Skip to main content

36 and 89 - NCDOT submits their applications for two new Interstates

Image
By
Well when I made predictions for the designations of the two new North Carolina Interstate corridors a few months ago, I was way off.  NCDOT has formally requested Interstate 36 to be signed along the Super 70 Corridor and Interstate 89 for the Raleigh to Norfolk corridor.  The designations are pending AASHTO (American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials) and FHWA (Federal Highway Administration) approval.  AASHTO meets in Des Moines, IA later this month.  The FHWA - to the best of our knowledge - has both requests under review.  Both numbers would be exceptions to the standard Interstate numbering grid set in the 1950s.

Interstate 36 will run North of Interstate 40.  Typically, a number higher that 40 would be assigned to this route (more on NCDOT's rationale in a moment). On the other hand, Interstate 89 has a number of exceptions. 1) It is a duplicate of Interstate 89 in Vermont and New Hampshire.  This does occur with other numbers so there is precedent.  2) Interstate 89 will run east of I-95 going against the aforementioned numbering grid.  3) The route is actually more east-west than north-south.  That's really my only objection to it.  Espescially when in 2012, North Carolina petitioned the FHWA for preliminary approval for Interstate 44 along the same corridor.

Friend of the blog, Adam Froehlig, wrote to NCDOT asking for some information in regards to the two requests - here's what they wrote:

This is in reference to your correspondence concerning recent Interstate request submittals to AASHTO from NCDOT. A great deal of thought went into the selection of the proposed Interstate numbers. We reviewed various 2 digit numbers; however, all had either conflicts with NC routes, VA routes or were utilized in other states.


The east west numbers that fell in the range between 40 and 64 had what we perceived as greater conflicts. The following routes were considered, but rejected due to the below reasons:
· 42 – has a State route that is a widely used in central and eastern NC
· 44 – received comments from people concerning 44 and confusing it with I- 440
· 46 – exists in both states, located in central NC
· 48 – has a State route that is widely used in central and eastern NC
· 50 – has a State route that is widely used in central and eastern NC
· 52 – NC and VA have a US route 52, but we prefer not to create other conflicts like 74
· 54 – has a State route used in central and eastern NC
· 58 – has a State route that is widely used in central and eastern NC
· 60 – avoiding utilizing 60 as well as 50based on review by FHWA
· 62 – exists in both states, located in central NC, less likely to be confused; however; VA would like to avoid the potential confusion with 64.

We also reviewed the various north south numbers between 89 and 95.
· 87 – has a State route that is widely used in central and eastern NC
· 89 – NC and VA have a state route, but they are located in the western parts of the state
· 91 – NC has a short section in the eastern portion of the state and VA has a route in the west
· 93 – NC and VA have a state route, but they are located in the western parts of the state

Interstate 89 was chosen due to the smaller amount of conflicts with other Interstates (85,95), US routes and NC routes. The even number routes did not appear to be fixable without creating conflicts with the current state routes.

We have received email correspondence from Virginia Department of Transportation indicating their support of the use of 89.

The Department will likely replace the 495 section and not continue it as aconcurrent route. We see opportunities to reduce the length of I-440 and possibly diminish some confusion on the 440 loop. We have not currently made this decision, but are considering the various alternatives.

Once the Department receives approval, we will follow the process required to place the appropriate signs. We would like to place the signs as soon as we are able.
For the 70 corridor, the number 36 appears to be the only number in the range that did not have a conflict. There are several examples across the country where the numbers are slightly out of order.

We are confident your community can appreciate the difficulty in attempting to find numbers that do not have state or multi-state conflicts. As we continue to add additional interstate routes, the supply of numbers will continue to diminish and simply end. Even the three digit numbers are becoming problematic in some instances. There are technically 50 numbers for north south and 50 numbers for east west highways, what are the realm of solutions for when you need 51 or more interstate highways? Will we duplicate more numbers? What about considering the geographic separation.? If there happens to be an Interstate 5 on the east coast, would anyone realistically become confused with the Interstate 5 on the west coast? As indicated previously, the Department took several scenarios into consideration and chose the number with the least amount of conflict.
Thank you for interest in the North Carolina highway system.

This great response from NCDOT explains why they chose 89 and their reasonings against the other numbers.  I think the state can redesignate routes they did as recently as 1979 when NC 277 in Gaston County became NC 279 when I-277 in Charlotte was approved. Also route number changes have occurred in the last two decades in the eastern part of the state.

AASHTO and the FHWA can reject the proposed numbers so we shall see in the next few weeks if 89 or 36 will stick.

But Adam's e-mail has some other information as for the signing of the two routes once a formal designation is approved.  NCDOT will request for permission to sign along both corridors (where they meet standards) as soon as a number is agreed upon.  So the US 70 Clayton Bypass should see Interstate shields by most likely 2017.  The same could occur for the US 70 Goldsboro Bypass.

If Interstate 89 is approved (or when another number is agreed upon), there may be a number of changes to existing Interstates in NC.  First, I-89 would be eligible to be signed along the entire Knightdale Bypass (US 64/264/I-495) - this would be out to Exit 429 (or 430) for Wendell Blvd./Business US 64 (or Rolesville Road).  This stretch of highway meets interstate standards as the current Interstate 495 designation indicates.  NCDOT will most likely (or from the e-mail definitely will) ditch the I-495 corridor from Raleigh to Rocky Mount in favor of the new number. Also, the 89 route will begin at I-40 at Exit 301 on the Raleigh Beltline creating an overlap with Interstate 440.  NCDOT is considering shortening I-440 to end at the current western terminus of the Knightdale Bypass (Exit 14). 
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Old NY 10 and Goodman Mountain in the Adirondacks

By
  Old highway alignments come in all shapes and sizes, as well as taking some different forms after their lifespan of serving cars and trucks has ended. In the case of an old alignment of what was NY 10 south of Tupper Lake, New York, part of the old road was turned into part of a hiking trail to go up Goodman Mountain. At one time, the road passed by Goodman Mountain to the east, or Litchfield Mountain as it was known at the time. As the years passed, sometime around 1960, the part of NY 10 north of Speculator became part of NY 30, and remains that way today from Speculator, past Indian Lake and Tupper Lake and up to the Canadian Border. At one time, the highway was realigned to pass the Goodman Mountain to the west, leaving this stretch of road to be mostly forgotten and to be reclaimed by nature. During the summer of 2014, a 1.6 mile long hiking trail was approved the Adirondack Park Agency to be constructed to the summit of the 2,176 foot high Goodman Mountain. For the first 0.9 mi
1 comment
Read more

Oregon State Highway 58

By
  Also known as the Willamette Highway No. 18, the route of Oregon State Highway 58 (OR 58) stretches some 86 miles between US 97 north of Chemult and I-5 just outside of Eugene, Oregon. A main route between the Willamette Valley region of Oregon with Central Oregon and Crater Lake National Park, the highway follows the Middle Fork Willamette River and Salt Creek for much of its route as it makes its way to and across the Cascades, cresting at 5,138 feet above sea level at Willamette Pass. That is a gain of over 4,500 in elevation from where the highway begins at I-5. The upper reaches of OR 58 are dominated by the principal pinnacle that can sometimes be seen from the highway, Diamond Peak, and three nearby lakes, Crescent, Odell and Waldo (Oregon's second largest lake). OR 58 is chock full of rivers, creeks, mountain views, hot springs and waterfalls within a short distance from the highway. OR 58 was numbered as such by the Oregon State Highway Department in 1940. OR 58 is a del
Post a Comment
Read more

Siuslaw River Bridge - US 101 in Florence, Oregon

By
  As the Oregon Coast Highway (US 101) was being completed across the State of Oregon during the 1930s, a number of bridges needed to be built to cross some of the state's finest rivers. In Florence, Oregon , the Siuslaw River Bridge was designed and constructed to help fill in the gaps between different coastal communities. Built in 1936, the Siuslaw River Bridge is a bascule bridge flanked by two reinforced concrete arches that spans across the Siuslaw River. The bridge and the river get their names from the Siuslaw tribal people who make their home along the river valleys of this part of the Oregon Coast. Today, the bridge provides a vital link connecting US 101 and the Central Oregon Coast to points north and south. The total length of the Siuslaw River Bridge is 1,568 feet, stretching across the river. But more specifically, the bridge is made up of a north approach with eight spans of reinforced concrete deck girder totaling 478 feet in length. There is a main span in three
Post a Comment
Read more