South Lawrence Trafficway (K-10) West leg Study and East Leg Construction Update

[Alex]

Looks like your camera has too short of a shutter speed. My Nikon D5100 did that often as well...

[route56]

I keep a circular polarizer on my lenses. They do tend to cause underexposure. I'm also shooting into the sun.


54840 by Richie Kennedy, on Flickr
K-10 marker past the Haskell interchange, with the noise wall separating the SLT from 31st and the Haskell Campus.


54842 by Richie Kennedy, on Flickr
Second advance marker for the US 59/Iowa interchange


54844 by Richie Kennedy, on Flickr
Third advance marker for the US 59/Iowa interchange


54845 by Richie Kennedy, on Flickr
The ribbon-cutting banner across westbound K-10 at Michigan Street


54846 by Richie Kennedy, on Flickr
US 59 pavement marking.


54849 by Richie Kennedy, on Flickr
Driving across the "Bridge to Nowhere"


54850 by Richie Kennedy, on Flickr
Transitioning onto the older two lane segment.

[US 41]

Can't wait until I get to drive on this in less than a month. 

[route56]

This press release just came in regarding the west leg. Commentary posted below.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
November 21, 2016

News Contact: Kimberly Qualls, (785) 640-9340 or kimberly.qualls@ks.gov, Aaron Frits, P.E., (785) 296-4139 or aaron.frits@ks.gov

K-10 SLT West Leg Study Update: SEIS Process to Begin Next Spring

In order to keep local stakeholders and the public informed, the Kansas Department of Transportation would like to provide an update on the status of the K-10 South Lawrence Trafficway West Leg Study in Lawrence (Douglas County).

After listening to public comments and stakeholder input on the K-10 West Leg Study and alternatives for improvement to the I-70/K-10/Farmer's Turnpike Interchange and adjacent roadways, KDOT has spent the past several months reviewing options for moving forward and discussing what is in the best interest of the K-10 corridor in serving transportation needs across the region. Preferred Access Alternatives and local road improvements have been a part of these ongoing discussions.

KDOT has decided to re-evaluate the K-10 corridor and the I-70/K-10/Farmer's Turnpike interchange through a Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (SEIS). The SEIS will fully evaluate and document the impacts and benefits that alternatives will have on the surrounding area throughout the study process. The SEIS will also allow KDOT to gather additional input from the public and local stakeholders.

The SEIS process will begin sometime spring 2017 and is expected to take approximately three years to complete. Throughout the process, KDOT will engage the community through stakeholder and public meetings/workshops to provide updates and gather input. KDOT will also continue to work with local public officials so that they are aware of modifications, new alternatives and potential implications of these on the community.

As a reminder, there is currently no funding for construction of any long-term improvements, but KDOT desires to continue with the design process so that when funding becomes available, construction can move forward.

We appreciate your input and encourage you to stay engaged as the study moves forward and the SEIS process begins. If you would like to receive updates, meeting notices and related information via email on the K-10 SLT West Leg Study, please send your email address to kimberly.qualls@ks.gov.

For more information on the K-10 SLT West Leg Study, please visit the study online at: http://www.ksdot.org/bureaus/TopekaMetro/projectstudytest.asp

For questions or additional information on the study, you can contact Aaron Frits, P.E., KDOT Project Manager, at aaron.frits@ks.gov or Kimberly Qualls, NE KDOT Public Affairs Manager at kimberly.qualls@ks.gov. (KDOT Project #10-23 KA-3634-04)

First off, I have not heard anything that indicates that any environmental groups were pressuring KDOT into going back into the NEPA process. That being said, I wouldn't consider a NEPA review unjustified - the design of the SLT and the land use out on the west leg have changed significantly since the original EIS was completed in 1990. I'm scratching my head wondering why this is being considered a supplement to the 1990 EIS. In my mind, the 4-laning of the west leg is a new project and, therefore, it should be considered as a new EIS.

[Bobby5280]

I'm surprised there would be any debate at all about adding the second set of lanes to the SLT between Iowa Street and the I-70 interchange West of town. The right of way is already secured. The road is already limited access and has freeway style exits for the most part, except for the W 27th street intersection.

The interchange with K-10/SLT and I-70 is really the only huge project I see looming ahead for this corridor. The existing interchange could actually be left as is, if the traffic levels aren't very high. But sticking stop signs or traffic lights in between a tollway to freeway connection kind of stinks. There's not enough room to build a cloverleaf interchange. A modified trumpet interchange or modified T interchange that preserves the exit for E 850 Rd would probably fit just fine.

[route56]

I'm surprised there would be any debate at all about adding the second set of lanes to the SLT between Iowa Street and the I-70 interchange West of town. The right of way is already secured. The road is already limited access and has freeway style exits for the most part, except for the W 27th street intersection.

If it were as simple as adding the second carriageway adjacent to the existing lanes, then this would clearly be a Finding Of No Significant Impact, and an EIS/SEIS would not be required.

The kicker here is that the SLT was not initially envisioned by its original proponents as a freeway.  In addition to having a folded-diamond interchange with the Turnpike, the curve at the Clinton Parkway interchange is substandard. Fixing the curve for a 70 MPH design speed will likely mean that some houses (which were developed after the SLT opened to traffic) will have to be taken. The likelihood of these takings probably triggered the NEPA review.

[Ned Weasel]

The interchange with K-10/SLT and I-70 is really the only huge project I see looming ahead for this corridor. The existing interchange could actually be left as is, if the traffic levels aren't very high. But sticking stop signs or traffic lights in between a tollway to freeway connection kind of stinks. There's not enough room to build a cloverleaf interchange. A modified trumpet interchange or modified T interchange that preserves the exit for E 850 Rd would probably fit just fine.

I finally thought of a re-design idea for this interchange that I actually like: https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=8790.msg2188414#msg2188414 .  Something like a double-trumpet might actually fit.  The problem is double-trumpets aren't exactly in style anymore.

[route56]

Well, this happened.

http://www2.ljworld.com/news/2016/nov/22/three-car-crash-injures-multiple-people-k-10-troop/

As I'm understanding this, the accident was caused by a driver attempting to turn left against the (recently completed) right-in, right-out restrictions at the Kasold.

[mvak36]

Well, this happened.

http://www2.ljworld.com/news/2016/nov/22/three-car-crash-injures-multiple-people-k-10-troop/

As I'm understanding this, the accident was caused by a driver attempting to turn left against the (recently completed) right-in, right-out restrictions at the Kasold.

Are there any actual barriers at this interchange? Or is it just some signage and restriped lanes?

[route56]

Are there any actual barriers at this interchange? Or is it just some signage and restriped lanes?

Just signage and channelizers. No hard barriers.

[Bobby5280]

Damn. I overlooked that at-grade intersection when I wrote my earlier response. That accident could put a little more pressure on getting the West leg of the SLT upgraded.

[Scott5114]

I made it a point this morning to come back from Kansas City via Lawrence and Topeka so I could check out K-10 and the SLT.

I'm guessing it's because it's where the SLT splits away from the existing K-10 freeway, but the 23rd Street interchange seems hilariously overbuilt and out of place. I'd imagine in twenty years when the SLT isn't "new" anymore people will wonder why there's such a big interchange there.

Agreed that the west leg could definitely use a freeway upgrade. Good thing most of the ROW is secure and the bridges built to easily accommodate a full 4-lane freeway.

[yakra]

I'm guessing it's because it's where the SLT splits away from the existing K-10 freeway, but the 23rd Street interchange seems hilariously overbuilt and out of place. I'd imagine in twenty years when the SLT isn't "new" anymore people will wonder why there's such a big interchange there.

I was thinking the same thing. I thought it woulda made sense to continue access on thru on old K-10, and have E 1750 in place as a connecting road. Build a nice little parclo, with ramps terminating at the N 1300 & N1360 junctions...

[mvak36]

It looks like KDOT might not make any changes to the Kasold curve: http://www2.ljworld.com/news/2016/nov/27/kdot-says-additional-improvements-kasold-and-slt-i/

EDIT: There will be changes. http://www2.ljworld.com/news/2016/dec/03/kdot-announces-more-signs-poles-stripping-problem-/

[route56]

It only took about 6 weeks before the topic of people using K-10 to shunpike I-70 came along:

http://www2.ljworld.com/news/2016/dec/21/slt-threatens-cut-turnpike-revenue/

[US 41]

It only took about 6 weeks before the topic of people using K-10 to shunpike I-70 came along:

http://www2.ljworld.com/news/2016/dec/21/slt-threatens-cut-turnpike-revenue/

I used this to avoid the Turnpike earlier this month. A big plus was that I didn't have to drive through downtown KC to do it either. US 40 wasn't great though (between Lawrence and Topeka) and I think most people will continue to use I-70, but I'm sure there will be plenty of others like me that will use this as a shunpike route.

[J N Winkler]

Direct route via Turnpike = 64.5 miles.

Shunpike route via K-10 and US 24 = 80 miles.

Shunpike route via K-10 and US 40 = 73.6 miles.

US 40 between Topeka and Lawrence winds up hill and down dale so much that I would trade seven additional miles for smoother running.  Before the Kansas Speedway was built, the easiest shunpike route of all was US 24 outside the I-435 loop (72.8 miles).

[Ned Weasel]

It only took about 6 weeks before the topic of people using K-10 to shunpike I-70 came along:

http://www2.ljworld.com/news/2016/dec/21/slt-threatens-cut-turnpike-revenue/

I don't think the issue with the South Lawrence Trafficway drawing traffic from the Kansas Turnpike has so much to do with it providing a new shunpike route as it has to do with providing a more convenient route for two very significant purposes.  (1) It now provides the most direct route between Kansas's state capital and the center of its most populous county (Johnson) as well as the state's second most populous city (Overland Park).  I believe the article mentioned this.  Previously, the main choices were either to go all the way north on I-70 as it turns north east of Lawrence and then come back south on I-435 or to suffer through Lawrence traffic in order to get between I-70 and K-10.  (2) The South Lawrence Trafficway was the missing link in Kansas City's first useful east-west bypass (which consists of thee routes: K-10, I-435, and I-470).  I-435 was always a useful bypass for northeast-southwest traffic (I-35 traffic), but it was never a good bypass for long-distance I-70 traffic, because, as with the first point, one would have to go all the way north into Leavenworth and Wyandotte Counties as I-70 turns north, only to go back south along I-435.  With K-10, you skip Leavenworth and Wyandotte Counties entirely.

Anyone who can read a map could have predicted that the South Lawrence Trafficway would draw traffic from the Kansas Turnpike.  I think it's also a safe prediction that the two-lane portion will become very congested until it is upgraded to a full freeway.  I imagine it will often be hard to come close to the 65-MPH speed limit during daytime hours.  The traffic might end up looking like the traffic on the last remaining portion of US 40 in St. Charles County, MO to be upgraded to I-64, before that was completed.

[J N Winkler]

The South Lawrence Trafficway was the missing link in Kansas City's first useful east-west bypass (which consists of three routes: K-10, I-435, and I-470).  I-435 was always a useful bypass for northeast-southwest traffic (I-35 traffic), but it was never a good bypass for long-distance I-70 traffic, because, as with the first point, one would have to go all the way north into Leavenworth and Wyandotte Counties as I-70 turns north, only to go back south along I-435.  With K-10, you skip Leavenworth and Wyandotte Counties entirely.

I-435 also has better access to regional retail destinations (for starters, Leawood has the only Dean & Deluca between DC and northern California, and the only REI between St. Louis and Denver).  However, I'm a bit skeptical about long-distance traffic actually using the K-10/I-435/I-70 itinerary as a southern KC bypass, except possibly to save a modest amount in Turnpike tolls, because there is a length disadvantage (66.2 miles versus 57.7 miles), a time disadvantage (52 minutes versus 1 hour), and more congestion along the Lenexa-Overland Park-Leawood corridor (it and parts of I-35 inside the I-435 loop are the only parts of the Kansas freeway network that have ramp metering).

I frankly do not consider Kansas City to have an effective bypass in any direction, and I have looked for one in the southwest/northeast axis because it is my gateway to places like Minneapolis/St. Paul, Chicago, Milwaukee, Detroit, and so on.  For example, I just mapped avoiding-KC itineraries for Emporia, Kansas to Chillicothe, Missouri (part of a logical Wichita-to-Chicago itinerary) and the route through KC is three miles and 16 minutes shorter than the route through Atchison and St. Joseph (following I-335, K-4, US 59, and US 36) that avoids transiting a major metropolitan area without going too far afield.

[Ned Weasel]

I-435 also has better access to regional retail destinations (for starters, Leawood has the only Dean & Deluca between DC and northern California, and the only REI between St. Louis and Denver).  However, I'm a bit skeptical about long-distance traffic actually using the K-10/I-435/I-70 itinerary as a southern KC bypass, except possibly to save a modest amount in Turnpike tolls, because there is a length disadvantage (66.2 miles versus 57.7 miles), a time disadvantage (52 minutes versus 1 hour), and more congestion along the Lenexa-Overland Park-Leawood corridor (it and parts of I-35 inside the I-435 loop are the only parts of the Kansas freeway network that have ramp metering).

I frankly do not consider Kansas City to have an effective bypass in any direction, and I have looked for one in the southwest/northeast axis because it is my gateway to places like Minneapolis/St. Paul, Chicago, Milwaukee, Detroit, and so on.  For example, I just mapped avoiding-KC itineraries for Emporia, Kansas to Chillicothe, Missouri (part of a logical Wichita-to-Chicago itinerary) and the route through KC is three miles and 16 minutes shorter than the route through Atchison and St. Joseph (following I-335, K-4, US 59, and US 36) that avoids transiting a major metropolitan area without going too far afield.

My assumption was that many people would rather avoid Kansas City's Downtown Loop, with its tight curves, 45-MPH speed limit, and Interstate routes being squeezed down to one lane in a direction in some places.  But yes, the east-west, eight-lane portion of I-435 can be quite slow at times, especially as you see rush-hour traffic commuting between Overland Park and Lee's Summit.  Conversely, it's often possible to get through the Downtown Loop with little if any delay.

[rte66man]

The South Lawrence Trafficway was the missing link in Kansas City's first useful east-west bypass (which consists of three routes: K-10, I-435, and I-470).  I-435 was always a useful bypass for northeast-southwest traffic (I-35 traffic), but it was never a good bypass for long-distance I-70 traffic, because, as with the first point, one would have to go all the way north into Leavenworth and Wyandotte Counties as I-70 turns north, only to go back south along I-435.  With K-10, you skip Leavenworth and Wyandotte Counties entirely.

Having the same desire, I often wondered about the St Joseph "bypass".  We've been taking 70 to 435 north to 152.  The bad part of that is the Liberty mess; however, that is always a good rest stop point.

I-435 also has better access to regional retail destinations (for starters, Leawood has the only Dean & Deluca between DC and northern California, and the only REI between St. Louis and Denver).  However, I'm a bit skeptical about long-distance traffic actually using the K-10/I-435/I-70 itinerary as a southern KC bypass, except possibly to save a modest amount in Turnpike tolls, because there is a length disadvantage (66.2 miles versus 57.7 miles), a time disadvantage (52 minutes versus 1 hour), and more congestion along the Lenexa-Overland Park-Leawood corridor (it and parts of I-35 inside the I-435 loop are the only parts of the Kansas freeway network that have ramp metering).

I frankly do not consider Kansas City to have an effective bypass in any direction, and I have looked for one in the southwest/northeast axis because it is my gateway to places like Minneapolis/St. Paul, Chicago, Milwaukee, Detroit, and so on.  For example, I just mapped avoiding-KC itineraries for Emporia, Kansas to Chillicothe, Missouri (part of a logical Wichita-to-Chicago itinerary) and the route through KC is three miles and 16 minutes shorter than the route through Atchison and St. Joseph (following I-335, K-4, US 59, and US 36) that avoids transiting a major metropolitan area without going too far afield.