Interstate 87 (NC-VA)

[Beltway]

80+% of the route is projected so far into the future that it could effectively be considered fictional, fanciful, imaginary, fantastic, dreamland.

If it's so fictional, imaginary, fantastic, dreamland, then why do you care so much?

Why do you care so much that you keep reflexively posting/responding?

As for the actual reality of I-87, 80% of the route is projected to be completed by 2030.

Error.  The advocacy article you posted said completion in 2050, and with the cost having increased 70% over the estimate in 2015.  Like I said, it is obvious that it has not been inflation-factored.

66 miles is non-freeway today.

[sprjus4]

Error.  The advocacy article you posted said completion in 2050

I never said completion wasn't 2050. I said 80% will tentatively be completed by 2030, and that is a -fact-.

The remaining 36 miles in North Carolina at any point could be accelerated. While 2050 is a -safe- completion date, nothing says it could be accelerated and done in the 2030s. That may well happen, it may well not. Only time and priorities will tell. The US-17 and US-64 Feasibility Study's utilize a 2040 Build for AADT counts.

and with the cost having increased 70% over the estimate in 2015.  Like I said, it is obvious that it has not been inflation-factored.

When are you going to realize the "increased cost" was along US-64, not US-17, and has been not been disclosed as to why by any official study?

66 miles is non-freeway today.

Error. 50 miles is non-freeway today. 130 miles is full freeway.

14 miles between US-64 freeway and Windsor Bypass
8 miles between Windsor Bypass and Edenton Bypass
18 miles between Edenton Bypass and Elizabeth City Bypass
10 miles between Elizabeth City Bypass and Virginia state line

14 miles are tentatively scheduled to be completed by 2030. 10 miles between Elizabeth City Bypass and Virginia state line, and 4 miles near Hertford.

144 / 180 = 80%

[Beltway]

Error.  The advocacy article you posted said completion in 2050

I never said completion wasn't 2050. I said 80% will tentatively be completed by 2030, and that is a -fact-.

If that is a "fact," then why will it take 20 years to build 20%?

The remaining 36 miles in North Carolina at any point could be accelerated.

Or decelerated.

and with the cost having increased 70% over the estimate in 2015.  Like I said, it is obvious that it has not been inflation-factored.

When are you going to realize the "increased cost" was along US-64, not US-17, and has been not been disclosed as to why by any official study?

So they haven't updated those costs yet, and inflation-factored them from the 2015 figures.

66 miles is non-freeway today.

Error. 50 miles is non-freeway today. 130 miles is full freeway.

Punt block.  You're 17 miles short of I-64.

You keep saying "tentatively scheduled."  That means "not firmly scheduled."

[sprjus4]

Punt block.  You're 17 miles short of I-64.

The designation currently ends at the state line, not I-64.

I imagine as the segment between the state line and the Elizabeth City Bypass begins further development over the next decade, there will be more desire north of the border to fill the 13 mile gap between the Dominion Blvd freeway and the state line to complete the freeway to Elizabeth City. No firm plans for that segment as of yet though.

If we're counting VA I-87's portion though, 68% of the total 197 miles has been complete, with 32% left to construct.

You keep saying "tentatively scheduled."  That means "not firmly scheduled."

Items can get shifted around, delayed, etc. and only the next 5 years have a more guaranteed schedule that still could be subject to delays.

Anything could happen going forth.

The major focus of this decade is completing I-42 and I-795 extension, both authorized in 2016 and scheduled to be complete by 2032. As those projects wrap up, there will likely be a more shifted focus in completing I-87 as more funds are opened up. This may well complete the highway by 2040.

As of now, 68% of the highway is complete, with the remaining 32% to be built.

[Beltway]

You're 17 miles short of I-64.

The designation currently ends at the state line, not I-64.

The boosters don't consider it ending there if they want its alleged benefits.

If we're counting VA I-87's portion though, 68% of the total 197 miles has been complete, with 32% left to construct.

Complete to what?  Is even 20% of the VI-87 mileage designed to Interstate standards?

Besides, 32% is 63 miles, and that cancels out any of the time advantages supposedly claimed by this advocacy paradigm -- 20 or 30 years before anything gels.

This may well complete the highway by 2040.

Speculation.  Could be 2050 or 2060, no enterprise can accurately predict out that far.

Most businesses don't plan beyond a 5-year horizon, so for them those times are an eternity, not something that they would anticipate or plan their long-term business strategies upon.

[sprjus4]

Complete to what?  Is even 20% of the VI-87 mileage designed to Interstate standards?

68% is complete to 70 mph freeway standards. While only 22% is currently at full interstate standards, the rest of the freeway segments already have to full control of access, 70 mph speed limits, wide rights of way, etc. The major feature lacking is a full 10 foot right paved shoulder, though does exist on most overpasses. For the most part, it is 4 foot paved, 6 foot graded. In addition, several bridges and interchanges, notably on the older segments near Nashville, Zebulon, and Tarboro, identified in the US-64 Feasibility Study were recommended for replacement and realignment in areas. For the remainder, shoulders will likely be added in typical rehabilitation projects that are programmed in the future. In the past year alone, 30 miles of US-70 (Future I-42) and 17 miles of US-264 (Future I-587), with similar cross-sections, are getting full 10 foot right paved shoulders where there was previously only 4 foot paved, 6 foot graded.

This is where I seriously question the cost estimate rising, so far only confirmed by a newspaper article, to nearly $1 billion to upgrade US-64 alone, as there's nowhere near $1 billion of needs along that corridor.

32% rest to build to at least complete the corridor to full freeway standards.

Either way, I'd argue the highest priority segments would large amounts of money would be upgrading the remaining segments of US-17, and adding shoulders to easy-upgradable segments of US-64 through maintenance rehabilitation projects to at least complete a full freeway along the HPC-13 Raleigh to Norfolk corridor. At that point, any large-scale improvements (still figuring out what would cost almost $1 billion) can be completed to fully complete the interstate highway and allow its designation in any remaining segments.

[Beltway]

Complete to what?  Is even 20% of the VI-87 mileage designed to Interstate standards?

68% is complete to 70 mph freeway standards. While only 22% is currently at full interstate standards, the rest of the freeway segments already have to full control of access, 70 mph speed limits, wide rights of way, etc. The major feature lacking is a full 10 foot right paved shoulder, though does exist on most overpasses. For the most part, it is 4 foot paved, 6 foot graded.[...]

OK, but that means there won't be any speed improvements on that 68%, or too small to be significant.

The remaining 32% would take until maybe 2050 or beyond, a slow process, and as I said not a time horizon that invigorate or exhilarate the business persons to locate there.  It also needs to be inflation-factored out to the possible build years and not continue to be deceptively stated in 2015 dollars.

[sprjus4]

The remaining 32% would take until maybe 2050 or beyond, a slow process

What about the 40+ miles of I-42 that are slated to be completed by 2032, or the remaining 20 miles of US-117 also slated to be completed by 2032?

What makes you think any segments may not be accelerated after those major projects are completed? Or even before that?

Weren't you also claiming VDOT, a division that has a track-record of taking decades of building any project of significance, could have mileage of a US-58 freeway, one that hasn't even been studied in any detail or been shown any or little interest by any public officials as of now, under construction before 2030?

OK, but that means there won't be any speed improvements on that 68%, or too small to be significant.

A 9 mile segment near Rocky Mount is currently 65 mph, and was evaluated to be increased to 70 mph through increasing superelevation along a few curves to the maximum allowable to allow higher speeds. This would reduce about one minute of travel time following the speed limit.

Additionally, 63 miles would see improvements to see.

A 14 mile segment between Williamston and Windsor currently takes about 17 minutes to drive; at 70 mph this would be reduced to 12 minutes.

A 8 mile segment between Windsor and Edenton currently takes about 9 minutes to drive; at 70 mph this would be reduced to 6 minutes.

A 19 mile segment between Edenton and Elizabeth City currently takes about 21 minutes to drive; at 70 mph this would be reduced to 16 minutes.

A 13 mile segment between Elizabeth City and the Virginia state line currently takes about 13 minutes to drive; at 70 mph this would be reduced to 11 minutes.

A 10 mile segment between the Virginia state line currently takes about 11 minutes to drive; if the speed limit were increased to 65 mph, being a rural area, this would be reduced to 9 minutes.

In total, about 17 minutes in time savings on the existing corridor. For a route that's currently 15 - 20 minutes longer than the existing route, it would end up having the same travel time as US-58.

[Strider]

Wow, sprigs4 vs Beltway dominates this thread. Interesting to read both of your different perspectives and facts from different sources.   

No comment from me because I don't live in that route nor drove on it.

[Beltway]

The remaining 32% would take until maybe 2050 or beyond, a slow process

What about the 40+ miles of I-42 that are slated to be completed by 2032, or the remaining 20 miles of US-117 also slated to be completed by 2032?

Different corridor, high traffic.  The fact that has one priority (of course, that is 12 years, which is in TIP "wish list" territory)  doesn't mean that another corridor might not have a completely different priority.

What makes you think any segments may not be accelerated after those major projects are completed? Or even before that?

What makes you think that those segments may not be postponed for 50 years?  All speculation.

A 14 mile segment between Williamston and Windsor currently takes about 17 minutes to drive; at 70 mph this would be reduced to 12 minutes.

You are playing games with math and figures like you have from the beginning of this thread.

That would be 14 minutes.  You did the same on the following <snipped>.

In total, about 17 minutes in time savings on the existing corridor. For a route that's currently 15 - 20 minutes longer than the existing route, it would end up having the same travel time as US-58.

Fake Math, and you are comparing something in 2050 to something today which could obviously change by then.

This time-comparison discussion should be moved to Fictional Highways.

[sprjus4]

Different corridor, high traffic.  The fact that has one priority (of course, that is 12 years, which is in TIP "wish list" territory)  doesn't mean that another corridor might not have a completely different priority.

US-117 has around the same traffic volumes as US-17 (down to 8,000 AADT with the connection with I-40) and is mostly limited-access (with intersections) highway with only one signal to be remaining with the completion with two interchanges this year north of Mt. Olive. A new connecting freeway segment will likely be constructed to avoid the existing I-40 diamond interchange.

I agree I-42 is currently the highest priority, and significant work is already slated to get underway by the end of this year, including an upgrade of 4 lane arterial to urban 6 lane freeway south of New Bern, and about 6 miles of arterial to freeway upgrade west of I-95. The US-70 Goldsboro Bypass, a 16 mile freeway bypass, was completed in 2016. The 10 mile Havelock Bypass began construction last year, and the 20 mile Kinston Bypass is slated to begin by 2025. 30 miles of the US-70 freeway outside of New Bern is currently being upgraded to interstate standards by widening the shoulders as apart of a maintenance rehabilitation project. A 7 mile upgrade of US-70 from arterial to freeway west of Goldsboro is already slated to begin around 2025. Between the urban freeway upgrade south of New Bern and the Havelock Bypass, that segment IIRC is funded to begin in the next 5 years, upgrade from arterial to rural freeway. The only remaining segment would be from just west of I-95 to Princeton, which will likely be funded by the end of the decade. The goal is to complete the corridor by 2032, and is well on track to being so.

I-87 may well be accelerated as more funding is opened up with these projects complete and built out throughout the 2030s and 2040s. It could be announced in the next few years money was found to accelerate more segments before 2030. It could be pushed off and not touched for three decades much like VA I-73. Nobody knows, and isn't worth going back and forth over.

What makes you think that those segments may not be postponed for 50 years?  All speculation.

Much like speculation to currently non-proposed improvements to US-58 being improved to full freeway by 2030. All speculation with no basis.

You are playing games with math and figures like you have from the beginning of this thread.

That would be 14 minutes.  You did the same on the following <snipped>.

14 miles / 70 mph = 0.2 * 60 = 12 minutes 0 seconds

A 9 mile segment near Rocky Mount is currently 65 mph, and was evaluated to be increased to 70 mph through increasing superelevation along a few curves to the maximum allowable to allow higher speeds. This would reduce about one minute of travel time following the speed limit.

9 miles / 70 mph = 0.129 * 60 = 7.71 = 7 minutes 43 seconds

A 8 mile segment between Windsor and Edenton currently takes about 9 minutes to drive; at 70 mph this would be reduced to 6 minutes.

8 miles / 70 mph = 0.114 * 60 = 6.85 = 6 minutes 51 seconds

A 19 mile segment between Edenton and Elizabeth City currently takes about 21 minutes to drive; at 70 mph this would be reduced to 16 minutes.

19 miles / 70 mph = 0.271 * 60 = 16.28 = 16 minutes 16 seconds

A 13 mile segment between Elizabeth City and the Virginia state line currently takes about 13 minutes to drive; at 70 mph this would be reduced to 11 minutes.

13 miles / 70 mph = 0.185 * 60 = 11.14 = 11 minutes 8 seconds

A 10 mile segment between the Virginia state line currently takes about 11 minutes to drive; if the speed limit were increased to 65 mph, being a rural area, this would be reduced to 9 minutes.

10 mile / 65 mph = 0.154 * 60 = 9.23 = 9 minutes 13 seconds

I will give about 2 minutes were added with seconds included.

This is also speculating the upgrade will follow the existing alignment entirely and will be relocated, which could reduce up to one or two miles, and therefore travel times by a minute or two. A segment south of Windsor is one area where the existing alignment may be bypassed and straightened, reducing around one mile.

Fake Math

This time-comparison discussion should be moved to Fictional Highways.

Agreed, and repetitively claiming "20 minutes longer" based on a completed corridor is fictional highways territory as we will not know the travel times, speed limits, and design (freeway vs. arterial for US-58) on either route by the 2030s, 2040s, or 2050, whenever the road may be completed.



Regardless of what happens with US-58, the likelihood of this route eventually getting built out is there, as while having that link between Raleigh and Norfolk will exist and may be beneficial for long-distance traffic if US-58 is not upgraded, the other major goal is to provide interstate / freeway access from Northeastern North Carolina to Raleigh, I-95, and to Norfolk.

[wdcrft63]

Really, let's move on from this endless argument. We know this: I-87 is going to be built (in NC at least), whether it is the "best" route between Raleigh and Norfolk or not. And that is all we know for sure at this point: everything else is speculation about the properties of roads that aren't built yet.

[sprjus4]

Really, let's move on from this endless argument. We know this: I-87 is going to be built (in NC at least), whether it is the "best" route between Raleigh and Norfolk or not. And that is all we know for sure at this point: everything else is speculation about the properties of roads that aren't built yet.

Agreed, and it seems anytime I make a post, whether it be an update, news article, op-ed, etc. regarding the highway, it somehow restarts and ends nowhere, based on a user's opinion on the proposed road that has been repeated umpteenth times.

I'm not necessarily against debate, but when it drags out for 30+ pages, is filled with the same points that have been repeated umpteenth times, restarting when anything regarding the highway's development, potential future, etc. is posted, and nothing new is developed, it's out of hand.

Mods have intervened before regarding this situation, yet it seems to continue to drag on, ending for a while and seemingly restarting in the future over an article, development, update, etc. that is posted.

[Beltway]

Agreed, and it seems anytime I make a post, whether it be an update, news article, op-ed, etc. regarding the highway, it somehow restarts and ends nowhere, based on a user's opinion on the proposed road that has been repeated umpteenth times.

That sounds like something my Ex would say.  If there is any problem in a relationship, it by definition was not her fault but the fault of the other person.

[sprjus4]

Agreed, and it seems anytime I make a post, whether it be an update, news article, op-ed, etc. regarding the highway, it somehow restarts and ends nowhere, based on a user's opinion on the proposed road that has been repeated umpteenth times.

That sounds like something my Ex would say.  If there is any problem in a relationship, it by definition was not her fault but the fault of the other person.

Wait, I started the problem by posting an article?

In fairness, I understand some of the points you were arguing, but then it just went right back to the usual with the other points that are not going to change.

[Beltway]

Agreed, and it seems anytime I make a post, whether it be an update, news article, op-ed, etc. regarding the highway, it somehow restarts and ends nowhere, based on a user's opinion on the proposed road that has been repeated umpteenth times.

That sounds like something my Ex would say.  If there is any problem in a relationship, it by definition was not her fault but the fault of the other person.

Wait, I started the problem by posting an article?

That's what I mean. 

[sprjus4]

That's what I mean.

Should I just not post anything regarding this highway ever again then, because one user has a harsh opposition to it?

Me posting an article shouldn't turn into a large back-and-forth.

Right now, this has only taken up 2 pages. It doesn't need to go any further.

[hotdogPi]

Can we quarantine this thread for 7 days?

[Beltway]

This time-comparison discussion should be moved to Fictional Highways.

Agreed, and repetitively claiming "20 minutes longer" based on a completed corridor is

Concocted claim.  I have said that it is that much longer now (and it is) and that number won't begin to reduce (if it does) until about 2035.

fictional highways territory as we will not know the travel times, speed limits, and design (freeway vs. arterial for US-58) on either route by the 2030s, 2040s, or 2050, whenever the road may be completed.

The bottom line is that whatever reduction occurs, it will be a minute or so at a time and between about 2035 and 2050.  And it still won't overcome the 20 extra miles.  That is way too far into the future for any business to plan their business strategy upon.

And to repeat, don't try to justify building a highway on what might not happen to another highway by 2050.

This violates basic business strategic planning principles, to try to plan a competitive enterprise that far into the future, that is so far into the future that the outcomes are essentially unknowable.  And this is the lynchpin argument of the advocates of this wasteful boondoggle.
. . . . . . . . . .

As to how fast a megaproject can (not that all do) move from initiation to construction, $3.6 billion HRBT Expansion --

In 2014, the Hampton Roads Transportation Accountability Commission (HRTAC) included a Hampton Roads Crossing Study in its list of priority projects, which led to the development of a Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (SEIS) to evaluate options for this crossing. In December 2016, the Commonwealth Transportation Board approved "Alternative A"  as the preferred alternative for this study, laying the groundwork to complete the SEIS and obtain a Record of Decision in June 2017.

The construction contract was awarded in April 2019, with an estimated completion in November 2025.

As far the previous study in 2001, they did not select an HRBT widening, they chose an I-564 extension and bridge-tunnel and I-664 expansion (the Third Crossing), so a formal proposal to widen the HRBT is a recent concept.

This project is an order of magnitude more complex than building a simple 4-lane rural freeway.

[sprjus4]

And to repeat, don't try to justify building a highway on what might not happen to another highway by 2050.

They haven't. I don't think US-58 has been mentioned once in any official discussions regarding I-87 outside this forum.

As to how fast a megaproject can (not that all do) move from initiation to construction, $3.6 billion HRBT Expansion --

In 2014, the Hampton Roads Transportation Accountability Commission (HRTAC) included a Hampton Roads Crossing Study in its list of priority projects, which led to the development of a Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (SEIS) to evaluate options for this crossing. In December 2016, the Commonwealth Transportation Board approved "Alternative A"  as the preferred alternative for this study, laying the groundwork to complete the SEIS and obtain a Record of Decision in June 2017.

The construction contract was awarded in April 2019, with an estimated completion in November 2025.

As far the previous study in 2001, they did not select an HRBT widening, they chose an I-564 extension and bridge-tunnel and I-664 expansion (the Third Crossing), so a formal proposal to widen the HRBT is a recent concept.

This project is an order of magnitude more complex that building a simple 4-lane rural freeway.

Here is the biggest difference with that project though. While the project concept may have been newer, the need for it was high and existent for decades which enabled the quick funding process, largely generated by the HRTAC and partially from toll revenue collected on the new capacity (HO/T lanes).

A counter example would be I-64 on the Peninsula. There had been success with the southern segments, though we are still almost 30 miles short of Richmond at finishing the 6 lanes, and there's currently no funding in sight. A completed EIS was produced for the entire corridor, though only certain pieces have been constructed.

Additionally, I-73 is yet another VDOT success story. The corridor had been authorized in 1991, had a completed EIS in 2006 (15 years later), and so far no new mileage has been constructed aside from pre-existing freeway that may be incorporated into the system.

A project like US-58 may be able to get through an EIS process over a 5 year period, but there's no guarantee funding would be instantly dedicated. Congestion is practically non-existent along the corridor, and may score low on a funding program such as SmartScale. Recall that the scaled-back US-460 project between Windsor and US-58 scored IIRC near 0 and failed hard. That would have provided a freeway bypass for the existing corridor to north of Windsor, then a divided highway to Zuni.

The HRBT Expansion and a currently non-proposed US-58 freeway isn't a good comparison to make as far as funding goes.

IIRC, the FTAC (Freight Transportation Advisory Committee) is the only organization apart of the HRTPO that has pushed for a southern connection to I-95, either via US-58 or I-87. For the 2045 Draft LRTP, they submitted a candidate project that would upgrade the remaining segment of US-17 between Cedar Rd and the North Carolina state line to interstate standards for I-87 that was included for further evaluation, though did not submit any projects for any large-scale freeway upgrades along the US-58 corridor. The highway (I-87) has also been brought up in meetings in the past, and they've expressed a profound interest in the concept.

From Virginia's perspective, a highway traveling along that corridor would be much cheaper opposed to upgrading nearly 70 miles of US-58 to interstate standards, and may well be an attractive alternative that would complete that connection with most of the cost bore to North Carolina. In the eye's of the FTAC, this seems to be the case.

Map of 2045 LRTP Candidate Projects - http://hrpdc-gis.maps.arcgis.com/apps/MapSeries/index.html?appid=b8852614e73a42bfa3730963d216f2ab
Spreadsheet of 2045 LRTP Candidate Projects - https://www.hrtpo.org/library/view/596/draft-2045-lrtp-candidate-projects

[vdeane]

I've found that it's generally better to just roll your eyes than to respond to a person who will never back down from the argument and whose mind is never going to be changed than it is to respond again and again.
https://xkcd.com/386/

Quite frankly, both sides in this fight have good points, and both sides have stupid points.  At this point it does no good to blow up the page count of this thread arguing about the same old stuff again and again and again when it's not going to convince anyone of anything.

[1995hoo]

I'm beginning to think there needs to be a "unified dick-waving thread."  

[Beltway]

From Virginia's perspective, a highway traveling along that corridor would be much cheaper opposed to upgrading nearly 70 miles of US-58 to interstate standards, and may well be an attractive alternative that would complete that connection with most of the cost bore to North Carolina. In the eye's of the FTAC, this seems to be the case.

No, that isn't and won't be Virginia's perspective, and there is nothing there other than "candidate projects" in a draft 2045 plan, and they weren't in the 2040 plan so that tells something about priority.

As you noted there is little congestion and little perceived need for any corridor upgrade on US-58 west of Suffolk, so that again tells something about need.

This violates basic business strategic planning principles, to try to plan a competitive enterprise that far into the future, 2050 or beyond, that is so far into the future that the outcomes are essentially unknowable.

[sprjus4]

No, that isn't and won't be Virginia's perspective

Sure about that?

As you noted there is little congestion and little perceived need for any corridor upgrade on US-58 west of Suffolk, so that again tells something about need.

But isn't VDOT going to complete an EIS and have segments under construction before 2030? Major changes and improvements by 2050?

If this is the case, an upgrade isn't warranted, though an interstate connection is still desired to the south, wouldn't it make the most economic sense to connect with NCDOT's segment with upgrades to that small segment of US-17 (12 miles of limited access highway) at a low cost (under $500 million), rather than construct a whole new interstate highway (70 miles of largely non-limited-access highway) for billions of dollars (over $2 billion) when another is already planned that another state would bore the cost of?

This violates basic business strategic planning principles, to try to plan a competitive enterprise that far into the future, 2050 or beyond, that is so far into the future that the outcomes are essentially unknowable.

They haven't. I don't think US-58 has been mentioned once in any official discussions regarding I-87 outside this forum.

[sparker]

No, that isn't and won't be Virginia's perspective

Sure about that?

As you noted there is little congestion and little perceived need for any corridor upgrade on US-58 west of Suffolk, so that again tells something about need.

But isn't VDOT going to complete an EIS and have segments under construction before 2030? Major changes and improvements by 2050?

If this is the case, an upgrade isn't warranted, though an interstate connection is still desired to the south, wouldn't it make the most economic sense to connect with NCDOT's segment with upgrades to that small segment of US-17 (12 miles of limited access highway) at a low cost (under $500 million), rather than construct a whole new interstate highway (70 miles of largely non-limited-access highway) for billions of dollars (over $2 billion) when another is already planned that another state would bore the cost of?

This violates basic business strategic planning principles, to try to plan a competitive enterprise that far into the future, 2050 or beyond, that is so far into the future that the outcomes are essentially unknowable.

They haven't. I don't think US-58 has been mentioned once in any official discussions regarding I-87 outside this forum.

Guys, guys, GUYS!!!!!  If you want to discuss US 58, I initiated a thread in Mid-Atlantic regarding just that.  Forgive me for sticking my nose into your lines of fire, but some of us are a bit tired of the circular firing squad that this thread has become.  I'm not a mod, and can't negotiate a cease-fire here, but if another corridor is going to be discussed, the proper place for it is a thread in the regional section where it actually exists.  So have fun with it, but try to keep pissing matches out of it as much as you can -- thanks!