Skip to main content

North Carolina to petition AASHTO for Interstate 295 designation (again...for like the third or fourth time)

The semi-annual American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) meeting is being held next week in Atlanta.  And with this meeting is another round of state petitions for highway designation changes, additions, and deletions.  Requests from North Carolina are typically on the agenda for every meeting.

This year is no different - as North Carolina is petitioning for the designation of Interstate 295 and Future Interstate 295 for the Fayetteville Outer Loop.  You may be wondering - wasn't this done before - maybe a few times before.  Hell, I've lost count.

So what is going on here - and if Interstate 295 was approved over a decade ago why did they take the I-295 signs down in the first place?
Taken in 2007, could I-295 shields be returning to the Fayetteville Outer Loop?

Well - it's complicated.  The first numbering request for the Fayetteville Outer Loop was made in 2003, and the highway was asked to be signed as Interstate 195.  It was rejected - as AASHTO said hey you are going to built this as a full loop one day why don't you try something like 295.  So two years later, when the highway was extended east to connect with Interstate 95 (Exit 58), NCDOT went back to AASHTO and said hey let's try this again as Interstate 295.  AASHTO approved and pretty much that was that.  Signs went up like the one above, and hey, NC had another Interstate.

By 2016, the Outer Loop was now known as NC Highway 295

Well, around 2014 is when all this confusion kicked in.  As NCDOT began to extend the Outer Loop westwards towards the All-American Freeway.  Signage plans revealed that the highway would be signed as NC 295 and not as Interstate 295.  An oversight maybe, after all it seemed like no one ever could agree on what number it should be.  But when NC replaced the Interstate 295 shields on signs along Interstate 95 around the same time - it was generally considered that because of various parts of the highway that did or may not meet full Interstate standards caused the Interstate status to go away. Two examples were the lack of shoulders on the bridge crossing the Cape Fear River and the lack of a direct freeway to freeway connection from I-95 North to I-295.

The left hand turn from Interstate 95 North onto I-295 is a possible reason why I-295 lost its shield. (Google Maps)
So let's fast forward to the present, and North Carolina's current application for Interstate and Future Interstate 295.  First, the Interstate 295 request is for the segment of highway that is currently open from Interstate 95 to the All-American Freeway.  The state argues in its petition that "[t]his section of roadway meets interstate standards and is currently open to traffic."  Further, they note that the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) had approved designation of this route as Future I-295 in November 2003. 
(Source: AASHTO)
The request for the Future I-295 designation is from US 401 (Raeford Road) south to Interstate 95 near St. Pauls.  I guess those are the next sections to open and won't be connected to the north end of the highway so they are going with Future.

So then why did they take the Interstate 295 signs down in the first place?  It the thought was because the highway didn't meet Interstate standards was correct, then why would have the FHWA approved the highway in 2003?  They must have agreed it was up to standard, right?

And could AASHTO reject the designation? Sure, they could, but they are not the ones to judge if the highway meets standard.  They are really in place more for an approval of a route designation.  And besides, they are too worried about the proper spacing format in an application.

(Source: AASHTO)
The Special Committee on US Route Numbering meets in Atlanta next week.  We should get an answer on Interstate 295's third at bat sometime in October.

Further Reading:


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Rep. Sue Myrick's letter to Gov. Easley and Sect. Tippett published in Charlotte Observer

US. Representative Sue Myrick's (R-Charlotte) letter to North Carolina's Governor Mike Easley and NC Transportation Secretary Lyndo Tippett was published in the Friday, November 30th edition of the Charlotte Observer . Why are we delaying the completion of 1-485 in Charlotte again? I read in The Charlotte Observer how rising prices of materials are leading to the delay. Why didn't these same rising costs delay the loops in Fayetteville and Wilmington? Why are we building loops in Fayetteville and Wilmington before we complete the one in Charlotte? We were working on the one in Charlotte back when I was mayor. That was 20 years ago! ... Last I looked Charlotte was the largest city in the state. There seems to be no recognition of that fact in Raleigh. No recognition that we are at a standstill with traffic. No recognition that we have a traffic problem. Nor is there any recognition of the fact that the state DOT utterly botched up the southern leg of our yet to be completed ...

New River Gorge National Park & Preserve - Sandstone Falls

The New River, which runs through New River Gorge National Park & Preserve, is best known for its dramatic rapids and whitewater adventures.  Those features begin at one of the river's widest points: Sandstone Falls. From the Sandstone Falls Boardwalk a look at just a small part of the falls. Though the vertical drop of roughly 20 feet is less than many other well-known waterfalls in the state, the falls' expanse, where the river approaches 1500 feet wide, makes Sandstone Falls impressive.   The Boardwalk Trail leads to a better vantage point of the overall falls. It is a great spot for photography, fishing, or laying out in the sun. Access to the falls is relatively easy: from Hinton, cross the New River on Highway 20, then turn right onto CR 26 and follow New River Road to the Sandstone Falls Parking Area. The Island Loop Trail is a short detour off the Boardwalk Trail and shows a quieter side of the area. At Sandstone Falls, you will find a variety of activities fr...

I-90 in Albany, New York and the Berkshire Spur

Today's Albany Times Union has a segment in their weekly Getting There? column that explains some of the history behind how I-90 is designated in the Albany, NY area as well as the Berkshire Spur. The long and short of the article was that I-90 was originally designated on the unsigned portion of the Berkshire Spur, but as free I-90 was built, the designation was moved onto the free portion of road. Additionally, there were talks in 1999 between state and federal officials about the possibility of moving I-90 back onto the unsigned portion of the Berkshire Spur, while extending I-88 onto what we know as free I-90. There would have also had been an I-88/I-90 multiplex between Rotterdam and Albany as a result. http://www.timesunion.com/AspStories/story.asp?storyID=916307