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

[route56]

On Tuesday (March 31) KDOT had a presentation in Lawrence on upgrading the western leg of the South Lawrence Trafficway.

The eastern leg, which was involved in a prolonged Environmental Impact Statement process and subsequent litigation in an attempt to keep the trafficway from going across the Baker Wetlands, is being built as a 4-lane freeway. The western leg, built in the mid 1990s, was built as a "super two." Upgrading the existing western leg of the SLT, needless to say, is a little more involved than adding the second carriageway.

Starting at the north/west end: K-10 currently ends at a folded-diamond interchange with the Turnpike, with a connection to the parallel N 1800 Road, also known as the "Farmer's Turnpike" or County Road 438.  KDOT is looking at three options to make a free flowing freeway-to freeway junction. One option would create "flyover" ramps over top of the existing folded diamond, adding roundabouts to the folded diamond ramps, and keeping the connection to N 1800 intact. The other two options would convert the interchange into a "trumpet" with the access to N 1800 eliminated. To compensate for the loss of access to Lecompton from the namesake interchange, KDOT is proposing a new interchange at E 600 Road, (KTA MP 194) E 1000 Road, (KTA MP 198) or both.

At 6th Street (US 40), KDOT is proposing changing this interchange into a DDI. This was not part of the presentation, but is on KDOT's radar. As noted a while back, the interchange is now signalized with a span-wire installation.

At Bob Billings Parkway (N 1500 Road on the county road system) a diamond interchange is under construction.

The curve at Clinton Parkway has a design speed (and posted advisory speed) of 60 MPH. KDOT wants to re-align this curve for a 70 MPH design speed, which would likely require the property of some recently-constructed houses. Interchange options here include a regular diamond, folded diamond, and something called a "Offset SPUI," where the ramps to/from westbound K-10 cross over the mainline and intersect Clinton Parkway at a roundabout along with the ramps to-from eastbound K-10.

Another option would be to eliminate the interchange at Clinton Parkway altogether, and build a diamond interchange further to the east. In this scenario, a new frontage road would be built along the west side of K-10, and the primary entrance to Clinton Lake from the north would be via the Bob Billings Parkway interchange.

On the original 1990 EIS, the area to the southwest of the existing traffic light at 27th Street was marked as an "Area of no planned recreational activity." By the time the SLT was opened, recreational facilities had been built in that area. This has led to congestion at that light, especially on the weekends. Options include building a diamond or folded diamond interchange here, with different ways of configuring the local streets, or buiding the interchange to the southeast at Inverness instead.

The current at-grade intersection at Kasold Drive will be eliminated. Either the SLT would go over Kasold, or Kasold would be cut off entirely.

EDIT 6/10/16 Eventually, the intersection at Kasold will be eliminated, see posts downthread.

Needless to say if you follow Kansas politics: No funding sources for the proposed improvements to the SLT western leg have been identified, and construction is several years away.

[Scott5114]

What are the odds that SLT opponents, angry that they lost on the east half, will come back out of hiding to protest any upgrades to the western half of it?

[route56]

What are the odds that SLT opponents, angry that they lost on the east half, will come back out of hiding to protest any upgrades to the western half of it?

Haven't heard anything suggesting that, nor have I heard of any instances of vandalism on the SLT construction site.

[mrcontroversy]

What happened to the plans of rerouting US-59 along that alignment and running the freeway to US-24. That was mentioned in the Journal-World a few months ago.

[route56]

What happened to the plans of rerouting US-59 along that alignment and running the freeway to US-24. That was mentioned in the Journal-World a few months ago.

I can't seem to find it in the recent J-W archives anything about the possibility of extending the Trafficway north; last time I heard it suggested, it was quickly shot down.

[yakra]

It seems a sensible option for a direct route and bypass of Lawrence; it's a pretty straight shot from the W end of K-10 to the 24/59 junction in Williamstown.

Direct route? O HAY! Speaking of that, why not just have US40 leave I-70 at US75, and follow US24 to US59?
I GOT YER MILEAGE CAP RIGHT HERE!!
*Ahem.* This is fictional highways territory, isn't it?

[Highway63]

Did the US 40 signs move onto K-10? I know that was supposed to happen but couldn't find any follow-ups.

[route56]

Did the US 40 signs move onto K-10? I know that was supposed to happen but couldn't find any follow-ups.

US 40 is still signed along 6th Street, and I have not seen any Highway Resolution or CCL Resolution that indicates that it has happened, either.

However, last year, two of the city's major intersections, 6th and Iowa and 23rd and Iowa, were rebuilt. The new signal-mounted street blades on Iowa at 23rd only show US 59 (with K-10 not present at all in anticipation of the SLT eastern leg completion). The blades on Iowa at 6th carry both the US 40 and US 59 shields (in apparent contradiction to the guide signs on the ground)

[Atomica]

I have just driven past that project myself and it looks rather impressive.   The completed product will be a welcome sight for those driving through Lawrence as they won't have to fight with traffic lights especially the ones at 23d/Clinton and US59 - and 31st Street.

[route56]

[Thread exhumation permit number 10-23 K-1501]

KDOT sent out a survey this afternoon regarding public input for proposed improvements to the western leg of the SLT.

Much of the survey was focused on whether the Clinton Parkway interchange should be retained. KDOT has narrowed its suggested improvements along this stretch: They now recommend building a modified DDI southeast of the current traffic signal at Wakarusa and creating a grade separation at Wakarusa. A new east-west road would connect the interchange to Wakarusa, but would not connect to local roads north of K-10. At the current Clinton Parkway interchange, they either propose rebuilding it (no specific design indicated) or eliminating it. If the interchange was eliminated, Clinton Parkway would still pass under the SLT. Access to Clinton Lake would either be via an extended Frontage Road connecting to the Bob Billings Parkway interchange, or via the Wakarusa interchange and Clinton Parkway.

The other design consideration is at the K-10/I-70 connection. It has been narrowed down to either a six-ramp interchange with flyover ramps between K-10 and I-70, or two separate interchanges, a trumpet connecting I-70 to K-10 only and a diamond interchange at E 600 Road south of Lecompton.

Access to Kasold would be eliminated, and the existing Kasold would dead-end at K-10.

In other news: A major milestone has been reached on the SLT construction project, as the new 31st Street opened to traffic August 7.


51899 by Richie Kennedy, on Flickr

SLT Construction - East Flickr album by me

[yakra]

Oh wow. Google Satellite view shows progress (Edit: on the eastern leg) coming along quite nicely. I had no idea... When is it expected to open?

[route56]

Related to the current construction on the east leg, these two youtube videos (first one from KDOT, second one from Baker) related to the dedication of the new Discovery Center built as part of the mitigation project.

[route56]

[Made slight change to the subject line to include current construction activity into this thread]

A traffic shift has occurred on K-10... Eastbound traffic has been shifted onto the new 23rd Street to Eastbound K-10 ramp. Traffic is still one lane each direction. This configuration should remain until next spring.

[route56]

Photos of the new eastbound 23rd to eastbound K-10 ramp (which currently serves one lane of eastbound K-10)


52604 by Richie Kennedy, on Flickr

Eventually, this will hold two BGSs indicating K-10 east in the left lane, K-10 west in the right. (note that it is the traditional "box" style truss and not the triangular truss being used in the Johnson County Gateway project)




52608 by Richie Kennedy, on Flickr

New eastbound 23rd Street to westbound K-10 ramp.




52609 by Richie Kennedy, on Flickr



Tri-level junction: EB K-10 to 23rd on Top, 23rd to EB K-10 in the middle, new K-10 mainline below


52611 by Richie Kennedy, on Flickr

New eastbound K-10 lanes.

[route56]

The inherent loss of access in turning a road into a freeway rears its ugly head:

http://m.ljworld.com/news/2016/feb/15/lecompton-area-residents-have-chance-voice-concern/

The folks in northwestern Douglas County (Including, full disclosure, both my sisters) are miffed that KDOT's plans to make the K-10/I-70 junction a freeway-to-freeway connection will result in the loss of direct access to K-10

http://m.ljworld.com/weblogs/town_talk/2016/feb/15/debate-brewing-over-possible-closure-of-/

Meanwhile, on the south end, KDOT doesn't want to wait to eliminate an at-grade.


iPhone

[Ned Weasel]

The inherent loss of access in turning a road into a freeway rears its ugly head:

http://m.ljworld.com/news/2016/feb/15/lecompton-area-residents-have-chance-voice-concern/

The folks in northwestern Douglas County (Including, full disclosure, both my sisters) are miffed that KDOT's plans to make the K-10/I-70 junction a freeway-to-freeway connection will result in the loss of direct access to K-10

I was tempted to say KDOT and the KTA should build a double-trumpet there with a single toll plaza, just like traditional freeway-to-turnpike connections, but there doesn't seem to be enough space for it or anything similar.  Paving E 800 Road between CR 438 and US 40 would alleviate some of these concerns, however.  Also, at the existing K-10/Turnpike interchange, they could simply build separate roadways for EB-to-EB traffic and WB-to-WB traffic to bypass the at-grade intersections (albeit at slow speeds), although this wouldn't address the WB-to-EB connections.

Is there a diagram anywhere showing the option to build the flyover ramps you mentioned in the original post on this thread?  Also, is there a diagram for the "Alternative B" referenced in the article?

(I made a small edit to the first paragraph of this response.)

[mvak36]

So will they do electronic tolling at the I-70 interchange? Or toll booths like the rest of the turnpike?

[Ned Weasel]

So will they do electronic tolling at the I-70 interchange? Or toll booths like the rest of the turnpike?

I don't know when the KTA will actually implement AET, but Exit 197 handles too much non-local traffic to make it a K-TAG/PikePass-only interchange (and it lacks a reasonable alternative, unlike the situation with future Exit 52), so tickets and cash payments need to remain available there until the entire Turnpike is converted to AET.

(Revised response.)

[route56]

Is there a diagram anywhere showing the option to build the flyover ramps you mentioned in the original post on this thread?  Also, is there a diagram for the "Alternative B" referenced in the article?

http://www.ksdot.org/Assets/wwwksdotorg/bureaus/TopekaMetro/pdf2015/K10WestLegPIOHboards1-3.pdf

The diagram (the two options you're looking for are one and the same) is on page 2.

[mvak36]

This probably won't happen, but it would be cool to see them make K-10 an interstate once they're done. I-870????

[The Ghostbuster]

If the upgrades go through, I'd like to see the highway have its exits numbered, although somehow I doubt it would happen.

[SD Mapman]

If the upgrades go through, I'd like to see the highway have its exits numbered, although somehow I doubt it would happen.

I don't think Kansas does that for non-interstate freeways, which a shame. Heck, even Iowa does that!

[Ned Weasel]

Is there a diagram anywhere showing the option to build the flyover ramps you mentioned in the original post on this thread?  Also, is there a diagram for the "Alternative B" referenced in the article?

http://www.ksdot.org/Assets/wwwksdotorg/bureaus/TopekaMetro/pdf2015/K10WestLegPIOHboards1-3.pdf

The diagram (the two options you're looking for are one and the same) is on page 2.

Thanks for the link!  Something occurred to me--  Has KDOT abandoned the idea of building a new US 59 alignment between US 24 and the western terminus of K-10 (which, of course, would involve routing US 59 onto the western leg of the South Lawrence Trafficway and would divert US 59 traffic off of Lawrence surface streets)?  I hope KDOT realizes that, if the new US 59 alignment is still under consideration as a future project, then "Alternative A" could end up being more costly in the long term.

[Scott5114]

If the upgrades go through, I'd like to see the highway have its exits numbered, although somehow I doubt it would happen.

I don't think Kansas does that for non-interstate freeways, which a shame. Heck, even Iowa does that!

The 2009 MUTCD mandates that they do. As KDOT sticks fairly close to the MUTCD, I wouldn't be surprised to see them start at some point.

[SD Mapman]

If the upgrades go through, I'd like to see the highway have its exits numbered, although somehow I doubt it would happen.

I don't think Kansas does that for non-interstate freeways, which a shame. Heck, even Iowa does that!

The 2009 MUTCD mandates that they do. As KDOT sticks fairly close to the MUTCD, I wouldn't be surprised to see them start at some point.

Might be a regional thing; both NE and MO don't do it either.