Which new/future interstate is most likely to be done and completed first?

[sprjus4]

Out of short segments of highway, I can see I-69E between Victoria and I-37 getting done within the next 10 years. It seems likely I-69 between the Houston and Corpus Christi area will be finished in the 2030's.

This seems a bit ambitious. I know they are working aggressively going south from Houston towards Wharton, but as far as I'm aware, there's no real progress between Victoria and I-37. Bypasses of Refugio and Odem are forthcoming, but are there any plans in the rural areas between?

Texas seems right now to be focusing on I-69E south of I-37 down to Raymondville.

I would love to see Corpus Christi to Houston eventually completed though. In the meantime, it is a well designed 4 lane divided highway with free-flow and a consistent 75 mph speed limit - outside of Odem and Refugio which will be addressed hopefully this decade.

[Strider]

Umm.. I-27W???? Texas is really proposing two branches of I-27? I thought that was only one... unless I am missing something (or falling behind).

[Bobby5280]

"I-27W" is actually a serious proposal. The Ports to Plains Corridor has East and West legs going through Big Spring and the Midland-Odessa areas.

This seems a bit ambitious. I know they are working aggressively going south from Houston towards Wharton, but as far as I'm aware, there's no real progress between Victoria and I-37. Bypasses of Refugio and Odem are forthcoming, but are there any plans in the rural areas between?

10 years from now would be almost 2034.

The first I-69 work between I-37 and Victoria is the new I-37/US-77 interchange, currently under construction. The Odem project would cover much of the leg up to Sinton. US-77 would need some minor improvements on the existing freeway around Sinton. The Refugio project would cover the bypass around Refugio and upgrade project through Woodsboro. That wouldn't leave a whole lot left between I-37 and Victoria to upgrade. The remaining work would be easy since there's very little development next to the existing highway.

The farther I-69 progress moves Southwest of Houston the easier it's going to be. Very little new ROW has to be acquired. I remember the US-71>I-49 upgrade in Southwest Missouri was a similar situation and it seemed to go relatively quickly since much of the work was in rural territory.

Of course, politics can either speed up or slow down the pace of progress. So that's a wild card.

[TheBox]

Umm.. I-27W???? Texas is really proposing two branches of I-27? I thought that was only one... unless I am missing something (or falling behind).

You heard of the US-87 Big Spring bypass? That'll be I-27E

They split and reunite at Lemesa north of I-20 and Sterling City south of I-20

And as I said before, US-87 from south of Lubbock all the way to San Angelo is already a 4-lane divided expressway (even when there's work TBD it's very doable), aside from the Lemesa and Sterling bypasses which just so happen to involve future I-27W

[DJStephens]

Honestly, my vote was for I-42 in Oklahoma/Arkansas...but in all reality, I believe that it will be I-57 done first.

Siloam Springs will be the big obstacle to that occurring.   

[roadman65]

I believe for I-49 it will be north of Texarkana to Dequeen rather than Shreveport or even US 90 from Lafayette to NOLA.

I also believe east of I-310 will be the last for when they get the Lafayette eastward segments done as with a connection to I-310 you don't need to go all the way to the Crescent City Connection to have a freeway to New Orleans from the north.

[bwana39]

I believe for I-49 it will be north of Texarkana to Dequeen rather than Shreveport or even US 90 from Lafayette to NOLA.

I also believe east of I-310 will be the last for when they get the Lafayette eastward segments done as with a connection to I-310 you don't need to go all the way to the Crescent City Connection to have a freeway to New Orleans from the north.

Are you saying I-49 will be completed to DeQueen before it is built through Shreveport (the ICC)?

As to I-49 ending at I-310 or even the Long bridge; the point of the road is to have an additional hurricane evacuation route. On here we tend to look at fair weather transportation needs. The state of Louisiana is looking at a balance of transportation needs versus hurricane evacuation. The connection to the CCC and central New Orleans is a goodly part of this need. From a transportation (truck) perspective, I-310 or even the HPL is more than sufficient, Either would create a good bypass of Baton Rouge.

[jgb191]

My prediction is US-59 between Rosenburg and Victoria completed first before anything else on that poll list.  Within a couple years Houston to Wharton shall be upgraded to interstate standards; the Jackson County Airport to the other side of Edna bypass (southwest end) is already up to interstate standards, so very little if anything at all needs work traversing the town of Edna (more on that in my next paragraph).  And then South of Victoria I predict US-77 south to Brownsville will be done before continuing on US-59 to Laredo since US-77 is a lot closer to interstate standards than US-59.  Bypasses will eventually be done around Refugio, Odem, and Riviera; and overpasses will be built over McFaddin, Woodsboro, and Ricardo; Refugio bypass will be the final piece of the puzzle since the town is a major stopping point a great deal of traffic for fuel, food, rest, etc.  Traffic need Refugio and that town still needs traffic for now.

Regarding US-59 between Victoria and Jackson County Airport.  I have a feeling that this stretch might be next on the upgrade list after the Wharton/Hungerford upgrade.  Only thing needed is to close the few crossovers between the mainlanes and either build an overpass for the Jackson County Airport or reroute the airport access road to align with the Cordele exit.  The overpasses at Cordele, Inez, and El Toro are already built to standards.

[roadman65]

I believe for I-49 it will be north of Texarkana to Dequeen rather than Shreveport or even US 90 from Lafayette to NOLA.

I also believe east of I-310 will be the last for when they get the Lafayette eastward segments done as with a connection to I-310 you don't need to go all the way to the Crescent City Connection to have a freeway to New Orleans from the north.

Are you saying I-49 will be completed to DeQueen before it is built through Shreveport (the ICC)?

As to I-49 ending at I-310 or even the Long bridge; the point of the road is to have an additional hurricane evacuation route. On here we tend to look at fair weather transportation needs. The state of Louisiana is looking at a balance of transportation needs versus hurricane evacuation. The connection to the CCC and central New Orleans is a goodly part of this need. From a transportation (truck) perspective, I-310 or even the HPL is more than sufficient, Either would create a good bypass of Baton Rouge.

I'm not against the Westbank Expressway being I-49. First of all it would end the non business designation of US 90 Business. Second and more practical, I believe in its intent. However I don't see LADOT building it top priority east of I-310. I see them upgrading US 90 from east of Houma to I-310 as very few obstacles in the way, but east of I-310 it's arterial with businesses along the route. I could very well see them stopping at I-310 like Tennessee stopping I-69 at Dyersburg instead of continuing it to Memphis due to I-155 and I-55 being a freeway to Memphis already.

Not saying either won't be built all the way eventually, but at the present moment top priorities will be to at least get 'em connected to freeways already built to other area interstates.

[Anthony_JK]

I believe for I-49 it will be north of Texarkana to Dequeen rather than Shreveport or even US 90 from Lafayette to NOLA.

I also believe east of I-310 will be the last for when they get the Lafayette eastward segments done as with a connection to I-310 you don't need to go all the way to the Crescent City Connection to have a freeway to New Orleans from the north.

Are you saying I-49 will be completed to DeQueen before it is built through Shreveport (the ICC)?

As to I-49 ending at I-310 or even the Long bridge; the point of the road is to have an additional hurricane evacuation route. On here we tend to look at fair weather transportation needs. The state of Louisiana is looking at a balance of transportation needs versus hurricane evacuation. The connection to the CCC and central New Orleans is a goodly part of this need. From a transportation (truck) perspective, I-310 or even the HPL is more than sufficient, Either would create a good bypass of Baton Rouge.

I'm not against the Westbank Expressway being I-49. First of all it would end the non business designation of US 90 Business. Second and more practical, I believe in its intent. However I don't see LADOT building it top priority east of I-310. I see them upgrading US 90 from east of Houma to I-310 as very few obstacles in the way, but east of I-310 it's arterial with businesses along the route. I could very well see them stopping at I-310 like Tennessee stopping I-69 at Dyersburg instead of continuing it to Memphis due to I-155 and I-55 being a freeway to Memphis already.

Not saying either won't be built all the way eventually, but at the present moment top priorities will be to at least get 'em connected to freeways already built to other area interstates.

The Boutte (I-310) to West Bank Expressway segment will probably be the final segment of I-49 South to be built, since having a connection with an extension of I-310 to reach I-10 west of NOLA will do well as a internim.

There was a major controversy originally on how to run I-49 South through Boutte, though. The original plans had the freeway with its own dedicated connectors terminating I-310, and the original I-310 south of the LA 3127 interchange downgraded to non-limited access and ending at a conventional intersection with US 90, and then I-49 would run along the BNSF railroad line just north of US 90 prior to rejoining the 90 ROW before Willowdale Boulevard. Local officials in St. Charles Parish, however, raised holy Hell about that, and insisted on bypassing I-49 well south of Boutte, with an extension of existing I-310/LA 3137 terminating in a directional Y interchange. That alternative was considered DOA by FHWA/LADOTD because it would pass through very sensitive wetlands and a federal wildlife reserve area. Ultimately, they reached a compromise: An extension of I-310/LA 3137 to an interchange with I-49, then the routing along the BNSF, but with the railroad realigned slightly to the north to allow enough ROW without expensive bridging.

[Anthony_JK]

I believe for I-49 it will be north of Texarkana to Dequeen rather than Shreveport or even US 90 from Lafayette to NOLA.

I also believe east of I-310 will be the last for when they get the Lafayette eastward segments done as with a connection to I-310 you don't need to go all the way to the Crescent City Connection to have a freeway to New Orleans from the north.

Are you saying I-49 will be completed to DeQueen before it is built through Shreveport (the ICC)?

As to I-49 ending at I-310 or even the Long bridge; the point of the road is to have an additional hurricane evacuation route. On here we tend to look at fair weather transportation needs. The state of Louisiana is looking at a balance of transportation needs versus hurricane evacuation. The connection to the CCC and central New Orleans is a goodly part of this need. From a transportation (truck) perspective, I-310 or even the HPL is more than sufficient, Either would create a good bypass of Baton Rouge.

I'm not against the Westbank Expressway being I-49. First of all it would end the non business designation of US 90 Business. Second and more practical, I believe in its intent. However I don't see LADOT building it top priority east of I-310. I see them upgrading US 90 from east of Houma to I-310 as very few obstacles in the way, but east of I-310 it's arterial with businesses along the route. I could very well see them stopping at I-310 like Tennessee stopping I-69 at Dyersburg instead of continuing it to Memphis due to I-155 and I-55 being a freeway to Memphis already.

Not saying either won't be built all the way eventually, but at the present moment top priorities will be to at least get 'em connected to freeways already built to other area interstates.

Just like I can't see them not building a Dyersburg to Memphis segment of I-69 because that would completely bypass Greater Memphis and/or overwhelm the existing crossings of I-55 and I-40 (unless you planned on extending the northern segment of I-269 across the Mississippi to connect with existing I-55), I can't see them not completing I-49 South all the way to NOLA. They do have some leeway to delay the I-310 to West Bank segment since a connection to I-310 would provide adequate Interstate access in the internim, but I can't see NOLA agreeing to not finishing it the full distance.


Although getting the Raceland to I-310 segment done would be easier, it does come with complications. The original plan was to bypass Des Allemands and Paradis to the south and then cross over to the north of US 90 for the dedicated connection with I-310, with the entire freeway elevated on viaduct. That was rejected for obvious financial reasons; the current plan is to overlay and hijack the current section of US 90 through Des Allemands by upgrading the existing US 90 bridge over Bayou Des Allemands, then borrow the existing US 90 ROW from east of Des Allemands to near Paradis, then briefly bypassing Paradis to the south before junctioning with the I-310 extension. The main issue here is that local access to the old US 90 would be cut off by I-49 taking over its ROW, and that has locals fuming for some kind of either frontage/access road for reconnecting old US 90 or shifting the ROW for I-49 further south and keeping old US 90 for the locals.

[roadman65]

That's the word I was looking for. For I-69 from Dyersburg to Memphis has I-155 as an interim solution until Tennessee decides when to complete their part of the Canada to Mexico corridor. Heck they can't even finish the Union City or Troy bypasses or redo the South Fulton interchange at US 45/45E/45W/51 junction.

Tennessee puts that highway on back burner for sure just as MS, AR, LA, and TX ( east of US 59). Maybe our great grandkids might see I-69 completed, but south of Dyersburg and east of US 59 we're not going to see I-69 built.

[lordsutch]

That's the word I was looking for. For I-69 from Dyersburg to Memphis has I-155 as an interim solution until Tennessee decides when to complete their part of the Canada to Mexico corridor. Heck they can't even finish the Union City or Troy bypasses or redo the South Fulton interchange at US 45/45E/45W/51 junction.

Tennessee puts that highway on back burner for sure just as MS, AR, LA, and TX ( east of US 59). Maybe our great grandkids might see I-69 completed, but south of Dyersburg and east of US 59 we're not going to see I-69 built.

TDOT is opening the Union City bypass in the next few weeks and has projects in the 2024–26 STIP for both Troy and the state line interface, so it would seem that there's more progress than you'd think. South of Dyersburg is more questionable, but US 51 between Millington and the Hatchie River is getting increasingly built up and will probably need to be bypassed in the next decade or so.

[The Ghostbuster]

Hopefully all of them will eventually be completed, even if it takes 50 or more years to complete them all.

[MikieTimT]

Has the US 412 corridor interstate been confirmed as I-42 already?
It would seem weird to duplicate 42 when every number between 46 and 62 are available, but whatever.

It's what Oklahoma wants, but I'm not sure that AASHTO or the FHWA have actually approved it. They would be wise not to.

I was surprised that Arkansas signed onto the number as well.  I'll just be glad to see it completed, hopefully before I have to be driven everywhere.

[Henry]

Where's I-69C?

(BTW, my vote is on I-57 in AR.)

[Some one]

Where's I-69C?

(BTW, my vote is on I-57 in AR.)

It's the redheaded stepchild 

[MikieTimT]

Honestly, my vote was for I-42 in Oklahoma/Arkansas...but in all reality, I believe that it will be I-57 done first.

Siloam Springs will be the big obstacle to that occurring.

We'll be to the 3rd PEL meeting with alternatives available by the Mar/Apr public involvement meeting, so we'll see what they come up with on alternatives for bypassing Siloam Springs.  Funding is going to be the tricky part for both states.  Arkansas is starting the western leg of AR-612 next year with a 2026 completion.  After that, we'll see what the alternatives are at that same public involvement meeting for the leg between the Siloam Springs Bypass and the Springdale Northern Bypass.  Probably new terrain builds as well as eliminating at-grade intersections with overpasses/access roads on the existing divided US-412 as a cheaper alternative.

[MikieTimT]

It appears that the request for US-412 to become I-42 were withdrawn, both from Arkansas and Oklahoma.  We can only hope that this it due to the number being duplicitous of the facility in North Carolina that would never have logical connection, no matter how far into the future we look.

https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=29375.msg2888852#msg2888852

[TheBox]

It appears that the request for US-412 to become I-42 were withdrawn, both from Arkansas and Oklahoma.  We can only hope that this it due to the number being duplicitous of the facility in North Carolina that would never have logical connection, no matter how far into the future we look.

https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=29375.msg2888852#msg2888852

And that leaves us with only the unused I-46 and I-48 left.
I-40 and I-45 are the majors, with I-42 (as you said), I-44, and I-49 existing else where.

Sure there's also the unused I-41, I-43, and I-47 but much like the aforementioned I-45 and I-49 those are odd and thus vertically N/S, they (or just I-x45) can also be saved for a hypothetical I-45 extension branch from it at McAlister, OK via Indian Nation Turnpike, whiling said hypothical I-45 goes straight to Big Cabin and then Kansas City via US-69, but that's getting to fictional territory at that point.

[sprjus4]

It appears that the request for US-412 to become I-42 were withdrawn, both from Arkansas and Oklahoma.  We can only hope that this it due to the number being duplicitous of the facility in North Carolina that would never have logical connection, no matter how far into the future we look.

https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=29375.msg2888852#msg2888852

And that leaves us with only the unused I-46 and I-48 left.
I-40 and I-45 are the majors, with I-42 (as you said), I-44, and I-49 existing else where.

Sure there's also the unused I-41, I-43, and I-47 but much like the aforementioned I-45 and I-49 those are odd and thus vertically N/S, they (or just I-x45) can also be saved for a hypothetical I-45 extension branch from it at McAlister, OK via Indian Nation Turnpike, whiling said hypothical I-45 goes straight to Big Cabin and then Kansas City via US-69, but that's getting to fictional territory at that point.

For US-412, any even number between 40 and 64 is fair game. Odd numbers indicate north-south, those aren't happening here period.

Avoiding unnecessary duplication, it could be I-46, I-48, I-50, I-52, I-54, I-56, I-58, I-60, or I-62.

I have my doubts about I-50 or I-60... I personally would like to see "I-58" applied to US-58 in Virginia if said route as ever upgraded, but that is certainly not a reason for this US-412 corridor to take "first dibs".

[FightingIrish]

It appears that the request for US-412 to become I-42 were withdrawn, both from Arkansas and Oklahoma.  We can only hope that this it due to the number being duplicitous of the facility in North Carolina that would never have logical connection, no matter how far into the future we look.

https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=29375.msg2888852#msg2888852

And that leaves us with only the unused I-46 and I-48 left.
I-40 and I-45 are the majors, with I-42 (as you said), I-44, and I-49 existing else where.

Sure there's also the unused I-41, I-43, and I-47 but much like the aforementioned I-45 and I-49 those are odd and thus vertically N/S, they (or just I-x45) can also be saved for a hypothetical I-45 extension branch from it at McAlister, OK via Indian Nation Turnpike, whiling said hypothical I-45 goes straight to Big Cabin and then Kansas City via US-69, but that's getting to fictional territory at that point.

I-41 and I-43 are alive and well in Wisconsin.

[The Ghostbuster]

I liked the Interstate 46 designation for the US 412 corridor. As for implementing an Interstate 47, I would have liked to see that designation follow the Interstate 369 corridor. In any event, I believe that the Interstate 42 designation might be resubmitted to AASTHO at a later date, though there is no guarantee it will be approved.

[Henry]

I liked the Interstate 46 designation for the US 412 corridor. As for implementing an Interstate 47, I would have liked to see that designation follow the Interstate 369 corridor. In any event, I believe that the Interstate 42 designation might be resubmitted to AASTHO at a later date, though there is no guarantee it will be approved.

Remember, I-42 was withdrawn before the most recent AASHTO meeting (though approval had been given with a condition), so the resubmission will most likely be under a new number. The "condition" part most likely refers to the renumbering; look at the two latest additions in NC (I-42 and I-87, both of which had other numbers for consideration before settling on their current designations).

[jgb191]

Among the polls listed, I predict US-290 from Houston to Austin.

I would like to add a project worth considering.  Instead of I-69W from Victoria to Laredo, I'd like to see an interstate highway from Corpus Christi to Laredo running along or parallel to TX-44 from Corpus Christi to Freer and then US-59 from there to Laredo.  Already at IH-standards from Corpus Christi to approaching Robstown (including bypassing around Clarkwood), it's still mostly a four-lane divided highway from there to San Diego (TX).  Bypasses around Robstown, Agua Dulce, Alice/San Diego, and Freer would be needed, and would need an overpass or two through Banquete.  This highway has been talked about since the late 1990's among locals along the way.  Getting around Robstown and Alice would be a great time-saver.  Driving through Alice can sometimes take over a quarter-hour on TX-44 for only a five-mile stretch.