I-73 in VA

[froggie]

^^ Money.  Or lack thereof.  This is in no small part why Virginia implemented their SmartScale project ranking system a few years ago (besides being Legislatively mandated), so that projects with the most bang for the buck are the ones that get funded.

Just happens to be that wholesale, widescale widenings don't see the ROI that smaller projects do.  In part because of this, virtually every major project VDOT's done in the past decade in those "three metro areas" has had a toll component to it.

[Jmiles32]

I know this is getting OT for this thread, but I am honestly surprised that there is very little to be seen in capacity improvements planned for I-81. There are decent sized cities along I-81 which would benefit. I guess there are many other needs in Northern Virginia, Richmond, and the area around Norfolk.

Southwest VA is pretty far down on the political totem pole, so it's not surprising that needs in that area often go neglected in favor of those three metro areas, especially NoVA. The three metros certainly have needs, but they've been mostly addressed or currently being addressed, whether in the planning stages or under construction. Meanwhile, I-81 and SW VA remains largely ignored with a few bread crumbs thrown their way.

Yeah which is why VDOT is fixing I-64(neglected similarly like I-81 up until recently) with widening projects near Richmond, on the Peninsula, the HRBT, and Southside). Why deal with I-64 first? Well because I-64 connects Hampton Roads to Richmond and is pretty much at this point no longer a "rural corridor" between them. However it is also important to note that two out of the four I-64 widening protects involve tolls which is accurate with what froggie said earlier.

In part because of this, virtually every major project VDOT's done in the past decade in those "three metro areas" has had a toll component to it.

Again relating back to I-73, I would very much be interested to see how building/designating at least one part of I-73 in Viringia or even widening a portion I-81 would score in Smart Scale.

[LM117]

Again relating back to I-73, I would very much be interested to see how building/designating at least one part of I-73 in Viringia or even widening a portion I-81 would score in Smart Scale.

I would be very interested in that as well.

[VTGoose]

I know this is getting OT for this thread, but I am honestly surprised that there is very little to be seen in capacity improvements planned for I-81. There are decent sized cities along I-81 which would benefit. I guess there are many other needs in Northern Virginia, Richmond, and the area around Norfolk.

Southwest VA is pretty far down on the political totem pole, so it's not surprising that needs in that area often go neglected in favor of those three metro areas, especially NoVA. The three metros certainly have needs, but they've been mostly addressed or currently being addressed, whether in the planning stages or under construction. Meanwhile, I-81 and SW VA remains largely ignored with a few bread crumbs thrown their way.

I knew he wouldn't win the GOP gubernatorial nomination, but things like this was a big reason I liked Frank Wagner. He was the only candidate that not only addressed the three metros, but he realized that there was more to the state than the three metros and addressed transportation needs there as well. But that ship has sailed and the status quo continues...

Yep, to a lot of people over east, there isn't much beyond Charlottesville (a place that doesn't have much going for it other than the school for wayward yuppies and loser football players), although some do acknowledge that Roanoke exists. Even with a map and detailed directions, there are folks in NoVA who would be unable to find Tazewell, Norton, Grundy, Big Stone Gap, Lee County, and other places in the western half of the state. NoVA types know Blacksburg is out there somewhere but may not have a clear idea of exactly where it is located (once had someone in Manassas state "Blacksburg is just on the other side of Harrisonsburg, isn't it?" -- yeah, relative to Denver we are close to Harrisonburg). It doesn't help when our "representatives" on the CTB aren't interested in the area they are supposed to represent (see dangerous N. Main/U.S. 460 intersection in Blacksburg).

As to Wagner, he had too much other baggage to be taken seriously. He was big on keeping the Confederacy alive in Virginia but I never could get an answer on his stance on keeping Massive Resistance and celebrating Harry Byrd.

Road related: Construction has begun on the replacement of the I-81 bridges over the New River at the Montgomery/Pulaski county line.

Bruce in Blacksburg

[Strider]

I know this is getting OT for this thread, but I am honestly surprised that there is very little to be seen in capacity improvements planned for I-81. There are decent sized cities along I-81 which would benefit. I guess there are many other needs in Northern Virginia, Richmond, and the area around Norfolk.

Southwest VA is pretty far down on the political totem pole, so it's not surprising that needs in that area often go neglected in favor of those three metro areas, especially NoVA. The three metros certainly have needs, but they've been mostly addressed or currently being addressed, whether in the planning stages or under construction. Meanwhile, I-81 and SW VA remains largely ignored with a few bread crumbs thrown their way.

I knew he wouldn't win the GOP gubernatorial nomination, but things like this was a big reason I liked Frank Wagner. He was the only candidate that not only addressed the three metros, but he realized that there was more to the state than the three metros and addressed transportation needs there as well. But that ship has sailed and the status quo continues...

Yep, to a lot of people over east, there isn't much beyond Charlottesville (a place that doesn't have much going for it other than the school for wayward yuppies and loser football players), although some do acknowledge that Roanoke exists. Even with a map and detailed directions, there are folks in NoVA who would be unable to find Tazewell, Norton, Grundy, Big Stone Gap, Lee County, and other places in the western half of the state. NoVA types know Blacksburg is out there somewhere but may not have a clear idea of exactly where it is located (once had someone in Manassas state "Blacksburg is just on the other side of Harrisonsburg, isn't it?" -- yeah, relative to Denver we are close to Harrisonburg). It doesn't help when our "representatives" on the CTB aren't interested in the area they are supposed to represent (see dangerous N. Main/U.S. 460 intersection in Blacksburg).

As to Wagner, he had too much other baggage to be taken seriously. He was big on keeping the Confederacy alive in Virginia but I never could get an answer on his stance on keeping Massive Resistance and celebrating Harry Byrd.

Road related: Construction has begun on the replacement of the I-81 bridges over the New River at the Montgomery/Pulaski county line.

Bruce in Blacksburg

I am pretty sure that there are things like that happening elsewhere in the United States, not just Virginia. For instance, in North Carolina, it is usually Charlotte vs. Raleigh when it comes to money for roads. Eastern coast cities, Asheville and sometimes the Triad were "ignored", but people down there acknowledges their existence, even the politics down there.

I don't know how politics work in Virginia because I am not from there... nor live in there, however I do know how SWVA feel when it comes to being ignored. Money received from Richmond (and Washington DC?) should be balanced for all regions, not based on favoritism.

If I lived in Virginia, I would vote for Frank Wagner. His ideas focused on ENTIRE state, especially SWVA. He knew SWVA needs economic boost BADLY. That is where I-73 (and widening US 58) among other projects such as Coalfields Expressway comes in. I-73 is their hope to boost their stale economy and attract jobs to that region. Most big companies want to build their in places where there is a interstate highway close, not the U.S. Routes. That is why I strongly support the state to build I-73.

I have driven though SWVA most of the time and I can see why they desperately want I-73 built down there. It is not their fault that I-73 costs around $4 billion dollars. The cost is rising (and more likely will continue to rise) because for so many years they were being neglected by the politics until the most recent voting passed last January.

The state owes it to SWVA so much for keep sending bread crumbs down their way these years.

[Beltway]

The newly released 6-yr plan has these I-81 projects funded in some way:
Rebuilding Exit 14, VA 140 (already under construction)
Add full transition lane between I-77 (Exit 72) and US 11 (Exit 73)
Rebuilding Exit 17 (US 58 ALT/VA 75)
Improving Exit 19 (US 11-58)
Replace New River Br on I-81 NB with no additional capacity beyond having a wider shoulder
Auxiliary lanes added between Exit 141 (VA 419) and Exit 143 (I-581/US 220)
Rebuilding Exit 150, US 11-220/VA 220 ALT (already under construction)
Rebuilding Exit 310, VA 37 (already under construction)

Everything else is minor stuff like ramp modifications and smaller bridge projects.  Not much in the way of true added capacity to I-81 in the next 6 years' plan.

The Exit 310 project noted that traffic is expected to exceed 76k NB and 85k SB at that location by 2035...

I know this is getting OT for this thread, but I am honestly surprised that there is very little to be seen in capacity improvements planned for I-81. There are decent sized cities along I-81 which would benefit. I guess there are many other needs in Northern Virginia, Richmond, and the area around Norfolk.

That is probably close to $300 million of projects in that list.  Replacing the New River bridges is about $120 million itself, they were opened in 1965 and they are wearing out (and reading between the lines in the SYP they are going to make them wide enough for 3 lanes and full shoulders).

[Beltway]

^^ Money.  Or lack thereof.  This is in no small part why Virginia implemented their SmartScale project ranking system a few years ago (besides being Legislatively mandated), so that projects with the most bang for the buck are the ones that get funded.

Just happens to be that wholesale, widescale widenings don't see the ROI that smaller projects do.  In part because of this, virtually every major project VDOT's done in the past decade in those "three metro areas" has had a toll component to it.

I am unconvinced that using a mathematical formula is really the way to "score" highway projects.  It all depends on the algorithm used.  Some things (like widening I-81) need a good dose of human and political judgment to make the best decision about.

[hbelkins]

^^ Money.  Or lack thereof.  This is in no small part why Virginia implemented their SmartScale project ranking system a few years ago (besides being Legislatively mandated), so that projects with the most bang for the buck are the ones that get funded.

Just happens to be that wholesale, widescale widenings don't see the ROI that smaller projects do.  In part because of this, virtually every major project VDOT's done in the past decade in those "three metro areas" has had a toll component to it.

I am unconvinced that using a mathematical formula is really the way to "score" highway projects.  It all depends on the algorithm used.  Some things (like widening I-81) need a good dose of human and political judgment to make the best decision about.

Kentucky just released a prioritized list of projects using some kind of formula, and I think it may be modeled in part on what Virginia has done. You have to get down to #15 in the list to find a project NOT in either Fayette, Jefferson or Boone/Kenton/Campbell counties, and it's on an interstate.

You could not spend one single construction dollar in those five counties in the next 20 years and they would still have a transportation network vastly superior to the rest of the state.

[froggie]

In terms of network, perhaps, but those counties also have the most traffic and VMT in the state.

Now here's a question:  are you or the state including normal repaving/bridge rehab/bridge replacement projects in that list and statement?  Or is this just for major projects?

[hbelkins]

In terms of network, perhaps, but those counties also have the most traffic and VMT in the state.

Now here's a question:  are you or the state including normal repaving/bridge rehab/bridge replacement projects in that list and statement?  Or is this just for major projects?

This is for major construction projects -- basically, anything that gets included in the highway plan submitted by the governor/KYTC and approved by the legislature. Bridge replacements generally go in the SYP, but rehabs don't.

[LM117]

State sen. Bill Stanley's I-73 funding bill that was passed last year has been re-filed with the General Assembly for their upcoming session.

http://www.roanoke.com/flurry-of-bills-precede-legislators-as-virginia-general-assembly-convenes/article_07439c01-b248-50d6-96d9-7ef2162ae96f.html

A bill earmarking funding for Interstate 73, which would run from Roanoke to the North Carolina line, is back for a second trip through the General Assembly gauntlet.

SB 31 would put the interstate next in line for a pot of money currently earmarked for U.S. 58. When the money becomes available in more than two decades, I-73 would receive about $40 million a year – a fraction of the project's $6 billion price tag.

Stanley's bill, which gained more traction last year than in previous years, will not become law unless re-enacted by the General Assembly this year.

[hbelkins]

^^^

What part of US 58? If the Commonwealth of Virginia is seriously considering building a second four-lane connection between Martinsville and Roanoke, instead of completing the four-lane US 58 corridor between Stuart and Hillsville, they've officially lost their minds in Richmond.

A new four-lane along that corridor is NOT needed.

[Beltway]

^^^
What part of US 58? If the Commonwealth of Virginia is seriously considering building a second four-lane connection between Martinsville and Roanoke, instead of completing the four-lane US 58 corridor between Stuart and Hillsville, they've officially lost their minds in Richmond.
A new four-lane along that corridor is NOT needed.

"next in line for a pot of money currently earmarked for U.S. 58"  -- means -after- completing the four-lane US 58 corridor between Stuart and Hillsville.

I attended the monthly CTB meeting yesterday, and that was one of the discussion items, and that is what they said.

[LM117]

The Senate passed Bill Stanley's I-73 funding bill. It's expected to pass the House when it gets voted on later this month.

http://www.martinsvillebulletin.com/news/a-costly-question-what-s-the-future-look-like-for/article_b5e3b218-143e-11e8-85f2-67ab23f443b7.html

[Strider]

^^^

What part of US 58? If the Commonwealth of Virginia is seriously considering building a second four-lane connection between Martinsville and Roanoke, instead of completing the four-lane US 58 corridor between Stuart and Hillsville, they've officially lost their minds in Richmond.

A new four-lane along that corridor is NOT needed.

You're losing your mind, dude. Obviously you haven't drove on that road everyday.  (oh it doesn't matter how old you are.)

[LM117]

The Senate passed Bill Stanley's I-73 funding bill. It's expected to pass the House when it gets voted on later this month.

http://www.martinsvillebulletin.com/news/a-costly-question-what-s-the-future-look-like-for/article_b5e3b218-143e-11e8-85f2-67ab23f443b7.html

Well, it didn't take long for someone to respond.

http://www.martinsvillebulletin.com/opinion/letters-to-the-editor-for-feb/article_3d29ba40-14f0-11e8-bb9b-f3cbc33ca4e0.html

What do we get?

I respect Sharon Hodges for asking a question that I think Henry County supervisors, heck even Franklin should be asking. What are we getting back for all this money we're putting in for I-73? Is that money even being spent in the right way? I mean after reading the story, I just came away sad. I wonder why a group like the Harvest Foundation couldn't have provided the money for the updated studies long before now. I think that would have been a better investment than a walking trail people are just going to fight over. I drive down to North Carolina all the time and they're going to it, building it up to the state line. How sad will it be when North Carolina is done with their part of I-73 and Virginia hasn't even started? It'll truly be the road to nowhere.

Alex Martinsen

Collinsville

I can't say I disagree with him, particularly where Sharon Hodge is concerned...

[hbelkins]

^^^

What part of US 58? If the Commonwealth of Virginia is seriously considering building a second four-lane connection between Martinsville and Roanoke, instead of completing the four-lane US 58 corridor between Stuart and Hillsville, they've officially lost their minds in Richmond.

A new four-lane along that corridor is NOT needed.

You're losing your mind, dude. Obviously you haven't drove on that road everyday.  (oh it doesn't matter how old you are.)

Looks like we're going to have to agree to disagree on this one. My opinion on this -- and turning US 31 between Indy and South Bend into an interstate -- won't change.

I'd rather see scarce transportation dollars spent improving corridors that are currently outdated two-lane roads than redoing corridors that are already four lanes and moving traffic well. I personally think the Mountain Parkway project in Kentucky is wasteful, because the super-2 that exists currently handles present traffic well and will also handle future projections. A few spot improvements (adding more passing lanes, straightening some curves, etc.) would be all that corridor needs.

[Beltway]

You're losing your mind, dude. Obviously you haven't drove on that road everyday.  (oh it doesn't matter how old you are.)

Looks like we're going to have to agree to disagree on this one. My opinion on this -- and turning US 31 between Indy and South Bend into an interstate -- won't change.
I'd rather see scarce transportation dollars spent improving corridors that are currently outdated two-lane roads than redoing corridors that are already four lanes and moving traffic well. I personally think the Mountain Parkway project in Kentucky is wasteful, because the super-2 that exists currently handles present traffic well and will also handle future projections. A few spot improvements (adding more passing lanes, straightening some curves, etc.) would be all that corridor needs.

Indeed.  Back when I-73 was first approved, much of N.C. US-220 was still a 2-lane nonlimited-access highway, parts of which went thru developed areas where it would have hard to widen.  So when considering 4-lane upgrades, a full relocation could be more easily justified, and at that point it is a small additional step to utilize full freeway standards.

[Strider]

^^^

What part of US 58? If the Commonwealth of Virginia is seriously considering building a second four-lane connection between Martinsville and Roanoke, instead of completing the four-lane US 58 corridor between Stuart and Hillsville, they've officially lost their minds in Richmond.

A new four-lane along that corridor is NOT needed.

You're losing your mind, dude. Obviously you haven't drove on that road everyday.  (oh it doesn't matter how old you are.)

Looks like we're going to have to agree to disagree on this one. My opinion on this -- and turning US 31 between Indy and South Bend into an interstate -- won't change.

I'd rather see scarce transportation dollars spent improving corridors that are currently outdated two-lane roads than redoing corridors that are already four lanes and moving traffic well. I personally think the Mountain Parkway project in Kentucky is wasteful, because the super-2 that exists currently handles present traffic well and will also handle future projections. A few spot improvements (adding more passing lanes, straightening some curves, etc.) would be all that corridor needs.

The Mountain Parkway... I will hand you this one because I am not familiar with Kentucky roads (never drove on any of them except I-74, I-75 and I-275) or how they spend money on building/widening their roads.. except for I-69.

Yes, we can only agree or disagree on this topic.

[hotdogPi]

(never drove on any of them except I-74, I-75 and I-275)

Since you've been on I-74 in Kentucky, you must be from the future. When did I-74 between Ohio and North Carolina finally get completed?

[Mapmikey]

The Senate passed Bill Stanley's I-73 funding bill. It's expected to pass the House when it gets voted on later this month.

http://www.martinsvillebulletin.com/news/a-costly-question-what-s-the-future-look-like-for/article_b5e3b218-143e-11e8-85f2-67ab23f443b7.html

This article is pretty lengthy and not once does it mention safety issues with US 220 for through traffic (including trucks).  It only seems to tout what jobs might arise out of it.  My question on the job numbers is whether they take into account jobs lost by bypassing large segments of US 220 (including the Rocky Mount bypass) which have these same types of businesses that may end up closing should I-73 be built.

Build a new road between Boones Mill and Roanoke if you must but make sensible improvements to the rest of existing US 220.  In a world of finite resources this is the right way to go.

[Strider]

(never drove on any of them except I-74, I-75 and I-275)

Since you've been on I-74 in Kentucky, you must be from the future. When did I-74 between Ohio and North Carolina finally get completed?

hahaha.. I-74 never entered Kentucky.   I mean I-64.

[hbelkins]

^^^

What part of US 58? If the Commonwealth of Virginia is seriously considering building a second four-lane connection between Martinsville and Roanoke, instead of completing the four-lane US 58 corridor between Stuart and Hillsville, they've officially lost their minds in Richmond.

A new four-lane along that corridor is NOT needed.

You're losing your mind, dude. Obviously you haven't drove on that road everyday.  (oh it doesn't matter how old you are.)

Looks like we're going to have to agree to disagree on this one. My opinion on this -- and turning US 31 between Indy and South Bend into an interstate -- won't change.

I'd rather see scarce transportation dollars spent improving corridors that are currently outdated two-lane roads than redoing corridors that are already four lanes and moving traffic well. I personally think the Mountain Parkway project in Kentucky is wasteful, because the super-2 that exists currently handles present traffic well and will also handle future projections. A few spot improvements (adding more passing lanes, straightening some curves, etc.) would be all that corridor needs.

The Mountain Parkway... I will hand you this one because I am not familiar with Kentucky roads (never drove on any of them except I-74, I-75 and I-275) or how they spend money on building/widening their roads.. except for I-69.

Yes, we can only agree or disagree on this topic.

I-69 isn't new construction of a four-lane to parallel an existing four-lane. What's been done is work to bring the existing Kentucky parkways up to current interstate standards.

[Beltway]

This article is pretty lengthy and not once does it mention safety issues with US 220 for through traffic (including trucks).  It only seems to tout what jobs might arise out of it.  My question on the job numbers is whether they take into account jobs lost by bypassing large segments of US 220 (including the Rocky Mount bypass) which have these same types of businesses that may end up closing should I-73 be built.
Build a new road between Boones Mill and Roanoke if you must but make sensible improvements to the rest of existing US 220.  In a world of finite resources this is the right way to go.

Those are retail service businesses for travelers, restaurants mainly for travelers, motels, and fuel and service stations.  Such businesses are usually fully capitalized after 5 years or so and if eliminated usually have been profitable for the owner and have returned the original investment.

The kind of businesses they are referring to are the major manufacturing and light industrial and major service companies that would provide long term structural employment.

[Mapmikey]

This article is pretty lengthy and not once does it mention safety issues with US 220 for through traffic (including trucks).  It only seems to tout what jobs might arise out of it.  My question on the job numbers is whether they take into account jobs lost by bypassing large segments of US 220 (including the Rocky Mount bypass) which have these same types of businesses that may end up closing should I-73 be built.
Build a new road between Boones Mill and Roanoke if you must but make sensible improvements to the rest of existing US 220.  In a world of finite resources this is the right way to go.

Those are retail service businesses for travelers, restaurants mainly for travelers, motels, and fuel and service stations.  Such businesses are usually fully capitalized after 5 years or so and if eliminated usually have been profitable for the owner and have returned the original investment.

The kind of businesses they are referring to are the major manufacturing and light industrial and major service companies that would provide long term structural employment.

The article only quantifies the service industry jobs and all but says don't count on much for the types of jobs you are referencing...

While it may be true a service establishment has a quick ROI for the owner/investor, the workers are still out of a job if it closes because nobody drives by there anymore (or get to work at a new establishment along the new route but that is not a net gain of jobs in the area).