Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I'm still a bit puzzled by all this. The road is what the road is, no matter what you number or name it. I have a hard time believing people whose job it is to select sites for companies are so short sighted that they would eliminate an area or site simply because a road was not called interstate xxx then down the road select it because the same exact road with the same exact access is now an interstate. If that's the case, they're even lazier than athletic directors paying a search firm six figures to fill a coaching job that everyone in the United States knows is open.
I'm still a bit puzzled by all this. The road is what the road is, no matter what you number or name it. I have a hard time believing people whose job it is to select sites for companies are so short sighted that they would eliminate an area or site simply because a road was not called interstate xxx then down the road select it because the same exact road with the same exact access is now an interstate. If that's the case, they're even lazier than athletic directors paying a search firm six figures to fill a coaching job that everyone in the United States knows is open.
I agree with what you're saying, but there are some companies out there that are that short-sighted. The Global TransPark in Kinston was the biggest factor behind turning US-70 into I-42 for that very reason.
In other words, Interstates are used as marketing gimmicks.
I'm still a bit puzzled by all this. The road is what the road is, no matter what you number or name it. I have a hard time believing people whose job it is to select sites for companies are so short sighted that they would eliminate an area or site simply because a road was not called interstate xxx then down the road select it because the same exact road with the same exact access is now an interstate. If that's the case, they're even lazier than athletic directors paying a search firm six figures to fill a coaching job that everyone in the United States knows is open.
You just answered your own question. Companies and city governments pay a lot of money for "feasibility studies" and consulting fees for things that could be handled in-house.
It's really human nature. People make a list of criteria they're looking for in any certain thing. If something doesn't meet the criteria they're looking for, they mark it off the list. I really believe that some big companies searching for places to locate have "interstate access" as something on their list. Since Greenville hasn't had that, they have been crossed off those lists.
Just like if you're looking for a new car, and find one that's great in so many ways(great gas mileage, runs great, looks good, etc. ), only to find out it has roll up windows that only go up halfway , no spare tire, and no radio . The car still runs fine, but you're a lot more likely to want to look at another car in the lot that has all those other features that should be "standard" .
Last edited by michealbond; 11-22-2016 at 08:25 AM..
They could very well co-sign current 495 as Future 87. It wouldn't hurt anything.
As far as Future 495, do they actually have to go through a formal process to decommission a not-yet-officially-signed route?
Six months later, no change. The Future 495 signs are still on 64 between Wendell and the I-95 interchange just outside Rocky Mount. No Future 87 signs seen yet.
Six months later, no change. The Future 495 signs are still on 64 between Wendell and the I-95 interchange just outside Rocky Mount. No Future 87 signs seen yet.
I'm surprised NCDOT did not ask AASHTO and FHWA to decommission I-495/Future I-495 last November. I figured they'd want to get rid of 495 before people got too used to it. They might do so in the spring.
On the other hand, "Future I-87" signs went up last October along US-17 between Williamston and VA state line. There may also be signs along US-64 east of Rocky Mount.
Another thing that surprised me was that NCDOT also didn't ask to have the US-70 Clayton and Goldsboro bypasses fully signed as I-42 since they already meet interstate standards.
On a related note, there's been no word on whether or not "Future I-587" signs have gone up on US-264 between Zebulon and Greenville.
This came out of left field. Apparently, FHWA has decommissioned I-495 and added a small stretch of I-440 and the whole length of the Knightdale Bypass (US-64/264) to the interstate system as I-87 between the I-40/440 interchange in southeast Raleigh and the US-64 Business interchange east of Knightdale. That small bit of I-440 has not been decommissioned in favor of I-87, but running concurrent with I-87...for now, anyway.
I-495 is no longer listed for NC in Table 2. I-87 is listed in Table 1.
I wonder if we will now see Future I-87 signs from Knightdale east.
Decommissioning that short stretch of 440 would complicate giving instructions to someone (for example) driving from Wilmington to North Hills. "40, then 87, then 440..."
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
