I-14 in Georgia

[MantyMadTown]

I-14 resolution passes the Georgia House; still waiting on approval from the Senate:

https://www.bizjournals.com/atlanta/news/2019/03/21/georgia-house-passes-interstate-14-resolution.html

[sparker]

I-14 resolution passes the Georgia House; still waiting on approval from the Senate:

https://www.bizjournals.com/atlanta/news/2019/03/21/georgia-house-passes-interstate-14-resolution.html

And here goes GA down that rabbit hole again.  If they choose to pull a NC and do their portion absent any cooperation from adjoining states, they'll have a Columbus to Augusta corridor, probably aligned along the existing GRIP routes with a Macon bypass added into the mix.   But the chances of AL going along with their portion of that corridor -- seeing as how they just scuttled the US 80 (I-85) plans west of Montgomery -- are at this time slim and none.  And something tells me the other I-14 states have no intention of pooling their funds (MS functionally has none!) to subsidize an AL routing.  Even if the full GA legislature approves this plan, it probably won't become reality in many of our lifetimes -- certainly not something over which to hold one's breath!   

[MantyMadTown]

I-14 resolution passes the Georgia House; still waiting on approval from the Senate:

https://www.bizjournals.com/atlanta/news/2019/03/21/georgia-house-passes-interstate-14-resolution.html

And here goes GA down that rabbit hole again.  If they choose to pull a NC and do their portion absent any cooperation from adjoining states, they'll have a Columbus to Augusta corridor, probably aligned along the existing GRIP routes with a Macon bypass added into the mix.   But the chances of AL going along with their portion of that corridor -- seeing as how they just scuttled the US 80 (I-85) plans west of Montgomery -- are at this time slim and none.  And something tells me the other I-14 states have no intention of pooling their funds (MS functionally has none!) to subsidize an AL routing.  Even if the full GA legislature approves this plan, it probably won't become reality in many of our lifetimes -- certainly not something over which to hold one's breath!   

That's not to say the portion in Georgia can't be built if Alabama is not willing to contribute for its portion. A Columbus to Augusta interstate still has its own merits, such as bypassing Atlanta.

[froggie]

^ For who?  Such an Interstate, for traffic going west of Columbus to Montgomery or Mobile, would dump drivers onto a 2-lane US 80.  If the intent is to bypass Atlanta with this type of road, it doesn't make sense without Alabama upgrading US 80.

[Eth]

^ For who?  Such an Interstate, for traffic going west of Columbus to Montgomery or Mobile, would dump drivers onto a 2-lane US 80.  If the intent is to bypass Atlanta with this type of road, it doesn't make sense without Alabama upgrading US 80.

US 280/431 to I-85 is only 4 miles farther than US 80 and AL 186 (and, according to Google, 3 minutes faster). Upgrading US 80 would be preferable, certainly, but I wouldn't call this useless by any means.

[Tomahawkin]

The Atlanta area needs this! Anyway to keep trucks, and bypass traffic away from Atlanta I'm all for. We just need another north/south cooridor. I wish they would modify US 27 to interstate grade...

[sparker]

^ For who?  Such an Interstate, for traffic going west of Columbus to Montgomery or Mobile, would dump drivers onto a 2-lane US 80.  If the intent is to bypass Atlanta with this type of road, it doesn't make sense without Alabama upgrading US 80.

US 280/431 to I-85 is only 4 miles farther than US 80 and AL 186 (and, according to Google, 3 minutes faster). Upgrading US 80 would be preferable, certainly, but I wouldn't call this useless by any means.

The issue in AL is a virtual moratorium on new Interstate-grade freeway construction; hey, they took long enough on the 65/22 interchange and now they've certainly got their hands full (but pocketbook being emptied!) with the 20/59 rebuild in downtown Birmingham.   And remember that AL is a state that is historically/politically tax-averse; doing what's in the chute right now is about all that they can handle at this time.  The fact that the 280/431 corridor cuts a few miles off the distance between the end of the current freeway in Phenix City and I-85 is in reality neither here nor there; neither routing is going to show up on ALDOT's radar in the foreseeable future as a potential freeway.  A new cross-GA/I-14 corridor would be just that -- but with only limited value as a long-distance Atlanta bypass.   

[Eth]

The fact that the 280/431 corridor cuts a few miles off the distance between the end of the current freeway in Phenix City and I-85 is in reality neither here nor there; neither routing is going to show up on ALDOT's radar in the foreseeable future as a potential freeway.

I really just meant that as a response to froggie's statement about being dumped onto two-lane US 80, pointing out that there's an existing and better four-lane option.

[MantyMadTown]

Maybe after I-14 in Georgia gets built Alabama would be willing to upgrade US 280 to I-85.

[sparker]

Maybe after I-14 in Georgia gets built Alabama would be willing to upgrade US 280 to I-85.

By the time I-14 gets built within GA (not likely within a decade or two), there could possibly be political changes in AL that would have the effect of providing sufficient funding for new freeway corridors there.  Or it could go the other way.  For the present the chances of I-14 east of I-59 or west of Columbus, GA are slim and none -- and slim has left the building!

[goobnav]

Maybe after I-14 in Georgia gets built Alabama would be willing to upgrade US 280 to I-85.

By the time I-14 gets built within GA (not likely within a decade or two), there could possibly be political changes in AL that would have the effect of providing sufficient funding for new freeway corridors there.  Or it could go the other way.  For the present the chances of I-14 east of I-59 or west of Columbus, GA are slim and none -- and slim has left the building!

Seriously, have you been to Alabama, the changes even being suggested are not going to happen, they'll be happy with I-22 for now before I-14, besides Louisiana has to build theirs first.

You're right slim left the building got on a plane and went to Canada.

[cjk374]

Maybe after I-14 in Georgia gets built Alabama would be willing to upgrade US 280 to I-85.

By the time I-14 gets built within GA (not likely within a decade or two), there could possibly be political changes in AL that would have the effect of providing sufficient funding for new freeway corridors there.  Or it could go the other way.  For the present the chances of I-14 east of I-59 or west of Columbus, GA are slim and none -- and slim has left the building!

Seriously, have you been to Alabama, the changes even being suggested are not going to happen, they'll be happy with I-22 for now before I-14, besides Louisiana has to build theirs first.

You're right slim left the building got on a plane and went to Canada.

The Saints have a better chance of winning 6 Superbowls than I-14 has of even being considered in LA.

[Tom958]

The time to have discussed this idea was twenty years ago, before the entire corridor was improved as a four lane divided at-grade facility, including the construction of significant sections on new alignment.

Here's an idea, though: I just asked Google how to get from Tuskegee to Macon, and one of the alternate routes was via GA 109 and US 41, cutting across Georgia from LaGrange to Forsyth and entering Macon on I-75. That route is only six miles and eight minutes longer than the obvious route via GA 96 near Columbus.

The Freight Logistics Plan that GDOT released in 2010 recommended a four-lane corridor from LaGrange to Macon, apparently as an improvement of existing GA 109 and 74. It was expected that it'd also serve truck traffic to and from I-20 in Alabama via the already-widened US 27 corridor. The benefit/cost ratio calculated for the project was 18:1, making it an outlier among the projects evaluated.

I haven't heard anything more about it in a while (and I wouldn't be surprised if the evaluation I mentioned was flawed in some way), but if people are seriously interested in this I-14 corridor, running it via a new LaGrange-Forsyth corridor is worth considering, IMO.

EDIT: I just found out that GDOT did a study of a LaGrange-Macon corridor, though it assumed widening and/or otherwise improving existing GA 109 and GA 74 all the way to I-475. Unsurprisingly, the proper time frame for major upgrades west of the 109-74 split at Woodbury is "never." The to-me-obvious alternative of going directly from Woodbury to I-75 between Forsyth and Bolingbroke wasn't considered, surely due to cost and the related feasibility of incremental implementation.

[MantyMadTown]

Maybe after I-14 in Georgia gets built Alabama would be willing to upgrade US 280 to I-85.

By the time I-14 gets built within GA (not likely within a decade or two), there could possibly be political changes in AL that would have the effect of providing sufficient funding for new freeway corridors there.  Or it could go the other way.  For the present the chances of I-14 east of I-59 or west of Columbus, GA are slim and none -- and slim has left the building!

Seriously, have you been to Alabama, the changes even being suggested are not going to happen, they'll be happy with I-22 for now before I-14, besides Louisiana has to build theirs first.

You're right slim left the building got on a plane and went to Canada.

The Saints have a better chance of winning 6 Superbowls than I-14 has of even being considered in LA.

I highly doubt the Saints are going to win 6 Super Bowls even. The Saints have been wildly amazing these last 2 seasons, and it's not going to last when Drew Brees retires. It's hard enough getting the Saints to even another one with their recent playoff disappointments.

[sparker]

Maybe after I-14 in Georgia gets built Alabama would be willing to upgrade US 280 to I-85.

By the time I-14 gets built within GA (not likely within a decade or two), there could possibly be political changes in AL that would have the effect of providing sufficient funding for new freeway corridors there.  Or it could go the other way.  For the present the chances of I-14 east of I-59 or west of Columbus, GA are slim and none -- and slim has left the building!

Seriously, have you been to Alabama, the changes even being suggested are not going to happen, they'll be happy with I-22 for now before I-14, besides Louisiana has to build theirs first.

You're right slim left the building got on a plane and went to Canada.

The Saints have a better chance of winning 6 Superbowls than I-14 has of even being considered in LA.

As I mentioned above, the situation in AL could go the other way and the present tax-averse environment could persist or become even more so.  Time will tell -- but it's not something about which to hold one's breath.  As far as LA is concerned -- if TX plans bring a facility to the Sabine River border with TX, LA might well consider an extension -- even if it only gets to Alexandria (I-49) rather than completely across the state, which would be pointless unless similar plans were promulgated in MS, including upgrades/replacement of the Natchez bridges.  But if by some currently unforeseen miracle MS elects to build I-14 along the US 84 corridor, the odds of it getting past Laurel/I-59 without some reciprocal action within AL are currently nil.  That's the trouble with multi-state corridors -- too many ducks to line up in a row.  Even if GA passes their legislation, that'll only leave 2 out of 5 states where there is any manifested interest in an I-14 corridor project -- and those states are at the ends of the whole concept!  It'll likely be a functional reiteration of the I-73/74 composite corridor concept -- only 3 states have even considered the project (fortunately they're at one end, even though only one has managed to cobble up some actual working facilities), but the other 3 at the NW end have washed their hands of the idea, with little if any chance of near-term revival. 

Ironically -- for an Interstate system -- the current methodology for creating additions favors intrastate corridor concepts -- ones that can be deployed unilaterally by states inclined to do so absent action from their neighboring jurisdictions.   But those states will continue to do so despite the probability that some of their efforts won't produce the intended results due to disinterest or lower prioritization outside their parvenu -- as long as they perceive some internal benefit from such.   Luckily, some multi-state corridors (I-22, I-49 to a large extent) have managed to gather some measure of support from each of the states through which they travel and have been completed or have had relatively long segments built to date.  Whether that was simply luck of the draw regarding the attitudes of the states themselves or internal teeth-gritting regarding getting the projects off the ground can be analyzed and/or debated -- but it's an indication that corridors can be done if enough support -- spread out so it permeates the whole corridor length -- is present.   For a number of these latter-day/"aftermarket" plans, that's clearly not the case!

[Gnutella]

I-18, bitches!

[sparker]

I-18, bitches!

If the two I-14 projects (TX, GA) aren't going to be connected together, then I-18 would be a highly appropriate designation for the eastern segment, particularly since half of it would be north of I-16. 

[MantyMadTown]

I-18, bitches!

If the two I-14 projects (TX, GA) aren't going to be connected together, then I-18 would be a highly appropriate designation for the eastern segment, particularly since half of it would be north of I-16.

Still hoping for a connection from Columbus to I-85.

[sparker]

I-18, bitches!

If the two I-14 projects (TX, GA) aren't going to be connected together, then I-18 would be a highly appropriate designation for the eastern segment, particularly since half of it would be north of I-16.

Still hoping for a connection from Columbus to I-85.

I'm guessing this means a connection westward in AL; a northward connection (expediting Columbus-Atlanta traffic) is made via I-185.  I suppose some sort of E-W connector could be cobbled up from I-185 west to I-85 near West Point, keeping such a project within GA rather than the reticent AL -- but whether projected traffic would warrant such a facility is doubtful.  In that respect Columbus has the misfortune of being located along a border shared with a state that seemingly has no intention of being part of GA's intrastate planning efforts (if indeed legislated); unless GA intends to gift AL the funds for a connection, it's simply an impasse.     

[edwaleni]

This is a pipe dream.

If Georgia is really serious, then fund it yourself, build it to I standards and file for your reimbursement. (and wait in line)

There isn't much political support (outside of Georgia) for a road that will benefit the ports of Georgia at the expense of Mobile.

Georgia is going to have to find Alabama something in return besides losing football games if they want to see this happen.

[roadman65]

I noticed that GDOT over the past few decades widened part of GA 88 west of Wrens.  I take that is to be part of the I-14 corridor and their way of getting support for it.  Then US 1 widening from Wrens to Augusta is also part of where it would run as well as being it needs to support Fort Gordon which is on US 1 proper.

I am all for this, but I do believe that it will become a two segment interstate as from the tone here from both MS and AL it will be almost a half a century before those states build it.

So it will end up joining the ranks of I-74 and I-69 and be just a discontinuous freeway for several hundred miles.

[sparker]

^^^^^^^^^
The Columbus-Augusta corridor, including the segment of GA 88 cited above, is unsigned GRIP route 540; primarily intended for construction to expressway standards.  Besides a Macon bypass -- likely serving Warner-Robins in the process -- most of the corridor, while substantially divided highway, will require extensive upgrades before meeting Interstate standards.  Actually the original I-14 proposal from the very early 2000's did specify the Macon-Augusta portion of GRIP 540, although it made a significant detour between Columbus and Macon via GA 26 (likely a political sop or payback) -- something that likely won't happen again due to the presence of an upgradable facility via GA 96.  This latest effort seems like a fanciful effort to revive the concept -- but without the cooperation of AL, it'll be just another intrastate project with potential R/W/B signage.  In any case, it'll be intriguing to see how it all shakes out over time -- and whether GA joins NC in the pantheon of Eastern Seaboard states engaging in unilateral Interstate planning.   

[VTGoose]

I noticed that GDOT over the past few decades widened part of GA 88 west of Wrens.  I take that is to be part of the I-14 corridor and their way of getting support for it.  Then US 1 widening from Wrens to Augusta is also part of where it would run as well as being it needs to support Fort Gordon which is on US 1 proper.

I am all for this, but I do believe that it will become a two segment interstate as from the tone here from both MS and AL it will be almost a half a century before those states build it.

So it will end up joining the ranks of I-74 and I-69 and be just a discontinuous freeway for several hundred miles.

The Fall Line Freeway already provides a decent divided-highway route between Augusta (almost) and Macon (almost). It meanders a bit along the way but probably meets the needs for travel between those points. A better connection from I-16 at/near Macon and with I-520 (probably) at Augusta would improve the usefulness of this highway.

It would be nice if Georgia would look at improvements between Augusta and Valdosta (I-77 extension, basically) to provide an alternative to I-77/I-26/I-95 and/or I-4 or other routes to reach the west coast of Florida.

[Henry]

Too bad the Gulf Coast states are already hindering any possibility of connecting it to the short stub in TX.

[sparker]

Too bad the Gulf Coast states are already hindering any possibility of connecting it to the short stub in TX.

Well, in large part the blame/responsibility for that can be laid at the hands of tax aversion within both states (getting any sort of revenue stream going is like pulling teeth -- but with less productive results) -- and, in the case of MS, a considerably smaller functional tax base to begin with (even if they raised gas/sales taxes like has been done in other jurisdictions, the aggregate amount would be decidedly less).  AL milked ARC and invoked HPC status to get I-22 completed; once that was done, their appetite for new freeways seemed to be sated -- despite the longstanding "I-85" extension project west of Montgomery, which was formally dropped, along with AL's share of the Dothan connector to I-10, last year.