SLT thoughts (ping J N Winkler)

[route56]

Unfortunately, no new news has come as of late regarding the fate of the South Lawrence Trafficway. However, going through my archive of J-W material, particularly from 2007-2009, I've come up with a few thoughts.

First, I have exchanged emails and listened to some of the arguments of Mike Caron, one of the leaders of the Wetlands groups who are the plaintiffs in the current round of litigation. Among his claims: building the trafficway would cause such noise and pollution that much of the wildlife will abandon the area. In particular, he says that 18-wheelers will parade through the night, particularly independents drivers wanting to avoid Turnpike Tolls and/or Weigh Stations, and that many long-distance truck routes are designed to go through major cities in the middle of the night. 

Needless to say, I find his assertion regarding truck traffic to be totally without merit. During the time I was employed at Sprint, I drew a night-shift job. Going home in the middle of the night, I noticed that traffic was very light, particularly on K-10 (where I could actually use my high-beams for significant distances). There were definitely more truck on the turnpike than on 10. As for dodging the weigh station... the weigh station for westbound I-70 is near McFarland, well west of the K-10/I-70 junction.

I do not know how the modern driving routes are programmed, but I find it far-fetched, based on my observations, that they are set to route through Kansas City at night by design.

[Revive 755]

Among his claims: building the trafficway would cause such noise and pollution that much of the wildlife will abandon the area.

Pretty sure I've seen plenty of wetlands along other major freeways/expressways that still display plenty of birds, deer and turtles.

[agentsteel53]

Trafficway.

why does Kansas use this word?  Were Congestionway, Accidentway, and Dufus In the Left Lane Doing Thirty Below the Speed Limit With His Left Blinker Way already taken?

[route56]

why does Kansas use this word?  Were Congestionway, Accidentway, and Dufus In the Left Lane Doing Thirty Below the Speed Limit With His Left Blinker Way already taken?

Actually, the term "South Lawrence Trafficway" goes back to the late 80's, and was a local designation for the proposal. The detractors have also used "truckway" to describe the road.

[Scott5114]

It's a Kansas City-area term...there are "Trafficways" on the Missouri side of KC too.

[J N Winkler]

Unfortunately, no new news has come as of late regarding the fate of the South Lawrence Trafficway. However, going through my archive of J-W material, particularly from 2007-2009, I've come up with a few thoughts.

Has there been any mention of KDOT letting a grading and bridges contract for the SLT in the relatively near future--say, the next two or three years?

First, I have exchanged emails and listened to some of the arguments of Mike Caron, one of the leaders of the Wetlands groups who are the plaintiffs in the current round of litigation. Among his claims: building the trafficway would cause such noise and pollution that much of the wildlife will abandon the area. In particular, he says that 18-wheelers will parade through the night, particularly independent drivers wanting to avoid Turnpike Tolls and/or Weigh Stations, and that many long-distance truck routes are designed to go through major cities in the middle of the night.

I agree that they don't amount to serious reasons not to build the SLT.  The observation that truckers will route straight through cities late at night is based on the assumption that they prefer empty roads in general, since this means they don't have to deal with peaks in commuter traffic or with large flows of cars which make it difficult for them to interface with city street systems.  However, I tend to think a better measure of the pressure traffic will apply to wildlife is not truck volume per se, or even the presence of elevated truck volumes late at night, but rather the overall noise levels at the times of day when wild animals are most active (generally around sunset and sunrise) in combination with the quality of the connections provided between different areas of habitat on either side of the SLT.

The "parade" of 18-wheelers is unlikely to happen on K-10, unless it also happens on the Turnpike, because even when the SLT is finished, it will be impossible to use it for long-distance freeway trips west of Lawrence without using the Turnpike.

I don't see anything in the arguments relating to weigh stations.  In addition to the fixed permanent weigh stations, I think the KHP has the authority to operate portable scales, and this can be done either on the Turnpike or on the SLT when it is finished.

Needless to say, I find his assertion regarding truck traffic to be totally without merit. During the time I was employed at Sprint, I drew a night-shift job. Going home in the middle of the night, I noticed that traffic was very light, particularly on K-10 (where I could actually use my high-beams for significant distances). There were definitely more truck on the turnpike than on 10. As for dodging the weigh station... the weigh station for westbound I-70 is near McFarland, well west of the K-10/I-70 junction.

Keep in mind that this comparison is based on a "before SLT" scenario where K-10 is an unattractive route for long-distance traffic (even late at night) because it entails going through Lawrence.  There is liable to be some increase in overall traffic volume, including trucks making long-distance trips, after the SLT is finished because it will then deliver substantial time savings over the current K-10 route as well as a more direct approach to the southern suburbs of KC.  The extent of the increase in truck traffic will depend partly on (1) the Turnpike's pricing policies (for example, KTA could impose a "welcome stranger" toll structure for trucks entering from K-10 and continuing westbound on I-70 which would make it more attractive to use the Turnpike instead of K-10 between Lawrence and KC) and (2) the extent to which freight terminals develop or relocate to take advantage of a freeway-standard K-10 bypass of Lawrence.

If memory serves, there is also a weigh station on westbound I-70 within the I-435 loop (I think it is near the I-635 interchange).  I do not know if there is a weigh station on the southern flank of I-435 westbound.  KDOT is currently building a new weigh station on I-35 at Lone Elm Road (KDOT project number 35-46 K 9014-01) but this is well outside the I-435 loop and will intercept only traffic going south on I-35.  There is another weigh station at the intersection of US 59 and US 56, which I presume will continue in operation (possibly with relocation/renovation) after the US 59 freeway is finished.

It is my understanding that the SLT, as currently planned, will allow free-flow traffic movement all the way from I-435 at the Missouri state line to the K-10/I-70 interchange.  (K-10/US 59 is currently planned as a diamond interchange with the ramp termini on US 59, which will effectively be the "surface" route at this interchange.)  What this means is that a long-distance trucker will be able to use I-435 and K-10 to detour around the KCK weigh station and get all the way west on I-70 to McFarland without being stopped.  I am not sure how useful this would be, though--it would be only 70 additional miles of distance covered if one were trying to work a driving hours scam that required evasion of weigh stations but did not want to leave freeways.  The McFarland station is evadable but this entails about 30 miles on the not-very-fast part of US 24, joining at US 75 (Topeka) and leaving at K-99 (Wamego).

I do not know how the modern driving routes are programmed, but I find it far-fetched, based on my observations, that they are set to route through Kansas City at night by design.

Downtown KC is difficult for trucks because of the road geometry (though the treacherous 45 MPH curve on I-70 is actually eastbound, not westbound), while I-470 to I-435 to K-10 is an easy run and will be even easier when the SLT is finished.  Again, this depends partly on Turnpike pricing policies.  They don't have to stick rigidly to a per-mile unit charge, and they don't--Turnpike tolls have traditionally included an implicit gate charge (you pay more if you exit and re-enter at an intermediate interchange than you would if you kept on the Turnpike all the way from start to finish).  This could easily be manipulated to keep traffic which would otherwise divert to K-10 on the Turnpike.

But, as I see it, the bottom line is that the Turnpike already forms a smooth-running freeway link between Kansas City and Topeka, has done so for more than 50 years, and has consistently run below capacity between Lawrence and Topeka, so I just don't see huge truck traffic volumes developing on itineraries through Lawrence purely as a result of the SLT being finished.  The key variable, I would expect, would be the emergence of a large number of warehouses and freight terminals focused on the Lawrence-to-KC corridor.  But if these are to serve multiple regions (which implies long-distance haulage), it would be more sensible to locate them closer to I-435, i.e. on the bits of K-10 which are already freeway and are due for widening (a stack is tentatively planned for K-7/K-10).

Complaints about a new KDOT freeway being a way for the road freight interests to get their camel's nose under the tent flap are, IMO, better directed against US 59 (and, for that matter, rural freeways like US 54 and US 69) than the SLT.  To me it has always been a 23rd Street bypass, i.e. a way to provide arterial connectivity to new residential development.

Trafficway.

why does Kansas use this word?  Were Congestionway, Accidentway, and Dufus In the Left Lane Doing Thirty Below the Speed Limit With His Left Blinker Way already taken?

It is actually a Kansas City term which has bled over to Lawrence and Topeka.  It is basically an undifferentiated reference to arterial roads and can refer to roads proposed as full freeways, like the SLT, as well as high-type surface streets.

[route56]

Has there been any mention of KDOT letting a grading and bridges contract for the SLT in the relatively near future--say, the next two or three years?

The only actual activity going on attm regarding the SLT is wetland mitigation. With no funding source identified and the EIS officially in litigation, it would be difficult for KDOT to talk about letting anywhere in the near future.

If memory serves, there is also a weigh station on westbound I-70 within the I-435 loop\

Thre is an inspection station between Turner Diagonal and 78th Street; however, there are no fixed scales at this location.

I do not know if there is a weigh station on the southern flank of I-435 westbound.

There are no fixed weigh stations to my knowledge on 435 on either side of the state line.

KDOT is currently building a new weigh station on I-35 at Lone Elm Road (KDOT project number 35-46 K 9014-01) but this is well outside the I-435 loop and will intercept only traffic going south on I-35.

This is actually a rebuilding of an existing weigh station. There is a matching northbound scale.

There is another weigh station at the intersection of US 59 and US 56, which I presume will continue in operation (possibly with relocation/renovation) after the US 59 freeway is finished.

The Baldwin Junction scale has been removed... along with all other structures at that intersection. KDOT does plan on building a new scale for southbound traffic just inside Franklin County, but they do not plan to open it until the Douglas County portion of US 59 is completed.

[bugo]

The K-10 route is useful if you're going to south KC, but through traffic would be better off staying on I-70.  K-10 traffic is defaulted onto I-435, which leads to the Grandview Triangle which is a bottleneck at times. 

If they're so worried about truckers evading weigh stations, then put a weigh station on K-10 around Eudora or DeSoto.  Problem solved.