My prediction on the numbers for the two new North Carolina Interstate Corridors

Could these be the next two Interstates in North Carolina?

It seems more than likely that NCDOT is going to petition AASHTO to approve the formal numeric numeration for the two new interstate corridors that were included in the FAST ACT. The two corridors are US 64 from Raleigh to Williamston then continuing north on US 17 to Hampton, VA. The other follows US 70 from Interstate 40 near Clayton eastwards to Morehead City.

NCDOT is most likely going to submit an application for both routes this April for the AASHTO meeting this coming May. Here are my predictions for the number of each route.

US 70 Corridor - We know that NCDOT is planning to petition for a number between 40 and 60. Obviously, 40 is already taken, and there is an Interstate 44 already in place running from St. Louis to Wichita Falls, TX. 42 is possible - however - there are a few of the opinion that since NC 42 intersects with the proposed Interstate this number is out. Though, this hasn't stopped NC 73 from intersecting with I-73, I think NCDOT will pass on 42 because of NC 42's close proximity. My guess is Interstate 46. NC 46 runs near the state line and can be renumbered if the state chooses. AASHTO and or the FHWA may throw a curveball and suggest a three digit branch of Interstate 40. If that is the case, and because I am going to hedge by bet here - I'll say that this suggestion with be Interstate 340 because the connection to 40 lies between 140 in Wilmington and 540 in Raleigh.

US 64/US 17 Corridor - This is slightly more difficult. The local business coalition that pushed for an Interstate designation along this corridor has always branded this as Interstate 44. However, they concede that Interstate 44 may not be the right number for the route. There seems to be an overall consensus of opinion for Interstate 50. Plus, the western end of this corridor - from I-95 in Rocky Mount west to I-440 in Raleigh - already has an Interstate designation, Interstate 495. So what will NCDOT do? Scratch 495 and have a two digit number for the entire corridor? Keep 495 and begin the new route at Interstate 95 in Rocky Mount?

My guess - Interstate 50. Yes, US 50 goes through Virginia but it is nowhere in the vicinity of the Tidewater Region. If that is of a concern - Interstate 54 would be my next choice. I also believe that if a two digit Interstate is approved that the allowed signage for the new route will go beyond Interstate 495's current end at I-540 in Knightdale. They will allow the route to be signed to the US 64 Business Exit in Wendell (Exit 429).

Of course, I'm most likely wrong. Feel free to make your own predictions in the comments below.

Interstate shields courtesy of David Kendrick's Shields Up!

2018 Mojave Road Trip Part 2; The deadly desert highway (California State Route 127 and Nevada State Route 373)

After leaving Barstow via Old Highway 58 my next destination was in Death Valley. To access Death Valley from rural San Bernardino County required a trek on north on Interstate 15 to California State Route 127 which becomes Nevada State Route 373 at the state line. Along I-15 I encountered the road sign oddity that is Zzyzx Road about eight miles south of Baker. Zzyzx Road is a four mile road that used to go to the Zzyzx Mineral Springs and Health Spa. The spa was founded in the 1940s and the owner made up the name "Zzyzx" to claim it was the last word in the English Language. The spa has been shut down since the 1970s and is now part of a Desert Studies Center for California State University. The southern terminus of CA 127 in Baker is located at I-15 exit 246. CA 127 is a 91 mile north/south highway which runs to the Nevada State Line in Inyo County. CA 127 is called Death Valley Road from I-15 northward. South of CA 127 ...

Finding the Pre-Emption Road of New York State

The Pre-Emption Road (or rather a series of roads named Pre-Emption Road) follows a survey line called the Pre-Emption Line, drawn in the early days of the United States. The story begins with Massachusetts and New York having competing land claims to modern day Western New York State that have their roots in colonial charters granted by the British. After the Revolutionary War ended, this land became the frontier of the nation and its settlement became a priority for the new American government. During this era, there were a lot of competing land claims that needed to be settled. It was no different with the land claims between New York State and Massachusetts. On November 30, 1786, Massachusetts and New York sent representatives to Hartford, Connecticut to resolve their competing land claims. In less than three weeks, the representatives had reached a compromise. Massachusetts would receive pre-emption rights, meaning the right to sell the land after the Indian title ...

What's In a Name?: When the Roads Really Do Tell a Story

Our tagline on the Gribblenation blog is "because every road tells a story". Some roads tell different stories than others. Along our travels, we may see historic markers that tell us a little story about the roads we travel or the places we pass by. Some historic markers are more general, as to telling us who lived where or what old trail traversed between two towns. During my travels across New York State and other states or provinces, I pass by many historic markers, some with interesting or amusing references to roads. I wanted to highlight a few of the markers I've seen along my travels around the Empire State and help tell their stories. Those stories may be as specific as explaining the tales of a tree that was used to help measure a distance of eight miles from Bath to Avoca in Steuben County, as referenced on the Eight Mile Tree historical marker above. They may also help point the way along historical roads first used centuries ago, or may help tell a local l...

Brian said…

In a state which has no problem with an I-74/US-74 concurrency, I doubt that other route numbers in conflict will be an issue. Personally, I don't see a need for new route numbers of any variety, but that's not the "cool and trendy" way to approach this.

5:14 PM

Bob Malme said…

Good choices for the predictions. I too agree that the US 70 one will be an I-4x and the US 64 an I-5x. As for I-50, the Regional Transportation Alliance (the organization pushing for the US 64 I-route) in a blog post last updated on Feb. 9 (available at: http://letsgetmoving.org/rta-blog/raleigh-norfolk-495-44-50-89-56/) sees potential problems with I-50 due to the existence of NC 50 which also intersects I-95. Their preferred I-5x route is I-56.

6:23 PM

6:36 PM

Kristin Rollins said…

Living in southeastern Virginia, I don't think Virginia's route numbering matters, because I fail to see where the political will will come from to foot the bill for any portion of this Interstate. Southeastern Virginia has many higher-priority projects for which funding has not yet been found, especially regarding a number of urban bridge and tunnel crossings. While I love the route (and the US 17/US 64 route is our favored route to get to I-95 southbound from Hampton Roads), I do not see the value of upgrading the portion north of the VA/NC state line, and I do not see circumstances where it is likely to become valuable enough to be worth the cost to taxpayers and governments here.

4:22 PM

Gribblenation

Search This Blog