I-73 & I-74 in S.C.

[LM117]

Why can't they extend the plans for I-74 south to Georgetown or Charleston? It doesn't look like there's too much in the way, and the portion of US 17 in this area has some of the worst congestion I have ever seen.

Alternatively, maybe US-17 could be fully grade separated instead, with frontage roads for business access.

There's no need for I-74 to go that far. Hell, I-74 shouldn't even be going to SC in the first place.

[Beltway]

Why can't they extend the plans for I-74 south to Georgetown or Charleston? It doesn't look like there's too much in the way, and the portion of US 17 in this area has some of the worst congestion I have ever seen.

Alternatively, maybe US-17 could be fully grade separated instead, with frontage roads for business access.

There's no need for I-74 to go that far. Hell, I-74 shouldn't even be going to SC in the first place.

I agree!  Much of the I-74 ISTEA routing is a case of "diarrhea of the Interstates".

[sparker]

Why can't they extend the plans for I-74 south to Georgetown or Charleston? It doesn't look like there's too much in the way, and the portion of US 17 in this area has some of the worst congestion I have ever seen.

Alternatively, maybe US-17 could be fully grade separated instead, with frontage roads for business access.

There's no need for I-74 to go that far. Hell, I-74 shouldn't even be going to SC in the first place.

I agree!  Much of the I-74 ISTEA routing is a case of "diarrhea of the Interstates".

That, and attempting to please each & every Congressperson along (or anywhere near, for that matter!) the original basic (circa 1991) corridor.  Prior to that, pretty much everyone who engaged in future Interstate speculation had something extending from around Asheville to Wilmington along US 74 (I know I did), but dragging something down from southern Ohio wasn't ever part of any rational equation.  The bright side of political injection into highway matters is that in the post-block-grant days, something actually needed often gets built (I-49, I-22); the convolution of I-73 and I-74 is part & parcel of the "dark side" of this particular calculus.  Yeah, Myrtle Beach is a major regional destination/attractant -- but two separate servers?  Please!  That whole dual concept was merely to let politicos on both sides of the state line gloat over their particular project -- nothing more, nothing less.  Anything using US 74 as an alignment, regardless of actual designation, needs to go to Wilmington; Myrtle Beach is a ridiculous "Bizarro World" pipedream -- let I-73 handle that aspect of the regional needs, which it will be more than capable of doing!   

[Beltway]

Why can't they extend the plans for I-74 south to Georgetown or Charleston? It doesn't look like there's too much in the way, and the portion of US 17 in this area has some of the worst congestion I have ever seen.

Alternatively, maybe US-17 could be fully grade separated instead, with frontage roads for business access.

There's no need for I-74 to go that far. Hell, I-74 shouldn't even be going to SC in the first place.

I agree!  Much of the I-74 ISTEA routing is a case of "diarrhea of the Interstates".

That, and attempting to please each & every Congressperson along (or anywhere near, for that matter!) the original basic (circa 1991) corridor.  Prior to that, pretty much everyone who engaged in future Interstate speculation had something extending from around Asheville to Wilmington along US 74 (I know I did), but dragging something down from southern Ohio wasn't ever part of any rational equation.  The bright side of political injection into highway matters is that in the post-block-grant days, something actually needed often gets built (I-49, I-22); the convolution of I-73 and I-74 is part & parcel of the "dark side" of this particular calculus.  Yeah, Myrtle Beach is a major regional destination/attractant -- but two separate servers?  Please!  That whole dual concept was merely to let politicos on both sides of the state line gloat over their particular project -- nothing more, nothing less.  Anything using US 74 as an alignment, regardless of actual designation, needs to go to Wilmington; Myrtle Beach is a ridiculous "Bizarro World" pipedream -- let I-73 handle that aspect of the regional needs, which it will be more than capable of doing!   

Yes, there were several new Interstate highways in ISTEA of 1991, that for some reason had to be "coast to coast" or close to it to justify that highway. 

I-73 from SC coast to northern MI.
I-69 from southern TX to eastern MI.
I-74 from NC coast to central OH.

All three have at least some boondoggle components.

It's ridiculous, they should have done something like when they added 1,500 miles in 1968 and tried to distribute them thru most of the states, although in 1991 it should have been more like adding 3,000 miles.

[sparker]

Yes, there were several new Interstate highways in ISTEA of 1991, that for some reason had to be "coast to coast" or close to it to justify that highway. 

I-73 from SC coast to northern MI.
I-69 from southern TX to eastern MI.
I-74 from NC coast to central OH.

All three have at least some boondoggle components.

It's ridiculous, they should have done something like when they added 1,500 miles in 1968 and tried to distribute them thru most of the states, although in 1991 it should have been more like adding 3,000 miles.

The 1968 additions started out as about 4500 miles (including some routes added later like I-49, I-22, and the Brownsville-Shreveport section of I-69) -- this based on large-scale troop withdrawals from Vietnam resulting in less $$ outlay there -- a concept dashed by the Tet offensive that had diametrically the opposite effect (and prompted Lyndon Johnson to abandon his re-election plans).  Cut back to 1500 miles, some of the selected remaining corridors were purely politically motivated (I-72 in Illinois, referred to at the time as [Sen.] "Everett Dirksen's Retirement Present" -- his hometown was Decatur! -- and I-88 in upstate NY, a sop to Jake Javits).  The rest were spread around the country -- the I-15 San Diego extension in CA, the I-75 extension in FL, I-27 in TX, the rerouting of I-82 to the "Quad Cities" in eastern WA, I-40 east to Selma, NC (Wilmington came later), and what eventually became I-43 north to Green Bay, WI.  Plus there were numerous urban/interurban loops & spurs (including I-380 in IA).  In retrospect, 1968 was a case of "what might have been if only..............."

1991/ISTEA seemed to be a case of "corridor fever"; the HPC concept (pre-designate but don't fund) took root then and now has expanded as the methodology of choice when states/local interests want to deploy a new Interstate. 

[Beltway]

Yes, there were several new Interstate highways in ISTEA of 1991, that for some reason had to be "coast to coast" or close to it to justify that highway. 
I-73 from SC coast to northern MI.
I-69 from southern TX to eastern MI.
I-74 from NC coast to central OH.
All three have at least some boondoggle components.
It's ridiculous, they should have done something like when they added 1,500 miles in 1968 and tried to distribute them thru most of the states, although in 1991 it should have been more like adding 3,000 miles.

The 1968 additions started out as about 4500 miles (including some routes added later like I-49, I-22, and the Brownsville-Shreveport section of I-69) -- this based on large-scale troop withdrawals from Vietnam resulting in less $$ outlay there -- a concept dashed by the Tet offensive that had diametrically the opposite effect (and prompted Lyndon Johnson to abandon his re-election plans).  Cut back to 1500 miles, some of the selected remaining corridors were purely politically motivated (I-72 in Illinois, referred to at the time as [Sen.] "Everett Dirksen's Retirement Present" -- his hometown was Decatur! -- and I-88 in upstate NY, a sop to Jake Javits).  The rest were spread around the country -- the I-15 San Diego extension in CA, the I-75 extension in FL, I-27 in TX, the rerouting of I-82 to the "Quad Cities" in eastern WA, I-40 east to Selma, NC (Wilmington came later), and what eventually became I-43 north to Green Bay, WI.  Plus there were numerous urban/interurban loops & spurs (including I-380 in IA).  In retrospect, 1968 was a case of "what might have been if only..............."

I-88 in upstate NY seemed a worthy addition, connecting the Albany area and Northway to I-81 to the south.

The 1968 additions is where VA I-195 and I-664 came from.  Short but very expensive and vital urban Interstate highways.

The tolled Beltline Expressway was already being designed when it got the I-195 funding to build it as a toll-free Interstate.

A planning study in 1966 first proposed what later became I-664.

[Rothman]

I-88 still has its detractors at NYSDOT.  A lot of people still wonder if the investment was worth the benefit.  It is also still seen as an inappropriate manhandling of funding by Senator Anderson.

[Beltway]

I-88 still has its detractors at NYSDOT.  A lot of people still wonder if the investment was worth the benefit.  It is also still seen as an inappropriate manhandling of funding by Senator Anderson.

Interesting, Wiki says it was completed in 1989, that it is still being questioned. 

I see a major function of I-81 as a "super bypass" of the Northeast, with connector Interstates I-90, I-88, I-84, I-80, I-78, I-76, I-70/I-270, I-66 and I-64, that connect to the major cities.

Later I-86 was designated and I-88 forms a corridor with western I-86.

[NE2]

Yes, there were several new Interstate highways in ISTEA of 1991, that for some reason had to be "coast to coast" or close to it to justify that highway. 

I-73 from SC coast to northern MI.
I-69 from southern TX to eastern MI.
I-74 from NC coast to central OH.

The 1991 ISTEA text only has Corridor 18 from Indy to Memphis (and 20 from Texarkana to Laredo). Nothing in between. And I-73/I-74 were a single route from Charleston, SC to Portsmouth, OH.

[Beltway]

Yes, there were several new Interstate highways in ISTEA of 1991, that for some reason had to be "coast to coast" or close to it to justify that highway. 

I-73 from SC coast to northern MI.
I-69 from southern TX to eastern MI.
I-74 from NC coast to central OH.

The 1991 ISTEA text only has Corridor 18 from Indy to Memphis (and 20 from Texarkana to Laredo). Nothing in between. And I-73/I-74 were a single route from Charleston, SC to Portsmouth, OH.

Then how about 'stemming from ISTEA of 1991' and finally approved in 1995 and 1998?
http://www.i73.com/aboutus.html
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interstate_69#Extended_route

My same basic point remains.

[epzik8]

I think even if one or both of these Interstates reaches Myrtle Beach, I'll continue using the slower routes.

[sparker]

I think even if one or both of these Interstates reaches Myrtle Beach, I'll continue using the slower routes.

If you've ever been to the Myrtle Beach area during the summer, pretty much all the surface routes could be classified as slower!  Snail-like would not be an inaccurate description.  If I-73 and possibly I-74 (or whatever the SC 31-based coastal route coming in from NC ends up being designated) are built out to 4 lanes only, the congestion will likely spread to those new facilities as well -- at least for the 20-30 miles outward or past the central portion of Myrtle Beach.  I don't think the proprietors of the local tourist businesses mind the congestion that much -- I suppose they figure someone will jump out of a car that's going about 5 blocks per hour and buy a few stupid-ass T-shirts!

[21stCenturyRoad]

I completely disagree with I-74 going into SC, it should go end in Wilmington. Myrtle Beach should be grateful that they are receiving I-73, which is enough. Wilmington, a port city, needs an interstate to/from I-95 south.

[The Nature Boy]

I completely disagree with I-74 going into SC, it should go end in Wilmington. Myrtle Beach should be grateful that they are receiving I-73, which is enough. Wilmington, a port city, needs an interstate to/from I-95 south.

I don't disagree with you regarding I-74 ending at Wilmington but I-40 connects Wilmington to I-95.

[LM117]

I completely disagree with I-74 going into SC, it should go end in Wilmington. Myrtle Beach should be grateful that they are receiving I-73, which is enough. Wilmington, a port city, needs an interstate to/from I-95 south.

I don't disagree with you regarding I-74 ending at Wilmington but I-40 connects Wilmington to I-95.

He's referring to points south of Wilmington along I-95, which would be served by the existing I-74/I-95 interchange in Lumberton if I-74 ended in Wilmington.

I-40's connection to I-95 from Wilmington is only good for those heading to points north on I-95 and even then, nobody in their right mind would take I-40 all the way to Benson to pick up I-95 North when they could get off at Exit 355 near Faison and take the US-117/I-795 shortcut to Wilson.

[Beltway]

I completely disagree with I-74 going into SC, it should go end in Wilmington. Myrtle Beach should be grateful that they are receiving I-73, which is enough. Wilmington, a port city, needs an interstate to/from I-95 south.

I don't disagree with you regarding I-74 ending at Wilmington but I-40 connects Wilmington to I-95.

He's referring to points south of Wilmington along I-95, which would be served by the existing I-74/I-95 interchange in Lumberton if I-74 ended in Wilmington.

I-40's connection to I-95 from Wilmington is only good for those heading to points north on I-95 and even then, nobody in their right mind would take I-40 all the way to Benson to pick up I-95 North when they could get off at Exit 355 near Faison and take the US-117/I-795 shortcut to Wilson.

Wilmington, NC is a small city and I disagree with the idea that it needs more than one Interstate.  It needs a southerly 4-lane connector but that highway does not warrant being a freeway.

How much shipping traffic does the port handle?  Their website does not say, so that indirectly indicates that it is likely fairly low traffic.

[sparker]

I completely disagree with I-74 going into SC, it should go end in Wilmington. Myrtle Beach should be grateful that they are receiving I-73, which is enough. Wilmington, a port city, needs an interstate to/from I-95 south.

I don't disagree with you regarding I-74 ending at Wilmington but I-40 connects Wilmington to I-95.

He's referring to points south of Wilmington along I-95, which would be served by the existing I-74/I-95 interchange in Lumberton if I-74 ended in Wilmington.

I-40's connection to I-95 from Wilmington is only good for those heading to points north on I-95 and even then, nobody in their right mind would take I-40 all the way to Benson to pick up I-95 North when they could get off at Exit 355 near Faison and take the US-117/I-795 shortcut to Wilson.

Wilmington, NC is a small city and I disagree with the idea that it needs more than one Interstate.  It needs a southerly 4-lane connector but that highway does not warrant being a freeway.

How much shipping traffic does the port handle?  Their website does not say, so that indirectly indicates that it is likely fairly low traffic.

At this point in time, the Cape Fear River is undergoing significant dredging in order to make the Port of Wilmington more attractive to shipping lines; the development of a new major CSX hub in Rocky Mount (just north of where the Wilmington branch merges with the main line that follows US 301) is largely predicated upon increased inbound cargo intended for Northeast and Great Lakes markets.  All this port activity (Savannah is dredging their port facilities as well) is due to "Panamax" (the canal, not the brand of audio/video line conditioners!) being fully operational by 2019 or at latest 2020.  Besides Wilmington and Savannah, Charleston (which dredged over a decade ago), Brunswick (GA), and Morehead City all are contending for what they see as vastly increased sea-to-land transfer traffic.  Both CSX and NS have beefed up their lines' capacities (passing sidings and/or enhanced CTC signaling systems) in the region; the gist of this is that multiple parties in both the public and private sectors are "doubling down" on this actually coming to pass.   

[Life in Paradise]

Let's just clean up North Carolina's interstate mess a bit.  Let's do away with I-42 and move I-40 over to it, since it makes more sense that an east/west interstate would go to Virginia Beach rather than Wilmington from Raleigh.  What do we do with I-40?  Just make it I-73.  You would then get rid of the multiplex south of Greensboro (make the current I-73 south that's by itself a 3-d) and it actually could bend about back to Myrtle Beach (if they wanted it to). 

For South Carolina, you could route I-20 around Florence and dead end it at Myrtle Beach, and you could have a 3-d as a spur.

There.  North Carolina can continue to build I-74 to Wilmington if they want.  I-73 doesn't have to be constructed except north of Greensboro and into Virginia.  I-40 can actually go east/west instead of far south.  I-42 does not have to exist.  With the extension of I-20, that eliminates the building of I-73 from I-95 to the North Carolina state line.

[sparker]

Let's just clean up North Carolina's interstate mess a bit.  Let's do away with I-42 and move I-40 over to it, since it makes more sense that an east/west interstate would go to Virginia Beach rather than Wilmington from Raleigh.  What do we do with I-40?  Just make it I-73.  You would then get rid of the multiplex south of Greensboro (make the current I-73 south that's by itself a 3-d) and it actually could bend about back to Myrtle Beach (if they wanted it to). 

For South Carolina, you could route I-20 around Florence and dead end it at Myrtle Beach, and you could have a 3-d as a spur.

There.  North Carolina can continue to build I-74 to Wilmington if they want.  I-73 doesn't have to be constructed except north of Greensboro and into Virginia.  I-40 can actually go east/west instead of far south.  I-42 does not have to exist.  With the extension of I-20, that eliminates the building of I-73 from I-95 to the North Carolina state line.

All well & good, except (a) I-42 is written into law within HPC designation, and Wilmington will give up their I-40 terminus only as a city corpse!  Also, SC has indicated over the past 20 years zero interest in extending I-20; they're more than happy with I-73 going down SC 38 and paralleling US 501; that provides the potential for NC tourists spending gas and snack money within SC.  Besides, as with I-42, all of the 73/74 complex is likewise written into federal law -- and that forms the basis for any federal funding contribution.  Since actually securing funds is presently worse than pulling teeth, not too many corridor proponents at any jurisdictional level want to "rock the boat", so to speak -- although the I-74 portion following NC 211 is probably -- and justifiably -- dead in the water (or swamp!).  Things will probably proceed more or less as presently planned; either the legislation will be "tweaked" to allow I-74 into Wilmington (and something else deployed along the coast) or an x74 will do the trick. 

The regional Interstates are convoluted because the locals certainly don't mind them that way, as long as they do the job in terms of local service and transporting folks with disposable income to the coasts for the ritual de-funding!  Not ideal, but serviceable!   

[PColumbus73]

If/when I-74 is completed in North Carolina, it might as well be signed as a North/South Interstate.

[LM117]

I-42 is written into law within HPC designation

While US-70 was indeed written into law as a HPC and future interstate, the I-42 number itself came from AASHTO, not Congress. NCDOT initially requested I-36, but AASHTO rejected it since it violated the numbering grid and changed it I-42 and told NCDOT to take it or leave it. NCDOT took it.

http://route.transportation.org/Documents/2016%20SM%20Des%20Moines%2c%20IA/USRN%20Meeting%20Minutes%20May25%2c2016.pdf

All the same, I-42 is staying put.

[sparker]

You are, of course, correct -- the I-42 selection was via AASHTO, not via direct congressional direction.  That is a reasonable number for that corridor -- unlike its neighbor to the north (87), selected alongside 42 -- but I won't rant about that issue here, except to say that by choosing 42 for US 70, it leaves enough qualified designations available above that number to use if & when everyone involved comes to their senses.

[US 89]

I-42 is written into law within HPC designation

While US-70 was indeed written into law as a HPC and future interstate, the I-42 number itself came from AASHTO, not Congress. NCDOT initially requested I-36, but AASHTO rejected it since it violated the numbering grid and changed it I-42 and told NCDOT to take it or leave it. NCDOT took it.

http://route.transportation.org/Documents/2016%20SM%20Des%20Moines%2c%20IA/USRN%20Meeting%20Minutes%20May25%2c2016.pdf

All the same, I-42 is staying put.

Since when does AASHTO care about the numbering systems? Look at I-11, I-69, and US 400, 412, and 425, to name a few.

[LM117]

I-42 is written into law within HPC designation

While US-70 was indeed written into law as a HPC and future interstate, the I-42 number itself came from AASHTO, not Congress. NCDOT initially requested I-36, but AASHTO rejected it since it violated the numbering grid and changed it I-42 and told NCDOT to take it or leave it. NCDOT took it.

http://route.transportation.org/Documents/2016%20SM%20Des%20Moines%2c%20IA/USRN%20Meeting%20Minutes%20May25%2c2016.pdf

All the same, I-42 is staying put.

Since when does AASHTO care about the numbering systems? Look at I-11, I-69, and US 400, 412, and 425, to name a few.

I-11 and I-69 were made into law by Congress. AASHTO couldn't reject those.

[vdeane]

I-11 and I-69 aren't too bad (I-69 suffixes aside, which they probably could have fought over what was meant with the corridor naming, but I imagine that few outside of the roadgeek community would feel like doing that), but I agree about those US routes.