I-69 in LA (and LA 3132/Shreveport Inner Loop Extension)

[Grzrd]

Through acquisitions the KCS got the Louisiana and Arkansas and a railroad which runs pretty much parallel to I-49 (current, plus I-10 and future) all the way to New Orleans, and now with their still developing Mexico line they're running parallel to a future Kansas City/Mexico corridor via I-49 and I-69 .... Shows me just how critical this emerging dual I-69 and I-49 corridor is as well.

(above quote from I-69 in TX thread)

At approximately the 1:00 mark of this TV video report, the following map caught my eye:

TxDOT used this map as part of its recent I-69 presentation to the Texas legislature. It (and TxDOT) seems to be tossing Shreveport a bone by using a star to denote that it is at the crossroads of the I-20/I-10 corridor, I-49 and I-69.

This article quotes Kent Rogers with the Northwest Louisiana Council of Governments as describing how the three interstates, the port, and the Kansas City and UP railroads will make Shreveport a "shipping mecca":

Texans aren't the only ones excited about the new path to a brighter economic future... I-69 is also slated to cross the red river near the Port of Shreveport. Kent Rogers with NLCOG said, "Shreveport-Bossier becomes the smallest urban area in the country with 3 intersecting cross continental interstate highways. With the highways in place, with the work that Kansas City railroad is doing, with up railroad, with the growth of the port. We become the shipping mecca you could say."

[Grzrd]

The email I received also mentioned SIU 16. An interesting piece of information in it is that LaDOTD has offered to become the lead agency for the SIU 16 environmental review, but TxDOT currently insists on remaining the lead agency:

Concerning I-69 SIU-16 we really haven't heard much locally from TXDOT, as far as, proactively leading the environmental study of SIU-16. LADOTD, who is identified as the secondary sponsor of the env. study of SIU-16, has offered to take the lead, but TXDOT has responded that it plans to continue leading this endeavor

From an email I received from the Northwest Louisiana Council of Governments ("NLCOG") .... In regard to the Stonewall, LA to Tenaha, TX SIU 16, it does not appear that TxDOT will begin the environmental process any time soon:

As far as I-69 SIU-16 (TxDOT lead) is concerned, I'm not holding out much hope for any progress to be made, at least from a NEPA standpoint, in the near future.

NLCOG's Transportation Policy Committee has posted its March 28, 2013 Draft Minutes and it looks like NLCOG wants Louisiana's politicians to start thinking about encouraging their Texas counterparts to begin the environmental process for the Stonewall, LA to Tenaha, TX Segment of Independent Utility ("SIU") 16 (page 2/3 of pdf):

Mayor Walker voiced concerns about the lack of work on the Texas portion of SIU 16. He motioned for the committee to send a letter to the Louisiana Department of Transportation and Development (LaDOTD) Secretary LeBas expressing their concerns. Mr. Altimus seconded the motion and suggested both the local and national congressional delegations be copied along with Mr. Kalivoda at LaDOTD. The motion passed with no opposition.

I guess they want Texas to either lead or get out of the way and let LaDOTD lead.

[Grzrd]

NLCOG's Transportation Policy Committee has posted its March 28, 2013 Draft Minutes and it looks like NLCOG wants Louisiana's politicians to start thinking about encouraging their Texas counterparts to begin the environmental process for the Stonewall, LA to Tenaha, TX Segment of Independent Utility ("SIU") 16 (page 2/3 of pdf)

NLCOG's Fiscal Year 2014 Unified Planning Work Program is now available for public review and comment and it expressly mentions the Stonewall, LA to Tenaha, TX Segment of Independent Utility ("SIU") 16 (page 6/43 of pdf; page 6 of 43 of document):

Task B-2 Project Development Stage 0 and Stage 1 ....
Coordination of ongoing efforts with I-69 SIU 16 connection the urban area to Texas.

I find SIU 16 and Louisiana's (tepid so far) efforts to prod Texas to move the project forward interesting for the following reason: a strong argument could be made that an I-49/I-x69 overlap (or simply I-49) from near Stonewall to Texarkana, in conjunction with SIU 16 from Stonewall to Tenaha, would decrease the attraction (on a national scale) of upgrading US 59 to I-369 from Tenaha to Texarkana (which in turn creates a disincentive for Texas to move SIU 16 forward at the possible expense of the development of I-369).  Of course, a central component of such an argument would be that I-49 from near Stonewall to Texarkana has essentially been completed.  At any rate, it is interesting to see SIU 16 mentioned in an official planning document.

[Grzrd]

NLCOG's Fiscal Year 2014 Unified Planning Work Program is now available for public review and comment and it expressly mentions the Stonewall, LA to Tenaha, TX Segment of Independent Utility ("SIU") 16 (page 6/43 of pdf; page 6 of 43 of document):

Task B-2 Project Development Stage 0 and Stage 1 ....
Coordination of ongoing efforts with I-69 SIU 16 connection the urban area to Texas.

... it is interesting to see SIU 16 mentioned in an official planning document.

This TxDOT I-69 Funding Program map includes $13,886,080 in funding for the US 84 Sabine River Bridge replacement project as part of I-69 Funding Program.  I emailed LaDOTD and asked them if they considered this to be an I-69 project, and, if so, has a corridor been chosen for a Logansport bypass. Louisiana does not consider this project to have anything to do with I-69 and asserts that there are no current plans for a Logansport bypass:

The U.S. 84 Bridge project is a  joint effort between DOTD and TxDOT but does not have anything to do with I-69, that we are aware of.  The project is scheduled to go to bid in August of this  year and is estimated to cost between $7.5M-$10M (our cost). 
This project will construct 2 new bridges that will have two lanes going in  eastbound and westbound direction. 
As of now, there is no Logansport bypass.

I cannot imagine I-69 being routed on Main Street.

This article from the September 7 Shreveport Times

But the segment connecting U.S. Highway 71 near Stonewall to Interstate 20 near Haughton as part of the project to link Indianapolis to the lower Rio Grande Valley in Texas is closer to fruition than people may think, said Kent Rogers, director of the North Louisiana Council of Governments ... The first construction priority is the Red River crossing. A study of that crossing is under way because the U.S. Geological Survey issued new navigational vertical clearance requirements earlier this year.

Is Louisiana the only state that doesn't have any section of I-69 under construction?

Who knows? If the new Sabine River bridges are ultimately incorporated into I-69, and construction begins on them begins before construction begins on the I-69 Red River bridge(s)(which at this point appears several years away), then it would be ironic that the first I-69 construction on Louisiana soil would have arguably begun in the SIU 16 corridor (before SIU 16 corridor environmental studies had been started by TxDOT/LaDOTD).

[O Tamandua]

Through acquisitions the KCS got the Louisiana and Arkansas and a railroad which runs pretty much parallel to I-49 (current, plus I-10 and future) all the way to New Orleans, and now with their still developing Mexico line they're running parallel to a future Kansas City/Mexico corridor via I-49 and I-69 .... Shows me just how critical this emerging dual I-69 and I-49 corridor is as well.

(above quote from I-69 in TX thread)

At approximately the 1:00 mark of this TV video report, the following map caught my eye:

TxDOT used this map as part of its recent I-69 presentation to the Texas legislature. It (and TxDOT) seems to be tossing Shreveport a bone by using a star to denote that it is at the crossroads of the I-20/I-10 corridor, I-49 and I-69.

This article quotes Kent Rogers with the Northwest Louisiana Council of Governments as describing how the three interstates, the port, and the Kansas City and UP railroads will make Shreveport a "shipping mecca":

Texans aren't the only ones excited about the new path to a brighter economic future... I-69 is also slated to cross the red river near the Port of Shreveport. Kent Rogers with NLCOG said, "Shreveport-Bossier becomes the smallest urban area in the country with 3 intersecting cross continental interstate highways. With the highways in place, with the work that Kansas City railroad is doing, with up railroad, with the growth of the port. We become the shipping mecca you could say."

Grzrd, while I know this should be in the "Bella Vista Fort Smith" thread, it's very amusing that, given that map above from Channel 3 in Shreveport, around Bella Vista the AHTD is only funding two lanes of the Bella Vista bypass at this time (even while they're funding six-laning the future I-49 just a scant 10-20 miles south).

That "two-lane" stuff is going to get old awfully quick on this corridor, from the Northwest Arkansas (home of three Fortune 500 companies, the new Crystal Bridges Museum of Art, the home of the University of Arkansas (member of the recent four-time-straight-home-of-a-national-football-champion Southeastern Conference West), etc.) traffic alone....

[O Tamandua]

Well, here's a fine kettle of fish...

Shreveport Times: "Residents question rebuilding housing complex in potential path of Interstate (49) expansion":

http://www.shreveporttimes.com/article/20130728/SPECIALPROJECTS01/307280023/Residents-question-rebuilding-housing-complex-potential-path-interstate-expansion

[apjung]

I have similar questions on a similar issue on I-49 South in Westwego on why they planted all those trees and installed light poles that will have to be removed when I-49 is extended to the West Bank (Harry Lee) Expressway.

[Brandon]

I flew over this on my way from Houston Hobby to Midway Airport.  The route of I-49 north of I-220 looks like it is complete, and the routing appears to go through a lightly developed area to connect to the current I-49.  Would I be correct in assuming that the corridor on the west side of the river is lightly developed?

[Grzrd]

A map of the alternatives (page 57/79 of the Environmental Summary pdf):

The fun and games regarding the LA 3132 extension in Shreveport continues.  The Finish 3132 Coalition has posted an Esplanade Aerial View:



The Finish 3132 Coalition has also posted an article explaining the Aerial View:

On the opening page of the Finish3132 Coalition's website - www.finish3132.com - entitled "August 2013 Updated Imagery:Esplanade Aerial View," is a photograph taken a few weeks ago of the development and surrounding area. Outlined in red is the 16+ acre tract owned by Shreveport taxpayers, outlined in yellow is Larkin's land, and the double, bolded purple lines are Hwy. 3132. The diamond interchange with Hwy. 3132 and Flournoy-Lucas Road (LA Hwy. 523) is shown at the top of the image, with the proposed southerly Extension of 3132, proceeding across Bayou Pierre, shown as it swings toward the Port. Clearly, the Hwy. 3132 Extension would run through a sizable portion of Larkin's development. Regardless, construction of the development is clearly visible ....
Last year, our Metropolitan Planning Commission (MPC) board members voted twice, unanimously each time, to block Larkin's building of a roadway from Flournoy-Lucas to Bayou Pierre. Likewise, in two separate votes, the Shreveport City Council refused to approve permits for that roadway because it is in the path of the 3132 Extension. Regardless, one day following the fourth and final such vote taken over several months, Glover ordered his city attorney and his city engineer to issue the permit to Larkin ....

I wonder if the Finish 3132 folks and the Loop It 49 folks ever share a few beers at the end of the day?

[Grzrd]

NLCOG's Fiscal Year 2014 Unified Planning Work Program is now available for public review and comment and it expressly mentions the Stonewall, LA to Tenaha, TX Segment of Independent Utility ("SIU") 16 (page 6/43 of pdf; page 6 of 43 of document):

Task B-2 Project Development Stage 0 and Stage 1 ....
Coordination of ongoing efforts with I-69 SIU 16 connection the urban area to Texas.

NLCOG has posted its May 20, 2013 Transportation Policy Committee Draft Minutes and the draft minutes include discussion of the probability that I-69 SIU 16 is as low on LaDOTD's priority list as it is on TxDOT's priority list and that it may be counterproductive to take the lead on the project (page 3/4 of pdf):

Mayor Walker gave a brief update about I‐69 and stated that it seemed Texas would make SIU 16 as their last priority. Mr. Rogers stated NLCOG may want to pursue completing the Logansport to Stonewall area. Mr. Goza stated it would be low on LaDOTD's list as well, while Mayor Walker agreed that it may be counterproductive to pursue that angle.

NLCOG has also posted its June 21, 2013 Executive Committee Draft Minutes and those draft minutes include a discussion of "mega projects" in Northwest Louisiana (page 2/4 of pdf):

... staff identified major transportation improvements or "mega projects"  that have been proposed for Northwest Louisiana. For the purposes of the update, a mega project is a very expensive or large‐scale transportation improvement that would have a regional or statewide impact, and require special funding beyond the normal LaDOTD funding program. A transportation improvement included as a mega project in the plan may be eligible for further study and possibly implementation should additional state or federal funding become available.

Not surprisingly, I-69 and the LA 3132 extension are both on the list.



Also included on the "mega projects" list is high-speed rail from Shreveport to Dallas.  In the May 20 Transportation Committee Draft Minutes, it was suggested that the high-speed rail project might be a "bargaining chip" to obtain funding for I-69 (page 3/4 of pdf):

Mr. Jambor asked about the Meridian, MS rail line. Mr. Rogers stated a second group was looking at a high speed only line and that a memorandum of agreement/understanding was in the works from the Dallas/Fort Worth, Tyler and Longview agencies. Mayor Walker stated a feasibility study was due in late May and indications are that the line may not be as feasible as originally thought — that the line is a $3 billion project. Mr. Goza asked if it would be a possible bargaining chip for I‐69; Mayor Walker stated he was not sure.

[Grzrd]

The SIU 15 website has a new FEIS webpage.  The Summary includes an implementation schedule to design and construct SIU 15 that has design and construction beginning in 2014 and concluding in 2026 (page S-21; p. 14/25 of pdf):



Here's a map of the implementation schedule (Exhibit S-2; p. 16/25 of pdf) :



Also of interest is that the I-49/I-69 interchange will require a design exception (page S-5; p. 5/25 of pdf):



Now wait and see if a ROD is issued and then if anything actually does start in 2014.

[thefro]

Table S2/Page 17 has the implentation schedule which has construction of the Red River bridge (the first scheduled segment) starting in 2016.  2014 is just preliminary engineering/mitigation, 2015 is Final Design/ROW/utilities

It'll be pretty encouraging for the completition of the entire I-69 project if this segment starts getting built.

[Grzrd]

Table S2/Page 17 has the implentation schedule which has construction of the Red River bridge (the first scheduled segment) starting in 2016.  2014 is just preliminary engineering/mitigation, 2015 is Final Design/ROW/utilities
It'll be pretty encouraging for the completition of the entire I-69 project if this segment starts getting built.

Louisiana is inching closer to being the last "I-69 state" to initiate I-69 construction-related activity.  I had a recent Q & A with a NLCOG representative:

Q: ... The Implementation Schedule in the I-69 SIU 15 FEIS includes a little under $10 million for preliminary engineering for the Red River crossing for FY 2014.  However, in taking a look at the Draft District 4 FY 2014-15 Highway Program, I do not see the preliminary engineering included for the Red River crossing.
I know the Comment Period for the SIU 15 FEIS is still ongoing and scheduled to conclude October 7.  Was the preliminary engineering excluded from the Highway Program because a Record of Decision has not yet been issued?  Related to that, what is the current best guess for the issuance of a ROD?

A: You're correct... until the project is issued a ROD, funds are not programmed and authorized for performing design/engineering, ROW acquisition, Utility Relocation, or Construction services along the selected alignment... otherwise our Federal partners will withdraw any future support (i.e. funding) for the project.
Late December or early January timeframe is the anticipated I-69 SIU 15 ROD signing party!

I assume it would be easy to amend the Highway Program once the ROD is finalized and allow the preliminary engineering to begin in 2014.

[Grzrd]

This TxDOT I-69 Funding Program map includes $13,886,080 in funding for the US 84 Sabine River Bridge replacement project as part of I-69 Funding Program.  I emailed LaDOTD and asked them if they considered this to be an I-69 project, and, if so, has a corridor been chosen for a Logansport bypass. Louisiana does not consider this project to have anything to do with I-69 and asserts that there are no current plans for a Logansport bypass

This article, primarily about I-369 in Texas, includes some discussion about Logansport and I-69:

Charles Thomas, executive director of the Carthage Improvement Corporation ....
"We wanted I-69 to come up to Carthage and then go Highway 79 east, but Logansport had a congressman on the appropriation board,"  Thomas said ....
In a joint effort, Texas and Louisiana road departments are working to improve transportation and safety on the Highway 84 corridor. Part of that corridor will be converted to I-69.
In Logansport, Mayor Katherine Freeman said the city is working toward welcoming the progress of Highway 84 and I-69.
" We're having the groundbreaking for the two new river bridges at 10:30 a.m., Nov. 8,"  Freeman said.
While I-69 is not expected to come directly through town, an improved Highway 84 and nearby access to the interstate only means good things for the small town.
"I think it would be wonderful impact for us,"  Freeman said. "Right now we're not on a major highway; everything in the parish has gone to Stonewall or Mansfield because of I-49. Except for the saltwater trucks coming to town going to drop their loads in Texas we don't have too much traffic."
The bridges will accommodate in total four lanes of traffic with two lanes going east and two lanes going west.
"They've been working on this for about 26 years or so,"  Freeman said. "The project finally came back in at 40 percent over, several million over budget, but both Texas and Louisiana finally concurred to pay."
Freeman became mayor in 2007 after her husband Dennis Freeman died. Dennis served as mayor from 1984 until 2007, a total of 23 years.
"He went to Washington, a long time ago, because at first Highway 84 was going to come through town with no new bridge and would not allow parking on Main Street,"  Freeman said. "That would have killed the town, but he worked with Texas and Louisiana to get that changed to this concept."
Freeman said her husband also worked to keep I-69 in western Louisiana.
"He went to Washington a couple of times trying to get I-69 to come through, too. At that time we were just trying to get it through our area."

[Grzrd]

The Finish 3132 Coalition has posted an Esplanade Aerial View:

The Finish 3132 Coalition has also posted an article explaining the Aerial View

This November 8 Shreveport Times article reports that lawsuits filed by the Finish 3132 Coalition haved stalled the process for construction of the extension:

The coalition pushing to finish Louisiana Highway 3132 is – ironically – a large part of the reason construction of the extension has stalled.
While the Louisiana Department of Transportation and Development (DOTD) is ready to proceed with the environmental impact study that would continue the process to link the highway from its end at Flournoy Lucas Road to the Port of Caddo-Bossier, the project remains at a standstill because of lawsuits filed by the Finish 3132 Coalition and Willis-Knighton Health Systems late last year.
"We have a contract ready to go for Stage 1; but because of all the litigation, we haven't been able to get going,"  said Kent Rogers, executive director of the Northwest Louisiana Council of Governments (NLCOG).
Three lawsuits are pending – two that have been consolidated into one in Caddo District Court and one in federal court.
"What we're trying to do is get the Department of Transportation and Federal Highway Administration to build a road on what we consider to be the most appropriate alignment or route from Flournoy Lucas to the port, which is across a portion of the subdivision which Mr. Larkin is building,"  said Billy Pesnell, attorney for the coalition and Willis-Knighton.

The article does not provide an estimate of when the legal proceedings will allow the environmental study to proceed.

[Grzrd]

This November 8 Shreveport Times article reports that lawsuits filed by the Finish 3132 Coalition haved stalled the process for construction of the extension

In this Nov. 28 guest column, Finish 3132 Coalition spokesperson Elliott Stonecipher puts forth the rationale for the Coalition's lawsuits:

Some 10 years ago, certain officials and developers, without mandated public involvement, commandeered the federally mandated highway planning process. The extension's adopted corridor route, set in 1992, is exactly where Twelve Oaks was built by its developers. Also in 2003, with no public participation, the Northwest Louisiana Council of Governments then relocated the route across Bayou Pierre. Soon, in 2006, developer Tim Larkin began his Esplanade subdivision exactly in the extension's new route, which he expected or knew would be terminated.
When, in 2011, Mayor Cedric Glover and NLCOG attempted that termination, with only insiders present, this important battle began.
Now, the Louisiana Department of Transportation and Development has withheld certain route alternatives initially designed and recommended by its own consulting and department engineers. In a key email, DOTD's project engineer explained that the alternatives protect adjacent, existing homeowners by instead using the available undeveloped land which would be Esplanade. She was overruled. The coalition discovered the routes and made them public at its expense, but officials have neither acknowledged their existence, nor presented them for debate by the public.
Thus, existing homeowners were denied the mandated forum to argue for protection of their property.
The project engineer, consulting engineers and the coalition agree: the hidden routes moving deep into undeveloped Esplanade land must be used. The DOTD/NLCOG route actually means the La. 3132 extension cannot safely, fairly or affordably be constructed.

This could take a long time ..... but it's fun to see highway proponents fight LaDOTD, NLCOG, etc.

[Grzrd]

The SIU 15 website has a new FEIS webpage ....Now wait and see if a ROD is issued and then if anything actually does start in 2014.

The Northwest Louisiana Council of Governments ("NLCOG") Transportation Policy Committee has posted its November 15, 2013 Draft Minutes and it seems that, at that time, they needed to respond to some comments from FHWA (page 2/5 of pdf; page 2 of document):

Mr. Rogers updated the members on I‐69 and some comments received from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).  Dr. Wilson with the Caddo Parish Commission arrived, creating a quorum.  Mayor Walker clarified that a resolution from the committee to the FHWA was needed requesting a quick response to the EPA's comments.  Mr. Rogers stated it would be prudent to send a letter or resolution.  Mayor Walker asked for a motion from the committee to have Mr. Rogers draft a resolution on behalf of  the committee.  Mr. Altimus motioned and Dr. Wilson seconded.  The motion passed with no objections.  Mr. Goza cautioned to carefully word the resolution; Mayor Walker asked for a draft to be sent to the committee for review.

NLCOG has also posted the Transportation Policy Committee's January 17, 2014 Draft Minutes.  I could not find any followup regarding communication with FHWA related to a possible I-69 SIU 15 ROD.  I hope that indicates that it was a relatively minor matter.

[mcdonaat]

I would love to see the bridge built first, and with a superstructure! Something like a cable stay, that just screams "I'm an open and free route! USE ME!".

I'm new to this I-69 thing, but is the highway, in essence, an upgraded US 79? It seems like a newer alignment, passing near the same towns as US 79.

[NE2]

I'm new to this I-69 thing, but is the highway, in essence, an upgraded US 79? It seems like a newer alignment, passing near the same towns as US 79.

Sort of. But it zigzags back and forth to serve pork production.

[Grzrd]

Upthread and elsewhere in the Forum I have posted the following map of "I-49 I-69 Crossroads to the Future":



I recently came across another version of the map being used in presentations that emphasizes a Mexican city as well as two Canadian cities:



Too bad the Mexican city is misspelled .....



How long will it take to fulfill the "Crossroads" vision?  This March 31 article includes a projection of twenty years:

In about 20 years, Shreveport-Bossier should be one of the major transportation crossroads of America but like other fast-growing areas, residents will see some growing pains.
"In another 20 years,the completion of I-69 and I-49 to go with I-20 will make this area the smallest metropolitan area in the country with three cross-continental interstates," said Kent Rogers, executive director of the Northwest Louisiana Council of Governments." That's huge."

Twenty years may be a tad optimistic ....

[yakra]

Heh. I-49 will only be about as cross-continental as US 66 was...

[Grzrd]

This November 8 Shreveport Times article reports that lawsuits filed by the Finish 3132 Coalition haved stalled the process for construction of the extension

In this Nov. 28 guest column, Finish 3132 Coalition spokesperson Elliott Stonecipher puts forth the rationale for the Coalition's lawsuits:

the Louisiana Department of Transportation and Development has withheld certain route alternatives initially designed and recommended by its own consulting and department engineers .... The project engineer, consulting engineers and the coalition agree: the hidden routes moving deep into undeveloped Esplanade land must be used. The DOTD/NLCOG route actually means the La. 3132 extension cannot safely, fairly or affordably be constructed.

This May 7 video reports that the Shreveport Metropolitan Planning Commission recently denied an application to allow for the subdivision of some of Esplanade's lots:

After two and a half hours of presentations, questions and deliberation, the Shreveport Metropolitan Planning Commission decided Tuesday to deny an application some say could Tuesday a decision could affect the expansion of LA 3132 all the way to the Port of Caddo-Bossier.
The application in question was filed by Larkin Development @ Railsback LLC et al to subdivide land in its existing community. The developer of the Esplanade Community wants to break up the lots to sell in a new phase of the development. This section is south of Flournoy Road, sandwiched between Ellerbe Road and Bayou Pierre. It's a stretch of land some say will be used for Highway 3132.
But if what Tom Arceneaux, attorney for the developers, said is correct it could have implications on the funding for 3132. Arceneaux said by denying the application, the Commission basically picks the route for the highway. Arceneaux said there is a chance the federal government could deny providing funds since a study has not been conducted to pick a specific a route, and the road project would essentially die.

The Finish 3132 Coalition has posted its take regarding the vote on its blog:

http://www.finish3132.com/Meetings-News/Elliott-Stonecipher/14-05-08/MPC_Commissioners_Again_Vote_to_Protect_Hwy_3132_Extension.aspx

the Larkin forces are angry that there is a federal court suit at issue. The Coalition has asked the court to order NLCOG, the Louisiana Department of Transportation & Development (LA DOTD), and the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) to re-do the Stage 0 Study of remaining route options. This followed the Coalition's discovery of irrefutable evidence - routes and explanatory emails from LA DOTD personnel - of routes which would protect surrounding homeowners - such as Twelve Oaks homeowners. The critical difference in these routes is that they would require Larkin's land. They were, thus, deliberately withheld from the public. The lots Larkin asked yesterday to be approved were dead within any remaining available route from Flournoy-Lucas to the Port. His Esplanade is the only undeveloped land available for construction of the Extension.

This may take a while.

[jbnv]

It was discussed upthread whether I-69 would use the Sabine River crossing at Logansport. It was mentioned that LaDOTD has no plans for a bypass around Logansport. I put the I-69 proposal into my own map and projected it into Texas. On my map, it appears that I-69 will course well north of Logansport, crossing into Texas before crossing the river southbound.

[mcdonaat]

It was discussed upthread whether I-69 would use the Sabine River crossing at Logansport. It was mentioned that LaDOTD has no plans for a bypass around Logansport. I put the I-69 proposal into my own map and projected it into Texas. On my map, it appears that I-69 will course well north of Logansport, crossing into Texas before crossing the river southbound.

I would doubt that I-69 would stray that far north of Logansport, but it definitely isn't using the new US 84 bridge... however, with the state building a four-lane structure to serve US 84, I'm guessing it will serve Joaquin more than Logansport anyways. I would prefer to see I-69 dip BELOW Logansport, but that's never going to happen!

As for the LA 3132 Extension, what would the Esplanade developer do if LaDOTD abandoned the section leading right to his property, and instead moved the Inner Loop to the property between the subdivision and LA 1? I see nothing but empty land there, and you could give access ramps to LA 1 directly instead of Flouroy Lucas. Also, if the federal government would deny funding for just that stretch of LA 3132, build it as a separate project than the rest of the stretch. I'm 50/50, because the state should have bought the ROW ahead of time and prevented this from happening, and the developer should have realized that the state is trying to build a highway and not built houses. All LA 3132 happens to be now is an overdeveloped, limited access driveway to the new subdivision.

I'm all for shifting LA 3132 to the east, riding between the subdivision and LA 1, and removing exit ramps for Flornoy Lucas Road. In fact, could you not just upgrade LA 1 for a good stretch? ROW is already there...

[jbnv]

... the developer should have realized that the state is trying to build a highway and not built houses.

The developer probably did realize that 3132 could go through his land (it's not that difficult to look at a map and see it) and built stuff there to either keep the extension from happening or to extort*COUGH* demand more money from the state to acquire the ROW. These people who buy and develop land tend to be rather shrewd.