Interstate 87 (NC-VA)

[bob7374]

Based on feedback from my new Future I-42 site, I've revised my Future I-87 in NC page to include segments in the Future Construction section based on those in the 2 NCDOT I-87 feasibility studies for US 64 and US 17. This means around 180 mile long I-87 gets 20 segments, the same as the number for the proposed route of 320 mile I-74. Each segment lists, if not complete, what is needed to get it up to interstate standards and whether there's currently a funded project to do so. If not, I discuss the alternative or alternatives suggested by the feasibility studies and projected costs. I will add additional information when it becomes available. http://www.malmeroads.net/ncfutints/fut87.html

[tolbs17]

I wish every single interchange from Raleigh to Chesapeake got lighting. Who cares if the traffic is low. It should have lighting. I hope they don't just widen the shoulders. I think they should add lighting at every interchange as well.

[sprjus4]

I hope they don't just widen the shoulders.

Why not widen the shoulders? It wouldn't meet interstate standards then and quite frankly shoulders are a major safety benefit even if it's not an interstate. Most new highways are built with them in North Carolina, and most other places by default.

[tolbs17]

I hope they don't just widen the shoulders.

Why not widen the shoulders? It wouldn't meet interstate standards then and quite frankly shoulders are a major safety benefit even if it's not an interstate. Most new highways are built with them in North Carolina, and most other places by default.

I hope they don't JUST widen the shoulders. I'm saying they will be widened but i hope they don't just do that. I was saying they should widen the shoulders and add lighting at every interchange.

[sprjus4]

add lighting at every interchange.

Ideally, that would be nice, but it's really not needed especially when a lot of the interchanges go to small rural roadways that will be used infrequently during non-daylight hours. More moderate and major junctions I could see it though, and in urban areas.

[tolbs17]

add lighting at every interchange.

Ideally, that would be nice, but it's really not needed especially when a lot of the interchanges go to small rural roadways that will be used infrequently during non-daylight hours. More moderate and major junctions I could see it though, and in urban areas.

Probably at US 64 and US 17 and where the freeway downgrades, there as well. So maybe not all but some. I'm not sure if the 11 and 13 one (that goes to Greenville) will get it.

Like looking at US 64 and I-95, that's a busy interchange so that's one of the main reasons that it has lighting. Even interchanges at Rocky Mount and Tarboro after that it goes through a rural area where it's not really needed.

[sprjus4]

add lighting at every interchange.

Ideally, that would be nice, but it's really not needed especially when a lot of the interchanges go to small rural roadways that will be used infrequently during non-daylight hours. More moderate and major junctions I could see it though, and in urban areas.

Probably at US 64 and US 17 and where the freeway downgrades, there as well. So maybe not all but some. I'm not sure if the 11 and 13 one (that goes to Greenville) will get it.

Locations where US routes branch off, US-64 / US-17 split, US-17 / US-13 split, US-64 / US-13 / NC-11 split, etc. are good candidates.

Interchanges that have developments off of them such as gas, fuel, lodging, etc. could warrant them as well.

And other interchanges with higher traffic volumes, particularly in urban areas would be candidates as well.

But the interchanges that are small diamond interchanges to a rural road with nothing off of it and light traffic counts wouldn't really warrant lighting.

[tolbs17]

add lighting at every interchange.

Ideally, that would be nice, but it's really not needed especially when a lot of the interchanges go to small rural roadways that will be used infrequently during non-daylight hours. More moderate and major junctions I could see it though, and in urban areas.

Probably at US 64 and US 17 and where the freeway downgrades, there as well. So maybe not all but some. I'm not sure if the 11 and 13 one (that goes to Greenville) will get it.

Locations where US routes branch off, US-64 / US-17 split, US-17 / US-13 split, US-64 / US-13 / NC-11 split, etc. are good candidates.

Interchanges that have developments off of them such as gas, fuel, lodging, etc. could warrant them as well.

And other interchanges with higher traffic volumes, particularly in urban areas would be candidates as well.

But the interchanges that are small diamond interchanges to a rural road with nothing off of it and light traffic counts wouldn't really warrant lighting.

http://ncdot.maps.arcgis.com/home/webmap/viewer.html?webmap=b7a26d6d8abd419f8c27f58a607b25a1

Use this then you will find where the best placement is. Not Everetts or Robersonville.

[tolbs17]

Does anyone know when they will start upgrading to interstate standards over here? Because I want to know to see it. I know they are working on I-42 but I want to see it over here also.

[sprjus4]

Does anyone know when they will start upgrading to interstate standards over here? Because I want to know to see it. I know they are working on I-42 but I want to see it over here also.

The only funded stretch is widening US-64 between Business 64 and the US-264 freeway to 6-lanes. That would presumably also bring it to interstate standards.

There's also 2 interchanges funded for construction in Hertford, NC along US-17, but not scheduled to start until 2027 - 2029.

The stretch between Virginia and Elizabeth City was funded in the 2018 - 2027 STIP for construction in 2027, however the new 2020 - 2029 STIP did not include funding for that.

Part of the issue is that they are trying to build this in large projects, like upgrading US-17 between Virginia and Elizabeth City in one string. They need to do small pieces at a time if they want any funding. For instance, that stretch between Virginia and Elizabeth is limited-access. They should be pursuing smaller projects that all follow the feasibility study's recommendations like interchange projects here and there, and a frontage road project. This is the technique being used on US-74 between I-95 and Wilmington, one interchange at a time. That's been more successful then trying to get it done in one string.

[tolbs17]

Does anyone know when they will start upgrading to interstate standards over here? Because I want to know to see it. I know they are working on I-42 but I want to see it over here also.

The only funded stretch is widening US-64 between Business 64 and the US-264 freeway to 6-lanes. That would presumably also bring it to interstate standards.

There's also 2 interchanges funded for construction in Hertford, NC along US-17, but not scheduled to start until 2027 - 2029.

The stretch between Virginia and Elizabeth City was funded in the 2018 - 2027 STIP for construction in 2027, however the new 2020 - 2029 STIP did not include funding for that.

Part of the issue is that they are trying to build this in large projects, like upgrading US-17 between Virginia and Elizabeth City in one string. They need to do small pieces at a time if they want any funding. For instance, that stretch between Virginia and Elizabeth is limited-access. They should be pursuing smaller projects that all follow the feasibility study's recommendations like interchange projects here and there, and a frontage road project. This is the technique being used on US-74 between I-95 and Wilmington, one interchange at a time. That's been more successful then trying to get it done in one string.

Wonder why they are going so slow... It's a bummer. Will I-587 open first?

[sprjus4]

Will I-587 open first?

That's almost a guarantee. The I-587 corridor is already a freeway. The only thing it needs is wider shoulders, and that is being completed in pavement rehabilitation projects, with the first stretch between I-95 and Greenville underway now or scheduled to start now (someone would have to confirm this, US-264 isn't something I drive on or have any reason to).

Once the shoulders are widened, the blue-and-red shields can go up.

[tolbs17]

Will I-587 open first?

That's almost a guarantee. The I-587 corridor is already a freeway. The only thing it needs is wider shoulders, and that is being completed in pavement rehabilitation projects, with the first stretch between I-95 and Greenville underway now or scheduled to start now (someone would have to confirm this, US-264 isn't something I drive on or have any reason to).

Once the shoulders are widened, the blue-and-red shields can go up.

Yeah, that's nice! I'm ready for it to see the blue and red shields!

[bob7374]

Will I-587 open first?

That's almost a guarantee. The I-587 corridor is already a freeway. The only thing it needs is wider shoulders, and that is being completed in pavement rehabilitation projects, with the first stretch between I-95 and Greenville underway now or scheduled to start now (someone would have to confirm this, US-264 isn't something I drive on or have any reason to).

Once the shoulders are widened, the blue-and-red shields can go up.

Yeah, that's nice! I'm ready for it to see the blue and red shields!

There are 2 combined projects, I-6032 and I-6035 that will rehabilitate pavement and widen shoulders along US 264 in Greene and Pitt County that were let on May 21, 2019. They do not appear to have started yet since there's no reference to them in the Construction Progress Report for the respective counties. There are no other I-587 related projects listed in either the Tentative July 2019-June 2020 Letting List or the 36 month list to July 2022.

The award letter to the winning contractor:
https://connect.ncdot.gov/letting/Central%20Letting/05-21-2019%20Central%20Letting/I-6032,%20I-6035,%2047981.3.GV1,%20etc.,%20C204332.pdf

[tolbs17]

Will I-587 open first?

That's almost a guarantee. The I-587 corridor is already a freeway. The only thing it needs is wider shoulders, and that is being completed in pavement rehabilitation projects, with the first stretch between I-95 and Greenville underway now or scheduled to start now (someone would have to confirm this, US-264 isn't something I drive on or have any reason to).

Once the shoulders are widened, the blue-and-red shields can go up.

Yeah, that's nice! I'm ready for it to see the blue and red shields!

There are 2 combined projects, I-6032 and I-6035 that will rehabilitate pavement and widen shoulders along US 264 in Greene and Pitt County that were let on May 21, 2019. They do not appear to have started yet since there's no reference to them in the Construction Progress Report for the respective counties. There are no other I-587 related projects listed in either the Tentative July 2019-June 2020 Letting List or the 36 month list to July 2022.

The award letter to the winning contractor:
https://connect.ncdot.gov/letting/Central%20Letting/05-21-2019%20Central%20Letting/I-6032,%20I-6035,%2047981.3.GV1,%20etc.,%20C204332.pdf

Well that kinda sucks that they are long because the pavement on the highway is terrible. It needs repaving badly.

[tolbs17]

https://connect.ncdot.gov/projects/planning/FeasibilityStudiesDocuments/Feasibility-Study_1504A_Report_2017.pdf

I apologize if this was already posted, but i was just asking if it's a good idea to raise the speed limit to 75 mph.

[LM117]

According to this article, the signing work in Raleigh and Knightdale should be complete by the end of the month.

http://www.rockymounttelegram.com/News/2019/08/01/New-signs-reflect-I-87-taking-shape.html

[sprjus4]

According to this article, the signing work in Raleigh and Knightdale should be complete by the end of the month.

http://www.rockymounttelegram.com/News/2019/08/01/New-signs-reflect-I-87-taking-shape.html

North Carolina had requested the highway be designated as I-89, but that road already existed in New England.

The FHA assigned I-87, which also existed in New York state, with the reasoning that it was more likely that the new I-87s might eventually connect than the other two roadways.

I thought this idea was dead in 2006 at the conclusion of VDOT's study that only North Carolina and Delaware were interested in a coastal route (obviously an I-87 extension would only be north of US-64 unlike the I-99 proposal, but everything from there northward is the same as the VDOT 2006 study evaluated).

IMO, Virginia has much higher priorities than building an 80-mile highway on the Eastern Shore and a massive urban upgrade to US-13 in Virginia Beach / Norfolk. The farthest north I see this highway going is I-64. An Eastern Shore highway would be a nice idea in theory, enough I even made a Fictional Highways proposal if it were to ever be built, though in reality it's never going to happen. It's just as likely to happen as linking the two I-74s.

[LM117]

According to this article, the signing work in Raleigh and Knightdale should be complete by the end of the month.

http://www.rockymounttelegram.com/News/2019/08/01/New-signs-reflect-I-87-taking-shape.html

North Carolina had requested the highway be designated as I-89, but that road already existed in New England.

The FHA assigned I-87, which also existed in New York state, with the reasoning that it was more likely that the new I-87s might eventually connect than the other two roadways.

I thought this idea was dead in 2006 at the conclusion of VDOT's study that only North Carolina and Delaware were interested in a coastal route (obviously an I-87 extension would only be north of US-64 unlike the I-99 proposal, but everything from there northward is the same as the VDOT 2006 study evaluated).

IMO, Virginia has much higher priorities than building an 80-mile highway on the Eastern Shore and a massive urban upgrade to US-13 in Virginia Beach / Norfolk. The farthest north I see this highway going is I-64. An Eastern Shore highway would be a nice idea in theory, enough I even made a Fictional Highways proposal if it were to ever be built, though in reality it's never going to happen. It's just as likely to happen as linking the two I-74s.

That's just wishful thinking on AASHTO's part. There's no way in hell the Eastern Shore would ever support an interstate there, especially Northampton County, which is notoriously NIMBY. Plus there's the little thing called the CBBT.

If VA does build their part of I-87 (very doubtful), I think it should take over I-464 and end at I-264.

[sprjus4]

I think it should take over I-464 and end at I-264.

Agreed. Another thing that needs to be factored is the Oak Grove Interchange (VA-168 / US-17 / I-64 / I-464). The northern part is planned to be reconstructed as apart of the I-64 Widening Phase 2 in 10-15 years, however the southern part would need to be designed to have I-87 to I-464 and vice versa as the thru movement. The I-464 (or "I-87 South") to VA-168 and vice versa movement would also need to be designed as a major split but it would not be the continuous route as it is today.

So 14 miles of rural US-17 limited-access highway would need upgrades, minor improvements to Dominion Blvd which is now an urban freeway with a fixed-span bridge over the Elizabeth River, and an expansion to the southern part of that interchange in conjunction with the I-64 expansion portion. I'd say ~$200 million for the portion south of Cedar Rd, and ~$150 million for the Oak Grove Interchange.

I honestly think that VDOT should complete an EIS the entire Oak Grove Interchange and develop recommendations similar to how they are studying the Bowers Hill Interchange. Improving it to have US-17 North to I-464 North as the thru movement could be a potential design feature - similar to how one of the options for the Bowers Hill Interchange makes I-264 to US-58 the thru movement. A separate EIS would involve "Upgrading US-17 between Great Bridge Blvd and North Carolina state line to interstate standards" - again, similar to how upgrading US-58 between the Suffolk Bypass and the Bowers Hill Interchange to interstate standards is a separate study from the interchange itself.

[froggie]

From what I recall, 87 was picked not because of the possibility to connect to the New York I-87, but because it was the number with the least potential to cause confusion with a state route of the same number.  Though IMO, there were plenty of even-numbered options with the same low potential.

[hotdogPi]

From what I recall, 87 was picked not because of the possibility to connect to the New York I-87, but because it was the number with the least potential to cause confusion with a state route of the same number.  Though IMO, there were plenty of even-numbered options with the same low potential.

I think that the number 87 could cause some confusion. There's already a freeway numbered 87 elsewhere in the state, and the surface portion of NC 87 isn't that far from proposed I-87.

They could have extended NC 54 and called I-54/NC 54 part of the same route.

[LM117]

From what I recall, 87 was picked not because of the possibility to connect to the New York I-87, but because it was the number with the least potential to cause confusion with a state route of the same number.

AASHTO disagrees.

https://www.newsobserver.com/news/traffic/article171521622.html

NCDOT had initially requested to call the highway Interstate 89, but there's already one of those, too, in New Hampshire and Vermont. AASHTO spokesman Tony Dorsey said the organization's route numbering committee decided that the new North Carolina highway has a better chance of one day connecting to I-87 in New York than to I-89 in New England, and decided the road between Raleigh and Virginia should be I-87.

[froggie]

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[sparker]

From what I recall, 87 was picked not because of the possibility to connect to the New York I-87, but because it was the number with the least potential to cause confusion with a state route of the same number.

AASHTO disagrees.

https://www.newsobserver.com/news/traffic/article171521622.html

NCDOT had initially requested to call the highway Interstate 89, but there's already one of those, too, in New Hampshire and Vermont. AASHTO spokesman Tony Dorsey said the organization's route numbering committee decided that the new North Carolina highway has a better chance of one day connecting to I-87 in New York than to I-89 in New England, and decided the road between Raleigh and Virginia should be I-87.

Both explanations are "CYA" rationalizations for less than due diligence on the part of SCOURN.  While they rejected NCDOT's selection of "I-89" for the NC/VA corridor, they accepted the odd-numbered rationale for a facility that's more E-W than N-S (I-85's presence to the west notwithstanding).  When NCDOT presented their rejection of the various even-numbered corridors simply because there were like-numbered state highways in the vicinity and they didn't want to have to renumber them (although the new I-42 and NC 42 don't seem to faze them -- even though they originally wanted I-50, then I-36, for the US 70 corridor!); AASHTO/SCOURN should have simply overridden that concept and subsequently chosen an unused even number between 40 and 64 (which would, to avoid conflict with US routes, mean 46, 54, or 56) and authorized such a number.   And if they still stuck to the odd-numbered concept, since most of the corridor lies east of I-95, they could have designated it I-97 -- where there's a hell of a better chance of connecting to the existing route than anything up in the northeast corner of the country!  I still think a blustery late-winter SCOURN meeting in Des Moines combined with an open or at worst cash bar may have contributed to the lack of rationality here  -- and having posted this surmising previously and seeing replies stating that yes, there's little to do in Des Moines outside of drinking during that time of year (although it's almost certain that some sarcasm is creeping in here! -- although I have been through there in March, and can attest to the gloomy weather).  Nevertheless, it'll likely be years if not decades before any (cough) I-87 shields show up north of Williamston (outside of "future" MGS's), so there's some chance things may change by that point, especially if NCDOT in the interim decides to pull the trigger on a comprehensive Interstate-grade US 17 upgrade between Williamston and Wilmington (and, given their track record, one could not put that past them!).  Eventually, I-87 may well go the way of the now-defunct I-495!