Interstate 73/74

[jcil4ever]

Drove down Future-74 from Fancy Gap today. Confirmed that there have been no mile marker changes on I-77 and that every exit except for US-52 South have been updated. Again, it almost seems intentional since the overhead for Westinghouse was updated to Exit 39 while Exit 119 on the same structure hasn't been updated (29:47 in the video). In adding the timestamps in the description, I also discovered that US-52 North near Mt. Airy was also renumbered from Exit 17 to 18 (maybe to align with the renumbering of the same exit northbound from 140 to 18?).

EDIT
Here are a few higher quality/drier images...

An example of the new "Future I-74 Corridor" signs:


The aforementioned overhead sign using both 74 and 52 exit numbers:


The 74/52 split:


Here's also a view of the interchange coming from Winston:

[cowboy_wilhelm]

I take it North Carolina doesn't do "Old Exit Numbers" when they renumber an exit. That sign should say Exit 29, Old Exit 129 as a way to avoid confusion by the new exit number.

They did with I-26 20+ years ago, and I believe someone gave another example recently when this same question came up. NCDOT has cited high costs for aluminum delaying new license plates and other signing projects, plus the major budget crunch from Helene, so it's not surprising that they're not making temporary signs.

[jcil4ever]

Here's a view through the interchange construction projects on the southern end of the project where I-74 will meet I-40 and NC-192:

[carbaugh2]

I came across the following projects while looking at the completion percentages for the Rockingham Bypass and Winston-Salem Beltway segments:

The bridges over Toms Creek at Exit 135 (future Exit 21- Thanks Bob) for the southbound only left exit to Old US 52 with plans found at https://xfer.services.ncdot.gov/dsplan/2024%20Highway%20Letting/04-16-24/Plans%20and%20Proposals/SURRY_B-5527_C204208/Standard%20PDF%20Files/

Repaving 7.5 miles between the Little Yadkin River and King with plans available at https://connect.ncdot.gov/letting/Division%209%20Letting/04-24-2024/DI00342%20-%20US%2052%20Plans.pdf.

Since I'm not skilled in reading through the detailed drawings, I'm guessing that this will also allow any substandard shoulders to be upgraded. Maybe this means we are seeing a piecemeal upgrade to interstate standards much like other parts of the state.

Thanks for finding those. For the Toms Creek bridge project, the plans do show interstate standard 12' lanes and 10' right shoulders with widened left shoulders in the construction area. For the other it's hard to tell, the shoulders are to be reconstructed but there's no specific mention of how wide they will be. You are probably correct with NCDOT's using a piecemeal approach, like with US 74 east of I-95, to bring the highway closer to interstate standards. They probably hope with enough progress they can convince the FHWA to allow them to post interstate shields earlier with waivers for the remaining substandard portions if they promise to upgrade them over a period of time. 

My family recently returned from a vacation to the Outer Banks (Waves specifically) and drove back through here on the way home (I took them on I-64 through Virginia on the way there). I can confirm that the repaving project from King northward has added full right shoulders. I couldn't see much of the bridge replacement project as the northbound lanes were largely unaffected.

Other observations:
My prior drives on the beltway had almost zero traffic. The volume of cars has certainly picked up now that the US 52 interchange has opened.
Driving through the finished (for now) beltway interchange with US 52 made me realize just how much of an undertaking that project was (and still more to come). The drive was very smooth. I only wish the signage for 52 South from 74 West would include "To NC 65" since it includes Rural Hall as a control city.
The mileage signs for the I-74/I-77 are still not changed, and I hope they stay that way.

Finally, someone had mentioned not understanding why many Appalachians always goes to Myrtle Beach for vacation. It is the closest place for many of us to find beaches with palm trees (After vacationing in the Outer Banks this year, I missed the salty air and palm trees). The Grand Strand has rental prices that are more affordable for those of us who reside in areas with lower costs of living- and the lower salaries that go with it. Also, it is one day's drive from most of Ohio, meaning families don't have to stop for a hotel stay on the way down, saving the budget for the main destination. Personally, all of the vacations for my family of 5 have been to the Carolinas (Outer Banks, Topsail Island, Ocean Isle Beach, North Myrtle Beach, and Little River) for those reasons.

[Rothman]

In my experiemce with the Appalachian side of my family, "Redneck Rivieras" like Myrtle Beach and the Florida panhandle remain popular with Appalachia mainly due to cost.  I have seen the phenomenon where members of my family have "moved up" to other vacation areas as their affluence grew.

Great uncle from WV even bought a hotel in Myrtle Beach to make money off others in his area...

Then again, last time I was in Myrtle Beach, I wondered if the Appalachian crowd would eventually be priced out...

[bob7374]

NCDOT is warning of possible delays next week when they close a lane along 'I-74 South':
https://www.ncdot.gov/news/press-releases/Pages/2025/2025-10-09-lane-closures-for-Interstate-74-scheduled.aspx

[bob7374]

Some Future I-74 corridor news, and NCDOT got the exit number right!:
https://www.ncdot.gov/news/press-releases/Pages/2025/2025-11-10-forsyth-bridge-repairs.aspx

[ARMOURERERIC]

I noted some bridge and interchange upgrade in Madison making their way up the NC bidding list.  Will this aid in extending I-73 north of its current terminus?

[The Ghostbuster]

It might, but don't expect Interstate 73 to enter Virginia (or South Carolina) anytime soon, if ever.

[PColumbus73]

It might, but don't expect Interstate 73 to enter Virginia (or South Carolina) anytime soon, if ever.

I believe that Virginia would have to restart the EIS process. South Carolina (outside of Horry County) hasn't committed any sort of funding.

[bob7374]

Though opening may still be more than a year away, NCDOT has started installing signage along I-74 approaching the future Beltway interchange. Here are a couple images taken by Mike Browne at the Union Cross Road interchange showing a collection of signage and sign supports to be installed, plus a covered up advance sign already up for the Future NC 192 exit on I-74 West:

[The Ghostbuster]

Are they also planning to renumber the exits on the portion of Interstate 74 that will become NC 192?

[Rothman]

It might, but don't expect Interstate 73 to enter Virginia (or South Carolina) anytime soon, if ever.

I believe that Virginia would have to restart the EIS process. South Carolina (outside of Horry County) hasn't committed any sort of funding.

FHWA hasn't been very stingy about their expiration dates lately. That said, it has been a while. Wonder if it's really been that long.

[Mapmikey]

It might, but don't expect Interstate 73 to enter Virginia (or South Carolina) anytime soon, if ever.

I believe that Virginia would have to restart the EIS process. South Carolina (outside of Horry County) hasn't committed any sort of funding.

FHWA hasn't been very stingy about their expiration dates lately. That said, it has been a while. Wonder if it's really been that long.

Virginia already stated they would have to start over if they ever picked I-73 back up north of Martinsville.

South of there the US 220 Southern Connector is in theory still on the table, so I-73 could still reach US 58.

[NE2]

Though opening may still be more than a year away, NCDOT has started installing signage along I-74 approaching the future Beltway interchange. Here are a couple images taken by Mike Browne at the Union Cross Road interchange showing a collection of signage and sign supports to be installed, plus a covered up advance sign already up for the Future NC 192 exit on I-74 West:

192 east? Is this really how the exit will be signed from I-40 east? Nothing about it still leading to I-74?

[bob7374]

Though opening may still be more than a year away, NCDOT has started installing signage along I-74 approaching the future Beltway interchange. Here are a couple images taken by Mike Browne at the Union Cross Road interchange showing a collection of signage and sign supports to be installed, plus a covered up advance sign already up for the Future NC 192 exit on I-74 West:

192 east? Is this really how the exit will be signed from I-40 east? Nothing about it still leading to I-74?

Apparently when you invest so much in building the I-74 interchange with I-40 you want as much traffic to use it as possible, so you don't mention that you can also get to I-74 East from NC 192. I assume though that GPS apps will route drivers that way.

[PColumbus73]

Though opening may still be more than a year away, NCDOT has started installing signage along I-74 approaching the future Beltway interchange. Here are a couple images taken by Mike Browne at the Union Cross Road interchange showing a collection of signage and sign supports to be installed, plus a covered up advance sign already up for the Future NC 192 exit on I-74 West:

192 east? Is this really how the exit will be signed from I-40 east? Nothing about it still leading to I-74?

Apparently when you invest so much in building the I-74 interchange with I-40 you want as much traffic to use it as possible, so you don't mention that you can also get to I-74 East from NC 192. I assume though that GPS apps will route drivers that way.

The stub is just long enough to not know what to do with. A hidden number and/or designating it as 'I-74 Spur' might have made more sense.

Situations like this one should allow for incomplete interchanges, since the 'missing' movements would be satisfied by the existing interchange.

[bob7374]

Though opening may still be more than a year away, NCDOT has started installing signage along I-74 approaching the future Beltway interchange. Here are a couple images taken by Mike Browne at the Union Cross Road interchange showing a collection of signage and sign supports to be installed, plus a covered up advance sign already up for the Future NC 192 exit on I-74 West:

192 east? Is this really how the exit will be signed from I-40 east? Nothing about it still leading to I-74?

Apparently when you invest so much in building the I-74 interchange with I-40 you want as much traffic to use it as possible, so you don't mention that you can also get to I-74 East from NC 192. I assume though that GPS apps will route drivers that way.

The stub is just long enough to not know what to do with. A hidden number and/or designating it as 'I-74 Spur' might have made more sense.

Situations like this one should allow for incomplete interchanges, since the 'missing' movements would be satisfied by the existing interchange.

The sign plans for the I-40 to I-74 segment of the Beltway did not include any signage for NC 192 on I-40 East to see if there was any reference to I-74 East. A subsequent project to revise the NC 109 exit did include sign plans up to the NC 109 exit that included advance signs for NC 192. No 'sign' of I-74 here either:

[sprjus4]

The I-40 / I-74 interchange is overbuilt. As PColumbus73 mentioned, the existing highway already provides the movements from I-40 East to I-74 East, and vice versa... so the two ramps at the new I-40 interchange don't need to exist.

Additionally, the new ramp from I-74 East to I-40
East, under no circumstances, needs to be a full blown flyover. The vast majority of I-74 East to I-40 East traffic will use US-421 (former I-40 Business). While this movement is still needed at the new interchange, it could've sufficed with a loop ramp.

Likewise, the flyover from I-40 West to I-74 East could suffice as a loop ramp as well. Again, not imagining it gets much traffic at all. The only flyover that the interchange warrants is from I-40 East to I-74 West. The other movements can be loop ramps (with a C/D lane in there somewhere), or outright not exist (because the existing I-74 highway that will renumbered provides that movement)

[Molandfreak]

The I-40 / I-74 interchange is overbuilt. As PColumbus73 mentioned, the existing highway already provides the movements from I-40 East to I-74 East, and vice versa... so the two ramps at the new I-40 interchange don't need to exist.

Additionally, the new ramp from I-74 East to I-40
East, under no circumstances, needs to be a full blown flyover. The vast majority of I-74 East to I-40 East traffic will use US-421 (former I-40 Business). While this movement is still needed at the new interchange, it could've sufficed with a loop ramp.

Likewise, the flyover from I-40 West to I-74 East could suffice as a loop ramp as well. Again, not imagining it gets much traffic at all. The only flyover that the interchange warrants is from I-40 East to I-74 West. The other movements can be loop ramps (with a C/D lane in there somewhere), or outright not exist (because the existing I-74 highway that will renumbered provides that movement)

Doesn't the FHWA require a full connection regardless?

[vdeane]

The I-40 / I-74 interchange is overbuilt. As PColumbus73 mentioned, the existing highway already provides the movements from I-40 East to I-74 East, and vice versa... so the two ramps at the new I-40 interchange don't need to exist.

Additionally, the new ramp from I-74 East to I-40
East, under no circumstances, needs to be a full blown flyover. The vast majority of I-74 East to I-40 East traffic will use US-421 (former I-40 Business). While this movement is still needed at the new interchange, it could've sufficed with a loop ramp.

Likewise, the flyover from I-40 West to I-74 East could suffice as a loop ramp as well. Again, not imagining it gets much traffic at all. The only flyover that the interchange warrants is from I-40 East to I-74 West. The other movements can be loop ramps (with a C/D lane in there somewhere), or outright not exist (because the existing I-74 highway that will renumbered provides that movement)

Doesn't the FHWA require a full connection regardless?

They do, but that doesn't explain why some movements are flyovers rather than loop ramps.

[PColumbus73]

The I-40 / I-74 interchange is overbuilt. As PColumbus73 mentioned, the existing highway already provides the movements from I-40 East to I-74 East, and vice versa... so the two ramps at the new I-40 interchange don't need to exist.

Additionally, the new ramp from I-74 East to I-40
East, under no circumstances, needs to be a full blown flyover. The vast majority of I-74 East to I-40 East traffic will use US-421 (former I-40 Business). While this movement is still needed at the new interchange, it could've sufficed with a loop ramp.

Likewise, the flyover from I-40 West to I-74 East could suffice as a loop ramp as well. Again, not imagining it gets much traffic at all. The only flyover that the interchange warrants is from I-40 East to I-74 West. The other movements can be loop ramps (with a C/D lane in there somewhere), or outright not exist (because the existing I-74 highway that will renumbered provides that movement)

It also appears that the NC 192 interchange with I-74 will be a T interchange, which again feels overbuilt and unnecessary. I don't see the amount of traffic between NC 192 and I-74 West and vice versa warranting the infrastructure that's being installed. Even if NC 192 were extended into downtown Winston-Salem, the logical route from I-74 East would be to get on I-40 West.

Even though full interchanges are required per FHWA, I think this is an example of where an exception is warranted. All the 'missing' movements are provided by an equivalent interstate-grade connection nearby. And these equivalent movements offer better service than the new movements being built.

[The Ghostbuster]

If the NC 192 boulevard between Interstate 40 and US 421 were constructed (very unlikely) maybe the new state highway could have been signed as a north-south route. Since the only portion of 192 will be the portion vacated by Interstate 74, I think it makes sense to sign it east-west.

[Strider]

The I-40 / I-74 interchange is overbuilt. As PColumbus73 mentioned, the existing highway already provides the movements from I-40 East to I-74 East, and vice versa... so the two ramps at the new I-40 interchange don't need to exist.

Additionally, the new ramp from I-74 East to I-40
East, under no circumstances, needs to be a full blown flyover. The vast majority of I-74 East to I-40 East traffic will use US-421 (former I-40 Business). While this movement is still needed at the new interchange, it could've sufficed with a loop ramp.

Likewise, the flyover from I-40 West to I-74 East could suffice as a loop ramp as well. Again, not imagining it gets much traffic at all. The only flyover that the interchange warrants is from I-40 East to I-74 West. The other movements can be loop ramps (with a C/D lane in there somewhere), or outright not exist (because the existing I-74 highway that will renumbered provides that movement)

I have been saying this for years in my old messages to NCDOT Representative. I-40/I-74 interchange is way overbuilt. If I remembered correctly (I will need to find old emails), I was told that the reason for the overbuilt interchange is that it was made in mind that NC-192 is supposed to extend north past I-40 up to US-421 and US-158 "Y" interchange and the current interchanges with I-40 (Exit 196) and US-421 at US-158 were to be reconstructed as full access interchanges (didn't state which type of interchanges).

Someone asked about the exit list for future NC-192: It will be Exit 1 for I-40, Exit 2 for Ridgewood Rd. and Exit 3 for I-74 (this is heading east towards High Point).

Also, I wanted to add that I drove by the construction zone the other day along current I-74 (Future NC-192) to see what the interchange looked like so far. While I don't have any photos since that area is an active construction zone, but it looks like I-74 will go down grade for a little bit then make a sharp curve under both NC-192 West flyover and the new High Point Rd bridge. It looks odd seeing in person in compared to Google Maps. Maybe it will look better when the whole thing is finished.

I wish I took a few pictures as it is hard to explain in text (The only example I can think of is the section where I-94 meets I-294 north of Chicago where I-94 takes a sharp curve when heading south to east or west to north). I-74's will be similar, but it goes downgrade a little bit before the curve.

Next time I am in the area, I will find a way to take some pictures unless someone beat me to it.

[PColumbus73]

I have been saying this for years in my old messages to NCDOT Representative. I-40/I-74 interchange is way overbuilt. If I remembered correctly (I will need to find old emails), I was told that the reason for the overbuilt interchange is that it was made in mind that NC-192 is supposed to extend north past I-40 up to US-421 and US-158 "Y" interchange and the current interchanges with I-40 (Exit 196) and US-421 at US-158 were to be reconstructed as full access interchanges (didn't state which type of interchanges).

Would that NC 192 proposal involve downgrading the old I-74 stub to an expressway or a signalized boulevard? Even then the logic is still somewhat flawed considering the current I-40/74 interchange is more efficient than the new interchange for the movements on the southwest quadrant.

If there are long-term plans to downgrade US 421 around Kernersville, I could possibly see the flyovers from I-74 E to I-40 E being justified. But I think NCDOT would have to demolish the existing US 421 exit off I-40 to really make the investment worthwhile, but doing so would cut downtown Winston-Salem from Greensboro and the US 52 interchanges with both I-40 and US 421 are too poor to be a viable alternative to US 421.