I-49 Coming to Missouri

[Scott5114]

Bleh. Some anonymous fool added that to Interstate 49 in Missouri and I reverted it out. I don't watch the I-49 main page, so I never caught that they added it there too. It's gone now.

[mvak36]

There was another place it was showing up: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interstate_49#Missouri

I took it out now. Hopefully, we got all of them.

[US71]

There was another place it was showing up: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interstate_49#Missouri

I took it out now. Hopefully, we got all of them.

I took out a part about US 71 to LA 168 being open to local traffic (it's not)

[Grzrd]

Ran across this on Wikipedia today (since it's wikipedia, I don't really trust the validity of it.):

Update: February 2014 - Interstate 49 in Missouri Future Northern End will be at I-70 after I-49 Freeway between 75th Street and U.S. 56 West/Swope Parkway Opens up in 2015.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interstate_49#Kansas_City

Bleh. Some anonymous fool added that to Interstate 49 in Missouri and I reverted it out. I don't watch the I-49 main page, so I never caught that they added it there too. It's gone now.

In an abundance of caution (as well as curiosity), I emailed MoDOT and asked if the rumors about overpasses were true.  The response:

This is in response to your inquiry regarding the construction of overpasses and replacement of the stoplights on US 71, also known as Bruce R. Watkins Drive.  MoDOT does not have any plans or funding identified in our 5 year construction program, to make these types of improvements.  Significant environmental and public outreach work would have to take place before a project to build overpasses could become reality.  It's very important that the nearby communities and region would support a project such as this.  We also do not have plans to perform that environmental and outreach.

I don't think it will happen in the near future ................ although it is a Congressionally designated corridor ........ that would arguably supersede the consent decree ........... 

[mvak36]

I don't think it will happen in the near future ................ although it is a Congressionally designated corridor ........ that would arguably supersede the consent decree ........... 

Does that mean if the federal govt wanted to build it, they could override the decree? Just curious.

[Grzrd]

^ Most probably not. First, MoDOT would have to ask, which would be political suicide. Next, it would get tied up in endless litigation. Not worth it. I was just messing around and being a little sarcastic.

[mvak36]

Haha. Ok. Well you got me. I didn't think that was possible either, but I don't know how this stuff works lol

[bugo]

Stick It To Whitey Drive will eventually be converted to a freeway.  Mark my words.  It might be 5 years or it might be 50 years but it will happen.

[Ned Weasel]

Stick It To Whitey Drive will eventually be converted to a freeway.  Mark my words.  It might be 5 years or it might be 50 years but it will happen.

I wouldn't be 100 percent sure about that.  It's also possible that the freeway portions, and even the expressway itself, could be torn down, with the route re-configured as surface streets or a surface-level boulevard, possibly with infill development in the footprint of the former expressway/freeway.  Of course, with all the money that's been spent on an attempted freeway, this seems unlikely, but we're dealing with political processes here, which aren't necessarily concerned with building artifacts that function well.*

The historical problem is not just opposition to a freeway, but the acceptance of a compromise that produced the worst possible result: a road clearly intended for high-speed traffic but with at-grade intersections that needed to be signalized due to traffic volumes.  Either extreme would have been safer; keeping US 71 in a surface street configuration (most of it was routed along Prospect Avenue) would have resulted in slower streets with no expectation of high-speed traffic flow, while building the entirety of the project as a freeway would have eliminated at-grade crossings with high-speed traffic.  Keep in mind that taking I-435 and then I-70 from the Grandview Triangle to Downtown is only 3.6 miles longer than the US 71/Bruce R. Watkins Drive expressway/freeway, and MoDOT could simply re-route US 71 if it wanted to.

Also, I don't think playing the race card helps your argument, but I digress.

*Note (as a late edit, for people who actually go back and read old posts): I found this sentence unclear in revealing my opinions on the subject.  I did not intend it to mean that I thought the freeway would necessarily function better than any alternatives; rather, I was trying to remark on how political processes tend to trump rationality in building projects that are supposed to function well.  At this time, I am not taking a position on whether upgrading all of Bruce R. Watkins drive to a freeway, or reverting the whole route to surface streets, would be a better alternative, although I am of the opinion that the status quo is undesirable and that either extreme would be preferable (as stated above).

[bugo]

Why can't I play the race card?  The neighborhood who threw a hissy fit about this road played the race card.  Their racism has led to several deaths.  The compromise was unacceptable and made nobody happy.  The neighborhood members who were opposed to this route were mad because they thought European-Americans would use the route.  I'm not making any of this up, you can look it up.

I can say that Prospect is actually faster than taking the Stick It To Whitey Drive at 7:30am at least as far north as Blue Parkway/US 56.

It will eventually be a freeway.  Like I said, it might not happen in my lifetime but in the next 50 years or so, it will be upgraded because the assholes living in that neighborhood will either move or die off and the new residents will realize that cars sitting at traffic lights create more pollution than cars whizzing by at 65 MPH.

[Bobby5280]

I don't understand why they can't dig this stretch of road into a trench and build at least a couple or more pedestrian bridges across it. Missouri is big on SPUI intersections aren't they? This is a huge freaking failure they can't make a simple road construction project like this happen anytime in the last 40 years.

They could build a freeway through that section of Kansas City if they made it nice enough. Did MODOT ever think about that one?

[bugo]

I don't understand why they can't dig this stretch of road into a trench and build at least a couple or more pedestrian bridges across it. Missouri is big on SPUI intersections aren't they? This is a huge freaking failure they can't make a simple road construction project like this happen anytime in the last 40 years.

They could build a freeway through that section of Kansas City if they made it nice enough. Did MODOT ever think about that one?

The residents of that neighborhood refused to compromise.  It was no highway or the highway, if you will.  Any freeway, even a gorgeous one, wasn't good enough for them.  I hope they all choke on the exhaust fumes until they realize they made a bad decision.

[apjung]

Not sure if anyone has mentioned it but Google Street View now has images from Dec. 2013 with I-49 signs.

[Grzrd]

This Feb. 5 article reports that the Missouri legislature is currently considering whether to put a one-cent sales tax increase before Missouri voters that would, among other things, help fund completion of the Bella Vista Bypass

This April 1 article reports that it looks like the House will pass the measure and that the Senate should have sufficient time to also pass the measure and allow Missouri voters to vote on the proposed sales tax increase in November

This article reports that the Missouri legislature will allow Missouri voters to decide the fate of the transportation sales tax:

Missouri voters will decide later this year whether to raise the state sales tax to generate more than $500 million annually for roads and other transportation projects.
The House gave final approval Wednesday to a proposed constitutional amendment that would impose a three-quarters-of-a-cent sales tax for transportation. The Senate approved the measure previously. That means it will go before voters in November, unless Gov. Jay Nixon sets an earlier election date.
If approved by voters, the general sales tax increase would take effect in 2015 and run for 10 years. It would mark the first time that Missouri's roads have been funded with something other than a user fee, such as a motor fuel tax, registration fees or a tax on vehicle sales. The projected $534 million of annual revenues would make it the state's largest-ever tax increase ....
This year's measure also began in the House as a 1-cent sales tax proposal, but the Senate amended it last month it to a 0.75 cent sales tax, which is why a final House vote was required. The measure had appeared in jeopardy last week, when some Democrats threatened to withdraw their support because of concerns about a separate income tax cut enacted when the Republican-led Legislature overrode Nixon's veto.
The proposal sets a 10-year limit on the transportation sales tax, with an additional vote of the people required for it to extend beyond that. Ninety percent of the money, an estimated $480 million annually, would go toward state transportation initiatives. Ten percent, or an estimated $54 million annually, would be split among cities and counties for transportation projects. While the sales tax is in place, the measure would bar the state from raising the fuel tax or operating toll roads.

I assume the reduction from the originally proposed one-cent tax to a three-quarters-of-a-cent tax will still allow the Bella Vista Bypass to be one of the projects funded by the tax if it is approved by voters.

edit

This article reports that a specific list of projects anticipated to be funded by the sales tax should be finalized in September:

After the House vote, MoDOT's director, Dave Nichols, issued a statement praising the Legislature's move.
"Today is a great day for the future of transportation in Missouri,"  he said.
Nichols said in an interview that the highway commission would work with regional planning agencies to develop a specific list of projects that would be funded. That list will be finalized by September, before the November vote on the tax increase.

[Grzrd]

MoDOT has posted its Draft 2014-2018 Highway and Bridge Construction Schedule and the Bella Vista Bypass Award Date has been moved up from 2015 to Fall 2014 (page 14/26 of pdf (McDonald County)):

This article reports that a specific list of projects anticipated to be funded by the sales tax should be finalized in September

It appears that rejection of the transportation sales tax by Missouri voters in November would not be the death knell for the Bella Vista Bypass. MoDOT has posted its Draft 2015-19 Southwest District Highway and Bridge Construction Schedule and it shows a 2018 Award Date and schedules construction for the Bella Vista Bypass during the July, 2017 to June, 2018 time period (page 15/32 of pdf):



Assuming no transportation sales tax, a slow timetable is better than no timetable.  On the other hand, approval of the sales tax by the voters should accelerate the construction timetable.

[mvak36]

Here's hoping the measure passes and they build it soon.

[Grzrd]

This article reports that a specific list of projects anticipated to be funded by the sales tax should be finalized in September

This article provides a bit more detail about how the project list will be finalized before the November vote; of note is the inclusion of a thirty-day public comment period:

Dave Nichols, director of the Missouri Department of Transportation ....
said MoDOT and its partners will put together a draft list of funding priorities and present it to the Missouri Highways and Transportation Commission in August. That draft list will be open for a 30-day public comment period. After making possible revisions, the final list will be presented for approval during the commission's September meeting. Once approved, the list will be made public so voters can know which projects will receive the money before they vote.

[Grzrd]

This article reports that a specific list of projects anticipated to be funded by the sales tax should be finalized in September

This article provides a bit more detail about how the project list will be finalized before the November vote; of note is the inclusion of a thirty-day public comment period:

Dave Nichols, director of the Missouri Department of Transportation ....
said MoDOT and its partners will put together a draft list of funding priorities and present it to the Missouri Highways and Transportation Commission in August. That draft list will be open for a 30-day public comment period. After making possible revisions, the final list will be presented for approval during the commission's September meeting. Once approved, the list will be made public so voters can know which projects will receive the money before they vote.

This article reports that Governor Nixon has set August 5, not a November date, as the date for the vote on the transportation sales tax; as a result, the projects list will have to be developed much more quickly:

Voters will decide Aug. 5 whether they want to approve or reject a three-quarter-cent sales tax increase on themselves to fund transportation projects around the state ....
Gov. Jay Nixon last week set election dates for the transportation tax and seven other constitutional amendments ....
Presiding County Commissioner John Griesheimer said he was "shocked"  when he saw that the election had been set for August instead of November.
Griesheimer questioned what ulterior motives Gov. Nixon may have in setting the election so early. The groups that will try to sell it to the public will have a very short time to mount any kind of statewide campaign, Griesheimer added.
It will be "extremely difficult"  to pass the tax in that amount of time, he said.
Nixon is withholding statements about the proposed transportation sales tax for now, St. Louis Public Radio reported ....
In fact, Griesheimer said he heard from a Missouri Department of Transportation official that the county needs to have its proposed project list submitted by the end of the week ....
He noted that MoDOT wants the list of projects before the election so voters will have an idea of how the tax would be used if it is approved.
Still, some officials who favor the tax have said there will be enough time before the August election to mount an effective campaign.

We should know shortly whether the Bella Vista Bypass will be included in the list of projects.

[skluth]

This article reports that Governor Nixon has set August 5, not a November date, as the date for the vote on the transportation sales tax; as a result, the projects list will have to be developed much more quickly:

Voters will decide Aug. 5 whether they want to approve or reject a three-quarter-cent sales tax increase on themselves to fund transportation projects around the state ....
Gov. Jay Nixon last week set election dates for the transportation tax and seven other constitutional amendments ....
Presiding County Commissioner John Griesheimer said he was "shocked"  when he saw that the election had been set for August instead of November.

That's a very clever way of killing the tax. The anti-tax vote in Missouri will come out against it in their usual vigor while casual voters won't even know it's being voted on. A very clever veto that's not really a veto.

[Grzrd]

This article reports that Governor Nixon has set August 5, not a November date, as the date for the vote on the transportation sales tax

That's a very clever way of killing the tax. The anti-tax vote in Missouri will come out against it in their usual vigor while casual voters won't even know it's being voted on. A very clever veto that's not really a veto.

This article reports that, although Governor Nixon did not veto the measure, he is opposed to it:

Will Missouri voters in August approve a huge, regressive sales tax increase that even Democratic Gov. Jay Nixon does not support?
We will find out in nine weeks, now that Nixon on Monday came out both barrels blazing against the three-quarter cent transportation tax hike championed by a lot of highway contractors ....
That led Nixon to say this in his announcement on Monday:
"Recently, members of the General Assembly have been engaged in a relentless effort to erode Missouri's tax base by carving out new loopholes and exemptions for wealthy individuals and businesses. In the past two months alone, the legislature has passed over a billion dollars in tax breaks that disproportionately benefit the most affluent taxpayers and businesses. These misguided policies, including the $776 million package of primarily sales tax giveaways rushed through on the last day of session, have shifted the tax burden away from the wealthy and onto working Missourians, while undermining support for education and other vital public services that create opportunity for Missouri families"  ....
"I cannot in good conscience endorse a $6.1 billion tax hike on Missouri families and seniors when special interests and the wealthy are being showered with sweetheart deals. This tax hike is neither a fair nor fiscally responsible solution to our transportation infrastructure needs and it does not have my support."

At least he is allowing the people of Missouri to vote on it.

edit

This article clarifies that Governor Nixon did not have legal authority to veto the constitutional vote (hence the above strike-through on my comment):

Because it is in the form a constitutional amendment that is decided by voters, the measure did not have to go before the Democratic governor for his signature or veto. But Nixon still has authority to determine the election date for ballot items.

The article also reports that MoDOT plans to release a list of projects by June 13:

The transportation department said it plans to release a list of projects by June 13 that could be funded if voters pass the sales tax.
After a public comment period, the transportation commission plans to vote on a final project list on June 26.

[Grzrd]

We should know shortly whether the Bella Vista Bypass will be included in the list of projects.

This article .... reports that MoDOT plans to release a list of projects by June 13:

The transportation department said it plans to release a list of projects by June 13 that could be funded if voters pass the sales tax.
After a public comment period, the transportation commission plans to vote on a final project list on June 26.

This article reports that the Bella Vista Bypass is included on the project list:

Some of the projects in southwestern Missouri include a bypass route to Route 171 near Carthage, completion of Interstate 49 to the Arkansas border, road resurfacing on a seven- to 10-year cycle and the installation of pedestrian signals in Nevada.

Let the transportation commission approve the BVB on June 26 and let the voters decide on August 5!

[Grzrd]

KCUR FM Audio - "No Change In Store For Controversial Bruce R. Watkins Drive"

KANSAS CITY, MO (kcur) - Tune in to the radio traffic reports any rush hour, and you're likely to hear one road name mentioned again and again. Highway 71, also known as Bruce R Watkins Drive, is known to cross-town commuters as one of the city's most accident-prone stretches of road. According to the Missouri Department of Transportation, the stretch between 55th Street and Gregory averages 277 accidents per hundred million vehicle miles, higher than the state average of 170 accidents for similar roadway types.

I emailed MoDOT and asked if the rumors about overpasses were true.  The response:

This is in response to your inquiry regarding the construction of overpasses and replacement of the stoplights on US 71, also known as Bruce R. Watkins Drive.  MoDOT does not have any plans or funding identified in our 5 year construction program, to make these types of improvements.  Significant environmental and public outreach work would have to take place before a project to build overpasses could become reality.  It's very important that the nearby communities and region would support a project such as this.  We also do not have plans to perform that environmental and outreach.

KCUR has a new audio report about the history of Bruce R. Watkins Drive:

Mamie Hughes, 85, stands in the middle of a bridge that's named after her, and she marvels at the power of the road below. The power of Highway 71.
"Sometimes I just like to stand here and look and watch the traffic,"  she says as cars and semis zoom underneath. "Seeing how much goes, and it's just kind of fun."
The Mamie Hughes Bridge crosses Highway 71, or Bruce R. Watkins Drive as it's also known, at Meyer Boulevard.
And to Hughes, this is a bridge "for the people."   It was part of a compromise decades ago that made the highway possible, to make sure it wouldn't divide communities, but would connect them, she says ....
Because it wasn't a freeway, the road would have lower speed limits and perhaps most controversial, the addition of bridges and streetlights. Hughes took a lot of the heat for that.
"These are arteries that are there for the people who live there. They need to be able to go across, back and forth, and those traffic lights control that,"  says Hughes.
When Bruce R. Watkins was finally completed in 2001, 50 years after its inception, there were three traffic lights on the roadway, at Gregory Boulevard, 55th Street And 59th Street. These intersections have proven to be some of the most accident-heavy spots on Kansas City's roadways,according to Steve Porter of the Missouri Department of Transportation.
"It's as safe as we can make it. What is going to make this corridor safer, is going to be the behavior of the people,"  Porter says.

[Grzrd]

Full lists: http://www.modot.org/movingforward/
The Bella Vista bypass is listed.

(above quote from MoDOT's Transportation Sales Tax 10-Year Project List thread)

Great news that inclusion of the BVB in the draft list is official!

Preliminary work on the potential of the MO 249/MO 171 corridor is about to begin.  This Sept. 25 Joplin Globe article reports the adoption of a four-year plan by the Joplin Area Transportation Study Organization and it includes the following:

MoDOT also plans to look, at a cost of $145,000, at what work needs to be done on I-49 between Joplin and Carthage

I emailed MoDOT and asked them if this study will include a look at the MO 249/MO 171 corridor and they indicate that it will; however, the current thinking is that the MO 249/MO 171 corridor will eventually be I-249 and not I-49:

Some people are interested in converting MO 249 and a portion of MO 171 to Carthage to I-249.  This would be the early work on this idea.

In addition to the BVB and the completion of I-49, construction of Future I-249 in Jasper County is included in the Draft Southwest Region Priority List:

Improve Rte 249 and Rte 171 to interstate standards from I-44 to Carthage

[bugo]

Will the clusterfuck at BL 49/MO 171/MO 249/Route HH have to be upgraded to bring the road to I-standards?  Will I-249 be duplexed with BL 49?

[Grzrd]

I became curious about MoDOT's long-term plans for the MO 249/ MO 171 corridor and how it relates to I-49.
I called the Southwest District Office, eventually spoke with one of the engineers, and had a great conversation.  First, MoDOT is probably looking at a ten-year horizon before a location study would be initiated.  The current thinking is that three primary options for the eventual I-49 routing exist for the location study:
1. Keep the I-44/I-49 overlap; however, this would necessitate an upgrade for the eastern I-44/I-49 interchange from a cloverleaf to a directional interchange.
2. Use the MO 249/ MO 171 corridor and upgrade the current MO 171/MO 249 corridor by finding a way to remove the presence of traffic signals at interchange ramps at US 71/MO 171/MO 96 near Carthage, as well as upgrade the MO 171/ I-49 interchange.
3. Build a new terrain connection that would basically be a "straight line" from the 171 "bend" west of the Hwy 96 interchange to the "90 degree bend" north of Carthage.
Other options could manifest themselves during the course of the study.  Again, this all is on a loooooong term horizon

Preliminary work on the potential of the MO 249/MO 171 corridor is about to begin.  This Sept. 25 Joplin Globe article reports the adoption of a four-year plan by the Joplin Area Transportation Study Organization and it includes the following:

MoDOT also plans to look, at a cost of $145,000, at what work needs to be done on I-49 between Joplin and Carthage

I emailed MoDOT and asked them if this study will include a look at the MO 249/MO 171 corridor and they indicate that it will; however, the current thinking is that the MO 249/MO 171 corridor will eventually be I-249 and not I-49:

Some people are interested in converting MO 249 and a portion of MO 171 to Carthage to I-249.  This would be the early work on this idea.

This article reports that the long-term plan is for the MO249/MO 171 corridor to be I-49, and not I-249:

The list includes hundreds of projects across the state, including some in and around Carthage.
The big one in this area would improve Missouri Highway 171 and Missouri Highway 249 to interstate standards by creating an interstate-standard, free-flowing interchange at I-49 and Missouri 171 in Carthage.
MoDOT Southwest Assistant District Engineer Dan Salisbury said this is expected to be the most expensive of the more than 200 projects proposed for Southwest Missouri.
Creating an interchange where traffic doesn't have to stop to transfer from I-49 to Missouri 171 between Carthage and Webb City has long been under discussion as a way to move I-49 traffic off I-44, but Carthage City Administrator Tom Short, who has been attending regional planning meetings about this list, says no firm plan has been developed for how and where to build the interchange.
Currently, I-49 follows the old U.S. Highway 71 to Fidelity, then joins I-44 between Fidelity and the Missouri 249 interchange southeast of Joplin.
Eventually the plan is for I-49 to follow Missouri 171 and Missouri 249 before heading south into Newton County, but an interchange where traffic doesn't have to stop is required to make that designation happen.
The area around the current Central Avenue interchange is heavily developed, making building a free-flowing interchange at that spot complicated at best.
"We've been trying to push for the interchange at Highway 96 and Central Avenue all along," Short said. "There have been other locations discussed, but our goal is to keep it as close to Carthage as possible."

Maybe the new terrain third option will make economic sense in comparison to the potential ROW expenses at the current location.

I also like the idea of designating the MO 249/ MO 171 corridor as I-49 in order to avoid an I-44 overlap.