Interstate 87 (NC-VA)

[Bcthurki]

I bet NC state officials submitted to Google that I-87 and I-587 be labeled. Everyone uses GPS nowadays, and it will cause folks to start calling the roads by their interstate number. Eventually the new numbers will become mainstream, and they won't even have to officially designate them.

I work in traffic operations for NCDOT.  We in fact, did not.  We have been asking google for months to remove I-587 and now will have to do the same with I-87.  They don't respond to requests for up to 6 months straight.  So it will probably be there for a while.

I would dare say it is someone in the roadgeek community that submitted it to google.

[sparker]

I suspect that NCDOT sought an odd number because of the possibility of extending I-87 down US 1 towards Rockingham at some point in the future.

No -- the even numbers initially being considered (46, 48, 54, 56) all conflicted with state highways in the vicinity of the Raleigh-Norfolk alignment -- and while there's no state law forbidding numerical duplication, NCDOT figured that they would have to re-designate one of the conflicting state highways, which would pose issues for folks with addresses along that route that referenced the route number.  So they came up with the original "89" plan, because state route 89 was well west of Raleigh and didn't pose any particular conflict issues.  Then AASHTO went and pulled "87" out of one of their orifices, ostensibly because the eastern section along US 17 was a little more in line with the present I-87 than with I-89 ("yeah....that's the ticket!").  Surprisingly, they didn't choose I-97 -- even though there's a miniscule chance of connecting those two routes' sections -- but certainly more than with either I-87 or I-89!  Convoluted reasoning, laughable number!   

[The Nature Boy]

I suspect that NCDOT sought an odd number because of the possibility of extending I-87 down US 1 towards Rockingham at some point in the future.

No -- the even numbers initially being considered (46, 48, 54, 56) all conflicted with state highways in the vicinity of the Raleigh-Norfolk alignment -- and while there's no state law forbidding numerical duplication, NCDOT figured that they would have to re-designate one of the conflicting state highways, which would pose issues for folks with addresses along that route that referenced the route number.  So they came up with the original "89" plan, because state route 89 was well west of Raleigh and didn't pose any particular conflict issues.  Then AASHTO went and pulled "87" out of one of their orifices, ostensibly because the eastern section along US 17 was a little more in line with the present I-87 than with I-89 ("yeah....that's the ticket!").  Surprisingly, they didn't choose I-97 -- even though there's a miniscule chance of connecting those two routes' sections -- but certainly more than with either I-87 or I-89!  Convoluted reasoning, laughable number!   

I may have been trying to assign too much logic to NCDOT. Though this does beg the question of NC 73/I-73, especially since NC 73 crosses what will eventually be apart of the I-73/74 multiplex.

[Beltway]

In Virginia the US 17 corridor would definitely be the preferred alignment if they really insist on building this stupid thing.

Yes it would be the alignment used, as it is all on limited-access right-of-way between the state line and I-64.  That means that it would be upgraded to a freeway by installing bridges to replace at-grade intersections.

[Beltway]

It's not.  Because Future Interstate designation does not give access to any additional pots of Federal funding.  If anything, given Federal law (mostly) and FHWA policy (a little), what this will do is force NCDOT to spend Federal funding on US 64 that they now won't have for other corridors, because it comes from their normal Federal highway funding allotment.

To add to this, the real reason I-87 was heavily pushed is to give eastern NC an interstate connection to the Port of Virgina. Despite the official spin regarding the idea of linking Raleigh and Norfolk, it was done to benefit eastern NC. I-87's routing makes this blatantly obvious.

Which I don't understand, because eastern NC is mostly rural with a collection of small towns and a few small cities.  They already have two decent high-speed 4-lane divided highways, in US-17 and NC-168/US-158, and the only thing needed on those highways over the next 20 years are some selected bridge replacements and a handful of interchange additions.

[The Nature Boy]

It's not.  Because Future Interstate designation does not give access to any additional pots of Federal funding.  If anything, given Federal law (mostly) and FHWA policy (a little), what this will do is force NCDOT to spend Federal funding on US 64 that they now won't have for other corridors, because it comes from their normal Federal highway funding allotment.

To add to this, the real reason I-87 was heavily pushed is to give eastern NC an interstate connection to the Port of Virgina. Despite the official spin regarding the idea of linking Raleigh and Norfolk, it was done to benefit eastern NC. I-87's routing makes this blatantly obvious.

Which I don't understand, because eastern NC is mostly rural with a collection of small towns and a few small cities.  They already have two decent high-speed 4-lane divided highways, in US-17 and NC-168/US-158, and the only thing needed on those highways over the next 20 years are some selected bridge replacements and a handful of interchange additions.

You have to understand a bit about North Carolina history to see why the Eastern part of the state receives preferential treatment (or at least better treatment than it would otherwise get). The base of power in the state has historically resided in eastern NC, Charlotte's emergence as a power is still REALLY recent in the state's history. The vast majority of the state's governors have come from Eastern North Carolina and until the decline of the tobacco crop, it was the hub of economic activity in the state.

A lot of money and influence are still in eastern NC and I-42 and 87 are attempts to recapture some of the region's past economy glory. Though I would argue that there is a benefit to connecting Raleigh to Hampton Roads but it'll mostly come for Hampton Roads since they'll have easier access to Raleigh and Charlotte vacationers.

[LM117]

A lot of money and influence are still in eastern NC and I-42 and 87 are attempts to recapture some of the region's past economy glory. Though I would argue that there is a benefit to connecting Raleigh to Hampton Roads but it'll mostly come for Hampton Roads since they'll have easier access to Raleigh and Charlotte vacationers.

To be fair, I think it was a very smart move by eastern NC (specifically the US-70 Corridor Commission) to push for US-70 to become what is now Future I-42, as well as I-795's extension. US-70 has been long overdue for an upgrade. It not only benefits the locals, but having a freeway from Raleigh to Morehead City would make it safer for beach and truck traffic as well. I'm sure many people in the Triangle would love to have a 70mph highway to the Crystal Coast. Linking I-795 with I-40 would create a high-speed shortcut between the Port of Wilmington and I-95, as well as improved crossings over the flood-prone Neuse River.

As for the benefit of linking Raleigh and Norfolk, the US-58/I-95/US-64 route is shorter which, again, boils down to it's intended purpose of linking eastern NC to the Port of Virginia.

[bob7374]

I bet NC state officials submitted to Google that I-87 and I-587 be labeled. Everyone uses GPS nowadays, and it will cause folks to start calling the roads by their interstate number. Eventually the new numbers will become mainstream, and they won't even have to officially designate them.

I work in traffic operations for NCDOT.  We in fact, did not.  We have been asking google for months to remove I-587 and now will have to do the same with I-87.  They don't respond to requests for up to 6 months straight.  So it will probably be there for a while.

I would dare say it is someone in the roadgeek community that submitted it to google.

Would you happen to know when NCDOT plans to sign I-87, the approved part from I-40 to the end of the Knightdale Bypass, now that I-495 has been officially decommissioned? Google Maps will probably remove the I-87 shields from US 64 soon after. 

[roadman65]

In Virginia the US 17 corridor would definitely be the preferred alignment if they really insist on building this stupid thing.

Yes it would be the alignment used, as it is all on limited-access right-of-way between the state line and I-64.  That means that it would be upgraded to a freeway by installing bridges to replace at-grade intersections.

If, and that is a pretty big If, the highway gets built in VA (good luck letting the environmentalists to build a freeway through the Great Dismal Swamp) plus the fact VA is not too keen on it anyway (if the tone here is correct) I take I-464 would become I-87 to keep continuity.

Plus if there is to be a Raliegh to Norfolk corridor why not just upgrade the US 258 corridor into Holland, VA (using the old VA 189 in VA) and save the east then north then east again and north as following US 64 to Williston and then up the US 17 corridor into Hampton Roads.  This would be more direct and cut time off as well as it would deter from US 64 from Tarboro and head North but Northeast.

[Thing 342]

It would actually require a lot more as you'd have to find a way to get a new alignment route from US 17 to NC/VA 168.

A lot less construction in VA though!

Not so sure; Large portions of the VA-168 freeway (most importantly, the high bridge over the Intracoastal Waterway) are not up to interstate standards. Plus, you'd have to replace a mile-long stoplighted section at the southern end.

I imagine that any improvements on VA's end toward a Raleigh - HR corridor would likely involve upgrades to US-58.

[Beltway]

Which I don't understand, because eastern NC is mostly rural with a collection of small towns and a few small cities.  They already have two decent high-speed 4-lane divided highways, in US-17 and NC-168/US-158, and the only thing needed on those highways over the next 20 years are some selected bridge replacements and a handful of interchange additions.

You have to understand a bit about North Carolina history to see why the Eastern part of the state receives preferential treatment (or at least better treatment than it would otherwise get). The base of power in the state has historically resided in eastern NC, Charlotte's emergence as a power is still REALLY recent in the state's history. The vast majority of the state's governors have come from Eastern North Carolina and until the decline of the tobacco crop, it was the hub of economic activity in the state.

A lot of money and influence are still in eastern NC and I-42 and 87 are attempts to recapture some of the region's past economy glory. Though I would argue that there is a benefit to connecting Raleigh to Hampton Roads but it'll mostly come for Hampton Roads since they'll have easier access to Raleigh and Charlotte vacationers.

As a Virginian I hear little if any real interest in the Hampton Roads area for this I-87.  US-17 between the state line and I-64 is now a very capable 4-lane highway, part freeway and the rest is at-grade expressway.

Eastern North Carolina is welcome to dream, but I just don't see Interstate warrants for either of those highways, when considering the $30 million or more cost per mile of rural Interstate highway.  I-87 would need at least 100 miles of new location highway, and I-42 would need at least 120 miles of new location highway.  So that would be $6.6 billion right there, fantastically expensive.  That doesn't include the cost of upgrading the sections that already are freeway.  From a cost-benefit analysis standpoint, it fails big time.

[Beltway]

It would actually require a lot more as you'd have to find a way to get a new alignment route from US 17 to NC/VA 168.

A lot less construction in VA though!

Not so sure; Large portions of the VA-168 freeway (most importantly, the high bridge over the Intracoastal Waterway) are not up to interstate standards. Plus, you'd have to replace a mile-long stoplighted section at the southern end.

The bridge has at least a 60 mph design speed, and full shoulders, I don't see why it would not meet Interstate standards.

http://www.roadstothefuture.com/VA168_CA_Bridge.jpg
2,750-foot-long high-level bridge with 65 feet of vertical navigational clearance over the Intracoastal Waterway / Chesapeake and Albemarle Canal. The approach spans pass over adjacent wetlands. Looking north. This is part of the Great Bridge Bypass that was opened about 1980.

Other than the last mile which is an expressway, I see only one issue on VA-168 that does not meet Interstate standards -- on the tolled segment, the shoulders and roadsides are too narrow, about 8 feet and 10 feet respectively.  I would recommend widening them to 10 feet and 20 feet respectively, before designating as an Interstate.
http://www.roadstothefuture.com/VA168_ICR_N_0501T.jpg

http://www.roadstothefuture.com/VA168_Chesa_Expwy.html

[Beltway]

Depends on how they routed such an alignment.

Like a direct route between Windsor, NC and existing US-17 at the VA border?  That would cut maybe 10 to 12 miles off of the current US-17 route, but then it would not pass near anything but a few small towns.

[plain]

I imagine that any improvements on VA's end toward a Raleigh - HR corridor would likely involve upgrades to US-58.

Agreed. Plus anyone west of Raleigh (Charlotte, Atlanta, hell even Durham) would likely continue up I-85 directly to US 58 to reach Hampton Roads anyway, whether I-87 is built as planned or not, as that is clearly to shorter route for that traffic.

I'm just wondering why NC wants so many interstates. Clearly they've been upgrading roads or bypassing them without the interstate designations for years (long stretches of freeways on US routes 1, 64, 220 pre interstate, 264). I do agree that the state should concentrate on US 70 though. Eastern NC now has a continuous 4 lane connection to Hampton Roads (ironically the last 2-lane section was in Virginia on US 17) so I'm not sure why the ports thing is necessarily an issue.

[vdeane]

I suspect that NCDOT sought an odd number because of the possibility of extending I-87 down US 1 towards Rockingham at some point in the future.

No -- the even numbers initially being considered (46, 48, 54, 56) all conflicted with state highways in the vicinity of the Raleigh-Norfolk alignment -- and while there's no state law forbidding numerical duplication, NCDOT figured that they would have to re-designate one of the conflicting state highways, which would pose issues for folks with addresses along that route that referenced the route number.  So they came up with the original "89" plan, because state route 89 was well west of Raleigh and didn't pose any particular conflict issues.  Then AASHTO went and pulled "87" out of one of their orifices, ostensibly because the eastern section along US 17 was a little more in line with the present I-87 than with I-89 ("yeah....that's the ticket!").  Surprisingly, they didn't choose I-97 -- even though there's a miniscule chance of connecting those two routes' sections -- but certainly more than with either I-87 or I-89!  Convoluted reasoning, laughable number!   

But the interstate system is the more important (and I'd dare say higher up on the hierarchy).  The state routes should bow down to the interstates and show their respect, not the other way around.

[sparker]

I suspect that NCDOT sought an odd number because of the possibility of extending I-87 down US 1 towards Rockingham at some point in the future.

No -- the even numbers initially being considered (46, 48, 54, 56) all conflicted with state highways in the vicinity of the Raleigh-Norfolk alignment -- and while there's no state law forbidding numerical duplication, NCDOT figured that they would have to re-designate one of the conflicting state highways, which would pose issues for folks with addresses along that route that referenced the route number.  So they came up with the original "89" plan, because state route 89 was well west of Raleigh and didn't pose any particular conflict issues.  Then AASHTO went and pulled "87" out of one of their orifices, ostensibly because the eastern section along US 17 was a little more in line with the present I-87 than with I-89 ("yeah....that's the ticket!").  Surprisingly, they didn't choose I-97 -- even though there's a miniscule chance of connecting those two routes' sections -- but certainly more than with either I-87 or I-89!  Convoluted reasoning, laughable number!   

But the interstate system is the more important (and I'd dare say higher up on the hierarchy).  The state routes should bow down to the interstates and show their respect, not the other way around.

While I can see NCDOT's point regarding not pissing off state taxpayers (and registered voters!) be making some of them change their mailing addresses, there is a concept of "the greater good" at play here -- and maintaining a cohesive numbering system (which, at least IMHO, calls for minimizing unnecessary duplications) for a national network needs prioritization.  Sometimes states walk a thin line between serving the status quo regarding their citizenry and looking at the big picture through a regional or even national lens; in this instance, they arbitrarily came down on one side of the line and in the end (or so far) no one really came out unscathed. 

Maybe this'll also serve as a lesson to AASHTO -- no open bar at SCOURN meetings!    

[LM117]

I'm just wondering why NC wants so many interstates. Clearly they've been upgrading roads or bypassing them without the interstate designations for years (long stretches of freeways on US routes 1, 64, 220 pre interstate, 264). I do agree that the state should concentrate on US 70 though. Eastern NC now has a continuous 4 lane connection to Hampton Roads (ironically the last 2-lane section was in Virginia on US 17) so I'm not sure why the ports thing is necessarily an issue.

It's mainly for marketing purposes. There's a widely held belief that companies will not locate to an area without nearby interstate access. Sometimes it's true, sometimes it's not. That's why Greenville pushed for US-264 to become what is now Future I-587 and for NC-11/US-13 between Kinston and Bethel to become an interstate. Being that Greenville is the largest city in eastern NC, as well as it's hub, they would be able to market themselves as having interstate access to I-95 and Raleigh, and the Port of Virginia. Without I-87, there would be no interstate to Hampton Roads from which Greenville and Kinston can connect to.

Kinston wanted I-42 and NC-11/US-13 for similar reasons, particularly to help revitalize the Global Transpark (http://www.ncgtp.com/). The rest of the towns/cities along I-42's corridor wanted the interstate designation because they saw it as a way of making US-70's upgrade a higher priority because of the aforementioned safety issues.

[LM117]

In Virginia the US 17 corridor would definitely be the preferred alignment if they really insist on building this stupid thing.

Yes it would be the alignment used, as it is all on limited-access right-of-way between the state line and I-64.  That means that it would be upgraded to a freeway by installing bridges to replace at-grade intersections.

If, and that is a pretty big If, the highway gets built in VA (good luck letting the environmentalists to build a freeway through the Great Dismal Swamp) plus the fact VA is not too keen on it anyway (if the tone here is correct) I take I-464 would become I-87 to keep continuity.

VA isn't keen on any new interstates, period. If I-87 does somehow make it into VA, then I agree that it would make sense for it to replace I-464 and end at I-264.

[LM117]

Eastern North Carolina is welcome to dream, but I just don't see Interstate warrants for either of those highways, when considering the $30 million or more cost per mile of rural Interstate highway.  I-87 would need at least 100 miles of new location highway, and I-42 would need at least 120 miles of new location highway.  So that would be $6.6 billion right there, fantastically expensive.  That doesn't include the cost of upgrading the sections that already are freeway.  From a cost-benefit analysis standpoint, it fails big time.

I agree with your post regarding I-87. However, I disagree that I-42 is a fail for reasons I've previously mentioned.

[froggie]

and I-42 would need at least 120 miles of new location highway.

No it doesn't.  Have you not noticed that most of I-42 will be a direct upgrade of existing US 70?  At this point, about the only new alignment would be the Kingston bypass and from Havelock down (though IMO, most of that "North Carteret Bypass" is overkill).

[Beltway]

and I-42 would need at least 120 miles of new location highway.

No it doesn't.  Have you not noticed that most of I-42 will be a direct upgrade of existing US 70?  At this point, about the only new alignment would be the Kingston bypass and from Havelock down (though IMO, most of that "North Carteret Bypass" is overkill).

Looks like at least 120 miles of nonlimited-access highway ... correct?  Upgrading a highway like that to freeway standards means buying access controls, building service roads, building overpass bridges, building interchanges, correcting any alignment deficiencies, replacing old bridges.  Near the same cost per mile as a new location freeway.  Example:  VA I-95 between Jarratt and VA-35.

[NE2]

Looks like at least 120 miles of nonlimited-access highway ... correct?

Hell no. 120 miles is the total distance from I-40 to Havelock. 60 whole miles of that is freeway.

[Beltway]

Looks like at least 120 miles of nonlimited-access highway ... correct?

Hell no. 120 miles is the total distance from I-40 to Havelock. 60 whole miles of that is freeway.

OK, I get 140 miles from I-40 to Morehead City.  So 80 miles of miles of nonlimited-access highway, still at least $2.4 billion to upgrade and/or bypass.  Still doesn't seem remotely warranted from a cost-benefit analysis standpoint or just finding the money period.

[VTGoose]

I work in traffic operations for NCDOT.  We in fact, did not.  We have been asking google for months to remove I-587 and now will have to do the same with I-87.  They don't respond to requests for up to 6 months straight.  So it will probably be there for a while.

I would dare say it is someone in the roadgeek community that submitted it to google.

Google may do great things but it is the worst when it comes to customer service. Being "open" is one thing but when there are no controls on who can submit what you get things like errant route numbers. Here at work, we "claimed" our business -- Virginia Tech -- and sent in post cards (yes, POST CARDS!) to Google to verify that we were the valid "owners" of university information on search results, maps, etc. That didn't prevent random people from changing contact phone numbers or adding (sometimes wrong) information to the Google map covering the campus.

Bruce in Blacksburg

[LM117]

Looks like at least 120 miles of nonlimited-access highway ... correct?

Hell no. 120 miles is the total distance from I-40 to Havelock. 60 whole miles of that is freeway.

OK, I get 140 miles from I-40 to Morehead City.  So 80 miles of miles of nonlimited-access highway, still at least $2.4 billion to upgrade and/or bypass.  Still doesn't seem remotely warranted from a cost-benefit analysis standpoint or just finding the money period.

Have you ever driven US-70? I grew up in Wayne County and lived there for 14 years and I lost count of how many horrific crashes that have happened there, not counting those that happened after I left in 2009. I used to commute on US-70 between Goldsboro and Clayton and I hated it. Whenever I went to Raleigh, I took I-795 to US-264 just to avoid it. Sure it was more mileage, but it had less traffic, no stoplights and a 70mph speed limit the whole way.

Before the new US-70 Bypass opened, Goldsboro was a huge bottleneck due to the US-70/Grantham Street interchange and the numerous traffic lights didn't help matters. That bypass was desperately needed.