Interstate 87 (NC-VA)

[WashuOtaku]

I think their point, Scott, is that you're over-exaggerating the confusion potential.

NCDOT apparently doesn't think there is any confusion potential for overlapping US-74 and I-74 on the same highway, when the two routes ultimately diverge.   

That is because the travelers that do get confused implode from trying to make a decision.  Since they don't survive, they cannot complain.

[Beltway]

I think their point, Scott, is that you're over-exaggerating the confusion potential.

NCDOT apparently doesn't think there is any confusion potential for overlapping US-74 and I-74 on the same highway, when the two routes ultimately diverge.   

That is because the travelers that do get confused implode from trying to make a decision.  Since they don't survive, they cannot complain.

Or else they take the wrong branch and they go out into hyperspace, never to return to Earth.

[sparker]

I think their point, Scott, is that you're over-exaggerating the confusion potential.

NCDOT apparently doesn't think there is any confusion potential for overlapping US-74 and I-74 on the same highway, when the two routes ultimately diverge.   

That is because the travelers that do get confused implode from trying to make a decision.  Since they don't survive, they cannot complain.

I for one wouldn't be at all surprised if somewhere down the line US 74 is decommissioned; of course, this would be contingent upon both the Columbus-Kings Mountain and Charlotte (or at least I-485) to Rockingham segments being subsumed by Interstate designations -- which appears to now be a NC tradition!  West of Asheville, there's only a few miles where US 74 is not multiplexed with other routes; that too could readily go by the wayside, rendering the entire route -- at least functionally -- as fully duplicative.         

[WashuOtaku]

I for one wouldn't be at all surprised if somewhere down the line US 74 is decommissioned; of course, this would be contingent upon both the Columbus-Kings Mountain and Charlotte (or at least I-485) to Rockingham segments being subsumed by Interstate designations -- which appears to now be a NC tradition!  West of Asheville, there's only a few miles where US 74 is not multiplexed with other routes; that too could readily go by the wayside, rendering the entire route -- at least functionally -- as fully duplicative.       

It is actually Western North Carolina that is probably anchoring US 74 in place.  It was extended west in the '80s to established a central route through the region; US 64 takes a more southern route and US 19 takes a more northern route and then leaves early towards Atlanta.  It also overlaps an ADHS corridor, with the Great Smoky Mountains Expressway as its crowning section; they are currently building new road around Robbinsville, bypassing the Nantahala Gorge.

No, US 74 will not be decommissioned.

[sparker]

I for one wouldn't be at all surprised if somewhere down the line US 74 is decommissioned; of course, this would be contingent upon both the Columbus-Kings Mountain and Charlotte (or at least I-485) to Rockingham segments being subsumed by Interstate designations -- which appears to now be a NC tradition!  West of Asheville, there's only a few miles where US 74 is not multiplexed with other routes; that too could readily go by the wayside, rendering the entire route -- at least functionally -- as fully duplicative.       

It is actually Western North Carolina that is probably anchoring US 74 in place.  It was extended west in the '80s to established a central route through the region; US 64 takes a more southern route and US 19 takes a more northern route and then leaves early towards Atlanta.  It also overlaps an ADHS corridor, with the Great Smoky Mountains Expressway as its crowning section; they are currently building new road around Robbinsville, bypassing the Nantahala Gorge.

No, US 74 will not be decommissioned.

If the US 74 designation is applied to the Nantahala bypass, with US 19 remaining on the "scenic" route through the gorge itself, then I'd have to concur that US 74 is certainly viable for the segment west of I-40.  Actually -- giving it a 2nd look -- Alternate 74 east of Asheville could conceivably reassume its previous "mainline" status as far as 74 is concerned; and with the under-development Shelby bypass well north of that town, US 74 (as has been done previously elsewhere within NC) would simply continue to be signed along the "in-town" route; even with that bypass given Interstate status in the future.  The same would go for the segment between Charlotte and Rockingham; US 74 could and would remain on its current alignment, with a new Interstate designation applied to both the nascent toll road and any eastern extension toward Rockingham.

However, the portion with the twin Interstate and US 74 designations might be in jeopardy once the Interstate-grade segments are completed; it would likely be more appropriate to label the historic US 74 alignment as "Business I-74" with the usual green shields rather than just continue to schlep US 74 down through those towns.  In the long haul, that might be a bit confusing.  Ironically, because of the identical numbers, US 74 works well as a "placeholder" for I-74, particularly as a connector between the Interstate segments.  But as a permanent multiplex or parallel route, less so!  So I'll revise my evaluation to say that US 74 could conceivably stay viable west of Rockingham if NCDOT elects to keep signing the original alignment as such even if Interstate status is afforded any parallel freeway. 

[WashuOtaku]

I for one wouldn't be at all surprised if somewhere down the line US 74 is decommissioned; of course, this would be contingent upon both the Columbus-Kings Mountain and Charlotte (or at least I-485) to Rockingham segments being subsumed by Interstate designations -- which appears to now be a NC tradition!  West of Asheville, there's only a few miles where US 74 is not multiplexed with other routes; that too could readily go by the wayside, rendering the entire route -- at least functionally -- as fully duplicative.       

It is actually Western North Carolina that is probably anchoring US 74 in place.  It was extended west in the '80s to established a central route through the region; US 64 takes a more southern route and US 19 takes a more northern route and then leaves early towards Atlanta.  It also overlaps an ADHS corridor, with the Great Smoky Mountains Expressway as its crowning section; they are currently building new road around Robbinsville, bypassing the Nantahala Gorge.

No, US 74 will not be decommissioned.

If the US 74 designation is applied to the Nantahala bypass, with US 19 remaining on the "scenic" route through the gorge itself, then I'd have to concur that US 74 is certainly viable for the segment west of I-40.  Actually -- giving it a 2nd look -- Alternate 74 east of Asheville could conceivably reassume its previous "mainline" status as far as 74 is concerned; and with the under-development Shelby bypass well north of that town, US 74 (as has been done previously elsewhere within NC) would simply continue to be signed along the "in-town" route; even with that bypass given Interstate status in the future.  The same would go for the segment between Charlotte and Rockingham; US 74 could and would remain on its current alignment, with a new Interstate designation applied to both the nascent toll road and any eastern extension toward Rockingham.

However, the portion with the twin Interstate and US 74 designations might be in jeopardy once the Interstate-grade segments are completed; it would likely be more appropriate to label the historic US 74 alignment as "Business I-74" with the usual green shields rather than just continue to schlep US 74 down through those towns.  In the long haul, that might be a bit confusing.  Ironically, because of the identical numbers, US 74 works well as a "placeholder" for I-74, particularly as a connector between the Interstate segments.  But as a permanent multiplex or parallel route, less so!  So I'll revise my evaluation to say that US 74 could conceivably stay viable west of Rockingham if NCDOT elects to keep signing the original alignment as such even if Interstate status is afforded any parallel freeway.

The only other option would to have a completely different number replacing US 74 in some way if we really want to end duplication, but that isn't going to happen.  Right now for Shelby and Monroe they are going to use "US 74 Bypass" for those new routes and leave mainland US 74 alone, which means if one day those section become part of an interstate they wouldn't have to change anything.  I agree that US 74 could revert back to its Alternate routing between Asheville and Forest City if an interstate is numbered between I-26 and I-85; a spur of I-73 or I-74 could do the same between Rockingham and I-485.  There are several choice NCDOT could go with in the future, so who knows.

[The Nature Boy]

I'm confused as to why the NCDOT hasn't tried to build an interstate across the entirety of the current US 74 corridor. I always feel like that gets overlooked. Connecting Asheville to Charlotte to Wilmington via one interstate route should take some priority.

[roadman65]

I'm confused as to why the NCDOT hasn't tried to build an interstate across the entirety of the current US 74 corridor. I always feel like that gets overlooked. Connecting Asheville to Charlotte to Wilmington via one interstate route should take some priority.

Because they are blinded in getting Myrtle Beach, SC an interstate.

Yes US 74 should have an interstate from Charlotte to Wilmington and ideally using the freeways of US 74 west of where it breaks off of I-85.  In the perfect world the section of US 52 north of Winston- Salem and the new US 311 upgrade should be an entirely different interstate with an x77 or x40 or even x73.   Even if OH and WV build their parts of both I-73 and 74, I-74 should end in OH where it would meet I-73 north of Portsmouth then solo I-73 down to WV where the two would split, then 73 through Roanoke and then either I-46 or I-48 down through VA and even along US 52 and 311 to where 74 now meets I-73.  I-73 would be solo and have a cross junction with the US 74 upgrade which could be I-32 or any even number in the 30's.

What is and what is supposed to be are two different realities in today's universe.

[sparker]

I'm confused as to why the NCDOT hasn't tried to build an interstate across the entirety of the current US 74 corridor. I always feel like that gets overlooked. Connecting Asheville to Charlotte to Wilmington via one interstate route should take some priority.

Because they are blinded in getting Myrtle Beach, SC an interstate.

Yes US 74 should have an interstate from Charlotte to Wilmington and ideally using the freeways of US 74 west of where it breaks off of I-85.  In the perfect world the section of US 52 north of Winston- Salem and the new US 311 upgrade should be an entirely different interstate with an x77 or x40 or even x73.   Even if OH and WV build their parts of both I-73 and 74, I-74 should end in OH where it would meet I-73 north of Portsmouth then solo I-73 down to WV where the two would split, then 73 through Roanoke and then either I-46 or I-48 down through VA and even along US 52 and 311 to where 74 now meets I-73.  I-73 would be solo and have a cross junction with the US 74 upgrade which could be I-32 or any even number in the 30's.

What is and what is supposed to be are two different realities in today's universe.

The reason for the convoluted nature of the 73/74 concept is called High Priority Corridor 5.  Interregional connections that likely will never be made notwithstanding, the reason the part that is being developed (albeit in bits & pieces) retains the original numbering concept is the same reason as the "placeholder" I-69E/I-69C/I-69W designations were applied and actually signed in places within Texas -- each concept is considered sacrosanct as written within the circles of those backing and funding the projects.  Equally likely -- each concept has structural and/or systemic weaknesses (duh!), and no party with anything to lose if the concepts are somehow ended or even truncated wants to fuck with the proverbial "golden goose", even if it only sporadically lays an egg or two.  Calling attention to the fact that there is no action or even proposals for this corridor north of Roanoke -- or that the convolution of I-74 in SE NC and NE SC is a planning travesty -- might jeopardize the timely deployment of those corridor portions that are currently near-term projects.  In short, no vested party wants to mess with the composite corridor's program -- and suggesting alternate numbers might well call attention to those issues no one involved wants to address. 

[froggie]

...each concept is considered sacrosanct as written within the circles of those backing and funding the projects.

Backing, but no longer funding.  Much of the funding for the HPCs came from earmarks, which have been out of vogue in Congress for several years now.

[CanesFan27]

I'm confused as to why the NCDOT hasn't tried to build an interstate across the entirety of the current US 74 corridor. I always feel like that gets overlooked. Connecting Asheville to Charlotte to Wilmington via one interstate route should take some priority.

Because they are blinded in getting Myrtle Beach, SC an interstate.

Yes US 74 should have an interstate from Charlotte to Wilmington and ideally using the freeways of US 74 west of where it breaks off of I-85.  In the perfect world the section of US 52 north of Winston- Salem and the new US 311 upgrade should be an entirely different interstate with an x77 or x40 or even x73.   Even if OH and WV build their parts of both I-73 and 74, I-74 should end in OH where it would meet I-73 north of Portsmouth then solo I-73 down to WV where the two would split, then 73 through Roanoke and then either I-46 or I-48 down through VA and even along US 52 and 311 to where 74 now meets I-73.  I-73 would be solo and have a cross junction with the US 74 upgrade which could be I-32 or any even number in the 30's.

What is and what is supposed to be are two different realities in today's universe.

Has nothing to do with 73 & myrtle beach.  As early as 1963, NC has tried to get the US 74 corridor as an Interstate.

http://surewhynotnow.blogspot.com/2016/08/to-shore-north-carolinas-struggle-to.html?m=1

"
In 1963, North Carolina made one of their first attempts to extend the Interstate System within the state.  The state petitioned for two extensions: One, a route from Durham via Raleigh to Morehead City, and the second, a route from Charlotte to Wilmington. "

"With the 1968 extensions in place, the state was very aggressive in making Interstate requests in 1970.  The state would request routes for eleven new corridors totaling an estimated 673.9 miles. (4)  Three of the requests would involve Morehead City and Wilmington.   Two of the three corridor requests ended in Wilmington.  The most lengthy was a 245.4 mile corridor from Asheville to Wilmington via Charlotte.  This route would basically follow US 74.  The second Wilmington corridor request ran 159 miles southeast from Greensboro.  This proposal essentially followed modern US 421."

So instead the state has done steps to four lane 74 to Wilmington with various parts freeway, expressway, and basic divided highway.  The ways to get interstates designated have changed since the 1960s and more aggressively since the 1990s.

Jp,  you are incorrect when stating it's an obsession with Myrtle Beach and NCDOTs past history in trying to get a Charlotte to Wilmington interstate is reason why.

[sparker]

...each concept is considered sacrosanct as written within the circles of those backing and funding the projects.

Backing, but no longer funding.  Much of the funding for the HPCs came from earmarks, which have been out of vogue in Congress for several years now.

Out of vogue in general (and within public proclamations) but still snuck in from time to time by wily old Congressfolks who know the ropes (and how to disguise earmarks as legislative modifications).  As long as there's not an obvious trail to draw the attention of the extremes on either side, projects with specific targets can be occasionally steered through the process.  It's certainly not like the old days of give-and-take and open-air tradeoffs -- but it is still there -- but not openly acknowledged as such.

[LM117]

Update on the US-17 section of the corridor. Interesting is the mention of a possible connection to NC-168.

http://www.dailyadvance.com/News/2017/09/25/DOT-to-post-I-87-concept-maps-online.html

The NC Department of Transportation will soon make its concept maps of Interstate 87 available online, allowing the public to weigh in on the $1.35 billion project that will reshape travel through Williamston, Hertford and other communities on the way to Virginia.

NC DOT personnel agreed to make the maps available for review and comment at the urging of local officials at an Interstate 87 meeting in Elizabeth City last week. Even though planning for Interstate 87 remains in early stages, local officials said the public is already calling for more information on the project that could impact several communities and many property owners.

According to an email from DOT Transportation Engineer Shane York, the maps should soon be available at https://www.ncdot.gov/projects/projectsstudies/default.html?Counties=*&Region=*.

During the meeting, DOT's consulting firm, AECOM, explained how they might turn US Highway 17 into Interstate 87, documenting the sections of road that need widening and the intersections that need changing if the road is to become a high-speed, "restricted access"  highway allowing unimpeded travel from Williamston to the Virginia state line. Interstate 87 would also include US Highway 64 from Raleigh to Williamston, a road already close to interstate standards, but AECOM focused solely on US 17 during the local meeting.

AECOM officials Christy Shumate and Laura Fisher said US 17 from Williamston to Virginia is about 80 miles long. For planning purposes, AECOM has broken that corridor down into 10 segments needing varying levels of work. In a followup email, York added about 24 miles of that road are already at "freeway"  standards, meaning DOT only needs to widen US 17 from Windsor to Castelloe Road, from the Chowan River almost to Edenton, and along the roughly 11-mile Elizabeth City bypass.

Things get more complicated in Williamston, Windsor and in the Town of Hertford, where keeping US 17 on its current route would require overpasses and numerous service roads to be constructed. Fisher noted several alternative routes for parts of Interstate 87, including arcing it east of US 17 in Williamston before tying back into the bridge over the Roanoke River, diverting it west of US 17 south of Windsor so it cuts around Windsor before tying into the existing bypass, and diverting it west of US 17 north of Winfall to tie into an interchange on Chapanoke Road. That Chapanoke interchange would avoid impacts to numerous properties around the intersection of Chapanoke and existing US 17.

Fisher proposed no alternative to taking I-87 through Hertford; however, which would require a diamond interchange be built at the intersection of US 17 and South Church Street.

Additionally, Fisher presented an alternative to the final stretch of I-87 in Camden, which would create an interchange not only connecting to the Dismal Swamp Canal Welcome Center, but create a connection to US Highway 168 in Currituck. Fisher said AECOM added that route at the request of officials in Currituck and Virginia.

Though DOT and AECOM officials agreed to provide their current concept maps, they noted those maps have been developed before the release of a "feasibility study"  that will include a more formal public comment period; that study is expected by year's end. As the name implies, the feasibility study is still a preliminary document itself; it sets the stage for submitting individual I-87 projects for possible state funding.

[Beltway]

Update on the US-17 section of the corridor. Interesting is the mention of a possible connection to NC-168.
http://www.dailyadvance.com/News/2017/09/25/DOT-to-post-I-87-concept-maps-online.html

The NC Department of Transportation will soon make its concept maps of Interstate 87 available online, allowing the public to weigh in on the $1.35 billion project that will reshape travel through Williamston, Hertford and other communities on the way to Virginia.

About 70 miles of rural Interstate highway?  No way they can build it for that cost today, it will be at least twice that.

The existing highway is in vast majority a nonlimited-access 4-lane highway, so they can't just upgrade that to Interstate standards without spending about the same per-mile cost of that of a new location Interstate highway.

[Henry]

If the Alligator Alley through the Everglades is any indication, they may try to build I-87 through the Great Dismal Swamp, although it will be far more expensive to build than what the NCDOT estimate is, unless tolls are somehow enacted elsewhere throughout the state. (IIRC, either I-85 or I-95 was going to be tolled from the VA line south; any updates on that plan?)

[LM117]

(IIRC, either I-85 or I-95 was going to be tolled from the VA line south; any updates on that plan?)

It was I-95 but that idea was killed after massive opposition from towns/cities and businesses in eastern NC.

[Beltway]

(IIRC, either I-85 or I-95 was going to be tolled from the VA line south; any updates on that plan?)

It was I-95 but that idea was killed after massive opposition from towns/cities and businesses in eastern NC.

And massive opposition from various trucking industry lobby groups, and various motorist advocacy lobby groups ...

[sparker]

Question: is the connection to NC 168 (and by extension VA 168) simply that -- a connecting access route -- or is it a fallback I-87 routing in case VA or the city of Chesapeake declines to improve US 17/Dominion Blvd. north to I-64?  (In other words, a "shunt" of I-87 over to a route that is significantly more completed in VA.) 

[LM117]

Question: is the connection to NC 168 (and by extension VA 168) simply that -- a connecting access route -- or is it a fallback I-87 routing in case VA or the city of Chesapeake declines to improve US 17/Dominion Blvd. north to I-64?  (In other words, a "shunt" of I-87 over to a route that is significantly more completed in VA.)

I suspect that VA is wanting I-87 to follow VA-168. Unlike US-17, the majority of VA-168 is almost interstate standard and wouldn't cost quite as much to upgrade as it would US-17, which still has at-grades remaining (some surrounded by businesses), even after the completion of the Dominion Blvd project. One can easily see why VA would favor using VA-168.

The big problem is that it would require a new routing in NC linking US-17 to 168. Given the cost and sensitive wetland it would go through (as well as the inevitable lawsuits), I highly doubt NCDOT would favor the 168 option.

US-17 benefits NC, VA-168 benefits VA. Catch 22.

[sparker]

Question: is the connection to NC 168 (and by extension VA 168) simply that -- a connecting access route -- or is it a fallback I-87 routing in case VA or the city of Chesapeake declines to improve US 17/Dominion Blvd. north to I-64?  (In other words, a "shunt" of I-87 over to a route that is significantly more completed in VA.)

I suspect that VA is wanting I-87 to follow VA-168. Unlike US-17, the majority of VA-168 is almost interstate standard and wouldn't cost quite as much to upgrade as it would US-17, which still has at-grades remaining (some surrounded by businesses), even after the completion of the Dominion Blvd project. One can easily see why VA would favor using VA-168.

The big problem is that it would require a new routing in NC linking US-17 to 168. Given the cost and sensitive wetland it would go through (as well as the inevitable lawsuits), I highly doubt NCDOT would favor the 168 option.

US-17 benefits NC, VA-168 benefits VA. Catch 22.

So the "fallback", if that, is that NC ends up ponying up extra $$ for the swamp connector so VA can collect even more tolls at the Intracoastal Waterway bridge on 168.  Sounds like a classic "win/FU" situation!  It'll be interesting to see how this all plays out, considering the improvements that have already been put into Dominion Blvd.   

[froggie]

If the Alligator Alley through the Everglades is any indication, they may try to build I-87 through the Great Dismal Swamp

ACoE shot down the US 460 plan because of wetlands...there's no way that they'd approve an Interstate across the Dismal Swamp.

[LM117]

Question: is the connection to NC 168 (and by extension VA 168) simply that -- a connecting access route -- or is it a fallback I-87 routing in case VA or the city of Chesapeake declines to improve US 17/Dominion Blvd. north to I-64?  (In other words, a "shunt" of I-87 over to a route that is significantly more completed in VA.)

I suspect that VA is wanting I-87 to follow VA-168. Unlike US-17, the majority of VA-168 is almost interstate standard and wouldn't cost quite as much to upgrade as it would US-17, which still has at-grades remaining (some surrounded by businesses), even after the completion of the Dominion Blvd project. One can easily see why VA would favor using VA-168.

The big problem is that it would require a new routing in NC linking US-17 to 168. Given the cost and sensitive wetland it would go through (as well as the inevitable lawsuits), I highly doubt NCDOT would favor the 168 option.

US-17 benefits NC, VA-168 benefits VA. Catch 22.

So the "fallback", if that, is that NC ends up ponying up extra $$ for the swamp connector so VA can collect even more tolls at the Intracoastal Waterway bridge on 168.  Sounds like a classic "win/FU" situation!  It'll be interesting to see how this all plays out, considering the improvements that have already been put into Dominion Blvd.

I don't think tolls have anything to do with it. Part of US-17 in Chesapeake recently had tolling implemented after the Dominion Blvd project wrapped up and the Dominion Blvd project was underway before I-87 was even thought of.

Upgrading VA-168 is simply cheaper and easier for VA, but they must be smoking crack if they think NCDOT could ever get approval for a new connector route versus upgrading US-17. You'd think they realize that after the US-460 fiasco...

[froggie]

The article LM117 posted has a link to the presentation NCDOT gave.  The conceptual design of that US 17/NC 168 connector has a loop ramp from the connector to SB US 17, which suggests to me that it would *NOT* be part of I-87 and that I-87 would continue along US 17 into Virginia.

[sparker]

If the Alligator Alley through the Everglades is any indication, they may try to build I-87 through the Great Dismal Swamp

ACoE shot down the US 460 plan because of wetlands...there's no way that they'd approve an Interstate across the Dismal Swamp.

The article LM117 posted has a link to the presentation NCDOT gave.  The conceptual design of that US 17/NC 168 connector has a loop ramp from the connector to SB US 17, which suggests to me that it would *NOT* be part of I-87 and that I-87 would continue along US 17 into Virginia.

That seems to clear that situation up; a VA 168 routing for I-87 would have been something of an inefficient detour.  Despite its traversal of the edge of the Great Dismal, US 17 in VA is a divided facility (at least the non-Dominion segment) that could conceivably, despite some level of difficulty, lend itself to Interstate-level upgrades. 

Looking at the area it appears the connector would intersect NC 168 somewhere in the vicinity of Moyock.  Seeing as the swampland just west of there was the site of the notorious Blackwater HQ and purported commando training area, it would be intriguing -- and probably ironically humorous -- to project how Erik Prince would react to a new major road facility slicing through his bailiwick -- something tells me he and his cohorts wouldn't care much for that prospect!  I'd like to be a fly on the wall when the phrase "eminent domain" became part of the conversation about the concept with that particular group of people.     

[LM117]

Even without I-87, there's practically zero chance NCDOT would ever get approval to build that connector.

That being said, I do think it has some merit, since it could serve as a detour route for those going into Chesapeake from NC should US-17 in VA be shut down for any reason (accidents, construction, etc.). It would also give those who live along VA-168 in southern Chesapeake easy access to US-17.

As for the idea of tolls being an issue, it won't be. Both VA-168 and US-17 in VA have tolls, so drivers are gonna get fleeced either way.