Interstate 73/74

[LM117]

I do not see why I-74 has to double back to the Myrtle Beach area when Wilmington, a perfectly good size city, is there in a straight line ahead.  Its like they are so blind building the I-73/I-74 thing with one thing in mind, that is giving the Myrtle Beach area two interstates they overlooked some other possibilities in the whole process.

+1! If I had it my way, I-74 would end in Wilmington and an I-x74 would link Myrtle Beach and Wilmington. That way, Myrtle Beach would have their two interstates and Wilmington wouldn't be getting the shaft. Win-win!  But I'm drifting into fictional territory here, so I'll shut up about it. What's done is done. 

[Strider]

Exit 100 is now open on I-73 as of today in Greensboro. The interchange is for Gate City Blvd. to no surprise, the interchange is DDI. There are still some work around the interchange, but the bottom line is: there is now Exit 100.

[Mapmikey]

I am sure there is enough demand for an interstate there.  I do not see why I-74 has to double back to the Myrtle Beach area when Wilmington, a perfectly good size city, is there in a straight line ahead.  Its like they are so blind building the I-73/I-74 thing with one thing in mind, that is giving the Myrtle Beach area two interstates they overlooked some other possibilities in the whole process.

I could be mistaken but I believe the law requires both 73 and 74 to go to Georgetown, so it would require Congressional action to have 74 not go there.

Then again I don't know the consequence of never building it that far, just as the 74 piece mandated to Cincinnati isn't exactly on the horizon either...

[wdcrft63]

I could be mistaken but I believe the law requires both 73 and 74 to go to Georgetown, so it would require Congressional action to have 74 not go there.

Then again I don't know the consequence of never building it that far, just as the 74 piece mandated to Cincinnati isn't exactly on the horizon either...

Congress can define interstate corridors, but it can't require states to build them. The I-74 corridor is defined to Georgetown, but SC has no plans to build it south of Surfside Beach.

[hbelkins]

Yes and no. It is like I-26 - a 'diagonal' interstate. That is if the interstate in NC EVER gets connected to Cincinnati. Probably not in my lifetime. Come on WV, what is the hold up 

Funding.

The complete lack of need for that to be anything other than a surface four-lane route in West Virginia because the traffic demand is not there, an interstate would be overkill, and a surface route would be more than sufficient.

Oh, and did I mention funding?

West Virginia never had intentions of upgrading US 52 to an interstate. The plan always was to build a four lane form Huntington to Bluefield via Williamson and Welch.

[SP Cook]

Funding.

The complete lack of need for that to be anything other than a surface four-lane route in West Virginia because the traffic demand is not there, an interstate would be overkill, and a surface route would be more than sufficient.

If some benefactor presented WV with 100% of the cash needed to build the Tolsia/King Coal project, either to interstate or the currently planned corridor standard, there are about 50 better things this flat broke state could do with it.  (Other than the needed 10 or so miles from the Prichard facility to I-64)  Road related and otherwise. 

Same goes for the boondoggle WV 10 upgrade currently being built and the farcical Coalfields Expressway. 

This is an economically potential free area.  There is no economic use for this land other than the (now essentially illegal) production of coal, and no reason to live there other than to mine coal.  So a couple of billion dollars to save less than 10 miles over the current interstate route between Huntington and Bluefield (64 and 77).  Through what is fast becoming an unpopulated woodland.  Dumb beyond belief.

WV needs to finish H and 35, 6 lane the rest of the western half of 64, try to fix some of the issues with the turnpike's misdesign, and deal with the only growing area, the eastern panhandle.  All of the rest of these projects are just waste. 

[WashuOtaku]

Congress can define interstate corridors, but it can't require states to build them. The I-74 corridor is defined to Georgetown, but SC has no plans to build it south of Surfside Beach.

Well, all they need to do is upgrade US 17 to an interstate south of Surfside Beach, wouldn't be difficult to do that a majority of the route.  The only difficult area would be Litchfield, which the right-of-way would be costly.

[WashuOtaku]

If some benefactor presented WV with 100% of the cash needed to build the Tolsia/King Coal project, either to interstate or the currently planned corridor standard, there are about 50 better things this flat broke state could do with it.  (Other than the needed 10 or so miles from the Prichard facility to I-64)  Road related and otherwise. 

Same goes for the boondoggle WV 10 upgrade currently being built and the farcical Coalfields Expressway. 

This is an economically potential free area.  There is no economic use for this land other than the (now essentially illegal) production of coal, and no reason to live there other than to mine coal.  So a couple of billion dollars to save less than 10 miles over the current interstate route between Huntington and Bluefield (64 and 77).  Through what is fast becoming an unpopulated woodland.  Dumb beyond belief.

WV needs to finish H and 35, 6 lane the rest of the western half of 64, try to fix some of the issues with the turnpike's misdesign, and deal with the only growing area, the eastern panhandle.  All of the rest of these projects are just waste.

If they got funds earmarked for the King Coal Highway, they cannot funnel it to another project; appropriations don't work that way.

When did mining coal become illegal?  How do we keep providing coal to all our coal power plants?

[SP Cook]

I'm quite aware of how appropriations work.  I was speaking theoretically.

As to coal, you do understand that no new permits for new coal mines have been issued and when the current ones run out, there will be no more coal mining.

[Mapmikey]

Congress can define interstate corridors, but it can't require states to build them. The I-74 corridor is defined to Georgetown, but SC has no plans to build it south of Surfside Beach.

Well, all they need to do is upgrade US 17 to an interstate south of Surfside Beach, wouldn't be difficult to do that a majority of the route.  The only difficult area would be Litchfield, which the right-of-way would be costly.

Upgrading US 17 would be extremely difficult and costly.  Only about 10 miles of this has a speed limit above 45 now and the built up area continues well south of Litchfield through Pawleys Island and Simmonsville...

Also the median is very narrow (or non-existent in some places) so it would be just like building from scratch...

[WashuOtaku]

As to coal, you do understand that no new permits for new coal mines have been issued and when the current ones run out, there will be no more coal mining.

Had to look that up.  The United States has put a freeze on new permits on Government lands, hasn't completely stopped the program.  Also, I'm sure existing mines have and will last for years.

Of course, that probably doesn't help the area any more... all the more reason to build an interstate through it and make it a scenic route.

[hbelkins]

I'm quite aware of how appropriations work.  I was speaking theoretically.

As to coal, you do understand that no new permits for new coal mines have been issued and when the current ones run out, there will be no more coal mining.

There was a mention on another thread about this and the King Coal/US 52 route. What was the issue that resulted in the coal companies not being able to build the road to grade the way the route between the Delbarton area and Gilbert is being done? Was it a dispute over prevailing wage because the project was being done by a coal company vs. a highway contractor? There was a court case over it but I can't remember the exact issue.

[vdeane]

Basically, someone was upset that WV wasn't putting the work out to bid.

[SP Cook]

There was a mention on another thread about this and the King Coal/US 52 route. What was the issue that resulted in the coal companies not being able to build the road to grade the way the route between the Delbarton area and Gilbert is being done? Was it a dispute over prevailing wage because the project was being done by a coal company vs. a highway contractor? There was a court case over it but I can't remember the exact issue.

The court case used the prevailing wage law (which WV has now repealed anyway).  It was more or less a "sour grapes" move by the unionized construction workers.  They "won" and stopped further "win-win" deals were the coal was striped and a road bed was left behind (to be finished by unionized construction workers) by union-free miners.

So the result is not that the road is getting built by construction workers, but it is not being built at all.

In any event, as no new coal mining permits are being issued (and not just on government lands, none anywhere) this whole endeavor is at an end, at least for now.

If you have driven the part that is open, which is two lanes with the other side "banked" for the future, it is in really bad shape.  Engineers say you should let the land settle for 5 or so years, but they rushed the deal and built the road ASAP, because the school system was so bad and they had to use the road to access a new consolidated HS (too many little failing HSs is a big problem in southern WV) and now it is like driving on a roller coaster.  Eventually they will have to rebuild the whole thing.  In any event, it is just 10 or so miles in the middle of nowhere.

[Henry]

IIRC, I-73 was to end in Charleston, then it was truncated back to Georgetown and then to Myrtle Beach. FWIW, I think I-74 should go to Wilmington and a spur to Myrtle Beach could do the trick if they insist on getting two Interstates there, however roundabout they may seem.

[hbelkins]

I've driven the new section at least twice, but it's been a few years. The connector between the new route and WV 44 was falling apart the one time I drove it. Fresh new concrete being patched with cold mix.

[seicer]

Ouch. The new US 35 is also seeing a lot of issues, despite it being just a few years old. The asphalt sections are some of the worst new roads I've driven on, with many sections dipping and settling 10- to 20-feet below grade. The concrete portions aren't much better and are either patched with asphalt or new concrete - which doesn't do anything to solve the underlying issue of crapshoot preparation. I can't remember any major issues on Corridor H/US 48 in the eastern part of the state.

[hbelkins]

Ouch. The new US 35 is also seeing a lot of issues, despite it being just a few years old. The asphalt sections are some of the worst new roads I've driven on, with many sections dipping and settling 10- to 20-feet below grade. The concrete portions aren't much better and are either patched with asphalt or new concrete - which doesn't do anything to solve the underlying issue of crapshoot preparation. I can't remember any major issues on Corridor H/US 48 in the eastern part of the state.

Wonder if it has anything to do with soil type? There's an area of Estill County with a lot of pyrite in the soil. It caused settling issues with the floor and foundation of a new school, also some washboarding with the northern end of the Irvine bypass built a few years ago.

[Strider]

I-73 update is set for tomorrow. We should know what's up with the construction north of Greensboro or if there is any changes coming  tomorrow.

http://www.greensboro.com/rockingham_now/news/i--update-set-for-may/article_7402773c-1fa1-11e6-a645-5f84f14a5d99.html

[CobaltYoshi27]

I know there is an update coming out tomorrow, but what is the planned route for I-73? Is it going to follow US 220 to Roanoke and take over I-581?

[74/171FAN]

I know there is an update coming out tomorrow, but what is the planned route for I-73? Is it going to follow US 220 to Roanoke and take over I-581?

Yes, though in VA basically the general area of US 220 until meeting with US 220 southeast of Roanoke and following that to I-81.  (replacing I-581)

See earlier in the thread for the planned routing:  https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=18.msg2143839#msg2143839

[Strider]

I know there is an update coming out tomorrow, but what is the planned route for I-73? Is it going to follow US 220 to Roanoke and take over I-581?

Yeah, I-73 will take over I-581 in Roanoke. As of the planned route, it is to leave US 220 right at the NC/VA state line and follow US 220 to the east until they meet in Roanoke.

[CanesFan27]

I know there is an update coming out tomorrow, but what is the planned route for I-73? Is it going to follow US 220 to Roanoke and take over I-581?

Yeah, I-73 will take over I-581 in Roanoke. As of the planned route, it is to leave US 220 right at the NC/VA state line and follow US 220 to the east until they meet in Roanoke.

You mean run parallel to the east of US 220.

[Mileage Mike]

Yes and no. It is like I-26 - a 'diagonal' interstate. That is if the interstate in NC EVER gets connected to Cincinnati. Probably not in my lifetime. Come on WV, what is the hold up 

Funding.

The complete lack of need for that to be anything other than a surface four-lane route in West Virginia because the traffic demand is not there, an interstate would be overkill, and a surface route would be more than sufficient.

Oh, and did I mention funding?

West Virginia never had intentions of upgrading US 52 to an interstate. The plan always was to build a four lane form Huntington to Bluefield via Williamson and Welch.

It seems that for the sake of just connecting the route I-74 should just be concurrent with 64/77 through the state all the way to Huntington.

[hbelkins]

It seems that for the sake of just connecting the route I-74 should just be concurrent with 64/77 through the state all the way to Huntington.

Why? Would you then run it concurrently all the way along I-64 and I-75 through Lexington to Cincinnati to connect it with existing I-74 (the "real" I-74)?

There is no need to build an interstate between Cincinnati and Huntington. The AA Highway and Corridor D/US 35 function just fine to connect the Metro Valley area of West Virginia to Cincy.