NC: Interstate 587

[IMGoph]

Why is North Carolina's Interstate 587 not in the database?

[oscar]

^ The roads that are/will be included in I-587 are parts of US routes, already in the database.

I think we decided not to add future Interstates to our database, or at least put them at the bottom of the priority list, if they are completely concurrent with routes already in the DB. When I-587 is more completely signed as a non-future route (a few signs reportedly are starting to show up in the field), might be time to change that.

[IMGoph]

^ The roads that are/will be included in I-587 are parts of US routes, already in the database.

I think we decided not to add future Interstates to our database, or at least put them at the bottom of the priority list, if they are completely concurrent with routes already in the DB. When I-587 is more completely signed as a non-future route (a few signs reportedly are starting to show up in the field), might be time to change that.

It's certainly not a 'future' interstate anymore, so I would say whoever is in charge of NC needs to add it to the database.

https://www.witn.com/2022/06/22/section-roadway-becomes-interstate-new-signs-be-unveiled/

[rickmastfan67]

I think we're waiting on the exit number changes, due to the underlying US routes needing to be changed too.

[IMGoph]

I think we're waiting on the exit number changes, due to the underlying US routes needing to be changed too.

Makes sense! Thanks!

[rickmastfan67]

So, it seems that the parts of US-264 that aren't becoming I-587 (at this time), will have their exit numbers updated to I-587 mileage now, rather than later.

https://www.ncdot.gov/news/press-releases/Pages/2022/2022-07-27-new-signs-future-i-587.aspx

To ease any public confusion, the department's Highway Division 4 forces will install the new numbering system for the remaining portion of U.S. 264.

That remaining portion spans 18 miles from the split of U.S. 64/264 in Zebulon and I-95 in Wilson, where I-587 officially begins.

Upgrading this 18-mile section to I-587 is scheduled to be awarded for construction in three to four years.

The new numbers will go up starting Thursday will be completed by early next week, weather permitting.

bob7374 has what he assumes the exit numbers to be listed here: https://malmeroads.net/ncfutints/i587exits.html

====

So, this leads up to an interesting question, how do we label the US-264 part that is getting the new numbers, but is not going to be part of I-587 for another 3-4 years?

I'm guessing we should just do '7(587)' labels for that part of it.  Probably safest thing we can do.

Anyways, in another week, as soon as somebody can do a field check, we should then be able to move forward once we have all the new numbers for each exit.

[Markkos1992]

I will obviously not be able to as part of my NC trip this weekend.

[yakra]

I'm guessing we should just do '7(587)' labels for that part of it.  Probably safest thing we can do.

A quick glance suggests that's legal under https://travelmapping.net/devel/manual/wayptlabels.php#noconc

"no concurrent route to explain it," but an existing sequence nonetheless

[Markkos1992]

Note that the US 264 ALT line ends up north of the US 264 line briefly between 21 and 27.

[mapmikey]

shaping point added to US 264

[rickmastfan67]

bob7374 has confirmed all the exit numbers along I-587 now.  Thus, this can now proceed.

https://malmeroads.net/ncfutints/i587exits.html

[Markkos1992]

I do have a route plan set up to clinch US 264 ALT hopefully by the end of the year.  Hopefully by then, I'll be able to clarify current signage in that regard.

[rickmastfan67]

You know how slow NC can be on complete reroutes though. LOL!  Might be 2030 before they have US-264 rerouted. lol!

[mapmikey]

I-587 file created and submitted.  US 264 changed to 587's exit numbers throughout but not rerouted yet.

[Markkos1992]

I think that the I-795 numbers need to be updated along the I-587/US 264 concurrency.