indianapolis says hello.

[yadkinv]

I'm reasonably sure it was announced recently that preliminary work on I 285 along US 52 in W-S will begin soon with bridge replacement and 52 will be closed was the indication for that action.

[Dirt Roads]

Regarding the Comment of US52 to I-285 in Winston Salem:
STIP Includes: HP-0027  for Preliminary Engineering at 337 Million  North of Salem Parkway till Airport Exit.

Q: Has the NC DOT Division considered shutting down US52 Completely to Modernize/Update to Interstate Standards once I-74 is Opened? 

Winston Salem was so successful at reducing the timeline/cost when they Modernized Salem Parkway (Old i40) by shutting down the Route Completely.

I believe Modernizing South of Salem Parkway and North of I-40  was under "discussion" for closing the Route Completely to Modernize.  But the Southern Portion will have I-74 for Thru Traffic and Peters Creek Parkway for City Center Traffic or Detour to Salem Parkway from I74 and I40.

It seems Rare for complete closure but Winston Salem has proven it a successful model for road improvement. 

PS (Complete Closure Northbound Makes Sense to me) Southbound not so much... Routing truck on I-74 to I-40W to the Cloverleaf Exit South onto I-285 would bottle neck...  I would have been in favor on modernizing US52/I40 and Southern Portion before Northern Section but question stands based on STIP that Northern portion of US52 is first)

Keep in mind that much of the Salem Parkway was not upgraded to Interstate standards.  A significant portion of the US-52 route through Winston-Salem is almost as tight as Green-40 was (particularly the section south of Old Salem all the way down to the "new" I-40). 

It is likely that the Beltway (NC-74/I-74) has already significantly dropped the traffic volume on US-52 (most recent data from NCDOT is from 2023).  No doubt that NCDOT can upgrade it to Interstate standards, but it is going to be a hard sell in the short term (ergo, what's left of my lifetime).

[bob7374]

Regarding the Comment of US52 to I-285 in Winston Salem:
STIP Includes: HP-0027  for Preliminary Engineering at 337 Million  North of Salem Parkway till Airport Exit.

Q: Has the NC DOT Division considered shutting down US52 Completely to Modernize/Update to Interstate Standards once I-74 is Opened? 

Winston Salem was so successful at reducing the timeline/cost when they Modernized Salem Parkway (Old i40) by shutting down the Route Completely.

I believe Modernizing South of Salem Parkway and North of I-40  was under "discussion" for closing the Route Completely to Modernize.  But the Southern Portion will have I-74 for Thru Traffic and Peters Creek Parkway for City Center Traffic or Detour to Salem Parkway from I74 and I40.

It seems Rare for complete closure but Winston Salem has proven it a successful model for road improvement. 

PS (Complete Closure Northbound Makes Sense to me) Southbound not so much... Routing truck on I-74 to I-40W to the Cloverleaf Exit South onto I-285 would bottle neck...  I would have been in favor on modernizing US52/I40 and Southern Portion before Northern Section but question stands based on STIP that Northern portion of US52 is first)

Keep in mind that much of the Salem Parkway was not upgraded to Interstate standards.  A significant portion of the US-52 route through Winston-Salem is almost as tight as Green-40 was (particularly the section south of Old Salem all the way down to the "new" I-40). 

It is likely that the Beltway (NC-74/I-74) has already significantly dropped the traffic volume on US-52 (most recent data from NCDOT is from 2023).  No doubt that NCDOT can upgrade it to Interstate standards, but it is going to be a hard sell in the short term (ergo, what's left of my lifetime).

NCDOT includes 3 projects for Future I-285 in its Prioritization 8.0 preliminary project listing for the 2028-2037 STIP: H190715-Exit 105 Clemmonsville Road to Exit 109 US 421/Salem Parkway, H190716-Exit 109 US 421 Salem Parkway to Exit 112 Akron Drive and H190218-Exit 112 Akron Drive to the Exit 118 NC 65.  They all would widen US 52 to 3 lanes in each direction and upgrade the road to Interstate standards. All these projects were brought up before for possible inclusion in the 2026-2035 STIP but did not make the cut.

[sprjus4]

I'm curious to know the traffic volumes on US-52 now that I-74 is complete to US-421 (former I-40 Business), and especially once it's complete all the way around the east side... will it warrant a 6 lane widening?

Certainly a reconstruction and modernization (ramp modifications, bridge rehabilitations & replacements, etc.) like US-421 had, but widening?

The interchanges with US-421 and I-40 with US-52 certainly could use some work (third lane through, C/D lanes, flyover?)... certainly more warranted than some of the flyovers being built on the new I-74 alignment.

[roadman65]

I saw that I-95 at the southend of I-295 the freeway is eight lanes there.  I assume its the goal to eight lane all of I-95 even in Robeson County.

Too bad SCDOT dont think proactively as they are just getting to six laning I-95 in Jasper County, SC.

I also saw on GSV the new Exit 41 NB guides eliminating Fayetteville as a second control city leaving only Hope Mills are now featured on Google Maps.

[jdunlop]

I saw that I-95 at the southend of I-295 the freeway is eight lanes there.  I assume its the goal to eight lane all of I-95 even in Robeson County.

Too bad SCDOT dont think proactively as they are just getting to six laning I-95 in Jasper County, SC.

I also saw on GSV the new Exit 41 NB guides eliminating Fayetteville as a second control city leaving only Hope Mills are now featured on Google Maps.

Drove 95 from I-40 to Port Canaveral last week.  There's four projects in NC to widen I-95 to eight lanes, one of which (miles ~71-56) is done.  Second project is I-40 south to mile 71, then 40-22, and 22-11. 

Only real traffic issues I had were in NC, both around the mile 70 mark.  SB, I was early, and the road was closed overnight for construction, and only opened just after I went on the detour over to US 301.  NB, a crash in roughly the same place cost me time as all lanes were closed, and I also detoured over to 301 along with just about every 18 wheeler out there.  I did hit a military convoy in SC that slowed me down for about 20 miles.

Some of the widening around mile 40 was done with the I-295 project, as you noted.  No funded projects yet that I'm aware of to widen from four to eight between 40 and 56, although feasibility projects have been done to identify what needs to be done, and an estimated cost. 

Likewise, a feasibility project was done for the section down to the SC line.  Both feasibility projects looked at both six and eight lanes, but no funded projects there yet either.  I would guess that the Fayetteville section will be eight lanes.  (Relatively easy project, I don't remember any bridges or interchanges that needed any significant modifications/replacement.)  I could see either six or eight for the southernmost section, as I don't think SC will widen to eight, and changing from four to three at I-74 is a better place for the lane drop.  Also relatively easy other than the interchange at the border, which would likely be reconfigured.

[Dirt Roads]

I saw that I-95 at the southend of I-295 the freeway is eight lanes there.  I assume its the goal to eight lane all of I-95 even in Robeson County.

Too bad SCDOT dont think proactively as they are just getting to six laning I-95 in Jasper County, SC.

I also saw on GSV the new Exit 41 NB guides eliminating Fayetteville as a second control city leaving only Hope Mills are now featured on Google Maps.

Drove 95 from I-40 to Port Canaveral last week.  There's four projects in NC to widen I-95 to eight lanes, one of which (miles ~71-56) is done.  Second project is I-40 south to mile 71, then 40-22, and 22-11. 

Only real traffic issues I had were in NC, both around the mile 70 mark.  SB, I was early, and the road was closed overnight for construction, and only opened just after I went on the detour over to US 301.  NB, a crash in roughly the same place cost me time as all lanes were closed, and I also detoured over to 301 along with just about every 18 wheeler out there.  I did hit a military convoy in SC that slowed me down for about 20 miles.

Some of the widening around mile 40 was done with the I-295 project, as you noted.  No funded projects yet that I'm aware of to widen from four to eight between 40 and 56, although feasibility projects have been done to identify what needs to be done, and an estimated cost. 

Likewise, a feasibility project was done for the section down to the SC line.  Both feasibility projects looked at both six and eight lanes, but no funded projects there yet either.  I would guess that the Fayetteville section will be eight lanes.  (Relatively easy project, I don't remember any bridges or interchanges that needed any significant modifications/replacement.)  I could see either six or eight for the southernmost section, as I don't think SC will widen to eight, and changing from four to three at I-74 is a better place for the lane drop.  Also relatively easy other than the interchange at the border, which would likely be reconfigured.

South of Fayetteville on I-95, most of the original overpasses were narrow and had low clearances with posted bypasses.  Starting in the late-1990s, NCDOT began systematically replacing them.  I'm pretty sure that they had all been replaced when I last drove that stretch back around 2013.

For the record, there were also Federal assistance projects to raise clearances on the railroads back in the same timeframe. 

[jdunlop]

I saw that I-95 at the southend of I-295 the freeway is eight lanes there.  I assume its the goal to eight lane all of I-95 even in Robeson County.

Too bad SCDOT dont think proactively as they are just getting to six laning I-95 in Jasper County, SC.

I also saw on GSV the new Exit 41 NB guides eliminating Fayetteville as a second control city leaving only Hope Mills are now featured on Google Maps.

Drove 95 from I-40 to Port Canaveral last week.  There's four projects in NC to widen I-95 to eight lanes, one of which (miles ~71-56) is done.  Second project is I-40 south to mile 71, then 40-22, and 22-11. 

Only real traffic issues I had were in NC, both around the mile 70 mark.  SB, I was early, and the road was closed overnight for construction, and only opened just after I went on the detour over to US 301.  NB, a crash in roughly the same place cost me time as all lanes were closed, and I also detoured over to 301 along with just about every 18 wheeler out there.  I did hit a military convoy in SC that slowed me down for about 20 miles.

Some of the widening around mile 40 was done with the I-295 project, as you noted.  No funded projects yet that I'm aware of to widen from four to eight between 40 and 56, although feasibility projects have been done to identify what needs to be done, and an estimated cost. 

Likewise, a feasibility project was done for the section down to the SC line.  Both feasibility projects looked at both six and eight lanes, but no funded projects there yet either.  I would guess that the Fayetteville section will be eight lanes.  (Relatively easy project, I don't remember any bridges or interchanges that needed any significant modifications/replacement.)  I could see either six or eight for the southernmost section, as I don't think SC will widen to eight, and changing from four to three at I-74 is a better place for the lane drop.  Also relatively easy other than the interchange at the border, which would likely be reconfigured.

South of Fayetteville on I-95, most of the original overpasses were narrow and had low clearances with posted bypasses.  Starting in the late-1990s, NCDOT began systematically replacing them.  I'm pretty sure that they had all been replaced when I last drove that stretch back around 2013.

For the record, there were also Federal assistance projects to raise clearances on the railroads back in the same timeframe. 

The structures in the 40-56 mile stretch around Fayetteville mostly date back to the 1980s/'90s original construction of that section, and are in good shape, and allows for eight lanes under those structures.  The median is wide enough for the future expansion as well. 

There were many of the bridges between I-40 and Fayetteville that were original to the 1950s initial construction.  In the '90s/early '00s there was a move that replaced some bridge spans with narrower beams as a temporary measure to provide some additional clearance, until they could be completely rebuilt with the current/recent projects.

[sprjus4]

That Fayetteville section should be done sooner than later. Even to just six lanes. It seems to me dropping from 4 to 2 lanes in each direction at either end of the bypass will cause a headache... even with some traffic departing into Fayetteville, I imagine most traffic is through - especially on peak weekends.

[roadman65]

I saw that I-95 at the southend of I-295 the freeway is eight lanes there.  I assume its the goal to eight lane all of I-95 even in Robeson County.

Too bad SCDOT dont think proactively as they are just getting to six laning I-95 in Jasper County, SC.

I also saw on GSV the new Exit 41 NB guides eliminating Fayetteville as a second control city leaving only Hope Mills are now featured on Google Maps.

Drove 95 from I-40 to Port Canaveral last week.  There's four projects in NC to widen I-95 to eight lanes, one of which (miles ~71-56) is done.  Second project is I-40 south to mile 71, then 40-22, and 22-11. 

Only real traffic issues I had were in NC, both around the mile 70 mark.  SB, I was early, and the road was closed overnight for construction, and only opened just after I went on the detour over to US 301.  NB, a crash in roughly the same place cost me time as all lanes were closed, and I also detoured over to 301 along with just about every 18 wheeler out there.  I did hit a military convoy in SC that slowed me down for about 20 miles.

Some of the widening around mile 40 was done with the I-295 project, as you noted.  No funded projects yet that I'm aware of to widen from four to eight between 40 and 56, although feasibility projects have been done to identify what needs to be done, and an estimated cost. 

Likewise, a feasibility project was done for the section down to the SC line.  Both feasibility projects looked at both six and eight lanes, but no funded projects there yet either.  I would guess that the Fayetteville section will be eight lanes.  (Relatively easy project, I don't remember any bridges or interchanges that needed any significant modifications/replacement.)  I could see either six or eight for the southernmost section, as I don't think SC will widen to eight, and changing from four to three at I-74 is a better place for the lane drop.  Also relatively easy other than the interchange at the border, which would likely be reconfigured.

No doubt another DDI aa many get on and off there for South of The Border.

[jdunlop]

No doubt another DDI aa many get on and off there for South of The Border.

Volumes aren't remotely close to justifying something like that; SotB is mostly a ghost town now.  (Volumes on 301 on either side of the interchange are less than 4000 AADT.  Ramp AADTs are less than 2000.) 

The main reason to redo the interchange is the awkward geometry.  Similar to what is being rebuilt further north at other 95/301 interchanges (exit 25 specifically and 33), realign 301 to get a 90 degree crossing, and use roundabouts at the ramp intersections for the realignment to a standard diamond.  Probably ~1200' north of the border.  SC can then reduce their cross-section to three lanes on 301.

None of the other three interchanges in this section need anything more than likely pavement rehab.  (I'd build roundabouts at the ramp interchanges for safety, but that's just my normal/standard recommendation for rural low volume interchanges.)

That Fayetteville section should be done sooner than later. Even to just six lanes. It seems to me dropping from 4 to 2 lanes in each direction at either end of the bypass will cause a headache... even with some traffic departing into Fayetteville, I imagine most traffic is through - especially on peak weekends.

The volume on 95 on either side of 295 is less than 50K AADT, so not an immediate need for widening.  I would agree that the Fayetteville section will be widened before the border section.