US 58 -- Past, Present, and Future

[Beltway]

Regarding what to do between there and Holland, one alternative would be to continue the 6-lane rebuild to the Holland Bypass, with access management.

Based on my experience, I don't think it quite warrants 6 lanes yet. According to VDOT, it only carries around 25,000 AADT and with only a few traffic signals, the roadway is adequate for now.

At least needs modernization with grade improvements in a few places, 12-foot lanes thruout, 10-foot paved shoulders, and long left turn and right turn lanes.

Any long range construction should be a relocation, which is what Suffolk shows on their long range plan. The goal isn't necessarily capacity, but rather creation of a limited access highway with free-flow.
The current widening covers an area with closer to 35,000 AADT, and more traffic signals. Bottlenecks are caused by trucks slow to accelerate out of the red lights, and the frequency of signals. That is not so much an issue west of the project.

If they want to bypass US-58, then why spend what $50 million on construction and $30 million on right-of-way for what they just widened?

The answer I know is LAP, which puts the city or country in the drivers' seat, and they may or may not make the very best decisions.

VDOT has increasingly embraced devolution of transportation projects to municipalities through its Locally Administered Projects (LAP) program, allowing cities, towns, and counties to take the lead on planning, designing, and delivering infrastructure projects -- especially those funded through state or federal programs.

Key features of VDOT's devolution framework
+ Locally Administered Projects (LAP):
+ Localities can manage projects directly, provided they meet VDOT's qualification standards.
+ Projects must be listed in the Six-Year Improvement Program (SYIP).
+ Local staff must complete the LAP Qualification Program, including online modules and in-person training.
+ Oversight Tiers:
+ Tier 1: Lower-risk projects reviewed by VDOT District Offices.
+ Tier 2: Higher-risk projects require Central Office oversight.
+ Project Requirements:
+ NEPA compliance
+ Title VI certification
+ Right-of-way acquisition per federal standards
+ Consultant procurement via VDOT-approved RFP processes

[Thing 342]

The answer I know is LAP, which puts the city or country in the drivers' seat, and they may or may not make the very best decisions.

Mostly not, based on the abysmal on-time/on-budget statistics presented on VDOT's project dashboard: https://dashboard.virginiadot.org/pages/projects/projects.aspx

[Rothman]

At least in NY, seriously advocating for the handing over the relocation of a state-owned major highway to a locally-administered federal-aid project would be an idea that could get the program manager fired from NYSDOT.

[Beltway]

The answer I know is LAP, which puts the city or country in the drivers' seat, and they may or may not make the very best decisions.

Mostly not, based on the abysmal on-time/on-budget statistics presented on VDOT's project dashboard: https://dashboard.virginiadot.org/pages/projects/projects.aspx

Those numbers are quite good for delivery of highway projects. Bad numbers would be in the 30 to 45% or so range.

I am on the fence about the LAP programs. But frankly I haven't seen any real improvements in delivery. The locality may feel like it is better for them.

At least in NY, seriously advocating for the handing over the relocation of a state-owned major highway to a locally-administered federal-aid project would be an idea that could get the program manager fired from NYSDOT.

Locally administered with a long list of state and federal requirements that they must meet. Or lose that status.

At least VDOT is not considering tearing down any Interstate highways.

[WillWeaverRVA]

At least VDOT is not considering tearing down any Interstate highways.

They probably could stand to get rid of I-381, though. (Seriously, just redesignate it an I-81 business spur.)

[Mapmikey]

At least VDOT is not considering tearing down any Interstate highways.

They probably could stand to get rid of I-381, though. (Seriously, just redesignate it an I-81 business spur.)

I would make it US 19 and run it up I-81 then replace VA 140 to Abingdon.

[WillWeaverRVA]

At least VDOT is not considering tearing down any Interstate highways.

They probably could stand to get rid of I-381, though. (Seriously, just redesignate it an I-81 business spur.)

I would make it US 19 and run it up I-81 then replace VA 140 to Abingdon.

Looking at a map, that's probably a better idea.

[The Ghostbuster]

I don't think the Interstate 381 designation is going anywhere, although I do consider it a dinky 3di.

[Rothman]

I-381 is eligible for 90% federal reimbursement.  I doubt they'll get rid of it any time soon.

[Mapmikey]

At least VDOT is not considering tearing down any Interstate highways.

They probably could stand to get rid of I-381, though. (Seriously, just redesignate it an I-81 business spur.)

I would make it US 19 and run it up I-81 then replace VA 140 to Abingdon.

Looking at a map, that's probably a better idea.

I'm surprised they didn't do this when they moved US 58 onto I-81 in 1966, especially given that US 58 is not much of a through route in either direction, especially east of Abingdon.  US 19 is much more of a through route north of Abingdon.

[Beltway]

I'm surprised they didn't do this when they moved US 58 onto I-81 in 1966, especially given that US 58 is not much of a through route in either direction, especially east of Abingdon.  US 19 is much more of a through route north of Abingdon.

Abingdon needs a ALT US-58 bypass. About 2.5 miles long and connecting ALT US-58 north of town to I-81 west of town.

In conjunction with I-81 it would provide a full 4-lane bypass of the town. A US-19 bypass and a ALT US-58 to US-58 bypass.

[sprjus4]

I'm surprised they didn't do this when they moved US 58 onto I-81 in 1966, especially given that US 58 is not much of a through route in either direction, especially east of Abingdon.  US 19 is much more of a through route north of Abingdon.

Abingdon needs a ALT US-58 bypass. About 2.5 miles long and connecting ALT US-58 north of town to I-81 west of town.

In conjunction with I-81 it would provide a full 4-lane bypass of the town. A US-19 bypass and a ALT US-58 to US-58 bypass.

You could even go shorter and connect with Jonesboro Rd at US-11. It wouldn't be freeway grade, but would divert traffic outside of Abingdon and to the existing I-81 interchange.

I'm not sure the traffic volumes there warrant full freeway, let alone the cost for interchanges at I-81 and US-11, so this would be an option.

[Beltway]

Abingdon needs a ALT US-58 bypass. About 2.5 miles long and connecting ALT US-58 north of town to I-81 west of town.
In conjunction with I-81 it would provide a full 4-lane bypass of the town. A US-19 bypass and a ALT US-58 to US-58 bypass.

You could even go shorter and connect with Jonesboro Rd at US-11. It wouldn't be freeway grade, but would divert traffic outside of Abingdon and to the existing I-81 interchange.
I'm not sure the traffic volumes there warrant full freeway, let alone the cost for interchanges at I-81 and US-11, so this would be an option.

Yes - I can see that could be done in 1.5 mile of new highway.

I wasn't thinking of a freeway, just an at-grade limited access highway.

[CYoder]

Abingdon needs a ALT US-58 bypass. About 2.5 miles long and connecting ALT US-58 north of town to I-81 west of town.
In conjunction with I-81 it would provide a full 4-lane bypass of the town. A US-19 bypass and a ALT US-58 to US-58 bypass.

You could even go shorter and connect with Jonesboro Rd at US-11. It wouldn't be freeway grade, but would divert traffic outside of Abingdon and to the existing I-81 interchange.
I'm not sure the traffic volumes there warrant full freeway, let alone the cost for interchanges at I-81 and US-11, so this would be an option.

Yes - I can see that could be done in 1.5 mile of new highway.

I wasn't thinking of a freeway, just an at-grade limited access highway.

I remember occasionally reading about a proposed extension for VA 140 to Porterfield Hwy. Managed to dig up an old map off of Internet Archive. (And the old landing page for the curious.)

[Beltway]

You could even go shorter and connect with Jonesboro Rd at US-11. It wouldn't be freeway grade, but would divert traffic outside of Abingdon and to the existing I-81 interchange.
I'm not sure the traffic volumes there warrant full freeway, let alone the cost for interchanges at I-81 and US-11, so this would be an option.

Yes - I can see that could be done in 1.5 mile of new highway.
I wasn't thinking of a freeway, just an at-grade limited access highway.

I remember occasionally reading about a proposed extension for VA 140 to Porterfield Hwy. Managed to dig up an old map off of Internet Archive. (And the old landing page for the curious.)

2020 Transportation Plan of Town of Abingdon
Prepared by VDOT Transportation Planning Division in 2001

So it is an official plan and recent.

The exact route I was thinking of, and the R4D means Rural 4-lane Divided cross-section.

VA-140 north of I-81 has the same cross-section.