Skip to main content

NCDOT Announces 'New Exit Numbers' in Greensboro

Another press release that may raise more questions than it answers from NCDOT was placed online this afternoon (8/20): https://apps.dot.state.nc.us/pio/releases/details.aspx?r=2877

"Motorists traveling on Interstates 40 and 73 in Guilford County can expect to see new signs and mile markers. Last summer, the N.C. Department of Transportation decided to reroute I-40 traffic from the Greensboro Western Urban Loop back to I-40 Business based on citizen comments.

The department has started replacing the following signs:

  • Changing the green I-40 Business signs back to the blue I-40 signs;
  • Re-signing the exits along I-40 as Exit 212 (I-40/73) to Exit 227 (I-40/85);
  • Re-signing the exits along I-73 as Exit 103 (I-73/40 interchange) to Exit 96 (I-73/U.S. 220 interchange); and
  • Rerouting U.S. 421 to run concurrently with I-73 and parts of I-85.

The I-85 exit signs will remain the same."


See the URL for the entire release and access to a correct(!) map of the new exit signs and designations for all the Greensboro interstates. The release also says "shield pavement markings will be installed along I-40 prior to the I-85/I-40 split on the west side of Greensboro to help motorists determine which lane to follow."

One problem, the I-85/40 split is EAST of Greensboro. Doh!


They say the hope to be completed in a few more weeks. Where have we heard that before?


Comment: 8 months after the signage replacement project that was supposed to be done at the end of the year, then April, then July, NCDOT releases this 'Final' release only to say the job's not done yet. Are they going to release another statement in September saying 'we are finally, finally done, please please you must believe us now."


'Motorists can expect to see new signs.' Are Greensboro drivers now suppose to look up and notice the new signs after most have been up since April? Are irate citizens going to call in saying why are you expecting us to see new signs when you put new ones up a few months ago?


And of course, there has to be one major blunder. If the people putting the news release together would look at the attached map, or an editor brought in to peruse the statement before putting it online they might have noticed that I-85 and I-40 meet east of Greensboro, not west. I'll plan to go out to Greensboro in mid-September and make sure the project truly is done. And that there are no I-85 shields at the I-40/I-73 interchange.


Comments

Anonymous said…
wow! apparently the guy didnt know where I-85/I-40 split is.. lol. However, I like the idea of that..I am also living in Greensboro and not all signs are complete. I still see some Business 40 and US 421 signs in greensboro.. especially from the Bus 85/I-40 split eastwards. I dont know what is taking them long..

I just wish they can widen the Death Valley and replace all bridges on that section.. oh well.

Popular posts from this blog

The Dummy Lights of New York

  A relic of the early days of motoring, dummy lights were traffic lights  that  were  placed  in the middle of a street intersection. In those early days, traffic shuffled through busy intersections with the help of a police officer who stood on top of a pedestal. As technology improved and electric traffic signals became commonplace, they were also  originally  positioned on a platform at the center of the intersection. Those traffic signals became known as  " dummy lights "  and were common until  traffic lights were moved  onto wires and poles that crossed above the intersection.  In New York State, only a handful of these dummy lights exist. The dummy lights  are found  in the Hudson Valley towns of Beacon and Croton-on-Hudson, plus there is an ongoing tug of war in Canajoharie in the Mohawk Valley, where their dummy light has been knocked down and replaced a few times. The dummy light in Canajoharie is currently out of commission, but popular demand has caused the dummy

Colorado Road (Fresno County)

Colorado Road is a rural highway located in San Joaquin Valley of western Fresno County.  Colorado Road services the city of San Joaquin in addition the unincorporated communities of Helm and Tranquility.  Colorado Road was constructed between 1910 and 1912 as a frontage road of the Hanford & Summit Lake Railway.  The roadway begins at California State Route 145 near Helm and terminates to the west at James Road in Tranquility.   Part 1; the history of Colorado Road Colorado Road was constructed as frontage road connecting the sidings of the Hanford & Summit Lake Railway.  The Hanford & Summit Lake Railway spanned from South Pacific Railroad West Side Line at Ingle junction southeast to the Coalinga Branch at Armona.  The Hanford & Summit Lake Railway broke ground during August 1910 and was complete by April 1912. The Hanford & Summit Lake Railway established numerous new sidings.  From Ingle the sidings of the line were Tranquility, Graham, San Joaquin, Caldwell, H

The Putah Creek Bridge of Monticello (former California State Route 28)

The Putah Creek Bridge was a masonry structure constructed during 1896 by Napa County to serve the community of Monticello.  The Putah Creek Bridge would be annexed into the State Highway System in 1933 when Legislative Route Number 6 was extended from Woodland Junction to Napa.  The Putah Creek Bridge was a component of the original California State Route 28 from 1934-1952.  The span briefly became part of California State Route 128 in 1953 until the highway was relocated as part of the Monticello Dam project in 1955.  Today the Putah Creek Bridge sits at the bottom of the Lake Berryessa reservoir and is accessible to divers.  Pictured as the blog cover is the Putah Creek Bridge as it was featured in the September 1950 California Highways & Public Works.   California State Route 28 can be seen crossing the Putah Creek Bridge near Monticello on the 1943 United States Geological Survey map of Copay.   The history of the Putah Creek Bridge The site of Monticello lies under the waters