The creation of a consensus-based vision for the US 64-NC 49 Corridor is an important planning step. A vision such as this provides a long-term, directional goal for future roadway improvements to US 64 and NC 49 within the study area and helps define the major aspects of a substantial financial investment. The vision also provides a means of building stakeholder buy in and commitment to major facility modifications and enhancements. To arrive at a solid, consensus-based vision, a process must be followed of identifying conceptual improvement alternatives, travel demand forecasting, evaluation of alternatives and ultimately establishing the Corridor Vision.

Five conceptual improvement alternatives were formulated and subjected to an evaluation as part of the corridor study. The links below provides brief overviews of each alternative definition:

• No-Build Alternative
• E+C (Existing Plus Committed) Alternative
• E+C Enhanced Alternative
• Expressway Alternative
• Freeway Alternative

The conceptual improvement alternatives were evaluated using criteria based on mobility benefits, growth management benefits, economic benefits, environmental issues and cost effectiveness benefits. A simple rating scale of "good," "better," and "best" was developed from complex methodologies to convey the findings of the evaluation. The following general statements summarize these findings and form a basis for the Corridor Vision.

• The E+C (Existing Plus Committed) Alternative provides sufficient user benefits compared to the investment level and effectively serves a short-term need for safety improvement and capacity enhancement.
• The E+C Enhanced Alternative provides user benefits similar to the Expressway Alternative, but at a substantially reduced cost.
• The Expressway Alternative substantially improves corridor mobility and diverts a good percentage of traffic from the I-85/I-40 Corridor; however, the capital cost is nearly as much as the Freeway Alternative with less overall user benefit.
• The Freeway Alternative provides the greatest mobility improvement and traffic diversion from the I-85/I-40 Corridor, but at the highest capital cost.

It is evident from the alternatives evaluation that the Freeway Alternative best satisfies the purposes and criteria of a Strategic Highway Corridor; however, it is also clear that immediate implementation of the Freeway Alternative is not financially feasible. Therefore, it is the recommendation of the study that the Freeway Alternative serve as the Corridor Vision, with the achievement of the vision occurring through stages with achievement of the vision occurring through a program of staged improvements. These improvements focus on improving mobility throughout the corridor, especially in the urban areas, using the E+C Enhanced Alternative as the interim solution. The freeway vision serves solely to provide improvement direction with full achievement of the vision ultimately being a function of traffic operations and roadway safety needs. There is no set time table for achieving the vision.

• Implementing the Vision - Step 1
• Implementing the Vision - Step 2
• Implementing the Vision - Step 3