News:

The AARoads Wiki is live! Come check it out!

Main Menu

Future of I-72 in Missouri?

Started by jhuntin1, December 11, 2014, 09:40:14 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

I-39

At this point, I'd be shocked if this happened. So much cost to upgrade US 36 into I-72 for little benefit. The Highway isn't even graded properly in some areas. I-57 is needed more right now.


edwaleni

Quote from: I-39 on July 16, 2023, 09:44:00 AM
At this point, I'd be shocked if this happened. So much cost to upgrade US 36 into I-72 for little benefit. The Highway isn't even graded properly in some areas. I-57 is needed more right now.

IDOT would love it.  I-72 from Springfield to Hannibal fails the benchmarks for interstate highway justifications.

It would provide cover for their error of not keeping it as US-36.

sprjus4

Quote from: edwaleni on July 16, 2023, 09:43:45 PM
Quote from: I-39 on July 16, 2023, 09:44:00 AM
At this point, I'd be shocked if this happened. So much cost to upgrade US 36 into I-72 for little benefit. The Highway isn't even graded properly in some areas. I-57 is needed more right now.

IDOT would love it.  I-72 from Springfield to Hannibal fails the benchmarks for interstate highway justifications.

It would provide cover for their error of not keeping it as US-36.
I'm not sure IDOT really cares that much... as far as they're aware, I-72 spans the state and does its job. What Missouri does is up to Missouri.

3467

IDOT used to care before it was 4 lane . I heard them complain because Missouri like Iowa would ask us for 4 lane connections. Now I dont think they do. It does meet current Interstate regulations the metro area stuff was dropped.

Molandfreak

Quote from: edwaleni on July 16, 2023, 09:43:45 PM
Quote from: I-39 on July 16, 2023, 09:44:00 AM
At this point, I'd be shocked if this happened. So much cost to upgrade US 36 into I-72 for little benefit. The Highway isn't even graded properly in some areas. I-57 is needed more right now.

IDOT would love it.  I-72 from Springfield to Hannibal fails the benchmarks for interstate highway justifications.

It would provide cover for their error of not keeping it as US-36.
What benchmarks are you talking about?
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on December 05, 2023, 08:24:57 PM
AASHTO attributes 28.5% of highway inventory shrink to bad road fan social media posts.

JREwing78

If traffic on US-36 doubled, the justification for a rebuild to full Interstate standard freeway would start making sense. But it's just not that busy of a road yet.

Completion of 4-laning of US-50 would be a better place to put funding for I-70 construction traffic relief.

captkirk_4

They would get a lot more traffic if they raised the speed limit on most of it to 70ph as that would cause a lot of the navigation apps to then recommend it to drivers as the shortest route. It's virtually empty across, plus I saw no cops unlike 70 which has two bears in the median with radar watching both directions every 10 miles across the state. Even if it took longer it's a lot more relaxing not having that traffic around.

Ideally with money it would be I-72 all the way from Hannibal to St. Joseph continuing up to run concurrent with Nebraska 2 all the way from I 29 to Lincoln where it could merge with I-80. Then a Danville IL to Lafayette IN new freeway to connect to the Hoosier Heartland extending I-72 all the way up to Toledo. Could be a great way for cross country traffic to avoid the bottleneck at the bottom of Lake Michigan.

sprjus4

Quote from: captkirk_4 on July 21, 2023, 03:25:06 PM
They would get a lot more traffic if they raised the speed limit on most of it to 70ph as that would cause a lot of the navigation apps to then recommend it to drivers as the shortest route. It's virtually empty across, plus I saw no cops unlike 70 which has two bears in the median with radar watching both directions every 10 miles across the state. Even if it took longer it's a lot more relaxing not having that traffic around.
I agree, and I understand in a lot of states where state laws do not permit. But Missouri has countless examples of 70 mph on non-limited-access divided highways, including US-63 which intersects US-36. US-63 is 70 mph while US-36 is still only 65 mph.

If they wanted to get more traffic re-routing from I-70, then they need to make the speed limit equivalent so that it is competitive and can offer the same speeds.

edwaleni

Quote from: sprjus4 on July 21, 2023, 03:31:43 PM
Quote from: captkirk_4 on July 21, 2023, 03:25:06 PM
They would get a lot more traffic if they raised the speed limit on most of it to 70ph as that would cause a lot of the navigation apps to then recommend it to drivers as the shortest route. It's virtually empty across, plus I saw no cops unlike 70 which has two bears in the median with radar watching both directions every 10 miles across the state. Even if it took longer it's a lot more relaxing not having that traffic around.
I agree, and I understand in a lot of states where state laws do not permit. But Missouri has countless examples of 70 mph on non-limited-access divided highways, including US-63 which intersects US-36. US-63 is 70 mph while US-36 is still only 65 mph.

If they wanted to get more traffic re-routing from I-70, then they need to make the speed limit equivalent so that it is competitive and can offer the same speeds.

As I posted earlier, my cousin recently traversed the entire US-36 route across Missouri and the average speed was 70+. Typically 75, and a minority near 80.

So I don't think its the lack of a I number that is limiting the speeds.

As for extending it east, it most definitely ends at downtown Champaign, Illinois, so I don't think doing overlay gymnastics will help. But your idea of a better connection to US-24 (Heartland) to reach Toledo via Fort Wayne might have some merit.

captkirk_4

Quote from: edwaleni on July 21, 2023, 04:00:07 PM
Quote from: sprjus4 on July 21, 2023, 03:31:43 PM
Quote from: captkirk_4 on July 21, 2023, 03:25:06 PM
They would get a lot more traffic if they raised the speed limit on most of it to 70ph as that would cause a lot of the navigation apps to then recommend it to drivers as the shortest route. It's virtually empty across, plus I saw no cops unlike 70 which has two bears in the median with radar watching both directions every 10 miles across the state. Even if it took longer it's a lot more relaxing not having that traffic around.
I agree, and I understand in a lot of states where state laws do not permit. But Missouri has countless examples of 70 mph on non-limited-access divided highways, including US-63 which intersects US-36. US-63 is 70 mph while US-36 is still only 65 mph.

If they wanted to get more traffic re-routing from I-70, then they need to make the speed limit equivalent so that it is competitive and can offer the same speeds.

As I posted earlier, my cousin recently traversed the entire US-36 route across Missouri and the average speed was 70+. Typically 75, and a minority near 80.

So I don't think its the lack of a I number that is limiting the speeds.

As for extending it east, it most definitely ends at downtown Champaign, Illinois, so I don't think doing overlay gymnastics will help. But your idea of a better connection to US-24 (Heartland) to reach Toledo via Fort Wayne might have some merit.

But the problem is a lot of people don't know about this route and the only way they will find out is if they type their destination on their phone and their maps app suggests this as the fastest route which the software computes by assuming you drive the speed limit. Trucking companies too set the computer on the truck with a speed limit according to the route. For instance when driving from Fort Wayne to Champaign my phone suggested driving all the way down to Indianapolis on 69 then over on 74 instead of using the four lane US24 Hoosier Heartland direct to Lafayette which has little traffic. It of course sets a silly 60 speed limit for that empty stretch which no one drives. But my phone's software would have me go through that crazy rush hour traffic on I-465 in Indianapolis as opposed to taking a known four lane state route with lower speed limits and much shorter mileage.

edwaleni

Quote from: captkirk_4 on July 24, 2023, 01:48:45 PM
Quote from: edwaleni on July 21, 2023, 04:00:07 PM
Quote from: sprjus4 on July 21, 2023, 03:31:43 PM
Quote from: captkirk_4 on July 21, 2023, 03:25:06 PM
They would get a lot more traffic if they raised the speed limit on most of it to 70ph as that would cause a lot of the navigation apps to then recommend it to drivers as the shortest route. It's virtually empty across, plus I saw no cops unlike 70 which has two bears in the median with radar watching both directions every 10 miles across the state. Even if it took longer it's a lot more relaxing not having that traffic around.
I agree, and I understand in a lot of states where state laws do not permit. But Missouri has countless examples of 70 mph on non-limited-access divided highways, including US-63 which intersects US-36. US-63 is 70 mph while US-36 is still only 65 mph.

If they wanted to get more traffic re-routing from I-70, then they need to make the speed limit equivalent so that it is competitive and can offer the same speeds.

As I posted earlier, my cousin recently traversed the entire US-36 route across Missouri and the average speed was 70+. Typically 75, and a minority near 80.

So I don't think its the lack of a I number that is limiting the speeds.

As for extending it east, it most definitely ends at downtown Champaign, Illinois, so I don't think doing overlay gymnastics will help. But your idea of a better connection to US-24 (Heartland) to reach Toledo via Fort Wayne might have some merit.

But the problem is a lot of people don't know about this route and the only way they will find out is if they type their destination on their phone and their maps app suggests this as the fastest route which the software computes by assuming you drive the speed limit. Trucking companies too set the computer on the truck with a speed limit according to the route. For instance when driving from Fort Wayne to Champaign my phone suggested driving all the way down to Indianapolis on 69 then over on 74 instead of using the four lane US24 Hoosier Heartland direct to Lafayette which has little traffic. It of course sets a silly 60 speed limit for that empty stretch which no one drives. But my phone's software would have me go through that crazy rush hour traffic on I-465 in Indianapolis as opposed to taking a known four lane state route with lower speed limits and much shorter mileage.

It would have to be fleshed out in fictional, but a simple north bypass of Lafayette to reach the IN-63/US-41 split would probably complete the route.

westerninterloper

Quote from: edwaleni on July 24, 2023, 09:55:36 PM
Quote from: captkirk_4 on July 24, 2023, 01:48:45 PM
Quote from: edwaleni on July 21, 2023, 04:00:07 PM
Quote from: sprjus4 on July 21, 2023, 03:31:43 PM
Quote from: captkirk_4 on July 21, 2023, 03:25:06 PM
They would get a lot more traffic if they raised the speed limit on most of it to 70ph as that would cause a lot of the navigation apps to then recommend it to drivers as the shortest route. It's virtually empty across, plus I saw no cops unlike 70 which has two bears in the median with radar watching both directions every 10 miles across the state. Even if it took longer it's a lot more relaxing not having that traffic around.
I agree, and I understand in a lot of states where state laws do not permit. But Missouri has countless examples of 70 mph on non-limited-access divided highways, including US-63 which intersects US-36. US-63 is 70 mph while US-36 is still only 65 mph.

If they wanted to get more traffic re-routing from I-70, then they need to make the speed limit equivalent so that it is competitive and can offer the same speeds.

As I posted earlier, my cousin recently traversed the entire US-36 route across Missouri and the average speed was 70+. Typically 75, and a minority near 80.

So I don't think its the lack of a I number that is limiting the speeds.

As for extending it east, it most definitely ends at downtown Champaign, Illinois, so I don't think doing overlay gymnastics will help. But your idea of a better connection to US-24 (Heartland) to reach Toledo via Fort Wayne might have some merit.

But the problem is a lot of people don't know about this route and the only way they will find out is if they type their destination on their phone and their maps app suggests this as the fastest route which the software computes by assuming you drive the speed limit. Trucking companies too set the computer on the truck with a speed limit according to the route. For instance when driving from Fort Wayne to Champaign my phone suggested driving all the way down to Indianapolis on 69 then over on 74 instead of using the four lane US24 Hoosier Heartland direct to Lafayette which has little traffic. It of course sets a silly 60 speed limit for that empty stretch which no one drives. But my phone's software would have me go through that crazy rush hour traffic on I-465 in Indianapolis as opposed to taking a known four lane state route with lower speed limits and much shorter mileage.

It would have to be fleshed out in fictional, but a simple north bypass of Lafayette to reach the IN-63/US-41 split would probably complete the route.

I've driven that route from Toledo to Champaign a few times, and yes, the problem is the connection from the Heartland Corridor/Ind 25 to I-74. The traffic in Lafayette is surprisingly heavy, and there is no easy, direct route to I-74. It adds considerably more time than it would appear on a map. I probably wouldn't drive south to Indianapolis, but for big rigs or people unfamiliar with Lafayette, that route might end up being as fast or faster. US 24/Ind 25, the Heartland Corridor, also has quite a few traffic lights and stops along the way, which thankfully keeps most of the through-truck traffic away. Also, I frequently cannot get a Verizon signal along the upper Wabash Valley, I'm not sure why.

I do agree, though, that an I-72 extension from Champaign, through/around Lafayette and upgrading the Heartland Corridor would be beneficial to regional and national traffic.
Nostalgia: Indiana's State Religion

edwaleni

A topic in Fictional has been added to discuss the "I-72 East to Indiana" subject more in depth.

https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=33560.0

The Ghostbuster

They probably only extended Interstate 72 a short distance into Missouri to eliminate Interstate 72 ending at Interstate 172's southern terminus, as it did originally.

MikieTimT

Quote from: The Ghostbuster on July 25, 2023, 01:55:09 PM
They probably only extended Interstate 72 a short distance into Missouri to eliminate Interstate 72 ending at Interstate 172's southern terminus, as it did originally.

With all the crap that Arkansas went through back in the 90's attempting to designate I-49 and had to settle for another I-540 segment leading to the exit number/mile marker cluster that it has in the northern half of the state, I'm surprised AASHTO even allowed the designation of I-72 anywhere west of Springfield as it doesn't terminate at another Interstate connected to the system.  In keeping with their typical policy, all should have been I-172 from Springfield to Hickory Grove until there was actual forward movement in Missouri to connect to at least Cameron.

DJStephens

Quote from: edwaleni on July 16, 2023, 09:43:45 PM
Quote from: I-39 on July 16, 2023, 09:44:00 AM
At this point, I'd be shocked if this happened. So much cost to upgrade US 36 into I-72 for little benefit. The Highway isn't even graded properly in some areas. I-57 is needed more right now.

IDOT would love it.  I-72 from Springfield to Hannibal fails the benchmarks for interstate highway justifications.  It would provide cover for their error of not keeping it as US-36.

Believe I-72 in west central Illnois was a "bone" thrown to "Forgottonia" lawmakers.  Believe it does meet standards, in terms of geometrics, shoulder width, etc.   There is a section, where the median narrows and there is jersey barrier in the median out in the middle of nowhere.  Likely where it was routed through someones' farm.  Anyone know the backstory on that?   

The Ghostbuster

The Interstate 172 designation was originally approved for the US 36 corridor between Exit 4 and Exit 97AB in 1991. It was later approved as an extension of Interstate 72 in 1995, and the 172 designation was approved for its present location. The new Mark Twain Memorial Bridge opened on September 16, 2000, completing 72 to its current western terminus at US 61.

edwaleni

Quote from: DJStephens on July 26, 2023, 12:45:21 PM
Quote from: edwaleni on July 16, 2023, 09:43:45 PM
Quote from: I-39 on July 16, 2023, 09:44:00 AM
At this point, I'd be shocked if this happened. So much cost to upgrade US 36 into I-72 for little benefit. The Highway isn't even graded properly in some areas. I-57 is needed more right now.

IDOT would love it.  I-72 from Springfield to Hannibal fails the benchmarks for interstate highway justifications.  It would provide cover for their error of not keeping it as US-36.

Believe I-72 in west central Illnois was a "bone" thrown to "Forgottonia" lawmakers.  Believe it does meet standards, in terms of geometrics, shoulder width, etc.   There is a section, where the median narrows and there is jersey barrier in the median out in the middle of nowhere.  Likely where it was routed through someones' farm.  Anyone know the backstory on that?

I would surmise this is a crossover point in case one of the Illinois River bridges goes out of service. They are not co-joined at the river but two distinct bridge spans. The jersey barriers are not permanently installed but actually anchored with water barrels at each end. The medians on the east side of the river are also non standard west of IL-100, but not co-joined like the west side is.

silverback1065

let's be honest, this will likely never be built in Missouri and its use in Missouri is dubious at best.

The Ghostbuster

I don't expect the US 36 corridor to be upgraded into an extension of Interstate 72 anytime soon. However, if the DOT and state politicians want the upgrade badly enough, I'm sure they will try to find a way to make it happen.

fhmiii

Quote from: The Ghostbuster on July 27, 2023, 05:14:55 PM
I don't expect the US 36 corridor to be upgraded into an extension of Interstate 72 anytime soon. However, if the DOT and state politicians want the upgrade badly enough, I'm sure they will try to find a way to make it happen.

There's political interest in the project and enough political will to get it passed in the legislature, but the governor has a line-item veto and struck the funds to do a study, along with funds to study widening I-44.

Molandfreak

#246
Quote from: MikieTimT on July 26, 2023, 07:58:48 AM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on July 25, 2023, 01:55:09 PM
They probably only extended Interstate 72 a short distance into Missouri to eliminate Interstate 72 ending at Interstate 172's southern terminus, as it did originally.

With all the crap that Arkansas went through back in the 90's attempting to designate I-49 and had to settle for another I-540 segment leading to the exit number/mile marker cluster that it has in the northern half of the state, I'm surprised AASHTO even allowed the designation of I-72 anywhere west of Springfield as it doesn't terminate at another Interstate connected to the system.  In keeping with their typical policy, all should have been I-172 from Springfield to Hickory Grove until there was actual forward movement in Missouri to connect to at least Cameron.
What policy is that? The only 3-digit interstate that is essentially an extension of its parent is I-345, and that really should have just been I-45 all the way to the Oklahoma state line to begin with.

I-72 is just fine the way it is.

Also still waiting to hear about the supposed "benchmarks for Interstate highway justifications".....
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on December 05, 2023, 08:24:57 PM
AASHTO attributes 28.5% of highway inventory shrink to bad road fan social media posts.

Rothman

Heh.  It's not AASHTO's policy, but FHWA's policy regarding having Interstate designations have at least one end terminating at another Interstate, in the name of it preserving the system part of the Interstate Highway System (therefore, I-72 is quite compliant).  This has been an issue with the NY 17/I-86 conversion. 

My perception is that the policy is inconsistently enforced from one FHWA division to another.
Please note: All comments here represent my own personal opinion and do not reflect the official position(s) of NYSDOT.

Revive 755

Quote from: Molandfreak on July 27, 2023, 08:47:37 PM

What policy is that? The only 3-digit interstate that is essentially an extension of its parent is I-345, and that really should have just been I-45 all the way to the Oklahoma state line to begin with.

I-345 isn't a good comparison as it is a number change on a straight through movement in an interchange.  I-72 east of Springfield and the freeway west of Springfield require using about 5 miles of I-55 for the connection.  So if I-172 was used for the route towards Hannibal, it would either need to be disconnected from I-72 or either I-172 or I-72 would need to have an overlap along I-55 for the connection.

If the freeway leading west from Springfield was to be a 3di, it should have been an odd I-x55.  Not that I have an issue with the use of I-72 for it.

edwaleni

Study is a bit dated. but it was the best I could find. Truck percentage is 22.4%






Opinions expressed here on belong solely to the poster and do not represent or reflect the opinions or beliefs of AARoads, its creators and/or associates.