Interstate 87 (NC-VA)

[froggie]

^ Slightly under, actually.  Also using 2017 HPMS data, the average for rural Interstates is just over 26%.

[Rothman]

I've heard a whole lot of NYSDOT employees say I-88 was unnecessary.

I don't know why, as I just posted a brief explanation of how it fits into the Interstate system both regionally and nationally.
The old road NY-7 was nearly all 2 lanes and passing thru towns.  It wasn't like there was a 4-lane high speed road already there.

There was a lot of feeling that the traffic volume did not necessitate the entire interstate.
But, hey, if only you were there with your network explanation, you could have convinced them that because it fit into some spider web as you envisioned that the thing was necessary despite their misgivings regarding the actual demand.

Interesting how you speak for all these nameless NYSDOT employees...  Given that it was completed over 30 years ago and was authorized over 50 years ago, how many employees would there still be around to vocalize their opinion?

A couple of them have only retired recently, actually and, shoot, one had a daughter at SUNY Oneonta and still thought it was overbuilt.
In short, a bunch, given that the completion date is actually irrelevant when it came to their opinion that there wasn't and hasn't been enough demand to legitimize its construction.

Interesting, I just looked up the rural volumes and they range from 10,000 to 15,000 AADT, but truck percentages are not listed.  About the same range as the northernmost 80 miles of I-87 Adirondack Northway.

For the record, having made the drive myself down to Binghamton multiple times, I don't mind that it's there.

[vdeane]

The lowest daily truck volume would then be around 1,700 between Exit 25 and the Thruway.  Next lowest beyond that is around 1,900 between Exit 17 (NY 28 North/Colliersville) and Exit 18 (Schenevus).

That's interesting, considering that there's a distribution center for Price Chopper right off NY 7 around there.  I think Wegmans trucks stop there on their way to Massachusetts too.

[Beltway]

In short, a bunch, given that the completion date is actually irrelevant when it came to their opinion that there wasn't and hasn't been enough demand to legitimize its construction.

Interesting, I just looked up the rural volumes and they range from 10,000 to 15,000 AADT, but truck percentages are not listed.  About the same range as the northernmost 80 miles of I-87 Adirondack Northway.

For the record, having made the drive [NY I-88] myself down to Binghamton multiple times, I don't mind that it's there.

That is what I would think, that plenty of people would find it useful.  The AADT of 10,000 to 15,000 on the rural sections may be on the low side for a rural Interstate highway in the Northeast, but the truck percentages of 23% on average are in the normal range.  Bordering states of PA and MA would tend to see some usefulness as well, and that would have factored into FHWA deciding to authorize I-88 in 1968 with 90% FHWA funding, from the package of 1,500 miles of national Interstate additions in 1968.  The state could have either suggested another rural Interstate addition, or else declined the addition and lost that federal funding.

[goobnav]

NY declining free federal money, that's the funniest thing I read on the internet today. 

The western end of your so-called "Vanity" I-87 in NC has volumes over 90K in the Triangle.  Guess that's why it was initially approved by FHWA as I-495 prior to the I-87 petition.

[sprjus4]

A lot of the I-87 (North Carolina) / US 17 mileage was built this way, limited-access or full freeway.

A lot of it wasn't/isn't.

I-87 will also fit the concept of a nationally important Interstate highway.

Refuted.

For 1, it will link two major metropolitan areas not linked by an interstate,

Refuted. 

it will serve many different communities along the route, and it will link Hampton Roads to I-95 via an interstate. Sure, a shorter alternative exists. But it will still provide a direct interstate connection no matter which way you argue it.

Refuted. 

Weren't you the one before who said an interstate isn't intended to go a straight line but rather to serve the communities on its route?

The reason why they don't build a 'straight shot' route is because it would go thru very rural areas and would serve hardly any even very small towns.  That is why many Interstate corridors considerably deviate from a straight line.

That was when you were questioning why I-64 wasn't built arrow-straight between Lexington and Richmond.

It's not vanity. It's an obsession because the interstate runs slightly more milage, nobody would ever use it going from Hampton Roads, VA to Raleigh / I-95. Simply not true, and you can refute that as much as you'd like. It's common fact that people would prefer an interstate over arterial, despite it being "longer", it would still run the same time, maybe a minute slower. It's North Carolina hate rhetoric against their concepts for building freeways - NC has a larger freeway network (and I don't mean short limited-access bypasses around towns, I'm talking about continuous systems) than Virginia. They want to continue to expand the freeway network, and bring US 17 on the game. Now, because it would get Virginia to continue to I-64 to create a continuous corridor, it's vanity. If anything, that's a bi-state partnership to accomplish one goal. It's not vanity. What's vanity is the constant need to trash the proposed concept every time it's mentioned in this forum. If you have an issue with it, then stop coming on the forum daily to tell us why you don't like it. News flash - it's the same stuff over and over. It's like FritzOwl's forum on his proposed interstate network. I don't go on their every time a new post is made and tell him his ideas are vanity and unrealistic, and repeat the same stuff over and over again. It's a forum about his ideas, and it can be. I personally respect him for that alone. This is a forum regarding I-87 stuff, but in reality it's been you for the past year telling everybody why it's vanity, useless, and never should happen.

Take a break dude. You're obsessed with trying to one-up every post about I-87.

NY declining free federal money, that's the funniest thing I read on the internet today. 

The western end of your so-called "Vanity" I-87 in NC has volumes over 90K in the Triangle.  Guess that's why it was initially approved by FHWA as I-495 prior to the I-87 petition.

The stretch from Raleigh to I-95 has more traffic. East of there, less so, but it would still work.

[Beltway]

Refuted. 

It's not vanity. It's an obsession because the interstate runs slightly more milage, nobody would ever use it going from Hampton Roads, VA to Raleigh / I-95. Simply not true, and you can refute that as much as you'd like. It's common fact that people would prefer an interstate over arterial, despite it being "longer", it would still run the same time, maybe a minute slower. It's North Carolina hate rhetoric against their concepts for building freeways - NC has a larger freeway network (and I don't mean short limited-access bypasses around towns, I'm talking about continuous systems) than Virginia. They want to continue to expand the freeway network, and bring US 17 on the game. Now, because it would get Virginia to continue to I-64 to create a continuous corridor, it's vanity. If anything, that's a bi-state partnership to accomplish one goal. It's not vanity. What's vanity is the constant need to trash the proposed concept every time it's mentioned in this forum. If you have an issue with it, then stop coming on the forum daily to tell us why you don't like it. News flash - it's the same stuff over and over. It's like FritzOwl's forum on his proposed interstate network. I don't go on their every time a new post is made and tell him his ideas are vanity and unrealistic, and repeat the same stuff over and over again. It's a forum about his ideas, and it can be. I personally respect him for that alone. This is a forum regarding I-87 stuff, but in reality it's been you for the past year telling everybody why it's vanity, useless, and never should happen.
Take a break dude. You're obsessed with trying to one-up every post about I-87.

I have explained repeatedly that this "I-87" will be 25 miles longer than the current route, and that with coming improvements on US-58 and I-95 it will never come close to catching up timewise.  It will not be a "direct route between Raleigh and Norfolk". 

You are not going to tell me when and where and how much to post.  I am tired of your lies and dishonesty that just keep going on and on like a bad case of diarrhea. 

This not some silly roadgeek issue, it is about the prime purpose or lack thereof for a proposed Interstate highway.

I will decide when and where to confront this fraudulent item of advocacy for this proposed highway.

What you have been doing here just reinforces my suspicions that there are dishonest advocates for this proposed highway, in both states.

Who are you anyway?  Many people here know me going back to the late 1990s when I started posting on online highways/roads/transport forums.  They know my background and I have met many of them in person at roads meets.

Go away little troll. 

[sprjus4]

I have explained repeatedly that this "I-87" will be 25 miles longer than the current route, and that with coming improvements on US-58 and I-95 it will never come close to catching up timewise.  It will not be a "direct route between Raleigh and Norfolk".

A lot of interstates run slightly indirect routes to service towns. The only difference here is there is an alternative to that slightly indirect routing that is more direct. No problems with it. The interstate is being constructed in North Carolina, Virginia would have all control over US 58 improvements. No improvements proposed for US 58 would speed it up timewise. The upgrade between Suffolk and I-64 will not increase capacity, cut time, nor will the 6 lane widening, which will add new traffic signals, and other than that there's no major upgrades planned.

You are not going to tell me when and where and how much to post.  I am tired of your lies and dishonesty that just keep going on and on like a bad case of diarrhea.

You're the only one who keeps coming back at the issue. Me or somebody else on the forum mentions an improvement to US 17 proposed, or discuss it, and you come on telling us the same thing at least 40 different times - it's "25 miles longer" and is "vanity".

The only one that seems like a bad case of diarrhea is you constantly coming back. This forum is mainly consisted of constant "vanity" talk against the route rather than actual discussion of the route itself. I'm just asking can you please stop coming back with the same thing? I'm not "lying" or being "dishonest", you're adding numbers and trash-talking this route beyond belief.

I will decide when and where to confront this fraudulent item of advocacy for this proposed highway.

And you have. About 40+ times. The same thing, over and over, to the exact same people. You've made your point clear. We get it.

What you have been doing here just reinforces my suspicions that there are dishonest advocates for this proposed highway, in both states.

And seriously, what is wrong with an upgrade to US 17? Does it hurt you? Does it make a huge negative change? I'm not seeing anything wrong with it, yes there might be things such as longer mileage that make it less "direct", but we're talking about a freeway upgrade NCDOT is proposing. They've done hundreds of them, and this is the first one you've come on strong about as far as I'm aware.

Who are you anyway?  Many people here know me going back to the late 1990s when I started posting on online highways/roads/transport forums.  They know my background and I have met many of them in person at roads meets.

Go away little troll.

Okay, and? You've joined in the 90s, I've joined more recently. I have every right to be here just as much as you do. Not everybody here on the forum has "met you in person" and "know your background". A few people in the mid-atlantic and northeastern sections may know you, but this forum has thousands of members. You need to accept that not everybody is going to agree with your views just because you worked with VDOT for 40 years and have background knowledge with some people. People will back you, agree with you, but so what? Are you superior over everyone new on this forum for that?

[Beltway]

You are not going to tell me when and where and how much to post.  I am tired of your lies and dishonesty that just keep going on and on like a bad case of diarrhea.

You're the only one who keeps coming back at the issue. Me or somebody else on the forum mentions an improvement to US 17 proposed, or discuss it, and you come on telling us the same thing at least 40 different times - it's "25 miles longer" and is "vanity".

YOU are the one who keeps bringing it up, about the "direct route between Raleigh and Norfolk".
YOU are by far the main person I reply to.
If YOU don't want to see my comments than stop making that claim.
If you make the claim then I reserve the right to respond, and it doesn't matter if it is 100 times, it take two people to have an argument.

Who are you anyway?

[sprjus4]

YOU are the one who keeps bringing it up, about the "direct route between Raleigh and Norfolk".

I've agreed and stated numerous times that US 58 is still the more direct route. I-87 will simply carry the same amount of travel time as US 58 will. I've already refuted your claims of that at least 40+ times.

YOU are by far the main person I reply to.
If YOU don't want to see my comments than stop making that claim.
If you make the claim then I reserve the right to respond, and it doesn't matter if it is 100 times, it take two people to have an argument.

Then it looks like we'll be going back and fourth for a long time.

It's a freeway upgrade NCDOT is proposing, along the many other miles of highway they've upgraded. Why so much heat and hate for this one particularly?

Who are you anyway?

I'm a member of this forum, one out of the thousands that are here. Do I have to be a particular person that you know?

[Roadsguy]

Let's compromise and get them to build I-87 all the way around the other side of the Earth in a straight ring.

[hotdogPi]

It seems like you both don't want to argue, but you feel like you have to.

Protip: if you don't want a reply, don't reply yourself.

[sprjus4]

It seems like you both don't want to argue, but you feel like you have to.

Protip: if you don't want a reply, don't reply yourself.

If I mention anything about I-87, the same "25 miles slower", "vanity I-87", "nobody between the two terminus points will use it whatsoever" nonsense gets said every single time. I don't ask for it when I simply make a post about I-87, even if I'm not replying to Beltway.

[Beltway]

YOU are the one who keeps bringing it up, about the "direct route between Raleigh and Norfolk".

I've agreed and stated numerous times that US 58 is still the more direct route. I-87 will simply carry the same amount of travel time as US 58 will. I've already refuted your claims of that at least 40+ times.

That's the problem, engineering proves otherwise.  Magical thinking tries to overrule engineering.  It will probably always be at least 20 minutes slower, maybe 30.

YOU are by far the main person I reply to.
If YOU don't want to see my comments than stop making that claim.
If you make the claim then I reserve the right to respond, and it doesn't matter if it is 100 times, it take two people to have an argument.

Then it looks like we'll be going back and fourth for a long time.
It's a freeway upgrade NCDOT is proposing, along the many other miles of highway they've upgraded. Why so much heat and hate for this one particularly?

You are taking this way too per$onally... why?  Why are you so inve$ted in this highway?

Who are you anyway?

I'm a member of this forum, one out of the thousands that are here. Do I have to be a particular person that you know?

You are what damages the credibility of anonymous posters. 

[Beltway]

Let's compromise and get them to build I-87 all the way around the other side of the Earth in a straight ring.

Build it all the way to Cape Hatteras!

[goobnav]

Let's compromise and get them to build I-87 all the way around the other side of the Earth in a straight ring.

Build it all the way to Cape Hatteras!

Remember, I already said that and then to make the Williamston to Tidewater area a 3 digit, .  Long live Fritz!!

[NE2]

Looks like we all agree that I-87 is not going to be the main route between Raleigh and Norfolk.

[sprjus4]

Looks like we all agree that I-87 is not going to be the main route between Raleigh and Norfolk.

It will be a route to Norfolk. There will be others. They will all take the around same amount of time depending on where you're headed, and at that point it's just preference.

[Beltway]

Looks like we all agree that I-87 is not going to be the main route between Raleigh and Norfolk.

It will be a route to Norfolk. There will be others. They will all take the around same amount of time depending on where you're headed, and at that point it's just preference.

You are trying to reargue the core point that is in dispute.

We were told by a Global Moderator to halt this exact same topical discussion (main route between Raleigh and Norfolk) in the Mid-Atlantic > Virginia thread --

Enough out of both of you. New topic.

I took that directive to be global, and I said so in that thread. 

The moderators can weigh in at this point about how to proceed, before I post any rebuttal.

[sprjus4]

You are trying to reargue the core point that is in dispute.

We were told by a Global Moderator to halt this exact same topical discussion (main route between Raleigh and Norfolk) in the Mid-Atlantic > Virginia thread --

The point of the comment was to end the back and fourth disputing about it on a completely unrelated thread. I have facts here, that you can attempt to dispute all day -

If you're traveling between I-95 and I-64 / I-464 / VA-168, it's 15 miles slower to take US 17, and if that speed limit was upped to 70 MPH on I-87, it would take 2 hours 7 minutes. The existing route on US 58 takes 2 hours 6 minutes. For many travelers not in a big 18-wheeler with strict mileage would prefer the interstate option over the arterial option, if it was to take the same time. Most drivers would avoid any traffic signal, slower speed limit, etc. if possible, and this would do just that. If, let's say, on a long trip from Florida to Norfolk, 1,000 miles long, why would one want to exit the freeway to then take an 1 hour 30 minute drive on a road averaged at 55 MPH (the western section is 60, the eastern has between 35 and 55) rather than hop on I-87, and keep cruising at 70+ MPH with no stop lights, etc. to hit Hampton Roads, then cruise at 65 MPH on I-64 or the other highways until home? It just makes sense. Myself, I would still hop in the interstate if it took 5 minutes longer. Being one who drives around 75 - 80 on the interstate like most people, I'd easily beat that time, and it's more convenient honestly.

How can you claim "25 minutes slower"? Do the math. Distance (135 on US 58 / 150 on US 17) divided by speed (63-64 MPH on US 58 and I-95 / 70 MPH on I-87). It's a formula. To certain parts of Hampton Roads, this would be longer, but east of the Elizabeth River would see these times around the same.

Also, throw in recurring congestion on I-95 between Rocky Mount and Emporia which is frequent during peak travel times, and I-87 would be the preferred option to avoid as much of that as possible if during peak times. Granted, I-95 may be widened to 6 lanes by that point, but congestion would only be caused at the Virginia border going 3 lanes down to 2, unless Virginia were to somehow fund a widening project themselves. This argument in particular depends on what happens in the future.

[Beltway]

You are trying to reargue the core point that is in dispute.
We were told by a Global Moderator to halt this exact same topical discussion (main route between Raleigh and Norfolk) in the Mid-Atlantic > Virginia thread --

The point of the comment was to end the back and fourth disputing about it on a completely unrelated thread.

Mid-Atlantic > Virginia is -not- a completely unrelated thread, technically it would be on-topic there.

Have you asked the moderators what their reasons were? 

Have you waited for them to weigh in on the matter here?  No, you didn't.

[sprjus4]

You are trying to reargue the core point that is in dispute.
We were told by a Global Moderator to halt this exact same topical discussion (main route between Raleigh and Norfolk) in the Mid-Atlantic > Virginia thread --

The point of the comment was to end the back and fourth disputing about it on a completely unrelated thread.

Mid-Atlantic > Virginia is -not- a completely unrelated thread, technically it would be on-topic there.

Have you asked the moderators what their reasons were? 

Have you waited for them to weigh in on the matter here?  No, you didn't.

The moderator (not plural) said for us to stop going back and fourth. These comments -

"I direct readers to the "Interstate 87 (NC-VA)" thread.  I will deal with this matter there in the future."

"If any readers are actually interested, you've mentioned your few vanity, anti-interstate rhetoric points. It's 25 miles slower, will carry no traffic whatsoever between I-95 and Norfolk, and is already serviced by a high-speed arterial highway. Did I miss anything? I just saved people the time of clicking through at least 15 pages of the same thing."

I'm pointing out factual information here, I'd surely be surprised if that's banned.

[wdcrft63]

Enough already. At this point everyone knows what they think about I-87 and future debate won't change anyone's mind. Time to move on!

[Beltway]

You are trying to reargue the core point that is in dispute.
We were told by a Global Moderator to halt this exact same topical discussion (main route between Raleigh and Norfolk) in the Mid-Atlantic > Virginia thread --

The point of the comment was to end the back and fourth disputing about it on a completely unrelated thread.

Mid-Atlantic > Virginia is -not- a completely unrelated thread, technically it would be on-topic there.
Have you asked the moderators what their reasons were? 
Have you waited for them to weigh in on the matter here?  No, you didn't.

The moderator (not plural) said for us to stop going back and fourth. These comments -

Our discussion here has been a near carbon copy of the one there.

"I direct readers to the "Interstate 87 (NC-VA)" thread.  I will deal with this matter there in the future."
"If any readers are actually interested, you've mentioned your few vanity, anti-interstate rhetoric points. It's 25 miles slower, will carry no traffic whatsoever between I-95 and Norfolk, and is already serviced by a high-speed arterial highway. Did I miss anything? I just saved people the time of clicking through at least 15 pages of the same thing."
I'm pointing out factual information here, I'd surely be surprised if that's banned.

They won't ban the topic, but if they think that 2 posters are eating up too much oxygen and indirectly discouraging others from posting (notice how few others have been posting recently?), then they have several ways they could utilize to exclude those 2 posters from commenting about VI-87.

[Rothman]

As Ken Watanabe said so eloquently:

Let them fight.