Interstate 87 (NC-VA)

[NE2]

The Hampton Roads TPO seems to have had a change of heart and has submitted I-87 in Virginia for consideration in their 2050 Long-Range Transportation Plan. They made the announcement this morning.

https://experience.arcgis.com/experience/99c5d0b2bc4348ec806da972e1ca6a57/page/Candidate-Project-Portal?draft=true&fbclid=IwY2xjawPLY69leHRuA2FlbQIxMABicmlkETE4cjMyWWVRQTdCRGdTeDdoc3J0YwZhcHBfaWQQMjIyMDM5MTc4ODIwMDg5MgABHrapq69SAVCe8ZRBchJyfdOeVb0VWcf8NTq9D5lCIhsGNqZSGfYvSSi5xNv4_aem_LB6kpOdN_-LnhLgz1k2clw&org=HRPDC-GIS#data_s=id%3AdataSource_2-18693da5e42-layer-7-18698a998fe-layer-6%3A10

When I click I get a project for US 58 between I-95 and I-64. Looks like the shorter route won

[NE2]

It seems that link you shared are user-suggested projects, not actual projects being studied or considered in depth.

🐐🐐🐐

[english si]

When I click I get a project for US 58 between I-95 and I-64. Looks like the shorter route won

I-87 was never about linking Hampton Roads and Raleigh/I-95 south but linking both to the smaller cities en-route.

US58 upgrades is going to be based off similar logic - regional traffic linking small cities to the big metro area. Just as I-685 in NC isn't about bypassing the Triangle for Greensboro-Wilmington traffic but serving the places en-route, and I-57 in AR isn't about the relieving of I-55 and I-40 which it does when zoomed out, but about serving the places en-route.

[WillWeaverRVA]

The Hampton Roads TPO seems to have had a change of heart and has submitted I-87 in Virginia for consideration in their 2050 Long-Range Transportation Plan. They made the announcement this morning.

https://experience.arcgis.com/experience/99c5d0b2bc4348ec806da972e1ca6a57/page/Candidate-Project-Portal?draft=true&fbclid=IwY2xjawPLY69leHRuA2FlbQIxMABicmlkETE4cjMyWWVRQTdCRGdTeDdoc3J0YwZhcHBfaWQQMjIyMDM5MTc4ODIwMDg5MgABHrapq69SAVCe8ZRBchJyfdOeVb0VWcf8NTq9D5lCIhsGNqZSGfYvSSi5xNv4_aem_LB6kpOdN_-LnhLgz1k2clw&org=HRPDC-GIS#data_s=id%3AdataSource_2-18693da5e42-layer-7-18698a998fe-layer-6%3A10

I-87 has been in their Long Range Transportation Plan candidate projects for at least the last 5-7 years. It has yet to be studied in depth, and likely won't for quite sometime. Progress in North Carolina has stalled and it is a low priority in the region until any work on that side of the line is done.

That map also shows ideas for US-460, US-58, and the Southeastern Parkway... both projects that will likely never come to fruition, unfortunately. The Southeastern Parkway has been canceled, and VDOT has no desire to improve US-58 and US-460 any further (outside of urban 6 lane widenings close to Suffolk and an I-95 interchange replacement in Emporia with a partial cloverleaf).

It seems that link you shared are user-suggested projects, not actual projects being studied or considered in depth.

After hearing back from HRTPO about this...yeah, you're right. Whoops. 

[Beltway]

When I click I get a project for US 58 between I-95 and I-64. Looks like the shorter route won

I-87 was never about linking Hampton Roads and Raleigh/I-95 south but linking both to the smaller cities en-route.
US58 upgrades is going to be based off similar logic - regional traffic linking small cities to the big metro area.

Cities plural? Elizabeth City is a city in name only.

Project Name/Roadway    US-58 Interstate to I-95
Project/Roadway From    I-664
Project/Roadway To    I-95

That has true inter-state network importance. Connect the Norfolk/Hampton Roads area to I-95 South.

[sprjus4]

When I click I get a project for US 58 between I-95 and I-64. Looks like the shorter route won

I-87 was never about linking Hampton Roads and Raleigh/I-95 south but linking both to the smaller cities en-route.
US58 upgrades is going to be based off similar logic - regional traffic linking small cities to the big metro area.

Cities plural? Elizabeth City is a city in name only.

Project Name/Roadway    US-58 Interstate to I-95
Project/Roadway From    I-664
Project/Roadway To    I-95

That has true inter-state network importance. Connect the Norfolk/Hampton Roads area to I-95 South.

Which, unfortunately, VDOT has no interest in.

[Beltway]

Project Name/Roadway    US-58 Interstate to I-95
Project/Roadway From    I-664
Project/Roadway To    I-95
That has true inter-state network importance. Connect the Norfolk/Hampton Roads area to I-95 South.

Which, unfortunately, VDOT has no interest in.

It is in the HRTPO Draft 2050 Long-Range Transportation Plan. The MPO is the usual place where a project starts.

That is a long way off and that would be a start date and not completion date.

[WahooBill]

I'd argue that Virginia doesn't care about I87 to Raleigh, but VA might like to see a freeway connection to Elizabeth City as time goes on as that area is going to become more of a suburb to the Hampton Roads area by 2050.

[Rothman]

I'd say the truth falls somewhere in between the above posts.

From my experience in NY, the LRTP development process can be surprisingly informal before being formally adopted.  It isn't the STIP, where projects are formally programmed, but is basically a gunny sack of candidate projects which come from the MPO members/project sponsors (asking when a project "starts" is like asking when human life begins...does it start when a study is performed that recognizes the need, or when a sponsor conceives its scope, or when it's actually programmed on the STIP, or when its federal funding is authorized...oh wait, if it's not federally-funded, it doesn't have to be on the MPO's TIP or the STIP...that complicates things...anyway...just a fun circle of thought...).  Project sponsors can choose to either progress them or not, but in order to be on the MPO's TIP or STIP, some reference to the project needs to be in the LRTP, even if it's some generic reference to a "maintenance" project or whatever other category that can take up a chunk of the financial projections.  And of course, an LRTP is more than just the candidate list (e.g., narrative of broad goals of the MPO and perhaps some material that can be called boilerplate...), but the candidate list really is what is most paid attention to until it is next updated with more possible projects to be thrown into the gunny sack.

The reason behind this dynamic is that it can be a real pain-in-the-tuchus to amend the LRTP (depending upon MPO procedure), so project sponsors throw anything that'll stick in there that has had the remotest attention so they don't have to go through the months-long process of amending the LRTP when an authority (broadest sense of the word) really wants to progress the project ASAP.  Luckily, most run-of-the-mill capital projects can just rely upon generic categories in the LRTP, but significant projects (say reconstructions or expensive multimodal projects all the way up to megaprojects) are individually listed.

Therefore, VDOT interest is hard to determine.  They could have thrown US 58 or I-87 in there for a multitude of reasons: Either they wait for someone along the way to have enough pressure to get them to do it or the funding may or may not show up (sometimes, DOTs may have a "if someone else finds a way, we'll do it" kind of mentality towards these things)...or they really do want to do it but know they won't have the resources to do it or it's way, way, way down their priority list.

Or...maybe they really do have a fervent interest in progressing the project.

I'd pay much more attention to the STIP to see what a DOT's real intentions really are (whether in an MPO area or not), especially since the LRTP gets updated every-so-many years anyway (probably varies by State or even by MPO) with its ridiculous time span.  LRTP is more about what projects have the faintest blips on project sponsors' radars than a real, concrete actual plan.  That's the STIP...until it's amended as projects' costs and schedules change.

(personal opinion emphasized)

[NE2]

Mr. Unlimited Breadsticks...this is a part of the planning map that can be edited by anyone. Last I saw, it was marked as connecting Alanland and the Perkins Union.

[Rothman]

Mr. Unlimited Breadsticks...this is a part of the planning map that can be edited by anyone. Last I saw, it was marked as connecting Alanland and the Perkins Union.

*reads back*

Yeah, that scribble map was referenced, but others said that I-87 and US 58 were actually in the MPO's LRTP itself.

[Beltway]

Yeah, that scribble map was referenced, but others said that I-87 and US 58 were actually in the MPO's LRTP itself.

Draft 2050 HRTPO LRTP

I'd pay much more attention to the STIP to see what a DOT's real intentions really

VDOT uses a Six Year Program for the STIP.

A STIP and a long range needs plan are two different things.

VDOT's 2050 Plan isn't a single document but part of broader regional planning (like Fairfax County's Visualize 2050, FAMPO, CAMPO, HRTPO, MWCOG, etc.)

[Rothman]

Yeah, that scribble map was referenced, but others said that I-87 and US 58 were actually in the MPO's LRTP itself.

Draft 2050 HRTPO LRTP

Yep, HRTPO is the MPO for the Hampton Roads area.  I took people to mean that it was seriously in the draft rather than just in the scribble map.

ETA:  Hm.  Hope there's more to it than the "candidate project portal": https://hrtpo.org/333/2050-Long-Range-Transportation-Plan

I'd pay much more attention to the STIP to see what a DOT's real intentions really are

VDOT uses a Six Year Program for the STIP.

A STIP and a long range needs plan are two different things.

VDOT's 2050 Plan isn't a single document but part of broader regional planning (like Fairfax County's Visualize 2050, FAMPO, CAMPO, HRTPO, MWCOG, etc.)

Yep.  That's why I'd go with the STIP over an MPO's LRTP and definitely over any DOT's high-level master plan -- conglomeration of regional plans or not -- when it comes to specific projects and when they'll actually be planned or prioritized (the latter being a good indicator of DOT actual interest).

[Beltway]

That's why I'd go with the STIP over an MPO's LRTP and definitely over any DOT's high-level master plan -- conglomeration of regional plans or not -- when it comes to specific projects and when they'll actually be planned or prioritized (the latter being a good indicator of DOT actual interest).

They're two entirely different instruments.

The STIP is a programmed document -- fiscally constrained, budgeted, and tied to actual funding availability within a 6-year window (VA SYP). If it's in the STIP, the state has committed real dollars and real schedule.

An LRTP is a long‑range planning document -- a 20 to 30+ year outlook built on broad financial assumptions, scenario modeling, and system‑level needs. It's not a commitment, it's a vision framework. Projects appear there because they're conceptually needed, not because they're funded or scheduled.

[Rothman]

That's why I'd go with the STIP over an MPO's LRTP and definitely over any DOT's high-level master plan -- conglomeration of regional plans or not -- when it comes to specific projects and when they'll actually be planned or prioritized (the latter being a good indicator of DOT actual interest).

They're two entirely different instruments.

The STIP is a programmed document -- fiscally constrained, budgeted, and tied to actual funding availability within a 6-year window (VA SYP). If it's in the STIP, the state has committed real dollars and real schedule.

An LRTP is a long‑range planning document -- a 20 to 30+ year outlook built on broad financial assumptions, scenario modeling, and system‑level needs. It's not a commitment, it's a vision framework. Projects appear there because they're conceptually needed, not because they're funded or scheduled.

Right.  Aren't we in agreement for once?

[PColumbus73]

Yeah, that scribble map was referenced, but others said that I-87 and US 58 were actually in the MPO's LRTP itself.

Draft 2050 HRTPO LRTP

Yep, HRTPO is the MPO for the Hampton Roads area.  I took people to mean that it was seriously in the draft rather than just in the scribble map.

ETA:  Hm.  Hope there's more to it than the "candidate project portal": https://hrtpo.org/333/2050-Long-Range-Transportation-Plan

I'd pay much more attention to the STIP to see what a DOT's real intentions really are

VDOT uses a Six Year Program for the STIP.

A STIP and a long range needs plan are two different things.

VDOT's 2050 Plan isn't a single document but part of broader regional planning (like Fairfax County's Visualize 2050, FAMPO, CAMPO, HRTPO, MWCOG, etc.)

Yep.  That's why I'd go with the STIP over an MPO's LRTP and definitely over any DOT's high-level master plan -- conglomeration of regional plans or not -- when it comes to specific projects and when they'll actually be planned or prioritized (the latter being a good indicator of DOT actual interest).

If I try to summarize in a few words:

LRTP: Wishlist / It Might Happen

STIP: Funded / Here comes the choo-choo train

[Beltway]

That's why I'd go with the STIP over an MPO's LRTP and definitely over any DOT's high-level master plan -- conglomeration of regional plans or not -- when it comes to specific projects and when they'll actually be planned or prioritized (the latter being a good indicator of DOT actual interest).

They're two entirely different instruments.
The STIP is a programmed document -- fiscally constrained, budgeted, and tied to actual funding availability within a 6-year window (VA SYP). If it's in the STIP, the state has committed real dollars and real schedule.
An LRTP is a long‑range planning document -- a 20 to 30+ year outlook built on broad financial assumptions, scenario modeling, and system‑level needs. It's not a commitment, it's a vision framework. Projects appear there because they're conceptually needed, not because they're funded or scheduled.

Right.  Aren't we in agreement for once?

The part about "the latter being a good indicator of DOT actual interest."

A DOT can be interested in a project that is not programmable within the current TIP.

The aforementioned 2050 plan has the Patriot's Crossing (8-lane MMMBT and Uptown Crossing to I-564) in the plan. Not programmable now but definitely something that the MPO wants in the future even if it is 10 to 20 years out. Based on HRTAC revenue levels could be sooner -- HRBT Expansion is a $3.8 billion project and only 5% federally funded.

[Rothman]

That's why I'd go with the STIP over an MPO's LRTP and definitely over any DOT's high-level master plan -- conglomeration of regional plans or not -- when it comes to specific projects and when they'll actually be planned or prioritized (the latter being a good indicator of DOT actual interest).

They're two entirely different instruments.
The STIP is a programmed document -- fiscally constrained, budgeted, and tied to actual funding availability within a 6-year window (VA SYP). If it's in the STIP, the state has committed real dollars and real schedule.
An LRTP is a long‑range planning document -- a 20 to 30+ year outlook built on broad financial assumptions, scenario modeling, and system‑level needs. It's not a commitment, it's a vision framework. Projects appear there because they're conceptually needed, not because they're funded or scheduled.

Right.  Aren't we in agreement for once?

The part about "the latter being a good indicator of DOT actual interest."

A DOT can be interested in a project that is not programmable within the current TIP.

The aforementioned 2050 plan has the Patriot's Crossing (8-lane MMMBT and Uptown Crossing to I-564) in the plan. Not programmable now but definitely something that the MPO wants in the future even if it is 10 to 20 years out.

Yep!  DOTs certainly can be truly interested in projects that are in the LRTP and have to be in order to get them on the TIP/STIP.  Even said that outright in my initial, rambling post.

Keep in mind, though, that an MPO is a sum of its project sponsors (and other voting membership).  Can get messy when saying "the MPO wants X or does not want X."  Sponsors can lick wounds after not getting their pet project funded depending on how their committees vote.

However, the STIP shows what DOTs are actually and actively pursuing (again, we have to keep in mind the STIP covers much more than MPO areas, while not necessarily covering 100% non-federal-aid funded projects).  That includes what they fought to get funded through the MPO (negotiations can be dicey due to fiscal constraints).  Typically, needs are so great that a DOT doesn't get all their priorities funded in one update round and they have to delay projects off for the next update round and, in the meantime, the "wish list" projects on the LRTP stay there until some funding's found...somehow, as other priorities and even interests prevail.  That said, of course there can be quite a bit of interest in projects that never even get scoping and preliminary engineering off the ground for decades.

LRTP process is much less contentious.  Like I said, "gunny sack" containing everything a DOT is really, really interested in to "Well, there's someone over there that'll make a stink if I don't put this in here" to "We'll never have money for this" to whatever else in between and beyond.

...

Now that I've typed all that, PColumbus' summary's better.

[architect77]

Both VIrginians and North Carolineans should be writing letters to Transportation Secretary (and former MTV Real World or some reality show star) S. Duffy to release the $1.1 billion awarded to NC for the S-line to Richmond.

Virginia has gone all in on rail and NC needs to be too for faster Northeast connections.

[ARMOURERERIC]

Both VIrginians and North Carolineans should be writing letters to Transportation Secretary (and former MTV Real World or some reality show star) S. Duffy to release the $1.1 billion awarded to NC for the S-line to Richmond.

Virginia has gone all in on rail and NC needs to be too for faster Northeast connections.

NC is very much in on rail improvements.

[sprjus4]

Since the 2050 LRTP is currently a working draft and is not complete, and the only projects we have are "candidate projects", it might be helpful to look at the 2045 LRTP released a few years ago.

https://www.hrpdcva.gov/331/2045-Long-Range-Transportation-Plan

https://www.hrpdcva.gov/DocumentCenter/View/1684/Amendments-and-Current-List-of-Projects-PDF

Neither I-87 or US-58 projects were included on this document, outside of current projects in Suffolk.
-
In regards to the Regional Crossing Study (the Third Crossing), it's merely listed as a study on the LRTP.

[bob7374]

NCDOT advertised the upcoming US 64/264 (Future I-87) pavement rehabilitation contract between the Business 64 exit in Wendell and the Nash County line on Tuesday (1/20). With the interstate upgrade project to Zebulon not funded in the latest STIP, there was some hope that this project, if it included shoulder widening, might lead to possible I-87 signing at its conclusion. No such luck. While the shoulders will be widened, according to this roadway plan, it will be only to 8 feet, and only 4 feet will be paved:


The project does include new signage, but it is simply updated versions of the exiting signs, no I-87 references, and the same exit numbers:






The contract plans are at: https://xfer.services.ncdot.gov/dsplan/2026%20Highway%20Letting/02-17-26/Plans%20and%20Proposals/WAKE_FRANKLIN_I-6001_C205088/

Unless there is a change in the status of STIP funding, there will no signing of I-87 in this area until after 2035.

[sprjus4]

That cross section you posted doesn't show any shoulder widening - it says 4 ft of paved shoulder and 8 ft total shoulder (paved + graded).

[brian440i]

The 4 Ft of paved shoulder is actually widening...  not to interstate standards unfortunately but as someone who uses the road regularly... wider.

Being able to pull off and keep the left tire out of traffic and on a paved surface is good compared to the currently shoulder which is barely wider than the rumble strip.

[sprjus4]

The 4 Ft of paved shoulder is actually widening...  not to interstate standards unfortunately but as someone who uses the road regularly... wider.

Being able to pull off and keep the left tire out of traffic and on a paved surface is good compared to the currently shoulder which is barely wider than the rumble strip.

I believe that shoulder is already around 4 ft, so it probably isn't getting any wider.

10 ft shoulders (interstate standard) should be the default on those types of facilities, regardless of white or blue shield. They did shoulder widening to 10 ft of US-64 resurfacing east of Rocky Mount, but also resurfaced through Rocky Mount and did not widen the shoulders, so it's wildly inconsistent.