NC is requesting I-36 for US 70 East Corridor and I-89 for RDU to Norfolk corr

[Thing 342]

Elizabeth City, et al. are satellite cities at best for the Hampton Roads metro area. They may be a part of the same media market (one that stretches as far north as Chincoteague and as far south as Ocracoke) , but most people from the area would regard a trip to NE NC as a bit of a trek unless they lived in Suffolk or Great Bridge. I just don't think there's enough demand to justify most of these NC interstate pet projects over say, the High Rise Bridge replacement (although basically all of 64 past Exit 291 needs to be widened and redone).

[LM117]

Elizabeth City, et al. are satellite cities at best for the Hampton Roads metro area. They may be a part of the same media market (one that stretches as far north as Chincoteague and as far south as Ocracoke) , but most people from the area would regard a trip to NE NC as a bit of a trek unless they lived in Suffolk or Great Bridge. I just don't think there's enough demand to justify most of these NC interstate pet projects over say, the High Rise Bridge replacement (although basically all of 64 past Exit 291 needs to be widened and redone).

I-64 definitely needs widened. I always hated driving on I-64 through Chesapeake.  There may not be much demand for I-87, but the NC's I-42 "pet project" is definitely warranted. I-42 needs to be done first over I-87. US-70 is long overdue for an upgrading.

[WashuOtaku]

I just don't think there's enough demand to justify most of these NC interstate pet projects over say, the High Rise Bridge replacement (although basically all of 64 past Exit 291 needs to be widened and redone).

I believe there is.  I have friends who will drive to Richmond then to Norfolk because it's all interstate; I believe a lot of people are like them.  Also, economically beneficial to the RTP area having a 70mph interstate connecting directly to a major seaport.

[LM117]

I just don't think there's enough demand to justify most of these NC interstate pet projects over say, the High Rise Bridge replacement (although basically all of 64 past Exit 291 needs to be widened and redone).

Also, economically beneficial to the RTP area having a 70mph interstate connecting directly to a major seaport.

+1

[froggie]

Most of RTP's economic might is intellectual, not manufacturing.  An interstate connection to a seaport is not going to help that.  Nevermind that, as has already been noted on this forum, there are better ways to make such a connection.

And yes, while there may be some who detour to Richmond because it's an "all Interstate route", those travel numbers are not big enough to justify the expense of Interstate construction.

[LM117]

Regardless of whether or not I-87 is worth building, I think we can all agree that US-70 is certainly worth upgrading to I-42. It carries heavy traffic (tourists, local and trucks) and connects the Port of Morehead City and military bases to I-95 and I-40. 

[slorydn1]

Regardless of whether or not I-87 is worth building, I think we can all agree that US-70 is certainly worth upgrading to I-42. It carries heavy traffic (tourists, local and trucks) and connects the Port of Morehead City and military bases to I-95 and I-40. 

You won't get any argument from me on that!

Over the years any time conversation of any upgrade to US-70 between Raleigh and the coast has come up one of the first comments from the peanut gallery has been "Oh great, more construction, just so the people up in Raleigh can get to their beach home a few minutes faster; Oh joy" <whiny sarcastic voice>.

Um, yeah, that and many other reasons, not the least of which is freight movement is usually my reply.

I first visited New Bern in 1986, and moved here in 1991. In that time, the average travel time for me from New Bern to I-40 has dropped from about 2hrs and 15 minutes (back when we had to go through Selma and Clayton and accessed I-40 at exit 306)  to the 1 hr and 28 minutes it took me this past Monday-which would have been even quicker yet had it not been for the 3 heavy rain storms I encountered, one of them on the new bypass). If I was coming from Morehead City you could add 45 minutes to an hour to that,depending on how bad Havelock and James City traffic is.


Think about it-back in the late 80's to early 90's we would have been sitting in long cues at more stoplights than I can count. Now its only a handful between New Bern and I-40, with Kinston being the biggest problem for me, and I still manage to catch most of those red-its how my luck goes, lol. Besides Kinston the few that are left seem to be out in the middle of podunk, and of course Havleock and Morehead City to the east of me.


One of the perks of my job is that I have the controls to the Trent/Neuse River Bridge cameras/VMS signs on my desk. I spend many a Friday afternoon during the summer watching the eastbound traffic crawl through James City. Its a mixture of beach goers and 18 wheelers, and the last few years I have been noticing a larger number of trucks heading through there. And I can count on 2-3 wrecks from lunch time until I get off at 6pm (when I'm on dayshift) on US-70 at either Williams Road, Airport Road, or Thurman Road.


I can only imagine what it's like up and down the rest of the corridor, but I'm confident that the numbers must be similar.


I wasn't sure that we absolutely needed an Interstate designation for US-70 to upgrade the corridor to a freeway along its entirety, I think there was momentum pushing things in that direction already. But I believe the Interstate designation will definitely speed that process up and for that I am thankful, I may now get to see it happen before I have to stop at the great toll booth in the sky.

[LM117]

Regardless of whether or not I-87 is worth building, I think we can all agree that US-70 is certainly worth upgrading to I-42. It carries heavy traffic (tourists, local and trucks) and connects the Port of Morehead City and military bases to I-95 and I-40. 

I can only imagine what it's like up and down the rest of the corridor, but I'm confident that the numbers must be similar.


I wasn't sure that we absolutely needed an Interstate designation for US-70 to upgrade the corridor to a freeway along its entirety, I think there was momentum pushing things in that direction already. But I believe the Interstate designation will definitely speed that process up and for that I am thankful, I may now get to see it happen before I have to stop at the great toll booth in the sky.

Oh man, US-70 was/still is a headache between Goldsboro and the Clayton Bypass. I went to Raleigh a few times and I hated that stretch. There were quite a few horrific crashes along that stretch. I also remember before the Goldsboro Bypass was built, westbound US-70 traffic had to follow a one-lane ramp at the US-70/Grantham Street interchange in Goldsboro in order to continue on US-70 west and traffic used to back up that ramp onto the mainline during rush hour, sometimes backing up to near the William Street interchange, and once you get past that, you're greeted by about 4-5 traffic lights in rapid succession. For eastbound US-70 traffic coming up at that same interchange, you had to follow a tight, single-loop ramp to continue on US-70 east. I remember a lot of semis flipped on that ramp over the years.

I grew up in Fremont, which is right off of I-795 near the Wilson County line and used to go through there all the time. I lived in NC from 1995-2009 and lived in Wayne County most of the time. The last time I was in the area was 3 years ago.  I've only been on US-70 east of Goldsboro a handful number of times during the time I lived there, last time being about 14-15 years ago. I don't remember too much from my trip on that part of US-70. I'm hoping to move back sometime this year if all goes well. It figures that all the action with I-42 happens after I moved away. At least I was around for I-795 when it came about during my last two years in high school.   

[slorydn1]

I should have been more clear when I said I wasn't sure about the rest of the corridor-I was talking about the frequency of crashes.

I am intimately familiar with that one lane ramp going westbound, and coming back east bound that extremely tight, 15mph advisory speed ramp.

My brother and I affectionately call that tight radius turn Martinsville in honor of the race track (even though it's backwards turning to the right instead of left). It's not such a big deal now that I have a 2014 Mustang GT but back in my loser cruiser days that was quite a scary turn and immediate need to accelerate to keep from getting run over by a semi that's already at speed.

Actually things got a lot better west of Goldsboro once they opened the Clayton bypass. That slog between I-95 and I-40 was the worst having to go through Clayton, many times in stop and go traffic.

[LM117]

I should have been more clear when I said I wasn't sure about the rest of the corridor-I was talking about the frequency of crashes. Oops. Pardon my brainfart.

I am intimately familiar with that one lane ramp going westbound, and coming back east bound that extremely tight, 15mph advisory speed ramp.

My brother and I affectionately call that tight radius turn Martinsville in honor of the race track (even though it's backwards turning to the right instead of left). It's not such a big deal now that I have a 2014 Mustang GT but back in my loser cruiser days that was quite a scary turn and immediate need to accelerate to keep from getting run over by a semi that's already at speed. I hated driving an SUV (and a U-Haul at one point) through there. Good name for it! 

Actually things got a lot better west of Goldsboro once they opened the Clayton bypass. That slog between I-95 and I-40 was the worst having to go through Clayton, many times in stop and go traffic. Yeah, my grandmother worked in Clayton before the bypass opened. The commute sucked. 

Replied in bold.

[JacobNC]

Dominion Blvd has had mile markers on it back to the VA 104 days which built upon US 17's mileage from the NC line...

Interestingly, the last study (2006) on an interstate corridor up US 17 and then the Eastern Shore did not use I-64 at all.  It had the interstate head east on the Southeastern Parkway, then connected to I-264 near the Oceanfront to head west back to around VA 225 to head north to the CBBT.

Also, Maryland wants to use US 13 while Delaware wants to use US 113.

Maps are at the end of this document - http://www.virginiadot.org/projects/resources/I-99_Final_Report_-_VDOT_website.pdf

That route through VA Beach is the most ridiculous interstate corridor proposal I've ever seen

[amroad17]

Agreed.  However, in that study, I guess the planners were considering a way to have a use for the Southeastern Parkway (which has been talked about for nearly 40 years, btw).  The odd part, other than going around you butt to get to your elbow, is the use of VA 225 (Independence Blvd.) to get to US 13.  This street was built up in the 1980's!  How could any DOT build an interstate through there?

If I-87, or another numbered interstate, is built through the Hampton Roads area, it should be routed on I-64 from Exit 291 to US 13 at Exit 282.  Upgrading US 13 from there to the CBBT would be an enormous undertaking.  The only way I could see it done is to do what NYSDOT did with I-86 is Horseheads, NY.  Build an elevated freeway with close proximity frontage roads and limited interchanges.  There are two "interchanges", albeit substandard, along US 13 between I-64 and the CBBT.  One is at VA 225 (Independence Blvd.) and the other is at US 60 (Shore Drive).  I could see only one or two more built in that stretch for this to remotely work.

As an aside, I am warming to I-87.  It sort of "fits" in tandem with I-85.

[74/171FAN]

Agreed.  However, in that study, I guess the planners were considering a way to have a use for the Southeastern Parkway (which has been talked about for nearly 40 years, btw).  The odd part, other than going around you butt to get to your elbow, is the use of VA 225 (Independence Blvd.) to get to US 13.  This street was built up in the 1980's!  How could any DOT build an interstate through there?

I guess this was the closest to ever getting Froggie's fictional VA 225 freeway to be built.  (Well, partially, note that this page was last updated years ago, I do not know if Froggie himself would make any changes to his fictional ideas from back then.)

[LM117]

Dominion Blvd has had mile markers on it back to the VA 104 days which built upon US 17's mileage from the NC line...

Interestingly, the last study (2006) on an interstate corridor up US 17 and then the Eastern Shore did not use I-64 at all.  It had the interstate head east on the Southeastern Parkway, then connected to I-264 near the Oceanfront to head west back to around VA 225 to head north to the CBBT.

Also, Maryland wants to use US 13 while Delaware wants to use US 113.

Maps are at the end of this document - http://www.virginiadot.org/projects/resources/I-99_Final_Report_-_VDOT_website.pdf

That route through VA Beach is the most ridiculous interstate corridor proposal I've ever seen

Yep. It looks like somebody hit a few bottles of Jack Daniels and drew an interstate. An interstate would never be built north of Norfolk anyway. I don't know about Maryland, but the Eastern Shore of VA would be up in arms with doomsday bunkers ready and screaming "apocalypse!" the moment the word "interstate" is mentioned, especially Northampton County. Northampton is probably the only county I know of that could give NoVA counties a run for the money in NIMBY'ism, whether it's road-related or businesses. My dad and his people are from Northampton County and he always jokes that they oppose damn near everything except breathing.

[froggie]

Well, partially, note that this page was last updated years ago, I do not know if Froggie himself would make any changes to his fictional ideas from back then.

For the record, I would not advocate trying to build such today...Independence Blvd is simply too built up and there's a stretch where there are houses right along the roadway.  My fantasy VA 225 freeway was intended as a "what-if" showing what COULD have happened if Virginia Beach had planned it as a freeway instead of as an arterial.

[LM117]

I know this is right out of left field, but when NCDOT sent their applications to AASHTO for these two corridors, I'm a bit puzzled as to why NCDOT didn't also send one to AASHTO to designate US-117 from Goldsboro to I-40 as "Future I-795".

[mvak36]

I know this is right out of left field, but when NCDOT sent their applications to AASHTO for these two corridors, I'm a bit puzzled as to why NCDOT didn't also send one to AASHTO to designate US-117 from Goldsboro to I-40 as "Future I-795".

I was thinking they would just ask for an extension of 795 once it's built to interstate standards. Would they need to designate it as Future 795 first?

[LM117]

I know this is right out of left field, but when NCDOT sent their applications to AASHTO for these two corridors, I'm a bit puzzled as to why NCDOT didn't also send one to AASHTO to designate US-117 from Goldsboro to I-40 as "Future I-795".

I was thinking they would just ask for an extension of 795 once it's built to interstate standards. Would they need to designate it as Future 795 first?

No, they don't have to. NCDOT usually has a habit of getting Future I-signs for future interstate corridors so they can advertise to motorists that the route will be upgraded to an interstate and also let's locals get used to the number before it's signed and added to the Interstate system. It also allows towns and cities along a future interstate corridor to advertise to businesses that they will soon have access to an interstate in the hopes that a company or small business will locate in or near those towns since most companies won't locate near a city or town that either doesn't have an interstate or won't be along an interstate in the future. It's one of the biggest reasons the Global TransPark in Kinston has been a failure after all these years since it lacked interstate access and at the time the Global TransPark was built, there were no plans to designate US-70 as an interstate. I just figured that since they got Future I-42 and Future I-87 for US-70 and US-64/US-17, they would do the same for US-117 since it was also included in the same amendment as US-70 in the FAST Act.

[mvak36]

No, they don't have to. NCDOT usually has a habit of getting Future I-signs for future interstate corridors so they can advertise to motorists that the route will be upgraded to an interstate and also let's locals get used to the number before it's signed and added to the Interstate system. It also allows towns and cities along a future interstate corridor to advertise to businesses that they will soon have access to an interstate in the hopes that a company or small business will locate in or near those towns since most companies won't locate near a city or town that either doesn't have an interstate or won't be along an interstate in the future. It's one of the biggest reasons the Global TransPark in Kinston has been a failure after all these years since it lacked interstate access and at the time the Global TransPark was built, there were no plans to designate US-70 as an interstate. I just figured that since they got Future I-42 and Future I-87 for US-70 and US-64/US-17, they would do the same for US-117 since it was also included in the same amendment as US-70 in the FAST Act.

Ok. I got ya. Maybe they will request it next time.

[The Ghostbuster]

Is the C.F. Harvey Parkway around Kinston proposed to reconnect with US 70 and thus become part of 70 (and Interstate 42)?

[NE2]

Is the C.F. Harvey Parkway around Kinston proposed to reconnect with US 70 and thus become part of 70 (and Interstate 42)?

http://www.google.com/search?q=kinston+bypass

[LM117]

Is the C.F. Harvey Parkway around Kinston proposed to reconnect with US 70 and thus become part of 70 (and Interstate 42)?

Not anymore. It was one of the northern alternatives for the bypass, but NCDOT eliminated all of the alternatives that ran north of the existing US-70. Kinston initially wanted the CF Harvey Parkway to be the alignment for the bypass since it runs right by the Global TransPark, but since the northern alternatives got the ax, only the southern alternatives remain.

[bob7374]

I know this is right out of left field, but when NCDOT sent their applications to AASHTO for these two corridors, I'm a bit puzzled as to why NCDOT didn't also send one to AASHTO to designate US-117 from Goldsboro to I-40 as "Future I-795".

I was thinking they would just ask for an extension of 795 once it's built to interstate standards. Would they need to designate it as Future 795 first?

No, they don't have to. NCDOT usually has a habit of getting Future I-signs for future interstate corridors so they can advertise to motorists that the route will be upgraded to an interstate and also let's locals get used to the number before it's signed and added to the Interstate system. It also allows towns and cities along a future interstate corridor to advertise to businesses that they will soon have access to an interstate in the hopes that a company or small business will locate in or near those towns since most companies won't locate near a city or town that either doesn't have an interstate or won't be along an interstate in the future. It's one of the biggest reasons the Global TransPark in Kinston has been a failure after all these years since it lacked interstate access and at the time the Global TransPark was built, there were no plans to designate US-70 as an interstate. I just figured that since they got Future I-42 and Future I-87 for US-70 and US-64/US-17, they would do the same for US-117 since it was also included in the same amendment as US-70 in the FAST Act.

There could be another reason, perhaps they want to re-designate I-795 to another number. A review of NCDOT's potential projects for the next STIP (2018-2027) reveals a couple potential projects that would upgrade US 264 to an interstate east to Greenville, and also US 13/NC 11 between the US 264 Greenville Bypass north to US 64. If this is part of a plan to create a future I-x87 running from Wendell past Wilson east to Greenville then north back to I-87/US 64 east of Tarboro perhaps NCDOT would prefer a non-95 number for the Goldsboro freeway, instead of it running concurrently with the I-x87 route as it currently does with US 264 from I-95 until it splits off.

The list and preliminary scores for potention 2018-2027 projects is available at:
http://www.ncdot.gov/strategictransportationinvestments/2018-2027.html

[LM117]

I know this is right out of left field, but when NCDOT sent their applications to AASHTO for these two corridors, I'm a bit puzzled as to why NCDOT didn't also send one to AASHTO to designate US-117 from Goldsboro to I-40 as "Future I-795".

I was thinking they would just ask for an extension of 795 once it's built to interstate standards. Would they need to designate it as Future 795 first?

No, they don't have to. NCDOT usually has a habit of getting Future I-signs for future interstate corridors so they can advertise to motorists that the route will be upgraded to an interstate and also let's locals get used to the number before it's signed and added to the Interstate system. It also allows towns and cities along a future interstate corridor to advertise to businesses that they will soon have access to an interstate in the hopes that a company or small business will locate in or near those towns since most companies won't locate near a city or town that either doesn't have an interstate or won't be along an interstate in the future. It's one of the biggest reasons the Global TransPark in Kinston has been a failure after all these years since it lacked interstate access and at the time the Global TransPark was built, there were no plans to designate US-70 as an interstate. I just figured that since they got Future I-42 and Future I-87 for US-70 and US-64/US-17, they would do the same for US-117 since it was also included in the same amendment as US-70 in the FAST Act.

There could be another reason, perhaps they want to re-designate I-795 to another number. A review of NCDOT's potential projects for the next STIP (2018-2027) reveals a couple potential projects that would upgrade US 264 to an interstate east to Greenville, and also US 13/NC 11 between the US 264 Greenville Bypass north to US 64. If this is part of a plan to create a future I-x87 running from Wendell past Wilson east to Greenville then north back to I-87/US 64 east of Tarboro perhaps NCDOT would prefer a non-95 number for the Goldsboro freeway, instead of it running concurrently with the I-x87 route as it currently does with US 264 from I-95 until it splits off.

The list and preliminary scores for potention 2018-2027 projects is available at:
http://www.ncdot.gov/strategictransportationinvestments/2018-2027.html

Well, that would be a plot twist! Greenville has been wanting US-264 upgraded to an interstate for a while now, so I'm sure they'll be happy. I'm not against Greenville having an interstate, but a single I-x87 designation from Zebulon to Bethel seems like a crooked routing. There's been a "Quad East" concept floating around since 2013 among the leaders of Greenville, Wilson, Kinston and Goldsboro to have all four cities connected by an interstate. If that's what NCDOT is doing, US-264 from Future I-87 in Zebulon to Stantonsburg Road on the west side of Greenville should be it's own I-x87 and NC-11 (along with the Greenville northwest bypass and future southwest bypass) from Future I-87 in Bethel to Future I-42 in Kinston should be a different I-x87, IMO. I-795 could remain where it is now along US-264/Future I-x87, like I-785 and I-840 in Greensboro.

[CanesFan27]

Bob, honestly that's a stretch to say they'll renumber 795.  Like 785 - they can have a brief multiplex with x87 from 95 to where 795 heads south.  There's no games being played there.

LM117, do you have any links for the Quad East - I've never seen anything on it and would love to catch up on it.

Thanks!
Adam