Interstate 87 (NC-VA)

[sprjus4]

But why?  They already have a high speed and high capacity 4-lane interregional highway that makes that connection.  Actually two, there is also the 4-lane highway US-158/NC-168/VA-168.

That's the issue these days, 4 lane highways work mainly fine, but it's all about money, money, and more money. You have a 4 lane route that works fine, but if you slap a shield on it with a high speed limit, it brings more business in money. I don't fully agree with the system of interstate designations, as it's all for money and business in the end, it just happens to come with a more convenient route, which is the part the public mainly hears about, not the money aspect.

Yeah, yeah, yeah ... but nowadays that would cost upteen billions of dollars just so that some people can feel good.

Many 4-lane interregional highways have average speeds that are nearly that of an Interstate highway.  Obstacles to that are major signalized intersections, and those can be selectively replaced with interchanges.

Interstates need to prioritized for major routes, such as I-42, and smaller ones like I-87 should be held off or done in small parts. Four-lane highways should get smaller projects done such as access control for smaller rural intersections, and larger ones with interchanges to allow higher speeds. Look at Texas, they have regular four-lane rural highways, non freeway with 75mph speed limits. More of these projects should be done and 65mph (70 should be reserved for freeways) speed limits should be allowed on 4-lane partial-control of access freeways. Cheaper, and gets the job done.

[sparker]

I'm seeing the term 4-lane interregional highway tossed about pretty freely in this thread; but except for in the upper Midwest (particularly IA & WI but with some presence in MN, MO, and NE, along with the [gag] MSR 110/CKC concept), where it seems to indicate a particular design idiom, the term is broad enough to encompass everything from signaled arterials to quasi-Interstate-grade freeways.   What characterizes such a facility seems to largely depend on the jurisdiction; the full-freeway US 64 portion of future I-87 seems to typify NC's approach, while in VA US 58 adheres to lesser standards (largely due to age) while maintaining a divided status.  VA (and SC for that matter) also features quite a few "twinned" 4-lane facilities (VA: US 29, SC: SC 151) where much if not all of the road consists of an original 2-lane alignment with a 2nd parallel carriageway constructed later, usually with full public & private access.  While some may quibble with new Interstate development, the fact remains that those facilities are at least consistent as to design and access criteria (the driver knows what he or she is getting -- the Surekill and BQE anomalies notwithstanding!).  I googled up "4-lane interregional highway" just to see if the term was in common usage and -- guess what -- the few references cited circled right back to this forum -- with particular reference back to the later posts in this very thread!  Since the actual characteristics of the individual examples of this "category" of highway seem to vary widely by jurisdiction, it seems somewhat presumptuous to assert a broad claim that facilities so described generally provide service levels approximating if not equaling those of Interstate or Interstate-grade routes.  Perhaps the raw capacities may be similar, but toss in the safety aspect endemic to limited access as well as the potential for inefficiencies due to periodic signalization, dodging cross traffic (with special mention given to farm equipment -- I personally have had more than a few close calls!), and the occasional speed trap, and the comparisons fall by the wayside.  I'd have little or no trouble accepting a classification such as this -- even if it seems cobbled up for comparative purposes -- if indeed there was some consistency (a facility similar to the Avenue of the Saints, even incomplete, would satisfy that definition) regarding what is encountered "on the ground".   

[Beltway]

I'm seeing the term 4-lane interregional highway tossed about pretty freely in this thread;

A term that I have often used.  If you don't like that, how about 4-lane rural arterial highway?  4-lane intra-state highway?  Those have seen official usage.

A 4-lane highway long distance route that has town bypasses and supplements the Interstate system.  Carries substantial volumes of long-distance traffic and large truck traffic, but generally less than that of an Interstate route.

but except for in the upper Midwest (particularly IA & WI but with some presence in MN, MO, and NE, along with the [gag] MSR 110/CKC concept), where it seems to indicate a particular design idiom, the term is broad enough to encompass everything from signaled arterials to quasi-Interstate-grade freeways.   What characterizes such a facility seems to largely depend on the jurisdiction; the full-freeway US 64 portion of future I-87 seems to typify NC's approach,

Not really, many such NC highways have at-grade intersections and including nonlimited-access right-of-way.

The Interstate class has its own problems, some are freeways with 4 lanes (the minimum standard) but little or nothing else.  Things like rural routes with 4-foot medians and 10 feet of clear roadside, short accell-decell lanes, sharp curves, bad pavement, bad shoulders, etc.  The argument can be made that they should never have been allowed into the Interstate system.

[wdcrft63]

But why?  They already have a high speed and high capacity 4-lane interregional highway that makes that connection.  Actually two, there is also the 4-lane highway US-158/NC-168/VA-168.

That's the issue these days, 4 lane highways work mainly fine, but it's all about money, money, and more money. You have a 4 lane route that works fine, but if you slap a shield on it with a high speed limit, it brings more business in money. I don't fully agree with the system of interstate designations, as it's all for money and business in the end, it just happens to come with a more convenient route, which is the part the public mainly hears about, not the money aspect.

Yeah, yeah, yeah ... but nowadays that would cost upteen billions of dollars just so that some people can feel good.

Many 4-lane interregional highways have average speeds that are nearly that of an Interstate highway.  Obstacles to that are major signalized intersections, and those can be selectively replaced with interchanges.

"4-lane interregional highways" work fine until they don't. If they succeed in attracting development, then they become clogged with traffic and slowed by traffic signals. Selectively replacing intersections with interchanges in developed areas is very expensive because the high-value development tends to be concentrated precisely at these intersections. Isn't something like this happening along US 29 in northern Virginia and north of Charlottesville? and along US 58 near Suffolk? It certainly happened along US 70 in eastern NC, which is why that road is being replaced by I-42.

[sprjus4]

But why?  They already have a high speed and high capacity 4-lane interregional highway that makes that connection.  Actually two, there is also the 4-lane highway US-158/NC-168/VA-168.

That's the issue these days, 4 lane highways work mainly fine, but it's all about money, money, and more money. You have a 4 lane route that works fine, but if you slap a shield on it with a high speed limit, it brings more business in money. I don't fully agree with the system of interstate designations, as it's all for money and business in the end, it just happens to come with a more convenient route, which is the part the public mainly hears about, not the money aspect.

Yeah, yeah, yeah ... but nowadays that would cost upteen billions of dollars just so that some people can feel good.

Many 4-lane interregional highways have average speeds that are nearly that of an Interstate highway.  Obstacles to that are major signalized intersections, and those can be selectively replaced with interchanges.

"4-lane interregional highways" work fine until they don't. If they succeed in attracting development, then they become clogged with traffic and slowed by traffic signals. Selectively replacing intersections with interchanges in developed areas is very expensive because the high-value development tends to be concentrated precisely at these intersections. Isn't something like this happening along US 29 in northern Virginia and north of Charlottesville? and along US 58 near Suffolk? It certainly happened along US 70 in eastern NC, which is why that road is being replaced by I-42.

US 70 through Charlotte was upgraded to an interesting type of divided highway. There's still driveways where needed, but the big intersections got replaced with smaller interchanges for slower speed limits, definitely not for a rural route, but it serves its purpose in that urban area, and traffic flows freely on it at 45-55mph. US 29 in Charlottesville and US 58 in Suffolk are being widened to 6 lanes and being made an urban roadway, with no interchanges, just traffic signals (as far as I know). Now US 58 between I-664 and the Suffolk Bypass is being upgraded to interstate standards with a couple of interchanges, but that road already has limited driveways, 6 lanes, and 60mph speed limits. They are considering widening it to 8 lanes potentially, an interchange near the airport, and widening the shoulders to 10-12 feet on both sides to meet standards. Would be interesting to see a speed hike to 65mph, but I doubt it knowing VDOT.

[sprjus4]

But why?  They already have a high speed and high capacity 4-lane interregional highway that makes that connection.  Actually two, there is also the 4-lane highway US-158/NC-168/VA-168.

That's the issue these days, 4 lane highways work mainly fine, but it's all about money, money, and more money. You have a 4 lane route that works fine, but if you slap a shield on it with a high speed limit, it brings more business in money. I don't fully agree with the system of interstate designations, as it's all for money and business in the end, it just happens to come with a more convenient route, which is the part the public mainly hears about, not the money aspect.

Yeah, yeah, yeah ... but nowadays that would cost upteen billions of dollars just so that some people can feel good.

Many 4-lane interregional highways have average speeds that are nearly that of an Interstate highway.  Obstacles to that are major signalized intersections, and those can be selectively replaced with interchanges.

"4-lane interregional highways" work fine until they don't. If they succeed in attracting development, then they become clogged with traffic and slowed by traffic signals. Selectively replacing intersections with interchanges in developed areas is very expensive because the high-value development tends to be concentrated precisely at these intersections. Isn't something like this happening along US 29 in northern Virginia and north of Charlottesville? and along US 58 near Suffolk? It certainly happened along US 70 in eastern NC, which is why that road is being replaced by I-42.

Another good example is Elizabeth City. U.S. Route 17 Business through the city was the main route, and it got clogged with development, so they built a bypass, US 17 Bypass. Years later, and guess what? That route is now clogged. So in 2002, they decided to build a full freeway bypass that completely avoids the city. One of the reasons it was made limited-access is so there wouldn't be this issue. The old US 17 Bypass is now US 17, with the new bypass US 17 Bypass. Elizabeth City has 3 Route 17 routes as of today now.

[Beltway]

"4-lane interregional highways" work fine until they don't. If they succeed in attracting development, then they become clogged with traffic and slowed by traffic signals. Selectively replacing intersections with interchanges in developed areas is very expensive because the high-value development tends to be concentrated precisely at these intersections. Isn't something like this happening along US 29 in northern Virginia and north of Charlottesville? and along US 58 near Suffolk?

Two-lane highways work fine until they don't.  Four-lane freeways work fine until they don't.  Six-lane freeways work fine until they don't.  Not sure what your point was.

Four-lane intra-state (or whatever you call them) highways are an important class of highway between the 2-lane highway class and the Interstate highway class.  In many places around the country including the vast majority of their mileage in Virginia they handle traffic at nearly Interstate average speeds.

Adding interchanges in rural areas incrementally works well and is affordable, just in the US-29 Culpeper-Warrenton area there have been three in the last 15 years and another was just awarded. 

Of course US-29 between Whoville and Gainesville is one of the busy highway segments that truly should have gotten a freeway full bypass with construction beginning at least 15 years ago, but there are too many RE/T groups in that area, so fat chance.

It will not take that much more work to keep US-58 between I-95 and I-64 flowing at near Interstate speeds, several more interchanges and the full freeway upgrade of the segment between the Suffolk Bypass and I-64.

[sprjus4]

"4-lane interregional highways" work fine until they don't. If they succeed in attracting development, then they become clogged with traffic and slowed by traffic signals. Selectively replacing intersections with interchanges in developed areas is very expensive because the high-value development tends to be concentrated precisely at these intersections. Isn't something like this happening along US 29 in northern Virginia and north of Charlottesville? and along US 58 near Suffolk?

Two-lane highways work fine until they don't.  Four-lane freeways work fine until they don't.  Six-lane freeways work fine until they don't.  Not sure what your point was.

Four-lane intra-state (or whatever you call them) highways are an important class of highway between the 2-lane highway class and the Interstate highway class.  In many places around the country including the vast majority of their mileage in Virginia they handle traffic at nearly Interstate average speeds.

Adding interchanges in rural areas incrementally works well and is affordable, just in the US-29 Culpeper-Warrenton area there have been three in the last 15 years and another was just awarded. 

Of course US-29 between Whoville and Gainesville is one of the busy highway segments that truly should have gotten a freeway full bypass with construction beginning at least 15 years ago, but there are too many RE/T groups in that area, so fat chance.

It will not take that much more work to keep US-58 between I-95 and I-64 flowing at near Interstate speeds, several more interchanges and the full freeway upgrade of the segment between the Suffolk Bypass and I-64.

I do agree, they should just build some interchanges along it overtime, and work toward access-control. Could potentially build new location from the Suffolk Bypass to Holland, and new location near Emporia and a new interchange I-95. If they ever did improve it, increased the speed, it would definitely beat I-87. I suppose I-87 would be beneficial from southern Chesapeake, the developed areas of northeast NC, to connect to I-95, but Hampton Roads should work on improving US 58. What would be nice is to freeway 58 from I-64 and I-81. THAT would be a benefit for many.

[Jmiles32]

I do agree, they should just build some interchanges along it overtime, and work toward access-control. Could potentially build new location from the Suffolk Bypass to Holland, and new location near Emporia and a new interchange I-95. If they ever did improve it, increased the speed, it would definitely beat I-87.

^Heres a fictional thread in which we discussed such concepts:
https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=20535.0

[Strider]

But why?  They already have a high speed and high capacity 4-lane interregional highway that makes that connection.  Actually two, there is also the 4-lane highway US-158/NC-168/VA-168.

That's the issue these days, 4 lane highways work mainly fine, but it's all about money, money, and more money. You have a 4 lane route that works fine, but if you slap a shield on it with a high speed limit, it brings more business in money. I don't fully agree with the system of interstate designations, as it's all for money and business in the end, it just happens to come with a more convenient route, which is the part the public mainly hears about, not the money aspect.

Yeah, yeah, yeah ... but nowadays that would cost upteen billions of dollars just so that some people can feel good.

Many 4-lane interregional highways have average speeds that are nearly that of an Interstate highway.  Obstacles to that are major signalized intersections, and those can be selectively replaced with interchanges.

"4-lane interregional highways" work fine until they don't. If they succeed in attracting development, then they become clogged with traffic and slowed by traffic signals. Selectively replacing intersections with interchanges in developed areas is very expensive because the high-value development tends to be concentrated precisely at these intersections. Isn't something like this happening along US 29 in northern Virginia and north of Charlottesville? and along US 58 near Suffolk? It certainly happened along US 70 in eastern NC, which is why that road is being replaced by I-42.

Another good example is Elizabeth City. U.S. Route 17 Business through the city was the main route, and it got clogged with development, so they built a bypass, US 17 Bypass. Years later, and guess what? That route is now clogged. So in 2002, they decided to build a full freeway bypass that completely avoids the city. One of the reasons it was made limited-access is so there wouldn't be this issue. The old US 17 Bypass is now US 17, with the new bypass US 17 Bypass. Elizabeth City has 3 Route 17 routes as of today now.

That 17 Bypass is eventually going to be renamed I-87, thus will reduce the Route 17s from 3 to 2.

[sprjus4]

But why?  They already have a high speed and high capacity 4-lane interregional highway that makes that connection.  Actually two, there is also the 4-lane highway US-158/NC-168/VA-168.

That's the issue these days, 4 lane highways work mainly fine, but it's all about money, money, and more money. You have a 4 lane route that works fine, but if you slap a shield on it with a high speed limit, it brings more business in money. I don't fully agree with the system of interstate designations, as it's all for money and business in the end, it just happens to come with a more convenient route, which is the part the public mainly hears about, not the money aspect.

Yeah, yeah, yeah ... but nowadays that would cost upteen billions of dollars just so that some people can feel good.

Many 4-lane interregional highways have average speeds that are nearly that of an Interstate highway.  Obstacles to that are major signalized intersections, and those can be selectively replaced with interchanges.

"4-lane interregional highways" work fine until they don't. If they succeed in attracting development, then they become clogged with traffic and slowed by traffic signals. Selectively replacing intersections with interchanges in developed areas is very expensive because the high-value development tends to be concentrated precisely at these intersections. Isn't something like this happening along US 29 in northern Virginia and north of Charlottesville? and along US 58 near Suffolk? It certainly happened along US 70 in eastern NC, which is why that road is being replaced by I-42.

Another good example is Elizabeth City. U.S. Route 17 Business through the city was the main route, and it got clogged with development, so they built a bypass, US 17 Bypass. Years later, and guess what? That route is now clogged. So in 2002, they decided to build a full freeway bypass that completely avoids the city. One of the reasons it was made limited-access is so there wouldn't be this issue. The old US 17 Bypass is now US 17, with the new bypass US 17 Bypass. Elizabeth City has 3 Route 17 routes as of today now.

That 17 Bypass is eventually going to be renamed I-87, thus will reduce the Route 17s from 3 to 2.

When they sign I-87, are they going to take off the 17 Bypass?

[Beltway]

It will not take that much more work to keep US-58 between I-95 and I-64 flowing at near Interstate speeds, several more interchanges and the full freeway upgrade of the segment between the Suffolk Bypass and I-64.

I do agree, they should just build some interchanges along it overtime, and work toward access-control. Could potentially build new location from the Suffolk Bypass to Holland, and new location near Emporia and a new interchange I-95. If they ever did improve it, increased the speed, it would definitely beat I-87.

Credit to Adam F. for posting conceptual maps of those bypass extensions.

A major portion of that route that includes US-58 is on I-95 and Future I-495.  It would handily beat (time and distance) so-called I-87 today, and even just modest improvements like I laid out will keep it that way.

A tight urban interchange could replace that major signalized intersection on US-58 just east of I-95.  That would be a big improvement.

[sparker]

Gee -- looks like I poked a hornet's nest here!  Let's try to boil this down to a few items:  The route currently described as Future I-87 (as well as HPC #13) is, sui generis, not the shortest or most efficient route between Raleigh and Hampton Roads; by all accounts that would be a combination of US 64 (former future I-495), I-95, and US 58.  Message received by all parties; reiteration unnecessary henceforth.  At this point, any decision to proceed with the present plans for I-87 lies strictly within NCDOT and its political handlers.  VA, at neither state nor local level, has little to gain by developing their segment, so for the foreseeable future it's functionally a dead issue within that state.  The actual projected routing in the northeast corner of NC is muddied by some who want to shunt it over to MSR 168 simply because that route has more limited-access development in VA than the more direct US 17.  This anomaly notwithstanding, NCDOT is planning to build out this facility.  Fortunately for them, the ROW for about 95 miles east of Raleigh is already developed as a full freeway; bringing it out to Interstate specs would be a process similar to what MS had to do with the US 78 freeway in order to achieve the I-22 designation.  The rest, except for the Elizabeth City bypass, is "up for grabs" regarding how much new-terrain construction will be necessary to satisfy folks in the affected areas; given the swampy terrain and the likely need for structures to address that, it certainly won't be cheap! 

But the folks in NE NC have the ear of NCDOT as well as the state's Congressional delegation; they damn well want their Interstate (87 -- the number and the process by which it was selected still piss me off!) and the chances are, despite criticism from some, they'll get it.  BTW -- if traffic ends up emptying out onto existing US 17 at the NC/VA state line and using that route to access I-64, it's still only about 16-17 miles longer than the I-95/US 58 combination.  As long as NC interests -- within and outside of the state government -- perceive that they can benefit from the corridor's development as an Interstate, everything else is just noise.   Yeah, it's blatantly political and dubiously economic in nature, but so's pretty much everything else around publicly-funded highways these days.  A priori notions about highway development have, for better or worse, been discarded -- the rule appears to be "money talks, everything else walks!"  Frankly, I don't think NCDOT or other in-state interests give a shit whether VA develops their "puny" 18 or so miles of the corridor; if they can convince firms with warehousing needs to locate along the Rocky Mount-Tarboro-Bethel corridor because of a red, white, and blue shield, that's all that counts.  They'll divert a reasonable amount of traffic if they slap a "Norfolk" control city line on the BGS at the 87/95 interchange; NB it'll be the first reference to that area they'll get from 95!  This is an intrastate project posing as an interstate corridor; the chances are it'll get built in the next 25-30 years, unless something in the environmental area crops up regarding the stretch north of the Sound.  And with or without VA cooperation, it'll be like horseshoes -- I-87's the archetypal  "leaner".         

[sprjus4]

Gee -- looks like I poked a hornet's nest here!  Let's try to boil this down to a few items:  The route currently described as Future I-87 (as well as HPC #13) is, sui generis, not the shortest or most efficient route between Raleigh and Hampton Roads; by all accounts that would be a combination of US 64 (former future I-495), I-95, and US 58.  Message received by all parties; reiteration unnecessary henceforth.  At this point, any decision to proceed with the present plans for I-87 lies strictly within NCDOT and its political handlers.  VA, at neither state nor local level, has little to gain by developing their segment, so for the foreseeable future it's functionally a dead issue within that state.  The actual projected routing in the northeast corner of NC is muddied by some who want to shunt it over to MSR 168 simply because that route has more limited-access development in VA than the more direct US 17.  This anomaly notwithstanding, NCDOT is planning to build out this facility.  Fortunately for them, the ROW for about 95 miles east of Raleigh is already developed as a full freeway; bringing it out to Interstate specs would be a process similar to what MS had to do with the US 78 freeway in order to achieve the I-22 designation.  The rest, except for the Elizabeth City bypass, is "up for grabs" regarding how much new-terrain construction will be necessary to satisfy folks in the affected areas; given the swampy terrain and the likely need for structures to address that, it certainly won't be cheap! 

But the folks in NE NC have the ear of NCDOT as well as the state's Congressional delegation; they damn well want their Interstate (87 -- the number and the process by which it was selected still piss me off!) and the chances are, despite criticism from some, they'll get it.  BTW -- if traffic ends up emptying out onto existing US 17 at the NC/VA state line and using that route to access I-64, it's still only about 16-17 miles longer than the I-95/US 58 combination.  As long as NC interests -- within and outside of the state government -- perceive that they can benefit from the corridor's development as an Interstate, everything else is just noise.   Yeah, it's blatantly political and dubiously economic in nature, but so's pretty much everything else around publicly-funded highways these days.  A priori notions about highway development have, for better or worse, been discarded -- the rule appears to be "money talks, everything else walks!"  Frankly, I don't think NCDOT or other in-state interests give a shit whether VA develops their "puny" 18 or so miles of the corridor; if they can convince firms with warehousing needs to locate along the Rocky Mount-Tarboro-Bethel corridor because of a red, white, and blue shield, that's all that counts.  They'll divert a reasonable amount of traffic if they slap a "Norfolk" control city line on the BGS at the 87/95 interchange; NB it'll be the first reference to that area they'll get from 95!  This is an intrastate project posing as an interstate corridor; the chances are it'll get built in the next 25-30 years, unless something in the environmental area crops up regarding the stretch north of the Sound.  And with or without VA cooperation, it'll be like horseshoes -- I-87's the archetypal  "leaner".       

I'm all for having an interstate between Norfolk and Raleigh, and while it may be quicker on US 17/64 route when it's complete, the mileage significantly increases. But I guess one of the reasons this route was leaned upon was not only for the business, but the fact that VDOT doesn't have any MAJOR improvements planned for US 58. IMO, I think that both US 58 and US 64/17 should be developed into freeways, as they are both major important routes for all the cities that lie on them, and doing so would create one big loop between 58/I-95/64/17. I created a concept in which US 58 could be improved through Emporia (https://goo.gl/yp3THL), and doing this would be one step further into upgrading 58. As for the rural areas on 58, a lot of it can get access roads on it and an interchange here and there. It would also need some new location routes, but it wouldn't be that expensive to upgrade near the rural areas. US 17 on the other hand is a much longer route to upgrade, new location routes would be needed significantly, or a large amount of torn down properties. All of this though should all be taken one step at a time. In the long-term future, I think all of these routes should be upgraded to interstate standards, cost-effectively

[LM117]

When they sign I-87, are they going to take off the 17 Bypass?

NCDOT hasn't said anything about it yet, but I hope so. Otherwise, it would just be another unnecessary overlap like US-64/264 and I-87/I-440.

But at least they took US-17 off the Wilmington Bypass once I-140 was built, as well as put US-117 back on it's former alignment between Goldsboro and Wilson once I-795 took over the freeway, so I have some hope that sanity will prevail here.

[Beltway]

BTW -- if traffic ends up emptying out onto existing US 17 at the NC/VA state line and using that route to access I-64, it's still only about 16-17 miles longer than the I-95/US 58 combination.

I've counterposted this "fact" before, referring to the US-17/I-64/I-464 interchange as a destination point.   If the destination is downtown Norfolk, Port Norfolk or Norfolk International Terminals, HPC #13 will be at least 24 miles longer than the current route.

[hotdogPi]

Why doesn't a near-straight line (someone mentioned NC 11/US 13) work?

[Beltway]

Why doesn't a near-straight line (someone mentioned NC 11/US 13) work?

That is not a straight line from I-95/US-64 junction, it is a dogleg.  Also not enough population along that route to even justify a 4-lane highway.

[michealbond]

It's already a done deal in NC. We're building our part. I've said before, I don't care if they build it a 1/4 inch into VA's border. It's happening. I don't care what VA does or doesn't do with its part.

Nobody cares about US 58 being a faster route. Those that want to go that way will continue to do so. There will be plenty of people that will like the simplicity and go straight on I-87. Both routes are viable.

It is documented that companies do favor places with interstate access to locate to. It won't "save" Northeastern NC. But it does finally get those towns & cities names on "the list" for some of these companies that wouldn't have been without interstate access.

Besides US 17 is a route that trucks and people use to travel throughout Eastern NC to and from Norfolk. Upgrading US17 to I-87 (from 55-70mph) between Williamston & Elizabeth City will help goods and people get from Norfolk to their destinations in Eastern NC faster, especially when traveling through the northeastern portion. There are companies in Washington NC or New Bern NC that get their goods delivered or visit other companies in the Norfolk area that would love to shave some time off the drive.

[Strider]

When they sign I-87, are they going to take off the 17 Bypass?

NCDOT hasn't said anything about it yet, but I hope so. Otherwise, it would just be another unnecessary overlap like US-64/264 and I-87/I-440.

But at least they took US-17 off the Wilmington Bypass once I-140 was built, as well as put US-117 back on it's former alignment between Goldsboro and Wilson once I-795 took over the freeway, so I have some hope that sanity will prevail here.

They will. I can bet you that. It will be so weird to sign I-87 with "Bypass" US 17 while you already have a US-17 AND Business US 17 in the same town/area. One of the US 17s has to go and I can bet it will be that "Bypass" US 17 that will be removed, so I-87 will be the sole shield on the bypass, unless they decide to eliminate Business US 17 through the town.

[Beltway]

It's already a done deal in NC. We're building our part. I've said before, I don't care if they build it a 1/4 inch into VA's border. It's happening. I don't care what VA does or doesn't do with its part.
Nobody cares about US 58 being a faster route. Those that want to go that way will continue to do so. There will be plenty of people that will like the simplicity and go straight on I-87. Both routes are viable.

The current route is simple for anyone who knows how to drive.   If Virginia tells them to pound sand then there won't be a completed Interstate.

[vdeane]

Why doesn't a near-straight line (someone mentioned NC 11/US 13) work?

That is not a straight line from I-95/US-64 junction, it is a dogleg.  Also not enough population along that route to even justify a 4-lane highway.

But the purpose of I-87 is to provide an efficient connection between Raleigh and Hampton Roads, no?  Because right now it seems like that was a lie and that the true purpose is to put a red, white, and blue shield in every Podunk town in eastern NC.  I'm sure NY's Southern Tier can tell them about how using interstates to drive economic growth is a bad idea.

And it definitely should not be I-87.  I could vaguely see a north-south number when I assumed that it would follow NC 11/US 13.  But knowing what I do now?  It doesn't even remotely resemble north-south and should be renumbered accordingly.

It seems like the Carolina Southway just becomes more and more an affront to everything that was elegant about the original interstate system (and first round of additions) the more I learn about it.  The interstate system has become a complete mess, and a majority (though not all) of the blame can be heaped at Texas and North Carolina.

[LM117]

When they sign I-87, are they going to take off the 17 Bypass?

NCDOT hasn't said anything about it yet, but I hope so. Otherwise, it would just be another unnecessary overlap like US-64/264 and I-87/I-440.

But at least they took US-17 off the Wilmington Bypass once I-140 was built, as well as put US-117 back on it's former alignment between Goldsboro and Wilson once I-795 took over the freeway, so I have some hope that sanity will prevail here.

They will. I can bet you that. It will be so weird to sign I-87 with "Bypass" US 17 while you already have a US-17 AND Business US 17 in the same town/area. One of the US 17s has to go and I can bet it will be that "Bypass" US 17 that will be removed, so I-87 will be the sole shield on the bypass, unless they decide to eliminate Business US 17 through the town.

I doubt US-17 Business will be eliminated, if NCDOT's inaction in Goldsboro is any indication. Last year, Goldsboro had asked NCDOT to decommission US-70 between both ends of the new US-70 Bypass and move US-70 Business from downtown to what would've been US-70's former alignment.

Thankfully, NCDOT never followed through with that stupidity since no such request was made to AASHTO.

[Beltway]

But the purpose of I-87 is to provide an efficient connection between Raleigh and Hampton Roads, no?  Because right now it seems like that was a lie and that the true purpose is to put a red, white, and blue shield in every Podunk town in eastern NC.  I'm sure NY's Southern Tier can tell them about how using interstates to drive economic growth is a bad idea.
And it definitely should not be I-87.  I could vaguely see a north-south number when I assumed that it would follow NC 11/US 13.  But knowing what I do now?  It doesn't even remotely resemble north-south and should be renumbered accordingly.
It seems like the Carolina Southway just becomes more and more an affront to everything that was elegant about the original interstate system (and first round of additions) the more I learn about it.  The interstate system has become a complete mess, and a majority (though not all) of the blame can be heaped at Texas and North Carolina.

Agreed.  The 4-lane rural highways (interregional, arterial, intrastate, etc.) get short shrift by some in the business community and official community.   I would like to see a special designation for them to highlight them, maybe with a sign panel over the route sign, with "ARTERIAL" or "INTRA-STATE" or some simple way to show the public that this is a completed 4-lane corridor.  Publicize the fact that this type is a high-speed 4-lane highway not built to full freeway standards.

[LM117]

the true purpose is to put a red, white, and blue shield in every Podunk town in eastern NC.

Exaggerate much? It's not like anybody is pushing for an interstate to connect Snow Hill and Saratoga. Other than I-87, what future interstate in eastern NC do you think is not warranted?

Extending I-795 to I-40 will form a high speed shortcut between I-95 and the Port of Wilmington, as well as functioning as a hurricane evacuation route. There are even more trucks on the corridor now since Enviva recently built their wood pellet plant next to the I-40 interchange. I-795's future new alignment in Goldsboro will also provide a desperately needed second crossing of the Neuse River since the current US-117 bridges are very flood prone.

I-42 is a major freight corridor, hurricane evacuation route, and is especially heavily traveled during the summer by tourists.

I-587 will give the largest city and medical/economic hub of eastern NC, Greenville, an interstate connection to I-95 and Raleigh. US-264 is already a 70mph freeway and, unlike I-87, will take little work to bring it to interstate standards. It's already interstate standard between I-95 and the Wilson/Greene County line. However, I will admit that because US-264 is already a freeway, it is nowhere near as much a priority as I-795 and I-42.