I know there is a lot of discussion (and in the Fictional threads, talk about new corridor ideas) on the ideal traffic levels for different standards, but:
1) At what point (AADT-wise) should a 2-lane corridor be upgraded to a 4-lane corridor? Presumably, at a minimum, a divided expressway.
2) At what point should a 4-lane divided be converted fully to a freeway (Interstate-grade)? Alternatively, would it be more logical to just build a new 4-lane Interstate-grade freeway immediately replacing a 2-lane corridor?
3) At what point should a 4-lane freeway be widened to 6 lanes?
For all of these, the assumption is that we are dealing with a rural area and an NHS corridor, so it would probably be a US route or an important state route.
1) Depending on which jurisdiction you talk to, the answer generally ranges anywhere from a 5K AADT to a ~12K AADT for a planning level estimate. The details are a lot more convoluted and complicated, and depend on numerous parameters...for example, hourly traffic density, number of intersecting roads and driveways, crash rate, presence of traffic signals. Many more than that.
2) Similar to the answer to #1, albeit with a higher daily traffic range. One state I'm familiar with pegs it at around 30K, but that is not a hard-and-fast rule because of all the other parameters involved.
3) This depends on a mostly-different set of parameters. Hourly (or, better yet, 15-minute) density rates are still looked at, but so are free flow speed, truck volumes, directional distribution, lane width, interchange spacing (including ramp-to-ramp), median width, shoulder clearance, and frequency of recreational traffic (since RVs drive differently than passenger vehicles and trucks). There are other parameters involved, but these are the main ones.
Given "typical" values, the AADT threshold for 4 lanes versus 6 can range anywhere from the mid-30Ks to near 50K for rural areas. Urban areas are typically higher...60-90K range, as a lower Level-of-Service (LOS) threshold is acceptable in urban areas. Specifics are really going to be highway segment-dependent.
Quote from: froggie on June 27, 2019, 09:57:38 AM
Quote from: RoadMaster09 on June 26, 2019, 10:49:41 PM
1) At what point (AADT-wise) should a 2-lane corridor be upgraded to a 4-lane corridor? Presumably, at a minimum, a divided expressway.
Depending on which jurisdiction you talk to, the answer generally ranges anywhere from a 5K AADT to a ~12K AADT for a planning level estimate.
I know there are many factors, but 5K sounds very low, at least for this area of the country. I'm sure NY would sneer at anything less than 10K, with an actual widening project being unlikely to occur unless volumes are 15K or higher; there just aren't many rural two-lane roads handling that kind of volume.
Quote from: webny99 on June 27, 2019, 10:16:12 AM
Quote from: froggie on June 27, 2019, 09:57:38 AM
Quote from: RoadMaster09 on June 26, 2019, 10:49:41 PM
1) At what point (AADT-wise) should a 2-lane corridor be upgraded to a 4-lane corridor? Presumably, at a minimum, a divided expressway.
Depending on which jurisdiction you talk to, the answer generally ranges anywhere from a 5K AADT to a ~12K AADT for a planning level estimate.
I know there are many factors, but 5K sounds very low, at least for this area of the country. I'm sure NY would sneer at anything less than 10K, with an actual widening project being unlikely to occur unless volumes are 15K or higher; there just aren't many rural two-lane roads handling that kind of volume.
Large truck percentages and trip lengths would play a major factor. If average trip lengths for 50% of the total traffic was over 100 miles, and large truck percentages were over 15%, that would warrant 4 lanes with town bypasses, even with current AADTs of 7,000 or 8,000.
Quote from: Beltway on June 27, 2019, 01:13:02 PM
Large truck percentages and trip lengths would play a major factor. If average trip lengths for 50% of the total traffic was over 100 miles, and large truck percentages were over 15%, that would warrant 4 lanes with town bypasses, even with current AADTs of 7,000 or 8,000.
I know in some states, especially in the West and Midwest, there are 4-lane divided highways with AADTs around 3,000 or so (in some cases even less), but I wasn't sure if that was normal. Honestly, when building from 2 lanes to 4 lanes on a NHS corridor (generally a US highway but can also be a major state highway) that is
not paralleling an Interstate, I think it should always be built to at least partial access control (limited entrances only where necessary, at-grade intersections with minor cross streets, interchanges where signals warranted), which can be upgraded to an Interstate-grade freeway at relatively limited cost.
That wouldn't be the case with busy local traffic routes (such as US routes paralleling Interstates or collector highways) since property access would be more important. However, I'm wondering where the warrant is there since there are many 2-lane highways that are long distance NHS routes, particularly in the West and Upper Midwest.
US-58 in Virginia is a good example of a long-distance highway mostly being 4-lanes thanks to extensive widening projects over the past four decades. Between I-85 and Suffolk it has around 8,000 - 13,000 AADT and is the main highway between I-95 South / I-85 South and the Hampton Roads metro area of 1.7 million people. West of there, AADT drops to 5,000 AADT, and creeps as low to near 2,500 AADT in some areas west of Martinsville. It's mostly four-lane with bypasses around every town, though signals and urban segments still exist along the route but holds 4-lanes through.
Once the remainder is four-laned and relocated on new alignment from the existing narrow, extremely windy, steep grade 2-lane road which prohibits trucks, there will likely be an increase of truck traffic heading to I-77 from towns and cities west of I-85 including Danville which is a medium sized metro area. Currently, truck traffic from there has to head to I-81 then south, or find some other viable route because US-58 prohibits trucks.
Through traffic between where US-58 and I-81 meet and Hampton Roads would simply take the all interstate trip up I-81 to I-64. Longer distance, but faster overall thanks to mostly 70 mph speed limits and zero interruptions (on a good day, when I-81 has its weekly major accident that shuts down the highway, it's a different story). Much more preferable than taking US-58 all the way across, even when it's finished to 4-lanes.
Quote from: sprjus4 on June 27, 2019, 07:55:44 PM
Through traffic between where US-58 and I-81 meet and Hampton Roads would simply take the all interstate trip up I-81 to I-64. Longer distance, but faster overall thanks to mostly 70 mph speed limits and zero interruptions (on a good day, when I-81 has its weekly major accident that shuts down the highway, it's a different story). Much more preferable than taking US-58 all the way across, even when it's finished to 4-lanes.
That traffic wouldn't use the section between Damascus and Independence and there are no plans to 4-lane that section.
Traffic from I-81 would use I-77 at Fort Chiswell to connect to US-58 and then take US-58 to South Hampton Roads.
US-58 times will improve when the 4-laning is complete between Hillsville and Stuart.
Wytheville to Norfolk, Google Maps Directions
-- I-81 and I-64 -- 346 miles and 5:20 time
-- I-81 to I-77 to US-58 -- 318 miles and 5:40 time
If 10 minutes could be knocked off of US-58 by those projects then a preference survey might be somewhere around 50-50. I would then favor US-58 because of not having to deal with I-81 and the lower Peninsula and the HRBT, and traveling 28 less miles.
Wytheville to Hampton, Google Maps Directions
-- I-81 and I-64 -- 329 miles and 4:57 time
-- I-81 to I-77 to US-58 -- 329 miles and 5:49 time
Hampton and Newport News would definitely favor I-81 and I-64.
West Virginia has built its four-lane routes as mostly at-grade expressways with grade-separated interchanges in certain spots. I'm not sure of the logic behind some of the decisions, however. On Corridor D, for example, there's an interchange at US 50 and WV 16, while the other state routes that US 50 crosses between Parkersburg and the beginning of the freeway outside of Clarksburg have at-grades.
And the new part of Corridor H has grade separations at Patterson Creek Road (CR 5), US 220, and WV 259/WV 29. Other major intersections (WV 93 near Mount Storm Lake, WV 93 near Scherr, Knobley Road, etc.) are at-grades.
Quote from: hbelkins on June 28, 2019, 12:20:31 PM
West Virginia has built its four-lane routes as mostly at-grade expressways with grade-separated interchanges in certain spots. I'm not sure of the logic behind some of the decisions, however. On Corridor D, for example, there's an interchange at US 50 and WV 16, while the other state routes that US 50 crosses between Parkersburg and the beginning of the freeway outside of Clarksburg have at-grades.
And the new part of Corridor H has grade separations at Patterson Creek Road (CR 5), US 220, and WV 259/WV 29. Other major intersections (WV 93 near Mount Storm Lake, WV 93 near Scherr, Knobley Road, etc.) are at-grades.
Are any of the at-grades signalized? That should be the critical indicator. Those should be replaced by interchanges/grade separations. It's a bit different when dealing with minor side roads, since there is relatively little traffic on them.
^ Yes, most of them have at least a few signals. The notable exception is Corridor H east of Elkins. Not enough traffic on that to warrant signals. But 19, 50, 119, and H west of Elkins (to name some examples) all have signals.
1. In Wisconsin the cut-off is around 15k when they start thinking about expanding to an expressway.
2. When the at-grade intersections become dangerous to the point where you would be nervous turning on/off the expressway. This varies depending on several factors, like AADT of the smaller road, truck traffic volumes, and topography.
3. At around 30-35k, or if micropassing trucks is a big issue.
Quote from: RoadMaster09 on June 26, 2019, 10:49:41 PM
2) At what point should a 4-lane divided be converted fully to a freeway (Interstate-grade)? Alternatively, would it be more logical to just build a new 4-lane Interstate-grade freeway immediately replacing a 2-lane corridor?
Quote from: thspfc on June 29, 2019, 10:18:31 AM
2. When the at-grade intersections become dangerous to the point where you would be nervous turning on/off the expressway. This varies depending on several factors, like AADT of the smaller road, truck traffic volumes, and topography.
I would add when multiple intersections start meeting traffic signal warrants.
For the second part of RoadMaster09's second question, I would go with when ROW is available, there is a desire to keep the corridor free flowing, and it is likely that developments may require multiple intersections to be signalized within a certain number of years of opening the four lane facility.
This isn't the best answer in the world, but you sort of "know it when you see it"
Both US-24 from Colorado Springs to Limon, and US-34 from Wiggins (I-76) to Greeley, are mostly 2-lane. Traffic counts aren't the highest in the world: generally maxing out at 7-8K and in spots as low as 3K.
But there is (1) considerable truck traffic, (2) traffic on those roads FLIES pretty quickly, especially given it's very barren space, and (3) the roads are major connectors for traffic from a given part of the Front Range to be able to access east-bound interstates (vice versa for Eastern Plains and Kansas/Nebraska travelers to reach areas North and South of Denver).
Those roads need to be 4-lane divided expressways. I don't like driving either of them right now.
Quote from: webny99 on June 27, 2019, 10:16:12 AM
Quote from: froggie on June 27, 2019, 09:57:38 AM
Quote from: RoadMaster09 on June 26, 2019, 10:49:41 PM
1) At what point (AADT-wise) should a 2-lane corridor be upgraded to a 4-lane corridor? Presumably, at a minimum, a divided expressway.
Depending on which jurisdiction you talk to, the answer generally ranges anywhere from a 5K AADT to a ~12K AADT for a planning level estimate.
I know there are many factors, but 5K sounds very low, at least for this area of the country. I'm sure NY would sneer at anything less than 10K, with an actual widening project being unlikely to occur unless volumes are 15K or higher; there just aren't many rural two-lane roads handling that kind of volume.
TxDOT uses 5,000 as a general limit on which two-lane roads should be made into Super 2. At levels higher than that, they prefer to look at a four or five lane road, or a divided road.
Also, there are quite a few roads that are regional travel routes, but not commuter routes, in rural areas between cities. The average traffic may be low, but weekend traffic can be severe for a two-lane road. I know of a couple of places where long lines are common on the weekend, and traffic is still pretty thick where the road expands into a freeway, because the incoming traffic tends to happen in bursts after the leader of each line gets to the freeway. These roads with reversed traffic loads (2 busy days instead of 5) are easy to be overlook if only averages are used.
Quote from: wxfree on June 29, 2019, 02:41:43 PM
Also, there are quite a few roads that are regional travel routes, but not commuter routes, in rural areas between cities. The average traffic may be low, but weekend traffic can be severe for a two-lane road. I know of a couple of places where long lines are common on the weekend, and traffic is still pretty thick where the road expands into a freeway, because the incoming traffic tends to happen in bursts after the leader of each line gets to the freeway. These roads with reversed traffic loads (2 busy days instead of 5) are easy to be overlook if only averages are used.
Spot-on description of the NY 104 corridor in Wayne County. It is somewhat of a commuter route west of Williamson, but the stretch from Williamson east to Wolcott easily warrants four lanes from Friday to Sunday, May to October.
Westbound traffic bunches up even on the freeway segment near Rochester; the root cause being the timing of the lights and the long strings of cars entering from the two lane segment making it challenging for anyone to get ahead of the pack.
Quote from: Beltway on June 27, 2019, 08:40:52 PM
Traffic from I-81 would use I-77 at Fort Chiswell to connect to US-58 and then take US-58 to South Hampton Roads.
US-58 times will improve when the 4-laning is complete between Hillsville and Stuart.
Wytheville to Norfolk, Google Maps Directions
-- I-81 and I-64 -- 346 miles and 5:20 time
-- I-81 to I-77 to US-58 -- 318 miles and 5:40 time
If 10 minutes could be knocked off of US-58 by those projects then a preference survey might be somewhere around 50-50. I would then favor US-58 because of not having to deal with I-81 and the lower Peninsula and the HRBT, and traveling 28 less miles.
Doing the math, it would shave roughly 4-5 minutes off at a 60 mph speed limit, assuming VDOT puts a 60 mph speed limit. A lot of the recent widenings have only gotten 55 mph speed limits and with a project going through the mountains, it may well have a 55 mph speed limit.
I've already talked about how most average drivers would prefer interstate highways over arterials. It may work for you, but the average person would not want to drive 5 hours, 400 miles on an arterial highway that has 60 mph rural speed limits, and urban segments along the way. A tractor trailer may find it beneficial to shave miles, but the average Joe would really only consider it if there was a wreck on I-81 or congestion on I-64.
Not to mention, if one was to use US-58 to avoid mess on I-81 and I-64, Google Maps routing still indicates it's currently 5 minutes faster, or when US-58 is completed, the same, to dip into North Carolina on interstate highways
(I-77 to I-74 to I-85) then finally come back up at South Hill. That routing would likely attract drivers
(not tractor trailers) moreso than arterial US-58.
Also another thing - by the time US-58 is widened to 4-lanes, I-64 could be 6-lanes all the way to Richmond, and the HRBT expansion would have been completed to 8-lanes during peak hours. The MMMBT also offers a good alternative. It usually only is congested at peak times, where the HRBT congests whenever it feels like it.
I'd favor I-81 to I-64, mostly due to the interstate factor. I'm sure plenty other would, though as you mention, some like yourself may chose to take US-58 for a stress free drive. US-58 is a nice drive, but again, I'd only use it when needed.
We'll have to revisit a year or two after US-58 is widened, and see how the traffic counts have changed on that route.
Quote from: sprjus4 on July 02, 2019, 01:08:51 PM
I've already talked about how most average drivers would prefer interstate highways over arterials. It may work for you, but the average person would not want to drive 5 hours, 400 miles on an arterial highway that has 60 mph rural speed limits, and urban segments along the way.
My money is on the average driver nowadays going whatever way his sat-nav device tells him to, and that he doesn't even think twice about what type of routes those are or what alternatives exist.
Quote from: kphoger on July 02, 2019, 01:43:35 PM
Quote from: sprjus4 on July 02, 2019, 01:08:51 PM
I've already talked about how most average drivers would prefer interstate highways over arterials. It may work for you, but the average person would not want to drive 5 hours, 400 miles on an arterial highway that has 60 mph rural speed limits, and urban segments along the way.
My money is on the average driver nowadays going whatever way his sat-nav device tells him to, and that he doesn't even think twice about what type of routes those are or what alternatives exist.
In that case, it'd still likely be I-81 to I-64 unless the sat-nav device has traffic information and indicates a massive wreck, and in that case would route I-77 to I-74 to I-85 to US-58.
I'd think of US-58 to be the last option if there's issues with both of those routes.
Quote from: sprjus4 on July 02, 2019, 01:08:51 PM
Quote from: Beltway on June 27, 2019, 08:40:52 PM
Traffic from I-81 would use I-77 at Fort Chiswell to connect to US-58 and then take US-58 to South Hampton Roads.
US-58 times will improve when the 4-laning is complete between Hillsville and Stuart.
Wytheville to Norfolk, Google Maps Directions
-- I-81 and I-64 -- 346 miles and 5:20 time
-- I-81 to I-77 to US-58 -- 318 miles and 5:40 time
If 10 minutes could be knocked off of US-58 by those projects then a preference survey might be somewhere around 50-50. I would then favor US-58 because of not having to deal with I-81 and the lower Peninsula and the HRBT, and traveling 28 less miles.
Doing the math, it would shave roughly 4-5 minutes off at a 60 mph speed limit, assuming VDOT puts a 60 mph speed limit. A lot of the recent widenings have only gotten 55 mph speed limits and with a project going through the mountains, it may well have a 55 mph speed limit.
I've already talked about how most average drivers would prefer interstate highways over arterials.
Really? You have survey data? So how is the 4-lane undivided (excepting major intersections) US-460, not even built to 4-lane divided rural arterial standards, posted as an official alternate to I-64 between Richmond and South Hampton Roads? Those dedicated VMS signs with the comparative time estimates for each route make it an official alternate.
US-460 clearly is a credible alternate to I-64 between those two areas, especially at major peak periods.
Quote from: sprjus4 on July 02, 2019, 01:08:51 PM
It may work for you, but the average person would not want to drive 5 hours, 400 miles on an arterial highway that has 60 mph rural speed limits, and urban segments along the way.
318 miles between the decision point and Norfolk, and you ignore the fact that US-58 is 28 miles shorter.
Quote from: sprjus4 on July 02, 2019, 01:08:51 PM
A tractor trailer may find it beneficial to shave miles, but the average Joe would really only consider it if there was a wreck on I-81 or congestion on I-64.
There is considerable possibility of encountering such between Norfolk and Wytheville, and be committed to the route before the incident occurs.
A completed 4-lane US-58 would have a high reliability factor with a low probability of incident delay.
Quote from: sprjus4 on July 02, 2019, 01:08:51 PM
Also another thing - by the time US-58 is widened to 4-lanes, I-64 could be 6-lanes all the way to Richmond, and the HRBT expansion would have been completed to 8-lanes during peak hours.
I-64 won't be 6-lanes all the way to Richmond in 2023. Then there are the issues at Afton Mountain and along I-81.
Quote from: sprjus4 on July 02, 2019, 01:57:16 PM
In that case, it'd still likely be I-81 to I-64 unless the sat-nav device has traffic information and indicates a massive wreck, and in that case would route I-77 to I-74 to I-85 to US-58.
And of the wreck doesn't occur until you are committed to the route and partway down the route?
That N.C. route is 34 miles longer than US-58, and almost 1/2 of it is non-Interstate, and it looks very circuitous on a map, more than the reality, but it just plain looks nasty. I can't imagine anyone but a roadgeek might use that between Wytheville and Norfolk.
Quote from: Beltway on July 02, 2019, 03:54:19 PM
Really? You have survey data?
Do -you- have survey data? :poke:
Quote from: Beltway on July 02, 2019, 03:54:19 PM
So how is the 4-lane undivided (excepting major intersections) US-460, not even built to 4-lane divided rural arterial standards, posted as an official alternate to I-64 between Richmond and South Hampton Roads? Those dedicated VMS signs with the comparative time estimates for each route make it an official alternate.
The stretch of I-64 between Richmond and Hampton Roads has numerous issues, daily congestion, tunnels, etc. far more than I-64 and I-81 west of Richmond.
And like you said - it's an "alternate". Yes, I said drivers may chose to use US-58 as an "alternate", but it's not going to be the main route. On a good day, I-81 to I-64 will be preferred by most, as it currently is. If there's horrible congestion, probably not.
I'll use US-460 if I-64 has congestion. If I-64 is clear, I will take I-64 hands down, no questions asked.
Quote from: Beltway on July 02, 2019, 03:54:19 PM
US-460 clearly is a credible alternate to I-64 between those two areas, especially at major peak periods.
Agreed.
Quote from: Beltway on July 02, 2019, 03:54:19 PM
you ignore the fact that US-58 is 28 miles shorter.
Do you think that a driver of a passenger vehicle cares about a 28 mile difference? That's a wash on a long-distance trip like that. I've made the same argument regarding other highways.
If distance was a big thing, all the traffic would get off at Roanoke, and take the 4-lane US-460 all the way. Less distance than I-81 to I-64 is, and not much slower. But most people don't. They continue to stay on 70 mph interstate highways all the way to Hampton Roads.
US-58 will be more beneficial as a shortcut for tractor trailers if anything.
Quote from: Beltway on July 02, 2019, 03:54:19 PM
A completed 4-lane US-58 would have a high reliability factor with a low probability of incident delay.
Once I-81 has $2.2 billion worth of upgrades, reliability on that highway will be higher, and I-64 is generally fine until east of Richmond. Once 6-lanes is completed and the HRBT is completed, reliability on that highway will be higher.
Quote from: Beltway on July 02, 2019, 03:54:19 PM
I-64 won't be 6-lanes all the way to Richmond in 2023.
Is US-58 fully funded and under construction or close to construction? I'll believe it when you provide official links and sources.
Quote from: Beltway on July 02, 2019, 03:54:19 PM
Then there are the issues at Afton Mountain and along I-81.
I-81 will be have improvements over the next 5-10 years that will fix issues on that highway, some smaller improvements even began yesterday with the funding officially in place.
Afton Mountain isn't really an issue? 6-lanes over it would be nice for slower trucks, but major delays are rare up there.
Quote from: Beltway on July 02, 2019, 04:02:18 PM
That N.C. route is 34 miles longer than US-58, and almost 1/2 of it is non-Interstate, and it looks very circuitous on a map, more than the reality, but it just plain looks nasty. I can't imagine anyone but a roadgeek might use that between Wytheville and Norfolk.
False. 1/2 of it may not be interstate posted, but it is all 65 - 70 mph freeway. It's also apart of Future I-74, and when the Winston-Salem Bypass is completed in the next few years (currently under construction), that will make the drive even easier as traffic will be able to bypass Winston-Salem on a 6-lane rural 65 mph freeway, as opposed to current substandard, congestion prone 55 mph urban freeway through there now.
If nobody would use it, why does Google route me that way between Wytheville and Emporia during non-peak hours?
I-81 to I-64 is circuitous and 30 miles slower than US-460, but most people use it anyways, and Google routes that way.
Poor argument.
Again, most passenger vehicle drivers aren't strict on mileage as you continue to spew and claim. 20-30 miles per gallon, and fuel efficiency in vehicles make this a wash. These are huge tractor trailers with 3-5 miles per gallon, and low fuel efficiency.
Quote from: sprjus4 on July 02, 2019, 04:11:25 PM
Quote from: Beltway on July 02, 2019, 03:54:19 PM
Really? You have survey data?
Do -you- have survey data? :poke:
YOU made the claim.
Quote from: sprjus4 on July 02, 2019, 04:11:25 PM
Quote from: Beltway on July 02, 2019, 03:54:19 PM
So how is the 4-lane undivided (excepting major intersections) US-460, not even built to 4-lane divided rural arterial standards, posted as an official alternate to I-64 between Richmond and South Hampton Roads? Those dedicated VMS signs with the comparative time estimates for each route make it an official alternate.
The stretch of I-64 between Richmond and Hampton Roads has numerous issues, daily congestion, tunnels, etc. far more than I-64 and I-81 west of Richmond.
Reason to avoid it if possible, especially at peak travel times.
Quote from: sprjus4 on July 02, 2019, 04:11:25 PM
And like you said - it's an "alternate". Yes, I said drivers may chose to use US-58 as an "alternate", but it's not going to be the main route. On a good day, I-81 to I-64 will be preferred by most, as it currently is. If there's horrible congestion, probably not.
Again, where is the survey data? YOU made the claim, YOU provide the verification.
Quote from: sprjus4 on July 02, 2019, 04:11:25 PM
I'll use US-460 if I-64 has congestion. If I-64 is clear, I will take I-64 hands down, no questions asked.
Again, you don't know ahead of time when you commit to a route whether there will be serious congestion and/or a major incident(s), that occurs -after- you are committed to the route and partway down the route.
In that case your goose is cooked.
Quote from: sprjus4 on July 02, 2019, 04:11:25 PM
Quote from: Beltway on July 02, 2019, 03:54:19 PM
you ignore the fact that US-58 is 28 miles shorter.
Do you think that a driver of a passenger vehicle cares about a 28 mile difference? That's a wash on a long-distance trip like that. I've made the same argument regarding other highways.
It is no "wash" especially for vehicles that get poorer mileage, when that is about 10% of the trip, that added to the issues along I-81 and parts of I-64.
Quote from: sprjus4 on July 02, 2019, 04:11:25 PM
If distance was a big thing, all the traffic would get off at Roanoke, and take the 4-lane US-460 all the way. Less distance than I-81 to I-64 is, and not much slower. But most people don't. They continue to stay on 70 mph interstate highways all the way to Hampton Roads.
US-460 has the aforementioned issues where parts don't meet 4-lane divided arterial standards, and you have to use an urbanized section to connect eastward from I-581.
Nevertheless, I would normally utilize US-460 and US-360 between Richmond and Roanoke, as it is a much more pleasant and reliable trip, it is 25 miles shorter, the times are within a few minutes. Doesn't involve the undivided sections east of Petersburg.
Quote from: sprjus4 on July 02, 2019, 04:11:25 PM
US-58 will be more beneficial as a shortcut for tractor trailers if anything.
Beneficial for 4-wheelers as well.
Quote from: sprjus4 on July 02, 2019, 04:11:25 PM
Quote from: Beltway on July 02, 2019, 03:54:19 PM
A completed 4-lane US-58 would have a high reliability factor with a low probability of incident delay.
Once I-81 has $2.2 billion worth of upgrades, reliability on that highway will be higher, and I-64 is generally fine until east of Richmond. Once 6-lanes is completed and the HRBT is completed, reliability on that highway will be higher.
28 miles of I-64 widening is as yet unfunded. How much of I-81 between Wytheville and Staunton will be widened?
Quote from: sprjus4 on July 02, 2019, 04:11:25 PM
Quote from: Beltway on July 02, 2019, 03:54:19 PM
I-64 won't be 6-lanes all the way to Richmond in 2023.
Is US-58 fully funded and under construction or close to construction? I'll believe it when you provide official links and sources.
Crooked Oak, Lovers Leap and Vesta
http://usroute58.com/
http://syip.virginiadot.org/Pages/lineitemDetails.aspx?syp_scenario_id=247&line_item_id=27339
http://syip.virginiadot.org/Pages/lineitemDetails.aspx?syp_scenario_id=247&line_item_id=27341
http://syip.virginiadot.org/Pages/lineitemDetails.aspx?syp_scenario_id=247&line_item_id=27342
Quote from: sprjus4 on July 02, 2019, 04:11:25 PM
Quote from: Beltway on July 02, 2019, 04:02:18 PM
That N.C. route is 34 miles longer than US-58, and almost 1/2 of it is non-Interstate, and it looks very circuitous on a map, more than the reality, but it just plain looks nasty. I can't imagine anyone but a roadgeek might use that between Wytheville and Norfolk.
False. 1/2 of it may not be interstate posted, but it is all 65 - 70 mph freeway. It's also apart of Future I-74, and when the Winston-Salem Bypass is completed in the next few years (currently under construction), that will make the drive even easier as traffic will be able to bypass Winston-Salem on a 6-lane rural 65 mph freeway, as opposed to current substandard, congestion prone 55 mph urban freeway through there now.
You still have to use US-58 east of South Hill all the way to Norfolk.
Quote from: sprjus4 on July 02, 2019, 04:11:25 PM
If nobody would use it, why does Google route me that way between Wytheville and Emporia during non-peak hours?
A bug in the system? Why only in non-peak hours? Why go 34 extra miles and have to deal with the central N.C. major metros?
Why go 34 extra miles and give Murphy's Law that many more miles for something to go wrong on the highway?
Quote from: sprjus4 on July 02, 2019, 04:11:25 PM
Again, most passenger vehicle drivers aren't strict on mileage as you continue to spew and claim.
Nothing "strict" about 30 miles more on a 300-mile trip.
Quote from: sprjus4 on July 02, 2019, 04:11:25 PM
20-30 miles per gallon, and fuel efficiency in vehicles make this a wash. These are huge tractor trailers with 3-5 miles per gallon, and low fuel efficiency.
What about an SUV that gets 12 to 15 mpg, and then even less when heavily loaded and/or pulling a trailer?
Quote from: Beltway on July 02, 2019, 07:11:25 PM
YOU made the claim.
And you countered my claim. If you're going to counter my claim, produce the data.
From my experience, most drivers would prefer interstate highways over arterial highways. If you can counter that, that's fine, provide it. I'm sharing what I'm aware of.
Quote from: Beltway on July 02, 2019, 07:11:25 PM
Reason to avoid it if possible, especially at peak travel times.
Take VA-288 or I-295 to US-460.
Quote from: Beltway on July 02, 2019, 07:11:25 PM
Again, where is the survey data? YOU made the claim, YOU provide the verification.
When US-58 is 4-laned, let's take a look at the traffic data. I'm willing to bet traffic counts aren't going increase significantly along US-58, and will remain generally static on the existing routing. Correction, truck traffic counts will increase. Not so sure about 2-axle vehicles.
Quote from: Beltway on July 02, 2019, 07:11:25 PM
Again, you don't know ahead of time when you commit to a route whether there will be serious congestion and/or a major incident(s), that occurs -after- you are committed to the route and partway down the route.
Get off and go around it. This past weekend, coming back from Richmond on I-64, there was a wreck in the widening work zone that had a lane closed - massive congestion. I got off at VA-143, dipped around it, and got back on at VA-199. No problems. It's not that hard. I'd rather stick with interstates and bypass congestion when needed rather than take an arterial route for 300+ miles. Now, if I-64 and I-81 had a large amount of congestion overall, that would be something to avoid and indeed take an improved US-58.
Quote from: Beltway on July 02, 2019, 07:11:25 PM
It is no "wash" especially for vehicles that get poorer mileage, when that is about 10% of the trip
Those vehicles can take the shorter route. Us 70% who don't have mileage issues will continue sticking with I-81 and I-64 overall, and the new 20%, including yourself, who would prefer an improved US-58 will go to that.
Quote from: Beltway on July 02, 2019, 07:11:25 PM
US-460 has the aforementioned issues where parts don't meet 4-lane divided arterial standards, and you have to use an urbanized section to connect eastward from I-581.
Divided or not - is there a difference? It's 55 mph rural highway that goes through a few towns. It adequately serves traffic with no issues. Just because there isn't a 40 foot grassy median doesn't change or impact travel times.
As for Roanoke, you don't use I-581 at all. You take I-81 to US-220 Alt, then that down to US-460 east. That bypasses your "urbanized" section.
Quote from: Beltway on July 02, 2019, 07:11:25 PM
Nevertheless, I would normally utilize US-460 and US-360 between Richmond and Roanoke, as it is a much more pleasant and reliable trip, it is 25 miles shorter, the times are within a few minutes.
That's fine - that's your preference. That doesn't mean because it's your preference that 80% of other people except "road geeks" are going follow it. You don't seem to have a problem driving hundreds of miles of arterial highways when an interstate option is available. You've followed these highways' progress and have driven them for decades. Not everybody is like that - and quite frankly from my experience as noted above, most people aren't accustomed like that and would still rather follow interstate highways.
For me, I-64 to I-81 would be the preferred route from Richmond to Roanoke. 25 miles is a wash in my case. It's already my preferred route from Norfolk to Roanoke.
Quote from: Beltway on July 02, 2019, 07:11:25 PM
Doesn't involve the undivided sections east of Petersburg.
Good for you.
Quote from: Beltway on July 02, 2019, 07:11:25 PM
A bug in the system? Why only in non-peak hours? Why go 34 extra miles and have to deal with the central N.C. major metros?
I-77 to I-74 to I-85 to US-58 is still less mileage than I-81 to I-64 is - so your question would still apply to the majority of drivers who use I-81 to I-64 as well.
It's only non-peak hours now because of congestion in Winston-Salem during peak hours that really choke things down. The Winston-Salem I-74 6-lane 65 mph rural freeway bypass is currently under construction, and not only will it avoid Downtown and 55 mph speed limits, it will also shave 6 miles off the trip now that I'm looking at it on a map. So you can take your 34 extra miles down to 28 miles.
With the completion of the Winston-Salem Bypass, travelers will have a bypass around Winston-Salem that will shave 6 miles and 10 minutes off the current trip - and it's currently the same amount of travel time taking US-58 all the way, so now that NC "dip down" will be even faster than US-58 when the $1.7 billion bypass is completed in the next few years.
Travelers will also be able to bypass rush hour congestion in Greensboro by using I-73 to I-85 around the south side - that adds 3 additional miles, and there's not much urban areas it passes through east of there.
Now that I'm thinking about it, when the Winston-Salem Bypass is completed, I-77 to I-74 to I-85 may be better than I-64 to I-81, and it will certainly still be faster than US-58 with the completion of the Winston-Salem Bypass.
Quote from: Beltway on July 02, 2019, 07:11:25 PM
Nothing "strict" about 30 miles more on a 300-mile trip.
I'll go 50 miles more. It doesn't really affect much in my case. If it's faster or similar travel times, I'll stick with the interstates. Mileage isn't a big factor for me - nor is it to a lot of drivers.
And yes, I know there's people like tractor trailers and certain vehicles that are mileage strict - and they can take their routes as they please.
Quote from: Beltway on July 02, 2019, 07:11:25 PM
Crooked Oak, Lovers Leap and Vesta
http://usroute58.com/
http://syip.virginiadot.org/Pages/lineitemDetails.aspx?syp_scenario_id=247&line_item_id=27339
http://syip.virginiadot.org/Pages/lineitemDetails.aspx?syp_scenario_id=247&line_item_id=27341
http://syip.virginiadot.org/Pages/lineitemDetails.aspx?syp_scenario_id=247&line_item_id=27342
By 2024, the Winston-Salem Bypass will be completed
(it's already under construction now, you can see it on Google Maps aerial), and that will shave about 10 minutes of travel time off the NC dip, and bypass the congested Winston-Salem Downtown area and will beat US-58 travel time wise. And remember - it's still even longer to take I-64 to I-81, so if you claim it's just "roadgeeks" taking the southern route, you better call the majority of drivers who use I-64 to I-81 "roadgeeks" as well.
Quote from: sprjus4 on July 02, 2019, 08:53:23 PM
Quote from: Beltway on July 02, 2019, 07:11:25 PM
Again, you don't know ahead of time when you commit to a route whether there will be serious congestion and/or a major incident(s), that occurs -after- you are committed to the route and partway down the route.
Get off and go around it. This past weekend, coming back from Richmond on I-64, there was a wreck in the widening work zone that had a lane closed - massive congestion. I got off at VA-143, dipped around it, and got back on at VA-199. No problems. It's not that hard. I'd rather stick with interstates and bypass congestion when needed rather than take an arterial route for 300+ miles.
You know fullwell it is not that simple. You have to know where the blockage is, what are the alternate routes, and then deal with the congestion on those alternates.
Given limited data, it may be better to stay in the mess on the Interstate rather than shoot craps and wind up in a worse situation if you leave.
How about when I was heading north on I-81 at Fort Chiswell and VMS said that the highway was blocked by a truck wreck at Christiansburg? That is a tough nut to crack for wherever you are heading. Richmond in my case, but how about Washington? Harrisburg? New York?
Quote from: sprjus4 on July 02, 2019, 08:53:23 PM
Quote from: Beltway on July 02, 2019, 07:11:25 PM
US-460 has the aforementioned issues where parts don't meet 4-lane divided arterial standards, and you have to use an urbanized section to connect eastward from I-581.
Divided or not - is there a difference? It's 55 mph rural highway that goes through a few towns. It adequately serves traffic with no issues. Just because there isn't a 40 foot grassy median doesn't change or impact travel times.
Those towns don't have bypasses, and travel times are definitely slower than on US-460 west of Petersburg.
Quote from: sprjus4 on July 02, 2019, 08:53:23 PM
As for Roanoke, you don't use I-581 at all. You take I-81 to US-220 Alt, then that down to US-460 east. That bypasses your "urbanized" section.
Diagonal route, 5 miles longer than I-581 to US-460.
Quote from: sprjus4 on July 02, 2019, 08:53:23 PM
Quote from: Beltway on July 02, 2019, 07:11:25 PM
Nevertheless, I would normally utilize US-460 and US-360 between Richmond and Roanoke, as it is a much more pleasant and reliable trip, it is 25 miles shorter, the times are within a few minutes.
That's fine - that's your preference. That doesn't mean because it's your preference that 80% of other people except "road geeks" are going follow it. You don't seem to have a problem driving hundreds of miles of arterial highways when an interstate option is available. You've followed these highways' progress and have driven them for decades. Not everybody is like that - and quite frankly from my experience as noted above, most people aren't accustomed like that and would still rather follow interstate highways.
Again, you are making claims about what most people do, without citing any empirical data.
Quote from: sprjus4 on July 02, 2019, 08:53:23 PM
Quote from: Beltway on July 02, 2019, 07:11:25 PM
Why only in non-peak hours? Why go 34 extra miles and have to deal with the central N.C. major metros?
I-77 to I-74 to I-85 to US-58 is still less mileage than I-81 to I-64 is - so your question would still apply to the majority of drivers who use I-81 to I-64 as well.
A couple miles less. Dipping well down into the Tar Heel State when traveling between western Virginia and southeastern Virginia is non-intuitive. About 40% of that trip is non-Interstate, and I thought you didn't like routes like that.
Quote from: sprjus4 on July 02, 2019, 08:53:23 PM
It's only non-peak hours now because of congestion in Winston-Salem during peak hours that really choke things down. The Winston-Salem I-74 6-lane 65 mph rural freeway bypass is currently under construction, and not only will it avoid Downtown and 55 mph speed limits, it will also shave 6 miles off the trip now that I'm looking at it on a map. So you can take your 34 extra miles down to 28 miles.
Looks like only 2 miles, 3 at best.
Why deal with Winston, Greensboro, and Raleigh-Durham at all if you don't need to?
Quote from: sprjus4 on July 02, 2019, 08:53:23 PM
And remember - it's still even longer to take I-64 to I-81, so if you claim it's just "roadgeeks" taking the southern route, you better call the majority of drivers who use I-64 to I-81 "roadgeeks" as well.
You seem to have a love affair with Interstate highways. They often provide optimum routing, but not always.
You can take an all-Interstate route between Richmond (or Washington) and Buffalo NY, but guess what - it is not the preferred route between those cities.
Quote from: Beltway on July 03, 2019, 12:02:41 AM
You know fullwell it is not that simple. You have to know where the blockage is, what are the alternate routes, and then deal with the congestion on those alternates.
Waze or Google Maps are your friend in that situation. I didn't know of the detour routing around Williamsburg until Waze re-routed me around the congestion automatically. I followed it, and sure enough, it was 45-55 mph highway, and avoided a 3 mile backup on the interstate - which was packed the entire way, and now being forced down to 1 lane.
Quote from: Beltway on July 03, 2019, 12:02:41 AM
Given limited data, it may be better to stay in the mess on the Interstate rather than shoot craps and wind up in a worse situation if you leave.
See my comments above.
Quote from: Beltway on July 03, 2019, 12:02:41 AM
How about when I was heading north on I-81 at Fort Chiswell and VMS said that the highway was blocked by a truck wreck at Christiansburg? That is a tough nut to crack for wherever you are heading. Richmond in my case, but how about Washington? Harrisburg? New York?
Where at Christiansburg? If it was north of US-460, then four-lane US-460 is a detour around it. If south of US-460, US-11.
Quote from: Beltway on July 03, 2019, 12:02:41 AM
Those towns don't have bypasses, and travel times are definitely slower than on US-460 west of Petersburg.
7 minutes slower than a consistent 60 mph divided highway. Current travel time 57 minutes for 50 miles, at 60 mph, that's 50 minutes. If you're strict on mileage, still a good option.
If they had built the toll road, that would have shaved off 15 minutes, 50 miles at 70 mph is 42 minutes.
Quote from: Beltway on July 03, 2019, 12:02:41 AM
Diagonal route, 5 miles longer than I-581 to US-460.
Closer to 1.5 miles. Check before you post. Do a custom route, and click on the I-81 NB lanes before the I-581 departure, then click on the US-460 east lanes after the US-220 alt junction. It will give you detailed routing info, times, and distances.
I-581 to US-460 is 11 miles, 17 minutes. I-81 to US-220 Alt is 12.5 miles, 15 minutes.
The first option would likely be longer during congestion - I say that from experience as I've used that route before to Norfolk. Still prefer I-81 to I-64 overall personally.
Quote from: Beltway on July 03, 2019, 12:02:41 AM
Again, you are making claims about what most people do, without citing any empirical data.
I said above from my experience, from people I know, people I've talked to, etc. the overall preference are interstate highways. And I'm not counting anyone within this forum, rather people I know personally.
If your experiences with people you know outside of this forum and not from this forum speaks differently, provide a counter. I'm just sharing what my experience with it is.
Quote from: Beltway on July 03, 2019, 12:02:41 AM
Looks like only 2 miles, 3 at best.
Why deal with Winston, Greensboro, and Raleigh-Durham at all if you don't need to?
After drawing out the routing of the new I-74 on Google My Maps after drawing it out exactly following the design plans, and comparing it to the existing route, it's in reality about 4 miles, not the 6 or 2 we predicted. The current routing is 16 miles, the bypass is 12 miles. About 10 minutes of travel time on the bypass routing
(65 mph), and 17 minutes on the current routing
(55-60 mph).
EDIT - Here's a detailed map that depicts the beltway - https://www.arcgis.com/home/webmap/viewer.html?webmap=8c59239de60146cbb2d6f8ce8f190494
The segment between I-40 Business and and US-311 is under construction, with the segment between US-158 and I-40 Business scheduled to open at the end of the year. The remaining segments between I-40 and I-74 north of Winston-Salem are slated to begin construction in the next couple of years, and will be almost or fully completed by the 2024 scheduled opening of the US-58 four-lane.
The $1.7 billion 6-lane 65 mph 30-mile freeway (consisting of I-74 and I-274) will be toll free when completed, so paying tolls won't be an obstacle to taking this faster routing over US-58.
The current routing runs through the heart of Downtown Winston-Salem on 4-lane urban 55 mph freeway, whereas the bypass is a 6-lane rural 65 mph freeway that completely bypasses it. As for Greensboro, adding 2 miles of the trip would route you onto the Greensboro Bypass (I-73 and I-85) if there happens to be some congestion there and avoid it, the short Durham stretch of I-85 is 8-lanes wide with auxiliary lanes between the exits, wide enough I've never witnessed any congestion on that stretch, even during the heart of rush hour. You don't pass through Raleigh on that route, I-85 does not go through Raleigh.
You can do a rush hour trip on the southern dip and bypass all of the metropolitan areas once I-74 is built around Winston-Salem and maintain interstate speeds with no stop lights, no slower speed zones, etc. between Hillsville and South Hill.
Right now Google gives me these options from Wytheville to Norfolk -
- I-77 to I-74 to I-85 to US-58 - 5 hours 39 minutes, 351 miles
- I-81 to US-460 - 5 hours 45 minutes, 316 miles
- I-81 to I-64 - 5 hours 48 minutes, 346 miles
Currently, it's predicting rush hour traffic by the time arriving in Norfolk, so it's advising to not go that way. US-58 isn't even an option that someone driving would be given, except during rush hour in Winston-Salem, which of course, will be fixed by 2024 when I-74 is completed. You have to do a custom route to create that. After doing a custom route, I see I-77 to US-58 is 5 hours 47 minutes, 317 miles.
US-58 will have it's travel time shaved by 5 minutes if the relocated / widened US-58 is completed, and the Winston-Salem routing will have 7 minutes shaved when completed. Travel times could look something like this when the Winston-Salem Bypass and US-58 relocation / widening is completed, and congestion is being factored in at Hampton Roads.
- I-77 to I-74 to I-85 to US-58 - 5 hours 32 minutes, 347 miles
- I-77 to US-58 - 5 hours, 42 minutes, 317 miles
- I-81 to I-64 - 5 hours 48 minutes, 346 miles
I-77 to I-74 to I-85 to US-58 still looks the better choice over US-58 in this case time wise. If I was going such a route in 2024 or beyond, I would pick the former. 10 minutes faster, and interstate routing over arterial. The 30 miles in that case is a wash for me, and as more and more vehicles are becoming fuel efficient, mileage will be less and less a factor for passenger vehicles.
Quote from: Beltway on July 03, 2019, 12:02:41 AM
Dipping well down into the Tar Heel State when traveling between western Virginia and southeastern Virginia is non-intuitive. About 40% of that trip is non-Interstate, and I thought you didn't like routes like that.
If there's a wreck on I-81 or I'm timed to get into Norfolk at rush hour, I'd rather do the dip than US-58 all the way across. See my time comparison above. Yes, South Hill to Norfolk is arterial, but Hillsville to South Hill is interstate, and would have bypasses of every metropolitan area, and mostly be a traffic free ride and interstate speeds.
Also, more places to stop on the dip routing. Fast food restaurants, truck stops, rest areas, etc. Don't see much of that on US-58, and having more of those options is another factor driving me towards the southern routing. And in 2024 when US-58 and Winston-Salem are completed, the dip will be 10 minutes faster because of time and mileage shaved from the bypass. Proven above.
Quote from: Beltway on July 03, 2019, 12:02:41 AM
You can take an all-Interstate route between Richmond (or Washington) and Buffalo NY, but guess what - it is not the preferred route between those cities.
It's only 4 minutes slower per Google Maps. I would definitely consider it an option, and if traveling at night, I would definitely prefer that over the 2-lane, windy roadway for 150 miles.
It's preference. If you don't like going the extra few minutes and additional miles, then don't. If you do, then do. I'm not going to change my routing preferences because you have different preferences, and just as likely, you're not going to change yours because I have different ones.
Quote from: sprjus4 on July 03, 2019, 11:36:07 AM
Quote from: Beltway on July 03, 2019, 12:02:41 AM
You know fullwell it is not that simple. You have to know where the blockage is, what are the alternate routes, and then deal with the congestion on those alternates.
Waze or Google Maps are your friend in that situation. I didn't know of the detour routing around Williamsburg until Waze re-routed me around the congestion automatically. I followed it, and sure enough, it was 45-55 mph highway, and avoided a 3 mile backup on the interstate - which was packed the entire way, and now being forced down to 1 lane.
I don't use Waze or Google Maps in my car and neither do many other people.
What if you are stuck in the jam and it isn't moving an inch and the only quick way out would be backing up, if that is even possible in that situation?
What if there are no exits between you and the incident?
Interstate incidents have too many variables to use some "one size fits all" approach to how you would deal with it.
Quote from: sprjus4 on July 03, 2019, 11:36:07 AM
Quote from: Beltway on July 03, 2019, 12:02:41 AM
Given limited data, it may be better to stay in the mess on the Interstate rather than shoot craps and wind up in a worse situation if you leave.
See my comments above.
See -my- comments above.
Quote from: sprjus4 on July 03, 2019, 11:36:07 AM
Quote from: Beltway on July 03, 2019, 12:02:41 AM
How about when I was heading north on I-81 at Fort Chiswell and VMS said that the highway was blocked by a truck wreck at Christiansburg? That is a tough nut to crack for wherever you are heading. Richmond in my case, but how about Washington? Harrisburg? New York?
Where at Christiansburg? If it was north of US-460, then four-lane US-460 is a detour around it. If south of US-460, US-11.
Those highways would be jammed, and in this case the VMS recommended exiting immediately and finding another route, and avoiding the Christiansburg/Roanoke area.
Quote from: sprjus4 on July 03, 2019, 11:36:07 AM
Quote from: Beltway on July 03, 2019, 12:02:41 AM
Those towns don't have bypasses, and travel times are definitely slower than on US-460 west of Petersburg.
If they had built the toll road, that would have shaved off 15 minutes, 50 miles at 70 mph is 42 minutes.
Coulda, woulda, shoulda ... I have made my position clear about that highway.
Quote from: sprjus4 on July 03, 2019, 11:36:07 AM
Quote from: Beltway on July 03, 2019, 12:02:41 AM
Diagonal route, 5 miles longer than I-581 to US-460.
Closer to 1.5 miles.
Even Google Maps doesn't recommend using Alt US-220
Quote from: sprjus4 on July 03, 2019, 11:36:07 AM
Quote from: Beltway on July 03, 2019, 12:02:41 AM
Again, you are making claims about what most people do, without citing any empirical data.
I said above from my experience, from people I know, people I've talked to, etc. the overall preference are interstate highways. And I'm not counting anyone within this forum, rather people I know personally.
So you have talked to a few people and have made broad conclusions, something I have not done here.
Quote from: sprjus4 on July 03, 2019, 11:36:07 AM
Quote from: Beltway on July 03, 2019, 12:02:41 AM
Looks like only 2 miles, 3 at best.
Why deal with Winston, Greensboro, and Raleigh-Durham at all if you don't need to?
After drawing out the routing of the new I-74 on Google My Maps after drawing it out exactly following the
It leaves the Interstate system for about 40% of the route, something that you have an antipathy for.
Good luck trying to get people to dip way down to make that trip thru Tarheeler Land.
Quote from: sprjus4 on July 03, 2019, 11:36:07 AM
If there's a wreck on I-81 or I'm timed to get into Norfolk at rush hour, I'd rather do the dip than US-58 all the way across.
How many times do I have to repeat the fact that the I-81 or I-64 incident(s) can happen after you have committed to that route and you are too far down the road to feasibly go back to US-58?
By utilizing US-58 all the way you have a miniscule chance of encountering what happens routinely on I-81 and I-64, incidents that can easily add one to two hours to total travel time.
I have not yet needed to make that trip, but even today I would most likely utilize US-58 all the way between Bowers Hill and I-77.
Quote from: sprjus4 on July 03, 2019, 11:36:07 AM
Quote from: Beltway on July 03, 2019, 12:02:41 AM
You can take an all-Interstate route between Richmond (or Washington) and Buffalo NY, but guess what - it is not the preferred route between those cities.
It's only 4 minutes slower per Google Maps. I would definitely consider it an option, and if traveling at night, I would definitely prefer that over the 2-lane, windy roadway for 150 miles.
About 70 miles of 2-lane, avoids about 200 miles of 10 cent per mile turnpikes, and at least 56 miles shorter.
My friends in the Buffalo area would -not- go by way of Pittsburgh.
Quote from: Beltway on July 03, 2019, 03:30:20 PM
neither do many other people.
You need to do some fact checking. Waze is a user-based app, and has heavy usage all over the country. You should research about it before making assumptions like "many people don't use it". If many people didn't use it, it wouldn't be that reliable. It's very reliable, and many people -do- use it. Ditto with Google Maps.
Quote from: Beltway on July 03, 2019, 03:30:20 PM
Even Google Maps doesn't recommend using Alt US-220
(https://i.ibb.co/9bBxWzF/US220Alt.png)
Even Google Maps -does- recommend using Alt US-220.
Provide a screenshot indicating it does not.
Quote from: Beltway on July 03, 2019, 03:30:20 PM
It leaves the Interstate system for about 40% of the route, something that you have an antipathy for.
Quote from: Beltway on July 03, 2019, 03:30:20 PM
If there's a wreck on I-81 or I'm timed to get into Norfolk at rush hour, I'd rather do the dip than US-58 all the way across.
You missed the entire point. I'm saying if there was a wreck on I-81 or rush hour traffic on I-64 and I was desiring to avoid I-81 and I-64 all together, I'd rather dip into North Carolina and back up at South Hill or Emporia rather than US-58 all the way across. It's more interstate driving than US-58 is, even if the latter end of it is arterial. Remember, us folks in Hampton Roads have to use US-58 anyways coming from the south, so that route is not foreign unlike US-58 west of South Hill which is.
Quote from: Beltway on July 03, 2019, 03:30:20 PM
Good luck trying to get people to dip way down to make that trip thru Tarheeler Land.
Good luck trying to sway people to US-58. During off-peak hours, Google Maps automatically routes me that way, doesn't even recommend US-58, and once the Winston-Salem Beltway is completed, that rush hour situation in Winston-Salem won't exist as it will be bypassed, and the route cut by 7 minutes.
As another poster mentioned, most people follow what Google Maps tells them without question. If the Google Maps tells them I-77 to I-74 to I-85 to US-58, they're going to follow that. It does not even recommend US-58, as I indicated.
What do you not get about that?
Quote from: Beltway on July 03, 2019, 03:30:20 PM
My friends in the Buffalo area would -not- go by way of Pittsburgh.
If you factor in tolls, that may be a different story, however someone foreign to the area may opt to stay with the interstate especially at night. I know people who do not prefer two-lane driving at night, especially on long-distance routes they're unfamiliar with.
During the day, if the tolls are truly that high, I would consider the two-lane routing, but I would not attempt it at night.
Quote from: sprjus4 on July 03, 2019, 03:49:48 PM
Quote from: Beltway on July 03, 2019, 03:30:20 PM
neither do many other people.
You need to do some fact checking. Waze is a user-based app, and has heavy usage all over the country. You should research about it before making assumptions like "many people don't use it". If many people didn't use it, it wouldn't be that reliable. It's very reliable, and many people -do- use it. Ditto with Google Maps.
Regardless, again, there are any number of incident scenarios where being notified about it won't prevent you from being stuck in it for maybe an hour or more, or from being shunted onto an alternate route that is horribly congested from the diverted traffic.
I would rather avoid such a highway if there was a reasonable competitor route that wasn't subject to those kind of incidents happening routinely.
Quote from: sprjus4 on July 03, 2019, 03:49:48 PM
Quote from: Beltway on July 03, 2019, 03:30:20 PM
Even Google Maps doesn't recommend using Alt US-220
Even Google Maps -does- recommend using Alt US-220.
Not unless you utilized the cursor to manually move the route.
Doesn't happen automatically.
Quote from: sprjus4 on July 03, 2019, 03:49:48 PM
During the day, if the tolls are truly that high, I would consider the two-lane routing, but I would not attempt it at night.
Those sections of US-20A do not allow thru trucks and are easily negotiable at night.
The US-219 section on the western route allows trucks but has relatively low volumes at night and also is easily negotiable.
Breezewood is another motoring insult that you encounter when routing by way of Pittsburgh.
Quote from: Beltway on July 03, 2019, 04:00:24 PM
Not unless you utilized the cursor to manually move the route.
Doesn't happen automatically.
Screenshot it then. It happened automatically on my end. If you use the cursor to manually adjust the route, it won't give you the alternative routings as it does on mine. That was auto-generated based on traffic conditions.
Do I need to do a whole screen recording just to prove it?
Quote from: Beltway on July 03, 2019, 04:00:24 PM
I would rather avoid such a highway if there was a reasonable competitor route that wasn't subject to those kind of incidents happening routinely.
If I was aware of a massive wreck or major congestion ahead of time, I'd do the dip into NC on I-77, I-74, I-85, and US-58 as Google would recommend to me as the next best routing, and which again, doesn't even make a peep about US-58. But if I'm already up I-81 and something happens, I'll figure out a way around it or sit through traffic.
Just my preferences.
Quote from: sprjus4 on July 03, 2019, 04:04:05 PM
Quote from: Beltway on July 03, 2019, 04:00:24 PM
Not unless you utilized the cursor to manually move the route.
Doesn't happen automatically.
Screenshot it then. It happened automatically on my end. If you use the cursor to manually adjust the route, it won't give you the alternative routings as it does on mine. That was auto-generated based on traffic conditions.
Do I need to do a whole screen recording just to prove it?
I have run it at least 5 different times and I didn't use local points but at least Lynchburg on the east side and Christiansburg on the west side.
No Alt US-220, but Google Maps is far from perfect, and other people would be subject to these inconsistencies as well.
Quote from: sprjus4 on July 03, 2019, 04:05:46 PM
Quote from: Beltway on July 03, 2019, 04:00:24 PM
I would rather avoid such a highway if there was a reasonable competitor route that wasn't subject to those kind of incidents happening routinely.
If I was aware of a massive wreck or major congestion ahead of time, I'd do the dip into NC on I-77, I-74, I-85, and US-58 as Google would recommend to me as the next best routing, and which again, doesn't even make a peep about US-58.
I just plugged in Wytheville-Norfolk, and it listed 3 routes -- via US-58, via US-460 and via I-64 and I-81.
No N.C., but again Google Maps is not always consistent. Another reason why not to over-rely on Internet tools for road routings.
Quote from: Beltway on July 03, 2019, 04:10:21 PM
I have run it at least 5 different times and I didn't use local points but at least Lynchburg on the east side and Christiansburg on the west side.
No Alt US-220, but Google Maps is far from perfect, and other people would be subject to these inconsistencies as well.
(https://i.ibb.co/PgWQ7xf/US220-Alt2.png)
Still recommends Alt US-220 on a long-distance routing.
If en-route and Google initially routed down US-460 and I-581, but then traffic formed while nearby, Google Maps would change routings while en-route after notifying the user of a faster route. Google Maps and Waze both use real-time traffic conditions to find the best routes that avoid the most traffic possible.
I use a phone mount while driving so I'm not physically holding my phone while using it, and many newer cars
(past 1-2 years) also support Google Maps and Waze on Apple CarPlay which would bring those applications over your center console if your car supports CarPlay and you have an iPhone.
Quote from: Beltway on July 03, 2019, 04:14:30 PM
I just plugged in Wytheville-Norfolk, and it listed 3 routes -- via US-58, via US-460 and via I-64 and I-81.
No N.C., but again Google Maps is not always consistent. Another reason why not to over-rely on Internet tools for road routings.
I've already mentioned this several times... during peak hours such as now the North Carolina routing is not mentioned due to congestion in Winston-Salem. If you plug the route during off-peak hours, it will show that route. Also consider when I-74 is completed around Winston-Salem, 7 minutes will be shaved off that routing, and will bypass the congested area with a 6-lane 65 mph rural freeway facility.
(https://i.ibb.co/qjkS1cR/Wytheville-Norfolk.png)
Interestingly it actually still shows that as an option even during peak hours... again no peep of US-58.
Doing a custom routing, the travel times are closer and more similar on US-58, but they tend to be slower on US-58 when done during off-peak hours.
There's currently a slowdown being factored in Winston-Salem that is causing 7 minutes of delay. That NC routing is usually around 5 hours 30 minutes, with US-58 around 5 hours 38 minutes.
And now that congestion continues to build in Winston-Salem, now Google advises US-58 on a routing from north of Hillsville to Norfolk. Notice how it says "fastest route -now-, -avoids- crashes on US-52". Normally that US-52 NC routing is faster.
(https://i.ibb.co/qdrjK7C/US58-Avoids-Crash.png)
Quote from: Beltway on July 03, 2019, 03:30:20 PM
Quote from: sprjus4 on July 03, 2019, 11:36:07 AM
Quote from: Beltway on July 03, 2019, 12:02:41 AM
You can take an all-Interstate route between Richmond (or Washington) and Buffalo NY, but guess what - it is not the preferred route between those cities.
It's only 4 minutes slower per Google Maps. I would definitely consider it an option, and if traveling at night, I would definitely prefer that over the 2-lane, windy roadway for 150 miles.
About 70 miles of 2-lane, avoids about 200 miles of 10 cent per mile turnpikes, and at least 56 miles shorter.
My friends in the Buffalo area would -not- go by way of Pittsburgh.
I don't think that's necessarily comparable to the Virginia example(s), but FWIW, I definitely wouldn't go through Pittsburgh either. I'd either take the recommended US 219 route, or, if I wanted to avoid the worst part of US 219, then US 15 to I-99 to I-86 to I-390 to US 20A would be the next-best option. In fact, the latter is mostly freeway and will become the de-facto routing after CSVT is complete.
Quote from: sprjus4 on July 03, 2019, 04:19:45 PM
Interestingly it actually still shows that as an option even during peak hours... again no peep of US-58.
All this proves is that Google Maps is inconsistent to the point of questioning its results.
I got no "peep" of N.C. routings, and no "peep" of Alt US-220 routings.
Quote from: Beltway on July 03, 2019, 04:25:34 PM
I got no "peep" of N.C. routings, and no "peep" of Alt US-220 routings.
Two things - screenshot it first off.
Secondly - I already said the NC routing isn't showing due to congestion in Winston-Salem. See my post above which you continuously ignore regarding this factor.
Try doing a routing at 11 am, and take a screenshot of it. Then I'll believe it.
EDIT - Here's another thing. Try Norfolk to Wytheville. My options -
I-64 to I-81 - 5 hours 23 minutes - 351 miles
US-460 to I-81 - 5 hours 37 minutes - 316 miles
US-58 to I-85 to I-74 to I-77 - 5 hours 40 minutes - 352 miles
I do a custom routing to US-58, and it gives me this - 5 hours 45 minutes - 318 miles
Seems the NC dip is faster...
:fight:
:paranoid:
Quote from: sprjus4 on July 03, 2019, 04:26:56 PM
Quote from: Beltway on July 03, 2019, 04:25:34 PM
I got no "peep" of N.C. routings, and no "peep" of Alt US-220 routings.
Two things - screenshot it first off.
Secondly - I already said the NC routing isn't showing due to congestion in Winston-Salem. See my post above which you continuously ignore regarding this factor.
Try doing a routing at 11 am, and take a screenshot of it. Then I'll believe it.
This is too complicated. I worked in the IT field for 35 years, in a number of high level technical positions and tasks.
Based on all these "output variations" with Google Maps, I will use it for a general trip planning tool but not something for any precise accuracy.
Quote from: sprjus4 on July 03, 2019, 04:26:56 PM
Here's another thing. Try Norfolk to Wytheville. My options -
I-64 to I-81 - 5 hours 23 minutes - 351 miles
US-460 to I-81 - 5 hours 37 minutes - 316 miles
US-58 to I-85 to I-74 to I-77 - 5 hours 40 minutes - 352 miles
I do a custom routing to US-58, and it gives me this - 5 hours 45 minutes - 318 miles
Seems the NC dip is faster...
A "custom routing to US-58"? Like I said, this is too complicated to spend so much time working with this tool and arguing with someone about the results.
Another factor for many people who make use of paper maps and atlases (like myself even with all my IT experience), is that they don't show this routing because the VA/NC southern border is straight enough that you can't see enough in either state map
to see your N.C. I-40 routing in the first place.
I just reviewed both state official highway maps and Rand McNally atlas.
I do have a regional paper map that shows both states but I use it rarely and don't know where it is.
For someone going say between Bristol and Norfolk, it just won't enter in the minds of the typical person to think of not making the whole trip within Virginia.
Quote from: Beltway on July 03, 2019, 08:32:56 PM
A "custom routing to US-58"?
Google does not present that as a routing option normally. I have to manually adjust the routing by creating a point on US-58 for that to show.
Quote from: Beltway on July 03, 2019, 08:32:56 PM
Another factor for many people who make use of paper maps and atlases
Factor a lot of people also use GPS, Google Maps, Waze, and other routing software as well. Most state DOTs even advise motorist check traffic information, use Waze, etc. when driving. VDOT does for one thing. VDOT even integrates Waze in its 511 website, though interestingly they don't display the police trap information that is available on Waze directly.
Quote from: Beltway on July 03, 2019, 08:32:56 PM
For someone going say between Bristol and Norfolk, it just won't enter in the minds of the typical person to think of not making the whole trip within Virginia.
You're right - for the typical person the routing is I-81 to I-64.
If they are making a detour due to a wreck and using mapping software, that mapping software would route them onto I-77, I-74, I-85, and back to US-58. I've only been routed on US-58 directly during peak hours in Winston-Salem, and that would be gone with the completion of I-74.
And as for US-58, before I got into all these road forums and more invested into this stuff, I really didn't know what US-58 was beyond I-85. I mostly viewed it as the connector between Norfolk, I-95, and I-85 and that's it. Most people aren't really aware of what happens to it beyond South Hill, and many certainly wouldn't think it's a fully completed 4-lane route all the way to southwest Virginia.
If I wasn't as informed, I would generally look at a map and view a preferred detour of I-81 and I-64 to be that I-77 to I-74 to I-85 to US-58 routing, especially if I wasn't aware of a fully completed 4-lane US-58 across Virginia. There's nothing that really screams four-lane expressway about it, it just appears as another arterial route, just as much of a 2-lane road.
Quote from: sprjus4 on July 03, 2019, 08:39:43 PM
Quote from: Beltway on July 03, 2019, 08:32:56 PM
For someone going say between Bristol and Norfolk, it just won't enter in the minds of the typical person to think of not making the whole trip within Virginia.
You're right - for the typical person the routing is I-81 to I-64.
If they are making a detour due to a wreck and using mapping software, that mapping software would route them onto I-77, I-74, I-85, and back to US-58. I've only been routed on US-58 directly during peak hours in Winston-Salem, and that would be gone with the completion of I-74.
If you are already 30 minutes into the 5-hour journey then that info would be useless.
Besides, there are gaps in the current smart traffic center system and even at best, delay estimates aren't but so accurate.
Quote from: sprjus4 on July 03, 2019, 08:39:43 PM
And as for US-58, before I got into all these road forums and more invested into this stuff, I really didn't know what US-58 was beyond I-85. I mostly viewed it as the connector between Norfolk, I-95, and I-85 and that's it. Most people aren't really aware of what happens to it beyond South Hill, and many certainly wouldn't think it's a fully completed 4-lane route all the way to southwest Virginia.
Because it is not fully completed, and the VDOT map accurately shows the 4-lane and bypass sections.
They would need to publicize the completion when it occurs, and make recommendations accordingly.
Maybe have permanent VMS time estimate signs like for I-64 between Richmond and Norfolk.
Quote from: sprjus4 on July 03, 2019, 08:39:43 PM
If I wasn't as informed, I would generally look at a map and view a preferred detour of I-81 and I-64 to be that I-77 to I-74 to I-85 to US-58 routing,
What map? The VDOT map doesn't show it, and the NCDOT map doesn't show enough of US-58 to know where it goes. Rand McNally has them on two different pages and not near each other.
Quote from: Beltway on July 03, 2019, 08:56:02 PM
Because it is not fully completed, and the VDOT map accurately shows the 4-lane and bypass sections.
Hate to say it, but you think everybody just has a VDOT map lying around, and when they go on a trip, they pull out the VDOT map to determine routing? Most people use Google Maps, Waze, etc. and other online routing softwares.
US-58 wouldn't even be considered by most over I-81 and I-64, and if it was, it's likely because their routing software re-routed them down into North Carolina and up I-85 due to a wreck on I-81.
Quote from: Beltway on July 03, 2019, 08:56:02 PM
Maybe have permanent VMS time estimate signs like for I-64 between Richmond and Norfolk.
Yes, then most people would then pull out their routing software, and be routed into North Carolina and up I-85. That route will be shaved by 7 minutes with the completion of I-74, and is the current preferred routing by Google Maps and Waze.
Quote from: Beltway on July 03, 2019, 08:56:02 PM
What map?
Google Maps, Waze, and other mapping softwares.
This isn't 1990 when State Highway Maps and Rand McNally's where the only maps. Hate to break it to you, a lot of people use online mapping software nowadays, and those displays all the states. You've used Google Maps, you know how seamless it is between state lines. Freeways are highlighted, then the smaller arterial roads below them, including US-58. When I look at a map, I see a freeway routing pop out, not a small arterial road on the map across Virginia. Not saying it's a "small arterial road", but that's all it appears as on a map.
Quote from: sprjus4 on July 03, 2019, 09:08:17 PM
Quote from: Beltway on July 03, 2019, 08:56:02 PM
Maybe have permanent VMS time estimate signs like for I-64 between Richmond and Norfolk.
Yes, then most people would then pull out their routing software, and be routed into North Carolina and up I-85. That route will be shaved by 7 minutes with the completion of I-74, and is the current preferred routing by Google Maps and Waze.
The current preferred routing by Google Maps is 1) I-64 and I-81, 2) US-460 to I-81.
Quote from: Beltway on July 03, 2019, 09:21:14 PM
Quote from: sprjus4 on July 03, 2019, 09:08:17 PM
Quote from: Beltway on July 03, 2019, 08:56:02 PM
Maybe have permanent VMS time estimate signs like for I-64 between Richmond and Norfolk.
Yes, then most people would then pull out their routing software, and be routed into North Carolina and up I-85. That route will be shaved by 7 minutes with the completion of I-74, and is the current preferred routing by Google Maps and Waze.
The current preferred routing by Google Maps is 1) I-64 and I-81, 2) US-460 to I-81.
You continuously dodge the point attempting to be made. If there is a wreck identified on I-81 that is shutting down the highway, and a motorist is detoured onto I-77 South, the preferred routing from that point is I-77 to I-74 to I-85 to US-58.
I decided to go on Waze and do a routing from Wytheville to Norfolk, and similar results as Google Maps. I-81 and I-64 is the preferred, and US-460 and the NC routing are the alternatives - no sign of US-58 being an alternative.
(https://i.ibb.co/pxhkJZZ/Waze-NCRouting.png)
Even more interestingly, I did a routing from Hillsville to Norfolk, and it shows three routings -
1) I-64 to I-81 - 5 hours 10 minutes, 355 miles
2) US-58 - 5 hours 3 minutes, 287 miles
3) I-77 to I-74 to I-85 to US-58 - 5 hours 6 minutes, 327 miles
And oddly enough, it showed "I-64 to I-81" as the most optimal routing despite the few extra minutes and mileage. Probably because while it's slightly longer, it's all interstate with no arterial sections to have to deal with.
A lot of motorists use Waze, and these are the routings they are getting. Ditto with Google Maps when it comes to dipping into North Carolina. They are going to follow their GPS.
(https://i.ibb.co/cr6fsY3/Waze-Optimal-Hillsville-Routing.png)
Quote from: sprjus4 on July 03, 2019, 09:29:05 PM
Quote from: Beltway on July 03, 2019, 09:21:14 PM
The current preferred routing by Google Maps is 1) I-64 and I-81, 2) US-460 to I-81.
You continuously dodge the point attempting to be made. If there is a wreck identified on I-81 that is shutting down the highway,
You have a gross misconception, you are assuming that the "wreck" is "shutting down the highway", that is rare, commonly there would be delays, and real-time data would be hard to determine in the remote areas beyond the reach of smart traffic centers, and even in the smart traffic center areas it is difficult to estimate delays.
What if the incident is at NB Lexington and you are NB about 10 miles south of there?
(Could post 20 other situations that would not be solved by your "logic").
There is too much data that is insufficient, partial, bad, or just non-existent, to utilize these tools in the manner in which you are trying. GIGO.
Quote from: Beltway on July 03, 2019, 09:46:13 PM
You have a gross misconception, you are assuming that the "wreck" is "shutting down the highway", that is rare, commonly there would be delays, and real-time data would be hard to determine in the remote areas beyond the reach of smart traffic centers, and even in the smart traffic center areas it is difficult to estimate delays.
What if the incident is at NB Lexington and you are NB about 10 miles south of there?
(Could post 20 other situations that would not be solved by your "logic").
There is too much data that is insufficient, partial, bad, or just non-existent, to utilize these tools in the manner in which you are trying. GIGO.
You clearly are not familiar with Waze. Real time data from users affected in it. I could pull up Waze as I'm 10 miles away, and people would be reporting lane closures, people can have discussions on there, ask others drivers what's going on, etc.
VDOT -advises- drivers to use Waze for real time traffic information. It's reliable.
Sorry to burst your bubble, but this isn't 20 years ago when you had to rely on smart traffic centers to deliver all of the information. I can get most of that info right on my phone before VDOT delivers it from drivers actually stuck in the wreck. Waze quickly updates when there's congestion, alternative routes available, etc. and will let you know what the best options are.
Hell, Waze will tell me if there's a vehicle pulled over on the shoulder up ahead if someone reports it - and most of the time it is reported. People report where speed traps are, lane closures, congestion, it even will tell me the speed of traffic in a congested area (I.E. average speed 28 mph) based on user data, etc.
VDOT is also quick to post this type of information on Twitter and other social media websites. It doesn't take a long time because it's in rural areas - it may be rural but it's a heavily traveled interstate.
And all of these "issues"
(that you claim are issues) are funded to be fixed under the $2.2 billion I-81 improvement plan, and the most crash-prone area between Christiansburg and Roanoke is being widened to 6-lanes. Acceleration lanes are being extended, sight improvements are being funded, roadway straightening, shoulder widening, etc.
Quote from: sprjus4 on July 03, 2019, 09:55:17 PM
Sorry to burst your bubble, but this isn't 20 years ago when you had to rely on smart traffic centers to deliver all of the information. I can get most of that info right on my phone before VDOT delivers it from drivers actually stuck in the wreck. Waze quickly updates when there's congestion, alternative routes available, etc. and will let you know what the best options are.
So where do you think your phone gets accurate incident data from if not originally from official sources like police, smart traffic centers and emergency services? The average motorist isn't going to be producing accurate data and delay estimates.
Quote from: sprjus4 on July 03, 2019, 09:55:17 PM
And all of these "issues" (that you claim are issues) are funded to be fixed under the $2.2 billion I-81 improvement plan, and the most crash-prone area between Christiansburg and Roanoke is being widened to 6-lanes. Acceleration lanes are being extended, sight improvements are being funded, roadway straightening, shoulder widening, etc.
ROTFL
Quote from: Beltway on July 03, 2019, 10:03:05 PM
So where do you think your phone it gets accurate incident data from if not from official sources like police, smart traffic centers and emergency services? The average motorist isn't going to be producing accurate data and delay estimates.
The average motorist sitting in the congestion and that can see what's happening is able to produce a lot of valuable information for someone 10 miles away to see. Yes, it's not the "most accurate" information, but it certainly helps. Traffic cameras are also helpful, and a lot more of those are planned and funded to be coming to I-81 under the improvement plan.
Waze has been extremely helpful over the years. I've avoided situations I don't want to be in. I've been notified of congestion and lane closure information before any official source produces it. I've been routed down alternative routes that aren't that bad, and do avoid bulk of the congestion.
That's why it's as popular as it is.
Sorry to burst your bubble, but this isn't 20 years ago when you had to rely on smart traffic centers to deliver all of the information. I can get most of that info right on my phone before VDOT delivers it from drivers actually stuck in the wreck. Waze quickly updates when there's congestion, alternative routes available, etc. and will let you know what the best options are.
Quote from: sprjus4 on July 03, 2019, 10:05:55 PM
Waze has been extremely helpful over the years. I've avoided situations I don't want to be in. I've been notified of congestion and lane closure information before any official source produces it. I've been routed down alternative routes that aren't that bad, and do avoid bulk of the congestion.
Something as much as 5 hours down the road, timely enough to feasibly change routes, not giving a false positive about an incident that would be gone by the time you get there?
Seems a lot easier to use routes that don't routinely have these problems.
Quote from: Beltway on July 03, 2019, 10:18:18 PM
Seems a lot easier to use routes that don't routinely have these problems.
You're right - I-77 to I-74 to I-85 to US-58 is a good alternative that doesn't have much in the way of these issues - and Google & Waze route that way when issues are present along I-81 that are known when approaching the I-77 split.
But overall, I'll still stick with I-64 to I-81. Personal preference. If I see a wreck ahead before reaching I-77, then I'll consider taking the next best routing that Google & Waze route me down - I-77 to I-74 to I-85 to US-58, or if it's a minor incident with good alternatives, I'll get off and go around it and just stick with I-81 and I-64.
Quote from: sprjus4 on July 03, 2019, 10:22:01 PM
Quote from: Beltway on July 03, 2019, 10:18:18 PM
Seems a lot easier to use routes that don't routinely have these problems.
You're right - I-77 to I-74 to I-85 to US-58 is a good alternative that doesn't have much in the way of these issues - and Google & Waze route that way when issues are present along I-81 that are known when approaching the I-77 split.
But what if those issues are such that they are a couple hours down the road and will be cleared up soon?
Given that US-58 still has 19 miles of 1940s era 2-lane highway thru the Blue Ridge Mountains, I would not expect that to be a recommended route for rural arterial traffic (other than between Stuart and Norfolk) before that is complete. But I have been aware of that since the beginning of this topic.
Quote from: Beltway on July 03, 2019, 11:09:42 PM
Given that US-58 still has 19 miles of 1940s era 2-lane highway thru the Blue Ridge Mountains, I would not expect that to be a recommended route for rural arterial traffic (other than between Stuart and Norfolk) before that is complete. But I have been aware of that since the beginning of this topic.
Currently, there's 20 miles of existing two-lane roadway, and Google indicates on both segments combined, takes 26 minutes to drive.
Once that is 4-lanes, the drive time will be reduced to 20 minutes, a savings of 6 minutes.
As of now, I-77 to I-74 to I-85 to US-58 is 6 minutes faster than US-58 all the way across. When the four-lane is completed, the travel times will be the same.
However, I-74 around Winston-Salem is now fully under construction and set to be completed in phases between 2020-2022. When that is completed, that will shave 4 miles off the existing trip, and about 7 minutes off of it due to 65 mph speed limits over 55 mph urban highway, plus the shorter route.
The completion of I-74 would still make the North Carolina routing 7 minutes faster than a completed US-58. And when I-74 is completed, and US-58 still is not, it will be 13 minutes faster.
Google and Waze don't change their routing based on "four-lanes". Just as it does today, Google and Waze will likely not display US-58 as an alternative, but rather the North Carolina routing as it currently does for someone heading between Wytheville and South Hill or Norfolk trying to avoid I-81.
I'm not against the four-lane widening of US-58, it will provide a needed corridor across Southern Virginia for freight movement and anybody who needs the most direct routing and is mileage strict. But I-77 to I-74 to I-85 will still compete with that road between Hillsville and South Hill and will provide faster travel times in the end, along with an interstate highway corridor that bypasses the major metropolitan areas. US-58 will likely be preferred for freight, and passenger vehicles using a GPS will be routed via I-77, I-74, and I-85, and that will be the preferred corridor for that traffic load. But of course, the best route over those two is simply I-81 to I-64 when no major incidents have occurred, and is the most familiar and well-known corridor for Hampton Roads traffic over US-58 and the North Carolina routing. Most people aren't familiar with US-58 beyond I-85 here in Hampton Roads, and quite frankly, I-85 in North Carolina is more familiar than US-58 west of South Hill.
Note - That 6 minute shave off US-58 is assuming the entire highway is posted 60 mph. If it's 55 mph, probably only about 4-5 minutes shaved.
Let's not forget the bigger picture either... someone on I-81 in Southwest VA long-distance likely came from the southern terminus from I-40.
If there was an incident on I-81, they could simply take I-40 all the way to I-85 to US-58. In fact, that's only 6 minutes slower than I-81 to I-64.
That's more direct then I-77 to I-74 to I-85 and makes more logical sense as they are just following I-40 all the way to I-85.
Quote from: sprjus4 on July 04, 2019, 07:55:55 PM
Quote from: Beltway on July 03, 2019, 11:09:42 PM
Given that US-58 still has 19 miles of 1940s era 2-lane highway thru the Blue Ridge Mountains, I would not expect that to be a recommended route for rural arterial traffic (other than between Stuart and Norfolk) before that is complete. But I have been aware of that since the beginning of this topic.
Currently, there's 20 miles of existing two-lane roadway, and Google indicates on both segments combined, takes 26 minutes to drive.
Once that is 4-lanes, the drive time will be reduced to 20 minutes, a savings of 6 minutes.
If trucks were allowed the current time would be much worse, with those steep grades. As it is the design of those 19 miles is such that only about 4,000 VPD are willing to use the highway.
A completed 4-lane highway could carry 10,000 to 15,000 VPD easily, although it may take awhile to break 10,000. But it is hard to tell, the current design is so low and mountainous that it suppresses traffic, and a completed highway may attract a lot more than the conventional wisdom. And of course it will be able to be a major trucking route.
Quote from: sprjus4 on July 04, 2019, 07:55:55 PM
However, I-74 around Winston-Salem
Who cares about Winston-Salem???
Nothing really wrong with the place, but it is just another boring N.C. Piedmont city no river and no mountains. I have no desire to go there.
The Google Maps first alternate for I-64 and I-81 between Norfolk and Wytheville is
US-460 between Bowers Hill and Roanoke.
Quote from: Beltway on July 04, 2019, 09:51:53 PM
Who cares about Winston-Salem???
As a US-58 relocation and widening to 4-lanes through the Blue Ridge Mountains would shave off 4-6 minutes the current US-58 routing and be equal to the North Carolina routing, the I-74 completion will shave 7 minutes off that routing, making it again 6-7 minutes faster as it is now to US-58.
Quote from: Beltway on July 04, 2019, 09:51:53 PM
The Google Maps first alternate for I-64 and I-81 between Norfolk and Wytheville is
US-460 between Bowers Hill and Roanoke.
And the third one is I-77, I-74, I-85, US-58. Not seeing US-58 all the way across. US-58 will remove 4-6 minutes of travel time when widened, and the North Carolina route will remove 7 minutes of travel time when I-74 is completed. The North Carolina routing will still be faster, and remain competitive with the I-74 completion, and actually a little faster (7-8 minutes faster to US-58 than the current 3-5 minutes today). That's why Winston-Salem is relevant here.
Quote from: sprjus4 on July 04, 2019, 10:00:07 PM
As a US-58 relocation and widening to 4-lanes through the Blue Ridge Mountains would shave off 4-6 minutes the current US-58 routing and be equal to the North Carolina routing, the I-74 completion will shave 7 minutes off that routing, making it again 6-7 minutes faster as it is now to US-58.
Those number of minutes is "down in the noise" in relevance on a 5 1/2 hour trip.
Then you have 30 less miles on US-58.
Quote from: Beltway on July 04, 2019, 10:17:50 PM
Then you have 30 less miles on US-58.
Those number of miles is "down in the noise" in relevance on a 350 mile trip - especially for a passenger vehicle. Don't go off on a tangent about truck mileage - I get it.
I know some states are willing to upgrade corridors of importance to 4 lanes even with 2,000 AADT in spots, but in the case of US 58, the terrain might be a limiting factor?
Then again, every state is different. I personally hate Super-2 corridors - they have a tendency to try to increase speed without increasing the separation (risk of head-on collisions), and they don't increase capacity too much either.
Quote from: sprjus4 on July 04, 2019, 10:19:46 PM
Quote from: Beltway on July 04, 2019, 10:17:50 PM
Then you have 30 less miles on US-58.
Those number of miles is "down in the noise" in relevance on a 350 mile trip - especially for a passenger vehicle. Don't go off on a tangent about truck mileage - I get it.
Not at all, no need to drive 30 extra miles which is an absolute figure, compared to a time estimate from an app which is only an estimate.
SUV that gets 12 to 15 mpg, less if heavily loaded.
Quote from: Beltway on July 04, 2019, 10:27:31 PM
Not at all, no need to drive 30 extra miles which is an absolute figure, compared to a time estimate from an app which is only an estimate.
I'd rather drive at interstate speeds (65-70 mph) than 55-60 mph the entire way.
Quote from: Beltway on July 04, 2019, 10:27:31 PM
SUV that gets 12 to 15 mpg, less if heavily loaded.
Closer to 20 mpg, might want to check that.
$2.50 average per gallon, so in the end you pay $2.50 - $3.50 more. That's a wash on a long distance trip when filling up at the gas pump 400-500 miles, $30+ in fuel.
30 extra miles for Murphy to intervene ... not worth it.
Quote from: Beltway on July 04, 2019, 10:39:57 PM
30 extra miles for Murphy to intervene ... not worth it.
Your call. You seem to be the one who's mileage strict here.
I'll take my roads, you take your roads.