Skip to main content

NCDOT Announces 'New Exit Numbers' in Greensboro

Image
By
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.


Labels:

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.
4:35 PM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Abandoned US Route 40 in the Truckee River Canyon

By
Within the Truckee River Canyon in the Sierra Nevada range numerous abandoned portions of US Route 40 can be found alongside modern Interstate 80.   This segment of highway was opened during 1926 as a bypass of the Dog Valley Grade which carried the early North Lincoln Highway and Victory Highway. The corridor of the Truckee River Canyon State Highway would be assigned as US Route 40 when the US Route System was commissioned during November 1926. During 1958 the segment of Interstate 80 between Boca, California and the Nevada state line was complete. When Interstate 80 opened east of Boca numerous obsolete portions of US Route 40 were abandoned. Some of these abandoned segments have been incorporated into the Tahoe-Pyramid Trail.  Part 1; the history of US Route 40 in the Truckee River Canyon The Truckee River Canyon for centuries has been an established corridor of travel known to native tribes crossing the Sierra Nevada range.  The first documented wagon crossi...
Post a Comment
Read more

Former California State Route 41 past Bates Station

By
When California State Route 41 was commissioned during August 1934 it was aligned along the then existing Fresno-Yosemite Road north of the San Joaquin River.  Within the Sierra Nevada foothills of Madera County, the original highway alignment ran past Bates Station via what is now Madera County Road 209, part of eastern Road 406 and Road 207.   Bates Station was a stage station plotted during the early 1880s at what was the intersection of the Coarsegold Road and Stockton-Los Angeles Road.   The modern alignment bypassing Bates Station to the east would be reopened to traffic during late 1939.   Part 1; the history of California State Route 41 past Bates Station Bates Station was featured as one of the many 1875-1899 Madera County era towns in the May 21, 1968, Madera Tribune .  Post Office Service at Bates Station is noted to have been established on November 23, 1883 and ran continuously until October 31, 1903.  The postal name was sourced...
Post a Comment
Read more

The William Flinn (not Flynn) Highway - Pittsburgh's Misspelled Street

By
For decades if you traveled along PA Route 8 in Pittsburgh's North Hills suburbs, you would have noticed signs that read "William Flynn Highway" at every intersection.  Even today, many businesses and residences have their addresses listed as XXXX William Flynn Highway.  However, it's not William Flynn Highway, it is William FLINN Highway - and the gentleman who it is named for has a long and storied past in Pittsburgh's infrastructure history. William Flinn was born in England in 1851; however later that year, his family emigrated to the United States and would settle in Pittsburgh.  A 10-year-old school dropout, Flinn grew interested in politics and would join the Allegheny County Republican Party in 1877 as a ward commissioner and a seat on the Board of Fire Commissioners.  Flinn would serve in the Pennsylvania State House of Representatives and Senate from 1877 to 1902. (1) Flinn along with James J. Booth would found the Booth and Flinn construction firm ...
2 comments
Read more