I-73 in VA

[sprjus4]

I feel like building an interstate to connect two places should make things faster than the existing route, not maintain approximately the same travel time while adding on additional mileage for taking an indirect route.

Once VDOT upgrades US-58, then that will be the case, but for now, I-87 will be how it is. NCDOT is building the best route they can that will benefit their towns and cities, while also in a way linking two metros. NCDOT can't build a freeway on US-58, it's not in their state. They're not going to build one down NC-11, because that will serve far less and much smaller communities. Some people will be mileage strict and chose to keep using US-58, others may say "Hey, I can do 75 - 80 MPH (which just about all drivers on the other interstates do) all the way as opposed to 60 - 65 MPH, I'll take I-87 instead."

And actually, all that traffic that heads down US-17 alone will benefit and have a faster route than before. A lot of traffic originates in Elizabeth City, and even some in Edenton that head to Hampton Roads. They will all see faster travel times. Elizabeth City is a city with a 20,000 population which is actively growing. In fact, a lot of the new suburbs being built near the US-17 bypass is actually not in the city itself, instead Pasquotank County, which has a population of 40,000. A lot of new development is planned in rural Camden County as well, which will again see faster travel times to Hampton Roads. And all this traffic from Elizabeth City, Pasquotank County, Edenton, Camden County, etc. will also have faster connections to I-95 south, and be connected via a 70 MPH interstate highway. Finally, with that interstate connection to I-95, and also interstate connection to Hampton Roads & the port, it could also bring new business opportunities to these towns and cities, and being able to advertise they have direct interstate connections to one the largest ports on the East Coast, and the main interstate on the East Coast (I-95).

So, yes, there's the argument that I-87 will be slower or simply the same time and more mileage connecting Hampton Roads to Raleigh. But also keep in mind it's to benefit these communities, towns, and cities as well that are on the route, provide them with quicker connection, and give them a 70 MPH link to the state's interstate highway system west of I-95, and I-95 itself.

[Beltway]

I feel like building an interstate to connect two places should make things faster than the existing route, not maintain approximately the same travel time while adding on additional mileage for taking an indirect route.

I agree, and I wish that the Tar Heel State interests would stop blowing all this smoke (and groceries) about connecting Raleigh and Norfolk, and not until 2040 or 2045 or even beyond.  My spreadsheet indicates that the average corridor speed on HPC 13 east of I-95 is already 62.0 mph.

I am getting 134 miles / 129 minutes versus 154 miles / 149 minutes today.  They have 20 miles and 20 minutes to climb over, and the miles aren't going to change, and the average truck speeds will likely be less than Interstate speed limits.

[sprjus4]

I feel like building an interstate to connect two places should make things faster than the existing route, not maintain approximately the same travel time while adding on additional mileage for taking an indirect route.

I agree, and I wish that the Tar Heel State interests would stop blowing all this smoke (and groceries) about connecting Raleigh and Norfolk, and not until 2040 or 2045 or even beyond.  My spreadsheet indicates that the average corridor speed on HPC 13 east of I-95 is already 62.0 mph.

I am getting 134 miles / 129 minutes versus 154 miles / 149 minutes today.  They have 20 miles and 20 minutes to climb over, and the miles aren't going to change, and the average truck speeds will likely be less than Interstate speed limits.

Two things -
1. See my comments above about the other benefits it will have that's not about the Norfolk - Raleigh connection. The real reasons for the interstate in NC's mind is to connect the towns & Elizabeth City to Hampton Roads and I-95 & Raleigh.

2. The speeds you're trying to use are truck speeds. Think about car speeds. The average interstate driver in my experience driving on I-95, I-40, US 64, etc is about 75 - 80 MPH, and the speedier ones go even faster. That would be the speed for most on an I-87, not 70 MPH. I understand from a trucking aspect, the route will still be US-58, but think about the passenger vehicle point of it too - the majority of the traffic.

[roadman65]

Yes NC needs to heeve ho on building more interstates as it seems every time you turn around anther freeway is an interstate or future one.

[vdeane]

Two things -
1. See my comments above about the other benefits it will have that's not about the Norfolk - Raleigh connection. The real reasons for the interstate in NC's mind is to connect the towns & Elizabeth City to Hampton Roads and I-95 & Raleigh.

2. The speeds you're trying to use are truck speeds. Think about car speeds. The average interstate driver in my experience driving on I-95, I-40, US 64, etc is about 75 - 80 MPH, and the speedier ones go even faster. That would be the speed for most on an I-87, not 70 MPH. I understand from a trucking aspect, the route will still be US-58, but think about the passenger vehicle point of it too - the majority of the traffic.

1. Interstates exist to connect the major metro areas of the country - not to "hook in" every little small town a state may have.
2. If two routes take about the same amount of time, but one is significantly shorter mileage, which one do you think the GPS is going to route people on?  Hint: it's not I-87.

[Beltway]

Two things -
1. See my comments above about the other benefits it will have that's not about the Norfolk - Raleigh connection. The real reasons for the interstate in NC's mind is to connect the towns & Elizabeth City to Hampton Roads and I-95 & Raleigh.

Those reasons alone aren't sufficient.  Those towns and cities are already connected by a high quality 4-lane intra-state highway.

2. The speeds you're trying to use are truck speeds. Think about car speeds. The average interstate driver in my experience driving on I-95, I-40, US 64, etc is about 75 - 80 MPH, and the speedier ones go even faster. That would be the speed for most on an I-87, not 70 MPH. I understand from a trucking aspect, the route will still be US-58, but think about the passenger vehicle point of it too - the majority of the traffic.

No, my spreadsheet uses the several mapping software tools.  Not truck speeds.  Like certain posters you routinely exaggerate the average speeds on highways ("on such-and-such highway if you don't go 80 you will get rear-ended").  Not my experience.

Large truck volume may be "only" 20% to 25% of total traffic on a major corridor, but when it comes to moving freight it does what all those passenger vehicles cannot do.

[roadman65]

You know you made me think about I-87 and the way it would be most feasible is to not go east to Williston and north along US 17 but to follow the NC 97 and US 258 corridor to Suffolk and then upgrade the US 13, 58, and 460 freeway to Bowers Hill.  That would be more time saving and more direct.

Also, US 58 incidentally has enough traffic to warrant interstate upgrade.  Heck make that I-62 and have then have Kentucky, Missouri, Kansas, Oklahoma, and New Mexico change the dead or not so dead I-66 to be that I-62 making a Raton to VA Beach continuous interstate.  Having that would renumber I-264 to that as well.

[sprjus4]

Two things -
1. See my comments above about the other benefits it will have that's not about the Norfolk - Raleigh connection. The real reasons for the interstate in NC's mind is to connect the towns & Elizabeth City to Hampton Roads and I-95 & Raleigh.

Those reasons alone aren't sufficient.  Those towns and cities are already connected by a high quality 4-lane intra-state highway.

1. Interstates exist to connect the major metro areas of the country - not to "hook in" every little small town a state may have.

I've already refuted there's things an interstate can offer that a four-lane cannot. When a business is looking to move to northeastern NC and realizes there's not an interstate for at least 70 miles, the chances of them selecting eastern NC is far less than if an interstate was 3 miles away from the property site.

Also, to vdeane's point, we're dealing with North Carolina here. Along with Texas, NC has kind of blown past the point of the original interstate system to serve their own interests with it. It may not be the purpose of the original 1956 system, but it's 2019 now. Much like a lot of things from the 50s and 60s, things have changed. At least in NC's mind...

Please note that FHWA did approve the I-87 routing, and even has approved a 13 mile designation of the highway near Raleigh. If they were opposed to this, it wouldn't be approved.

Lastly, the idea to upgrade US-17 to interstate standards has been around long before the whole HR to Raleigh interstate. There's only opposition to it because the way it's being done. If a proposal existed for an interstate between HR and Wilmington per se, there'd likely be less opposition from this forum. But here's the thing - US-17 gets upgraded in either case. We're essentially arguing over the fact NCDOT wants to upgrade 80 miles of four-lane highway to interstate standards. I really don't see any issues with that.

No, my spreadsheet uses the several mapping software tools.  Not truck speeds.

Is your spreadsheet calculating current speeds or a constant 70 MPH speed limit? Because I don't know if you're aware, while US-64 is indeed 70 MPH entirely, US-17 is all 55 MPH, except on the Windsor, Edenton, and E-City bypasses it's 70 MPH, and it's 60 MPH between E-City and Virginia.

At a constant 70 MPH, it's maybe a 1 or 2 minute difference than US-58. I've calculated that up thread. But after I state it's similar times, you go on the tangent that we can't predict speed limits. The same applies with I-87. It could be 75 MPH, where Virginia's is still 60 MPH. In that case, I-87 would be the faster route.

Nobody knows. That's not NC's reasoning for building it.

Like certain posters you routinely exaggerate the average speeds on highways ("on such-and-such highway if you don't go 80 you will get rear-ended").  Not my experience.

I've been doing a lot of long-distance driving lately, and have used the interstate system mostly. I should clarify. I've used the left lane to pass. My speed will be about 75 - 78 MPH. 6 cars will fly up behind me, and ride as closely as they can until I move over. Then they fly past 80+ when I do. All 6 of them. And asides from trucks, the majority of the traffic is at least maintaining 75 MPH in both lanes. So it's safe to assume, it'll be the same way w/ I-87.

2. If two routes take about the same amount of time, but one is significantly shorter mileage, which one do you think the GPS is going to route people on?  Hint: it's not I-87.

Not entirely true. Google Maps routes me on I-64 and I-81 between Roanoke and Norfolk even though US-460 is 50 miles less, and 1 minute is faster. It simply tells me "Best route". Not "Quickest route, the usual traffic". Just "Best route". And I prefer I-64 and I-81 over the mostly 60 MPH US-460 even with the mileage difference. It doesn't bother me, and it allows me to drive 75 - 80 MPH and have an all interstate trip. I'd do the same with I-87 over US-58. A lot of people would likely agree who aren't roadgeeks on this forum obsessed with mileage and numbers that have a bias being opposed to the route.

You know you made me think about I-87 and the way it would be most feasible is to not go east to Williston and north along US 17 but to follow the NC 97 and US 258 corridor to Suffolk and then upgrade the US 13, 58, and 460 freeway to Bowers Hill.  That would be more time saving and more direct.

More costly, and wouldn't hit the big activity centers of Northeastern NC. You'd have to likely build at least 80 miles of full new location freeway. With US-17, a significant amount of freeway / limited-access already exists that would be upgraded, and the rest will mostly be upgraded or short 6-8 mile relocated segments.

Also, US 58 incidentally has enough traffic to warrant interstate upgrade.  Heck make that I-62 and have then have Kentucky, Missouri, Kansas, Oklahoma, and New Mexico change the dead or not so dead I-66 to be that I-62 making a Raton to VA Beach continuous interstate.  Having that would renumber I-264 to that as well.

I think we're getting fictional here. US-58 between I-85 and Norfolk could warrant an upgrade because of it's purpose connecting the main routes (I-95 and I-85) of the East Coast to a metro of almost 2 million, but there's almost no traffic west of I-85. I took a trip 5 months ago to Martinsville, and all the traffic essentially vanished after I-85. A car here and there, but mostly the occasional truck carrying a port container headed to Norfolk. A nice drive, a lot better then I originally imagined.

[Beltway]

No, my spreadsheet uses the several mapping software tools.  Not truck speeds.

Is your spreadsheet calculating current speeds or a constant 70 MPH speed limit? Because I don't know if you're aware, while US-64 is indeed 70 MPH entirely, US-17 is all 55 MPH, except on the Windsor, Edenton, and E-City bypasses it's 70 MPH, and it's 60 MPH between E-City and Virginia.

I know exactly what they are, and the numbers came from the mapping software tools.

At a constant 70 MPH, it's maybe a 1 or 2 minute difference than US-58.

The best I get would be 12 minutes longer and 20 miles longer for a HPC 13 freeway.  It is tough trying to overcome that mileage.  Reality is a tough thing to accept, for sure.

Like certain posters you routinely exaggerate the average speeds on highways ("on such-and-such highway if you don't go 80 you will get rear-ended").  Not my experience.

I've been doing a lot of long-distance driving lately, and have used the interstate system mostly. I should clarify. I've used the left lane to pass. My speed will be about 75 - 78 MPH. 6 cars will fly up behind me, and ride as closely as they can until I move over. Then they fly past 80+ when I do. All 6 of them.

Again, not my experience, on the average quite a bit slower. 

And you seem to be forgetting that I-95 is about half of the mileage of the current route.  So whatever happens on Interstate highways happens there as well.

Not entirely true. Google Maps routes me on I-64 and I-81 between Roanoke and Norfolk even though US-460 is 50 miles less, and 1 minute is faster.

I just ran it and it routes me on US-460, as being 40 miles shorter and 10 minutes faster.

Given the considerably lighter volumes on much of US-460, and the potential congestion zones of parts of I-64 and I-81, I would definitely prefer US-460 for trip like that.

[Roadsguy]

I thought this thread was about I-73.

[sprjus4]

The best I get would be 12 minutes longer and 20 miles longer for a HPC 13 freeway.  It is tough trying to overcome that mileage.  Reality is a tough thing to accept, for sure.

Would you mind sharing your spreadsheets here? Just curious to see the breakdown. My calculations got about 4-5 minutes slower max, and that's obeying every speed limit.

Again, not my experience, on the average quite a bit slower.

You're experience seems to be different than mine it seems. I did around 3,200 miles of interstate highway driving in one trip last year (VA - TX, TX - VA). I ran into this frequently.

And you seem to be forgetting that I-95 is about half of the mileage of the current route.  So whatever happens on Interstate highways happens there as well.

What point are you trying to make? Both the current route and the "HPC 13" route have the southern most 55 miles as 70 MPH 4-lane freeways. It's the same on both routes.

I just ran it and it routes me on US-460, as being 40 miles shorter and 10 minutes faster.

Not for me. 1 minute faster on US-460, though still recommends I-64. And you are correct about the 40 miles, look like I misread that originally.

Given the considerably lighter volumes on much of US-460, and the potential congestion zones of parts of I-64 and I-81, I would definitely prefer US-460 for trip like that.

With everything you've been saying, I-95 has potential congestion zones, US-58 would retain all of it's traffic, and the Downtown Tunnel has major congestion as is, and no plans for expansion. An I-87 routing would completely avoid 55 miles of I-95, have less traffic, and avoid the tunnels. That's another reason for chosing an I-87 routing over US-58. But hey, that's up to each individual driver to make that decision once the interstate is completed.

I thought this thread was about I-73.

Who knows anymore 

[LM117]

I feel like building an interstate to connect two places should make things faster than the existing route, not maintain approximately the same travel time while adding on additional mileage for taking an indirect route.

I agree, and I wish that the Tar Heel State interests would stop blowing all this smoke (and groceries) about connecting Raleigh and Norfolk, and not until 2040 or 2045 or even beyond.

For what it's worth, I-87 isn't a top priority in eastern NC right now. I-795's extension and I-42 are...as they should be.

EDIT: Even more so now, according to this morning's article.

https://www.newsargus.com/news/rail-terminal-set-to-spur-economic-growth/article_b576dada-6ee2-11e9-a752-9bf14d19fbae.html

[sprjus4]

For what it's worth, I-87 isn't a top priority in eastern NC right now. I-795's extension and I-42 are...as they should be.

Agreed. As the major projects are completed over the next 5 to 10 years on those corridors, the focus will likely change. The first leg that will likely be completed is from the Elizabeth City to Virginia. It almost got funding this round in the STIP, though narrowly fell off. If there's less competition for interstate upgrade projects that are on higher priority corridors, then I could see it receiving funding once again.

EDIT: Even more so now, according to this morning's article.

https://www.newsargus.com/news/rail-terminal-set-to-spur-economic-growth/article_b576dada-6ee2-11e9-a752-9bf14d19fbae.html

Not a good argument. That's simply an economic developer of a county I-42 and I-795 will both travel through hoping it will accelerate the projects. I've seen similar articles from Elizabeth City, Pasquotank County, Currituck County, etc. that claim "so and so could help to accelerate I-87".

And not to mention they are mentioning the Quad East Loop once again. That's a project that's years off. They're putting all these freeways on their wish list hoping they will all happen. Once I-42 and I-795 are completed (honestly I see I-42 happening before I-795), it's going to be a while before NC-11 / US-13 gets upgraded. Just my opinion anyways.

At least up in Northeastern NC, there's simply one main interstate on the wish list - the main north-south corridor (US-17).

[LM117]

For what it's worth, I-87 isn't a top priority in eastern NC right now. I-795's extension and I-42 are...as they should be.

EDIT: Even more so now, according to this morning's article.

https://www.newsargus.com/news/rail-terminal-set-to-spur-economic-growth/article_b576dada-6ee2-11e9-a752-9bf14d19fbae.html

Not a good argument. That's simply an economic developer of a county I-42 and I-795 will both travel through hoping it will accelerate the projects. I've seen similar articles from Elizabeth City, Pasquotank County, Currituck County, etc. that claim "so and so could help to accelerate I-87".

It wasn't just Pope saying it. From the article:

The facility is going to have a big impact across eastern North Carolina, and Goldsboro is less than an hour's drive from Rocky Mount, thanks in large part to Interstate 795 that provides an easy four-lane trip the entire way, said Gus Tulloss of Rocky Mount, who represents Division 4 on the state transportation board. Division 4 includes Wayne County.

"One of the biggest things that it has already done is given us instant creditability,"  Tulloss said.

Both Pope and Tulloss foresee the project possibly accelerating highway programs, including the extension of I-795 from Goldsboro to Interstate 40 in Sampson County.

"Everybody is on go and right now, the economy is very favorable to it,"  Tulloss said. "A lot of money is out there for infrastructure. I think this is just another reason to make that thing happen. There are so many (highway) projects going on that are feeding on each other."

Granted, it's not a done deal, but the words carry a little more weight when it's coming from a BOT member.

[Beltway]

I just ran it and it routes me on US-460, as being 40 miles shorter and 10 minutes faster.

Not for me. 1 minute faster on US-460, though still recommends I-64. And you are correct about the 40 miles, look like I misread that originally.

It doesn't always give the same exact figures, probably because of traffic conditions.  Nevertheless, US-460 is the preferred route Norfolk-Roanoke for many people.

Given the considerably lighter volumes on much of US-460, and the potential congestion zones of parts of I-64 and I-81, I would definitely prefer US-460 for trip like that.

With everything you've been saying, I-95 has potential congestion zones, US-58 would retain all of it's traffic, and the Downtown Tunnel has major congestion as is, and no plans for expansion. An I-87 routing would completely avoid 55 miles of I-95, have less traffic, and avoid the tunnels. That's another reason for chosing an I-87 routing over US-58. But hey, that's up to each individual driver to make that decision once the interstate is completed.

You keep absurdly mixing today with 25+ years into the future.  I-95 will never be 6-laned, US-58 will never be improved, the I-564 bridge-tunnel / Uptown Crossing won't ever be built.  You can't drive 68-70 mph on US-58 without worrying about being ticketed (you can go that, easily, I know).

The Downtown Tunnel has already been relieved by the new Midtown Tunnel, and the Midtown Tunnel provides an alternate route between the downtown and I-264 west.

It is absurd to plan some new Interstate highway for completion 25 years into the future on the basis that it might supplant an existing highway.  Only THSDOT would do something like that.

You have already conceded that Norfolk-Raleigh and Norfolk-95 South truck traffic would remain on the existing corridor if VI-87 was built, and VI-87 would not feasibly attract that truck traffic.  Then you rationalized that trucks only comprise a small percentage of overall traffic, that it was not an issue.  An Interstate highway with 20% truck traffic has about 80% of the total vehicle weights in those trucks, and they are major freight vehicles.

Any proposed mainline Interstate highway that can't attract long distance truck traffic is an imposter, as such highways are supposed to carry at least 20% long distance truck traffic, and if they can't do that then they have no business being proposed as an Interstate highway.  VI-87 is a boondoggle and a deceit.   It has no business being promoted as a "Raleigh-Norfolk Interstate highway", because it ain't.

IJN Yamato was hard to sink but it did go down and it left a mushroom cloud that was a mile high and visible 100 miles away.

[sprjus4]

It wasn't just Pope saying it. From the article:

The facility is going to have a big impact across eastern North Carolina, and Goldsboro is less than an hour's drive from Rocky Mount, thanks in large part to Interstate 795 that provides an easy four-lane trip the entire way, said Gus Tulloss of Rocky Mount, who represents Division 4 on the state transportation board. Division 4 includes Wayne County.

"One of the biggest things that it has already done is given us instant creditability,"  Tulloss said.

Both Pope and Tulloss foresee the project possibly accelerating highway programs, including the extension of I-795 from Goldsboro to Interstate 40 in Sampson County.

"Everybody is on go and right now, the economy is very favorable to it,"  Tulloss said. "A lot of money is out there for infrastructure. I think this is just another reason to make that thing happen. There are so many (highway) projects going on that are feeding on each other."

Granted, it's not a done deal, but the words carry a little more weight when it's coming from a BOT member.

He's one BOT member out of 19 of them who represents Division 4. He supports the projects in his division. I-87 would run through a completely different division (Division 1), and similar to Division 4, there's support from the BOT member in Division 1. Supporting a project or saying "it could be accelerated" really doesn't carry much weight, especially when everybody says it about their project or their top priority. I tend to ignore those news articles. Until there's an actual push at receiving funding, I'm not buying. Same with members of the General Assembly or Congress. They can say all day long they support it, but until they actually push for funding and get something, same thing.

When 13 miles of US-17 was funded for upgrade before it was removed, that was actually real information. That was something. An economic developer or BOT member stating he supports it or thinks so-and-so will accelerate so-and-so project doesn't carry much IMHO.

http://www.dailyadvance.com/News/2017/08/11/New-BOT-member-ready-to-serve.html

"Moran said his priorities as Division 1's representative on the BOT include the completion of the future Bonner Bridge and the proposed Mid-Currituck Bridge and the transformation of the Raleigh-to-Williamston-to-Norfolk corridor to the proposed Interstate 87."

[sprjus4]

You keep absurdly mixing today with 25+ years into the future.  I-95 will never be 6-laned, US-58 will never be improved, the I-564 bridge-tunnel / Uptown Crossing won't ever be built.  You can't drive 68-70 mph on US-58 without worrying about being ticketed (you can, easily, I know).

20 years into the future isn't that far away as much as it seems. As it is now, NCDOT has no plans to even expand I-95 to 6 lanes north of US 64. And we sure know VDOT isn't getting any type of funding for that anytime soon. They're already trying to tackle I-81, I-64 and I-95 north of Richmond, which are all higher priorities.

The current proposals for 6 or 8 lane widenings -

• Exit 119 (US-264 / Future I-587) to Exit 138 (US-64 / Future I-87) - 20 miles - 6 lanes - Unfunded
• Exit 56 (I-95 Business) to Exit 81 (I-40) - 25 miles - 8 lanes - Funded
• Exit 40 (I-95 Business) to Exit 56 (I-95 Business) - 15 miles - 8 lanes - Unfunded
• Exit 22 (US-301 at Lumberton) to Exit 40 (I-95 Business) - 20 miles - 8 lanes - Funded
• Exit 13 (I-74 / US-74) to Exit 22 (US-301 at Lumberton) - 9 miles - 8 lanes - Unfunded
• SC Border to Exit 13 (I-74 / US-74) - 13 miles - 6 lanes - Unfunded

Nothing north of US-64 / I-87. There's about 57 miles of 6 and 8 lane widening which are currently their top priorities, and unless $3 billion magically appears, it's going to be a while before those happen, and then maybe the rest of the corridor.

And if they chose to toll I-95 to fund it, it's pretty much guaranteed I-87 would become a major shunpiking route. But I-95 likely isn't getting tolled, and that would most likely involve I-95 not being widened.

Maybe business advocates will push for I-95 to be tolled 

----------

As for US-58 and speed.... I was pulled over 3 years ago for doing 67 in a 60 MPH. I rarely see people on that road surpass 65 MPH. It's risky. And when going through Greensville County, I always keep my speed down to 55 MPH even though it's still 60 MPH. They have a bad rep for police trapping. You can argue all day and night it's not, but I can tell you first hand, and so can hundreds of others who've been through there and been pulled, it is.

The Downtown Tunnel has already been relieved by the new Midtown Tunnel, and the Midtown Tunnel provides an alternate route between the downtown and I-264 west.

Not really.... as someone who lives in the area and goes to Downtown Norfolk frequently, I can tell you first hand that the congestion on I-264 during rush hour, and through Downtown isn't "relieved".

And with the new I-564 Intermodal Connector, that's the major entrance for port trucks now... not via Hampton Blvd.

It is absurd to plan some new Interstate highway for completion 25 years into the future on the basis that it might supplant an existing highway.  Only THSDOT would do something like that.

It's not being planned around that. It's mostly to connect the towns and cities along the route to I-95 and Raleigh AND to bring 80 miles of US-17 to a 70 MPH freeway, which in case you didn't know, US-17 itself is a major truck route with 13 - 15% truck traffic all the way thru. Upgrading US-17 itself down to Wilmington could be a valuable project. This US-17 upgrade is one piece of that.

Any proposed mainline Interstate highway that can't attract long distance truck traffic is an imposter, as such highways are supposed to carry at least 20% long distance truck traffic, and if they can't do that then they have no business being proposed as an Interstate highway.  VI-87 is a boondoggle and a deceit.   It has no business being promoted as a "Raleigh-Norfolk Interstate highway", because it ain't.

I looked at I-40, I-95, I-74, and US-70 (Future I-42). They all carry 13 - 15% truck traffic through NC. Should not be interstate highways? The US-64 & US-17 corridors (the I-87 route) already carries 13 - 15% as well. The numbers compare to the other highways with 13 - 15% truck traffic that under your standards shouldn't be interstate highways either. You're argument is poor.

[vdeane]

Not entirely true. Google Maps routes me on I-64 and I-81 between Roanoke and Norfolk even though US-460 is 50 miles less, and 1 minute is faster.

I just ran it and it routes me on US-460, as being 40 miles shorter and 10 minutes faster.

Given the considerably lighter volumes on much of US-460, and the potential congestion zones of parts of I-64 and I-81, I would definitely prefer US-460 for trip like that.

Hmm... this makes me wonder if Google takes into account the types of roads a person typically drives when giving them directions.  I generally browse Google Maps in incognito to avoid such things, and I sometimes find myself dragging the directions onto a freeway segment off of a local "shortcut" and having the travel time decrease by a minute or two.

[rickmastfan67]

Please leave the stuff about I-87 in the I-87 thread.  Thanks!

[hotdogPi]

This was entirely my fault.

[The Ghostbuster]

At the rate it's going, we'll probably see Interstate 87 in Virginia before we see Interstate 73 in the state.

[LM117]

At the rate it's going, we'll probably see Interstate 87 in Virginia before we see Interstate 73 in the state.

I don't think we'll see any new interstate in VA...ever.

[The Ghostbuster]

Probably not.

[sprjus4]

At the rate it's going, we'll probably see Interstate 87 in Virginia before we see Interstate 73 in the state.

I don't think we'll see any new interstate in VA...ever.

Agreed. Though I-87 is definitely an easier build than I-73 is. The freeway-grade cross-section (4 lanes, limited-access, full shoulders, etc.) already exists, you just need interchanges at select locations to replace some of the intersections and a couple frontage roads. Whereas I-73 is 60+ miles of new freeway-grade roadway, and at least 20 interchanges, if not more.

I do agree that I-73 is more of a priority though, but even if I-87 is funded, it'd likely be inside of the Hampton Roads district, and wouldn't be competing w/ I-73.

[Alps]

At the rate it's going, we'll probably see Interstate 87 in Virginia before we see Interstate 73 in the state.

I don't think we'll see any new interstate in VA...ever.

I-366...