AARoads Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length

Author Topic: Interstate 87 (NC-VA)  (Read 134947 times)

Beltway

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 6783
  • Roads to the Future

  • Location: Richmond, VA
  • Last Login: Today at 07:27:18 AM
Re: Interstate 87 (NC-VA)
« Reply #1075 on: February 13, 2019, 11:17:52 AM »

I'm seeing this Virginia I-87 in much the same light as Virginia's portion of Corridor H (US 48).
The primary benefit for I-87 will fall to North Carolina. The primary benefit for Corridor H is in West Virginia.
Let NC build it's section of I-87 (upgrade US 17). Later on, if traffic warrants, Virginia will upgrade its section of US 17 to interstate standards. Likewise, Virginia won't do anything to its 14 or so miles of US 48 until WV gets its part finished and if traffic warrants.

The big difference here is that West Virginia interests aren't tirelessly pressuring Virginia to build it.  No real pressure at all.

Another big difference is that ADHS Corridor H was authorized in 1965 as one of the Appalachian Development Highway System (ADHS) corridors.  Been around for a -long- time.
Logged
http://www.roadstothefuture.com
http://www.capital-beltway.com

Baloney is a reserved word on the Internet
    (Robert Coté, 2002)

Roadsguy

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1695
  • Age: 21
  • Location: Here
  • Last Login: Today at 06:04:49 PM
Re: Interstate 87 (NC-VA)
« Reply #1076 on: February 13, 2019, 11:42:03 AM »

Was this the left entrance mentioned on NC I-73?  I don't see anything else north of Greensboro.

The freeway becomes the nonlimited-access highway US-220 just above the top of this photo.  This design looks temporary, and something that would be reconfigured to something like this if the freeway was extended northward, and I am showing the likely way that ramp would be built to enter the right side of the freeway.

http://capital-beltway.com/I73-US220.jpg

Not a final design, just conceptual.

I doubt very strongly that they'd extend I-73 out through all those houses rather than just upgrade 220 or have it curve away to the east on a new alignment. From the alignment of Price Farm Road, it seems as though whatever they originally were planning here (perhaps before I-73) would have had NC 68 as the through route and US 220 as an exit like the I-69 TOTSO south of Memphis. I do agree that keeping the left entrance is odd. It seems that they'd have plenty of room to realign the northbound lanes to stick to the southbound lanes and have NC 68 merge in on the right. Maybe they'll do that when they get around to extending I-73, idk.
Logged

Strider

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 702
  • Location: Greensboro, NC
  • Last Login: May 13, 2020, 11:45:13 PM
Re: Interstate 87 (NC-VA)
« Reply #1077 on: February 13, 2019, 12:56:17 PM »

Was this the left entrance mentioned on NC I-73?  I don't see anything else north of Greensboro.

The freeway becomes the nonlimited-access highway US-220 just above the top of this photo.  This design looks temporary, and something that would be reconfigured to something like this if the freeway was extended northward, and I am showing the likely way that ramp would be built to enter the right side of the freeway.

http://capital-beltway.com/I73-US220.jpg

Not a final design, just conceptual.

I doubt very strongly that they'd extend I-73 out through all those houses rather than just upgrade 220 or have it curve away to the east on a new alignment. From the alignment of Price Farm Road, it seems as though whatever they originally were planning here (perhaps before I-73) would have had NC 68 as the through route and US 220 as an exit like the I-69 TOTSO south of Memphis. I do agree that keeping the left entrance is odd. It seems that they'd have plenty of room to realign the northbound lanes to stick to the southbound lanes and have NC 68 merge in on the right. Maybe they'll do that when they get around to extending I-73, idk.

The current plan is to upgrade US 220 to interstate standards from that interchange up to the state line. No new alignment.
Logged

Beltway

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 6783
  • Roads to the Future

  • Location: Richmond, VA
  • Last Login: Today at 07:27:18 AM
Re: Interstate 87 (NC-VA)
« Reply #1078 on: February 13, 2019, 04:23:02 PM »

Was this the left entrance mentioned on NC I-73?  I don't see anything else north of Greensboro.
The freeway becomes the nonlimited-access highway US-220 just above the top of this photo.  This design looks temporary, and something that would be reconfigured to something like this if the freeway was extended northward, and I am showing the likely way that ramp would be built to enter the right side of the freeway.  http://capital-beltway.com/I73-US220.jpg  Not a final design, just conceptual.
I doubt very strongly that they'd extend I-73 out through all those houses rather than just upgrade 220 or have it curve away to the east on a new alignment. From the alignment of Price Farm Road, it seems as though whatever they originally were planning here (perhaps before I-73) would have had NC 68 as the through route and US 220 as an exit like the I-69 TOTSO south of Memphis. I do agree that keeping the left entrance is odd. It seems that they'd have plenty of room to realign the northbound lanes to stick to the southbound lanes and have NC 68 merge in on the right. Maybe they'll do that when they get around to extending I-73, idk.
The current plan is to upgrade US 220 to interstate standards from that interchange up to the state line. No new alignment.

3 miles of nonlimited-access 4-lane highway to the north of that intersection, lots of driveways and houses.  I very seriously doubt that they will use that alignment and not bypass it, as many more houses would be taken than what I postulated in my conceptual design, and most of the homes are in a mobile home park to where the impacted homes could be trucked to a new place.

We would need to see the design and construction plans for that project, it would likely show an ultimate design of how the freeway would extend northward, including ultimate ramp designs.
 
« Last Edit: February 13, 2019, 04:26:59 PM by Beltway »
Logged
http://www.roadstothefuture.com
http://www.capital-beltway.com

Baloney is a reserved word on the Internet
    (Robert Coté, 2002)

sprjus4

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 4500
  • Location: Hampton Roads, VA
  • Last Login: Today at 06:38:43 PM
Re: Interstate 87 (NC-VA)
« Reply #1079 on: February 13, 2019, 05:04:24 PM »

Was this the left entrance mentioned on NC I-73?  I don't see anything else north of Greensboro.
The freeway becomes the nonlimited-access highway US-220 just above the top of this photo.  This design looks temporary, and something that would be reconfigured to something like this if the freeway was extended northward, and I am showing the likely way that ramp would be built to enter the right side of the freeway.  http://capital-beltway.com/I73-US220.jpg  Not a final design, just conceptual.
I doubt very strongly that they'd extend I-73 out through all those houses rather than just upgrade 220 or have it curve away to the east on a new alignment. From the alignment of Price Farm Road, it seems as though whatever they originally were planning here (perhaps before I-73) would have had NC 68 as the through route and US 220 as an exit like the I-69 TOTSO south of Memphis. I do agree that keeping the left entrance is odd. It seems that they'd have plenty of room to realign the northbound lanes to stick to the southbound lanes and have NC 68 merge in on the right. Maybe they'll do that when they get around to extending I-73, idk.
The current plan is to upgrade US 220 to interstate standards from that interchange up to the state line. No new alignment.

3 miles of nonlimited-access 4-lane highway to the north of that intersection, lots of driveways and houses.  I very seriously doubt that they will use that alignment and not bypass it, as many more houses would be taken than what I postulated in my conceptual design, and most of the homes are in a mobile home park to where the impacted homes could be trucked to a new place.

We would need to see the design and construction plans for that project, it would likely show an ultimate design of how the freeway would extend northward, including ultimate ramp designs.
http://www.malmeroads.net/i7374nc/i73seg1.html

The plan has always been to upgrade this segment to interstate standards, I don't believe a bypass was ever proposed.
Logged

Beltway

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 6783
  • Roads to the Future

  • Location: Richmond, VA
  • Last Login: Today at 07:27:18 AM
Re: Interstate 87 (NC-VA)
« Reply #1080 on: February 13, 2019, 05:18:05 PM »

3 miles of nonlimited-access 4-lane highway to the north of that intersection, lots of driveways and houses.  I very seriously doubt that they will use that alignment and not bypass it, as many more houses would be taken than what I postulated in my conceptual design, and most of the homes are in a mobile home park to where the impacted homes could be trucked to a new place.
We would need to see the design and construction plans for that project, it would likely show an ultimate design of how the freeway would extend northward, including ultimate ramp designs.
http://www.malmeroads.net/i7374nc/i73seg1.html
The plan has always been to upgrade this segment to interstate standards, I don't believe a bypass was ever proposed.

"Currently there are no active projects listed through 2029 in NCDOT's Draft 2020-2029 State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) to upgrade this highway. "

I don't see anything there about EIS/location studies, so perhaps none have been done yet.

Nevertheless, here is a possible treatment for a right-hand ramp entrance should they follow the existing --
http://capital-beltway.com/I73-US220-exist.jpg
Logged
http://www.roadstothefuture.com
http://www.capital-beltway.com

Baloney is a reserved word on the Internet
    (Robert Coté, 2002)

sprjus4

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 4500
  • Location: Hampton Roads, VA
  • Last Login: Today at 06:38:43 PM
Re: Interstate 87 (NC-VA)
« Reply #1081 on: February 13, 2019, 05:25:49 PM »

3 miles of nonlimited-access 4-lane highway to the north of that intersection, lots of driveways and houses.  I very seriously doubt that they will use that alignment and not bypass it, as many more houses would be taken than what I postulated in my conceptual design, and most of the homes are in a mobile home park to where the impacted homes could be trucked to a new place.
We would need to see the design and construction plans for that project, it would likely show an ultimate design of how the freeway would extend northward, including ultimate ramp designs.
http://www.malmeroads.net/i7374nc/i73seg1.html
The plan has always been to upgrade this segment to interstate standards, I don't believe a bypass was ever proposed.

"Currently there are no active projects listed through 2029 in NCDOT's Draft 2020-2029 State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) to upgrade this highway. "

I don't see anything there about EIS/location studies, so perhaps none have been done yet.

Nevertheless, here is a possible treatment for a right-hand ramp entrance should they follow the existing --
http://capital-beltway.com/I73-US220-exist.jpg
Something along those lines would work. I have always found it weird it was designed that way, especially because it was new construction and the fact that, while I-73 isn't north of here yet, it's still a mainline 4-lane route. Frontage roads continue past this interchange, implying that it will likely be part of the future interstate, not new location. I've got a feeling they'll likely just leave it as is, but we'll just have to wait and see. NCDOT does not plan on constructing that portion until VDOT begins their portion, which would be the Martinsville Southern Connector. For quite sometime likely, I-73 will continue to end north of this interchange.



Logged

Beltway

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 6783
  • Roads to the Future

  • Location: Richmond, VA
  • Last Login: Today at 07:27:18 AM
Re: Interstate 87 (NC-VA)
« Reply #1082 on: February 13, 2019, 06:06:36 PM »

"Currently there are no active projects listed through 2029 in NCDOT's Draft 2020-2029 State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) to upgrade this highway. "
I don't see anything there about EIS/location studies, so perhaps none have been done yet.
Nevertheless, here is a possible treatment for a right-hand ramp entrance should they follow the existing --
http://capital-beltway.com/I73-US220-exist.jpg
Something along those lines would work. I have always found it weird it was designed that way, especially because it was new construction and the fact that, while I-73 isn't north of here yet, it's still a mainline 4-lane route. Frontage roads continue past this interchange, implying that it will likely be part of the future interstate, not new location. I've got a feeling they'll likely just leave it as is, but we'll just have to wait and see. NCDOT does not plan on constructing that portion until VDOT begins their portion, which would be the Martinsville Southern Connector. For quite sometime likely, I-73 will continue to end north of this interchange.

It is an Interstate and freeway temporary terminus, even if it may be some years before being extended and being indefinite at this time.  As such those transitions would not be expected to meet mainline Interstate standards.

Just from seeing that temporary terminus, it appears to me like no exact design has been determined yet as to how it would be extended, could be 2 or 3 alternatives are possible.
Logged
http://www.roadstothefuture.com
http://www.capital-beltway.com

Baloney is a reserved word on the Internet
    (Robert Coté, 2002)

sprjus4

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 4500
  • Location: Hampton Roads, VA
  • Last Login: Today at 06:38:43 PM
Re: Interstate 87 (NC-VA)
« Reply #1083 on: February 13, 2019, 06:43:10 PM »

"Currently there are no active projects listed through 2029 in NCDOT's Draft 2020-2029 State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) to upgrade this highway. "
I don't see anything there about EIS/location studies, so perhaps none have been done yet.
Nevertheless, here is a possible treatment for a right-hand ramp entrance should they follow the existing --
http://capital-beltway.com/I73-US220-exist.jpg
Something along those lines would work. I have always found it weird it was designed that way, especially because it was new construction and the fact that, while I-73 isn't north of here yet, it's still a mainline 4-lane route. Frontage roads continue past this interchange, implying that it will likely be part of the future interstate, not new location. I've got a feeling they'll likely just leave it as is, but we'll just have to wait and see. NCDOT does not plan on constructing that portion until VDOT begins their portion, which would be the Martinsville Southern Connector. For quite sometime likely, I-73 will continue to end north of this interchange.

It is an Interstate and freeway temporary terminus, even if it may be some years before being extended and being indefinite at this time.  As such those transitions would not be expected to meet mainline Interstate standards.
I-73 goes through a 25 MPH loop ramp, and has three left exits, all non continuous along its mainline through Greensboro, and all of these examples were constructed in the past 10 years as new location, with I-73 in mind during design & construction, and was designated upon completion.

Red indicates I-73 routing.


I-40 also has a left exit in the picture above, granted, the left movement onto the Greensboro Bypass was a re-routed I-40 for a short period of time, and designed that way, but it was re-routed back on the old routing. But no interchange modification was warranted, same with I-73's construction, to justify a right exit. Signage is pictured below where the left exit is signed properly. "To Bryan Blvd / PTI Airport" signage will be replaced by I-73 signage in the near future. The interchange is quite adequate, and will continue to be, and no right exit would've made anything better.

The 25 MPH loop ramp IMHO needs to be replaced by a two-lane flyover, as that is a mainline movement, not a interstate to interstate movement.



« Last Edit: February 13, 2019, 06:49:46 PM by sprjus4 »
Logged

Roadsguy

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1695
  • Age: 21
  • Location: Here
  • Last Login: Today at 06:04:49 PM
Re: Interstate 87 (NC-VA)
« Reply #1084 on: February 13, 2019, 06:50:13 PM »

"Currently there are no active projects listed through 2029 in NCDOT's Draft 2020-2029 State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) to upgrade this highway. "
I don't see anything there about EIS/location studies, so perhaps none have been done yet.
Nevertheless, here is a possible treatment for a right-hand ramp entrance should they follow the existing --
http://capital-beltway.com/I73-US220-exist.jpg
Something along those lines would work. I have always found it weird it was designed that way, especially because it was new construction and the fact that, while I-73 isn't north of here yet, it's still a mainline 4-lane route. Frontage roads continue past this interchange, implying that it will likely be part of the future interstate, not new location. I've got a feeling they'll likely just leave it as is, but we'll just have to wait and see. NCDOT does not plan on constructing that portion until VDOT begins their portion, which would be the Martinsville Southern Connector. For quite sometime likely, I-73 will continue to end north of this interchange.

It is an Interstate and freeway temporary terminus, even if it may be some years before being extended and being indefinite at this time.  As such those transitions would not be expected to meet mainline Interstate standards.
I-73 goes through a 25 MPH loop ramp, and has three left exits, all non continuous along its mainline through Greensboro, and all of these examples were constructed in the past 10 years as new location, with I-73 in mind during design & construction, and was designated upon completion.

Red indicates I-73 routing.


I suspect that the Urban Loop was designed under the assumption that I-73 would follow US 220 up to I-40, then I-40 west to NC 68 without running on the Urban Loop or Bryan Boulevard at all. I think this was the actual plan at one point. I-73 would still exit itself at two points with this setup, but only because both points have a more major through route: I-40.

The current I-40/73 interchange in your picture also was designed for I-40 to go around the loop like I-85 does, so even with the rerouted I-73, it was still the secondary route at that split until I-40 was rerouted back through Greensboro.

Of course, it would be hard to run a new interstate along various mostly existing (or under or just about to go to construction) freeways while reconfiguring every TOTSO interchange to have I-73 be the physical mainline.
Logged

sprjus4

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 4500
  • Location: Hampton Roads, VA
  • Last Login: Today at 06:38:43 PM
Re: Interstate 87 (NC-VA)
« Reply #1085 on: February 13, 2019, 07:17:06 PM »

I suspect that the Urban Loop was designed under the assumption that I-73 would follow US 220 up to I-40, then I-40 west to NC 68 without running on the Urban Loop or Bryan Boulevard at all. I think this was the actual plan at one point. I-73 would still exit itself at two points with this setup, but only because both points have a more major through route: I-40.

The current I-40/73 interchange in your picture also was designed for I-40 to go around the loop like I-85 does, so even with the rerouted I-73, it was still the secondary route at that split until I-40 was rerouted back through Greensboro.
It was always designated as I-73 / I-40 since that leg opened in March 2008. I know I-40 was re-routed, but my point is, no massive expansion projects were required to route an interstate designation through a multi-lane exit, and have a left exit in place, like Scott had implied would be necessary for I-64 / I-464.

Of course, it would be hard to run a new interstate along various mostly existing (or under or just about to go to construction) freeways while reconfiguring every TOTSO interchange to have I-73 be the physical mainline.
I agree, I'm not saying it's wrong. (though that I-73 North movement at I-85 seriously needs some sort of two-lane flyover, a 25 MPH loop is pushing it) My point is reconfiguring the I-464 / I-64 interchange just to have right exits as opposed to left exits, and to waste hundreds of millions for the I-87 designation doing so is a waste of funds when the existing interchange is adequate, and will continue to be.

Still waiting on those concepts for the badly needed hundred million dollar interchange improvements.... (directed at Scott)
« Last Edit: February 13, 2019, 07:21:34 PM by sprjus4 »
Logged

sprjus4

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 4500
  • Location: Hampton Roads, VA
  • Last Login: Today at 06:38:43 PM
Re: Interstate 87 (NC-VA)
« Reply #1086 on: February 13, 2019, 07:41:39 PM »

Going back to the roadway itself...if 2500ft is the narrowest radius on the US 17 curves, that comes out to just under a 65mph design speed at 0% superelevation.  Assuming NCDOT (or VDOT...sprjus wasn't specific on which section of US 17 he was estimating curve radius on) used 0.2% superelevation for water run-off, none of the curves with less than a ~3200ft radius would meet a 70 MPH design speed.

"HIS DAY OFF, and Scott Kozel is devoting it to something he loves: He's behind the wheel of his big Buick, steering it around a curve on a just-opened highway outside of Richmond, admiring the concrete and steel all around. The road's surface, unstained ash-gray, shimmers under the midday sun. Overpasses are unblemished by time and vandals. The median is crisply mowed, the shoulders free of litter and weeds. It looks less a highway than a computer simulation. What Kozel fastens on, however, are things that might easily escape attention. The way the highway banks ever  so slightly as it sweeps left. Its arc as it does so, no doubt true to the state's prescribed minimum radius of 1,821 feet for a flat-terrain freeway designed for travel at 70 mph. Interchanges overbuilt in anticipation of ratcheting traffic loads. Collector-distributor lanes straddling the main line, siphoning away congestion at especially busy crossroads. “A very ample design,” Kozel muses. He points to a diamond-shaped interchange. “Built with enough room to add a cloverleaf, should that be warranted in the future.” He nods, cataloging the details. In a short while, he’ll steer his LeSabre home, post the data he’s gathered on his Web site – which specializes in the arcana of highway history and design in Virginia, the D.C. area, Maryland and West Virginia – and share it with the world."

This is literally posted on his website. http://www.roadstothefuture.com/main.html

Guessing it doesn't meet some specific standard then. Looking at the roadway closer now, there actually is superelevation along U.S. 17. I underestimated that in my original statement, because it certainly does exist. Look on GSV.
« Last Edit: February 13, 2019, 07:48:48 PM by sprjus4 »
Logged

Beltway

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 6783
  • Roads to the Future

  • Location: Richmond, VA
  • Last Login: Today at 07:27:18 AM
Re: Interstate 87 (NC-VA)
« Reply #1087 on: February 13, 2019, 08:11:27 PM »

I-73 goes through a 25 MPH loop ramp, and has three left exits, all non continuous along its mainline through Greensboro, and all of these examples were constructed in the past 10 years as new location, with I-73 in mind during design & construction, and was designated upon completion.

Those aren't left exits, they are mainline splits, and are a consequence of overlapping two Interstate highways on the same freeway and then having them split.  The southern bypass was designed to take I-40, and the mainline roadways ran thru that interchange (western loop and new I-40 / westerly I-40).

My point is reconfiguring the I-464 / I-64 interchange just to have right exits as opposed to left exits, and to waste hundreds of millions for the I-87 designation doing so is a waste of funds when the existing interchange is adequate, and will continue to be.

VA-168 and US-17 are not Interstate highways, and you are still laboring under the misconception that an Interstate highway project is designed for -today- and not for at least 20 years in the future (2040 or beyond) with much higher traffic volumes.

What Kozel fastens on, however, are things that might easily escape attention. The way the highway banks ever  so slightly as it sweeps left. Its arc as it does so, no doubt true to the state's prescribed minimum radius of 1,821 feet for a flat-terrain freeway designed for travel at 70 mph.

I didn't write that, Earl Swift wrote that in the Virginian-Pilot, the intro paragraph of his article which I copied there after the hyperlinked article was deleted from the newspaper website several years later.
 
« Last Edit: February 13, 2019, 08:25:34 PM by Beltway »
Logged
http://www.roadstothefuture.com
http://www.capital-beltway.com

Baloney is a reserved word on the Internet
    (Robert Coté, 2002)

sprjus4

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 4500
  • Location: Hampton Roads, VA
  • Last Login: Today at 06:38:43 PM
Re: Interstate 87 (NC-VA)
« Reply #1088 on: February 13, 2019, 08:45:33 PM »

Those aren't left exits, they are mainline splits, and are a consequence of overlapping two Interstate highways on the same freeway and then having them split.  The southern bypass was designed to take I-40, and the mainline roadways ran thru that interchange (western loop and new I-40 / westerly I-40).
Correct. When I-40 was routed along the original alignment, why didn't they reconstruct the interchange to provide a right exit, as you say is necessary along US-17 / I-464 interchange?

VA-168 and US-17 are not Interstate highways, and you are still laboring under the misconception that an Interstate highway project is designed for -today- and not for at least 20 years in the future (2040 or beyond) with much higher traffic volumes.
Both VA-168 and US 17 are 55 MPH four-lane freeways that have high speed 55 MPH connections through the interchange, it has the highest level of design. The most you can do is add more lanes, which would be apart of a widening project for either highway. Placing the blue and red shield on an existing interstate-standard freeway would not involve completely tearing up the high-speed, high capacity interchange, rebuilding it somehow (still waiting on your concept maps), blowing hundreds of millions of dollars, and ending up with the same exact design, just with right exits and... that's about it.

Please, I'm open to hear what concepts you recommend, and would love to see a concept map.

I didn't write that, Earl Swift wrote that in the Virginian-Pilot, the intro paragraph of his article which I copied there after the hyperlinked article was deleted from the newspaper website several years later.
So he's lying?
Logged

Beltway

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 6783
  • Roads to the Future

  • Location: Richmond, VA
  • Last Login: Today at 07:27:18 AM
Re: Interstate 87 (NC-VA)
« Reply #1089 on: February 13, 2019, 09:17:59 PM »

Those aren't left exits, they are mainline splits, and are a consequence of overlapping two Interstate highways on the same freeway and then having them split.  The southern bypass was designed to take I-40, and the mainline roadways ran thru that interchange (western loop and new I-40 / westerly I-40).
Correct. When I-40 was routed along the original alignment, why didn't they reconstruct the interchange to provide a right exit,

Those aren't left exits, they are mainline splits, and are a consequence of overlapping two Interstate highways on the same freeway and then having them split.

as you say is necessary along US-17 / I-464 interchange?

VA-168 and US-17 are not Interstate highways, and you are still laboring under the misconception that an Interstate highway project is designed for -today- and not for at least 20 years in the future (2040 or beyond) with much higher traffic volumes.
Both VA-168 and US 17 are 55 MPH four-lane freeways that have high speed 55 MPH connections through the interchange, it has the highest level of design.

No.  45 mph advisory signing.  Those roads were not built under an Interstate design.  Principal arterial highway.

The most you can do is add more lanes, which would be apart of a widening project for either highway. Placing the blue and red shield on an existing interstate-standard freeway would not involve completely tearing up the high-speed, high capacity interchange, rebuilding it somehow (still waiting on your concept maps), blowing hundreds of millions of dollars, and ending up with the same exact design, just with right exits and... that's about it.
Please, I'm open to hear what concepts you recommend, and would love to see a concept map.

The relocated mainline (didn't even attempt the relocated ramps) of I-464 thru US-17 would have untenable impacts, so I would say the idea of an Interstate US-17 should be dropped --
http://capital-beltway.com/VI-87-464-17.jpg

I didn't write that, Earl Swift wrote that in the Virginian-Pilot, the intro paragraph of his article which I copied there after the hyperlinked article was deleted from the newspaper website several years later.
So he's lying?

So a reporter can't misremember something without lying?

Look, your conduct as an anonymous poster who is obviously deeply invested in this highway, is very unseemly at best, going into stuff that is on my website and then playing logical games to support your hyper-advocacy of this highway that wouldn't even be built until about a 2026 to 2040 or 2045 timeframe.
Logged
http://www.roadstothefuture.com
http://www.capital-beltway.com

Baloney is a reserved word on the Internet
    (Robert Coté, 2002)

sprjus4

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 4500
  • Location: Hampton Roads, VA
  • Last Login: Today at 06:38:43 PM
Re: Interstate 87 (NC-VA)
« Reply #1090 on: February 13, 2019, 10:16:48 PM »

Those aren't left exits, they are mainline splits, and are a consequence of overlapping two Interstate highways on the same freeway and then having them split.
I believe the sign reads "Left Exit 212"

The fact you deny this is a left exit is astonishing. To stay on I-40, you keep right, and the left splits you to other interstates.

Trying to put this at a higher level than the US 17 / I-464 interchange is pretty funny.

No.  45 mph advisory signing.

The relocated mainline (didn't even attempt the relocated ramps) of I-464 thru US-17 would have untenable impacts, so I would say the idea of an Interstate US-17 should be dropped --
http://capital-beltway.com/VI-87-464-17.jpg
Ah yes, relocate the entire highway, over $300 million, at least 40 relocations, impacts to a cemetery, just to satisfy a 60 MPH design speed. I highly doubt your design would be considered as an "alternative" in an EIS.

Please clarify this - at what point would a realigned highway at 60 MPH do to help traffic flow that the existing interchange lacks? A slight increase to 60 MPH?

Most of the interchange satisfies a 55 MPH design speed, a few movements are 45 MPH. The map below depicts what movements are posted at 55 MPH (green), and 45 MPH (red). The southbound movement wouldn't even need to be modified. The northbound movement could have an advisory speed posted. There's nothing preventing this, urban design speed is 50 MPH as per interstate standards, 45 MPH posted. A slight realignment on general existing location could be done if truly necessary.

Either way, for all we could know, I-87 could end at I-64. That was the implied original plan, the concept to replace I-464 was touted here a few times, but has never made real discussion. Connecting to I-64 would satisfy just as much as overlapping I-464 would. But I suppose requiring an 60 MPH high-speed connection is another way you can add hundreds of millions of dollars to your estimate. How about we wait until this thing has a real cost estimate? Oh, but considering NC's, I'd suppose you'd say if VA had a cost estimate of under $200 million, you'd say it's vanity too and doesn't satisfy your 60 MPH complete realignment to I-464, to replace existing 45 - 55 MPH high speed multi-lane ramps that already serve the movement quite adequately, and will continue to for many years to come?


Those roads were not built under an Interstate design.  Principal arterial highway.
US-17 has a 46 foot median, 55 MPH speed limit, 10 foot right shoulders, 4 foot left shoulders, 12 foot travel lanes, full control of access.
VA-168 has a 60 foot median, 55 MPH speed limit, 10 foot right shoulders, 4 foot left shoulders, 12 foot travel lanes, full control of access.

Trying to clarify where it's -not- built to interstate standards.

So a reporter can't misremember something without lying?
Seems pretty precise for a remembrance, a rounded number would've worked.

Look, your conduct as an anonymous poster who is obviously deeply invested in this highway, is very unseemly at best, going into stuff that is on my website and then playing logical games to support your hyper-advocacy of this highway that wouldn't even be built until about a 2026 to 2040 or 2045 timeframe.
Ah yes, "deeply invested", "playing logical games", "hyper-advocacy".

I'm a resident of Hampton Roads who has an interest in this type of stuff, and am supporting an interstate alignment to the south. You call me a North Carolina business advocate because I support such concept. Does everybody that supports the concept a business advocate?

Just because I've not been with your "group" for the past 15+ years, I'm now an outsider who cannot comment on a public forum with hundreds of members to share my thoughts, and factual knowledge.

Pretty sad.
« Last Edit: February 13, 2019, 10:29:19 PM by sprjus4 »
Logged

Beltway

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 6783
  • Roads to the Future

  • Location: Richmond, VA
  • Last Login: Today at 07:27:18 AM
Re: Interstate 87 (NC-VA)
« Reply #1091 on: February 14, 2019, 12:13:08 AM »

Those aren't left exits, they are mainline splits, and are a consequence of overlapping two Interstate highways on the same freeway and then having them split.
I believe the sign reads "Left Exit 212"
The fact you deny this is a left exit is astonishing. To stay on I-40, you keep right, and the left splits you to other interstates.

It is not astonishing that you lack highway engineering acumen.  A 5-lane Interstate freeway roadway splits into two 3-lane Interstate freeway roadways.  That is a mainline split, and there is no lefthand offramp there.

The route numbering was shifted from the original design.  The route numbering could be shifted again, back to I-40 on the south leg of the loop.

Most of the interchange satisfies a 55 MPH design speed, a few movements are 45 MPH. The map below depicts what movements are posted at 55 MPH (green), and 45 MPH (red). The southbound movement wouldn't even need to be modified. The northbound movement could have an advisory speed posted. There's nothing preventing this, urban design speed is 50 MPH as per interstate standards, 45 MPH posted. A slight realignment on general existing location could be done if truly necessary.

It is questionable as to whether that southbound US-17 really should be as high as 55 mph.

Either way, for all we could know, I-87 could end at I-64.

Or could stay in N.C., and maybe not even there.  The world is not going to stop rotating if it isn't built.

Those roads were not built under an Interstate design.  Principal arterial highway.
US-17 has a 46 foot median, 55 MPH speed limit, 10 foot right shoulders, 4 foot left shoulders, 12 foot travel lanes, full control of access.
VA-168 has a 60 foot median, 55 MPH speed limit, 10 foot right shoulders, 4 foot left shoulders, 12 foot travel lanes, full control of access.
Trying to clarify where it's -not- built to interstate standards.

Very narrow clear zones on nearly all of VA-168.  In guardrailed sections an 8-foot paved right shoulder.

The aforementioned sharp curves on US-17 and the fact that only 3 miles of Dominion Blvd. is freeway.  In guardrailed sections an 8-foot paved right shoulder.

The best way to solve this issue IMHO is to leave Dominion Blvd. out of any Interstate highway proposal.

So a reporter can't misremember something without lying?
Seems pretty precise for a remembrance, a rounded number would've worked.

Hard to say, but I normally don't specify a curve's radius, I express it in degrees and minutes, as in say 2 degrees and 30 minutes.

I spent several hours with him, he is a pretty sharp guy, and he wrote the "Big Roads" book several years later.  That is a major part of why he was interested in my works.
https://www.amazon.com/Big-Roads-Visionaries-Trailblazers-Superhighways/dp/0547907249

Look, your conduct as an anonymous poster who is obviously deeply invested in this highway, is very unseemly at best, going into stuff that is on my website and then playing logical games to support your hyper-advocacy of this highway that wouldn't even be built until about a 2026 to 2040 or 2045 timeframe.
Ah yes, "deeply invested", "playing logical games", "hyper-advocacy".
I'm a resident of Hampton Roads who has an interest in this type of stuff, and am supporting an interstate alignment to the south. You call me a North Carolina business advocate because I support such concept. Does everybody that supports the concept a business advocate?
Just because I've not been with your "group" for the past 15+ years, I'm now an outsider who cannot comment on a public forum with hundreds of members to share my thoughts, and factual knowledge.
Pretty sad.

You can certainly comment as that is a civil right in the U.S., but I can also comment right back.

I have a problem with anonymous posters when they start getting up in my face and overstepping certain personal boundaries.
Logged
http://www.roadstothefuture.com
http://www.capital-beltway.com

Baloney is a reserved word on the Internet
    (Robert Coté, 2002)

sprjus4

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 4500
  • Location: Hampton Roads, VA
  • Last Login: Today at 06:38:43 PM
Re: Interstate 87 (NC-VA)
« Reply #1092 on: February 14, 2019, 07:42:51 AM »

A 5-lane Interstate freeway roadway splits into two 3-lane Interstate freeway roadways.  That is a mainline split, and there is no lefthand offramp there.
So when the 3-lane I-464 Southbound splits into two 2-lane freeway roadways, that's a left exit, but this isn't?

It is questionable as to whether that southbound US-17 really should be as high as 55 mph.
Actually, not really, it's easily driveable at 60 MPH. You're assuming.

Or could stay in N.C., and maybe not even there.  The world is not going to stop rotating if it isn't built.
And the world is not going to stop rotating if US 17 is upgraded to I-87 and brought up to I-64.

In guardrailed sections an 8-foot paved right shoulder.
VA-168 has a 10 foot paved shoulder, at least on the 1999 Oak Grove Connector. US-17 also has a 10 foot shoulder, not 8.

The aforementioned sharp curves on US-17 and the fact that only 3 miles of Dominion Blvd. is freeway.  In guardrailed sections an 8-foot paved right shoulder.
Your sharp shoulders meet at least 62 MPH design according to you, and with superelevation in account, this could be studied for higher speed. Just like you can claim US 58 will have 70 MPH posted on substandard bypasses, it can easily happen here too.

The best way to solve this issue IMHO is to leave Dominion Blvd. out of any Interstate highway proposal.
Ah, yes. More of this. The entirety of US-17 is a limited-access 4 lane highway, a design speed of 60 MPH (could be studied for higher), has a median of at least 42 foot (with one 2 mile exception), and is easily driveable at 65 MPH. It meets interstate standards, even at 60 MPH.

You can certainly comment as that is a civil right in the U.S., but I can also comment right back.

I have a problem with anonymous posters when they start getting up in my face and overstepping certain personal boundaries.
What personal boundaries? I'm happy to stop, you need to clarify though.
Logged

wdcrft63

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 644
  • Location: Durham, NC
  • Last Login: June 23, 2020, 06:45:45 PM
Re: Interstate 87 (NC-VA)
« Reply #1093 on: February 14, 2019, 06:31:47 PM »

Words from Captain Obvious:

If two interstate routes split apart, one of them will be on the left.

Neither of them is an exit, because an exit is a ramp that leaves the interstate system.
Logged

sprjus4

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 4500
  • Location: Hampton Roads, VA
  • Last Login: Today at 06:38:43 PM
Re: Interstate 87 (NC-VA)
« Reply #1094 on: February 14, 2019, 08:16:30 PM »

Words from Captain Obvious:

If two interstate routes split apart, one of them will be on the left.

Neither of them is an exit, because an exit is a ramp that leaves the interstate system.
Continuity. I-40 is continuous through here, the left free-flowing ramps take you to I-73 South, not I-40. It's not "two routes splitting", it's I-40 continuing off to the right, and I-73 perpendicular to the roadway, and you exiting left onto it.

Though, in that regard, an I-87 to the right / VA-168 to the left split is the same thing. A left freeway to freeway exit, continuity to the right, where I-87 still has 2-lanes at 55 MPH.
Logged

Beltway

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 6783
  • Roads to the Future

  • Location: Richmond, VA
  • Last Login: Today at 07:27:18 AM
Re: Interstate 87 (NC-VA)
« Reply #1095 on: February 15, 2019, 12:52:35 AM »

Words from Captain Obvious:
If two interstate routes split apart, one of them will be on the left.
Neither of them is an exit, because an exit is a ramp that leaves the interstate system.
Continuity. I-40 is continuous through here, the left free-flowing ramps take you to I-73 South, not I-40. It's not "two routes splitting", it's I-40 continuing off to the right, and I-73 perpendicular to the roadway, and you exiting left onto it.

As the French would say, that is "gahr-baahzhze'". 

This is not a one-lane off-ramp decelerating down to a lower-class road.  One Interstate freeway roadway widens out to 5 lanes and then divides into two 3-lane Interstate freeway roadways.  Driver expectancy is that either roadway is an Interstate highway mainline roadway.  From a safety standpoint the whole transition is an Interstate mainline roadway that maintains full speed thru the whole area.  These highways were built as Interstate highways when this scheme was designed.

Though, in that regard, an I-87 to the right / VA-168 to the left split is the same thing. A left freeway to freeway exit, continuity to the right, where I-87 still has 2-lanes at 55 MPH.

Not an Interstate highway now or previously. 

A 5-lane Interstate freeway roadway splits into two 3-lane Interstate freeway roadways.  That is a mainline split, and there is no lefthand offramp there.
So when the 3-lane I-464 Southbound splits into two 2-lane freeway roadways, that's a left exit, but this isn't?

That is not I-464 as that highway's southern terminus is at I-64.

Interstate 464 in Virginia is the 5.7-mile-long freeway from I-64 in the City of Chesapeake to I-264 in the Berkley section of City of Norfolk.  Those are the official termini. 

The southern leg when built was VA-104 Dominion Blvd.

It is questionable as to whether that southbound US-17 really should be as high as 55 mph.
Actually, not really, it's easily driveable at 60 MPH. You're assuming.

I can drive the I-195 Acca Yards viaduct at 60 to 62 mph but I would not recommend that speed for the general community.  50 or below.

A southerly alternative shows the same infeasibility issues as did the northerly alternative, for trying to ram a mainline Interstate highway thru there --
http://capital-beltway.com/VI-87-464-17-s.jpg

The aforementioned sharp curves on US-17 and the fact that only 3 miles of Dominion Blvd. is freeway.  In guardrailed sections an 8-foot paved right shoulder.
Your sharp shoulders meet at least 62 MPH design according to you, and with superelevation in account, this could be studied for higher speed.

I never claimed that on Dominion Blvd.'s design.

Just like you can claim US 58 will have 70 MPH posted on substandard bypasses, it can easily happen here too.

Never said that it "will", just that the law would allow it pending the results of an engineering study.

I predicted that no metropolitan freeway general purpose lanes will be posted above 60 mph, based on what is practiced nearly everywhere in the U.S.  That includes the city of Chesapeake.

Going well out into rural areas is another matter, that is normally where the higher limits like 70 begin.

The 19 miles of I-95 between Colonial Heights and Maury Street in Richmond was posted at 65 mph when it was part of the Richmond-Petersburg Turnpike back well before 1973.  It has been 6-laned since then along with interchange improvements, and a paved median with a concrete median barrier was installed later; a considerably more modern and safe highway.  Today it is 60 mph.  When that gets raised I will believe it can happen in South Hampton Roads.  Until then I won't.

The best way to solve this issue IMHO is to leave Dominion Blvd. out of any Interstate highway proposal.
Ah, yes. More of this. The entirety of US-17 is a limited-access 4 lane highway, a design speed of 60 MPH (could be studied for higher), has a median of at least 42 foot (with one 2 mile exception), and is easily driveable at 65 MPH. It meets interstate standards, even at 60 MPH.

At-grade intersections do not meet Interstate highway standards.  Dominion Blvd. has 8-foot paved right shoulders in guardrailed sections.

Logged
http://www.roadstothefuture.com
http://www.capital-beltway.com

Baloney is a reserved word on the Internet
    (Robert Coté, 2002)

sparker

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 6908
  • Location: Bay Area, CA
  • Last Login: Today at 01:42:14 PM
Re: Interstate 87 (NC-VA)
« Reply #1096 on: February 15, 2019, 02:48:04 AM »

I must modify my previous assessment of the direction of this thread; it no longer resembles McEnroe v. Borg -- it's starting to look much more like Alexander Hamilton v. Aaron Burr!  Let's just hope both parties are standing at the conclusion (if one ever occurs)! 
Logged

GreenLanternCorps

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 326
  • What's behind me, is not important!

  • Age: 53
  • Location: Ohio
  • Last Login: Today at 01:30:55 PM
Re: Interstate 87 (NC-VA)
« Reply #1097 on: February 15, 2019, 09:31:19 AM »

I must modify my previous assessment of the direction of this thread; it no longer resembles McEnroe v. Borg -- it's starting to look much more like Alexander Hamilton v. Aaron Burr!  Let's just hope both parties are standing at the conclusion (if one ever occurs)!

No, it's more like Connor MacLeod vs. The Kurgan...

THERE CAN BE ONLY ONE!

 
Logged

hbelkins

  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 14559
  • It is well, it is well, with my soul.

  • Age: 58
  • Location: Kentucky
  • Last Login: Today at 03:13:57 PM
    • Millennium Highway
Re: Interstate 87 (NC-VA)
« Reply #1098 on: February 15, 2019, 02:20:17 PM »

Words from Captain Obvious:

If two interstate routes split apart, one of them will be on the left.

Neither of them is an exit, because an exit is a ramp that leaves the interstate system.

Then why are most of these splits signed as exits, with exit numbers and the now-standard "LEFT" black-on-yellow tabs?
Logged

sprjus4

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 4500
  • Location: Hampton Roads, VA
  • Last Login: Today at 06:38:43 PM
Re: Interstate 87 (NC-VA)
« Reply #1099 on: February 15, 2019, 05:28:00 PM »

This is not a one-lane off-ramp decelerating down to a lower-class road.  One Interstate freeway roadway widens out to 5 lanes and then divides into two 3-lane Interstate freeway roadways.  Driver expectancy is that either roadway is an Interstate highway mainline roadway.  From a safety standpoint the whole transition is an Interstate mainline roadway that maintains full speed thru the whole area.  These highways were built as Interstate highways when this scheme was designed.
Not an Interstate highway now or previously.
VA-168 and US-17 split at the southern terminus of I-464. They are not signed as interstates, correct, but are both interstate-standard highway. Both highways have 10 foot paved shoulders, 12 foot travel lanes, are freeways. It's a multi-lane split, not a "single lane" exit to a lower class road. There's no difference between this and the I-40 / I-73 split, they're both multi-lane, would be signed as a Left Exit properly (currently, it's correct because VA-168 is the mainline, US-17 exits. This would be flipped), and they both are interstate-standard freeways, one signed as interstate. Just because it doesn't carry the blue and red shield doesn't make it different. They're equally high-quality high-speed roadways built to the same standard.

I can drive the I-195 Acca Yards viaduct at 60 to 62 mph but I would not recommend that speed for the general community.  50 or below.
That's a viaduct, has two sharper curves, of course an advised speed would be 50 MPH. The 55 MPH US-17 ramp is straight with one curve onto the Dominion Blvd interstate-standard freeway, and is posted and driveable at 55 MPH. The majority of drivers, including semis, drive this at 55 MPH or higher. I've seen semis in the left and right lane taking the curve together, and both maintained their lane and 60 MPH around the curve.

A southerly alternative shows the same infeasibility issues as did the northerly alternative, for trying to ram a mainline Interstate highway thru there --
http://capital-beltway.com/VI-87-464-17-s.jpg
Ah yes, your right exit appeal. Your option addresses none of the issues that the existing interchange has (which it really doesn't have any), except a higher speed limit. They are not going to destroy and abandoned a perfectly adequate mainly 55 MPH interchange built recently to appeal for a higher speed and right exits. If there's truly a 55 MPH design speed and right exits desired, here's a concept that would use existing location, and only replace or modify one single overpass. No homes destroyed, existing interchange mostly retained, and would satisfy your desires a lot cheaper than a full relocation. In today's costs, this would likely be about $50-60 million.

EDIT: Now thinking about it, this would be an interesting concept if I-87 was to run I-464. But I do not support a new location whatsoever, nor would almost anybody.



I never claimed that on Dominion Blvd.'s design.
Referring to the southern section of US 17. The Dominion Blvd freeway is designed at 60 MPH.

based on what is practiced nearly everywhere in the U.S.
That's beyond false. Many metropolitan areas have 65 MPH mainly and even 70 MPH in some cities. It's around the core downtown areas that are slower, 55 MPH or 60 MPH, but the suburbs usually have 65 MPH and 70 MPH.

The Northeast + Virginia have slower speeds through the suburb areas, and only higher speeds in rural areas, but most of the US does not follow this practice. I can name numerous of cities which have 65 MPH speed limits in suburbs, even some with 70 MPH, hell 75 MPH in some western ones.

Going well out into rural areas is another matter, that is normally where the higher limits like 70 begin.
US-17 is a completely rural 4-lane highway beyond George Washington Hwy. It's not "suburban" or "urban" anymore.

The 19 miles of I-95 between Colonial Heights and Maury Street in Richmond was posted at 65 mph when it was part of the Richmond-Petersburg Turnpike back well before 1973.  It has been 6-laned since then along with interchange improvements, and a paved median with a concrete median barrier was installed later; a considerably more modern and safe highway.  Today it is 60 mph.  When that gets raised I will believe it can happen in South Hampton Roads.  Until then I won't.
I-64 in Newport News was a 3-lane highway, and was widened to 4-lanes in the early 2000s. Full inner and outer shoulders, barrier wall, well designed. 60 MPH. In December 2018, it was raised to 65 MPH. Case in point.

It's funny, because you say no highway in South Hampton Roads will be posted beyond 60 MPH, yet you propose US 58 between I-664 and west of Suffolk (including the bypass) can be as high as 70 MPH. It can be considered rural, but pretty suburban on the bypass. US-17 in Chesapeake is way more rural than that highway, but you claim it can be only 60 MPH. You're blatantly contradicting yourself to make US-58 more attractive, and to shoot down US-17,  Keep it consistent. If US-58 can be raised to 70 MPH, then US-17 can be raised to 70 MPH. If US-17 cannot be higher than 60 MPH, than US-58 cannot be higher than 60 MPH.

At-grade intersections do not meet Interstate highway standards.  Dominion Blvd. has 8-foot paved right shoulders in guardrailed sections.
*10 foot shoulders

The cross-section of US-17 from I-64 to North Carolina meets interstate standards with one exception. The US-17 relocation done in 2005 has 8 foot shoulders, and this would likely involve adding 2 foot of pavement (since it's only 2 foot, not an entire shoulder, a full reconstruction of the shoulder would not be necessary) to the outside. This likely would not add much more than $15 million to the project, if that.
« Last Edit: February 15, 2019, 05:33:08 PM by sprjus4 »
Logged

 


Opinions expressed here on belong solely to the poster and do not represent or reflect the opinions or beliefs of AARoads, its creators and/or associates.