AARoads Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length

Author Topic: North Carolina  (Read 443750 times)

LM117

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1936
  • Age: 30
  • Location: Danville, VA 👎
  • Last Login: Today at 10:12:23 AM
Re: North Carolina
« Reply #2725 on: July 03, 2019, 11:48:47 AM »

https://www.ncdot.gov/news/press-releases/Pages/2019/19-07-03-pitt-county-ramp-improvements-closure.aspx

Quote
GREENVILLE – A Pitt County highway ramp will be closed for several weeks as crews make improvements to part of the Southwest Bypass project.

Beginning at 7 a.m. July 8, exit 73 B on U.S. 264 East will be closed. This exit will remain closed for about one month.

During the closure, the N.C. Department of Transportation will replace the approach slabs for the bridge at the interchange of U.S. 264 East.

Traffic heading east will continue on U.S. 264 to Memorial Drive (U.S. 13 N) and turn left. Traffic will head toward the interchange and continue for about two miles. Traffic will exit onto U.S. 264 and then head back east.

​Drivers should anticipate needing extra time during their commute and use caution when approaching the work zone.

This construction is part of the Southwest Bypass, which will be a four-lane, 12.6-mile freeway going between two miles south of Ayden on N.C. 11. The construction will wrap around the west side of Ayden and Winterville and ending at the U.S. 264 Bypass, west of Greenville. The new highway should open in 2020.
Logged
“I don’t know whether to wind my ass or scratch my watch!” - Jim Cornette

LM117

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1936
  • Age: 30
  • Location: Danville, VA 👎
  • Last Login: Today at 10:12:23 AM
Re: North Carolina
« Reply #2726 on: July 05, 2019, 01:56:16 PM »

https://www.ncdot.gov/news/press-releases/Pages/2019/29-07-05-nightly-lane-closure-slocum-gate-overpass.aspx

Quote
HAVELOCK – Starting Monday, the N.C. Department of Transportation plans to close lanes on U.S. 70 as work continues to complete the overpass across the highway into Slocum Gate, the main access to Marine Corps Air Station Cherry Point.

From July 8 through Sept. 20, east and westbound lanes will close overnight on U.S. 70 in Havelock. Lanes can be closed every night of the week, but crews are restricted to work between 8 p.m. and 4 a.m. These closures are necessary for contract crews to place asphalt, as well as finish the shoulders and overpass.

This work is part of the project to build a new overpass across U.S. 70 into Slocum Gate​ at MCAS Cherry Point. The $24.4 million project impacts 1.2 miles of the highway and will allow traffic to freely flow into the Slocum Gate entrance.
Logged
“I don’t know whether to wind my ass or scratch my watch!” - Jim Cornette

LM117

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1936
  • Age: 30
  • Location: Danville, VA 👎
  • Last Login: Today at 10:12:23 AM
Re: North Carolina
« Reply #2727 on: July 08, 2019, 07:03:23 AM »

Progress update on the US-301 (Wesleyan Blvd) widening project in Rocky Mount.

http://www.rockymounttelegram.com/News/2019/07/07/Road-project-remains-on-schedule.html
Logged
“I don’t know whether to wind my ass or scratch my watch!” - Jim Cornette

LM117

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1936
  • Age: 30
  • Location: Danville, VA 👎
  • Last Login: Today at 10:12:23 AM
Re: North Carolina
« Reply #2728 on: July 08, 2019, 12:51:06 PM »

A public meeting is being held on July 15 in Ash to discuss improving the US-17/Hickman Road NW intersection.

https://www.ncdot.gov/news/press-releases/Pages/2019/2019-07-08-brunswick-county-intersection-public-meeting.aspx
Logged
“I don’t know whether to wind my ass or scratch my watch!” - Jim Cornette

BrianP

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 408
  • Location: Maryland
  • Last Login: Today at 03:26:40 PM
Re: North Carolina
« Reply #2729 on: July 08, 2019, 02:52:38 PM »

I've had this on my to do list for a long time but I finally have finished a feature on the decade long battle to complete Interstate 95 in Fayetteville, North Carolina.

A few things of note:
- The appeals came from local businesses along US 301 hoping to route I-95 on what is now Business 95/US 301 in Fayetteville
- The case went all the way to the Supreme Court but was not taken.
- The I-95 Committee's attempt to find  any way (often at the last possible minute) to change the routing.

https://www.gribblenation.org/2019/06/governor-hunt-cuts-ribbon-on-doomsday.html
Nice article.  I could see most of the existing US 301 route being able to be upgraded to be I-95.  Much of it has or had frontage roads which would allow for the upgrade like what will be done for I-42/US 70 in the James City area.  The problem area is between Locust St and Grove St.  I suppose this is where the compromise route would have used a new alignment.  That route would have been ok until the route needs to to be expanded.  Expanding the compromise route likely would be much more expensive to build compared to expanding the route that exists now. 

But I would question whether the compromise route would have been much better than the route that was ultimately built since that too probably would have bypassed the section of highway with the most businesses along it or highest density of businesses.  But they would still be much closer to I-95.

Here I guessed at the smallest part of the route that would be bypassed.
https://drive.google.com/open?id=1cS3AxNGyKWZD2ySzL8nVjBBnrIh8B93F&usp=sharing
And for giggles I combined that with a connection to make a Fayetteville inner loop.
Logged

LM117

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1936
  • Age: 30
  • Location: Danville, VA 👎
  • Last Login: Today at 10:12:23 AM
Re: North Carolina
« Reply #2730 on: July 08, 2019, 03:33:28 PM »

I've had this on my to do list for a long time but I finally have finished a feature on the decade long battle to complete Interstate 95 in Fayetteville, North Carolina.

A few things of note:
- The appeals came from local businesses along US 301 hoping to route I-95 on what is now Business 95/US 301 in Fayetteville
- The case went all the way to the Supreme Court but was not taken.
- The I-95 Committee's attempt to find  any way (often at the last possible minute) to change the routing.

https://www.gribblenation.org/2019/06/governor-hunt-cuts-ribbon-on-doomsday.html
Nice article.  I could see most of the existing US 301 route being able to be upgraded to be I-95.  Much of it has or had frontage roads which would allow for the upgrade like what will be done for I-42/US 70 in the James City area.  The problem area is between Locust St and Grove St.  I suppose this is where the compromise route would have used a new alignment.  That route would have been ok until the route needs to to be expanded.  Expanding the compromise route likely would be much more expensive to build compared to expanding the route that exists now. 

But I would question whether the compromise route would have been much better than the route that was ultimately built since that too probably would have bypassed the section of highway with the most businesses along it or highest density of businesses.  But they would still be much closer to I-95.

Here I guessed at the smallest part of the route that would be bypassed.
https://drive.google.com/open?id=1cS3AxNGyKWZD2ySzL8nVjBBnrIh8B93F&usp=sharing
And for giggles I combined that with a connection to make a Fayetteville inner loop.

I saw an article yesterday that might be relevant here.

https://www.fayobserver.com/news/20190707/faywhat-why-so-few-businesses-at-cumberland-countys-i-95-exits
Logged
“I don’t know whether to wind my ass or scratch my watch!” - Jim Cornette

wdcrft63

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 549
  • Location: Durham, NC
  • Last Login: July 22, 2019, 06:35:48 PM
Re: North Carolina
« Reply #2731 on: July 08, 2019, 06:22:02 PM »

A public meeting is being held on July 15 in Ash to discuss improving the US-17/Hickman Road NW intersection.

https://www.ncdot.gov/news/press-releases/Pages/2019/2019-07-08-brunswick-county-intersection-public-meeting.aspx
For Those who may not be familiar with Hickman Road, it is the route used by many drivers to bridge the gap between US 17 in NC and the Carolina Bays Parkway in SC. So there's a lot of northbound traffic turning left onto US 17 from Hickman Road. Sight lines are good, so it's not a particularly dangerous turn. However I can see why NCDOT is interested in upgrading the intersection.
Logged

wdcrft63

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 549
  • Location: Durham, NC
  • Last Login: July 22, 2019, 06:35:48 PM
Re: North Carolina
« Reply #2732 on: July 09, 2019, 06:49:43 PM »

I missed this announcement last week: NCDOT has begun replacement of this 1941 bridge over the Eno River on US 70 Bypass east of Hillsborough: https://goo.gl/maps/nZzU6xYB2vJJzmPf7

The new bridge will be long enough to provide clearance for a greenway trail underneath: that trail would be a link in the Mountains to Sea Trail.
https://www.ncdot.gov/news/press-releases/Pages/2019/2019-07-02-eno-river-bridge-replacement.aspx
Logged

CanesFan27

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1234
  • Last Login: Today at 02:57:02 PM
Re: North Carolina
« Reply #2733 on: July 10, 2019, 08:39:32 PM »

NC has also proposed NC 472 for the Northern Durham Pkwy which will run from the I-40/540 by RDU Airport concurrent with I-540  to Aviation Pkwy then north as new construction to connect with US 501 north of Durham.  See https://connect.ncdot.gov/resources/safety/Route%20Changes/Map%20U-4721%20140611%201609%20-%20SDV.pdf

I find it odd that the June 2014 NC STIP (https://connect.ncdot.gov/projects/planning/Planning%20Document%20Library/LIVE_STIP.pdf) shows this as unfunded yet they have gone to the trouble of proposing a route change and assigning a number.

They are also going to extend NC 58 another 1.4 miles to the end of the road in Fort Macon State Park - https://connect.ncdot.gov/resources/safety/Route%20Changes/NC%2058%20Carteret%20Request%20140422%20-%20APPROVED.pdf

These changes plus NC 555 were published in the last day or two.

Mapmikey

Earlier today, a trip to the attic ended up with me checking out a box of NC maps I hadn't touched in probably five years.  WIthin the box was a 2004 map of Raleigh that had a few clues (two map errors of roads not even built yet) on the Northern Durham Parkway/NC 472.  Some further digging lead to a blog entry about the proposals for this route and the map errors. 

The Northern Durham Parkway was first proposed in the late 1960s and was part of the controversial "Eno Drive" proposal.  A compromise proposal in the late 90s leads to the new routing today. Plus, if the state ever moves forward in building the highway from I-540 to I-85 as a freeway - another new interstate perhaps.  However, there is no funding for this highway at the moment....so time will tell.

http://surewhynotnow.blogspot.com/2017/07/the-few-clues-of-northern-durham-parkway.html

I recently received two pieces of information that help put together more of the Northern Durham Parkway puzzle.

1st - at one of NCDOT's Traffic Management Center's - the proposed routing of the cancelled Northern Durham Parkway's Northern Arc is shown.
2nd - information on some of the preserved right-of-way for the Parkway near Mineral Springs Road (north of NC 98) within Section AC. 

https://www.gribblenation.org/2017/07/the-few-clues-of-northern-durham-parkway.html

H/T on the Northern Arc Routing to Ben Thurkill.
« Last Edit: July 10, 2019, 08:48:05 PM by CanesFan27 »
Logged

74/171FAN

  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1583
  • Age: 27
  • Location: Harrisburg, PA
  • Last Login: Today at 07:06:20 AM
Re: North Carolina
« Reply #2734 on: July 11, 2019, 07:08:20 AM »

NC has also proposed NC 472 for the Northern Durham Pkwy which will run from the I-40/540 by RDU Airport concurrent with I-540  to Aviation Pkwy then north as new construction to connect with US 501 north of Durham.  See https://connect.ncdot.gov/resources/safety/Route%20Changes/Map%20U-4721%20140611%201609%20-%20SDV.pdf

I find it odd that the June 2014 NC STIP (https://connect.ncdot.gov/projects/planning/Planning%20Document%20Library/LIVE_STIP.pdf) shows this as unfunded yet they have gone to the trouble of proposing a route change and assigning a number.

They are also going to extend NC 58 another 1.4 miles to the end of the road in Fort Macon State Park - https://connect.ncdot.gov/resources/safety/Route%20Changes/NC%2058%20Carteret%20Request%20140422%20-%20APPROVED.pdf

These changes plus NC 555 were published in the last day or two.

Mapmikey

Earlier today, a trip to the attic ended up with me checking out a box of NC maps I hadn't touched in probably five years.  WIthin the box was a 2004 map of Raleigh that had a few clues (two map errors of roads not even built yet) on the Northern Durham Parkway/NC 472.  Some further digging lead to a blog entry about the proposals for this route and the map errors. 

The Northern Durham Parkway was first proposed in the late 1960s and was part of the controversial "Eno Drive" proposal.  A compromise proposal in the late 90s leads to the new routing today. Plus, if the state ever moves forward in building the highway from I-540 to I-85 as a freeway - another new interstate perhaps.  However, there is no funding for this highway at the moment....so time will tell.

http://surewhynotnow.blogspot.com/2017/07/the-few-clues-of-northern-durham-parkway.html

I recently received two pieces of information that help put together more of the Northern Durham Parkway puzzle.

1st - at one of NCDOT's Traffic Management Center's - the proposed routing of the cancelled Northern Durham Parkway's Northern Arc is shown.
2nd - information on some of the preserved right-of-way for the Parkway near Mineral Springs Road (north of NC 98) within Section AC. 

https://www.gribblenation.org/2017/07/the-few-clues-of-northern-durham-parkway.html

H/T on the Northern Arc Routing to Ben Thurkill.

Personal opinion empahsized, but I think it would make more sense for NC 472 just be put on all of Aviation Pkwy to NC 54 instead of having it end in a concurrency with I-540.
Logged
I am now a PennDOT employee.  My opinions/views do not necessarily reflect the opinions/views of PennDOT.

LM117

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1936
  • Age: 30
  • Location: Danville, VA 👎
  • Last Login: Today at 10:12:23 AM
Re: North Carolina
« Reply #2735 on: July 11, 2019, 01:23:40 PM »

NCDOT is holding two public meetings (July 22 in Lumberton, July 23 in Hope Mills) to discuss widening I-95 to 8 lanes between Lumberton and Hope Mills.

https://www.ncdot.gov/news/press-releases/Pages/2019/2019-07-11-ncdot-widening-proposal-i-95-robeson-cumberland.aspx
Logged
“I don’t know whether to wind my ass or scratch my watch!” - Jim Cornette

sprjus4

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 1752
  • Location: Hampton Roads, VA
  • Last Login: Today at 03:32:39 PM
Re: North Carolina
« Reply #2736 on: July 11, 2019, 01:37:53 PM »

NCDOT is holding two public meetings (July 22 in Lumberton, July 23 in Hope Mills) to discuss widening I-95 to 8 lanes between Lumberton and Hope Mills.

https://www.ncdot.gov/news/press-releases/Pages/2019/2019-07-11-ncdot-widening-proposal-i-95-robeson-cumberland.aspx
Been waiting on this project... now we're up to 45 miles out of 182 - 25% of the entire corridor.

Hopefully this will get accelerated in future STIPs and the Fayetteville Bypass will get funded for 6 or 8-lanes as well.

Edit - After reviewing the projects submitted to the STIP, though many unfunded, it gives an idea what the ultimate build out is. Here's the submissions for I-95 -

1) Widen from 4 to 6 lanes between US-64 and I-795 / US-264 - Unfunded
2) Widen from 4 to 8 lanes between I-40 and I-95 Business - Fully Funded
3) Widen from 4 to 8 lanes between I-95 Business and I-95 Business (Fayetteville Bypass) - Unfunded
4) Widen from 4 to 8 lanes between I-95 Business and US-301 - Fully Funded
5) Widen from 4 to 8 lanes between US-301 and I-74 - Unfunded
6) Widen from 4 to 6 lanes between I-74 and the SC State Line - Unfunded

Nothing proposed or submitted for the STIP for the US-64 to VA segment, and US-64 to I-795 / US-264 segment. It appears the major 8-lane section NCDOT wants is between I-40 and I-74, and 6-lanes the rest. All of the 8-lane section is now fully funded, except the small US-301 to I-74 leg, and the Fayetteville Bypass.
« Last Edit: July 11, 2019, 01:57:41 PM by sprjus4 »
Logged

CanesFan27

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1234
  • Last Login: Today at 02:57:02 PM
Re: North Carolina
« Reply #2737 on: July 11, 2019, 02:28:57 PM »

I've had this on my to do list for a long time but I finally have finished a feature on the decade long battle to complete Interstate 95 in Fayetteville, North Carolina.

A few things of note:
- The appeals came from local businesses along US 301 hoping to route I-95 on what is now Business 95/US 301 in Fayetteville
- The case went all the way to the Supreme Court but was not taken.
- The I-95 Committee's attempt to find  any way (often at the last possible minute) to change the routing.

https://www.gribblenation.org/2019/06/governor-hunt-cuts-ribbon-on-doomsday.html
Nice article.  I could see most of the existing US 301 route being able to be upgraded to be I-95.  Much of it has or had frontage roads which would allow for the upgrade like what will be done for I-42/US 70 in the James City area.  The problem area is between Locust St and Grove St.  I suppose this is where the compromise route would have used a new alignment.  That route would have been ok until the route needs to to be expanded.  Expanding the compromise route likely would be much more expensive to build compared to expanding the route that exists now. 

But I would question whether the compromise route would have been much better than the route that was ultimately built since that too probably would have bypassed the section of highway with the most businesses along it or highest density of businesses.  But they would still be much closer to I-95.

Here I guessed at the smallest part of the route that would be bypassed.
https://drive.google.com/open?id=1cS3AxNGyKWZD2ySzL8nVjBBnrIh8B93F&usp=sharing
And for giggles I combined that with a connection to make a Fayetteville inner loop.

I saw an article yesterday that might be relevant here.

https://www.fayobserver.com/news/20190707/faywhat-why-so-few-businesses-at-cumberland-countys-i-95-exits

Thanks for sharing that and I will most likely add some of the information to the feature.

I kinda get a chuckle on the timing - it's almost like someone from the faytteville paper saw the blog story and got an idea from it.  I'm probably wrong but...
Logged

goobnav

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 209
  • Cannonball Run should start in Wilmington!

  • Age: 44
  • Location: Durham, NC
  • Last Login: July 21, 2019, 03:14:29 PM
Re: North Carolina
« Reply #2738 on: July 11, 2019, 02:59:58 PM »

NCDOT is holding two public meetings (July 22 in Lumberton, July 23 in Hope Mills) to discuss widening I-95 to 8 lanes between Lumberton and Hope Mills.

https://www.ncdot.gov/news/press-releases/Pages/2019/2019-07-11-ncdot-widening-proposal-i-95-robeson-cumberland.aspx
Been waiting on this project... now we're up to 45 miles out of 182 - 25% of the entire corridor.

Hopefully this will get accelerated in future STIPs and the Fayetteville Bypass will get funded for 6 or 8-lanes as well.

Edit - After reviewing the projects submitted to the STIP, though many unfunded, it gives an idea what the ultimate build out is. Here's the submissions for I-95 -

1) Widen from 4 to 6 lanes between US-64 and I-795 / US-264 - Unfunded
2) Widen from 4 to 8 lanes between I-40 and I-95 Business - Fully Funded
3) Widen from 4 to 8 lanes between I-95 Business and I-95 Business (Fayetteville Bypass) - Unfunded
4) Widen from 4 to 8 lanes between I-95 Business and US-301 - Fully Funded
5) Widen from 4 to 8 lanes between US-301 and I-74 - Unfunded
6) Widen from 4 to 6 lanes between I-74 and the SC State Line - Unfunded

Nothing proposed or submitted for the STIP for the US-64 to VA segment, and US-64 to I-795 / US-264 segment. It appears the major 8-lane section NCDOT wants is between I-40 and I-74, and 6-lanes the rest. All of the 8-lane section is now fully funded, except the small US-301 to I-74 leg, and the Fayetteville Bypass.

Going north of 64, the big issue will be the Roanoke River bridges, can't just slap and extra lane and be done with it.
Logged
Life is a highway and I drive it all night long!

sprjus4

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 1752
  • Location: Hampton Roads, VA
  • Last Login: Today at 03:32:39 PM
Re: North Carolina
« Reply #2739 on: July 11, 2019, 03:08:45 PM »

NCDOT is holding two public meetings (July 22 in Lumberton, July 23 in Hope Mills) to discuss widening I-95 to 8 lanes between Lumberton and Hope Mills.

https://www.ncdot.gov/news/press-releases/Pages/2019/2019-07-11-ncdot-widening-proposal-i-95-robeson-cumberland.aspx
Been waiting on this project... now we're up to 45 miles out of 182 - 25% of the entire corridor.

Hopefully this will get accelerated in future STIPs and the Fayetteville Bypass will get funded for 6 or 8-lanes as well.

Edit - After reviewing the projects submitted to the STIP, though many unfunded, it gives an idea what the ultimate build out is. Here's the submissions for I-95 -

1) Widen from 4 to 6 lanes between US-64 and I-795 / US-264 - Unfunded
2) Widen from 4 to 8 lanes between I-40 and I-95 Business - Fully Funded
3) Widen from 4 to 8 lanes between I-95 Business and I-95 Business (Fayetteville Bypass) - Unfunded
4) Widen from 4 to 8 lanes between I-95 Business and US-301 - Fully Funded
5) Widen from 4 to 8 lanes between US-301 and I-74 - Unfunded
6) Widen from 4 to 6 lanes between I-74 and the SC State Line - Unfunded

Nothing proposed or submitted for the STIP for the US-64 to VA segment, and US-64 to I-795 / US-264 segment. It appears the major 8-lane section NCDOT wants is between I-40 and I-74, and 6-lanes the rest. All of the 8-lane section is now fully funded, except the small US-301 to I-74 leg, and the Fayetteville Bypass.

Going north of 64, the big issue will be the Roanoke River bridges, can't just slap and extra lane and be done with it.
Widen the bridges just like any other overpass bridge. It's not that hard.

My biggest concern widening I-95 to Virginia is the Va State Line itself because there would be a lane drop and we all know how that goes on any major highway during peak travel times. VDOT has no plans to expand I-95 to 6-lanes north of there, and if they did, it would have to go up to I-295 to be any effective because any lane drop south of there would still cause backups in peak travel times.

VDOT has far greater priorities widening I-64 to Richmond, I-81, and I-95 to Fredericksburg / I-295 North.
« Last Edit: July 11, 2019, 03:11:59 PM by sprjus4 »
Logged

goobnav

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 209
  • Cannonball Run should start in Wilmington!

  • Age: 44
  • Location: Durham, NC
  • Last Login: July 21, 2019, 03:14:29 PM
Re: North Carolina
« Reply #2740 on: July 11, 2019, 03:36:27 PM »

NCDOT is holding two public meetings (July 22 in Lumberton, July 23 in Hope Mills) to discuss widening I-95 to 8 lanes between Lumberton and Hope Mills.

https://www.ncdot.gov/news/press-releases/Pages/2019/2019-07-11-ncdot-widening-proposal-i-95-robeson-cumberland.aspx
Been waiting on this project... now we're up to 45 miles out of 182 - 25% of the entire corridor.

Hopefully this will get accelerated in future STIPs and the Fayetteville Bypass will get funded for 6 or 8-lanes as well.

Edit - After reviewing the projects submitted to the STIP, though many unfunded, it gives an idea what the ultimate build out is. Here's the submissions for I-95 -

1) Widen from 4 to 6 lanes between US-64 and I-795 / US-264 - Unfunded
2) Widen from 4 to 8 lanes between I-40 and I-95 Business - Fully Funded
3) Widen from 4 to 8 lanes between I-95 Business and I-95 Business (Fayetteville Bypass) - Unfunded
4) Widen from 4 to 8 lanes between I-95 Business and US-301 - Fully Funded
5) Widen from 4 to 8 lanes between US-301 and I-74 - Unfunded
6) Widen from 4 to 6 lanes between I-74 and the SC State Line - Unfunded

Nothing proposed or submitted for the STIP for the US-64 to VA segment, and US-64 to I-795 / US-264 segment. It appears the major 8-lane section NCDOT wants is between I-40 and I-74, and 6-lanes the rest. All of the 8-lane section is now fully funded, except the small US-301 to I-74 leg, and the Fayetteville Bypass.

Going north of 64, the big issue will be the Roanoke River bridges, can't just slap and extra lane and be done with it.
Widen the bridges just like any other overpass bridge. It's not that hard.

My biggest concern widening I-95 to Virginia is the Va State Line itself because there would be a lane drop and we all know how that goes on any major highway during peak travel times. VDOT has no plans to expand I-95 to 6-lanes north of there, and if they did, it would have to go up to I-295 to be any effective because any lane drop south of there would still cause backups in peak travel times.

VDOT has far greater priorities widening I-64 to Richmond, I-81, and I-95 to Fredericksburg / I-295 North.

Don't disagree on the lane drop, have it here on I-40 westbound at the 15-501 exit and evening rush traffic is a bear. 

But, still going to disagree on the simplicity of just adding another lane on the bridges, it's not a normal water crossing.
Logged
Life is a highway and I drive it all night long!

sprjus4

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 1752
  • Location: Hampton Roads, VA
  • Last Login: Today at 03:32:39 PM
Re: North Carolina
« Reply #2741 on: July 11, 2019, 04:49:28 PM »

Don't disagree on the lane drop, have it here on I-40 westbound at the 15-501 exit and evening rush traffic is a bear.
https://publicinput.com/I-40-Orange-County

A $160.2 million project set to begin in 2021 would widen I-40 from 15-501 to I-85 from 4 to 6 lanes. That should help.

But, still going to disagree on the simplicity of just adding another lane on the bridges, it's not a normal water crossing.
It's been done countless times. Many times the bridges will end up just being fully replaced instead of widened. It may not be the simplest of tasks, but it's certainly doable.

Where I'm at, they are going to construct a 4-mile 8-lane bridge over the Hampton Roads waters and two 1/2 mile underwater tunnels starting next year. Certainly not simple, but certainly doable.
Logged

BrianP

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 408
  • Location: Maryland
  • Last Login: Today at 03:26:40 PM
Re: North Carolina
« Reply #2742 on: July 11, 2019, 05:45:06 PM »

But, still going to disagree on the simplicity of just adding another lane on the bridges, it's not a normal water crossing.
What's not normal about it?

Those bridges would definitely not be replaced.  They were replaced in 1999.  I think it would be more likely to fill in the space between the two bridges to accommodate six lanes for that crossing.   
Logged

sprjus4

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 1752
  • Location: Hampton Roads, VA
  • Last Login: Today at 03:32:39 PM
Re: North Carolina
« Reply #2743 on: July 11, 2019, 05:56:25 PM »

But, still going to disagree on the simplicity of just adding another lane on the bridges, it's not a normal water crossing.
What's not normal about it?

Those bridges would definitely not be replaced.  They were replaced in 1999.  I think it would be more likely to fill in the space between the two bridges to accommodate six lanes for that crossing.   
Well in that case, it would likely just be widened to the inside. Not a hard task.

Weird, you'd think the replacement in 1999 would have been built with a wide (22-24 feet) left shoulder for expansion.

The current bridge replacement over the Little River further south is being built with future lanes. Currently, only 2 lanes in each direction traverse the existing bridges, however the new ones will have 4 lanes southbound and 5 lanes northbound (an extended acceleration lane). Only 2 mainline lanes each way will be striped for now, but when the section is widened to 6 or even 8 lanes, the bridge will simply be re-striped instead of having to be widened.
« Last Edit: July 11, 2019, 05:59:45 PM by sprjus4 »
Logged

Beltway

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 5033
  • Roads to the Future

  • Location: Richmond, VA
  • Last Login: Today at 03:21:47 PM
Re: North Carolina
« Reply #2744 on: July 11, 2019, 09:01:27 PM »

But, still going to disagree on the simplicity of just adding another lane on the bridges, it's not a normal water crossing.
It's been done countless times. Many times the bridges will end up just being fully replaced instead of widened. It may not be the simplest of tasks, but it's certainly doable.
Where I'm at, they are going to construct a 4-mile 8-lane bridge over the Hampton Roads waters and two 1/2 mile underwater tunnels starting next year. Certainly not simple, but certainly doable.

The I-95 Roanoke River bridges are about 1,150 feet long.  That is child's play compared to what has been needed in a number of other states; if that is the most difficult bridge project you can find in N.C.

BTW, the twin tunnels on the Hampton Roads Bridge-Tunnel are each 7,479 feet long.
 
« Last Edit: July 11, 2019, 09:04:09 PM by Beltway »
Logged
Scott M. Kozel
-- Baloney is a reserved word on the Internet
    (Robert Coté, 2002)

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

Mapmikey

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2666
  • Co-curator with Froggie of www.vahighways.com

  • Age: 49
  • Last Login: Today at 03:08:25 PM
    • Co-curator Virginia Highways Project
Re: North Carolina
« Reply #2745 on: July 11, 2019, 09:32:14 PM »

Since I know nothing substantive about bridge construction I will pose this question...

The Roanoke River in that location is subject to very large fluctuations in flow because the nearby dam releases water which affects both the depth of the river and the speed of the flow.  Would this either require sturdier piers and/or would there be logistical difficulties during the construction because of the rapid changes in the river condition?
Logged

sprjus4

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 1752
  • Location: Hampton Roads, VA
  • Last Login: Today at 03:32:39 PM
Re: North Carolina
« Reply #2746 on: July 11, 2019, 09:48:30 PM »

if that is the most difficult bridge project you can find in N.C.
Oh please. There are countless bridges in North Carolina that are longer than 1,000 feet.

To name a few of the longer ones...

- US-17 over Chowan River, 2 miles long
- NC-32 over Chowan River, 4 miles long
- US-64 Bypass over Croatan Sound, 6 miles long
- US-64 over Croatan Sound, 3 miles long
- US-64 over Roanoke Sound, 1 mile long
- NC-12 over Oregon Inlet, 3 miles long
- US-70 over Gallants Channel, 1 mile long
- I-140 over Cape Fear River, 1 mile long
- US-70 / US-17 over Neuse River, 3 miles long
- US-17 over Pamlico River, 3 miles long
- US-158 over Currituck Sound, 3 miles long

All those examples are in Eastern NC, I could name plenty of more in the western, more mountainous part of the state, and likely more I missed in the eastern part. Most of those were built in the last 20-30 years, a lot the past 10-15.

Not to mention, the proposed high-rise Cape Fear Skyway which would be almost 2 miles long, along with the proposed Mid-Currituck Bridge which would build almost 7 miles of bridge over water and swamp.
Logged

Beltway

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 5033
  • Roads to the Future

  • Location: Richmond, VA
  • Last Login: Today at 03:21:47 PM
Re: North Carolina
« Reply #2747 on: July 11, 2019, 10:16:53 PM »

if that is the most difficult bridge project you can find in N.C.
Oh please. There are countless bridges in North Carolina that are longer than 1,000 feet.
I was referring to the poster who was complaining about the complexity of the I-95 Roanoke River bridges.

To name a few of the longer ones...
The only really impressive one is the new bridge on NC-12 over Oregon Inlet, with the combination of length, height, foundations, span lengths, and what it crosses.
Logged
Scott M. Kozel
-- Baloney is a reserved word on the Internet
    (Robert Coté, 2002)

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

goobnav

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 209
  • Cannonball Run should start in Wilmington!

  • Age: 44
  • Location: Durham, NC
  • Last Login: July 21, 2019, 03:14:29 PM
Re: North Carolina
« Reply #2748 on: July 12, 2019, 11:00:38 AM »

if that is the most difficult bridge project you can find in N.C.
Oh please. There are countless bridges in North Carolina that are longer than 1,000 feet.
I was referring to the poster who was complaining about the complexity of the I-95 Roanoke River bridges.

To name a few of the longer ones...
The only really impressive one is the new bridge on NC-12 over Oregon Inlet, with the combination of length, height, foundations, span lengths, and what it crosses.

The complexity come from the amount of traffic that stretch of I-95 carries, sure close one span while the other is being worked and create a choke point where the alternatives are local roads, US 301 being the most logical but that is 2 lane rural road.  The other alternatives are either too far to be practical or as listed previously rural 2 lane back roads.

Mapmikey pointed out the release and water flow of the Roanoke River, we do get hurricanes here and that area is prone to flooding so, construction will be subject to weather delays no matter how you can plan.  Nevermind, that our fair share of wet weather is during peak construction times of the year.  We do have the exception of somewhat warmer winter but, that is also in flux.  Glad you brought up the Basnight Bridge, that was 3 years of construction after 30 years of lawsuits over environmental issues. 

By all means explain away these complexities.
Logged
Life is a highway and I drive it all night long!

sprjus4

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 1752
  • Location: Hampton Roads, VA
  • Last Login: Today at 03:32:39 PM
Re: North Carolina
« Reply #2749 on: July 12, 2019, 11:18:34 AM »

if that is the most difficult bridge project you can find in N.C.
Oh please. There are countless bridges in North Carolina that are longer than 1,000 feet.
I was referring to the poster who was complaining about the complexity of the I-95 Roanoke River bridges.

To name a few of the longer ones...
The only really impressive one is the new bridge on NC-12 over Oregon Inlet, with the combination of length, height, foundations, span lengths, and what it crosses.

The complexity come from the amount of traffic that stretch of I-95 carries, sure close one span while the other is being worked and create a choke point where the alternatives are local roads, US 301 being the most logical but that is 2 lane rural road.  The other alternatives are either too far to be practical or as listed previously rural 2 lane back roads.

Mapmikey pointed out the release and water flow of the Roanoke River, we do get hurricanes here and that area is prone to flooding so, construction will be subject to weather delays no matter how you can plan.  Nevermind, that our fair share of wet weather is during peak construction times of the year.  We do have the exception of somewhat warmer winter but, that is also in flux.  Glad you brought up the Basnight Bridge, that was 3 years of construction after 30 years of lawsuits over environmental issues. 

By all means explain away these complexities.
You don’t have to close a span. You can widen a bridge with traffic moving on it. Hell, you can even replace a bridge with traffic moving on it by doing it in sections.

It’s certainly doable without removing traffic. Reduce the speed limit to 55 mph, shift traffic to the far right of each bridge, put up construction barriers on the left, then work in the median to build more bridge.
Logged

 


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.