AARoads Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length

Author Topic: North Carolina  (Read 436739 times)

WashuOtaku

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 577
  • Location: North Carolina
  • Last Login: June 19, 2019, 08:05:34 PM
Re: North Carolina
« Reply #2650 on: June 04, 2019, 09:40:10 AM »

At the AASHTO 2019 Spring Meeting, two proposals were submitted for NCDOT, which were subsequently approved. Link to Final Report.
  • Establishment of "Future I-274" in Winston-Salem, along the western segment of the Winston-Salem Beltway, on paper identified as NC 452.
  • Establishment of "Future I-285" in Winston-Salem, along US 52 from current terminus to Future I-74/I-274 interchange.
Hope you all are excited for more interstates.
Logged

LM117

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1878
  • Age: 30
  • Location: Danville, VA 👎
  • Last Login: June 24, 2019, 08:33:32 PM
Re: North Carolina
« Reply #2651 on: June 04, 2019, 11:57:33 AM »

At the AASHTO 2019 Spring Meeting, two proposals were submitted for NCDOT, which were subsequently approved. Link to Final Report.
  • Establishment of "Future I-274" in Winston-Salem, along the western segment of the Winston-Salem Beltway, on paper identified as NC 452.
  • Establishment of "Future I-285" in Winston-Salem, along US 52 from current terminus to Future I-74/I-274 interchange.
Hope you all are excited for more interstates.

No complaints from me. They make perfect sense.
Logged
ďI donít know whether to wind my ass or scratch my watch!Ē - Jim Cornette

jcarte29

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 296
  • Location: Charlotte, NC
  • Last Login: June 24, 2019, 10:52:38 AM
Re: North Carolina
« Reply #2652 on: June 04, 2019, 11:59:39 AM »

At the AASHTO 2019 Spring Meeting, two proposals were submitted for NCDOT, which were subsequently approved. Link to Final Report.
  • Establishment of "Future I-274" in Winston-Salem, along the western segment of the Winston-Salem Beltway, on paper identified as NC 452.
  • Establishment of "Future I-285" in Winston-Salem, along US 52 from current terminus to Future I-74/I-274 interchange.
Hope you all are excited for more interstates.


It only makes sense on both proposals, western leg is still a couple decades from completion tho. I've always thought US 52 through center city deserved upgrading and promotion to interstate. Only my opinion though. Glad both are paper official.
Logged
Interstates I've driven on (Complete and/or partial, no particular order)
------------------
40, 85, 95, 77, 277(NC), 485(NC), 440(NC), 540(NC), 795(NC), 140(NC), 73, 74, 840(NC), 26, 20, 75, 285(GA), 81, 64, 71, 275(OH), 465(IN), 65, 264(VA), 240(NC), 295(VA), 526(SC), 985(GA), 395(FL), 195(FL)

mvak36

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 723
  • 2016 WS champs!!!!

  • Last Login: June 24, 2019, 08:34:32 PM
Re: North Carolina
« Reply #2653 on: June 04, 2019, 01:13:13 PM »

At the AASHTO 2019 Spring Meeting, two proposals were submitted for NCDOT, which were subsequently approved. Link to Final Report.
  • Establishment of "Future I-274" in Winston-Salem, along the western segment of the Winston-Salem Beltway, on paper identified as NC 452.
  • Establishment of "Future I-285" in Winston-Salem, along US 52 from current terminus to Future I-74/I-274 interchange.
Hope you all are excited for more interstates.

I was definitely surprised by the I-285 application. I was wondering if they would ever request the extension to I-74. Will be interesting to see when they actually finish both of these interstates. It seems like 274 will probably be completed first since it's programmed in the STIP, but that could always change.
Logged
Counties: Counties visited
Travel Mapping: Summary

froggie

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 10522
  • Location: Greensboro, VT
  • Last Login: June 24, 2019, 04:06:07 PM
    • Froggie's Place
Re: North Carolina
« Reply #2654 on: June 04, 2019, 02:56:30 PM »

^ That is the "extension to I-74".  Where "I-285" will meet "I-274" is the same location it will meet I-74.  I-74 is planned to follow the eastern side of the Winston-Salem Beltway.
Logged

The Ghostbuster

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2179
  • Age: 34
  • Location: Madison, WI
  • Last Login: June 22, 2019, 03:42:10 PM
Re: North Carolina
« Reply #2655 on: June 04, 2019, 03:49:55 PM »

I think future Interstate 274 (if approved) should only go from Interstate 40 to Future Interstates 74 and 285. The spur from US 158 to Interstate 40 should have a different designation, such as NC 274.
Logged

mvak36

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 723
  • 2016 WS champs!!!!

  • Last Login: June 24, 2019, 08:34:32 PM
Re: North Carolina
« Reply #2656 on: June 04, 2019, 03:53:01 PM »

^ That is the "extension to I-74".  Where "I-285" will meet "I-274" is the same location it will meet I-74.  I-74 is planned to follow the eastern side of the Winston-Salem Beltway.

Sorry I meant it as extension from the current terminus of I-285 to the I-74/I-274 junction. Bad wording on my part. :pan:
Logged
Counties: Counties visited
Travel Mapping: Summary

WashuOtaku

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 577
  • Location: North Carolina
  • Last Login: June 19, 2019, 08:05:34 PM
Re: North Carolina
« Reply #2657 on: June 04, 2019, 04:30:50 PM »

I think future Interstate 274 (if approved) should only go from Interstate 40 to Future Interstates 74 and 285. The spur from US 158 to Interstate 40 should have a different designation, such as NC 274.

I do not know why you said "if approved," it is approved.  :-/
Logged

LM117

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1878
  • Age: 30
  • Location: Danville, VA 👎
  • Last Login: June 24, 2019, 08:33:32 PM
Re: North Carolina
« Reply #2658 on: June 05, 2019, 05:35:30 AM »

I still donít get why NCDOT didnít ask to extend I-140 east of I-40 along the remaining part of the Wilmington Bypass.
« Last Edit: June 05, 2019, 05:39:10 AM by LM117 »
Logged
ďI donít know whether to wind my ass or scratch my watch!Ē - Jim Cornette

jcarte29

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 296
  • Location: Charlotte, NC
  • Last Login: June 24, 2019, 10:52:38 AM
Re: North Carolina
« Reply #2659 on: June 05, 2019, 07:47:37 AM »

I still donít get why NCDOT didnít ask to extend I-140 east of I-40 along the remaining part of the Wilmington Bypass.

It had something to do with the building of the new Military Cutoff extension, but I think Dr Malme knows a little better than myself!
Logged
Interstates I've driven on (Complete and/or partial, no particular order)
------------------
40, 85, 95, 77, 277(NC), 485(NC), 440(NC), 540(NC), 795(NC), 140(NC), 73, 74, 840(NC), 26, 20, 75, 285(GA), 81, 64, 71, 275(OH), 465(IN), 65, 264(VA), 240(NC), 295(VA), 526(SC), 985(GA), 395(FL), 195(FL)

sprjus4

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1388
  • Location: Hampton Roads, VA
  • Last Login: Today at 02:01:08 AM
Re: North Carolina
« Reply #2660 on: June 05, 2019, 10:16:48 AM »

I still donít get why NCDOT didnít ask to extend I-140 east of I-40 along the remaining part of the Wilmington Bypass.

It had something to do with the building of the new Military Cutoff extension, but I think Dr Malme knows a little better than myself!
That extension / bypass has a poor design IMHO. Mostly because US-17 does not have a seamless connection to I-140, but rather has to use a flyover ramp, and continuity is given to the Military Cutoff Extension.

But hey, what can we do?
Logged

Roadsguy

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1469
  • Age: 20
  • Location: Here
  • Last Login: June 24, 2019, 10:21:12 PM
Re: North Carolina
« Reply #2661 on: June 05, 2019, 06:55:47 PM »

I still donít get why NCDOT didnít ask to extend I-140 east of I-40 along the remaining part of the Wilmington Bypass.

It had something to do with the building of the new Military Cutoff extension, but I think Dr Malme knows a little better than myself!
That extension / bypass has a poor design IMHO. Mostly because US-17 does not have a seamless connection to I-140, but rather has to use a flyover ramp, and continuity is given to the Military Cutoff Extension.

But hey, what can we do?

I had heard that US 17 was staying put, and that the bypass would have a new number (NC 417). Still, the ultimate long-distance corridor uses the flyover.
Logged
[thing you don't like] is better than [thing you like]

sprjus4

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1388
  • Location: Hampton Roads, VA
  • Last Login: Today at 02:01:08 AM
Re: North Carolina
« Reply #2662 on: June 05, 2019, 08:26:10 PM »

Still, the ultimate long-distance corridor uses the flyover.
That's my point. The long-distance corridor should have seamless continuity onto I-140 and vice versa creating one seamless freeway. I suppose it'll be another I-73 at Greensboro situation for long-distance traffic.
Logged

sparker

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 5634
  • Location: Bay Area, CA
  • Last Login: June 24, 2019, 03:41:27 PM
Re: North Carolina
« Reply #2663 on: June 05, 2019, 09:43:39 PM »

I still donít get why NCDOT didnít ask to extend I-140 east of I-40 along the remaining part of the Wilmington Bypass.

It had something to do with the building of the new Military Cutoff extension, but I think Dr Malme knows a little better than myself!
That extension / bypass has a poor design IMHO. Mostly because US-17 does not have a seamless connection to I-140, but rather has to use a flyover ramp, and continuity is given to the Military Cutoff Extension.

But hey, what can we do?

I had heard that US 17 was staying put, and that the bypass would have a new number (NC 417). Still, the ultimate long-distance corridor uses the flyover.
Still, the ultimate long-distance corridor uses the flyover.
That's my point. The long-distance corridor should have seamless continuity onto I-140 and vice versa creating one seamless freeway. I suppose it'll be another I-73 at Greensboro situation for long-distance traffic.

Hey -- at least the through (bypass/I-140) movement doesn't have to circumnavigate a loop; the flyover ramp is configured as a straight-line movement from NB 17, even if it isn't the leftmost set of lanes.  Out here, we who use I-5 say a big hello; NB there are TWO TOTSO's in the San Joaquin Valley (one at CA 99 and one at I-580); we've internalized those reasonably well.  All else considered, just be thankful that the bypass interchange NE of Wilmington is "conventionally" oriented, with the main traffic lanes turning onto the bypass.     
Logged

cowboy_wilhelm

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 73
  • Location: Raleigh
  • Last Login: June 15, 2019, 09:19:00 AM
Re: North Carolina
« Reply #2664 on: June 06, 2019, 05:22:26 PM »

The new roller coaster ramp from US 74 west to I-26 east has finally opened this week. It doesn't appear that NCDOT is planning to renumber the eastbound exit for US 74 to Exit 66 to match the westbound exit number and is keeping it as 67.
Logged

LM117

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1878
  • Age: 30
  • Location: Danville, VA 👎
  • Last Login: June 24, 2019, 08:33:32 PM
Re: North Carolina
« Reply #2665 on: June 10, 2019, 07:31:12 AM »

US-401 between NC-96 and NC-98 in northeastern Wake County is out of commission for a while.

https://www.wral.com/weekend-floodwaters-collapse-us-401-causing-issues-for-wake-drivers/18442230/
Logged
ďI donít know whether to wind my ass or scratch my watch!Ē - Jim Cornette

LM117

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1878
  • Age: 30
  • Location: Danville, VA 👎
  • Last Login: June 24, 2019, 08:33:32 PM
Re: North Carolina
« Reply #2666 on: June 10, 2019, 06:20:46 PM »

Logged
ďI donít know whether to wind my ass or scratch my watch!Ē - Jim Cornette

ARMOURERERIC

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 968
  • Age: 55
  • Location: Morganton NC
  • Last Login: June 24, 2019, 08:41:06 PM
Re: North Carolina
« Reply #2667 on: June 10, 2019, 09:10:34 PM »

This current rain event  has been epic One government rain guage near work had 12" of rain in 36 hours.  Near the area, US 321 under I-40 had water rescue action Friday night and parts of the freeway we're under 8" of water.
Logged

cowboy_wilhelm

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 73
  • Location: Raleigh
  • Last Login: June 15, 2019, 09:19:00 AM
Re: North Carolina
« Reply #2668 on: June 12, 2019, 05:45:34 PM »

This current rain event  has been epic One government rain guage near work had 12" of rain in 36 hours.  Near the area, US 321 under I-40 had water rescue action Friday night and parts of the freeway we're under 8" of water.

And it's getting very expensive to keep up with. Landslides, washouts, culvert and bridge replacements. First Matthew and then Florence, and it's starting to impact available funding for new projects.

Hopefully DOT starts building higher bridges and larger culverts where feasible. I was at a meeting during Matthew recovery where a community brought up that DOT builds structures to accommodate the discharge and water surface elevation for "50-year" storm events, which is considered the typical lifespan for most hydraulic structures. The community also said those structures have been under water several times over the past decade, and that structures need to be built to accommodate the discharge from a 1-percent annual chance flood event (100-year).

Secretary Trogdon even mentioned this when discussing the recent 401 washout in Wake County. "Most of the primary roads in North Carolina are designed by standard to meet 50-year storms," Trogdon said during a news conference. "Seven and a half inches [of rain] in four hours ... that's a 1,000-year storm event."

We keep getting those. The 500-year storm is now the 100-year storm, the 100-year storm is now the 50-year storm, etc.
Logged

sprjus4

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1388
  • Location: Hampton Roads, VA
  • Last Login: Today at 02:01:08 AM
Re: North Carolina
« Reply #2669 on: June 13, 2019, 05:12:21 PM »

Logged

Beltway

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 4816
  • Roads to the Future

  • Location: Richmond, VA
  • Last Login: Today at 12:25:46 AM
Re: North Carolina
« Reply #2670 on: June 13, 2019, 05:18:00 PM »

Logged
Scott M. Kozel
-- Baloney is a reserved word on the Internet
    (Robert Cotť, 2002)

http://www.roadstothefuture.com
http://www.capital-beltway.com

sprjus4

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1388
  • Location: Hampton Roads, VA
  • Last Login: Today at 02:01:08 AM
Re: North Carolina
« Reply #2671 on: June 13, 2019, 05:30:32 PM »

https://www.ncdot.gov/news/public-meetings/Pages/I-5870-2019-06-04.aspx
https://www.ncdot.gov/projects/i-440-glenwood/Pages/concept-maps.aspx
What was NCDOT smoking when they came up with these concepts?

They were taking pot and getting all doped up.
The scary part is it's funded to begin construction in 2025. This isn't just some drawing - this might be reality  :no:

I wouldn't have as much of an issue with it if the area wasn't a flood prone area. It's just going to be worse.

Interesting... in the FAQs -

Quote
Will the project contribute to flooding in the Crabtree Valley area?
NCDOT is well aware of the flooding that occurs along Crabtree Creek during storm events, and the project's potential to impact the existing flood plain is a major consideration. As design options are developed, the project team will use a detailed computer model of the study area to determine whether the design options will increase flooding during storm events.

Options that increase the potential for flooding will not be considered. NCDOT will also investigate design measures and treatment options that further minimize the impacts of stormwater runoff within the study area.

And I'm pretty sure no EIS is planned for this either.
« Last Edit: June 13, 2019, 05:34:20 PM by sprjus4 »
Logged

NE2

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 13807
  • fuck

  • Age: 11
  • Location: central Florida
  • Last Login: June 24, 2019, 09:15:22 PM
Re: North Carolina
« Reply #2672 on: June 13, 2019, 07:20:26 PM »

Those plans have a very Tysons Corner feel, especially concepts 6 and 7. They must have been smoking auto fumes from car culture.
Logged
Florida route log | pre-1945
I will do my best to not make America hate again.
Global warming denial is barely worse than white privilege denial.

sprjus4

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1388
  • Location: Hampton Roads, VA
  • Last Login: Today at 02:01:08 AM
Re: North Carolina
« Reply #2673 on: June 13, 2019, 08:40:56 PM »

Those plans have a very Tysons Corner feel, especially concepts 6 and 7. They must have been smoking auto fumes from car culture.
Well it is a major urban center. This will be interesting to see play out, especially if it's constructed as soon as 2025. As of now, it's fully funded at $230 million.
Logged

Beltway

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 4816
  • Roads to the Future

  • Location: Richmond, VA
  • Last Login: Today at 12:25:46 AM
Re: North Carolina
« Reply #2674 on: June 13, 2019, 09:33:27 PM »

Those plans have a very Tysons Corner feel, especially concepts 6 and 7. They must have been smoking auto fumes from car culture.
Well it is a major urban center. This will be interesting to see play out, especially if it's constructed as soon as 2025. As of now, it's fully funded at $230 million.

Tysons Corner is the 15th largest central business district in the U.S., with more square feet of office space than downtown Pittsburgh.
Logged
Scott M. Kozel
-- Baloney is a reserved word on the Internet
    (Robert Cotť, 2002)

http://www.roadstothefuture.com
http://www.capital-beltway.com

 


Opinions expressed here on belong solely to the poster and do not represent or reflect the opinions or beliefs of AARoads, its creators and/or associates.