Interstate 87 (NC-VA)

[sparker]

The HPCs are very flexible.  We have "Interstate 73" as in a supposedly approved Interstate corridor, yet West Virginia is planning their segment as an at-grade expressway, and Ohio and Michigan have done no serious preliminary planning yet (let alone proceed past that stage).  Virginia has a completed location/EIS NEPA process on the 70 miles of I-73 between N.C. and I-81, but the $4 billion cost has held up any construction so far, and the existing US-220 and I-581 is a very capable multilane high speed highway with 4 or more lanes and 30% of the length is freeway standard.  I would like to see I-73 built at least between SC I-95 and VA I-81.

And barring any NC-like impetus from any states to the north, I-81 is liable to be the I-73 terminus for most of our lifetimes, if it advances past Martinsville.  It would be most enlightening to be a fly on the wall inside VDOT when and if either I-73 or I-87 come up for discussion! 

[Strider]

The HPCs are very flexible.  We have "Interstate 73" as in a supposedly approved Interstate corridor, yet West Virginia is planning their segment as an at-grade expressway, and Ohio and Michigan have done no serious preliminary planning yet (let alone proceed past that stage).  Virginia has a completed location/EIS NEPA process on the 70 miles of I-73 between N.C. and I-81, but the $4 billion cost has held up any construction so far, and the existing US-220 and I-581 is a very capable multilane high speed highway with 4 or more lanes and 30% of the length is freeway standard.  I would like to see I-73 built at least between SC I-95 and VA I-81.

And barring any NC-like impetus from any states to the north, I-81 is liable to be the I-73 terminus for most of our lifetimes, if it advances past Martinsville.  It would be most enlightening to be a fly on the wall inside VDOT when and if either I-73 or I-87 come up for discussion!

Yeah, I agree with you. I-81 is more likely to be I-73's terminus for a long time. Martinsville will get it first, however.

[Interstate 69 Fan]

It's signed!
http://www.malmeroads.net/ncfutints/fut87.html

[froggie]

We know...

[WashuOtaku]

It's signed!
http://www.malmeroads.net/ncfutints/fut87.html

I see one of my pictures without the proper credit.   

[Takumi]

* Takumi goes to get some popcorn

[LM117]

Pasquotank County is strongly opposed to the idea of re-routing I-87 along the proposed connector route to Currituck and VA-168. They want I-87 to stay on US-17. VDOT has also just begun their study of I-87.

http://www.dailyadvance.com/News/2017/10/27/Where-should-I-87-go-Locals-No-reroute-through-Currituck.html

Pasquotank County officials say they're "dead set"  against any effort to reroute the proposed Raleigh-to-Norfolk I-87 interstate through Currituck County and connect with Virginia Highway 168.

Commissioner Jeff Dixon said at last week's Elizabeth City-Pasquotank Economic Development Commission meeting that county commissioners want the proposed interstate to follow the current route set out in federal law creating it: U.S. Highway 64 from Raleigh to Williamston and U.S. 17 from Williamston to Chesapeake, Virginia.

Dixon was responding to a recent report that Currituck officials had contacted the N.C. Department of Transportation about the possibility of making a connector route that's been proposed from U.S. 17 to Currituck an actual alternate for I-87.

Pasquotank officials say while they support the proposed U.S. 17-Currituck connector road, they do not support making it the route for I-87 into Virginia.

EDC Director Wayne Harris last week told the Elizabeth City Downtown, Inc. board that having I-87 turn right in northern Camden County and head toward Currituck not only would be contrary to federal legislation but "would be tremendously expensive."  He noted that the highway project, already projected to cost $1 billion in North Carolina alone, could see its price tag go up by tens of millions of more dollars. Shifting the interstate through Currituck could also add more time to completing the project, he said.

Harris also said shifting I-87 into Currituck would reduce the effectiveness of the interstate as an evacuation route for federal military and civilian personnel should a hurricane make landfall in the region.

Dixon said he expects Pasquotank commissioners, the EDC board and Elizabeth City City Council would all adopt resolutions asking DOT to stick to the current plan to have I-87 follow U.S. 64 and U.S. 17 into Virginia.

Shane York, a feasibility studies engineer with NCDOT, brought up Currituck's interest in having the U.S. 17-Currituck connector studied as an alternate route for I-87 during a recent meeting with Camden commissioners. The current plan for I-87 has the interstate following U.S. 17 through Camden into Chesapeake.

York said Currituck officials had asked NCDOT to study the cost of rerouting I-87 through Currituck.
He also advised Camden officials that Virginia's transportation secretary had expressed interest in the idea.

NCDOT documents show a proposed alternate route for I-87 starting just north of the Dismal Swamp State Park and extending just below the state line into northern Currituck, which is the location of the county's proposed Moyock Mega-Site commercial and residential project. The alternate route would pass northwest of Moyock and bend just slightly northeast into Virginia, ending at a new interchange with Virginia Highway 168, which feeds into Interstates 64 and 464.

Currituck County Manager Dan Scanlon acknowledged this week that the county asked NCDOT to study the feasibility of aligning I-87 with the proposed U.S. 17-Currituck connector.

He said it's Currituck's belief that the proposed connector road would be built closer to interstate standards than U.S. 17 would be. Also, Currituck believes the connector would be the better route for I-87 if North Carolina's and Virginia's transportation priorities are unaligned, he said.

In an email, Scanlon said county officials have discussed the I-87 project with a number of agencies and officials in Virginia and also reviewed documents outlining future transportation plans in the Hampton Roads area. Currituck's concern, he said, is that the I-87 project seems more of a priority in northeastern North Carolina than it is in Virginia.

"We have learned that although there is some support for the (I-87) project in Virginia, it has not been included in the Hampton Roads Transportation Planning Organization's 2040 long-range transportation plan and is not currently considered a priority for any of the HRTPO jurisdictions,"  Scanlon said.

The Hampton Roads Transportation Planning Organization is the group that includes municipalities, state and federal agencies responsible for the planning of bridges, highways and roads in the Hampton Roads region.

Scanlon said Currituck's inquiry included looking at a city of Chesapeake study called "Forward Chesapeake"  that outlines the city's plans through 2026 as well as Chesapeake's long-term master transportation plan. According to Scanlon, neither makes a priority of bringing U.S. 17 through Virginia up to interstate standards.

Scanlon said Currituck's concern is that if the proposed I-87 isn't viewed with the same priority north of the North Carolina-Virginia border as it is south of it, "Where does that leave North Carolina?"

Virginia Department of Transportation Commissioner Charlie Kilpatrick recently said Chesapeake officials have asked his agency to work with VDOT experts on opportunities for I-87 in Virginia.

Kilpatrick said VDOT is just beginning its study of I-87 and hasn't discussed possible alignments of the proposed roadway.

[Takumi]

Of course they're against a routing that wouldn't bring as much money to them.

[Beltway]

"We have learned that although there is some support for the (I-87) project in Virginia, it has not been included in the Hampton Roads Transportation Planning Organization's 2040 long-range transportation plan and is not currently considered a priority for any of the HRTPO jurisdictions,"  Scanlon said.

IOW, that speaks for itself.  Little if any support.

[sparker]

"We have learned that although there is some support for the (I-87) project in Virginia, it has not been included in the Hampton Roads Transportation Planning Organization's 2040 long-range transportation plan and is not currently considered a priority for any of the HRTPO jurisdictions,"  Scanlon said.

IOW, that speaks for itself.  Little if any support.

If the cited "2040" plan was drafted and published prior to the 2016 re-designation of HPC 13, including VA's segment of US 17, as the I-87 corridor, it obviously wouldn't reflect that particular change of circumstances.  As the previous cite states, Chesapeake has asked VDOT for cooperation regarding corridor routing.  It will take time for VDOT to respond, since prior to last year they likely wouldn't have had any contingency plans in place for such a concept.  We'll just have to wait and see what transpires -- and what is proffered (and any pending timetable for such -- which would likely be pushed out to about, well, 2040!). 

[LM117]

"We have learned that although there is some support for the (I-87) project in Virginia, it has not been included in the Hampton Roads Transportation Planning Organization's 2040 long-range transportation plan and is not currently considered a priority for any of the HRTPO jurisdictions,"  Scanlon said.

IOW, that speaks for itself.  Little if any support.

If the cited "2040" plan was drafted and published prior to the 2016 re-designation of HPC 13, including VA's segment of US 17, as the I-87 corridor, it obviously wouldn't reflect that particular change of circumstances.

The plan was adopted on July 21, 2016, months after Congress passed the FAST Act.

http://www.hrtpo.org/page/2040-long-range-transportation-plan/

[sparker]

"We have learned that although there is some support for the (I-87) project in Virginia, it has not been included in the Hampton Roads Transportation Planning Organization's 2040 long-range transportation plan and is not currently considered a priority for any of the HRTPO jurisdictions,"  Scanlon said.

IOW, that speaks for itself.  Little if any support.

If the cited "2040" plan was drafted and published prior to the 2016 re-designation of HPC 13, including VA's segment of US 17, as the I-87 corridor, it obviously wouldn't reflect that particular change of circumstances.

The plan was adopted on July 21, 2016, months after Congress passed the FAST Act.

http://www.hrtpo.org/page/2040-long-range-transportation-plan/

Well then -- that indicates that if the I-87 corridor is indeed completed in NC and empties out onto US 17 at the state line -- at least before 2040 -- the ball would be in the court of VA and the city of Chesapeake.  Whether they take any action, or just simply choose to sit out the game, remains to be seen.  The chances are, though, that it'll be sometime after 2030 before the NC segment is finished -- so VA folks will have a few years to assess whether there's enough additional traffic on US 17 to consider upgrading the corridor (unless the existing plan is internally amended).  I think it's fair to say that this is going to be a point of contention for the next few decades. 

[froggie]

Given my experience with southeastern Virginia, I doubt VDOT and Chesapeake (really the latter as they have operational/maintenance control over US 17) will do anything unless and until commuter traffic from southern Chesapeake and any bedroom communities between there and E-City becomes enough to warrant improvements.  And given precedent with the Steel Bridge, they would likely toll any such improvements.

[LM117]

I know it's not directly road-related, but a recent announcement today involving development near the I-87 corridor could move the upgrade of US-64 up a notch or two in the future.

http://www.wral.com/csx-to-build-massive-cargo-terminal-in-edgecombe-county/15861789/

There's a report going around that CSX will not build the Carolina Connector terminal. CSX hasn't confirmed or denied it.

http://www.rockymounttelegram.com/News/2017/11/02/CSX-hub-plans-in-question-online-report-says.html

A magazine that covers the rail industry has reported that CSX isn't moving forward with plans to build the Carolina Connector in Rocky Mount.

CSX officials on Thursday would neither confirm nor deny the report.

A story on the Trains News Wire website said it has learned that the Jacksonville, Fla.-based railroad company will not build the more than $270 million intermodal terminal in Rocky Mount. The report also said CSX aims to end container sorting at its busy intermodal terminal in North Baltimore, Ohio, by Nov. 11.

But CSX spokesman Christopher Smith wouldn't confirm or deny the report in a statement to the Telegram. Smith said CSX has been focused since March on adopting a new operating plan.

"As part of our new plan, we have been conducting a comprehensive and strategic review of the company's intermodal business, including the use and development of existing and planned infrastructure projects,"  Smith said. "Intermodal will remain an important part of CSX's business and any changes to existing service or to proposed plans will be discussed directly with CSX customers and relevant stakeholders. CSX appreciates the partnership we have developed with the state of North Carolina and we look forward to continuing the dialogue with the state about CCX and our new operating plan."

Construction of the intermodal terminal was set to begin in early 2018, with operations commencing by the end of 2019, officials said.

Construction of the facility would create up to 300 short-term jobs. Once operational, CCX would provide more than 300 direct, long-term jobs with average terminal salaries of more than $60,000 per year.

Over time, CSX expected the intermodal to produce more than 1,500 jobs statewide, while attracting new businesses to the area and pump an estimated $125 million into the state economy.

Here's the magazine article that was referenced:

http://trn.trains.com/news/news-wire/2017/11/02-csx-intermodal-cuts

[sparker]

There's a report going around that CSX will not build the Carolina Connector terminal. CSX hasn't confirmed or denied it.

If it's true, then that'll be something of a body-blow to the region.  Since CSX brought former CN chief Hunter Harrison out of retirement and made him CEO, they seem to be in retrenchment mode.  Their principal source of income, export coal, has seen a precipitous drop in overall transactions (loadings/unloadings) over the past 7-10 years; Harrison was brought in to address the issue; most analysts expected a shift of priorities to container cargo to make up for the lost coal business.  CSX, overall, has the best port presence of the southeast rail conglomerates and is in a better overall position to take advantage of any Panamax-related uptick in business; the Rocky Mount "hub" was intended to enhance that prospect by providing a place to assemble "platooned" unit container trains heading for the Northeast and Midwest.  But Harrison, who has developed a reputation as a shareholder "darling", seems to be employing a strategy of waiting out the downturn and postponing or even eliminating capital outlay -- and development of a major facility like the Rocky Mount hub would certainly be in jeopardy under that game plan.  But except for functioning as an psychological "downer" -- and possibly affecting the rate of industrial development in NE NC simply by an "osmosis" of negativity regarding other regional enterprises, it's highly unlikely that there would be any direct correlation to potential I-87 traffic, as it's unlikely that CSX itself would need to avail themselves of any road corridor between Norfolk and Rocky Mount, since they already have rail lines or trackage rights between the two points and wouldn't require over-the-road transport; any offloads right at the port going onto trucks would be LTL/"less-than-trainload" shipments intended for locations not conveniently served by the main rail corridors.  In other words, there's little chance CSX or the other regional rail conglomerate, NS, would require I-87 -- or any other road corridor for that matter -- directly out of Hampton Roads in order to reload cargo onto rails elsewhere.  If the Rocky Mount hub is indeed cancelled, there might be something of a "ripple effect" causing rethinking by businesses that might have considered locating in the region because of the proximity of both major rail facilities and Interstate corridors.  We'll all just have to see how this turn of events plays out.

On another note, it would be ironic if a rail-related downturn such as this would in any way negatively affect the development of an Interstate corridor, since it is widely perceived that the deployment of the Interstate system both negatively affected the state of rail freight transport (effectively truncating individual carloadings) while providing a means to enhance the alternative truck-based transport mode.  Here, a negative occurrence in one mode (CSX rail) might just result in a corresponding devaluation and subsequent delay or truncation of the other mode (the I-87 corridor, or at least the timetable for its development).       

[jwolfer]

The reality is somewhat different.  Far too many people see an Interstate shield as a panacea for economic growth.  Takes far more than that.  Takes resources and skilled workers too, amongst other things.  An Interstate alone isn't going to do it.

Look at West Virginia, possibly the most transformed state highway system in the country, with its excellent network Interstate highways and ADHS highways.

The state has lost population since 1950, when the average U.S. state growth per decade was about 12%.  National population has increased by 112% since 1950.

West Virginia
        2015        2010          2000          1990         1950
1,844,128  1,852,996  1,808,344  1,793,477  2,005,552

Easier to get out of the area.

Z981

[roadman65]

I got the new 2018 RN map and it still shows I-495 as the route near Raleigh.

[Beltway]

The reality is somewhat different.  Far too many people see an Interstate shield as a panacea for economic growth.  Takes far more than that.  Takes resources and skilled workers too, amongst other things.  An Interstate alone isn't going to do it.

Look at West Virginia, possibly the most transformed state highway system in the country, with its excellent network Interstate highways and ADHS highways.
The state has lost population since 1950, when the average U.S. state growth per decade was about 12%.  National population has increased by 112% since 1950.
West Virginia
        2015        2010          2000          1990         1950
1,844,128  1,852,996  1,808,344  1,793,477  2,005,552

Easier to get out of the area.

There is an anecdote, about how someone hears a joke told in church on Sunday, and then they laugh about it on Monday.   

I just now picked up on what jwolfer was saying ... that all those modern highways make it easier to move out of West Virginia.

[jwolfer]

The reality is somewhat different.  Far too many people see an Interstate shield as a panacea for economic growth.  Takes far more than that.  Takes resources and skilled workers too, amongst other things.  An Interstate alone isn't going to do it.

Look at West Virginia, possibly the most transformed state highway system in the country, with its excellent network Interstate highways and ADHS highways.
The state has lost population since 1950, when the average U.S. state growth per decade was about 12%.  National population has increased by 112% since 1950.
West Virginia
        2015        2010          2000          1990         1950
1,844,128  1,852,996  1,808,344  1,793,477  2,005,552

Easier to get out of the area.

There is an anecdote, about how someone hears a joke told in church on Sunday, and then they laugh about it on Monday.   

I just now picked up on what jwolfer was saying ... that all those modern highways make it easier to move out of West Virginia.

However the eastern panhandle of WV is growing as Washington DC exurbs

Z981

[Beltway]

Look at West Virginia, possibly the most transformed state highway system in the country, with its excellent network Interstate highways and ADHS highways.
The state has lost population since 1950, when the average U.S. state growth per decade was about 12%.  National population has increased by 112% since 1950.
West Virginia
        2015        2010          2000          1990         1950
1,844,128  1,852,996  1,808,344  1,793,477  2,005,552

Easier to get out of the area.

There is an anecdote, about how someone hears a joke told in church on Sunday, and then they laugh about it on Monday.   
I just now picked up on what jwolfer was saying ... that all those modern highways make it easier to move out of West Virginia.

However the eastern panhandle of WV is growing as Washington DC exurbs

Indeed it is, but not nearly enough to get the state population even near what it was in 1950.

[The Ghostbuster]

Anyone want to bet we'll see Interstate 87 (and 587 and 42) on the 2019 editions of road atlases?

[sparker]

Anyone want to bet we'll see Interstate 87 (and 587 and 42) on the 2019 editions of road atlases?

Rand McNally generally doesn't slap shields on Interstate routes that aren't signed; chances are we will see I-87 on at least the Raleigh-Durham insert and maybe on the main state map.  If 587 and 42 aren't signed, they probably won't show up.  Not like the old American Maps (pre-Kappa shit) of the early '00's, which had "Future" Interstate shields on such things as the south I-49, the then-finished freeway stretches of I-22, etc.; some of the AAA maps followed suit, but not to the extent of American Map.   

[LM117]

As far as I-87 goes, I seriously doubt it will turn anything around. If there's any development at all, it will most likely be between Rocky Mount and Raleigh and between Elizabeth City and Virginia.

While interstates are not an automatic guarantee of economic development, there are cases where it has helped to give some areas a boost, whether big or small.

Welp, I was wrong.

http://www.rockymounttelegram.com/News/2017/12/20/Tire-plants-to-create-800-jobs.html

Here's the official website for the Kingsboro megasite, which includes an aerial view of it's location. Triangle Tire Co. will be it's first major tenant.

https://www.econdev.org/kingsboromegasite

[Beltway]

As far as I-87 goes, I seriously doubt it will turn anything around. If there's any development at all, it will most likely be between Rocky Mount and Raleigh and between Elizabeth City and Virginia.
While interstates are not an automatic guarantee of economic development, there are cases where it has helped to give some areas a boost, whether big or small.

Welp, I was wrong.
http://www.rockymounttelegram.com/News/2017/12/20/Tire-plants-to-create-800-jobs.html
Here's the official website for the Kingsboro megasite, which includes an aerial view of it's location. Triangle Tire Co. will be it's first major tenant.
https://www.econdev.org/kingsboromegasite

It is already near to I-95 and well connected by the US-64 freeway.  I don't see where proposed I-87 should get credit for this.

"The Kingsboro CSX Select Site is strategically located in the heart of the eastern seaboard, just off US Highway 64, and 10 minutes east of Interstate I-95. The capital city, Raleigh, is only one hour to the west."

[Mapmikey]

Oddly, their map shows Future I-495 on that part of US 64, which was never on the table as far as I know...

A separate article from Dec 2016 touting the Kingsboro site did not mention interstate to Norfolk at all.  Just that it was on US 64 and 10 minutes from I-95...

Also of note...North Carolina has 4 of these megasties like Kingsboro.  None of them besides Kingsboro is on an existing or imminent interstate corridor (US 1 Moncure; US 64 Siler City; US 421 Liberty).

This article (http://www.newsobserver.com/news/business/article190550539.html) suggests that financial incentives offered by the state and a larger amount by Edgecombe County were a major factor in their decision to locate at Kingsboro.

Zero articles/items I could find mention access to the Port in Norfolk including the State of NC and the tire company itself.  Pretty much all of them mentioned CSX access, I-95, and being near Raleigh.  Only a 2012 article about the site being for sale mentioned that it was equidistant from the ports at Norfolk and Morehead City.

Also count me as a skeptic on any effect from I-87...