Recent news article mainly regarding the MoDOT director wanting truck lanes for I-70 and I-44, and mention of the Bella Vista bypass for I-49:
http://www.neoshodailynews.com/news/x718259336/Road-work-MoDOT-director-talks-about-future-projects-in-Neosho-area (http://www.neoshodailynews.com/news/x718259336/Road-work-MoDOT-director-talks-about-future-projects-in-Neosho-area)
Regarding the truck lanes: First the math seems to be faulty, as the SEIS indicates at least a 16.6666% increase to a 33.33333% increase for the truck lanes. There's no funds to rebuild I-70 either way, so I'd like to see where they are going to get funds for I-44. Then how many useful projects like upgrading US 71 to interstate standards will be pushed back to fund only these two corridors?
Article today regarding MoDOT not accepting two roads in Pulaski County into the state system:
http://www.waynesvilledailyguide.com/news/x303486423/-No-to-Cave-Road (http://www.waynesvilledailyguide.com/news/x303486423/-No-to-Cave-Road)
Map of the area:
http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=cave+road,+pulaski+county,+mo&sll=37.878105,-92.458191&sspn=0.062328,0.175781&ie=UTF8&ll=37.916305,-92.135296&spn=0.029726,0.087891&z=14 (http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=cave+road,+pulaski+county,+mo&sll=37.878105,-92.458191&sspn=0.062328,0.175781&ie=UTF8&ll=37.916305,-92.135296&spn=0.029726,0.087891&z=14)
Part of these two roads - between Rte Y and Rte O - look like a logical addition to the system.
In regards to the truck lanes, I think that this is a great idea, especially for I-70. I-70 is a huge cross-country corridor, and the truck lanes would help out all the travellers along the stretch in Missouri, given that it connects KC and STL. I think it would be good for I-44, especially in St. Louis metro to alleviate whatever traffic problems occur.
Well, Missouri has already shrunk the lanes of I-70 and I-44 in St. Louis to squeeze in another lane making it harder for trucks to avoid cars. They should do what Atlanta and Birmingham does and restrict trucks from entering inside the loop.
As for truck only lanes, it's a bogus idea that is absurdly costly. Just add a third lane the entire way. Entirely cheaper, and adds capacity for all vehicles.
Sykotyk
Sykotyk, I've only seen something like this on the NJ Turnpike. They have cars only lanes, which seem to run efficiently enough for the NJ Turnpike. Maybe it's not the most cost-effective way, but there is the probability that it would work.
Quote from: SykotykWell, Missouri has already shrunk the lanes of I-70 and I-44 in St. Louis to squeeze in another lane making it harder for trucks to avoid cars. They should do what Atlanta and Birmingham does and restrict trucks from entering inside the loop.
I'm not sure that would work well given the capacity crunch on I-270. The NB I-270 to WB I-44 loop ramps already seems ready for a flyover replacement, NB I-270 can stay slow between at least MO 21 and I-44 a decent amount of time after the morning rush hour, SB I-270 gets lousy between I-64 and I-44 between 14:30 and at least 17:30, and I have to wonder about I-270 east of MO 370.
Quote from: njroadhorseSykotyk, I've only seen something like this on the NJ Turnpike. They have cars only lanes, which seem to run efficiently enough for the NJ Turnpike. Maybe it's not the most cost-effective way, but there is the probability that it would work.
The Missouri plan is much different, with trucks getting their own lanes in the median, and maybe only being able to exit directly from these lanes on I-70 initially at US 54, US 63, and US 65 - some of the alternatives for the 'direct connections' pretty much looked like the standard slip ramp. There may be additional direct ramps added later at MO 47, MO 13, and Oak Grove(?) (Exit 28). For any other exit or a rest area or a weight station, trucks must exit on a 60 mph slip ramp, enter the "general purpose lanes" on the left side, and proceed to weave across. It is specifically noted in the SEIS that there will be no direct ramps at the US 61 interchange. There's no guarantee trucks will even enter the lanes built specially for them - if the truck lanes are tolled, I expect a decent number not to use them.
I also wonder how many will use them during inclement winter weather - or since MoDOT flip-flopped on the criteria for the truck lanes compared to the original parallel freeway alternative, are they only going to give priority to the truck lanes and clear the general purpose lanes less? I think it would be much easier to get a lane or two cleared for everyone on a six lane highway, plus not having to clear the extra ramps.
And that's the New York City suburbs, essentially, where that's taking place. We're talking about the middle of Missouri. HUGE difference.
I've been on the NJTP before, nice road. Only issue, is cars are still allowed in the truck lanes. Which I find unfathomable. But, I guess they need that to maximize capacity for cars during rush hour.
To me, the simplest, cheapest, and quickest solution is to add a third lane and restrict trucks from the left lane. But make it a law that slow moving vehicles must use the right lane. No 60mph car riding the middle lane just because they don't want to be around the big trucks. Just causes problems, passing situations, and aggravation.
Sykotyk
QuoteI'm not sure that would work well given the capacity crunch on I-270. The NB I-270 to WB I-44 loop ramps already seems ready for a flyover replacement, NB I-270 can stay slow between at least MO 21 and I-44 a decent amount of time after the morning rush hour, SB I-270 gets lousy between I-64 and I-44 between 14:30 and at least 17:30, and I have to wonder about I-270 east of MO 370.
True, but this would only be for trucks. I-70 and I-44 are getting dangerously narrow lanes (similar to Atlanta, and to an extent, Birmingham's I-20). An 8'6 wide vehicle in a 10' lane is not really safe. But, to cram in another lane of travel, that's what they have now. And no traffic control measure can justify the safety issue, to me.
QuoteThe Missouri plan is much different, with trucks getting their own lanes in the median, and maybe only being able to exit directly from these lanes on I-70 initially at US 54, US 63, and US 65 - some of the alternatives for the 'direct connections' pretty much looked like the standard slip ramp. There may be additional direct ramps added later at MO 47, MO 13, and Oak Grove(?) (Exit 28). For any other exit or a rest area or a weight station, trucks must exit on a 60 mph slip ramp, enter the "general purpose lanes" on the left side, and proceed to weave across.
Do you have any idea how dangerous it is for trucks to 'weave' across multiple lanes of traffic? The other problem is slow trucks (some governed as slow as 60mph) must attempt to enter the left-most car-only lane in order to advance to the cross-over. Not safe. Either the car will have to slow down, or impatiently pass on the right, which again, is not safe.
QuoteIt is specifically noted in the SEIS that there will be no direct ramps at the US 61 interchange. There's no guarantee trucks will even enter the lanes built specially for them - if the truck lanes are tolled, I expect a decent number not to use them.
I think 0% would use them if tolled. A trucker won't get paid any more for his load to take those tolled lanes, so it's a pay cut to entertain the thought. Probably put up with the hassle of staying to the right and save $20.
QuoteI also wonder how many will use them during inclement winter weather - or since MoDOT flip-flopped on the criteria for the truck lanes compared to the original parallel freeway alternative, are they only going to give priority to the truck lanes and clear the general purpose lanes less? I think it would be much easier to get a lane or two cleared for everyone on a six lane highway, plus not having to clear the extra ramps.
Another great safety point. In really bad weather, a three-lane road might only have two lanes cleared, but they're running concurrently. Would they simply 'sacrifice' the truck lanes to keep the other two lanes clear?
As for the idea that these lanes would run in the median negates the valid point of where the roads have no median, including bridges and through narrow urban areas (Columbia, Pacific, etc). The truck lanes would also need their own completely usable WIDE shoulder to accommodate breakdowns (which due happen for vehicles that average 300-500mi a day). Then, you get the added wammy of a 40-ton tow truck trying to pull a disabled truck into the fast lane of the car side to try and get them to exit the highway.
Here's a tip: merging traffic into the fast lane is never safe. That's why no new freeway will ever have an onramp enter on left (or for that matter, exit on the left). And to think that it will only be the biggest and slowest of vehicles to use our roadways that will have to navigate unsafe merging is a recipe for disaster.
Truck-only lanes are a fantasy that aren't practical in reality. The law-makers and organizers have good intentions, but as always, the road to hell is paved with good intentions.
Sykotyk
Here are a couple truck lane studies I've found online:
http://www.reason.org/files/cce62e3a8ed97d31be8e1094f658968a.pdf (http://www.reason.org/files/cce62e3a8ed97d31be8e1094f658968a.pdf)
http://www.intrans.iastate.edu/mtc/papers/2005/burke.pdf (http://www.intrans.iastate.edu/mtc/papers/2005/burke.pdf)
Wow, the second study has so many inconsistencies with reality, I'm baffled.
First, the second study is more to accommodate LCVs, not tractor-trailers. LCVs are doubles and triples in excess of the current statutory limitation of roughly 73'. Basically saying if there were truck only lanes, there'd be more opportunity for LCVs to operate, thereby eliminating the need for more trucks (these LCVs are also called Turnpike Doubles). I would greatly believe they'd need their own entrance exits if they were to drive in the median.
The other two points I want to point out in this guys study:
He suggests one lane each way. With passing lanes every few miles. As I've said, MANY trucks are governed as slow as 60mph. Just depends on the carrier. Passing lanes just aren't feasible. Especially in a state where the speed limit is 70mph (Missouri and Iowa, the state of the study). They will slow down the shipment of goods, no speed them up or make it more efficient.
Secondly, please note he feels 6 feet (next to a jersey barrier) is enough room for a breakdown lane in each direction. A standard tractor-trailer is 8'6 wide. So, they're suggesting the truck driver should bring his truck to a stop alongside a jersey barrier and have his truck stick 18" into traffic. As mentioned about oversize loads, will they be allowed through here? What about a 14' wide load that comes across a disabled truck? Just stop and let hundreds of trucks backlog? Or, would oversizes still only access the car lanes?
Secondly, if a truck does break down, road service would need to access the vehicle in a 6' wide breakdown lane. If a truck needs to be towed, the tow-truck operator would then need to get out of his truck INTO TRAFFIC in order to access the truck, secure it, hoist it, and start driving.
Either that, or you suggest backlogging trucks up to the previous cross-over in order to facilitate breakdowns.
Also, another point in the study is he states the New Jersey Turnpike has truck-only lanes. That's false. Cars are still allowed in truck-only lanes. Even the 'truck only' lanes on I-5 north of Los Angeles through the mountains allow cars.
And, the crux of the matter, it comes down to tolling. And as pointed out, would require a transponder. This is about LCVs, not trucks. LCVs should never have to get outside the rightmost lane. True, the federal government would have to allow them again on all interstates (or even some specific interstates) that won't affect what trucks do.
A trucker will not, I repeat, will NOT pay for a toll road if their is a free alternative. So, unless they pass a law that they MUST enter the toll lanes (which would require a lot of changes to already existing laws and rules), they will not be used.
As for the first study you posited, it's the one the second study is based on. Again, it regarding LCVs, not tractor-trailers. LCVs are much more dangerous. As for LCVs that are heavier (as mentioned in the study) they still would need to get that truck on and off the road and to a terminal of some kind. The current limit is 34,000 pounds on a dual axle. If these truckways (as they're called) allowed heavier weights, they'd still be doing a lot of wear and tear on other roads. Unless, of course, they went immediately to a terminal where they were offloaded onto smaller trucks. But, as with railroads, they'd need more trucks to still make the shorter trip.
And short-haul drivers make a LOT more than long-haul drivers. In fact, any savings in fuel (minus the toll) for overweight LCVs that get offloaded into small (standard 80,000 pound tractor-trailers), would mean you'd be paying a lot more local and regional drivers to continue with the freight onto its final destination. And that would cost a LOT more.
Anyways, if this is only for LCVs, this is fraught with incompetence. If this is for all trucks, you'll have to dig a little deeper for any research that backs up the need for truck-only lanes.
Sykotyk
St. Louis traffic column blog regarding a state representative wanting to end the variable speed limits on the I-270/I-255 loop:
http://www.stltoday.com/blogzone/along-for-the-ride/driving/2009/05/legistlator-wants-variable-speed-limits-to-end-on-i-270/ (http://www.stltoday.com/blogzone/along-for-the-ride/driving/2009/05/legistlator-wants-variable-speed-limits-to-end-on-i-270/)
I always thought the variable speed limits would be more credible if they would go up to 65 in the off-hours, or maybe even 70 between I-44 and I-55.
Quote from: Sykotyk on May 03, 2009, 12:23:37 AM
I've been on the NJTP before, nice road. Only issue, is cars are still allowed in the truck lanes. Which I find unfathomable. But, I guess they need that to maximize capacity for cars during rush hour.
I've wound up in the truck lanes for one reason or another despite having a car. There were times my parents used to take the old family camper up or down the turnpike, and I thought we should've been in the truck lane instead of the cars only lane.
I have a Missouri question; Is MoDOT really trying to convert Exits 229 A-B into a SPUI? Because that seems like a really bad spot for one.
Quote from: D-Dey65 on April 27, 2017, 01:46:40 PM
I have a Missouri question; Is MoDOT really trying to convert Exits 229 A-B into a SPUI? Because that seems like a really bad spot for one.
No, it was converted into a diverging diamond interchange with the addition of one way outer roads and a new exit at Fairgrounds Rd. It is already complete.
iPad Pro
MoDOT holding pubic meeting for proposed interchange between US 54 and Business 54/Route W in Lake of the Ozarks (http://www.modot.org/central/news_and_information/District5Release.shtml?action=displaySSI&newsId=216773)
I believe this is the intersection in question. (https://goo.gl/maps/Y2XjrJQFSrJ2)
Quote from: Revive 755 on July 12, 2018, 09:29:30 PM
MoDOT holding pubic meeting for proposed interchange between US 54 and Business 54/Route W in Lake of the Ozarks (http://www.modot.org/central/news_and_information/District5Release.shtml?action=displaySSI&newsId=216773)
I believe this is the intersection in question. (https://goo.gl/maps/Y2XjrJQFSrJ2)
I'd try to avoid a pubic meeting. There's more than information exchange with that kind of meeting. Now a public one on the other hand...
Quote from: Revive 755 on July 12, 2018, 09:29:30 PM
MoDOT holding pubic meeting for proposed interchange between US 54 and Business 54/Route W in Lake of the Ozarks (http://www.modot.org/central/news_and_information/District5Release.shtml?action=displaySSI&newsId=216773)
I believe this is the intersection in question. (https://goo.gl/maps/Y2XjrJQFSrJ2)
That is so badly needed. I remember what an annoyance that stoplight was back in the day when I went to college at Mizzou. Now with 54 a freeway through Osage Beach, that really is the last "stop" along the route between there and I-70 basically. Now if they would upgrade that interchange at I-70...
Quote from: ChiMilNet on July 13, 2018, 05:32:53 PM
Quote from: Revive 755 on July 12, 2018, 09:29:30 PM
MoDOT holding pubic meeting for proposed interchange between US 54 and Business 54/Route W in Lake of the Ozarks (http://www.modot.org/central/news_and_information/District5Release.shtml?action=displaySSI&newsId=216773)
I believe this is the intersection in question. (https://goo.gl/maps/Y2XjrJQFSrJ2)
That is so badly needed. I remember what an annoyance that stoplight was back in the day when I went to college at Mizzou. Now with 54 a freeway through Osage Beach, that really is the last "stop" along the route between there and I-70 basically. Now if they would upgrade that interchange at I-70...
Which interchange? If you mean US 54 @ I-70, I'm not sure there's much you can do with all the businesses at Kingdom City. OTOH, the US 63 @ I-70 cluster of insanity is one of the more idiotic convolutions this side of Breezewood.
Quote from: ChiMilNet on July 13, 2018, 05:32:53 PM
Quote from: Revive 755 on July 12, 2018, 09:29:30 PM
MoDOT holding pubic meeting for proposed interchange between US 54 and Business 54/Route W in Lake of the Ozarks (http://www.modot.org/central/news_and_information/District5Release.shtml?action=displaySSI&newsId=216773)
I believe this is the intersection in question. (https://goo.gl/maps/Y2XjrJQFSrJ2)
That is so badly needed. I remember what an annoyance that stoplight was back in the day when I went to college at Mizzou. Now with 54 a freeway through Osage Beach, that really is the last "stop" along the route between there and I-70 basically. Now if they would upgrade that interchange at I-70...
I think there were some proposals in the past to bypass Kingdom City to the east of the current US 54 and I-70 interchange. It would have to start veering to the east north of Fulton and meet up with US 54 just east of North Callaway High School near the curve next to the bridges over Auxvasse Creek.
After that eventually happens, there would be no signals on US 54 from the Mexico exit all the way past Lake of the Ozarks in Camdenton.
iPad Pro
Quote from: m2tbone on July 15, 2018, 09:15:16 AM
Quote from: ChiMilNet on July 13, 2018, 05:32:53 PM
Quote from: Revive 755 on July 12, 2018, 09:29:30 PM
MoDOT holding pubic meeting for proposed interchange between US 54 and Business 54/Route W in Lake of the Ozarks (http://www.modot.org/central/news_and_information/District5Release.shtml?action=displaySSI&newsId=216773)
I believe this is the intersection in question. (https://goo.gl/maps/Y2XjrJQFSrJ2)
That is so badly needed. I remember what an annoyance that stoplight was back in the day when I went to college at Mizzou. Now with 54 a freeway through Osage Beach, that really is the last "stop" along the route between there and I-70 basically. Now if they would upgrade that interchange at I-70...
I think there were some proposals in the past to bypass Kingdom City to the east of the current US 54 and I-70 interchange. It would have to start veering to the east north of Fulton and meet up with US 54 just east of North Callaway High School near the curve next to the bridges over Auxvasse Creek.
After that eventually happens, there would be no signals on US 54 from the Mexico exit all the way past Lake of the Ozarks in Camdenton.
iPad Pro
That would probably make the most sense. Also, mentioning the mess at 63 and 70 in Columbia, I couldn't agree more there too. That intersection was always horrible, and I would intentionally avoid that exit because of the long backups. It really is the Breezewood of Missouri!
Quote from: ChiMilNet on July 15, 2018, 10:33:39 AM
Quote from: m2tbone on July 15, 2018, 09:15:16 AM
Quote from: ChiMilNet on July 13, 2018, 05:32:53 PM
Quote from: Revive 755 on July 12, 2018, 09:29:30 PM
MoDOT holding pubic meeting for proposed interchange between US 54 and Business 54/Route W in Lake of the Ozarks (http://www.modot.org/central/news_and_information/District5Release.shtml?action=displaySSI&newsId=216773)
I believe this is the intersection in question. (https://goo.gl/maps/Y2XjrJQFSrJ2)
That is so badly needed. I remember what an annoyance that stoplight was back in the day when I went to college at Mizzou. Now with 54 a freeway through Osage Beach, that really is the last "stop" along the route between there and I-70 basically. Now if they would upgrade that interchange at I-70...
I think there were some proposals in the past to bypass Kingdom City to the east of the current US 54 and I-70 interchange. It would have to start veering to the east north of Fulton and meet up with US 54 just east of North Callaway High School near the curve next to the bridges over Auxvasse Creek.
After that eventually happens, there would be no signals on US 54 from the Mexico exit all the way past Lake of the Ozarks in Camdenton.
iPad Pro
That would probably make the most sense. Also, mentioning the mess at 63 and 70 in Columbia, I couldn't agree more there too. That intersection was always horrible, and I would intentionally avoid that exit because of the long backups. It really is the Breezewood of Missouri!
Fortunately, a road connecting Business Loop 70 to Conley Rd (outer road for US 63) will open soon. That could possibly help eliminate some of the traffic from using the 63 Connector interchange that you mentioned in Columbia. Hopefully directional ramps can finally be built for traffic to get between I-70 and US 63 soon.
iPad Pro
Quote from: m2tbone on July 15, 2018, 10:41:05 AM
Quote from: ChiMilNet on July 15, 2018, 10:33:39 AM
Quote from: m2tbone on July 15, 2018, 09:15:16 AM
Quote from: ChiMilNet on July 13, 2018, 05:32:53 PM
Quote from: Revive 755 on July 12, 2018, 09:29:30 PM
MoDOT holding pubic meeting for proposed interchange between US 54 and Business 54/Route W in Lake of the Ozarks (http://www.modot.org/central/news_and_information/District5Release.shtml?action=displaySSI&newsId=216773)
I believe this is the intersection in question. (https://goo.gl/maps/Y2XjrJQFSrJ2)
That is so badly needed. I remember what an annoyance that stoplight was back in the day when I went to college at Mizzou. Now with 54 a freeway through Osage Beach, that really is the last "stop" along the route between there and I-70 basically. Now if they would upgrade that interchange at I-70...
I think there were some proposals in the past to bypass Kingdom City to the east of the current US 54 and I-70 interchange. It would have to start veering to the east north of Fulton and meet up with US 54 just east of North Callaway High School near the curve next to the bridges over Auxvasse Creek.
After that eventually happens, there would be no signals on US 54 from the Mexico exit all the way past Lake of the Ozarks in Camdenton.
iPad Pro
That would probably make the most sense. Also, mentioning the mess at 63 and 70 in Columbia, I couldn't agree more there too. That intersection was always horrible, and I would intentionally avoid that exit because of the long backups. It really is the Breezewood of Missouri!
Fortunately, a road connecting Business Loop 70 to Conley Rd (outer road for US 63) will open soon. That could possibly help eliminate some of the traffic from using the 63 Connector interchange that you mentioned in Columbia. Hopefully directional ramps can finally be built for traffic to get between I-70 and US 63 soon.
iPad Pro
That had been in the works since I was in college there, which was mote than a decade ago. That will help, not to mention, give people living in NE Columbia better access to the shopping centers that way. I heard that there is a gas tax increase on the ballot for this fall in MO. The 70/63 interchange should be a priority item if that passes, followed by I-70 itself through Columbia with an additional lane each way.
Based on the following news article, MoDOT is trying for a grant to widen I-44 through Springfield.
https://www.ozarksfirst.com/local-news/local-news-local-news/springfield-city-council-members-consider-i-44-expansion/ (https://www.ozarksfirst.com/local-news/local-news-local-news/springfield-city-council-members-consider-i-44-expansion/)
For a state that contracted the first miles of the interstate system, they have completely botched I-70. A truck only lane and putting those lanes in the median is a joke, right? Traffic counts will only go up from here and the system is overcrowded now, along with Missouri's penchant to use band-aids to cover over major problems, this will end badly at the current pace.
Three lanes in each direction, portions of the route four lanes, and bypass Columbia completely would be a place to start. MoDOT needs to get ahold of the situation quickly because states like Iowa will solve the problem and truck traffic will avoid Missouri like the plague. Maybe letting go of some of the supplemental system or raising taxes(or both) will be the only way to avoid this disaster.
A good place to start would be for Missouri to get its finances together. That could mean fixing the budget (https://oa.mo.gov/sites/default/files/FY_2020_Budget_Summary_combined.pdf) (I know nothing about economics) or passing a tax (like that will happen, it's Missouri we're talking about).
Back to the I-44 project, I-44 is the least busy of the three Springfield freeways (it is on the arguably less-developed part of town). The main issue is the trucks, and with a lane where no trucks are allowed, this certainly helps those who use the freeway for getting around town.
Quote from: rarnold on February 29, 2020, 10:18:06 PM
For a state that contracted the first miles of the interstate system, they have completely botched I-70. A truck only lane and putting those lanes in the median is a joke, right? Traffic counts will only go up from here and the system is overcrowded now, along with Missouri's penchant to use band-aids to cover over major problems, this will end badly at the current pace.
MoDOT's still pursuing the truck only lanes for I-70? I was under the possibly misguided impression that idea had been abandoned (particularly since it was (IIRC) at least a half to a full billion more than the regular widening, which MoDOT finances wouldn't permit either).
Quote from: rarnold on February 29, 2020, 10:18:06 PM
For a state that contracted the first miles of the interstate system, they have completely botched I-70. A truck only lane and putting those lanes in the median is a joke, right? Traffic counts will only go up from here and the system is overcrowded now, along with Missouri's penchant to use band-aids to cover over major problems, this will end badly at the current pace.
Three lanes in each direction, portions of the route four lanes, and bypass Columbia completely would be a place to start. MoDOT needs to get ahold of the situation quickly because states like Iowa will solve the problem and truck traffic will avoid Missouri like the plague. Maybe letting go of some of the supplemental system or raising taxes(or both) will be the only way to avoid this disaster.
I agree with all your statements regarding how to properly rebuild I-70. Three lanes in each direction, especially if they prohibit truck and trailer traffic from the left lane, would solve congestion far more than a separated truck lane. Bypassing Columbia will be tougher than adding an extra lane in each direction thanks to all the new construction on the north side of I-70 in the last 20 years.
Traffic won't divert to Iowa. Part of the appeal of Missouri is it has some of the absolute cheapest gasoline taxes in the country.
MODOT should just tell everyone they're going to rebuild I-70 from Blue Springs to Wentzville with three lanes in each direction. Progress will proceed based on funding. Considering they just got around to beginning the last work on I-49 on the Arkansas border, I wouldn't count on anything being done for a while.
Traffic from the North could divert to I-72/US 36 across Missouri if I-70 is really in THAT bad of shape...Heck, even from Indy and points east it is not THAT much longer to use I-74/I-72/US 36/I-35 to reach KC
I haven't driven across MO in quite a few years, but reports here have consistently been that I-70 needs upgrades between STL and KC
Quote from: skluth on March 01, 2020, 08:47:28 PM
Quote from: rarnold on February 29, 2020, 10:18:06 PM
For a state that contracted the first miles of the interstate system, they have completely botched I-70. A truck only lane and putting those lanes in the median is a joke, right? Traffic counts will only go up from here and the system is overcrowded now, along with Missouri's penchant to use band-aids to cover over major problems, this will end badly at the current pace.
Three lanes in each direction, portions of the route four lanes, and bypass Columbia completely would be a place to start. MoDOT needs to get ahold of the situation quickly because states like Iowa will solve the problem and truck traffic will avoid Missouri like the plague. Maybe letting go of some of the supplemental system or raising taxes(or both) will be the only way to avoid this disaster.
I agree with all your statements regarding how to properly rebuild I-70. Three lanes in each direction, especially if they prohibit truck and trailer traffic from the left lane, would solve congestion far more than a separated truck lane. Bypassing Columbia will be tougher than adding an extra lane in each direction thanks to all the new construction on the north side of I-70 in the last 20 years.
Traffic won't divert to Iowa. Part of the appeal of Missouri is it has some of the absolute cheapest gasoline taxes in the country.
MODOT should just tell everyone they're going to rebuild I-70 from Blue Springs to Wentzville with three lanes in each direction. Progress will proceed based on funding. Considering they just got around to beginning the last work on I-49 on the Arkansas border, I wouldn't count on anything being done for a while.
I went to college at Mizzou, and I lost count of how many times traffic got backed up on I-70 because of congestion or an accident. It has been in need of upgrades for many years. The section through Columbia, in particular, needs a complete rebuild. In a city of 120,000+, there are still only two lanes each way, short merges, and a narrow median. On top of it, you basically have a Breezewood situation to connect from I-70 to US 63 (the main N-S Freeway in Columbia). Despite some minor capacity improvements, that interchange is still prone to backups, especially during MU Football games. Another other really bad section is between Wentzville Parkway and Route Z in Wentzville, with a sharp and narrow curve going under a railroad overpass. I have to ask what they heck they were thinking on that even in the late 50s?! Finally, a section in Western Montgomery County that goes into a large valley with no truck climbing lanes despite a notable include, and I cannot count how many times I have had to race around trucks before that climb to avoid being stuck behind them. There are already plans to replace the Missouri River bridge West of Columbia, and those three sections need to be next after that!
Quote from: ChiMilNet on March 01, 2020, 11:53:13 PM
Quote from: skluth on March 01, 2020, 08:47:28 PM
Quote from: rarnold on February 29, 2020, 10:18:06 PM
For a state that contracted the first miles of the interstate system, they have completely botched I-70. A truck only lane and putting those lanes in the median is a joke, right? Traffic counts will only go up from here and the system is overcrowded now, along with Missouri's penchant to use band-aids to cover over major problems, this will end badly at the current pace.
Three lanes in each direction, portions of the route four lanes, and bypass Columbia completely would be a place to start. MoDOT needs to get ahold of the situation quickly because states like Iowa will solve the problem and truck traffic will avoid Missouri like the plague. Maybe letting go of some of the supplemental system or raising taxes(or both) will be the only way to avoid this disaster.
I agree with all your statements regarding how to properly rebuild I-70. Three lanes in each direction, especially if they prohibit truck and trailer traffic from the left lane, would solve congestion far more than a separated truck lane. Bypassing Columbia will be tougher than adding an extra lane in each direction thanks to all the new construction on the north side of I-70 in the last 20 years.
Traffic won't divert to Iowa. Part of the appeal of Missouri is it has some of the absolute cheapest gasoline taxes in the country.
MODOT should just tell everyone they're going to rebuild I-70 from Blue Springs to Wentzville with three lanes in each direction. Progress will proceed based on funding. Considering they just got around to beginning the last work on I-49 on the Arkansas border, I wouldn't count on anything being done for a while.
I went to college at Mizzou, and I lost count of how many times traffic got backed up on I-70 because of congestion or an accident. It has been in need of upgrades for many years. The section through Columbia, in particular, needs a complete rebuild. In a city of 120,000+, there are still only two lanes each way, short merges, and a narrow median. On top of it, you basically have a Breezewood situation to connect from I-70 to US 63 (the main N-S Freeway in Columbia). Despite some minor capacity improvements, that interchange is still prone to backups, especially during MU Football games. Another other really bad section is between Wentzville Parkway and Route Z in Wentzville, with a sharp and narrow curve going under a railroad overpass. I have to ask what they heck they were thinking on that even in the late 50s?! Finally, a section in Western Montgomery County that goes into a large valley with no truck climbing lanes despite a notable include, and I cannot count how many times I have had to race around trucks before that climb to avoid being stuck behind them. There are already plans to replace the Missouri River bridge West of Columbia, and those three sections need to be next after that!
They did win a grant last year for the new I-70 bridge and the Minneola truck climbing lanes. https://www.transportation.gov/sites/dot.gov/files/docs/grants/344906/fy2019-infra-fact-sheets.pdf
As for the rest, I am hoping they at least do it piecemeal with the worst areas first. The sections you mentioned in Columbia and Wentzville should be the first ones. I remember back in 2014 when they were trying to pass that Amendment 7, they wanted to do it all at once. I hope they're still not thinking like that and they at least make incremental progress, which is better than the no progress now.
This has always struck me as odd. Although Interstate 29's mile 0 is at its interchange with Interstate 35, Interstate 29 continues co-designated with 35 for another 5 miles before terminating at Interstate 70. Shouldn't Interstate 29's mileage and exit numbers count upwards from it's terminus at Interstate 70 instead of from its terminus at Interstate 35 (29's Exits 1A through 1E would be 5A through 5E, etc.)? It kind of reminds me of the southern-most segment of US 75 in Texas. At Interstate 30, Interstate 45 becomes unsigned Interstate 345 (signed as US 75), and 45's Exit sequence continues to Spur 366, where US 75's mileage and exit numbering take over.
Quote from: skluth on March 01, 2020, 08:47:28 PM
Traffic won't divert to Iowa. Part of the appeal of Missouri is it has some of the absolute cheapest gasoline taxes in the country.
MODOT should just tell everyone they're going to rebuild I-70 from Blue Springs to Wentzville with three lanes in each direction. Progress will proceed based on funding. Considering they just got around to beginning the last work on I-49 on the Arkansas border, I wouldn't count on anything being done for a while.
In addition to the lowest tax on tobacco in the country.
Time and time again, there have been proposals to toll that section of I-70, though I think it would be a good idea to leave the area around Columbia a free road.
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on March 02, 2020, 05:34:21 PM
This has always struck me as odd. Although Interstate 29's mile 0 is at its interchange with Interstate 35, Interstate 29 continues co-designated with 35 for another 5 miles before terminating at Interstate 70. Shouldn't Interstate 29's mileage and exit numbers count upwards from it's terminus at Interstate 70 instead of from its terminus at Interstate 35 (29's Exits 1A through 1E would be 5A through 5E, etc.)? It kind of reminds me of the southern-most segment of US 75 in Texas. At Interstate 30, Interstate 45 becomes unsigned Interstate 345 (signed as US 75), and 45's Exit sequence continues to Spur 366, where US 75's mileage and exit numbering take over.
That's where it should be the duplex with 35 is pointless and should be eliminated.
MoDOT is holding a virtual public meeting for widening US 60 in Springfield between National Avenue and US 65 (https://www.modot.org/us-route-60-james-river-freewayglenstone-avenue-interchange-project).
Quote from: Revive 755 on April 01, 2020, 10:01:27 PM
MoDOT is holding a virtual public meeting for widening US 60 in Springfield between National Avenue and US 65 (https://www.modot.org/us-route-60-james-river-freewayglenstone-avenue-interchange-project).
Oh boy, this layout won't fly.
A lot of traffic coming down Republic Road to get to the Towne Centre shopping area. They will just go up National instead.
Is Nature Center Road really driving that much traffic into where Republic and Glenstone meet?
I would just bridge Republic over the James River Freeway and connect it to Republic Road on the other side. Then take Nature's Way and bridge it over the James River Freeway to the north and intersect it with Republic and put the roundabout there.
Stub Nature's Way so there is no access to it south of the James River Freeway unless you go down Republic further.
This plan looks way to cheap and short term.
I am curious as to how MoDOT will be signing the western part of the 60/65 interchange now that there will be a new traffic pattern, removing the current option lane setup.
The final set of signs leading up to the interchange may very will look like this (https://www.google.com/maps/@37.2448812,-93.2244115,3a,75y,357.84h,86.05t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s-CVAYNl4c9-MnCZp6ZcO3A!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) setup on the north side. As for the BGSs leading up to it.. Something like this (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.6160954,-90.1925801,3a,32.8y,230.94h,103.45t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1ssF0k2Pr9s3v5EfwboZbveQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)? It may be a month or two before that info is released, around the time when bids are announced.
Quote from: edwaleni on April 02, 2020, 12:50:25 PM
Quote from: Revive 755 on April 01, 2020, 10:01:27 PM
MoDOT is holding a virtual public meeting for widening US 60 in Springfield between National Avenue and US 65 (https://www.modot.org/us-route-60-james-river-freewayglenstone-avenue-interchange-project).
Oh boy, this layout won't fly.
Is Nature Center Road really driving that much traffic into where Republic and Glenstone meet?
Stub Nature's Way so there is no access to it south of the James River Freeway unless you go down Republic further.
Much of the Farmer's Park Plaza was developed immediately after the partial reconstruction of the Glenstone interchange in 2008. What I would have done before the area got consumed by development was route the Nature Center Way down to the Lark/Harvard intersection (about a block south of Republic) and have a roundabout there.
Quote from: ozarkman417 on April 02, 2020, 10:26:14 PM
I am curious as to how MoDOT will be signing the western part of the 60/65 interchange now that there will be a new traffic pattern, removing the current option lane setup.
The final set of signs leading up to the interchange may very will look like this (https://www.google.com/maps/@37.2448812,-93.2244115,3a,75y,357.84h,86.05t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s-CVAYNl4c9-MnCZp6ZcO3A!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) setup on the north side. As for the BGSs leading up to it.. Something like this (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.6160954,-90.1925801,3a,32.8y,230.94h,103.45t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1ssF0k2Pr9s3v5EfwboZbveQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)? It may be a month or two before that info is released, around the time when bids are announced.
Quote from: edwaleni on April 02, 2020, 12:50:25 PM
Quote from: Revive 755 on April 01, 2020, 10:01:27 PM
MoDOT is holding a virtual public meeting for widening US 60 in Springfield between National Avenue and US 65 (https://www.modot.org/us-route-60-james-river-freewayglenstone-avenue-interchange-project).
Oh boy, this layout won't fly.
Is Nature Center Road really driving that much traffic into where Republic and Glenstone meet?
Stub Nature's Way so there is no access to it south of the James River Freeway unless you go down Republic further.
Much of the Farmer's Park Plaza was developed immediately after the partial reconstruction of the Glenstone interchange in 2008. What I would have done before the area got consumed by development was route the Nature Center Way down to the Lark/Harvard intersection (about a block south of Republic) and have a roundabout there.
I'm not a fan of small, multi-lane roundabouts in urban areas. However, in my experience large ones work relatively well. So I completely redesigned the interchange with one large roundabout. There's too much business (specifically a budget Hilton, but a few others who would also greatly object to losing their current access) to make Nature Center Way a stub. So how's this?
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/49741313097_114a81b6cc_z.jpg)
All old ramps and bridges are gone. The roundabout is mostly two lanes, though there are merge areas where it widens to three lanes and between EB East Republic and Nature Center Way is four lanes. One lane would exit at Nature Center Way. Three lanes continue to the entrance ramp for EB US 60 where one dedicated lane exits the roundabout.
There is currently no pedestrian/bike crossing, so I added one. I repurposed the cut on the current ramp from NB South Harvard so that a bridge could be built on the EB US 60 exit ramp. The ped/bike lane then crosses US 60 on the west roundabout bridge before using a crosswalk (not the best solution but probably more than enough) over the WB US 60 entrance ramp and continuing up Glenstone.
Honestly, I've never been through the area even though I lived in St Louis for 26 years. This is probably more expensive than using the existing bridges, though IIRC this highway is 20-25 years old so new bridges wouldn't be totally out of the question. I think this is easier to navigate, keeps traffic flowing better, and solves the current pedestrian access omission. It's my strawman, so have at it.
Quote from: ozarkman417 on March 02, 2020, 06:35:11 PM
Quote from: skluth on March 01, 2020, 08:47:28 PM
Traffic won't divert to Iowa. Part of the appeal of Missouri is it has some of the absolute cheapest gasoline taxes in the country.
MODOT should just tell everyone they're going to rebuild I-70 from Blue Springs to Wentzville with three lanes in each direction. Progress will proceed based on funding. Considering they just got around to beginning the last work on I-49 on the Arkansas border, I wouldn't count on anything being done for a while.
In addition to the lowest tax on tobacco in the country.
Time and time again, there have been proposals to toll that section of I-70, though I think it would be a good idea to leave the area around Columbia a free road.
As a student at MU, please... leave that section free.
Once we go back to school in person, at least.
Quote from: TravelingBethelite on April 06, 2020, 12:14:10 AM
As a student at MU, please... leave that section free.
Once we go back to school in person, at least.
Good point, but what about HOT(High-occupancy toll lanes) or ETL(Express toll) lanes while the main lanes stay free?
The new lanes between Springfield and Willard on US 160 are finally starting to be paved. The project started in July.
Photo from MoDOT Southwest District Instagram
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20200407/0ce4a11bb89fcaf0d964b9880ff2c0cd.jpg)
SM-G965U
According to the newest contract listings, the historic Route 66 bridge over the Gasconade River is scheduled for demolition. (https://www6.modot.mo.gov/eBidLettingPublicWeb/viewFileStream.do?documentType=plan&key=9622%5B/url)
https://www.kmbc.com/article/plans-to-replace-the-buck-oneil-bridge-hit-snag/32022939
Quote
KANSAS CITY, Mo. –
The plans to replace the Buck O'Neil Bridge are stalled for now.
Economic uncertainty is one of them, just because the city and the region are taking a serious hit.
"So before we are signing onto contracts and that sort of thing, we want to make sure the money is there," Kansas City Mayor Quinton Lucas said.
It is estimated that it will cost $250 million to replace the bridge. It breaks down like this: $100 million from the state, which owns the bridge; $60 million from Kansas City; $40 million from the Missouri side of the region, through the Mid-America Regional Council; and $24 million from Washington, D.C.
The project is short $26 million. Two alternatives include, having the city and the state split the difference, or see if Washington, D.C., has more infrastructure money in a COVID-19 stimulus bill.
"That's the sort of thing where you would have the Buck O'Neil Bridge project ready for, and as, a shovel-ready project," Lucas said.
That is an idea and not a hard plan.
This is a complex project. There are railroad tracks on two sides of the bridge and then there is the Missouri River.
The plan is to have the new bridge connect to Interstate 35. Despite cutbacks, MoDOT has its bridge money in a special account. A lobbyist told the City Council Thursday that means, it is "about as solid as you could make it."
So right now, it's a question of details. But if the delay continues, it could become a serious question.
I wouldn't be surprised to see more projects being delayed since people aren't driving as much. This bridge and the I-70 Rocheport bridge are the next two major bridges slated for replacement.
Quote from: ozarkman417 on April 10, 2020, 12:12:06 PM
According to the newest contract listings, the historic Route 66 bridge over the Gasconade River is scheduled for demolition.
(https://www6.modot.mo.gov/eBidLettingPublicWeb/viewFileStream.do?documentType=plan&key=9622%5B/url)
Why demolish it? If it is structurally unsound, close it off to vehicular traffic and let bikes use it.
Quote from: rte66man on April 10, 2020, 03:06:36 PM
Quote from: ozarkman417 on April 10, 2020, 12:12:06 PM
According to the newest contract listings, the historic Route 66 bridge over the Gasconade River is scheduled for demolition.
(https://www6.modot.mo.gov/eBidLettingPublicWeb/viewFileStream.do?documentType=plan&key=9622%5B/url)
Why demolish it? If it is structurally unsound, close it off to vehicular traffic and let bikes use it.
The state doesn't want to be responsible. HOWEVER: the Missouri Route 66 association is negotiating buying it for a bike/pedestrian path.
Quote from: US71 on April 17, 2020, 04:26:55 PM
Quote from: rte66man on April 10, 2020, 03:06:36 PM
Quote from: ozarkman417 on April 10, 2020, 12:12:06 PM
According to the newest contract listings, the historic Route 66 bridge over the Gasconade River is scheduled for demolition.
(https://www6.modot.mo.gov/eBidLettingPublicWeb/viewFileStream.do?documentType=plan&key=9622%5B/url)
Why demolish it? If it is structurally unsound, close it off to vehicular traffic and let bikes use it.
The state doesn't want to be responsible. HOWEVER: the Missouri Route 66 association is negotiating buying it for a bike/pedestrian path.
The embankments are sinking (probably due to recent flooding) that is why they closed it. The pylons are in good shape. Some of the rebar is starting to poke up through the asphalt.
Even for bike use, its a bumpy ride across due to all of the patching over the years. If whomever bought it, they would have to scrape off the bitumen, inspect the crossbars for rust before they resurface it.
The embankments will need remediation so another flood event doesn't cause them to collapse.
https://bridgereports.com/1291524 (https://bridgereports.com/1291524)
Inspection report (as of December 2014)
Owner: State Highway Agency
Year built: 1922
Historic significance: Bridge is eligible for the National Register of Historic Places
Overall condition: Poor
Superstructure condition rating: Serious (3 out of 9)
Substructure condition rating: Fair (5 out of 9)
Deck condition rating: Serious (3 out of 9)
Sufficiency rating: 18 (out of 100)
Recommended work: Replacement of bridge or other structure because of substandard load carrying capacity or substantial bridge roadway geometry. [31]
Estimated cost of work: $2,533,000
I've reached out "Roamin Rich" Dinklea who's the MO 66 President to see if there are any updates.
MODOT has two different proposed concepts for the MO 125 and US 60 interchange at their new virtual public meeting. Each has their own advantages and disadvantages. Concept three is a partial cloverleaf with roundabouts on both sides, while concept two is a diamond interchange with roundabouts on both sides, but this one will be away from the existing junction.
https://www.modot.org/route-60-route-125-interchange (https://www.modot.org/route-60-route-125-interchange)
Which design do you think is the best for this interchange? I'm going to go with concept two, based on the advantages/disadvantages document found on the linked page.
Quote from: ozarkman417 on April 22, 2020, 01:35:31 PM
MODOT has two different proposed concepts for the MO 125 and US 60 interchange at their new virtual public meeting. Each has their own advantages and disadvantages. Concept three is a partial cloverleaf with roundabouts on both sides, while concept two is a diamond interchange with roundabouts on both sides, but this one will be away from the existing junction.
https://www.modot.org/route-60-route-125-interchange (https://www.modot.org/route-60-route-125-interchange)
Which design do you think is the best for this interchange? I'm going to go with concept two, based on the advantages/disadvantages document found on the linked page.
I think it will confuse the elderly. The roundabouts have to be able to support 40 foot semi trailers and this route sees a large number of trucks, if service facilities are built nearby.
There are enough videos on You Tube showing mayhem of cars trying to navigate ROW on a roundabout with a semi involved.
It seems as if they are in love with roundabouts without thinking this through like edwaleni said. Semis will have a tough time making a NB to WB or SB to EB turn. Seems like a good place for a DDI.
Quote from: rte66man on April 23, 2020, 12:38:23 PM
It seems as if they are in love with roundabouts without thinking this through like edwaleni said. Semis will have a tough time making a NB to WB or SB to EB turn. Seems like a good place for a DDI.
Yes. I agree. Unless I am missing something, there is no need to complicate it so much. Just build a DDI (or even a regular diamond) and be done with it.
Quote from: mvak36 on April 23, 2020, 03:53:47 PM
Quote from: rte66man on April 23, 2020, 12:38:23 PM
It seems as if they are in love with roundabouts without thinking this through like edwaleni said. Semis will have a tough time making a NB to WB or SB to EB turn. Seems like a good place for a DDI.
Yes. I agree. Unless I am missing something, there is no need to complicate it so much. Just build a DDI (or even a regular diamond) and be done with it.
I'm a fan of roundabouts, but as I said above in regards to a different project I don't like small roundabouts in or near urban areas; the combination of heavy traffic and trucks negotiating a circle is too dangerous. Concept three would be good if you were building a new exit at Seymour or anywhere east of that to Poplar Bluff. Concept two looks like someone took advantage of Illinois recent cannabis legalization and decided to design an art deco interchange. Neither is a good idea where planned.
I think a regular diamond would be enough as long as you make the crossing on MO 125 four lanes. This is close enough to Springfield that eventually (and possibly quite soon) there will be too much commercial truck traffic for a small roundabout. I'd prefer a regular diamond unless it's going to be immediately signaled in which case there's no point in waiting to build the inevitable DDI. It's not too difficult to design a diamond with the intention of converting it to a DDI in the future.
On top of these roundabouts, MoDOT is doing a similar setup to this project's option two in Marshfield at I-44 Mile 103.
There are going to be three new roundabouts between Springfield and Willard on the 60 MPH, four-lane US-160.
Quote from: ozarkman417 on April 26, 2020, 08:06:34 PM
On top of these roundabouts, MoDOT is doing a similar setup to this project's option two in Marshfield at I-44 Mile 103.
There are going to be three new roundabouts between Springfield and Willard on the 60 MPH, four-lane US-160.
MoDOT has a roundabout fetish.
Quote from: US71 on April 26, 2020, 08:22:04 PM
Quote from: ozarkman417 on April 26, 2020, 08:06:34 PM
On top of these roundabouts, MoDOT is doing a similar setup to this project's option two in Marshfield at I-44 Mile 103.
There are going to be three new roundabouts between Springfield and Willard on the 60 MPH, four-lane US-160.
MoDOT has a roundabout fetish.
It could be worse. It could be Wisconsin.
Quote from: STLmapboy on May 05, 2020, 12:04:41 PM
Quote from: US71 on April 26, 2020, 08:22:04 PM
Quote from: ozarkman417 on April 26, 2020, 08:06:34 PM
On top of these roundabouts, MoDOT is doing a similar setup to this project's option two in Marshfield at I-44 Mile 103.
There are going to be three new roundabouts between Springfield and Willard on the 60 MPH, four-lane US-160.
MoDOT has a roundabout fetish.
It could be worse. It could be Wisconsin.
Or it could be Indiana as well.
MoDOT's fetish is DDIs. Roundabouts are just a hobby.
Quote from: kphoger on May 06, 2020, 12:20:33 PM
MoDOT's fetish is DDIs. Roundabouts are just a hobby.
They also like the J-Turn
Quote from: US71 on May 07, 2020, 01:16:07 PM
Quote from: kphoger on May 06, 2020, 12:20:33 PM
MoDOT's fetish is DDIs. Roundabouts are just a hobby.
They also like the J-Turn
They do lol. I think there are at least 2 or 3 on US50 just on the stretch from east of Lee's Summit to Warrensburg, with another one on the way. They also just added a bunch of them on MO13 between Clinton and Springfield in the past few years.
Quote from: mvak36 on May 07, 2020, 02:13:04 PM
Quote from: US71 on May 07, 2020, 01:16:07 PM
Quote from: kphoger on May 06, 2020, 12:20:33 PM
MoDOT's fetish is DDIs. Roundabouts are just a hobby.
They also like the J-Turn
They do lol. I think there are at least 2 or 3 on US50 just on the stretch from east of Lee's Summit to Warrensburg, with another one on the way. They also just added a bunch of them on MO13 between Clinton and Springfield in the past few years.
Near St. Louis (around 141 and 44) they've put jughandles on 141 as well. It was one to begin with (the Vance/Forest intersection) and I think they're putting another south of 44.
Quote from: STLmapboy on May 10, 2020, 10:03:59 PM
Near St. Louis (around 141 and 44) they've put jughandles on 141 as well. It was one to begin with (the Vance/Forest intersection) and I think they're putting another south of 44.
The ones on MO 141 in Valley Park are more of a Michigan left. MO 100 at Barrett Station (https://goo.gl/maps/Ek26PALHKGK8fcmn7) and some of the intersections on US 67 north of US 40 (https://goo.gl/maps/dNLFRUZL6QrY4esX6) are jughandles.
Quote from: Revive 755 on May 10, 2020, 10:10:59 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on May 10, 2020, 10:03:59 PM
Near St. Louis (around 141 and 44) they've put jughandles on 141 as well. It was one to begin with (the Vance/Forest intersection) and I think they're putting another south of 44.
The ones on MO 141 in Valley Park are more of a Michigan left. MO 100 at Barrett Station (https://goo.gl/maps/Ek26PALHKGK8fcmn7) and some of the intersections on US 67 north of US 40 (https://goo.gl/maps/dNLFRUZL6QrY4esX6) are jughandles.
Right, my bad.
Looking at the meeting minutes (https://www.modot.org/sites/default/files/documents/2020-04-01%20Minutes.pdf) from the MHTC on April 1, 2020, it looks like they added a project to the Governor's Cost Share program. They awarded Sikeston $2.05 million for the Route 60 and Ingram Road Overpass and Outer Road Improvements project. This looks to be like another project on the Future I-57 corridor but I can't find any information on it.
Governor's Cost Share projects list (updated) (https://www.modot.org/sites/default/files/documents/Governor%27s%20Transportation%20Cost%20Share%20Program%20List%20of%2020%20Projects%20Approved%20by%20MHTC.pdf)
EDIT: They've also posted the videos of the last two MHTC meetings. https://www.modot.org/meeting-datesagendas. Hopefully they continue to do that moving forward even after the quarantine is over.
Quote from: edwaleni on April 22, 2020, 03:52:19 PM
Quote from: ozarkman417 on April 22, 2020, 01:35:31 PM
MODOT has two different proposed concepts for the MO 125 and US 60 interchange at their new virtual public meeting. Each has their own advantages and disadvantages. Concept three is a partial cloverleaf with roundabouts on both sides, while concept two is a diamond interchange with roundabouts on both sides, but this one will be away from the existing junction.
https://www.modot.org/route-60-route-125-interchange (https://www.modot.org/route-60-route-125-interchange)
Which design do you think is the best for this interchange? I'm going to go with concept two, based on the advantages/disadvantages document found on the linked page.
I think it will confuse the elderly. The roundabouts have to be able to support 40 foot semi trailers and this route sees a large number of trucks, if service facilities are built nearby.
There are enough videos on You Tube showing mayhem of cars trying to navigate ROW on a roundabout with a semi involved.
They have chosen Concept #2 (https://www.modot.org/sites/default/files/documents/Concept%202%204-2020.pdf) for this interchange.
https://www.modot.org/node/18818
QuoteRogersville, Greene County — As a result of comments received during a virtual (online) public meeting held April 22 through May 6 and other feedback from the community, the Missouri Department of Transportation will build a new interchange approximately 1/3 of a mile east of the existing U.S. Route 60/Missouri Route 125 intersection near Rogersville.
The interchange is needed to improve safety along Route 60. The project will remove the traffic signal which has been the scene of many crashes, including some severe as well as one fatality crash. By removing the traffic signal, congestion along Route 60 during higher traffic volume times also will be reduced.
Nearly 200 people responded to questions during the April-May virtual public meeting. MoDOT requested input on two possible options for building a new interchange.
The survey results along with a frequently asked questions document which addresses comments received during the virtual meeting along with the plans for the new interchange can be viewed on the project website: Route 60 at Route 125 Interchange (https://www.modot.org/route-60-route-125-interchange)
Three public meetings over the course of two years gathered input from the public as well as nearby businesses, property owners and community leaders to help pick the best option for the safety improvements.
Construction of the new interchange will take place in 2022-2023.
The estimated total project cost is $22 million.
Quote from: mvak36 on May 17, 2020, 11:59:44 AM
They have chosen Concept #2 (https://www.modot.org/sites/default/files/documents/Concept%202%204-2020.pdf) for this interchange.
Although MoDOT has funding issues, I don't care for the large jog MO 125 gets with Concept 2.
Quote from: mvak36 on May 11, 2020, 10:31:18 PM
Looking at the meeting minutes (https://www.modot.org/sites/default/files/documents/2020-04-01%20Minutes.pdf) from the MHTC on April 1, 2020, it looks like they added a project to the Governor's Cost Share program. They awarded Sikeston $2.05 million for the Route 60 and Ingram Road Overpass and Outer Road Improvements project. This looks to be like another project on the Future I-57 corridor but I can't find any information on it.
Governor's Cost Share projects list (updated) (https://www.modot.org/sites/default/files/documents/Governor%27s%20Transportation%20Cost%20Share%20Program%20List%20of%2020%20Projects%20Approved%20by%20MHTC.pdf)
While the Ingram Road overpass could be for the I-57 upgrades, I suspect it may be more for a proposed development.
Consider the other areas with known safety problems that need funding for upgrades, such as US 61 between Wentzville and Troy, US 61 at New London, and probably a few other expressway segments elsewhere in Missouri (US 67 south of Crystal City perhaps), the upgrades between Poplar Bluff and Sikeston should be lower on the priority list IMHO.
Quote from: Revive 755 on May 17, 2020, 12:53:40 PM
Quote from: mvak36 on May 17, 2020, 11:59:44 AM
They have chosen Concept #2 (https://www.modot.org/sites/default/files/documents/Concept%202%204-2020.pdf) for this interchange.
Although MoDOT has funding issues, I don't care for the large jog MO 125 gets with Concept 2.
Quote from: mvak36 on May 11, 2020, 10:31:18 PM
Looking at the meeting minutes (https://www.modot.org/sites/default/files/documents/2020-04-01%20Minutes.pdf) from the MHTC on April 1, 2020, it looks like they added a project to the Governor's Cost Share program. They awarded Sikeston $2.05 million for the Route 60 and Ingram Road Overpass and Outer Road Improvements project. This looks to be like another project on the Future I-57 corridor but I can't find any information on it.
Governor's Cost Share projects list (updated) (https://www.modot.org/sites/default/files/documents/Governor%27s%20Transportation%20Cost%20Share%20Program%20List%20of%2020%20Projects%20Approved%20by%20MHTC.pdf)
While the Ingram Road overpass could be for the I-57 upgrades, I suspect it may be more for a proposed development.
Consider the other areas with known safety problems that need funding for upgrades, such as US 61 between Wentzville and Troy, US 61 at New London, and probably a few other expressway segments elsewhere in Missouri (US 67 south of Crystal City perhaps), the upgrades between Poplar Bluff and Sikeston should be lower on the priority list IMHO.
The design for that interchange seems like overkill. I still think a diamond or DDI would probably work there.
I agree with you regarding the future I-57 stuff. I don't think MODOT needs to do anything till Arkansas is getting close to finishing their section. I'd like to see them build the Hannibal bypass along with the US61 projects you mentioned before any upgrades on US60.
Quote from: Revive 755 on May 17, 2020, 12:53:40 PM
Although MoDOT has funding issues, I don't care for the large jog MO 125 gets with Concept 2.
That was my first thought too. But, upon further reflection, I realized I've never used MO-125 as a straight-through route there, and I've hardly ever seen a driver doing so either. It's my experience that most people are getting on or off US-60 at that point.
Out for a drive today after a job and drove through Noel, MO on MO-90 after stopping at the state tri-point nearby to take an obligatory video of myself touching 3 states simultaneously. After driving under the edge of a bluff there (https://goo.gl/maps/BPYcsBCMvPMaoE4CA (https://goo.gl/maps/BPYcsBCMvPMaoE4CA)), I noticed a mobile VMS that stated that MO-90 was going to be closed down starting 7/2020, so they're fixing to start construction on the Bella Vista Bypass (I-49) interchange in a few weeks. Finally Missouri!
Quote from: MikieTimT on May 18, 2020, 04:49:30 PM
Out for a drive today after a job and drove through Noel, MO on MO-90 after stopping at the state tri-point nearby to take an obligatory video of myself touching 3 states simultaneously. After driving under the edge of a bluff there (https://goo.gl/maps/BPYcsBCMvPMaoE4CA (https://goo.gl/maps/BPYcsBCMvPMaoE4CA)), I noticed a mobile VMS that stated that MO-90 was going to be closed down starting 7/2020, so they're fixing to start construction on the Bella Vista Bypass (I-49) interchange in a few weeks. Finally Missouri!
I didn't think 90 would be closed so soon. MoDOT must be working quickly. IIRC, this will only be for a few week before it's reopened.
Quote from: US71 on May 18, 2020, 05:12:53 PM
Quote from: MikieTimT on May 18, 2020, 04:49:30 PM
Out for a drive today after a job and drove through Noel, MO on MO-90 after stopping at the state tri-point nearby to take an obligatory video of myself touching 3 states simultaneously. After driving under the edge of a bluff there (https://goo.gl/maps/BPYcsBCMvPMaoE4CA (https://goo.gl/maps/BPYcsBCMvPMaoE4CA)), I noticed a mobile VMS that stated that MO-90 was going to be closed down starting 7/2020, so they're fixing to start construction on the Bella Vista Bypass (I-49) interchange in a few weeks. Finally Missouri!
I didn't think 90 would be closed so soon. MoDOT must be working quickly. IIRC, this will only be for a few week before it's reopened.
They are working pretty fast. According to this news release (https://www.modot.org/node/18450) from mid-April, it will be closed for up to 101 days and it wasn't supposed to start till mid to late July. I might have to make a trip down there this fall sometime (and also check out the tri state markers) :).
Quote from: US71 on May 18, 2020, 05:12:53 PM
Quote from: MikieTimT on May 18, 2020, 04:49:30 PM
Out for a drive today after a job and drove through Noel, MO on MO-90 after stopping at the state tri-point nearby to take an obligatory video of myself touching 3 states simultaneously. After driving under the edge of a bluff there (https://goo.gl/maps/BPYcsBCMvPMaoE4CA (https://goo.gl/maps/BPYcsBCMvPMaoE4CA)), I noticed a mobile VMS that stated that MO-90 was going to be closed down starting 7/2020, so they're fixing to start construction on the Bella Vista Bypass (I-49) interchange in a few weeks. Finally Missouri!
I didn't think 90 would be closed so soon. MoDOT must be working quickly. IIRC, this will only be for a few week before it's reopened.
It didn't have much traffic on it mid-day when I drove it, but H isn't too terribly long of a detour anyway, and more scenic since it hugs the Elk River most of the way.
Quote from: mvak36 on May 18, 2020, 05:25:34 PM
Quote from: US71 on May 18, 2020, 05:12:53 PM
Quote from: MikieTimT on May 18, 2020, 04:49:30 PM
Out for a drive today after a job and drove through Noel, MO on MO-90 after stopping at the state tri-point nearby to take an obligatory video of myself touching 3 states simultaneously. After driving under the edge of a bluff there (https://goo.gl/maps/BPYcsBCMvPMaoE4CA (https://goo.gl/maps/BPYcsBCMvPMaoE4CA)), I noticed a mobile VMS that stated that MO-90 was going to be closed down starting 7/2020, so they're fixing to start construction on the Bella Vista Bypass (I-49) interchange in a few weeks. Finally Missouri!
I didn't think 90 would be closed so soon. MoDOT must be working quickly. IIRC, this will only be for a few week before it's reopened.
They are working pretty fast. According to this news release (https://www.modot.org/node/18450) from mid-April, it will be closed for up to 101 days and it wasn't supposed to start till mid to late July. I might have to make a trip down there this fall sometime (and also check out the tri state markers) :).
Not as fast as some forward looking speculators. Noted a rather large sign on MO-90 where the interchange is going offering a rather large tract of land for sale, so somebody's getting ready to cash in.
Quote from: mvak36 on May 18, 2020, 05:25:34 PM
Quote from: US71 on May 18, 2020, 05:12:53 PM
Quote from: MikieTimT on May 18, 2020, 04:49:30 PM
Out for a drive today after a job and drove through Noel, MO on MO-90 after stopping at the state tri-point nearby to take an obligatory video of myself touching 3 states simultaneously. After driving under the edge of a bluff there (https://goo.gl/maps/BPYcsBCMvPMaoE4CA (https://goo.gl/maps/BPYcsBCMvPMaoE4CA)), I noticed a mobile VMS that stated that MO-90 was going to be closed down starting 7/2020, so they're fixing to start construction on the Bella Vista Bypass (I-49) interchange in a few weeks. Finally Missouri!
I didn't think 90 would be closed so soon. MoDOT must be working quickly. IIRC, this will only be for a few week before it's reopened.
They are working pretty fast. According to this news release (https://www.modot.org/node/18450) from mid-April, it will be closed for up to 101 days and it wasn't supposed to start till mid to late July. I might have to make a trip down there this fall sometime (and also check out the tri state markers) :).
I'm a bit disappointed that ODOT removed most of the 20/43 duplex. :(
Quote from: US71 on May 18, 2020, 06:21:19 PM
Quote from: mvak36 on May 18, 2020, 05:25:34 PM
Quote from: US71 on May 18, 2020, 05:12:53 PM
Quote from: MikieTimT on May 18, 2020, 04:49:30 PM
Out for a drive today after a job and drove through Noel, MO on MO-90 after stopping at the state tri-point nearby to take an obligatory video of myself touching 3 states simultaneously. After driving under the edge of a bluff there (https://goo.gl/maps/BPYcsBCMvPMaoE4CA (https://goo.gl/maps/BPYcsBCMvPMaoE4CA)), I noticed a mobile VMS that stated that MO-90 was going to be closed down starting 7/2020, so they're fixing to start construction on the Bella Vista Bypass (I-49) interchange in a few weeks. Finally Missouri!
I didn't think 90 would be closed so soon. MoDOT must be working quickly. IIRC, this will only be for a few week before it's reopened.
They are working pretty fast. According to this news release (https://www.modot.org/node/18450) from mid-April, it will be closed for up to 101 days and it wasn't supposed to start till mid to late July. I might have to make a trip down there this fall sometime (and also check out the tri state markers) :).
I'm a bit disappointed that ODOT removed most of the 20/43 duplex. :(
You mean that I can no longer straddle the center line and rack up mile after mile in 2 states simultaneously! :-o
Quote from: MikieTimT on May 18, 2020, 06:29:18 PM
Quote from: US71 on May 18, 2020, 06:21:19 PM
Quote from: mvak36 on May 18, 2020, 05:25:34 PM
Quote from: US71 on May 18, 2020, 05:12:53 PM
Quote from: MikieTimT on May 18, 2020, 04:49:30 PM
Out for a drive today after a job and drove through Noel, MO on MO-90 after stopping at the state tri-point nearby to take an obligatory video of myself touching 3 states simultaneously. After driving under the edge of a bluff there (https://goo.gl/maps/BPYcsBCMvPMaoE4CA (https://goo.gl/maps/BPYcsBCMvPMaoE4CA)), I noticed a mobile VMS that stated that MO-90 was going to be closed down starting 7/2020, so they're fixing to start construction on the Bella Vista Bypass (I-49) interchange in a few weeks. Finally Missouri!
I didn't think 90 would be closed so soon. MoDOT must be working quickly. IIRC, this will only be for a few week before it's reopened.
They are working pretty fast. According to this news release (https://www.modot.org/node/18450) from mid-April, it will be closed for up to 101 days and it wasn't supposed to start till mid to late July. I might have to make a trip down there this fall sometime (and also check out the tri state markers) :).
I'm a bit disappointed that ODOT removed most of the 20/43 duplex. :(
You mean that I can no longer straddle the center line and rack up mile after mile in 2 states simultaneously! :-o
That's a shame, I haven't even been to the state tripoint yet. If I ever go down to the bypass I'll probably check it out. When you say most, do you know what section(s) remain?
The road is still there, trip-point is still there, but the signage has changed
It's no longer 20/43, just 20
(https://live.staticflickr.com/3033/2305208504_44fd76fb86_z_d.jpg)
Quote from: US71 on May 18, 2020, 07:42:36 PM
The road is still there, trip-point is still there, but the signage has changed
It's no longer 20/43, just 20
(https://live.staticflickr.com/3033/2305208504_44fd76fb86_z_d.jpg)
That same sign was there yesterday. I have video evidence and just consulted it!
Quote from: MikieTimT on May 19, 2020, 02:38:43 PM
Quote from: US71 on May 18, 2020, 07:42:36 PM
The road is still there, trip-point is still there, but the signage has changed
It's no longer 20/43, just 20
(https://live.staticflickr.com/3033/2305208504_44fd76fb86_z_d.jpg)
That same sign was there yesterday. I have video evidence and just consulted it!
They must have missed one.
The "triplets" disappeared around 2017
(https://live.staticflickr.com/2018/2305207634_1d6b55c636_d.jpg)
Quote from: mvak36 on April 10, 2020, 01:13:01 PM
https://www.kmbc.com/article/plans-to-replace-the-buck-oneil-bridge-hit-snag/32022939
Quote
KANSAS CITY, Mo. –
The plans to replace the Buck O'Neil Bridge are stalled for now.
Economic uncertainty is one of them, just because the city and the region are taking a serious hit.
"So before we are signing onto contracts and that sort of thing, we want to make sure the money is there," Kansas City Mayor Quinton Lucas said.
It is estimated that it will cost $250 million to replace the bridge. It breaks down like this: $100 million from the state, which owns the bridge; $60 million from Kansas City; $40 million from the Missouri side of the region, through the Mid-America Regional Council; and $24 million from Washington, D.C.
The project is short $26 million. Two alternatives include, having the city and the state split the difference, or see if Washington, D.C., has more infrastructure money in a COVID-19 stimulus bill.
"That's the sort of thing where you would have the Buck O'Neil Bridge project ready for, and as, a shovel-ready project," Lucas said.
That is an idea and not a hard plan.
This is a complex project. There are railroad tracks on two sides of the bridge and then there is the Missouri River.
The plan is to have the new bridge connect to Interstate 35. Despite cutbacks, MoDOT has its bridge money in a special account. A lobbyist told the City Council Thursday that means, it is "about as solid as you could make it."
So right now, it's a question of details. But if the delay continues, it could become a serious question.
I wouldn't be surprised to see more projects being delayed since people aren't driving as much. This bridge and the I-70 Rocheport bridge are the next two major bridges slated for replacement.
I went to the project site for the Buck O'Neil Bridge (https://www.modot.org/buck-oneil-bridge-project) and they have posted an updated Draft Procurement Schedule.
Quote
Updated Draft Procurement Schedule:
Project Advertisement: May 19th, 2020
RFQ/Industry meeting: June 19th, 2020
SOQ shortlist: July 2020
RFP: August 2020
Award: February 2021
Hopefully they will be able to award this next February and it won't get delayed any further.
There's nothing on the project site, but I found an article about the Recommended Alternative (https://www.flatlandkc.org/news-issues/modot-recommends-new-buck-oneil-bridge-with-direct-access-to-interstate-35/), which is the Central Alternative (https://www.modot.org/sites/default/files/documents/Central_alternatives_0.pdf).
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/gallery/12408_21_05_20_5_13_52.jpeg)
Quote from: ozarkman417 on April 10, 2020, 12:12:06 PM
According to the newest contract listings, the historic Route 66 bridge over the Gasconade River is scheduled for demolition.
(https://www6.modot.mo.gov/eBidLettingPublicWeb/viewFileStream.do?documentType=plan&key=9622%5B/url)
This project appears to have been removed from the bid lettings. Anything new from "Roamin Rich", US 71?
Quote from: ozarkman417 on May 24, 2020, 05:00:03 PM
Quote from: ozarkman417 on April 10, 2020, 12:12:06 PM
According to the newest contract listings, the historic Route 66 bridge over the Gasconade River is scheduled for demolition.
(https://www6.modot.mo.gov/eBidLettingPublicWeb/viewFileStream.do?documentType=plan&key=9622%5B/url)
This project appears to have been removed from the bid lettings. Anything new from "Roamin Rich", US 71?
The project is on "hold". 66'ers have managed to persuade MoDOT NOT to destroy the bridge and to turn it over to them to maintain. They are still working out the details, so there's no "victory lap" as of yet, but it looks promising.
Got this in my email today:
Quote
MoDOT Kansas City Completes I-435 South Loop Link Design/Build Project
JACKSON COUNTY — MoDOT Kansas City has completed the Interstate 435 South Loop Link design/build project. This project has completely rebuilt more than three miles of pavement through one of Kansas City's top three regional commuter corridors, added an additional lane in both eastbound and westbound directions, replaced and rehabilitated five bridges. This is a heavily traveled route that winds from the northern part of the metro southbound, eventually curving west to the Kansas state line and exceeds daily traffic counts of 150,000 vehicles a day.
The Radmacher-Wilson team that was awarded the project understood that minimizing the impacts to the public during peak travel hours was a large project goal. The key to its success was all about shifting traffic. The team built new lanes along the outside of the existing footprint, then shifted traffic to and away from where they needed to work next, completing the bridge work in place simultaneously. The crew was able to maintain four lanes through most morning and afternoon peak travel hours since breaking ground in spring 2018.
MoDOT's method of delivering large-scale projects through a design-build format is relatively new. Design-build includes hiring a consultant to complete design and construction under one contract. MoDOT provides project goals, budget and schedule. This technique is proven to significantly save time and money. Some other very successful design-build projects include the Christopher S. Bond Bridge over the Missouri River and the Safe and Sound Bridge Improvement Project which replaced more than 800 bridges under one contract. The next anticipated Design-Build contract is the U.S. 169 Buck O'Neil Bridge (https://www.modot.org/buck-oneil-bridge-project).
I'm glad this project's over. I use part of this stretch for my daily commute (before the quarantine). IMO, it was managed pretty well. I didn't have to deal with too many delays and the extra lanes are nice.
https://www.kbia.org/post/maryland-heights-residents-call-rename-road-bearing-slave-trader-s-name
Apparently some MD Heights residents in Greater St Louis want to rename Dorsett Rd because it's named after a slave trader (never knew that). It probably won't happen, but if it did could the Midland Blvd designation found in Overland (and currently ending at Lindbergh) be extended west?
Quote from: STLmapboy on June 14, 2020, 02:01:24 PM
https://www.kbia.org/post/maryland-heights-residents-call-rename-road-bearing-slave-trader-s-name
Apparently some MD Heights residents in Greater St Louis want to rename Dorsett Rd because it's named after a slave trader (never knew that). It probably won't happen, but if it did could the Midland Blvd designation found in Overland (and currently ending at Lindbergh) be extended west?
Midland actually runs parallel north of Dorsett between Lindbergh and the Beltway. There's also the issue of Old Dorsett in Maryland Heights.
Quote from: skluth on June 22, 2020, 06:13:58 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on June 14, 2020, 02:01:24 PM
https://www.kbia.org/post/maryland-heights-residents-call-rename-road-bearing-slave-trader-s-name
Apparently some MD Heights residents in Greater St Louis want to rename Dorsett Rd because it's named after a slave trader (never knew that). It probably won't happen, but if it did could the Midland Blvd designation found in Overland (and currently ending at Lindbergh) be extended west?
Midland actually runs parallel north of Dorsett between Lindbergh and the Beltway. There's also the issue of Old Dorsett in Maryland Heights.
At the risk of being called to task for "making light" of a now-sore subject, the road name could remain the same, but the dedication changed to honor NFL's Tony Dorsett!
Quote from: skluth on June 22, 2020, 06:13:58 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on June 14, 2020, 02:01:24 PM
https://www.kbia.org/post/maryland-heights-residents-call-rename-road-bearing-slave-trader-s-name
Apparently some MD Heights residents in Greater St Louis want to rename Dorsett Rd because it's named after a slave trader (never knew that). It probably won't happen, but if it did could the Midland Blvd designation found in Overland (and currently ending at Lindbergh) be extended west?
Midland actually runs parallel north of Dorsett between Lindbergh and the Beltway. There's also the issue of Old Dorsett in Maryland Heights.
Best to leave it as it is, I guess. We could otherwise end up with a cluster like Lackland and Fee Fee (discontinuous, disjointed)
Quote from: sparker on June 23, 2020, 02:37:56 AM
Quote from: skluth on June 22, 2020, 06:13:58 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on June 14, 2020, 02:01:24 PM
https://www.kbia.org/post/maryland-heights-residents-call-rename-road-bearing-slave-trader-s-name
Apparently some MD Heights residents in Greater St Louis want to rename Dorsett Rd because it's named after a slave trader (never knew that). It probably won't happen, but if it did could the Midland Blvd designation found in Overland (and currently ending at Lindbergh) be extended west?
Midland actually runs parallel north of Dorsett between Lindbergh and the Beltway. There's also the issue of Old Dorsett in Maryland Heights.
At the risk of being called to task for "making light" of a now-sore subject, the road name could remain the same, but the dedication changed to honor NFL's Tony Dorsett!
TD has no connection to STL and they may not want to name a road after a living person considering the fate of the Mark McGwire Freeway. They could drop the second "T" and call it Dorset after the region in England. No real connection either but there's not much love for former Dallas Cowboys in the area.
Quote from: skluth on June 23, 2020, 06:08:42 PM
Quote from: sparker on June 23, 2020, 02:37:56 AM
Quote from: skluth on June 22, 2020, 06:13:58 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on June 14, 2020, 02:01:24 PM
https://www.kbia.org/post/maryland-heights-residents-call-rename-road-bearing-slave-trader-s-name
Apparently some MD Heights residents in Greater St Louis want to rename Dorsett Rd because it's named after a slave trader (never knew that). It probably won't happen, but if it did could the Midland Blvd designation found in Overland (and currently ending at Lindbergh) be extended west?
Midland actually runs parallel north of Dorsett between Lindbergh and the Beltway. There's also the issue of Old Dorsett in Maryland Heights.
At the risk of being called to task for "making light" of a now-sore subject, the road name could remain the same, but the dedication changed to honor NFL's Tony Dorsett!
TD has no connection to STL and they may not want to name a road after a living person considering the fate of the Mark McGwire Freeway. They could drop the second "T" and call it Dorset after the region in England. No real connection either but there's not much love for former Dallas Cowboys in the area.
All well & good -- but I was trying to be somewhat sarcastic/ironic here. In retrospect, I'll give myself a D+ for that effort!
Video of St Louis downtown in 1973, just as the decay was starting to build: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V2ujLPtwZVg
The streets are busier, and most traffic lights are mounted on yellow poles on the side of the road with visors of varying lengths. A few trombone mounts are seen. The lights are still black-fronted, but with yellow backs.
St Louis 1963: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CqQ9J5BCsx4
Not as many lights but still some side mounts, and a very early overhead mount at the Bevo Windmill at 3:18.
I think I heard Revive 755 say somewhere that STL signals used to have blue backplates. Does anyone have examples of those?
^ I thought it was the back of the signals? Not that I can find any in Streetview, but there are more green mast arms than I recall.
I'm also finding a lot more of the non-MUTCD compliant 'left only on left arrow' signs with four or five section heads. Example (https://goo.gl/maps/RZ9vrgz4bhDupBrFA).
There is a new virtual public meeting regarding the replacement bridge for Route 86 over Table Rock Lake. It started July 13 and ends July 27. The original truss bridge was built in 1956, while the new bridge should be complete by early 2022.
https://www.modot.org/long-creek-bridge-project (https://www.modot.org/long-creek-bridge-project)
Quote from: ozarkman417 on July 16, 2020, 06:14:46 PM
There is a new virtual public meeting regarding the replacement bridge for Route 86 over Table Rock Lake. It started July 13 and ends July 27. The original truss bridge was built in 1956, while the new bridge should be complete by early 2022.
https://www.modot.org/long-creek-bridge-project (https://www.modot.org/long-creek-bridge-project)
A little piece of me dies whenever a steel truss bridge in Taney County goes bye-bye.
Quote from: kphoger on July 17, 2020, 10:09:46 AM
Quote from: ozarkman417 on July 16, 2020, 06:14:46 PM
There is a new virtual public meeting regarding the replacement bridge for Route 86 over Table Rock Lake. It started July 13 and ends July 27. The original truss bridge was built in 1956, while the new bridge should be complete by early 2022.
https://www.modot.org/long-creek-bridge-project (https://www.modot.org/long-creek-bridge-project)
A little piece of me dies whenever a steel truss bridge in Taney County goes bye-bye.
I feel that way about nearly any steel truss.
On my way to work I pass by a house with a driveway that goes over a pony truss. If I was rich I'd build my mansion on a property with a creek or something just so I could build a steel through truss over it.
Quote from: Scott5114 on July 18, 2020, 01:44:29 PM
On my way to work I pass by a house with a driveway that goes over a pony truss. If I was rich I'd build my mansion on a property with a creek or something just so I could build a steel through truss over it.
In a rich area on the east side of Springfield, someone has not only an artificial lake, but has a covered wooden bridge over it.
There are still a few trusses in Taney County, most of the ones I know about are east of Forsyth on U.S 160 (the Route 76 truss was replaced a few years ago). Further east in Ozark County, some historic bridges were wiped out in 2017 by a flood.
There is a private covered bridge near Lebanon and another on MO 86 near Racine
I still follow MODOT on Facebook from when I lived in St Louis. This was copied from their FB page today:
For today's #WorkZoneWednesday, we're traveling to the northeast part of the state along U.S. Route 61, Avenue of the Saints, near Troy in Lincoln County.
This week, northbound and southbound traffic will be shifted onto the new Cuivre River Bridges and adjoining roadway. U.S. 61 in this area will remain reduced to one lane throughout the project, which is scheduled for completion at the end of this year.
The project includes the construction of northbound and southbound bridges over the Cuivre River in addition to intersection safety improvements at Route KK, which were completed at the beginning of the project.
Please slow down and pay attention through the work zone for your safety and the safety of our workers. And know before you go by checking traveler.modot.org (http://traveler.modot.org). #BUPD
I drove US 61 whenever I visited my brother in Minneapolis along with hearing traffic reports that included this area on the local news stations, so I know how busy this highway gets.
Quote from: ozarkman417 on July 18, 2020, 02:15:31 PM
Quote from: Scott5114 on July 18, 2020, 01:44:29 PM
On my way to work I pass by a house with a driveway that goes over a pony truss. If I was rich I'd build my mansion on a property with a creek or something just so I could build a steel through truss over it.
In a rich area on the east side of Springfield, someone has not only an artificial lake, but has a covered wooden bridge over it.
Holy shit. https://www.google.com/maps/@37.1889151,-93.2064127,347m/data=!3m1!1e3?hl=en/
Quote from: STLmapboy on July 29, 2020, 05:56:18 PM
Quote from: ozarkman417 on July 18, 2020, 02:15:31 PM
Quote from: Scott5114 on July 18, 2020, 01:44:29 PM
On my way to work I pass by a house with a driveway that goes over a pony truss. If I was rich I'd build my mansion on a property with a creek or something just so I could build a steel through truss over it.
In a rich area on the east side of Springfield, someone has not only an artificial lake, but has a covered wooden bridge over it.
Holy shit. https://www.google.com/maps/@37.1889151,-93.2064127,347m/data=!3m1!1e3?hl=en/
While that's not their only driveway, it appears the other entrance uses
this simple wooden bridge (https://goo.gl/maps/fTJ31umhBzGAMbkY7). I bet truck drivers say a prayer before arriving with furniture. Can you imagine delivering a skid dumpster to that house for a renovation project?
Quote from: kphoger on July 30, 2020, 10:04:39 AM
Quote from: STLmapboy on July 29, 2020, 05:56:18 PM
Quote from: ozarkman417 on July 18, 2020, 02:15:31 PM
Quote from: Scott5114 on July 18, 2020, 01:44:29 PM
On my way to work I pass by a house with a driveway that goes over a pony truss. If I was rich I'd build my mansion on a property with a creek or something just so I could build a steel through truss over it.
In a rich area on the east side of Springfield, someone has not only an artificial lake, but has a covered wooden bridge over it.
Holy shit. https://www.google.com/maps/@37.1889151,-93.2064127,347m/data=!3m1!1e3?hl=en/
While that's not their only driveway, it appears the other entrance uses this simple wooden bridge (https://goo.gl/maps/fTJ31umhBzGAMbkY7). I bet truck drivers say a prayer before arriving with furniture. Can you imagine delivering a skid dumpster to that house for a renovation project?
I've seen a number of those in the Neosho-Anderson area.
https://goo.gl/maps/LjMZAJ19EdiXGhab7
https://www.modot.org/node/20106
Quote
MoDOT Takes the Next Step to Building a New Buck O'Neil Bridge
JACKSON/CLAY COUNTIES — After an extensive and exhaustive evaluation process, the Missouri Department of Transportation has developed a list of qualified design-build teams to compete for the contract to build a new U.S. Route 169 Buck O'Neil Bridge. Each of the teams come from a diverse mix of experienced local and national companies who submitted exceptional proposals.
"We are excited about the interest we have received in the project. Five teams have been selected to compete for the contract to oversee the design and construction of this bridge project," said MoDOT Project Director Mary Miller.
The following teams (in no particular order) were selected to further develop their proposals on the project:
American Bridge/Parsons Team
Lunda Construction Co.
Massman-Clarkson, a joint venture
Traylor Ames Joint Venture
The Walsh Design-Build Team
Design-build projects combine both the design and construction phases into one contract. The selected contract team completes the design and construction in parallel instead of in succession, which saves time and resources.
From this group, the Missouri Highways and Transportation Commission will select a best-value proposal from a design-build team to deliver the project. The selection is expected in February 2021, with construction beginning later that year.
The John Jordan "Buck" O'Neil Memorial Bridge (formerly the Broadway Bridge), is a triple arch bridge carrying U.S. 169 over the Missouri River, and serves as a key regional connection between downtown Kansas City and communities north of the river.
While safe, the bridge is nearing the end of its projected lifespan. Opened in 1956, the bridge recently celebrated its 60th year of operation.
Since that time, neighborhoods and communities on both sides of the bridge have changed significantly and now nearly 50,000 vehicles use the bridge daily.
"Thank you to everyone who expressed interest and put in the time and effort to deliver a SOQ for consideration," Miller added.
For more information on the U.S. Route 169 Buck O'Neil Bridge, please visit the project webpage available at: https://www.modot.org/buck-oneil-bridge-project
https://www.modot.org/node/20075
Quote
MHTC Selects Team to Deliver $21.3 Million Bootheel Bridge Bundle Project
Robertson Contractors Team to Improve Bridges Across Southeast Missouri
SIKESTON — Southeast Missouri travelers can soon expect to see more than 15 bridge improvement projects coming to fruition through the Bootheel Bridge Bundle design-build project. During today's Missouri Highways and Transportation Commission meeting, the Robertson Contractors Team, headquartered in Poplar Bluff, Missouri was selected to design and construct the $21.3 million project.
The Robertson Contractors Team is comprised of Robertson Contractors, Inc., Horner & Shifrin and Penzel Construction Company, Inc.
"The purpose of the Bootheel Bridge Bundle project is to repair or replace 15 bridges on the Missouri Department of Transportation's asset management plan for the Southeast District," said Project Director Benji Philpot. "Due to the innovative nature of design-build projects, we also identified 10 more bridges as potential add-ons to increase the value of the project."
Contractor teams then submitted proposals detailing their plans for the 15 primary bridges and selected potential add-on bridges to also address.
Philpot explained reviewing proposals from potential design-build teams was a rigorous process. The Bootheel Bridge Bundle team evaluated the use of innovation to maximize the number of bridges addressed, quality of proposed structures, traffic impacts, construction speed and scheduling and safety improvements.
"Thank you to the teams who put in the time and effort to deliver a proposal for consideration," he added. "Robertson Contractors' proposal was deemed to be of the best apparent value to taxpayers based on the project goals."
The team's proposal includes improving 17 bridge locations, with construction beginning as early as this fall. Completion of the design-build project is anticipated on or before Dec. 31, 2023.
Thirteen bridges in the Bootheel Bridge Bundle are included in Gov. Mike Parson's $351 million Focus on Bridges program, which will repair or replace 250 bridges across the state.
For more information on the Bootheel Bridge Bundle, please visit the project webpage available at https://www.modot.org/bootheel-bridge-bundle or call MoDOT's Customer Service Center toll-free at 1-888 ASK MODOT (275-6636).
I don't get over to KC a ton, so I figured I'd asked this here. Why does the US-71 freeway stop between 51st/63rd and Meyer/75th? It looks like a Texas-style "frontage lanes only" setup with plenty of room to build mainlanes. Is it NIMBYism?
Quote from: STLmapboy on November 03, 2020, 09:24:26 AM
I don't get over to KC a ton, so I figured I'd asked this here. Why does the US-71 freeway stop between 51st/63rd and Meyer/75th? It looks like a Texas-style "frontage lanes only" setup with plenty of room to build mainlanes. Is it NIMBYism?
Sort of.
https://www.kcur.org/community/2014-06-03/highway-71-and-the-road-to-compromise
Quote from: US71 on November 03, 2020, 09:52:39 AM
Quote from: STLmapboy on November 03, 2020, 09:24:26 AM
I don't get over to KC a ton, so I figured I'd asked this here. Why does the US-71 freeway stop between 51st/63rd and Meyer/75th? It looks like a Texas-style "frontage lanes only" setup with plenty of room to build mainlanes. Is it NIMBYism?
Sort of.
https://www.kcur.org/community/2014-06-03/highway-71-and-the-road-to-compromise
There is a court order preventing the construction of full interchanges at those locations. Unfortunately, those have become very accident prone over the years. As you have already noticed, there is ample room for freeway lanes at those spots, and I am certain this was clearly done on purpose. IMO, it is only a matter of time before the inevitable happens and that the freeway is fully completed and the resulting extension of I-49 North into Downtown KC. It seems it would actually increase safety, especially at those intersections, to move the through traffic into freeway lanes. Of course, right now, with MoDOT's money woes, it may be a stretch for much to happen there at all anytime in the immediate future, even if the court order were removed.
From the I-49 Comes to Missouri thread:
https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=3239.msg2251964#msg2251964
Maybe someday Interstate 49 will connect with Interstates 70 and 670. But that day seems to be very far into the future.
Looks like 41 bridges in northern Missouri will be replaced to the tune of about 36 million which seems like a good deal. Almost hard to believe.
https://www.equipmentworld.com/missouri-dot-41-poor-rated-bridges-project/
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on November 06, 2020, 01:08:07 PM
Maybe someday Interstate 49 will connect with Interstates 70 and 670. But that day seems to be very far into the future.
I don't know if it's possible for a horse to be more dead. Meanwhile, other 2DIs are just fine ending at 3DIs.
Quote from: stridentweasel on November 16, 2020, 08:28:29 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on November 06, 2020, 01:08:07 PM
Maybe someday Interstate 49 will connect with Interstates 70 and 670. But that day seems to be very far into the future.
I don't know if it's possible for a horse to be more dead. Meanwhile, other 2DIs are just fine ending at 3DIs.
Dead to the point of puree? ;)
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on November 06, 2020, 01:08:07 PM
Maybe someday Interstate 49 will connect with Interstates 70 and 670. But that day seems to be very far into the future.
Perhaps a generation or so down the line when the original parties to the legal action that resulted in the court order have long gone, the matter would be revisited -- but with
very extensive community mitigation, such as a full cut-and cover freeway facility capped with a neighborhood plaza/open-air market, or other beneficial and appropriate land use for the neighborhood. But it certainly can't be fun for the local population to (a) have to cross the widely divided surface arterial during peak commute times, and, correspondingly (b) have to breathe the exhaust fumes of lines of vehicles stopped at the signals. And except in activist circles, the temporal joy of "dancing on the grave" of the interrupted freeway -- or even "sticking it to" suburban commuters might have worn off a decade or so down the line. IMO, the situation
will be addressed again at some point -- but the alternate outcome of razing the rest of the existing US 71/Watkins facility (which apparently has been suggested by some) would be an inordinate expense in itself and would have the consequence of shifting traffic over to the already congested I-70/435 combination.
https://krcgtv.com/news/local/new-details-from-modot-on-rocheport-i-70-bridge-construction
Quote
The Missouri Department of Transportation says work on the new Interstate 70 bridge over the Missouri River at Rocheport will begin in late 2021.
The Missouri Highways and Transportation Commission is scheduled to award that contract in July 2021.
The bridge is expected to be open to traffic in 2024.
In a press release, Project Director Brandi Baldwin says they are already working toward the start of construction. "Last December, we started the re-evaluation of an environmental study that had been completed for the bridge in 2005," Baldwin said. "In March, we conducted geological testing and survey gathering that provided valuable information about the area's rock and soil stability."
MoDOT states they want to build the bridge for under $240 million.
The current bridge was built in 1960.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/54480415@N08/albums/72157705415485421
Have a few MO 370 pics to share.
Anyone can confirm that the Watkins portion of US 71 has exit numbers? I see that google maps has them labeled (https://www.google.com/maps/@39.0824066,-94.5664159,17.29z), but it's not on either street view or Wikipedia's exits list. The I-70/670 interchange is marked as 196. Also those exit numbers seem to be a continuation of I-49's mileage, instead of US 71's. US 71 is at mile 198 at that point.
Something interesting I realized, if for some reason Modot wants to combine I-29 and 49 into a single route, and they simply add 200 to all of I-29's exit numbers, that estimate would only be under 1 as the I-35/I-29 interchange is milepost 201 with I-49. Better than being over 16 like on another certain highway in another state ;)
Back in 1965, there was a proposal to extend Interstate 29 down the present (and future) sections of Interstate 49 along the US 71 corridor to New Orleans. However, given that existing Interstate 49 presently exists east of Interstates 35 and 45, and west of Interstate 55, I think the 49 designation for the corridor is a better one than if it had been Interstate 29.
Quote from: SkyPesos on January 05, 2021, 01:40:37 PM
Anyone can confirm that the Watkins portion of US 71 has exit numbers? I see that google maps has them labeled (https://www.google.com/maps/@39.0824066,-94.5664159,17.29z), but it's not on either street view or Wikipedia's exits list. The I-70/670 interchange is marked as 196. Also those exit numbers seem to be a continuation of I-49's mileage, instead of US 71's. US 71 is at mile 198 at that point.
Something interesting I realized, if for some reason Modot wants to combine I-29 and 49 into a single route, and they simply add 200 to all of I-29's exit numbers, that estimate would only be under 1 as the I-35/I-29 interchange is milepost 201 with I-49. Better than being over 16 like on another certain highway in another state ;)
To my knowledge, no they don't. I think, in part, because US 71 mileage =/= I-49 mileage.
Quote from: sparker on November 17, 2020, 01:05:46 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on November 06, 2020, 01:08:07 PM
Maybe someday Interstate 49 will connect with Interstates 70 and 670. But that day seems to be very far into the future.
Perhaps a generation or so down the line when the original parties to the legal action that resulted in the court order have long gone, the matter would be revisited -- but with very extensive community mitigation, such as a full cut-and cover freeway facility capped with a neighborhood plaza/open-air market, or other beneficial and appropriate land use for the neighborhood. But it certainly can't be fun for the local population to (a) have to cross the widely divided surface arterial during peak commute times, and, correspondingly (b) have to breathe the exhaust fumes of lines of vehicles stopped at the signals. And except in activist circles, the temporal joy of "dancing on the grave" of the interrupted freeway -- or even "sticking it to" suburban commuters might have worn off a decade or so down the line. IMO, the situation will be addressed again at some point -- but the alternate outcome of razing the rest of the existing US 71/Watkins facility (which apparently has been suggested by some) would be an inordinate expense in itself and would have the consequence of shifting traffic over to the already congested I-70/435 combination.
I would agree with you on the cut and cover approach. Missouri typically hasn't funded anything this extensive in the past. Usually cities in or near hilly or mountainous terrain will do this. (Like the I-90 Mercer Island cut and cover in Seattle)
I think a new road could be lowered more between 51st down to 75th and I am sure that suggestion has been pureed to death. Putting a park over it would definitely speed things up when it comes to community approval.
Its just incredibly dangerous and stupid they can't just remove those at-grade lights and extend I-49 into downtown.
Quote from: I-39 on January 11, 2021, 03:16:58 PM
Its just incredibly dangerous and stupid they can't just remove those at-grade lights and extend I-49 into downtown.
Someday, maybe they will, But no time soon
Quote from: US71 on November 16, 2020, 09:53:53 PM
Quote from: stridentweasel on November 16, 2020, 08:28:29 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on November 06, 2020, 01:08:07 PM
Maybe someday Interstate 49 will connect with Interstates 70 and 670. But that day seems to be very far into the future.
I don't know if it's possible for a horse to be more dead. Meanwhile, other 2DIs are just fine ending at 3DIs.
Dead to the point of puree? ;)
More like glue
Quote from: CapeCodder on January 13, 2021, 05:26:19 PM
Quote from: US71 on November 16, 2020, 09:53:53 PM
Quote from: stridentweasel on November 16, 2020, 08:28:29 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on November 06, 2020, 01:08:07 PM
Maybe someday Interstate 49 will connect with Interstates 70 and 670. But that day seems to be very far into the future.
I don't know if it's possible for a horse to be more dead. Meanwhile, other 2DIs are just fine ending at 3DIs.
Dead to the point of puree? ;)
More like glue
Puree
Quote from: mvak36 on November 22, 2020, 01:05:22 AM
https://krcgtv.com/news/local/new-details-from-modot-on-rocheport-i-70-bridge-construction
Quote
The Missouri Department of Transportation says work on the new Interstate 70 bridge over the Missouri River at Rocheport will begin in late 2021.
The Missouri Highways and Transportation Commission is scheduled to award that contract in July 2021.
The bridge is expected to be open to traffic in 2024.
In a press release, Project Director Brandi Baldwin says they are already working toward the start of construction. "Last December, we started the re-evaluation of an environmental study that had been completed for the bridge in 2005," Baldwin said. "In March, we conducted geological testing and survey gathering that provided valuable information about the area's rock and soil stability."
MoDOT states they want to build the bridge for under $240 million.
The current bridge was built in 1960.
I haven't been to Rocheport in 20+ years. What is wrong with that bridge? Does it need widening or is it worn out that bad after only 61 years?
Quote from: cjk374 on January 14, 2021, 07:10:44 AM
Quote from: mvak36 on November 22, 2020, 01:05:22 AM
https://krcgtv.com/news/local/new-details-from-modot-on-rocheport-i-70-bridge-construction
Quote
The Missouri Department of Transportation says work on the new Interstate 70 bridge over the Missouri River at Rocheport will begin in late 2021.
The Missouri Highways and Transportation Commission is scheduled to award that contract in July 2021.
The bridge is expected to be open to traffic in 2024.
In a press release, Project Director Brandi Baldwin says they are already working toward the start of construction. "Last December, we started the re-evaluation of an environmental study that had been completed for the bridge in 2005," Baldwin said. "In March, we conducted geological testing and survey gathering that provided valuable information about the area's rock and soil stability."
MoDOT states they want to build the bridge for under $240 million.
The current bridge was built in 1960.
I haven't been to Rocheport in 20+ years. What is wrong with that bridge? Does it need widening or is it worn out that bad after only 61 years?
Yes. Its rated in poor condition and is getting close to the end of its life. Even a rehab is pretty expensive on that bridge.
Here's the project website: https://www.modot.org/RocheportBridge
Quote from: mvak36 on January 14, 2021, 07:21:21 AM
Quote from: cjk374 on January 14, 2021, 07:10:44 AM
Quote from: mvak36 on November 22, 2020, 01:05:22 AM
https://krcgtv.com/news/local/new-details-from-modot-on-rocheport-i-70-bridge-construction
Quote
The Missouri Department of Transportation says work on the new Interstate 70 bridge over the Missouri River at Rocheport will begin in late 2021.
The Missouri Highways and Transportation Commission is scheduled to award that contract in July 2021.
The bridge is expected to be open to traffic in 2024.
In a press release, Project Director Brandi Baldwin says they are already working toward the start of construction. "Last December, we started the re-evaluation of an environmental study that had been completed for the bridge in 2005," Baldwin said. "In March, we conducted geological testing and survey gathering that provided valuable information about the area's rock and soil stability."
MoDOT states they want to build the bridge for under $240 million.
The current bridge was built in 1960.
I haven't been to Rocheport in 20+ years. What is wrong with that bridge? Does it need widening or is it worn out that bad after only 61 years?
Yes. Its rated in poor condition and is getting close to the end of its life. Even a rehab is pretty expensive on that bridge.
Here's the project website: https://www.modot.org/RocheportBridge
I am very curious how they are going to get a new bridge built without requiring more extensive cutting into the bluffs on the east side of the river.
The road currently loses its median to fit the current bridge. If they build a replacement right next to it on both sides, it will require a small curve or a cut in the bluff.
If they do an incomplete replacement on each side of the current, divert traffic to them, demolish the old one, then complete the section in the middle to complete the final product, then perhaps no cutting will be needed.
With it being a design/build, I am not expecting anything significant architecturally. Hopefully it won't be a total chase to the bottom dollar.
What happened to the full rebuild/widen of I-70 across the state? Has that been put on the back burner due to funding issues?
Quote from: I-39 on January 14, 2021, 09:38:41 AM
What happened to the full rebuild/widen of I-70 across the state? Has that been put on the back burner due to funding issues?
Yeah they don't have enough funds for that. When they tried to pass the sales tax increase back in 2014, they said it would cost 2.5 billion to widen it across the state, if I remember it correctly. Not sure how much that is now with inflation.
They are doing the Climbing lanes project and this Rocheport bridge. Not sure if there are any other projects after that. I don't know if they even have enough funds now to even do piecemeal projects like they have done for I-65 in Indiana.
Quote from: mvak36 on January 14, 2021, 10:04:48 AM
Quote from: I-39 on January 14, 2021, 09:38:41 AM
What happened to the full rebuild/widen of I-70 across the state? Has that been put on the back burner due to funding issues?
Yeah they don't have enough funds for that. When they tried to pass the sales tax increase back in 2014, they said it would cost 2.5 billion to widen it across the state, if I remember it correctly. Not sure how much that is now with inflation.
They are doing the Climbing lanes project and this Rocheport bridge. Not sure if there are any other projects after that. I don't know if they even have enough funds now to even do piecemeal projects like they have done for I-65 in Indiana.
Missouri. Enough money for their highways. Ha! good one...
Quote from: kphoger on January 14, 2021, 10:24:27 AM
Quote from: mvak36 on January 14, 2021, 10:04:48 AM
Quote from: I-39 on January 14, 2021, 09:38:41 AM
What happened to the full rebuild/widen of I-70 across the state? Has that been put on the back burner due to funding issues?
Yeah they don't have enough funds for that. When they tried to pass the sales tax increase back in 2014, they said it would cost 2.5 billion to widen it across the state, if I remember it correctly. Not sure how much that is now with inflation.
They are doing the Climbing lanes project and this Rocheport bridge. Not sure if there are any other projects after that. I don't know if they even have enough funds now to even do piecemeal projects like they have done for I-65 in Indiana.
Missouri. Enough money for their highways. Ha! good one...
If they got rid of the Secondary (Alphabet) Roads.
Quote from: US71 on January 14, 2021, 08:44:02 PM
Quote from: kphoger on January 14, 2021, 10:24:27 AM
Missouri. Enough money for their highways. Ha! good one...
If they got rid of the Secondary (Alphabet) Roads.
Yeah, I've thought about that. Quite a few of the lettered highways would need to become primary highways, in my opinion. And the counties in the Ozarks would be pretty well screwed by having to maintain them. But, overall, I'm sure the state would have more money to go around.
Quote from: kphoger on January 15, 2021, 09:40:28 AM
Quote from: US71 on January 14, 2021, 08:44:02 PM
Quote from: kphoger on January 14, 2021, 10:24:27 AM
Missouri. Enough money for their highways. Ha! good one...
If they got rid of the Secondary (Alphabet) Roads.
Yeah, I've thought about that. Quite a few of the lettered highways would need to become primary highways, in my opinion. And the counties in the Ozarks would be pretty well screwed by having to maintain them. But, overall, I'm sure the state would have more money to go around.
There's a couple I can think off the top of my head that can be extensions of primary highways. MO D in St. Louis County could become a MO 364 extension. MO W/MO MM/MO M in Jefferson County seems like a single corridor that can be a MO 109 southern extension. MO K/MO M in St. Charles County also seems like a logical path for a MO 109 northern extension via a concurrency with US 40/US 61.
And the state still have 88 and 93 available for primary state routes
Quote from: SkyPesos on January 15, 2021, 12:22:41 PM
Quote from: kphoger on January 15, 2021, 09:40:28 AM
Quote from: US71 on January 14, 2021, 08:44:02 PM
Quote from: kphoger on January 14, 2021, 10:24:27 AM
Missouri. Enough money for their highways. Ha! good one...
If they got rid of the Secondary (Alphabet) Roads.
Yeah, I've thought about that. Quite a few of the lettered highways would need to become primary highways, in my opinion. And the counties in the Ozarks would be pretty well screwed by having to maintain them. But, overall, I'm sure the state would have more money to go around.
There's a couple I can think off the top of my head that can be extensions of primary highways. MO D in St. Louis County could become a MO 364 extension. MO W/MO MM/MO M in Jefferson County seems like a single corridor that can be a MO 109 southern extension. MO K/MO M in St. Charles County also seems like a logical path for a MO 109 northern extension via a concurrency with US 40/US 61.
And the state still have 88 and 93 available for primary state routes
Bring back the former MO 175 alignment that used to serve Fort Zumwalt Park and get rid of the newer one in SW MO.
Quote from: CapeCodder on January 15, 2021, 10:13:39 PM
Quote from: SkyPesos on January 15, 2021, 12:22:41 PM
Quote from: kphoger on January 15, 2021, 09:40:28 AM
Quote from: US71 on January 14, 2021, 08:44:02 PM
Quote from: kphoger on January 14, 2021, 10:24:27 AM
Missouri. Enough money for their highways. Ha! good one...
If they got rid of the Secondary (Alphabet) Roads.
Yeah, I've thought about that. Quite a few of the lettered highways would need to become primary highways, in my opinion. And the counties in the Ozarks would be pretty well screwed by having to maintain them. But, overall, I'm sure the state would have more money to go around.
There's a couple I can think off the top of my head that can be extensions of primary highways. MO D in St. Louis County could become a MO 364 extension. MO W/MO MM/MO M in Jefferson County seems like a single corridor that can be a MO 109 southern extension. MO K/MO M in St. Charles County also seems like a logical path for a MO 109 northern extension via a concurrency with US 40/US 61.
And the state still have 88 and 93 available for primary state routes
Bring back the former MO 175 alignment that used to serve Fort Zumwalt Park and get rid of the newer one in SW MO.
Does anyone have an old map of where MO 175 was located in O'Fallon? I live near Fort Zumwalt Park and am interested in seeing where that went.
iPad Pro
Quote from: m2tbone on January 16, 2021, 08:41:35 PM
Quote from: CapeCodder on January 15, 2021, 10:13:39 PM
Quote from: SkyPesos on January 15, 2021, 12:22:41 PM
Quote from: kphoger on January 15, 2021, 09:40:28 AM
Quote from: US71 on January 14, 2021, 08:44:02 PM
Quote from: kphoger on January 14, 2021, 10:24:27 AM
Missouri. Enough money for their highways. Ha! good one...
If they got rid of the Secondary (Alphabet) Roads.
Yeah, I've thought about that. Quite a few of the lettered highways would need to become primary highways, in my opinion. And the counties in the Ozarks would be pretty well screwed by having to maintain them. But, overall, I'm sure the state would have more money to go around.
There's a couple I can think off the top of my head that can be extensions of primary highways. MO D in St. Louis County could become a MO 364 extension. MO W/MO MM/MO M in Jefferson County seems like a single corridor that can be a MO 109 southern extension. MO K/MO M in St. Charles County also seems like a logical path for a MO 109 northern extension via a concurrency with US 40/US 61.
And the state still have 88 and 93 available for primary state routes
Bring back the former MO 175 alignment that used to serve Fort Zumwalt Park and get rid of the newer one in SW MO.
Does anyone have an old map of where MO 175 was located in O'Fallon? I live near Fort Zumwalt Park and am interested in seeing where that went.
iPad Pro
From the oldest St. Charles County Street Guide I had (1986) it showed that it began at 70 and Bryan Road and followed the south outer road.
The MODOT maps I looked at are pretty vague when it comes to that particular route's routing. O'Fallon dosen't have its own insets on the ones I viewed (namely 1980, the route's last year of existance). I suppose it simply ran along what is now Veterans memorial Parkway.
If the Veterans memorial parkway were to become MO 175 again, what would you do with the current MO 175? The whole thing is entirely in Newton county, so either an x71 (given its history as US71) or a lettered route.
Quote from: ozarkman417 on January 16, 2021, 09:48:20 PM
The MODOT maps I looked at are pretty vague when it comes to that particular route's routing. O'Fallon dosen't have its own insets on the ones I viewed (namely 1980, the route's last year of existance). I suppose it simply ran along what is now Veterans memorial Parkway.
If the Veterans memorial parkway were to become MO 175 again, what would you do with the current MO 175? The whole thing is entirely in Newton county, so either an x71 (given its history as US71) or a lettered route.
Isn't there a gap for Veterans Memorial Pkwy between MO 79 and Mid Rivers Mall Dr? And idk if it's still there, but I rembmer at Muegge Rd, WB traffic on Veterans Memorial have to turn right, or use Mexico Rd to continue on Veterans Memorial.
Quote from: SkyPesos on January 16, 2021, 10:23:14 PM
Isn't there a gap for Veterans Memorial Pkwy between MO 79 and Mid Rivers Mall Dr? And idk if it's still there, but I rembmer at Muegge Rd, WB traffic on Veterans Memorial have to turn right, or use Mexico Rd to continue on Veterans Memorial.
I'm seeing a gap between Salt Lick Road and Dardenne Creek, plus a discontinuity/diversion around Mid Rivers Mall. Then there's another discontinuity at Sonderen Street in O'Fallon with a stub to potentially fix this one.
They are starting the signage upgrades for the US24 route changes in the Kansas City area.
https://www.modot.org/node/21782
Quote
JACKSON COUNTY— MoDOT Kansas City will be making U.S. 24 route marking designation changes along both I-435 and I-70. Crews are working to remove the U.S. 24 designation from Independence Ave. west of I-435. Beginning at I-435, U.S. 24 will soon be routed along I-435 and I-70 into downtown Kansas City. East of I-435, the U.S. 24 designation will remain unchanged. This work will require various overnight lane closures. Motorists are advised to plan ahead and find alternate routes if necessary. All work is weather permitting.
This project includes route marking designation changes on I-435 from U.S. 24 to I-70, on I-70 from I-435 to U.S. 24. Beginning Tuesday, Jan. 19, the work will include:
- Westbound I-70 will be reduced to ONE LANE from Blue Ridge Cutoff to I-435 for overhead sign truss work Tuesday, Jan. 19, from 8 p.m. until 5 a.m. the following morning.
- Westbound I-70 will be reduced to ONE LANE from U.S. 40 to Van Brunt Blvd. for overhead sign truss work on Wednesday, Jan. 20, from 8 p.m. until 5 a.m. the following morning. During this time, the ramp from westbound I-70 to Van Brunt Blvd. will also be closed.
- Westbound I-70 will be reduced to one lane from The Paseo to the Troost Ave. for overhead sign truss work on Thursday, Jan. 21, from 8 p.m. until 5 a.m. the following morning. During this time, the ramp from westbound I-70 to Harrison St./Troost Ave. will also be closed.
Updates on the I-70 Rocheport bridge.
https://krcgtv.com/news/local/modot-unveils-new-details-for-rocheport-bridge-construction
https://abc17news.com/top-stories/2021/01/26/modot-provides-update-on-missouri-river-bridge-replacement-in-rocheport/
https://www.70westsentinel.com/long-range-transportation-plans-include-changes-to-i-70-s-curve-in-wentzville/
I was noticing on Facebook there are plans to realign and replace one of the overpasses on I-70 in St. Charles County. I posted a pic of the Route Z exit and someone said soon the area will change. However another said talk about I-70 has been for ages but nothing yet. So the debating party said he would believe it when it happens.
That got me to research the project to some extent including the three alternatives MoDOT has come up with to eliminate the Wentzville bottlenecks. However, no official funding of yet, so MoDOT according to their page is using the queue time to study better alternatives.
Though old from 2019 some of those planned projects are completed or in progress.
I read through the list, going to comment on some of the changes as I lived in the area for a bit until 8 years ago.
- I think the MO 94/364/Muegge project have been mentioned here before. Basically turns the MO 94 and Muegge interchange from the current one loop ramp for EB 364 to a DDI to allow for access to NB Muegge. 6 laning the remaining 4 lane sections of MO 94 between 364 and I-70 is included too.
- For MO 94/I-70, the current SPUI (specifically the WB 70 to WB 94 movement) gets backed up even in 2012 when I lived in the area. Not sure if a DDI is the right choice, though maybe my idea of a flyover for that movement is too costly. Or is there not enough space to add a 3rd left turn lane in the current interchange, to coincide with the 6 laning of MO 94?
- For the Zumbehl interchange improvements, wondering why they stop there? Cave Springs, just to the west, have the same issues as Zumbehl.
A small nitpick, but they really called 67 a "MO Route" ...
Quote from: SkyPesos on April 12, 2021, 09:26:03 AM
I read through the list, going to comment on some of the changes as I lived in the area for a bit until 8 years ago.
- I think the MO 94/364/Muegge project have been mentioned here before. Basically turns the MO 94 and Muegge interchange from the current one loop ramp for EB 364 to a DDI to allow for access to NB Muegge. 6 laning the remaining 4 lane sections of MO 94 between 364 and I-70 is included too.
- For MO 94/I-70, the current SPUI (specifically the WB 70 to WB 94 movement) gets backed up even in 2012 when I lived in the area. Not sure if a DDI is the right choice, though maybe my idea of a flyover for that movement is too costly. Or is there not enough space to add a 3rd left turn lane in the current interchange, to coincide with the 6 laning of MO 94?
- For the Zumbehl interchange improvements, wondering why they stop there? Cave Springs, just to the west, have the same issues as Zumbehl.
A small nitpick, but they really called 67 a "MO Route" ...
Noticed that one also.
MODOT has added a High-Priority Unfunded Needs List (https://www.modot.org/sites/default/files/documents/High-Priority%20Unfunded%20Needs%202021%20final.pdf) on their website.
Excerpt from the document:
QuoteMoDOT staff have worked with Metropolitan Planning Organizations and Regional Planning Commissions throughout the state to develop a list of unfunded road and bridge needs. The funding assumption targeted a total of $2.5 billion in two tiers. Tier one includes $540 million and includes projects we could accomplish in the time of the current STIP if we received more money. These projects have good estimates. Tier two is worth $2.2 billion and includes projects beyond the current STIP timeframe with broader estimates. The assumed district distribution was based on the Missouri Highways and Transportation Commission's (MHTC) Flexible Funding formula. A third tier worth approximately $2 billion and multimodal needs will be added in the coming months.
Quote from: mvak36 on April 12, 2021, 05:42:58 PM
MODOT has added a High-Priority Unfunded Needs List (https://www.modot.org/sites/default/files/documents/High-Priority%20Unfunded%20Needs%202021%20final.pdf) on their website.
Excerpt from the document:
QuoteMoDOT staff have worked with Metropolitan Planning Organizations and Regional Planning Commissions throughout the state to develop a list of unfunded road and bridge needs. The funding assumption targeted a total of $2.5 billion in two tiers. Tier one includes $540 million and includes projects we could accomplish in the time of the current STIP if we received more money. These projects have good estimates. Tier two is worth $2.2 billion and includes projects beyond the current STIP timeframe with broader estimates. The assumed district distribution was based on the Missouri Highways and Transportation Commission's (MHTC) Flexible Funding formula. A third tier worth approximately $2 billion and multimodal needs will be added in the coming months.
I thought 6-laning I-70 from KC to StL is one of those unfunded projects. Guess I'm wrong about that.
Also, I found this under the St Louis district section for I-70:
QuoteReconfigure STL airport access, replace bridges, reconfigure interchanges from Rte. 141 to I-170.
Hopefully that mean the hideous interchange with 5 left exit ramps at I-170 will be rebuilt.
Quote from: SkyPesos on April 12, 2021, 07:14:10 PM
I thought 6-laning I-70 from KC to StL is one of those unfunded projects. Guess I'm wrong about that.
Also, I found this under the St Louis district section for I-70:
QuoteReconfigure STL airport access, replace bridges, reconfigure interchanges from Rte. 141 to I-170.
Hopefully that mean the hideous interchange with 5 left exit ramps at I-170 will be rebuilt.
Ha! I sometimes wonder if they're just hoping for a big pot of money to fall in their lap so they can do it all at once instead of piecemealing it (I know they tried back in 2014 with that Amendment 7). IMO, they should just start at Wentzville and work their way westward whenever they can find funding. They have so many needs I am not sure when they will do 70.
The Six-Laning of Springfield's James River Freeway between National Avenue and the US 65 freeway has started.
Quote from: mvak36 on April 12, 2021, 05:42:58 PM
MODOT has added a High-Priority Unfunded Needs List (https://www.modot.org/sites/default/files/documents/High-Priority%20Unfunded%20Needs%202021%20final.pdf) on their website.
Tier 1* Wondering what the $3 million listed for improving the US 36/I-35 interchange would do?
* Mentions the already under construction work on I-270 through northern St. Louis County.
* Lists intersection improvements for the access off MO 76 to Silver Dollar City.
* Lists upgrading US 60 to a freeway from I-55 to US 61 (thought there was a grant for part of this one?)
Tier 2* Two listings for US 61 in Lincoln County: One for finishing the outer roads, and another one for just eliminating at grade crossings in Lincoln County - are the ones north of Troy now be considered for elimination as well?
* US 50 is listed for a shared four lane from Tipton to California
* US 63 is listed for shared four lane evaluations between Jefferson City and Rolla
* For MO 5: "New roadway from I-44 to Rte. 5 at Lebanon". Guessing this would be a partial bypass of Lebanon - anyone heard if it will be on the east or west side?
* The I-70 interchange with Bermuda Road near Ferguson is listed for another redo.
* Capacity improvements for US 40 from Route K to I-70 and I-270 from MO 100 to US 40 are listed among numerous interstate projects for the St. Louis area
* $44,215,000 for ramp improvements at at the eastern I-44/I-49 interchange
* "New corridor from Rte. 65 to Rte. BB near Hollister"
* $21,845,000 for access improvements to I-55 at Perryville
* $18,197,000 for a new interchange on US 67 with Routes JJ and Y near St. Francis State Park.
* There's "Add lanes to provide four lane highway from County Road 352 to County Road 270" for US 67 in Butler County but doesn't appear to be anything else for upgrading that section or US 60 between Poplar Bluff and Sikeston to I-57
Quote from: Revive 755 on April 12, 2021, 11:25:31 PM
Quote from: mvak36 on April 12, 2021, 05:42:58 PM
MODOT has added a High-Priority Unfunded Needs List (https://www.modot.org/sites/default/files/documents/High-Priority%20Unfunded%20Needs%202021%20final.pdf) on their website.
Tier 1
* Mentions the already under construction work on I-270 through northern St. Louis County.
* Lists upgrading US 60 to a freeway from I-55 to US 61 (thought there was a grant for part of this one?)
Feel free to correct me, but I thought they could only build part of the 270 project (which I believe is what they're doing now). They've changed that website so I don't know what work they still have to do. The thing says 33.9 million so I'm not sure what that work is.
For the US60, I think there was some project mentioned in the Governor's cost share projects. I'm not sure if that's what they're talking about in this list.
If I remember correctly, because of COVID they couldn't fund some of those cost share projects so that US60 project might or might not be funded now.
Ramp stub in place WB on I-70 near Wentzville for the proposed David Hoekel Parkway in St. Charles County.
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51118760002_96d6f901c7_k.jpg)
Quote from: roadman65 on April 18, 2021, 07:41:42 AM
Ramp stub in place WB on I-70 near Wentzville for the proposed David Hoekel Parkway in St. Charles County.
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51118760002_96d6f901c7_k.jpg)
I can see they've graded for a bridge and (on Google Maps) rerouted the service road.
Quote from: STLmapboy on April 18, 2021, 11:18:57 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on April 18, 2021, 07:41:42 AM
Ramp stub in place WB on I-70 near Wentzville for the proposed David Hoekel Parkway in St. Charles County.
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51118760002_96d6f901c7_k.jpg)
I can see they've graded for a bridge and (on Google Maps) rerouted the service road.
The other side is more difficult to reroute the service road due to the rail line running opposite the freeway. They should do what Caltrans would do, and build the freeway overpass over the frontage road and rail line with ramps having flyovers over the frontage road and rail line and have all three inside the diamond.
Quote from: roadman65 on April 19, 2021, 10:15:18 AM
Quote from: STLmapboy on April 18, 2021, 11:18:57 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on April 18, 2021, 07:41:42 AM
Ramp stub in place WB on I-70 near Wentzville for the proposed David Hoekel Parkway in St. Charles County.
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51118760002_96d6f901c7_k.jpg)
I can see they've graded for a bridge and (on Google Maps) rerouted the service road.
The other side is more difficult to reroute the service road due to the rail line running opposite the freeway. They should do what Caltrans would do, and build the freeway overpass over the frontage road and rail line with ramps having flyovers over the frontage road and rail line and have all three inside the diamond.
$$$$$$$$$$$. Missouri doesn't have that kind of money for one interchange.
Quote from: rte66man on April 20, 2021, 10:44:24 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on April 19, 2021, 10:15:18 AM
Quote from: STLmapboy on April 18, 2021, 11:18:57 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on April 18, 2021, 07:41:42 AM
Ramp stub in place WB on I-70 near Wentzville for the proposed David Hoekel Parkway in St. Charles County.
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51118760002_96d6f901c7_k.jpg)
I can see they've graded for a bridge and (on Google Maps) rerouted the service road.
The other side is more difficult to reroute the service road due to the rail line running opposite the freeway. They should do what Caltrans would do, and build the freeway overpass over the frontage road and rail line with ramps having flyovers over the frontage road and rail line and have all three inside the diamond.
$$$$$$$$$$$. Missouri doesn't have that kind of money for one interchange.
My guess is they used up their money on making MO 364 phase 1 10 lanes wide when traffic levels are low enough to be 6 lanes even 18 years after opening, and phase 2 8 lanes wide with an auxiliary lane, along with 2 frontage lanes in each direction. Would've been nice if they spent the money elsewhere, like the originally proposed SPUI design at US 40 and Brentwood. The current tight diamond have left turns onto the ramps backed up frequently from my experience.
Well Warrenton has money for the new recent August 2018 Dumbbell interchange at new Road West Warrenton Blvd.
http://www.warrenton-mo.org/government/city_departments/economic_development/new_interchange
I see already the parcels of land at the exchange are taken and the City of Warrenton is looking for the new businesses already to open as that interchange is just a connector between the freeway and service roads. Though signed as Route MM, the actual route is east of it along Boonestick Road into Main Street for Downtown.
Being 62 miles from St. Louis and 60 miles to Columbia, that city is banking on businesses to spawn its economy. The city leveed a sales tax increase to fund it and it opened in 2018. No state or federal money is used here.
Quote from: SkyPesos on April 20, 2021, 10:50:12 PM
(deleted because this is a tangent from that thread)
My guess is they used up their money on making MO 364 phase 1 10 lanes wide when traffic levels are low enough to be 6 lanes even 18 years after opening, and phase 2 8 lanes wide with an auxiliary lane, along with 2 frontage lanes in each direction. Would've been nice if they spent the money elsewhere, like the originally proposed SPUI design at US 40 and Brentwood. The current tight diamond have left turns onto the ramps backed up frequently from my experience.
There's a lot wrong from the 40/64 rebuild a little over a decade ago. My main complaint is keeping it at six lanes between I-170 and Forest Park. The roundabout at the Hampton entrance to Forest Park regularly backs up from Zoo traffic and screws up the SPUI at Hampton. The entire Brentwood/Hanley interchange.; I hated going through there every time I went to MicroCenter. It's better than it used to be with the free-flowing traffic at 64/170 and the full interchange at Big Bend. But it could have been much better.
I-70 across the state sees a lot of volume from my experiences driving it cross state. Florida would have it six lanes statewide and tolled express lanes in the St. Louis area. However Florida is years behind in suburban areas road growth though, but when it's done it looks like present I-95 in South Florida.
They've posted the Draft 2022-2026 STIP on the MODOT STIP site (https://www.modot.org/statewide-transportation-improvement-program-stip).
I have only looked through some of it. The projects for Future I-57 south of Poplar Bluff are listed in there. I haven't looked too closely at anything else so not sure if there were any other big projects on there.
https://www.modot.org/node/22735
Quote
Public Comment Period Opens on Statewide Transportation Improvement Program
JEFFERSON CITY — A draft 2022-2026 Statewide Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) that focuses on taking care of the state's existing transportation system was presented today to the Missouri Highways and Transportation Commission. A 30-day public review and comment period begins today.
Missouri Department of Transportation Planning Director Eric Curtit told commissioners the draft STIP includes 1,417 highway and bridge projects, of which 84% will maintain the system in the condition it is in today. On average, this STIP annually invests in 740 lane miles of interstate pavements, 1,387 miles of major route pavements, 2,733 miles of minor route pavements and 277 bridges.
Missouri has the nation's seventh largest state highway system with 33,832 miles of roadways and 10,397 bridges but ranks 45th nationally in revenue per mile.
"MoDOT's priority is maintaining the existing system of highways and bridges," Curtit said. "We have developed asset management plans for each district, which focus on preventive maintenance improvements to keep good roads and bridges in good condition. If preventive maintenance investments were not made, the cost of improving the asset in poor condition can cost four to ten times more."
This STIP includes funding for the "Focus on Bridges" program that was initiated by Governor Parson and funded by the Missouri General Assembly in 2019. The first phase authorized $50 million in general revenue to expedite the repair and replacement of 45 bridges that had already been identified as some of the state's top bridge priorities by local planning organizations. The second authorized $301 million in bonding — to be repaid over seven years from general revenue — to repair or replace another 215 bridges that had been previously prioritized, contingent on Missouri receiving a federal INFRA Grant to replace the I-70 Missouri River Bridge at Rocheport. Missouri received an $81.2 million INFRA Grant in July 2019, which triggered the first of two bond sales which occurred in November 2019. During 2020, 101 Focus on Bridges projects were completed and many more will be completed in 2021.
This STIP was developed assuming a federal funding level consistent with the last year of the FAST Act and includes the federal surface transportation funding provided by the Coronavirus Response and Relief Supplemental Appropriations Act (CRRSAA), which was enacted on Dec. 27, 2020. Other funding assumptions include redirected CARES Act monies and bond issuances in 2023 and 2026 to be repaid with dedicated motor vehicle sales tax revenue which is deposited in the State Road Bond Fund per the Amendment 3 legislation.
The STIP details an annual construction program that averages $1.1 billion per year for the five-year period. But it is insufficient to meet the state's unfunded high-priority transportation needs that are estimated in MoDOT's "Citizen's Guide to Transportation Funding" at an additional $825 million per year.
"The STIP represents our commitment to Missourians of the projects that will be developed and delivered over the next five years," MoDOT Director Patrick McKenna said.
The draft STIP also includes detailed project information for non-highway modes of transportation. It includes a section detailing planned operations and maintenance activities for the next three years, alongside expenditures for those same activities in the prior year. This additional information is provided to allow Missourians to more easily see how their transportation funding is invested.
The draft 2022-2026 Statewide Transportation Improvement Program lists transportation projects planned by state and regional planning agencies for fiscal years 2022 through 2026 (July 1, 2021 through June 30, 2026). The proposed program is available for public review. Those interested in seeing the program or offering comments can contact MoDOT by email to STIPcomments@modot.mo.gov, by calling customer service at 1-888-ASK-MoDOT (275-6636), or by mail to Transportation Planning, Program Comments, P.O. Box 270, Jefferson City, MO 65102. The program is also available on MoDOT's website: https://www.modot.org/DRAFTSTIP. The formal comment period ends June 4, 2021.
Following the public review period, the comments will be presented to the Missouri Highways and Transportation Commission. The Commission will review the comments and the final transportation program before considering it for approval at its July meeting.
https://www.modot.org/node/22746
Quote
Lehman-Wilson team selected to design, build 31 bridges in northern Missouri
All projects to be completed by Fall 2023
JEFFERSON CITY — The Missouri Highways and Transportation Commission today selected the Lehman-Wilson team for the design-build contract to replace 31 weight-restricted and poor condition bridges in northern Missouri over the next two and a half years through the Fixing Access to Rural Missouri (FARM) Bridge Program. It was made possible by the 2019 receipt of a $20.7 million federal grant under the Federal Highway Administration's Competitive Highway Bridge Program.
Design-build is a project delivery method in which one contracting team is selected to design and build the highway improvement under one contract. MoDOT provides the project goals, budget and schedule and the contractor team completes the work. This technique has been known to significantly save time and provide cost savings.
The Lehman-Wilson team includes Lehman Construction Co. of California, Missouri and Wilson & Co. Engineers & Architects of Kansas City. "We were very pleased with the proposals submitted by these teams and are ready to make improvements on the transportation system in these rural areas," said Missouri Department of Transportation Project Director Jeff Gander.
The project will replace deficient bridges on low-volume routes that are:
- Weight-restricted
- In poor condition
- On timber pile
- One-lane but carry two-way traffic
The full list of bridges to be replaced can be found on the FARM Bridge program web page (https://www.modot.org/farm-bridge-program).
"We're proud to have been selected to build the bridges on the FARM Bridge Program and look forward to a good working relationship with MoDOT and the region," said Lehman Construction owner Kenny Lehman.
The Lehman-Wilson team's goal is to subcontract 6% of the construction and 12% of the professional and design activities to Disadvantaged Business Enterprise companies. Federal workforce goals also require that various percentages by county of those working on the project are minorities and 6.9% are female for all counties.
The next step in the design-build process is for Lehman-Wilson to fine-tune its design plans on the first set of bridges to be replaced. "We expect construction to begin later this fall," Gander said, "and, depending on the level of winter we have, it is possible we could work straight through."
He indicated each road will be closed at the bridge to speed up construction. "Message boards will be placed on these roads a few weeks before each closure, and we encourage residents in these areas to sign up to receive our email and text alerts," he said. He added MoDOT will continue to send information and updates to local media for their distribution. MoDOT's online traveler map also shows locations of work zones and road closures.
The oldest bridge to be replaced is on Route A in Worth County and was built in 1930. (Photo attached) The average age of these bridges is 80 years.
Looks like the Missouri lawmakers passed a gas tax increase last week.
https://www.kansascity.com/news/politics-government/article251341958.html
Now the (potentially) bad news: https://www.ky3.com/2021/05/17/proposal-would-put-missouri-gas-tax-hike-to-public-vote/
QuoteCOLUMBIA, Mo. (AP) – A conservative advocacy group's Missouri chapter is seeking to put what's expected to be the state's first gas tax hike in years to a public vote, a state official said Monday.
Jeremy Cady, who heads Americans for Prosperity-Missouri, filed a petition to put the newly passed gas tax increase to voters, the secretary of state said.
Legislators passed a bill last week to gradually raise the state's 17-cent-a-gallon gas tax to 29.5 cents over five years, with the option for buyers to get a refund if they keep track of their receipts.
Gov. Mike Parson, who has long advocated to put more money toward fixing and maintaining the state's roads and bridges, is expected to sign the bill into law.
....
Cady's referendum petition is now open for public comment. If it's approved, he can start trying to gather the millions of voter signatures needed to get it on the ballot in 2022.
Bad news? Yeah, who would want voters to have a say in things? Stupid democracy.
Quote from: kphoger on May 19, 2021, 01:27:10 PM
Bad news? Yeah, who would want voters to have a say in things? Stupid democracy.
I would be pretty leery of the Missouri government when they say they want a referendum on something. I don't follow MO politics very closely but I understand there have been a few recent cases where the legislature effectively voided the results of a referendum by refusing to provide funding to voter-approved initiatives, or rerunning referendums with slightly different ballot language until Jeff City gets what they want (while the voters are like "didn't I vote yes on this last time?").
For all its flaws, the Oklahoma legislature at least tends to grit its teeth and reluctantly implement voter referendums that go against the political orthodoxy at 23rd and Lincoln.
Quote from: Scott5114 on May 19, 2021, 03:46:36 PM
Quote from: kphoger on May 19, 2021, 01:27:10 PM
Bad news? Yeah, who would want voters to have a say in things? Stupid democracy.
I would be pretty leery of the Missouri government when they say they want a referendum on something. I don't follow MO politics very closely but I understand there have been a few recent cases where the legislature effectively voided the results of a referendum by refusing to provide funding to voter-approved initiatives, or rerunning referendums with slightly different ballot language until Jeff City gets what they want (while the voters are like "didn't I vote yes on this last time?").
For all its flaws, the Oklahoma legislature at least tends to grit its teeth and reluctantly implement voter referendums that go against the political orthodoxy at 23rd and Lincoln.
I don't think it's the government that's doing the referendum. This looks its done by that AFP group.
I think they didn't need to do a public vote for this bill because the tax increase was under a certain amount (I think it's called the Hancock Amendment). Given how past referendums have gone, I would think this gas tax increase will probably get shot down.
FWIW, I was surprised that the MO Legislature actually passed something.
EDIT: After thinking about it more last night, I'm ok with it going to a public vote. I'd love to be proven wrong, but I think they're going to vote against the increase and they will be back to square one.
I don't have any issues with gas tax increases as long as they are rational and used for highways. The fact many states haven't adjusted their fuel tax amounts to inflationary factors, which are more prevalent when they haven't been touched for more than 10-15 years is a big issue in strategic highway planning.
What I do have an issue with is the free ride some states are allowing for EV's. As long as EV's remained under a certain GVWR I didn't care so much.
But with Ford, Tesla and GM all coming out with EV trucks, and in the example the new EV Hummer weighs a very exceptional amount, (10,400 lbs) weight that will most definitely carry a road burden, this non-taxing is not sustainable.
So states either need to come up with a consumption tax for EV's that increment their support of road use or as some states do, make the buyer pay an "road impact fee" at purchase time.
The new Hummer is a *huge* EV and the batteries do weigh a lot.
Quote from: edwaleni on May 23, 2021, 04:31:13 PM
I don't have any issues with gas tax increases as long as they are rational and used for highways. The fact many states haven't adjusted their fuel tax amounts to inflationary factors, which are more prevalent when they haven't been touched for more than 10-15 years is a big issue in strategic highway planning.
What I do have an issue with is the free ride some states are allowing for EV's. As long as EV's remained under a certain GVWR I didn't care so much.
But with Ford, Tesla and GM all coming out with EV trucks, and in the example the new EV Hummer weighs a very exceptional amount, (10,400 lbs) weight that will most definitely carry a road burden, this non-taxing is not sustainable.
So states either need to come up with a consumption tax for EV's that increment their support of road use or as some states do, make the buyer pay an "road impact fee" at purchase time.
The new Hummer is a *huge* EV and the batteries do weigh a lot.
I hadn't thought about that when I was watching the news on the EV F-150 last week. Maybe this will be the push to come up with that fee (they'll never call it a tax) to properly account for their usage. We have to do this soon as more and more vehicles go electric. Last year, 6.2% of vehicles sold in California were EVs. It's only a little of 1% of total registered vehicles in California now. What happens by 2030.
Quote from: skluth on May 23, 2021, 07:14:55 PM
Quote from: edwaleni on May 23, 2021, 04:31:13 PM
I don't have any issues with gas tax increases as long as they are rational and used for highways. The fact many states haven't adjusted their fuel tax amounts to inflationary factors, which are more prevalent when they haven't been touched for more than 10-15 years is a big issue in strategic highway planning.
What I do have an issue with is the free ride some states are allowing for EV's. As long as EV's remained under a certain GVWR I didn't care so much.
But with Ford, Tesla and GM all coming out with EV trucks, and in the example the new EV Hummer weighs a very exceptional amount, (10,400 lbs) weight that will most definitely carry a road burden, this non-taxing is not sustainable.
So states either need to come up with a consumption tax for EV's that increment their support of road use or as some states do, make the buyer pay an "road impact fee" at purchase time.
The new Hummer is a *huge* EV and the batteries do weigh a lot.
I hadn't thought about that when I was watching the news on the EV F-150 last week. Maybe this will be the push to come up with that fee (they'll never call it a tax) to properly account for their usage. We have to do this soon as more and more vehicles go electric. Last year, 6.2% of vehicles sold in California were EVs. It's only a little of 1% of total registered vehicles in California now. What happens by 2030.
I saw a byline the other day saying that state DMV's are trying to figure out how to classify these Hummer EV's. Technically since trucks are licensed and registered by weight, some think the Hummer will end up being a Class C or Class D truck.
MoDOT is going to have a virtual public meeting to remove the I-44 interchange with MO 66 (https://goo.gl/maps/BsBaJiH2YVBR3btT6): See https://www.modot.org/node/23221 (https://www.modot.org/node/23221)
Quote from: Revive 755 on June 24, 2021, 10:53:10 PM
MoDOT is going to have a virtual public meeting to remove the I-44 interchange with MO 66 (https://goo.gl/maps/BsBaJiH2YVBR3btT6): See https://www.modot.org/node/23221 (https://www.modot.org/node/23221)
Big mistake, IMO
Quote from: US71 on June 25, 2021, 11:28:29 AM
Quote from: Revive 755 on June 24, 2021, 10:53:10 PM
MoDOT is going to have a virtual public meeting to remove the I-44 interchange with MO 66 (https://goo.gl/maps/BsBaJiH2YVBR3btT6): See https://www.modot.org/node/23221 (https://www.modot.org/node/23221)
Big mistake, IMO
Why on earth do they want to take it out?
It doesn't say, since the "meeting" hasn't "started" yet (can they not just post the documents anyway?) But my guess is that it's redundant with the Prigmor interchange and they want to reduce the maintenance liability.
https://www.komu.com/news/midmissourinews/modot-highway-commission-announces-contactor-for-new-rocheport-bridge/article_7046372a-da7a-11eb-b3bc-1b7541747bdf.html
Quote
JEFFERSON CITY - The Missouri Highways and Transportation Commission announced the Lunda Team as the official design-build contractor team for the Interstate 70 Missouri River Bridge near Rocheport on Thursday afternoon.
The team consists of Lunda Construction Co., Parsons Transportation Group, Inc., Dan Brown & Associates and Hugh Zeng United. Lunda's headquarters are in Wisconsin, Parsons' is in Virginia but has a St. Louis office, Dan Brown & Associates is from Tennessee and High Zeng United is headquartered in Minnesota.
The announcement took place at noon at MoDOT Headquarters in Jefferson City.
"This is an exciting moment for this project, and we are thrilled to be working with the Lunda Team," MoDOT Rocheport Bridge Project Director Brandi Baldwin said. "The replacement of the bridge provides a long-lasting solution and the plan will have minimal impacts to traffic on I-70 during construction."
....
Another article on the I-70 Rocheport Bridge (https://www.modot.org/RocheportBridge) project: https://www.columbiatribune.com/story/news/local/2021/07/01/lunda-awarded-modot-contract-rocheport-bridge-construction-interstate-highway-70-infrastructure/7824558002/
Quote
....
Construction is expected to start this fall, with the entire project taking up to three years.
What set Lunda apart was its plan to build two separate bridges as part of the project, MoDOT Project Director Brandi Baldwin said.
The first bridge will be constructed north of the current Rocheport Bridge. Once that is complete by spring 2023, that new bridge will open and all traffic will be routed there.
This means the current bridge will have one less year of maintenance costs, as it will be demolished to make way for the second bridge.
"The existing bridge we have concerns with will be out of service a full year ahead of schedule, so we take that maintenance concern off the table," Baldwin said.
The new eastbound and westbound bridges each will be three lanes, with eight- and 12-foot shoulders once construction is completed by Dec. 31, 2024.
Once the first new bridge opens in 2023, it will support four lanes of traffic – two eastbound and two westbound – during construction of the second bridge.
Going forward, the two-bridge setup will benefit motorists because when there are maintenance needs, MoDOT can close one bridge completely and still have relatively minimal impact on traffic.
The decision to make each new bridge three lanes was made with an eye to the future and the hope I-70 can be expanded to a total of six lanes, Baldwin said.
"(We are) keeping our eye on the future since this is a bridge that will be in place for 100 years," Baldwin said.
....
Good thing that they're making it 6 lanes. Considering that it's MoDOT, I was sort of expecting them to do 4 lanes on the new bridge with no room for expansion.
This is the MODOT link for the announcement (https://www.modot.org/node/23316)
Quote
MoDOT Selects Contractor for the Design-Build of New I-70 Rocheport Bridge
Project: I-70 Rocheport Bridge Replacement (https://www.modot.org/RocheportBridge)
JEFFERSON CITY — Today the Missouri Highways and Transportation Commission announced the selection of the Lunda Team, made up of Lunda Construction Co., Parsons Transportation Group, Inc., Dan Brown & Associates, and Hugh Zeng United, as the design-build contractor to replace the Interstate 70 Missouri River Bridge near Rocheport.
"This is an exciting moment for this project, and we are thrilled to be working with the Lunda Team," said Missouri Department of Transportation Rocheport Bridge Project Director Brandi Baldwin. "The replacement of the bridge provides a long-lasting solution and the plan will have minimal impacts to traffic on I-70 during construction."
The current bridge was built in 1960 and is rated as being in poor condition, which could have resulted in weight restrictions in the coming years. MoDOT said the 60-year-old bridge is safe and will be maintained while construction of the new bridge is underway.
The new Missouri River bridge will cost approximately $240 million and will provide a safe and reliable bridge for interstate travelers for the next 100 years. It was funded in part by an $81.2 million INFRA Grant, the largest competitive grant ever received by MoDOT.
"This bridge lies at the heart of Missouri and not only connects the two sides of our state but the majority of our country," Governor Parson said. "With over 12 million vehicles using the bridge each year and trucks carrying goods to all corners of the country, it is vital that we have world-class infrastructure in place that can meet the demand. This new bridge will keep people moving safely and drive economic activity in our state and local communities."
"This announcement is the culmination of a lot of hard work and dedication by a large group of people dedicated to Missouri's transportation system and infrastructure," said MoDOT Director Patrick McKenna. "It required local communities, state lawmakers and our congressional delegation all working towards that shared vision of a new bridge that made the funding come together."
The Lunda Team competed against three other design build teams, all of whom had local and national experience. The winning proposal showed not only an understanding of the engineering endeavor set out before the teams and a design that will serve travelers for the next century, it also showed an understanding of the local, statewide, and national importance of the work.
The design includes two bridges, one in each direction of travel, each with three lanes. This allows for construction to take place with a limited impact to traffic.
The design-build team's proposal had to meet or exceed several goals set by MoDOT, which included providing a high-quality, durable, low-maintenance project that improves safety and reliability, minimizing traffic impacts during and after construction, and demonstrating a commitment to quality and innovation in all phases of the project.
Construction on the new bridge is scheduled to begin later this year and be complete by the end of 2024.
For more information or to sign up for updates sent to your inbox, visit the project webpage at www.modot.org/rocheportbridge. For instant updates, follow MoDOT Central on Twitter or share posts and comments on our Facebook at www.facebook.com/MoDOTCentral. The Central District maintains more than 11,000 miles of state roadway in 18 counties.
Quote from: mvak36 on July 02, 2021, 11:00:03 AM
Another article on the I-70 Rocheport Bridge (https://www.modot.org/RocheportBridge) project: https://www.columbiatribune.com/story/news/local/2021/07/01/lunda-awarded-modot-contract-rocheport-bridge-construction-interstate-highway-70-infrastructure/7824558002/
Quote
....
Construction is expected to start this fall, with the entire project taking up to three years.
What set Lunda apart was its plan to build two separate bridges as part of the project, MoDOT Project Director Brandi Baldwin said.
The first bridge will be constructed north of the current Rocheport Bridge. Once that is complete by spring 2023, that new bridge will open and all traffic will be routed there.
This means the current bridge will have one less year of maintenance costs, as it will be demolished to make way for the second bridge.
"The existing bridge we have concerns with will be out of service a full year ahead of schedule, so we take that maintenance concern off the table," Baldwin said.
The new eastbound and westbound bridges each will be three lanes, with eight- and 12-foot shoulders once construction is completed by Dec. 31, 2024.
Once the first new bridge opens in 2023, it will support four lanes of traffic – two eastbound and two westbound – during construction of the second bridge.
Going forward, the two-bridge setup will benefit motorists because when there are maintenance needs, MoDOT can close one bridge completely and still have relatively minimal impact on traffic.
The decision to make each new bridge three lanes was made with an eye to the future and the hope I-70 can be expanded to a total of six lanes, Baldwin said.
"(We are) keeping our eye on the future since this is a bridge that will be in place for 100 years," Baldwin said.
....
Any word on widening the rest of the Interstate to six lanes across the state?
Quote from: I-39 on July 02, 2021, 10:33:26 PM
Quote from: mvak36 on July 02, 2021, 11:00:03 AM
Another article on the I-70 Rocheport Bridge (https://www.modot.org/RocheportBridge) project: https://www.columbiatribune.com/story/news/local/2021/07/01/lunda-awarded-modot-contract-rocheport-bridge-construction-interstate-highway-70-infrastructure/7824558002/
Quote
....
Construction is expected to start this fall, with the entire project taking up to three years.
What set Lunda apart was its plan to build two separate bridges as part of the project, MoDOT Project Director Brandi Baldwin said.
The first bridge will be constructed north of the current Rocheport Bridge. Once that is complete by spring 2023, that new bridge will open and all traffic will be routed there.
This means the current bridge will have one less year of maintenance costs, as it will be demolished to make way for the second bridge.
"The existing bridge we have concerns with will be out of service a full year ahead of schedule, so we take that maintenance concern off the table," Baldwin said.
The new eastbound and westbound bridges each will be three lanes, with eight- and 12-foot shoulders once construction is completed by Dec. 31, 2024.
Once the first new bridge opens in 2023, it will support four lanes of traffic – two eastbound and two westbound – during construction of the second bridge.
Going forward, the two-bridge setup will benefit motorists because when there are maintenance needs, MoDOT can close one bridge completely and still have relatively minimal impact on traffic.
The decision to make each new bridge three lanes was made with an eye to the future and the hope I-70 can be expanded to a total of six lanes, Baldwin said.
"(We are) keeping our eye on the future since this is a bridge that will be in place for 100 years," Baldwin said.
....
Any word on widening the rest of the Interstate to six lanes across the state?
I haven't heard anything. I know they mentioned it in passing in that article. Hopefully if an infrastructure bill passes, they will have funding for a few sections at least.
MoDOT is taking another look at the I-70/US 54 interchange at Kingdom City: https://www.modot.org/KingdomCityInterchange (https://www.modot.org/KingdomCityInterchange)
Does anyone know where the line "Exit 157" on US 36 in Hannibal for the MO 79 interchange came from? Starting from the KS/MO line in St Joseph, that exit is at milepost 191, and should really be exit 191.
Quote from: SkyPesos on October 19, 2021, 12:44:27 PM
Does anyone know where the line "Exit 157" on US 36 in Hannibal for the MO 79 interchange came from? Starting from the KS/MO line in St Joseph, that exit is at milepost 191, and should really be exit 191.
Using driving directions on Google from about the green box with 157 to the west side ramp at I-35 I get a distance of 157 miles.
Quote from: Revive 755 on October 19, 2021, 10:30:57 PM
Quote from: SkyPesos on October 19, 2021, 12:44:27 PM
Does anyone know where the line "Exit 157" on US 36 in Hannibal for the MO 79 interchange came from? Starting from the KS/MO line in St Joseph, that exit is at milepost 191, and should really be exit 191.
Using driving directions on Google from about the green box with 157 to the west side ramp at I-35 I get a distance of 157 miles.
I-35 is the zero point if I-72 is extended across Missouri. Short-sighted to not use the Kansas stateline, but it is supposed to be more "realistic".
Quote from: aboges26 on October 22, 2021, 01:10:33 PM
Quote from: Revive 755 on October 19, 2021, 10:30:57 PM
Quote from: SkyPesos on October 19, 2021, 12:44:27 PM
Does anyone know where the line "Exit 157" on US 36 in Hannibal for the MO 79 interchange came from? Starting from the KS/MO line in St Joseph, that exit is at milepost 191, and should really be exit 191.
Using driving directions on Google from about the green box with 157 to the west side ramp at I-35 I get a distance of 157 miles.
I-35 is the zero point if I-72 is extended across Missouri. Short-sighted to not use the Kansas stateline, but it is supposed to be more "realistic".
If they extend it west of I-35 (highly unlikely), it would only go till I-29. Not sure that they would need to go west of 29 since they're looking into possibly de-designating I-229.
https://www.aaroads.com/guides/us-169-south-kansas-city-mo/#gallery-65
Nice.
https://www.aaroads.com/guides/us-169-south-kansas-city-mo/#gallery-58
Is there supposed to be a US 40 shield here? If there was, why are all those removed as every shield assembly on US 169 south at the exchange south of the Buck O' Neil Bridge has an open space where a US 40 shield exists?
Quote from: mvak36 on October 22, 2021, 02:36:37 PM
Quote from: aboges26 on October 22, 2021, 01:10:33 PM
Quote from: Revive 755 on October 19, 2021, 10:30:57 PM
Quote from: SkyPesos on October 19, 2021, 12:44:27 PM
Does anyone know where the line "Exit 157" on US 36 in Hannibal for the MO 79 interchange came from? Starting from the KS/MO line in St Joseph, that exit is at milepost 191, and should really be exit 191.
Using driving directions on Google from about the green box with 157 to the west side ramp at I-35 I get a distance of 157 miles.
I-35 is the zero point if I-72 is extended across Missouri. Short-sighted to not use the Kansas stateline, but it is supposed to be more "realistic".
If they extend it west of I-35 (highly unlikely), it would only go till I-29. Not sure that they would need to go west of 29 since they're looking into possibly de-designating I-229.
US 36 is already a freeway west of I-29 to Kansas except for the interchange with I-229. It continues as a freeway a couple miles east of I-29. It would not be difficult to eliminate the stoplight at the I-229 interchange, especially given the discussion to remove I-229.
Quote from: skluth on October 23, 2021, 08:39:39 PM
Quote from: mvak36 on October 22, 2021, 02:36:37 PM
Quote from: aboges26 on October 22, 2021, 01:10:33 PM
Quote from: Revive 755 on October 19, 2021, 10:30:57 PM
Quote from: SkyPesos on October 19, 2021, 12:44:27 PM
Does anyone know where the line "Exit 157" on US 36 in Hannibal for the MO 79 interchange came from? Starting from the KS/MO line in St Joseph, that exit is at milepost 191, and should really be exit 191.
Using driving directions on Google from about the green box with 157 to the west side ramp at I-35 I get a distance of 157 miles.
I-35 is the zero point if I-72 is extended across Missouri. Short-sighted to not use the Kansas stateline, but it is supposed to be more "realistic".
If they extend it west of I-35 (highly unlikely), it would only go till I-29. Not sure that they would need to go west of 29 since they're looking into possibly de-designating I-229.
US 36 is already a freeway west of I-29 to Kansas except for the interchange with I-229. It continues as a freeway a couple miles east of I-29. It would not be difficult to eliminate the stoplight at the I-229 interchange, especially given the discussion to remove I-229.
Yes it is freeway west of there but my question would be where would they extend it to? The state line or further west into Kansas?
iPhone
Quote from: mvak36 on October 23, 2021, 09:00:06 PM
Quote from: skluth on October 23, 2021, 08:39:39 PM
Quote from: mvak36 on October 22, 2021, 02:36:37 PM
Quote from: aboges26 on October 22, 2021, 01:10:33 PM
Quote from: Revive 755 on October 19, 2021, 10:30:57 PM
Quote from: SkyPesos on October 19, 2021, 12:44:27 PM
Does anyone know where the line "Exit 157" on US 36 in Hannibal for the MO 79 interchange came from? Starting from the KS/MO line in St Joseph, that exit is at milepost 191, and should really be exit 191.
Using driving directions on Google from about the green box with 157 to the west side ramp at I-35 I get a distance of 157 miles.
I-35 is the zero point if I-72 is extended across Missouri. Short-sighted to not use the Kansas stateline, but it is supposed to be more "realistic".
If they extend it west of I-35 (highly unlikely), it would only go till I-29. Not sure that they would need to go west of 29 since they're looking into possibly de-designating I-229.
US 36 is already a freeway west of I-29 to Kansas except for the interchange with I-229. It continues as a freeway a couple miles east of I-29. It would not be difficult to eliminate the stoplight at the I-229 interchange, especially given the discussion to remove I-229.
Yes it is freeway west of there but my question would be where would they extend it to? The state line or further west into Kansas?
iPhone
I'm thinking just the state line. There isn't really anything in Kansas west of St Joseph that needs an interstate.
Quote from: SkyPesos on October 23, 2021, 09:14:47 PM
Quote from: mvak36 on October 23, 2021, 09:00:06 PM
Quote from: skluth on October 23, 2021, 08:39:39 PM
Quote from: mvak36 on October 22, 2021, 02:36:37 PM
Quote from: aboges26 on October 22, 2021, 01:10:33 PM
Quote from: Revive 755 on October 19, 2021, 10:30:57 PM
Quote from: SkyPesos on October 19, 2021, 12:44:27 PM
Does anyone know where the line "Exit 157" on US 36 in Hannibal for the MO 79 interchange came from? Starting from the KS/MO line in St Joseph, that exit is at milepost 191, and should really be exit 191.
Using driving directions on Google from about the green box with 157 to the west side ramp at I-35 I get a distance of 157 miles.
I-35 is the zero point if I-72 is extended across Missouri. Short-sighted to not use the Kansas stateline, but it is supposed to be more "realistic".
If they extend it west of I-35 (highly unlikely), it would only go till I-29. Not sure that they would need to go west of 29 since they're looking into possibly de-designating I-229.
US 36 is already a freeway west of I-29 to Kansas except for the interchange with I-229. It continues as a freeway a couple miles east of I-29. It would not be difficult to eliminate the stoplight at the I-229 interchange, especially given the discussion to remove I-229.
Yes it is freeway west of there but my question would be where would they extend it to? The state line or further west into Kansas?
iPhone
I'm thinking just the state line. There isn't really anything in Kansas west of St Joseph that needs an interstate.
This is just my opinion, but it seems like if there are no plans to do anything in Kansas, then I don't think they need to go past I-29. The mile markers could still be from the state line.
Again this is all hypothetical. Let's see if Missouri will build it to I-35 first.
Quote from: mvak36 on October 24, 2021, 01:38:07 PM
This is just my opinion, but it seems like if there are no plans to do anything in Kansas, then I don't think they need to go past I-29. The mile markers could still be from the state line.
Again this is all hypothetical. Let's see if Missouri will build it to I-35 first.
Could do something similar to I-22 in MS, where the mile markers use US 78's since it goes a bit further west than I-22 to the TN state line. In this case, I-72 could end at I-29 (or even I-35 if it's just planned to cover MO 110), and use US 36's mileage, starting at "exit 6" for I-29, or "exit 55" for I-35.
Quote from: kphoger on May 18, 2020, 12:42:24 PM
Quote from: Revive 755 on May 17, 2020, 12:53:40 PM
Although MoDOT has funding issues, I don't care for the large jog MO 125 gets with Concept 2.
That was my first thought too. But, upon further reflection, I realized I've never used MO-125 as a straight-through route there, and I've hardly ever seen a driver doing so either. It's my experience that most people are getting on or off US-60 at that point.
Looks like this is moving forward:
The project will cost $25.5 million and is being funded through a cost-share with the City of Rogersville and Greene County. Sanders said if funding is available, an outer road will be constructed between Route 125 and Farm Road 243 to connect existing businesses and homes. The city of Rogersville and Greene County are looking into ways to fund the outer road construction.
https://youtu.be/KRh5HEw5KbM
Revised concept 1
https://www.kmmo.com/2021/11/12/modot-invites-public-to-discuss-priority-unfunded-transportation-needs/
Quote
Missouri's transportation system is a tremendous asset to the citizens of Missouri. The system consists of 33,830 miles of roads and 10,399 bridges, both of which rank among the largest for any state in the nation.
The Missouri Department of Transportation, working with its statewide regional planning partners, have identified $1 billion in annual unfunded needs. From the broader unfunded needs, MoDOT has developed a High Priority Unfunded Needs list to guide the development of projects into funded projects as state and federal transportation funds increase.
According to a news release, public meetings will be held across the state from Nov. 16 through Dec. 9. The full list of the meeting dates, time and locations are here (https://www.modot.org/unfundedneeds).
A meeting located in the KMMO listening area is scheduled to be held at the Warrensburg Municipal Court, located at 200 South Holden Street, from 4 to 6 p.m. Thursday, December 9.
MoDOT officials say since the passage of Missouri's additional 12.5 cent motor fuel tax increase in July, MoDOT staff have worked with metropolitan planning organizations and regional planning commissions throughout the state to develop a list of high priority unfunded road and bridge needs.
The draft project-specific lists include $4.5 billion of road and bridge projects in three tiers.
Tier one includes $543 million and includes projects we could accomplish in the time of the current five-year Statewide Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) as federal and state funding levels increase. These projects have good estimates. Tier two is worth $2.1 billion and includes projects beyond the current STIP time-frame with broader estimates. Tier three includes $2.2 billion of projects that are also beyond the current STIP time-frame with broader estimates. In addition, MoDOT staff worked with the planning partners to identify $1 billion in multimodal needs.
The draft document and comment forms are available online through December 22. For more information, call MoDOT at 888-ASK-MODOT (275-6636) or visit www.modot.org.
Draft document located at: https://www.modot.org/unfundedneeds
Public Meeting Schedule: https://www.modot.org/high-priority-unfunded-needs-public-meetings
Connect a future I-72 with I-70 and I-335/Kansas Turnpike in Topeka. The Kansas City area would be upset (so it will never happen) but it would take some pressure off of I-35 in Johnson County and bring some traffic that is headed to the west/southwest off of I-70 in Missouri.
Quote from: rarnold on November 13, 2021, 01:28:59 PM
Connect a future I-72 with I-70 and I-335/Kansas Turnpike in Topeka. The Kansas City area would be upset (so it will never happen) but it would take some pressure off of I-35 in Johnson County and bring some traffic that is headed to the west/southwest off of I-70 in Missouri.
Why would they be upset that a bypass shaves off traffic in their area? I thought they would like having a bit less congestion.
Quote from: SkyPesos on November 13, 2021, 02:16:03 PM
Quote from: rarnold on November 13, 2021, 01:28:59 PM
Connect a future I-72 with I-70 and I-335/Kansas Turnpike in Topeka. The Kansas City area would be upset (so it will never happen) but it would take some pressure off of I-35 in Johnson County and bring some traffic that is headed to the west/southwest off of I-70 in Missouri.
Why would they be upset that a bypass shaves off traffic in their area? I thought they would like having a bit less congestion.
It doesn't have to be an interstate. Kansas could build a toll road from Topeka to US 36 across from St Joseph. The new toll road could also pay for upgrading KS 4 to four lanes across the Kansas River.
Quote from: mvak36 on November 13, 2021, 09:22:57 AM
Draft document located at: https://www.modot.org/unfundedneeds
Public Meeting Schedule: https://www.modot.org/high-priority-unfunded-needs-public-meetings
From Page 34 (or 35/73) of the draft document:
Quote
KANSAS CITY URBAN JACKSON US 71 SAFETY IMPROVEMENTS ACROSS BRUCE R. WATKINS $25,2544
Really curious to see what type of safety improvements MoDOT has in mind.
EDIT: From Page 38:
QuoteOUTHWEST RURAL JASPER MO 171 LANE EXTENSIONS, GUARDRAIL UPGRADES, AND SIGNAGE FOR INTERSTATE DESIGNATION FROM I‐49 TO I‐44. $2,013
Quote from: Revive 755 on November 13, 2021, 10:29:33 PM
Quote from: mvak36 on November 13, 2021, 09:22:57 AM
Draft document located at: https://www.modot.org/unfundedneeds
Public Meeting Schedule: https://www.modot.org/high-priority-unfunded-needs-public-meetings
From Page 34 (or 35/73) of the draft document:
Quote
KANSAS CITY URBAN JACKSON US 71 SAFETY IMPROVEMENTS ACROSS BRUCE R. WATKINS $25,2544
Really curious to see what type of safety improvements MoDOT has in mind.
That's interesting. I'm not sure what they can do for the stoplight part without the removal of the injunction. Maybe it's for the freeway parts of Bruce Watkins.
I thought another interesting project I saw was on page 37 (38 of 73 of pdf) where they talk about the companion bridge to the I-70 Mississippi River bridge. Are they expecting a huge traffic increase that they need another bridge?
Quote from: mvak36 on November 13, 2021, 10:39:09 PM
I thought another interesting project I saw was on page 37 (38 of 73 of pdf) where they talk about the companion bridge to the I-70 Mississippi River bridge. Are they expecting a huge traffic increase that they need another bridge?
I'd rather see access to the Stan Span from the Inbound I-70 Express Lanes before getting the companion bridge
Quote from: SkyPesos on November 13, 2021, 02:16:03 PM
Quote from: rarnold on November 13, 2021, 01:28:59 PM
Connect a future I-72 with I-70 and I-335/Kansas Turnpike in Topeka. The Kansas City area would be upset (so it will never happen) but it would take some pressure off of I-35 in Johnson County and bring some traffic that is headed to the west/southwest off of I-70 in Missouri.
Why would they be upset that a bypass shaves off traffic in their area? I thought they would like having a bit less congestion.
Businesses would be upset. Less traffic would mean fewer people purchasing goods and services. Yes, less congestion would be a plus, but losing out on the business would lead to complaints to legislators, thus killing the project.
Quote from: skluth on November 13, 2021, 05:12:34 PM
Quote from: SkyPesos on November 13, 2021, 02:16:03 PM
Quote from: rarnold on November 13, 2021, 01:28:59 PM
Connect a future I-72 with I-70 and I-335/Kansas Turnpike in Topeka. The Kansas City area would be upset (so it will never happen) but it would take some pressure off of I-35 in Johnson County and bring some traffic that is headed to the west/southwest off of I-70 in Missouri.
Why would they be upset that a bypass shaves off traffic in their area? I thought they would like having a bit less congestion.
It doesn't have to be an interstate. Kansas could build a toll road from Topeka to US 36 across from St Joseph. The new toll road could also pay for upgrading KS 4 to four lanes across the Kansas River.
Sure, I am okay with a toll road. In fact, I remember seeing that elsewhere, expanding the turnpike to Atchison.
Quote from: mvak36 on November 13, 2021, 10:39:09 PM
I thought another interesting project I saw was on page 37 (38 of 73 of pdf) where they talk about the companion bridge to the I-70 Mississippi River bridge. Are they expecting a huge traffic increase that they need another bridge?
Might be nice to have for the next time there is work on the PSB and the MLK and/or Eads Bridges are unavailable. Plus MoDOT won't build access between the Stan Span and the south without the second bridge.
Isn't the current Stan Spam wide enough for reconfiguring to 6 lanes? If so, I don't see the need for a twin span for a long time. At this time, it's better to replace and widen the I-270 Mississippi River crossing first imo.
Quote from: SkyPesos on November 14, 2021, 11:03:16 PM
Isn't the current Stan Spam wide enough for reconfiguring to 6 lanes? If so, I don't see the need for a twin span for a long time. At this time, it's better to replace and widen the I-270 Mississippi River crossing first imo.
It could be widened to 6, but then there would be no room for the shoulders.
That second span was listed in Tier 3 of the Unfunded needs so it's not like they need to do it anytime soon. I'm guessing with this extra money they're getting from the bill, they will probably finish the Tier 1 and part of Tier 2 projects and the rest get moved up the list.
Quote from: rarnold on November 14, 2021, 12:29:06 AM
Quote from: SkyPesos on November 13, 2021, 02:16:03 PM
Quote from: rarnold on November 13, 2021, 01:28:59 PM
Connect a future I-72 with I-70 and I-335/Kansas Turnpike in Topeka. The Kansas City area would be upset (so it will never happen) but it would take some pressure off of I-35 in Johnson County and bring some traffic that is headed to the west/southwest off of I-70 in Missouri.
Why would they be upset that a bypass shaves off traffic in their area? I thought they would like having a bit less congestion.
Businesses would be upset. Less traffic would mean fewer people purchasing goods and services. Yes, less congestion would be a plus, but losing out on the business would lead to complaints to legislators, thus killing the project.
A city the size of Kansas City doesn't depend on pass-through traffic as a major part of its economy. If you're doing business in Kansas City, it's because you are in Kansas City for a reason. Hallmark, Sprint, and H&R Block are not going to give a damn if I-72 lets people bypass KC or not.
Quote from: rarnold on November 14, 2021, 12:29:06 AM
Quote from: SkyPesos on November 13, 2021, 02:16:03 PM
Quote from: rarnold on November 13, 2021, 01:28:59 PM
Connect a future I-72 with I-70 and I-335/Kansas Turnpike in Topeka. The Kansas City area would be upset (so it will never happen) but it would take some pressure off of I-35 in Johnson County and bring some traffic that is headed to the west/southwest off of I-70 in Missouri.
Why would they be upset that a bypass shaves off traffic in their area? I thought they would like having a bit less congestion.
Businesses would be upset. Less traffic would mean fewer people purchasing goods and services. Yes, less congestion would be a plus, but losing out on the business would lead to complaints to legislators, thus killing the project.
Highly doubt. Or else St Louis would've complained to legislators when I-57, and later the US 36 widening, became a thing, and that it's less people going through the city using I-55 and I-70. Kansas City just happen to not have any long-distance bypasses yet.
I know I've said in this thread that I-72 doesn't need to go past I-29 but if they find the money and political will to build it all the way to Topeka, then go right ahead :D.
Effectively, it seems like it would be a bypass of I-70 in Missouri. I don't think anyone would complain if some of the truck traffic gets reduced on 70.
https://www.news-leader.com/story/news/politics/2022/01/11/buc-ees-travel-center-headed-springfield-council-debates-incentive/9124629002/
Quote
Once built, the superstore will be located just northeast of Springfield at the intersection of I-44 and Mulroy Road. Beard said the chain hopes to break ground sometime this year and finish construction 12 to 15 months after that.
Looks like I'll be making a trip down to Springfield when this opens :biggrin:.
Quote from: mvak36 on January 13, 2022, 10:10:27 AM
https://www.news-leader.com/story/news/politics/2022/01/11/buc-ees-travel-center-headed-springfield-council-debates-incentive/9124629002/
Quote
Once built, the superstore will be located just northeast of Springfield at the intersection of I-44 and Mulroy Road. Beard said the chain hopes to break ground sometime this year and finish construction 12 to 15 months after that.
Looks like I'll be making a trip down to Springfield when this opens :biggrin:.
Should make Springfield's tourism industry even stronger. This likely puts a nail in anything around Joplin for Buc-ees for the foreseeable future, though, unless they are wanting several stores in a general area for ease of distribution purposes.
Does Bucee's have something against Oklahoma? They put a location in Springfield before OKC? They expand to Arkansas and now Missouri before Oklahoma? :pan:
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on January 17, 2022, 01:06:22 PM
Does Bucee's have something against Oklahoma? They put a location in Springfield before OKC? They expand to Arkansas and now Missouri before Oklahoma? :pan:
Who wants to compete against OnCue and QuikTrip if they don't have to?
Personally, I'm fine with there not being any Buc-ee's around here. They seem like the sort of place that's great when you're on a road trip and looking for a place to stop and stretch your legs, but would be a pain in the ass if it was your everyday fill-up station.
Quote from: Scott5114 on January 17, 2022, 01:39:29 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on January 17, 2022, 01:06:22 PM
Does Bucee's have something against Oklahoma? They put a location in Springfield before OKC? They expand to Arkansas and now Missouri before Oklahoma? :pan:
Who wants to compete against OnCue and QuikTrip if they don't have to?
Personally, I'm fine with there not being any Buc-ee's around here. They seem like the sort of place that's great when you're on a road trip and looking for a place to stop and stretch your legs, but would be a pain in the ass if it was your everyday fill-up station.
I'd love for a couple around the metro just to be able to stop and grab some goodies every once in awhile.
Quote from: Scott5114 on January 17, 2022, 01:39:29 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on January 17, 2022, 01:06:22 PM
Does Bucee's have something against Oklahoma? They put a location in Springfield before OKC? They expand to Arkansas and now Missouri before Oklahoma? :pan:
Who wants to compete against OnCue and QuikTrip if they don't have to?
Personally, I'm fine with there not being any Buc-ee's around here. They seem like the sort of place that's great when you're on a road trip and looking for a place to stop and stretch your legs, but would be a pain in the ass if it was your everyday fill-up station.
Ingress and egress tends to be a hassle around them. That's why they have to do so much roadwork around them as part of the project.
If they are going to build a Buc-ee's in Missouri, why not put it in Gotham City? :bigass:
https://www.instagram.com/dam_up_bucees/ (https://www.instagram.com/dam_up_bucees/) <-- an Instagram account arguing against the Springfield Buc-ee's construction
I've never been to a Buc-ee's, so I'm not sure what my city has to gain from this.
Quote from: ozarkman417 on January 19, 2022, 08:35:39 PM
If they are going to build a Buc-ee's in Missouri, why not put it in Gotham City? :bigass:
https://www.instagram.com/dam_up_bucees/ (https://www.instagram.com/dam_up_bucees/) <-- an Instagram account arguing against the Springfield Buc-ee's construction
I've never been to a Buc-ee's, so I'm not sure what my city has to gain from this.
You mean the million dollars of tax revenue? I mean what kind of Mickey Mouse logic are you using the question what your city has to gain from it in order to justify it being built? Pft.
Of course there's tax revenue to be had.. eventually. It's gonna take some time (not sure how long) to create net positive revenue for the city as a result of it spending $8.5 million that include tax incentives/reimbursement, as well as improvements to the area. Additionally, the 150 or so new employees will be bringing in money to the Springfield metro from outside. 88% of Buc-ee's customers come from >20 miles away.
The reason why I said I wasn't sure how much is to be gained was not about economics (although clearly I poorly worded my statement). Instead, I was referring to the establishment itself. I'm simply not sure if Buc-ee's is worth all the hype or if its just another overrated establishment.. though I suppose in the end that is just a matter of opinion, and I'll be finding that out in the somewhat near future provided everything goes as planned.
An additional note regarding its location is that some, but certainly not all, Branson-bound travellers will pass very near the store. If it were located on the west side of US 65, it would simply be out of the way. For the reasons I've listed, I'm personally looking forward to seeing this new growth, though as seen in my previous post, there is a sizable amount of those around here that clearly oppose it strongly.
Quote from: Revive 755 on October 06, 2021, 10:12:42 PM
MoDOT is taking another look at the I-70/US 54 interchange at Kingdom City: https://www.modot.org/KingdomCityInterchange (https://www.modot.org/KingdomCityInterchange)
MODOT is now taking public comment (https://abc17news.com/news/transportation/road-construction/2022/02/15/modot-public-can-review-proposed-kingdom-city-interchange-enhancements/) for those interested.
Quote from: ozarkman417 on January 20, 2022, 04:39:38 PM
Of course there's tax revenue to be had.. eventually. It's gonna take some time (not sure how long) to create net positive revenue for the city as a result of it spending $8.5 million that include tax incentives/reimbursement, as well as improvements to the area. Additionally, the 150 or so new employees will be bringing in money to the Springfield metro from outside. 88% of Buc-ee's customers come from >20 miles away.
The reason why I said I wasn't sure how much is to be gained was not about economics (although clearly I poorly worded my statement). Instead, I was referring to the establishment itself. I'm simply not sure if Buc-ee's is worth all the hype or if its just another overrated establishment.. though I suppose in the end that is just a matter of opinion, and I'll be finding that out in the somewhat near future provided everything goes as planned.
An additional note regarding its location is that some, but certainly not all, Branson-bound travellers will pass very near the store. If it were located on the west side of US 65, it would simply be out of the way. For the reasons I've listed, I'm personally looking forward to seeing this new growth, though as seen in my previous post, there is a sizable amount of those around here that clearly oppose it strongly.
The average Bucees increases the sales tax revenue for the locals from 15-20%. The average Bucees costs $17 million to build. Some 80% of Bucees revenue is classified as "out of town" or a "pass through".
Bucees growth has been done on borrowed money. The founder of Bucees admits they have a lot of loans funding their expansion. He admitted that as long as interest rates stay low (they aren't in the near term) he will keep going.
So when his cost of funds goes up, I would expect them to slow down on the build outs.
What should people look for in future Bucees? After 100 gas pumps and a massive store, what else is there? EV chargers. It gives people a reason to come inside while their EV "fills up".
Margins on retail gas is around 1.8%. Margins on retail goods is around 25-30%. Margins on Bucee branded anything is closer to 40%.
By making it more destination like, people are inclined to purchase Bucees stuff (tshirts, bumper magnets, etc)
Quote from: edwaleni on February 16, 2022, 10:59:28 PM
The average Bucees increases the sales tax revenue for the locals from 15-20%. The average Bucees costs $17 million to build. Some 80% of Bucees revenue is classified as "out of town" or a "pass through".
Not arguing for or against Bucees. Just pointing out that increasing the local sales tax percentage is highly dependent on the size of the tax district and useless without knowing the actual amount. Increasing the sales tax revenue 15-20% is a big deal if Springfield. It's a lot less impressive in a small town.
Quote from: skluth on February 17, 2022, 12:36:11 PM
Quote from: edwaleni on February 16, 2022, 10:59:28 PM
The average Bucees increases the sales tax revenue for the locals from 15-20%. The average Bucees costs $17 million to build. Some 80% of Bucees revenue is classified as "out of town" or a "pass through".
Not arguing for or against Bucees. Just pointing out that increasing the local sales tax percentage is highly dependent on the size of the tax district and useless without knowing the actual amount. Increasing the sales tax revenue 15-20% is a big deal if Springfield. It's a lot less impressive in a small town.
How many small towns has Bucees set up in?
https://www.modot.org/node/25137
Quote
Kansas City, Mo. — The Missouri Department of Transportation is hosting two, in-person public meetings as part of an Interstate 70 Environmental Study Re-evaluation between The Paseo to U.S. 40. The previous study was completed nearly five years ago and conditions have likely changed so public input is necessary. A National Environmental Policy Act re-evaluation of the project area is needed to gain a current understanding of those changes. The re-evaluation is scheduled to be complete by the end of March 2023.
Project Website: https://www.modot.org/improvei70kc
There is a project tentatively scheduled for Fiscal Year 2024 in the STIP (Job 4I3448) for corridor improvements from 27th St to US40. This would fix the Jackson curve and other bridges along the stretch.
Quote from: skluth on February 17, 2022, 12:36:11 PM
Quote from: edwaleni on February 16, 2022, 10:59:28 PM
The average Bucees increases the sales tax revenue for the locals from 15-20%. The average Bucees costs $17 million to build. Some 80% of Bucees revenue is classified as "out of town" or a "pass through".
Not arguing for or against Bucees. Just pointing out that increasing the local sales tax percentage is highly dependent on the size of the tax district and useless without knowing the actual amount. Increasing the sales tax revenue 15-20% is a big deal if Springfield. It's a lot less impressive in a small town.
Totally agree. Springfield is too large to have that big of an impact. That is an average based on their current footprint.
With such a large contribution, there must be some small to medium size towns that host a Bucees.
Quote from: edwaleni on February 17, 2022, 05:14:54 PM
Quote from: skluth on February 17, 2022, 12:36:11 PM
Quote from: edwaleni on February 16, 2022, 10:59:28 PM
The average Bucees increases the sales tax revenue for the locals from 15-20%. The average Bucees costs $17 million to build. Some 80% of Bucees revenue is classified as "out of town" or a "pass through".
Not arguing for or against Bucees. Just pointing out that increasing the local sales tax percentage is highly dependent on the size of the tax district and useless without knowing the actual amount. Increasing the sales tax revenue 15-20% is a big deal if Springfield. It's a lot less impressive in a small town.
Totally agree. Springfield is too large to have that big of an impact. That is an average based on their current footprint.
With such a large contribution, there must be some small to medium size towns that host a Bucees.
Madisonville, TX comes to mind although I do not know if their Bucees is with the city limits
Quote from: Revive 755 on February 25, 2020, 05:27:17 PM
Based on the following news article, MoDOT is trying for a grant to widen I-44 through Springfield.
https://www.ozarksfirst.com/local-news/local-news-local-news/springfield-city-council-members-consider-i-44-expansion/ (https://www.ozarksfirst.com/local-news/local-news-local-news/springfield-city-council-members-consider-i-44-expansion/)
Update on this effort: https://sgfcitizen.org/economy-growth/springfield-transportation/i-44-expansion-gets-county-support/ (https://sgfcitizen.org/economy-growth/springfield-transportation/i-44-expansion-gets-county-support/)
Should this come to pass, I-44 between MO-13 (Kansas Expressway) and US-65 (Schoolcraft Freeway) will be six-laned. Very much needed, given the amount of truck traffic that travels between those two exits, which serve as the fastest route between KC and Memphis.
Quote from: ozarkman417 on March 29, 2022, 07:10:56 PM
Quote from: Revive 755 on February 25, 2020, 05:27:17 PM
Based on the following news article, MoDOT is trying for a grant to widen I-44 through Springfield.
https://www.ozarksfirst.com/local-news/local-news-local-news/springfield-city-council-members-consider-i-44-expansion/ (https://www.ozarksfirst.com/local-news/local-news-local-news/springfield-city-council-members-consider-i-44-expansion/)
Update on this effort: https://sgfcitizen.org/economy-growth/springfield-transportation/i-44-expansion-gets-county-support/ (https://sgfcitizen.org/economy-growth/springfield-transportation/i-44-expansion-gets-county-support/)
Should this come to pass, I-44 between MO-13 (Kansas Expressway) and US-65 (Schoolcraft Freeway) will be six-laned. Very much needed, given the amount of truck traffic that travels between those two exits, which serve as the fastest route between KC and Memphis.
I found this for the INFRA Grant Application: https://www.ozarkstransportation.org/fix-i-44-infrastructure-for-rebuilding-america-infra-grant-application
Quote from: mvak36 on March 29, 2022, 07:53:46 PM
I found this for the INFRA Grant Application: https://www.ozarkstransportation.org/fix-i-44-infrastructure-for-rebuilding-america-infra-grant-application
There's a link on the site for a study to redo the MO 13/I-44 interchange: https://www.ozarkstransportation.org/north13study (https://www.ozarkstransportation.org/north13study). The alternatives shown:
1) The DDI gets widened, the Norton Road intersection goes to a T-intersection with the stem to the west, and a new T-intersection is added near the current Farm Road 413/Wentchell Road intersection to provide access to the east.
2) The current DDI is converted to a conventional diamond with all but NB to EB, NB to WB, and SB to WB having dual turn lanes. The Norton Road intersection is removed, and a new four way intersection is constructed north of the the curve on MO 13.
3) The current DDI is replaced with a SPUI.
4) A new connection is built between MO 13 and I-44 west of the current interchange. The I-44 is a modified semi-directional T, a half interchange is provided with current MO 13. The existing DDI appears to have some sort of ramp modifications. Could be C-D roadways between the two interchanges.
5) SB to EB gets a flyover. Norton Road is grade separated from MO 13, with access provided by way of a pair of right-in/right out intersections north of Norton Road.
I am guessing the following alternatives are intended to be combined with some of the interchange alternatives.
6) The MO 13/Farm Road 94 intersection becomes a J-turn.
7) The MO 13/Farm Road intersection is converted to a right-in/right out only on both sides of MO 13.
Are DDIs falling out of favor or are they something that can't handle larger traffic loads?
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on March 30, 2022, 03:45:31 PM
Are DDIs falling out of favor or are they something that can't handle larger traffic loads?
DDIs are still gaining traction (Oklahoma has a bunch of them proposed) but it sounds like this particular interchange has a number of characteristics that are causing it to not perform as well as it should. One problem that can happen with a DDI is that it processes traffic so quickly that it ends up causing backups at adjacent intersections (like the one at Norton Road), the tailback of which then back up into the DDI. In addition it seems like this one has a lot of left-turning (SB to EB) traffic, which a SPUI might be able to handle better.
I imagine the best solution might be Alternative 1 since that would remove some of the conflict points at Norton Road. What I would do is go a little bit further and close the Norton Road intersection entirely and route all of those movements through a full intersection where the Alternative 1 map shows access to Farm Road 143.
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on March 30, 2022, 03:45:31 PM
Are DDIs falling out of favor or are they something that can't handle larger traffic loads?
Nope, MoDOT is still building new ones, including an interesting partial one w/ grade seperation at one of the crossings of the sides at MO 364/94 and Muegge Rd that I'm keeping up with.
Though if MoDOT proceeds with removing the I-44 and MO 13 DDI, I think it's the second DDI in the US that's been removed, after one in Utah (forgot the exact interchange).
Quote from: SkyPesos on March 30, 2022, 04:31:53 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on March 30, 2022, 03:45:31 PM
Are DDIs falling out of favor or are they something that can't handle larger traffic loads?
Nope, MoDOT is still building new ones, including an interesting partial one w/ grade seperation at one of the crossings of the sides at MO 364/94 and Muegge Rd that I'm keeping up with.
Though if MoDOT proceeds with removing the I-44 and MO 13 DDI, I think it's the second DDI in the US that's been removed, after one in Utah (forgot the exact interchange).
While MoDOT is still building new DDIs, there are more roundabout-based interchanges being built by the agency than anything else.
Alternative #4 will be more useful for long distance truckers and travellers but it might be more costly as well.
Quote from: Stephane Dumas on April 01, 2022, 07:10:02 PM
Alternative #4 will be more useful for long distance truckers and travellers but it might be more costly as well.
I think Alternate 4 is not going to be chosen, but is the best for future considerations. The last few times I've driven MO 13 the road seemed to get busy enough approaching Springfield to warrant eventual upgrading to a full freeway.
https://www.kansascity.com/news/politics-government/article260666987.html
Quote
Kansas City leaders say it's finally time to build a park atop Interstate 670 in the heart of downtown. Local and federal officials gathered Friday to announce official plans for a $160 million deck over downtown's south loop. Few details about financing were provided, but officials said a $5 million donation from the Loews Kansas City Hotel will kickstart design and planning efforts. That phase is expected to take between 12 and 18 months, according to a news release from the city.
...
City manager Brian Platt said he's not sure how much Kansas City would need to pitch in for the project – in fact, the total cost is not yet known. But he said the city is backed by federal, state and local stakeholder support. Platt said the city has applied for a $25 million RAISE grant from the U.S. Department of Transportation.
Quote from: mvak36 on April 26, 2022, 10:05:10 AM
https://www.kansascity.com/news/politics-government/article260666987.html
Quote
Kansas City leaders say it's finally time to build a park atop Interstate 670 in the heart of downtown. Local and federal officials gathered Friday to announce official plans for a $160 million deck over downtown's south loop. Few details about financing were provided, but officials said a $5 million donation from the Loews Kansas City Hotel will kickstart design and planning efforts. That phase is expected to take between 12 and 18 months, according to a news release from the city.
...
City manager Brian Platt said he's not sure how much Kansas City would need to pitch in for the project – in fact, the total cost is not yet known. But he said the city is backed by federal, state and local stakeholder support. Platt said the city has applied for a $25 million RAISE grant from the U.S. Department of Transportation.
Considering it cost St Louis $380M (https://news.stlpublicradio.org/government-politics-issues/2018-03-26/park-over-the-highway-entrance-opens-at-gateway-arch) to build their small (<200' over highway) park over the highway at the Arch, that $5M isn't going to go far. Not sure how much of the St Louis cost was for aesthetics (it is a national park). But KC isn't going to get this done for $160M especially if they want more than one between-the-viaducts segment.
Quote from: skluth on April 26, 2022, 01:24:57 PM
Quote from: mvak36 on April 26, 2022, 10:05:10 AM
https://www.kansascity.com/news/politics-government/article260666987.html
Quote
Kansas City leaders say it's finally time to build a park atop Interstate 670 in the heart of downtown. Local and federal officials gathered Friday to announce official plans for a $160 million deck over downtown's south loop. Few details about financing were provided, but officials said a $5 million donation from the Loews Kansas City Hotel will kickstart design and planning efforts. That phase is expected to take between 12 and 18 months, according to a news release from the city.
...
City manager Brian Platt said he's not sure how much Kansas City would need to pitch in for the project – in fact, the total cost is not yet known. But he said the city is backed by federal, state and local stakeholder support. Platt said the city has applied for a $25 million RAISE grant from the U.S. Department of Transportation.
Considering it cost St Louis $380M (https://news.stlpublicradio.org/government-politics-issues/2018-03-26/park-over-the-highway-entrance-opens-at-gateway-arch) to build their small (<200' over highway) park over the highway at the Arch, that $5M isn't going to go far. Not sure how much of the St Louis cost was for aesthetics (it is a national park). But KC isn't going to get this done for $160M especially if they want more than one between-the-viaducts segment.
I think the 5 million was to go towards design and planning. I also think that this thing is going to cost a lot more than $160M. I'll believe we are closer to construction if they get this RAISE grant.
Quote from: mvak36 on April 26, 2022, 01:59:54 PM
Quote from: skluth on April 26, 2022, 01:24:57 PM
Quote from: mvak36 on April 26, 2022, 10:05:10 AM
https://www.kansascity.com/news/politics-government/article260666987.html
Quote
Kansas City leaders say it's finally time to build a park atop Interstate 670 in the heart of downtown. Local and federal officials gathered Friday to announce official plans for a $160 million deck over downtown's south loop. Few details about financing were provided, but officials said a $5 million donation from the Loews Kansas City Hotel will kickstart design and planning efforts. That phase is expected to take between 12 and 18 months, according to a news release from the city.
...
City manager Brian Platt said he's not sure how much Kansas City would need to pitch in for the project – in fact, the total cost is not yet known. But he said the city is backed by federal, state and local stakeholder support. Platt said the city has applied for a $25 million RAISE grant from the U.S. Department of Transportation.
Considering it cost St Louis $380M (https://news.stlpublicradio.org/government-politics-issues/2018-03-26/park-over-the-highway-entrance-opens-at-gateway-arch) to build their small (<200' over highway) park over the highway at the Arch, that $5M isn't going to go far. Not sure how much of the St Louis cost was for aesthetics (it is a national park). But KC isn't going to get this done for $160M especially if they want more than one between-the-viaducts segment.
I think the 5 million was to go towards design and planning. I also think that this thing is going to cost a lot more than $160M. I'll believe we are closer to construction if they get this RAISE grant.
Agreed. My main point of contention is the estimated $160M which I found incredibly low. It's almost like some official makes up a figure and everybody runs with it without verifying its accuracy.
2023-2027 Draft STIP (https://www.modot.org/DRAFTSTIP) is available online. I've only gotten a chance to look at the projects in the KC area. Biggest project is for I-70 between downtown and I-435. Another project of interest is I-49 widening in Cass county as I mentioned in the other thread (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=3239.msg2738952#msg2738952).
These projects might get delayed if SB262 (gas tax increase from 2021) gets repealed.
This is post number 670 for me, which makes me think of downtown KC, because of where I live. In turn, it reminds me of the Buck O'Neil Bridge, for which several supports are already up. What's the latest from MoDOT, as far as the timeline for construction?
This article has all the major projects listed in the Draft STIP: https://www.columbiamissourian.com/news/state_news/major-projects-in-modots-proposed-five-year-road-and-bridge-plan/article_06af8706-dd23-11ec-8d18-df4755b2cc88.html
Article about Draft STIP: https://www.columbiamissourian.com/news/state_news/modot-reveals-massive-transportation-spending-plan-focuses-on-maintenance/article_6adeacc2-d7a9-11ec-a20c-5fd1cb360c7a.html
^^^^ " $140 million to modify interchange at the U.S. 63 Connector and Interstate 70 in Columbia."
That's a pretty big investment will they be adding flyovers?
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on May 28, 2022, 01:11:36 PM
^^^^ " $140 million to modify interchange at the U.S. 63 Connector and Interstate 70 in Columbia."
That's a pretty big investment will they be adding flyovers?
Maybe at least one, there was one proposal who once showed a flyover where I-70 and US-63 meet.
https://web.archive.org/web/20201108000450/http://www1.komu.com/news/i-70-us-63-interchange-in-need-of-major-revamp-still-a-challenge-for-modot/
https://web.archive.org/web/20190709225820/https://www.komu.com/news/i-70-us-63-interchange-in-need-of-major-revamp-still-a-challenge-for-modot/
(https://dcer237tfveol.cloudfront.net/v2/444a4kwj-FvR2AWckhnCLwMUwC-XiUH2JlrWepqhgSUpSfgjxjkoGxw_FrZA1um3UG8FbWmwYesUkAkai65LWJUdnpZ5IWLoplfjyfOBTEBSfUkpRZY7Py2IembOczqlxLe3TrNMAPQGIrcPwRAFlw)
Quote from: Stephane Dumas on May 28, 2022, 02:04:00 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on May 28, 2022, 01:11:36 PM
^^^^ " $140 million to modify interchange at the U.S. 63 Connector and Interstate 70 in Columbia."
That's a pretty big investment will they be adding flyovers?
Maybe at least one, there was one proposal who once showed a flyover where I-70 and US-63 meet.
https://web.archive.org/web/20201108000450/http://www1.komu.com/news/i-70-us-63-interchange-in-need-of-major-revamp-still-a-challenge-for-modot/
https://web.archive.org/web/20190709225820/https://www.komu.com/news/i-70-us-63-interchange-in-need-of-major-revamp-still-a-challenge-for-modot/
(https://dcer237tfveol.cloudfront.net/v2/444a4kwj-FvR2AWckhnCLwMUwC-XiUH2JlrWepqhgSUpSfgjxjkoGxw_FrZA1um3UG8FbWmwYesUkAkai65LWJUdnpZ5IWLoplfjyfOBTEBSfUkpRZY7Py2IembOczqlxLe3TrNMAPQGIrcPwRAFlw)
It would be great if they rebuilt the interchange as pictured though three businesses would have to be bought out. It would even be a huge help if they built a direct ramp from EB I-70 to SB US 63. I remember going EB through Columbia during the evening rush hour a few years back and the exit ramp was backed up to the old Business I-70 entrance ramp.
Quote from: mvak36 on May 19, 2022, 11:44:36 AM
2023-2027 Draft STIP (https://www.modot.org/DRAFTSTIP) is available online. I've only gotten a chance to look at the projects in the KC area. Biggest project is for I-70 between downtown and I-435. Another project of interest is I-49 widening in Cass county as I mentioned in the other thread (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=3239.msg2738952#msg2738952).
A few scoping projects of note:
* Scoping for the Hannibal Expressway (in dark gray)
* Scoping for an interchange for US 65 at MO 86
* Scoping for US 50 corridor improvements from MO 87 to west of Tipton
* Another study of US 63 between US 50 and Rolla
* Safety and capacity improvements for the I-44 interchange with MO 72 in Rolla
* Scoping for the US 67 freeway upgrades between US 160 and the Arkansas border
* Scoping for freeway upgrades to US 60 between US 61 and I-55
Quote from: Revive 755 on June 01, 2022, 10:24:01 PM
A few scoping projects of note:
* Scoping for the Hannibal Expressway (in dark gray)
* Scoping for an interchange for US 65 at MO 86
* Scoping for US 50 corridor improvements from MO 87 to west of Tipton
* Another study of US 63 between US 50 and Rolla
* Safety and capacity improvements for the I-44 interchange with MO 72 in Rolla
* Scoping for the US 67 freeway upgrades between US 160 and the Arkansas border
* Scoping for freeway upgrades to US 60 between US 61 and I-55
Dumb question, but I think I can guess it is something along the lines of planning/prelim design? Or even early planning studies?
That said, US 60/Future I-57 between I-55 and US 61 isn't very long, just under 3 miles. Only have to eliminate some driveway access, and build a southern Frontage Rd to serve the one private residence that has its driveway presently on US 60, and also the cell tower. The other businesses and cross streets already have alternate access to the road network other than via US 60
The US 61/62 already is a Grade-Separated Diamond with US 60/Future I-57
That said, Scoping for south of US 160 for US 67/Future I-57 to Arkansas doesn't make sense. That is already all studied and designed, up to very near the border, which will require cooperation with ArDOT. It is merely awaiting funding, I thought?
Quote from: ilpt4u on June 01, 2022, 11:59:09 PM
Dumb question, but I think I can guess it is something along the lines of planning/prelim design? Or even early planning studies?
Based on https://epg.modot.org/index.php/104.2_Project_Scoping (https://epg.modot.org/index.php/104.2_Project_Scoping), I would say a combination of both.
https://www.komu.com/news/midmissourinews/modot-seeking-public-comment-on-i-70-hwy-63-connector-improvements/article_79bad754-fe26-11ec-8fa9-0784580120ef.html
Quote
COLUMBIA − The Missouri Department of Transportation is seeking public feedback on a study of the Interstate 70, including the I-70 and Highway 63 connector in Columbia.
The study is a re-evaluation of an Environmental Impact Statement completed in the mid-2000s, according to MoDOT.
It's designed to identify ways to improve the part of the 18-mile stretch of interstate through Boone County, from east of Route BB (exit 115) to east of Route Z (exit 133).
MoDOT said the re-evaluation is needed to identify changes to existing conditions, possible solutions, potential impacts and related mitigation measures.
The connector reconfiguration was added to MoDOT's Statewide Transportation Improvement Program, which was approved Wednesday (https://www.komu.com/tncms/asset/editorial/a44b08e4-fd5f-11ec-aee3-175de2db93be/). It will completed as a design-build project worth about $140 million.
MoDOT will hold an in-person public meeting on Thursday, July 21 from 4 to 6 p.m. at the Columbia Activities and Recreation Center to go over the project materials and potential alternatives.
Public comment is also welcome starting Wednesday, July 13 through Sunday, July 31 online here (https://www.modot.org/improvei70Columbia).
Project Website: https://www.modot.org/improvei70Columbia
Quote from: mvak36 on May 19, 2022, 11:44:36 AM
2023-2027 Draft STIP (https://www.modot.org/DRAFTSTIP) is available online. I've only gotten a chance to look at the projects in the KC area. Biggest project is for I-70 between downtown and I-435. Another project of interest is I-49 widening in Cass county as I mentioned in the other thread (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=3239.msg2738952#msg2738952).
These projects might get delayed if SB262 (gas tax increase from 2021) gets repealed.
https://www.modot.org/node/26362
Quote
JEFFERSON CITY — The Missouri Highways and Transportation Commission today approved the FY 2023-2027 Statewide Transportation Improvement Program (STIP), which lists transportation projects planned by state and regional planning agencies July 1, 2022 through June 30, 2027.
The STIP makes available $10 billion of federal and state revenues for all modes of transportation over the next five years, making it the state's largest program. This includes $100 million from the Governor's Rural Route program, which will address low volume roads in FY 2023. Of the remaining $9.9 billion, the STIP details $7.65 billion in road and bridge construction contractor awards, averaging approximately $1.5 billion each year over each of the next five years.
"Just a few years ago, our 2016 STIP made available a fraction of this program with only $2.6 billion," said MoDOT Director Patrick McKenna. "The new STIP–our largest to date–is quite an achievement that has taken the collective efforts of policymakers, state leaders and the leadership of the commission, which has held firm on the need for resources to do the projects our citizens expect us to do. By working with planning partners across the state and listening to the needs of the communities we serve, we've made these plans to take care of this massive system."
The program details a focus on preventive maintenance improvements to Missouri's nearly 34,000 miles of roads and 10,400 bridges. The draft STIP was released in May for public review, and MoDOT received 317 comments.
The STIP also includes detailed project information for non-highway modes of transportation and a section detailing planned operations and maintenance activities for the next three years. This additional information is provided to allow Missourians to more easily see how their transportation funding is invested. The Final STIP is available online at https://www.modot.org/statewide-transportation-improvement-program-stip
Quote from: mvak36 on January 13, 2022, 10:10:27 AM
https://www.news-leader.com/story/news/politics/2022/01/11/buc-ees-travel-center-headed-springfield-council-debates-incentive/9124629002/
Quote
Once built, the superstore will be located just northeast of Springfield at the intersection of I-44 and Mulroy Road. Beard said the chain hopes to break ground sometime this year and finish construction 12 to 15 months after that.
The interchange just south of what will be Buc-ee's is being redone (https://www.modot.org/sites/default/files/documents/I-44%20Rebuild%20at%20MO%20744Mulroy%20Road%20Fact%20Sheet%20Updated.pdf).. crews are preparing to start the project. I hold the opinion that regardless of if Buc-ee's comes to Springfield or not, its about time this interchange gets some upgrades. I use this interchange to commute to the "Industrial East" part of Springfield, which features a multitude of warehouses and factories of several high-profile companies. With this comes a fair deal of truck traffic as well as commuters.
As for the Buc-ee's itself, no progress on the ground just yet.
https://www.kfvs12.com/2022/08/03/modot-choose-between-four-teams-build-chester-bridge-route-51/
QuoteSIKESTON, Mo. (KFVS) - The Missouri Department of Transportation (MoDOT) is choosing potential design-build teams for the Chester Bridge project.
This bridge, which connects the cities of Perryville, Mo. and Chester, Ill., will replace the Route 51 bridge over the Mississippi River.
...
MoDOT says it will issue the request for proposal in September 2022. The design-build team is expected to be selected in March 2023, with construction beginning as early as spring 2023.
Project Website: https://www.modot.org/chesterbridge
I hope they give some spinach to the Popeye statue at the Chester Welcome Center.
https://www.ksdk.com/article/news/local/modot-new-plan-st-charles-county-i-70-i-64-interchange/63-725ecd9c-76d3-4ce2-960f-5051eacce647
Conceptual Preferred Alternative:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/gallery/12408_23_08_22_9_54_46.png)
More detailed drawing: https://www.modot.org/sites/default/files/documents/Conceptual%20Preferred%20Alternative%20Exhibit.pdf
Project Site: https://www.modot.org/i-64i-70route-61-interchange
Quote from: mvak36 on August 23, 2022, 09:56:09 AM
More detailed drawing: https://www.modot.org/sites/default/files/documents/Conceptual%20Preferred%20Alternative%20Exhibit.pdf
The weave to get from westbound I-70 to northbound Church Street looks nasty. MoDOT should try to braid it somehow or go for a configuration similar to the westbound Page Avenue to Bennington Place movement at the I-270/MO 364/Page Avenue interchange.
Is the I-70/I-64 interchange project designed to tie into the Wentzville Parkway mainline upgrades seen here?: https://www.modot.org/sites/default/files/documents/6I0624_2022_03_22_Stripmap_Reduced_0.pdf
The interchange improvement map shows quite a few more lanes to the west of the Route Z interchange than are shown on the Wentzville Parkway map: https://www.modot.org/sites/default/files/documents/Conceptual%20Preferred%20Alternative%20Exhibit.pdf
Is there room between Route Z and the new railroad bridge to merge all those lanes down to three westbound lanes?
https://www.modot.org/node/26603
Quote
MoDOT Shortlists Four Teams for Chester Bridge Design-Build Project
SIKESTON - The Missouri Department of Transportation has received Statements of Qualification from potential design-build teams for the Chester Bridge project, which will replace the Route 51 bridge over the Mississippi River. This major river bridge connects the cities of Perryville, Missouri and Chester, Illinois.
The SOQs have been evaluated, and four teams have been prequalified to proceed.
The following teams (in no particular order) were selected to further develop their proposals:
Massman Traylor Chester Joint Venture: comprised of Massman Construction, Traylor Bros., Inc., and HNTB Corporation
The Ames Team: comprised of Ames Construction Inc. and Parsons Transportation Group
American Bridge/Burns & McDonnell Team: comprised of American Bridge Company, Burns & McDonnell Engineering Company, Inc., and Modjeski and Masters, Inc.
Lunda Team: comprised of Lunda Construction Company and T.Y. Lin International
"The shortlisted teams have been selected to compete for the contract to oversee the design and construction of the Chester Bridge design-build project," said Chester Bridge Project Director Brian Okenfuss.
Design-build projects combine both the design and construction phases into one contract. The selected contract team completes the design and construction in parallel instead of in succession, which saves time and resources.
"We are excited about the interest we received and look forward to working with the shortlisted teams to further develop their proposals," added Okenfuss. "Each team has great experience in both design and construction, and the proposals will detail their plans to meet or exceed each project goal."
MoDOT will issue the Request for Proposal in September 2022. The design-build team is expected to be selected in March 2023, with construction beginning as early as spring 2023.
For more information about the Chester Bridge design-build project, please visit the project website at: www.modot.org/chesterbridge.
###
https://www.modot.org/node/26976
Quote
HANNIBAL, MO — The Missouri Department of Transportation has kicked off the US 61 Expressway Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) Re-evaluation study. "While this is a different study than the one completed in 1996, we will still be using some of the same data, so we are not starting completely over," explained MoDOT Northeast District Engineer, Paula Gough. "Development and land use patterns have changed, and new technology has been introduced, so we need to reevaluate the four options presented at that time," Gough added. The previous study presented solutions to traffic congestion, delay, and safety on U.S. 61 through Hannibal and evaluated four roadway alternatives.
Gough said the new study will have the similar goals, even though it has been twenty-five years since the completion of the previous study. The re-evaluation will factor each alternative's ability to meet the purpose and need for the project, natural, and socio-economic environmental impacts, engineering criteria, cost, and constructability. "These factors, in addition to public input, will help determine if there is a feasible alternative to move forward into further project development," Gough explained.
Gough stresses there is no current funding for the design and construction of the project; the $500,000 funding is for the study only.
The proposed project is focused on improving safety, congestion, and mobility for the City of Hannibal and regional area. In addition, it is intended to reduce heavy truck conflicts on US 61 through Hannibal.
"In 2008 and 2009, we initiated some public involvement efforts as an opportunity to consider funding some of the engineering of the actual project," Gough noted. As part of our current planning process, Updating the Hannibal Expressway Study was identified as part of the 2021 High Priority Unfunded Road & Bridge Needs list.
As part of the project, there will be a robust public involvement program, including the re-establishment of a Citizens Advisory Group, and MoDOT will host public meetings to gather input from key stakeholders and the public. Those interested in following the project can sign up for project email updates, find the latest materials, and submit questions and comments directly to the project team through the project web page at U.S. Route 61 Expressway EIS Re-evaluation Study | Missouri Department of Transportation (modot.org) (https://www.modot.org/us-route-61-expressway-eis-re-evaluation-study).
"We expect the study to conclude by the end of 2023," Gough concluded.
MODOT is going to have a public meeting today to "discuss the next phase of Future I-57". There's no funding for this phase.
Meeting Handout: https://www.modot.org/sites/default/files/documents/US%2067%20Future%20I57%20Handout_Oct%202022%20Public%20Meeting.pdf
Quote from: mvak36 on October 19, 2022, 09:14:33 AM
MODOT is going to have a public meeting today to "discuss the next phase of Future I-57". There's no funding for this phase.
Meeting Handout: https://www.modot.org/sites/default/files/documents/US%2067%20Future%20I57%20Handout_Oct%202022%20Public%20Meeting.pdf
Well, it's good they're still ironing out the plan for the phase, even if it isn't yet funded. Makes it more likely to get funded, eventually.
Quote from: MikieTimT on October 19, 2022, 09:25:28 AM
Quote from: mvak36 on October 19, 2022, 09:14:33 AM
MODOT is going to have a public meeting today to "discuss the next phase of Future I-57". There's no funding for this phase.
Meeting Handout: https://www.modot.org/sites/default/files/documents/US%2067%20Future%20I57%20Handout_Oct%202022%20Public%20Meeting.pdf
Well, it's good they're still ironing out the plan for the phase, even if it isn't yet funded. Makes it more likely to get funded, eventually.
I do like the plan for the interchange except for the roundabout at the end of the SB offramp. I don't have anything against roundabouts; just think it's an unnecessary expense when a simple T-intersection would work as well. This will be nice whenever it happens. I don't know what the current traffic is like, but I imagine it's increasing as US 67 has been four lanes from Little Rock to Pocahontas for about five years now.
According to this article MODOT prefers flyover ramps for the I-70/U.S. 63 Interchange in Columbia.
QuoteThe project would involve tri-level flyover ramps from northbound 63 onto westbound 70 and from eastbound 70 onto southbound 63, completely avoiding the current connector. The project has funding in the 2023-27 Statewide Transportation Improvement Plan and is part of the Improve I-70 initiative.
MoDOT presented three construction alternatives for the connector project in July.
The department shared its preferred alternative Wednesday afternoon during an open house at the Activity and Recreation Center after receiving input from community members in addition to feedback from businesses and government leaders.
https://news.yahoo.com/modot-prefers-flyover-ramps-interstate-111535605.html
Quote from: afguy on November 06, 2022, 05:58:13 PM
According to this article MODOT prefers flyover ramps for the I-70/U.S. 63 Interchange in Columbia.
QuoteThe project would involve tri-level flyover ramps from northbound 63 onto westbound 70 and from eastbound 70 onto southbound 63, completely avoiding the current connector. The project has funding in the 2023-27 Statewide Transportation Improvement Plan and is part of the Improve I-70 initiative.
MoDOT presented three construction alternatives for the connector project in July.
The department shared its preferred alternative Wednesday afternoon during an open house at the Activity and Recreation Center after receiving input from community members in addition to feedback from businesses and government leaders.
https://news.yahoo.com/modot-prefers-flyover-ramps-interstate-111535605.html
There's another article who confirmed Alternative A.
https://www.komu.com/news/midmissourinews/modot-presents-alternatives-for-i-70-highway-63-connector/article_ce8166a0-5ae6-11ed-a402-f320dba15961.html
And for those who are curious to see how Alternatives B and C look it's on the following document on page 23.
https://www.modot.org/sites/default/files/documents/2022.11.02_J5S3411_PIM_2_Presentation_All_Final.pdf
Quote from: skluth on October 19, 2022, 03:50:05 PM
Quote from: MikieTimT on October 19, 2022, 09:25:28 AM
Quote from: mvak36 on October 19, 2022, 09:14:33 AM
MODOT is going to have a public meeting today to "discuss the next phase of Future I-57". There's no funding for this phase.
Meeting Handout: https://www.modot.org/sites/default/files/documents/US%2067%20Future%20I57%20Handout_Oct%202022%20Public%20Meeting.pdf
Well, it's good they're still ironing out the plan for the phase, even if it isn't yet funded. Makes it more likely to get funded, eventually.
I do like the plan for the interchange except for the roundabout at the end of the SB offramp. I don't have anything against roundabouts; just think it's an unnecessary expense when a simple T-intersection would work as well. This will be nice whenever it happens. I don't know what the current traffic is like, but I imagine it's increasing as US 67 has been four lanes from Little Rock to Pocahontas for about five years now.
It's time for Missouri to start figuring out some funding for their part of I-57 south of Neelyville since Arkansas now has completed the DEIS with preferred alignments selected and one alternative eliminated from contention. Things are now moving south of the border, and although not all is funded in Arkansas, some funds for final studies and ROW acquisition are dedicated as of this writing. Not to say we don't have a repeat of the Bella Vista Bypass where the states flip-flopped with available funds for the project with NWARPC pulling strings to help get Missouri the final grant to complete I-49's gap. There isn't a comparable planning commission on either side of the border to help pull together funds for this one.
https://future57.transportationplanroom.com/ (https://future57.transportationplanroom.com/)
They've posted an updated High-Priority Unfunded Needs (https://www.modot.org/sites/default/files/documents/High-Priority%20Unfunded%20Needs%202022%20DRAFT%2011-2022.pdf) list. They are also going to have public meetings (https://www.modot.org/high-priority-unfunded-needs-public-meetings) like last year.
From the document:
QuoteTier one includes $528 million and includes project needs we could accomplish in the time of the current five-year STIP as federal
and state funding levels increase. These projects have more refined estimates. Tier two is worth $2 billion and includes project needs beyond the
current STIP timeframe with broader estimates. Tier three includes $2.2 billion of project needs also beyond the current STIP timeframe with broader
estimates. In addition, DOT staff worked with the planning partners to identify $1 billion in multimodal needs. There is also an additional nearly $3
billion in identified statewide unfunded needs, primarily focused on improving Interstate 70.
Doing a quick scan, Tier 2 has 110 million for "SAFETY IMPROVEMENTS ACROSS BRUCE R. WATKINS" and also 3 projects in the Joplin area to make MO249/MO171 into an interstate highway.
Quote from: mvak36 on November 18, 2022, 12:00:43 PM
They've posted an updated High-Priority Unfunded Needs (https://www.modot.org/sites/default/files/documents/High-Priority%20Unfunded%20Needs%202022%20DRAFT%2011-2022.pdf) list. They are also going to have public meetings (https://www.modot.org/high-priority-unfunded-needs-public-meetings) like last year.
Page 23 lists a 'new roadway from I-44 to MO 5 at Lebanon' for around $30 million. Hopefully this is a partial bypass for MO 5.
Page 23 also lists interchange and outer road improvements for US 67 from Route CC to the St. Francis County line for $65 million - possible a partial freeway conversion?
Page 27 suggests I-55 may get at least a partial new interchange at Route U around New Madrid. (https://goo.gl/maps/3bo37aiCkPBfE7E19)
Page 31 lists a new interchange for I-229 at Cook Road. (https://goo.gl/maps/frbzgJajsa4D7Qz77)
Page 35 mentions a replacement of the PSB and possibly twinning the I-70 Mississippi Bridge, but with partial in parenthesis.
Quote from: mvak36 on November 18, 2022, 12:00:43 PM
They've posted an updated High-Priority Unfunded Needs (https://www.modot.org/sites/default/files/documents/High-Priority%20Unfunded%20Needs%202022%20DRAFT%2011-2022.pdf) list. They are also going to have public meetings (https://www.modot.org/high-priority-unfunded-needs-public-meetings) like last year.
From the document:
QuoteTier one includes $528 million and includes project needs we could accomplish in the time of the current five-year STIP as federal
and state funding levels increase. These projects have more refined estimates. Tier two is worth $2 billion and includes project needs beyond the
current STIP timeframe with broader estimates. Tier three includes $2.2 billion of project needs also beyond the current STIP timeframe with broader
estimates. In addition, DOT staff worked with the planning partners to identify $1 billion in multimodal needs. There is also an additional nearly $3
billion in identified statewide unfunded needs, primarily focused on improving Interstate 70.
Doing a quick scan, Tier 2 has 110 million for "SAFETY IMPROVEMENTS ACROSS BRUCE R. WATKINS" and also 3 projects in the Joplin area to make MO249/MO171 into an interstate highway.
Hopefully, the lane extensions they are talking about for MO-171/249 are related to redoing the interchange at Exit 53 on I-49 with a flyover for northbound traffic so that there isn't a left-turn intersection to get onto I-49. Can't really call it an interstate with the current interchange there, although the rest are pretty much there along that route. Signage and guardrails are nice, but that interchange is the big ticket item preventing its promotion.
Quote from: Revive 755 on November 18, 2022, 10:54:57 PM
Quote from: mvak36 on November 18, 2022, 12:00:43 PM
They've posted an updated High-Priority Unfunded Needs (https://www.modot.org/sites/default/files/documents/High-Priority%20Unfunded%20Needs%202022%20DRAFT%2011-2022.pdf) list. They are also going to have public meetings (https://www.modot.org/high-priority-unfunded-needs-public-meetings) like last year.
Page 23 lists a 'new roadway from I-44 to MO 5 at Lebanon' for around $30 million. Hopefully this is a partial bypass for MO 5.
That would be nice. They wouldn't even need a new interchange; just build it from the Route F exit west to MO 5.
Quote
Page 23 also lists interchange and outer road improvements for US 67 from Route CC to the St. Francis County line for $65 million - possible a partial freeway conversion?
US 67 is already an expressway with interchanges at MO 110 and Valles Mines. Ideally, it would be building an interchange at CC (I think I hit that light on red almost every time I had to visit my ex's family), but it could be Victoria Road (which needs at least a light) for all the commuters turning left to NB US 67. MODOT really needs to remove all the stoplights and busy crossings on US 67 down to Fredericktown now that it's four lanes to Poplar Bluff. In any case, it's unfunded so we may never know.
Quote
Page 27 suggests I-55 may get at least a partial new interchange at Route U around New Madrid. (https://goo.gl/maps/3bo37aiCkPBfE7E19)
Page 31 lists a new interchange for I-229 at Cook Road. (https://goo.gl/maps/frbzgJajsa4D7Qz77)
That's surprising considering the effort to remove I-229 from Downtown St Joseph and that there is almost no development there. St Jo's population is slowly shrinking so I wouldn't expect an explosion of new development anytime soon. This looks more like some politico's pet pork project.
Quote
Page 35 mentions a replacement of the PSB and possibly twinning the I-70 Mississippi Bridge, but with partial in parenthesis.
The PSB is getting up there in age. I don't know what its expected life is given the earthquake retrofits late last century and if they did any extra improvements when they added the fifth lane EB. Don't see the need for a second Stan Span, but I haven't lived or been back to St Louis for four years now. I think I'd prefer a dedicated exit ramp from the "reversible" lanes EB to the Musial Bridge. I'm also curious about what small improvement is unfunded at I-64/MO 141 (p 24). The improvements I'd want, a couple flyover ramps, cost far more than $6.5M.
Quote from: mvak36 on November 18, 2022, 12:00:43 PM
Doing a quick scan, Tier 2 has 110 million for "SAFETY IMPROVEMENTS ACROSS BRUCE R. WATKINS" and also 3 projects in the Joplin area to make MO249/MO171 into an interstate highway.
I wonder what the safety improvements will be?
Quote from: Route66Fan on November 21, 2022, 09:54:16 AM
Quote from: mvak36 on November 18, 2022, 12:00:43 PM
Doing a quick scan, Tier 2 has 110 million for "SAFETY IMPROVEMENTS ACROSS BRUCE R. WATKINS" and also 3 projects in the Joplin area to make MO249/MO171 into an interstate highway.
I wonder what the safety improvements will be?
Maybe they'll at least add traffic cameras along the corridor. There's a conspicuous gap on the map of KC Scout traffic cams along Bruce R. Watkins. Wonder if MoDOT left them out of the ITS project out of pique or something.
Lawmaker wants to use Missouri surplus to widen I-70Quote"The option to do nothing on I-70 is not there," Kevin Keith, then-director of MODOT, said in January 2012. "If we do nothing, in 10 to 15 years, it will become a gravel parking lot."
Funding for the biggest project of all — widening the interstate to three or four lanes in each direction — has eluded planners. But with the state enjoying an unprecedented surplus in excess of $6 billion, now is the time to make the wish for money a reality, said state Sen. Bill Eigel, R-Weldon Spring.
As one of his first bills filed in advance of the legislative session that begins Jan. 4, Eigel is proposing lawmakers dedicate a portion of the surplus to widen the highway to four lanes from St. Louis to Kansas City.
"I don't think it is necessarily a great thing for cash to be sitting in the government's bank account," Eigel said. "We need to invest those funds in actual big infrastructure projects like I-70."
Under his proposal, any general revenue funds in excess of a $4 billion cash balance would be transferred to the project fund. And from ongoing revenue, Eigel would dedicate about 2% annually — nearly $300 million this year — for 10 years.
That could generate up to $9 billion for the project, he said.
https://news.stlpublicradio.org/government-politics-issues/2022-12-03/lawmaker-wants-to-use-missouri-surplus-to-widen-i-70
Was that really worth 24pt font?
Missouri doesn't need a surplus to start this. Just put some money in the budget to start widening I-70 from each end of the state. How much is built will be directly related to how much is budgeted. Have one crew start in Blue Springs and one in Wentzville. They work towards each other like the builders of the Transcontinental Railroad. At 10 miles per year at each end, the highway will be six lanes in about a decade. Drivers will see the benefit as I-70 is less clogged by trucks passing other trucks at suboptimal speed. The main problem will be widening it to six lanes through Columbia.
Quote from: skluth on December 06, 2022, 05:24:53 PM
Missouri doesn't need a surplus to start this. Just put some money in the budget ...
Having a wife from Missouri, this made me laugh. Everyone laments that the state doesn't have enough money to maintain the highways they already have, let alone start new improvement projects.
Quote from: kphoger on December 06, 2022, 05:56:47 PM
Quote from: skluth on December 06, 2022, 05:24:53 PM
Missouri doesn't need a surplus to start this. Just put some money in the budget ...
Having a wife from Missouri, this made me laugh. Everyone laments that the state doesn't have enough money to maintain the highways they already have, let alone start new improvement projects.
I lived there for 28 years until 2018. I know all too well the cheapness of Missouri legislators going back to the Hancock Amendment.
Quote"The option to do nothing on I-70 is not there," Kevin Keith, then-director of MODOT, said in January 2012. "If we do nothing, in 10 to 15 years, it will become a gravel parking lot."
It's January 2023 next month, which leaves four years for I-70 to become a gravel parking lot.
I actually like this approach to widening I-70, target the most congested areas first.
Missouri governor wants to put I-70 widening on fast trackQuoteIn a 50-minute address to lawmakers Wednesday, Parson called on the GOP-controlled House and Senate to approve $859 million to add lanes on the highway from Wentzville to Warrenton in the St. Louis region, while also widening parts of the thoroughfare in Columbia and suburban Kansas City."This is a major pinch point," said Missouri Department of Transportation Director Patrick McKenna.
A push to widen the east-west artery has been gaining steam for years as heavy truck and car traffic have frustrated motorists and affected the transport of goods.
https://www.stltoday.com/news/local/govt-and-politics/missouri-governor-wants-to-put-i-70-widening-on-fast-track/article_232752c9-a356-5d81-a447-89aa5acd5771.html
Quote from: afguy on January 18, 2023, 07:44:56 PM
I actually like this approach to widening I-70, target the most congested areas first.
Missouri governor wants to put I-70 widening on fast track
QuoteIn a 50-minute address to lawmakers Wednesday, Parson called on the GOP-controlled House and Senate to approve $859 million to add lanes on the highway from Wentzville to Warrenton in the St. Louis region, while also widening parts of the thoroughfare in Columbia and suburban Kansas City."This is a major pinch point," said Missouri Department of Transportation Director Patrick McKenna.
A push to widen the east-west artery has been gaining steam for years as heavy truck and car traffic have frustrated motorists and affected the transport of goods.
https://www.stltoday.com/news/local/govt-and-politics/missouri-governor-wants-to-put-i-70-widening-on-fast-track/article_232752c9-a356-5d81-a447-89aa5acd5771.html
This is excellent. I agree it needs to be done. It's been talked about since when I originally moved to Missouri and that was 1987. Not sure how they plan to widen it through Columbia since there are some really tight fits there. Personally, I'd just start four design-build projects starting east of KC, west of Wentzville, and on either side of Columbia and just keep adding more six lane sections to I-70 along the entire corridor until it's finished. Widening it through Columbia would be its own project. It may take twenty years or more to finish a six-lane I-70, but the longer Missouri waits the more expensive and difficult it becomes.
I-70 is nearing the end of its life expectancy anyway with some of the original parts dating back to the 1950s. It's going to be a complete rebuild in so many segments there is no time better to rebuild and improve it than now.
Report from the local station here in KC about the potential I-70 widening: https://www.kmbc.com/article/governor-parsons-proposed-i-70-expansion/42579837. It talked about the areas that would get the funding if the legislature agrees to the governor's request.
Quote
AREAS IMPACTED
The 19 miles between Blue Springs and Odessa would be one of the three expansion areas.
The 13 miles from Midway to Route Z around Columbia, which MoDOT says sees roughly 50,000 drivers daily.
The 20 miles between Warrenton and Wentzville that MoDOT says has almost 82,000 on it a day.
As much as some drivers want it, none of this is green-lighted yet. The Missouri legislature still has to agree to it, and they could be the ones who pump the brakes.
The article also posted the link to a MODOT Infographic (https://www.modot.org/sites/default/files/documents/2023%20I-70%20Capacity%20Improvements%20-%20Gov%20Parson%20I-70%20Project%20Highlights.pdf) which shows the impacted areas mentioned in the article, projects already awarded or in planning, and unfunded sections.
Another pdf (https://www.modot.org/sites/default/files/documents/Gov.%20Parson%20I-70%20Project%20Placemat.pdf) from the Improve I-70 site (https://www.modot.org/improvei70/home). Same info as the previous pdf but it only lists the potential projects if the legislature passes the funding.
Quote from: mvak36 on January 21, 2023, 08:06:17 PM
The article also posted the link to a MODOT Infographic (https://www.modot.org/sites/default/files/documents/2023%20I-70%20Capacity%20Improvements%20-%20Gov%20Parson%20I-70%20Project%20Highlights.pdf) which shows the impacted areas mentioned in the article, projects already awarded or in planning, and unfunded sections.
Wonder what the planned project is for I-70 at US 67 for $46 million?
Quote from: Revive 755 on January 21, 2023, 10:47:50 PM
Quote from: mvak36 on January 21, 2023, 08:06:17 PM
The article also posted the link to a MODOT Infographic (https://www.modot.org/sites/default/files/documents/2023%20I-70%20Capacity%20Improvements%20-%20Gov%20Parson%20I-70%20Project%20Highlights.pdf) which shows the impacted areas mentioned in the article, projects already awarded or in planning, and unfunded sections.
Wonder what the planned project is for I-70 at US 67 for $46 million?
The only thing I was able to find was a project listed in the STIP which is for corridor improvements on I-70 from the Missouri River to US67. I don't know what those improvements would be and the cost listed in the STIP is just below 59 million, which is more than what was shown in that infographic.
MoDOT has selected a design-build contractor to replace the Chester Bridge. It looks like another cable-stayed bridge will be built across the Missisippi River.
MoDOT selects team to replace Chester Bridge(https://media.ksdk.com/assets/KSDK/images/a43a4111-123d-43bf-bdae-e45bb73c138a/a43a4111-123d-43bf-bdae-e45bb73c138a_750x422.jpg)
QuoteThe bridge was originally constructed in 1942. It spans across the Mississippi River, connecting the cities of Perryville, Missouri, and Chester, Illinois, via Route 51. According to MoDOT, around 7,000 vehicles use the bridge daily.
The bridge is safe for travel, but the aging structure is considered in poor condition, according to MoDOT. The commission approved an amendment on Sept. 9, 2021, to fund the Chester Bridge Replacement Project.
"This major river bridge is vital to agricultural traffic, area industries and travelers," said Missouri Department of Transportation Project Director Brian Okenfuss. "While the current bridge is safe, it is in poor condition. The new Chester Bridge will reduce the number of flood-related closures and better serve today's traffic."
The Ames Team will construct the bridge upstream from the existing structure, making it twice as wide. No long-term lane closures are anticipated by MoDOT and traffic will continue as construction is completed.
https://www.ksdk.com/article/news/local/modot-team-replace-chester-bridge/63-8c6c1501-ebc4-4d0d-9e6a-f1be0699ffca (https://www.ksdk.com/article/news/local/modot-team-replace-chester-bridge/63-8c6c1501-ebc4-4d0d-9e6a-f1be0699ffca)
They're able to do a fancier bridge for some rural 2-lane across the Mississippi but not for I-270?
Cross-posted from the MODOT Contract Lettings (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=19531.msg2826801#msg2826801) thread:
All the Focus on Bridges projects have been let: https://www.newstribune.com/news/2023/mar/09/modot-awards-final-focus-on-bridges-contracts/
Looks like lawmakers are trying to scale back some of the improvements that Gov. Parsons wants for I-70. While I understand lawmakers that that don't live near the I-70 corridor want MoDOT to focus on their needs as well, the fact remains that I-70 is Missouri's main street and that it connects the state's two largest metro areas and that 60% of the state's population lives within 30 miles of the corridor. So, widening it is a must. Also, I-44 will be the next corridor MoDOT will be focusing on as far as widening statewide.
Lawmakers chip away at Missouri governor's plan for I-70 improvementsQuoteQuestioning of McKenna began in the committee's morning session and resumed after the House, in floor action, voted 101-45 in favor of a state constitutional amendment that would give lawmakers control of the state road fund. Currently, money from fuel taxes, license fees and vehicle sales taxes to maintain highways"stand appropriated without legislative action."
The proposed constitutional amendment now goes to the Senate where, if approved, it would be put on a statewide ballot.
During the hearing, Rep. Scott Cupps, R-Shell Knob, peppered McKenna with questions about how I-70 was chosen over other projects, such as I-44.
"Is this something that stems from the fact that I-70 does go through what I have coined as being the bureaucrat bubble?" Cupps asked.
Cupps, who drives a truck, said he doesn't believe the congestion on I-70 outside urban "pinch points" is as bad as it is on I-44.
https://www.bizjournals.com/stlouis/news/2023/03/08/missouri-1-70-improvement-plan.html (https://www.bizjournals.com/stlouis/news/2023/03/08/missouri-1-70-improvement-plan.html)
Quote from: SkyPesos on March 08, 2023, 11:59:26 PM
They're able to do a fancier bridge for some rural 2-lane across the Mississippi but not for I-270?
The Chain of Rocks Main Channel Bridge isn't required to accommodate barge traffic.
MoDOT is going to close more rest areas for converson to truck parking: The one on SB I-29 between St. Joseph and KC, and the rest areas on I-35 between KC and Cameron. (https://www.modot.org/node/28062)
Quote from: Revive 755 on March 09, 2023, 10:45:05 PM
MoDOT is going to close more rest areas for converson to truck parking: The one on SB I-29 between St. Joseph and KC, and the rest areas on I-35 between KC and Cameron. (https://www.modot.org/node/28062)
Sorry to hear that. We always used those I-35 rest areas going to and from Minnesota. Now we will have to either gt off at Kearney or Cameron and deal with the cross traffic. Ugh!
There are gas stations at Exit 34 (MO PP - Lawson/Holt) and Exit 40 (MO 116 - Polo/Lathrop). They aren't rest areas, but they are easier to get in and out of than Kearney and Cameron.
Quote from: rte66man on March 10, 2023, 09:27:25 AM
Quote from: Revive 755 on March 09, 2023, 10:45:05 PM
MoDOT is going to close more rest areas for converson to truck parking: The one on SB I-29 between St. Joseph and KC, and the rest areas on I-35 between KC and Cameron. (https://www.modot.org/node/28062)
Sorry to hear that. We always used those I-35 rest areas going to and from Minnesota. Now we will have to either gt off at Kearney or Cameron and deal with the cross traffic. Ugh!
Quote from: rarnold on March 15, 2023, 09:51:59 PM
There are gas stations at Exit 34 (MO PP - Lawson/Holt) and Exit 40 (MO 116 - Polo/Lathrop). They aren't rest areas, but they are easier to get in and out of than Kearney and Cameron.
I haven't stopped at the new-ish Trex station at Exit #40 (I still remember when it was an old Phillips 66 station before that was torn down). But I did stop at the BP in Holt once, and it was awfully small and grungy. The Phillips 66 station in Holt might be better but, if I were you, I'd try the Trex at Exit #40.
But, actually, you know what? There's a brand-new Love's truck stop that opened in Cameron, and it's
not at the US-36 exit. It's at the BB Hwy exit (#52), which should be a lot more convenient to use.
Quote from: kphoger on March 16, 2023, 09:41:41 AM
Quote from: rte66man on March 10, 2023, 09:27:25 AM
Quote from: Revive 755 on March 09, 2023, 10:45:05 PM
MoDOT is going to close more rest areas for converson to truck parking: The one on SB I-29 between St. Joseph and KC, and the rest areas on I-35 between KC and Cameron. (https://www.modot.org/node/28062)
Sorry to hear that. We always used those I-35 rest areas going to and from Minnesota. Now we will have to either gt off at Kearney or Cameron and deal with the cross traffic. Ugh!
Quote from: rarnold on March 15, 2023, 09:51:59 PM
There are gas stations at Exit 34 (MO PP - Lawson/Holt) and Exit 40 (MO 116 - Polo/Lathrop). They aren't rest areas, but they are easier to get in and out of than Kearney and Cameron.
I haven't stopped at the new-ish Trex station at Exit #40 (I still remember when it was an old Phillips 66 station before that was torn down). But I did stop at the BP in Holt once, and it was awfully small and grungy. The Phillips 66 station in Holt might be better but, if I were you, I'd try the Trex at Exit #40.
But, actually, you know what? There's a brand-new Love's truck stop that opened in Cameron, and it's not at the US-36 exit. It's at the BB Hwy exit (#52), which should be a lot more convenient to use.
We have a winner!! Thanks.
https://www.kansascity.com/news/politics-government/article273372665.html
QuoteMissouri Gov. Mike Parson's push to spend $859 million to expand three key portions of I-70 — near Kansas City, Columbia and St. Louis — is at risk of running out of gas amid a bureaucratic fight over who, exactly, controls state highway dollars.
The Missouri Department of Transportation, led by a governor-appointed commission, faces a backlash from Republican lawmakers after the commission filed a lawsuit that seeks a ruling giving it firm authority to spend hundreds of millions from the state roads fund without legislative approval. The dispute centers on the meaning of a five-word phrase in the state constitution that lawmakers are trying to remove to undercut the lawsuit.
It looks like Gov. Parson's plans for widening I-70 has survived the House's latest budget plan. In addition, $15 million would be set aside for a pharmaceutical center in St. Louis, $1 million for the Powell Hall renovation, $3 million for a Kirkwood Community Center and $48 million for widening I-44.
Missouri House budget backs push to widen Interstate 70, renovate Powell Symphony HallQuoteHouse Budget Committee Chairman Cody Smith, R-Carthage, unveiled the latest list of brick-and-mortar projects Tuesday, including $15 million for a pharmaceutical center in St. Louis, $3 million for Kirkwood's community center, $1 million for Powell Symphony Hall – and $859 million to upgrade the interstate near Wentzville, Columbia and Kansas City.
Earlier versions had taken some of that amount for projects on Interstate 44, but in the latest spending blueprint those also are funded at about $48 million. All told, the construction spending outlined in the plan amounts to $2.8 billion.
The state is currently sitting on a surplus estimated at about $5 billion. And new revenue figures show the state could add another $1 billion in unspent tax receipts before the end of the fiscal year, giving budget writers even more of a cushion heading into the final weeks of the legislative session.
https://www.stltoday.com/news/local/govt-and-politics/missouri-house-budget-backs-push-to-widen-interstate-70-renovate-powell-symphony-hall/article_bb7972b4-5264-58f3-a8b0-bee3b314b65d.html#tracking-source=home-top-story (https://www.stltoday.com/news/local/govt-and-politics/missouri-house-budget-backs-push-to-widen-interstate-70-renovate-powell-symphony-hall/article_bb7972b4-5264-58f3-a8b0-bee3b314b65d.html#tracking-source=home-top-story)
Quote from: afguy on April 11, 2023, 03:42:22 PM
It looks like Gov. Parson's plans for widening I-70 has survived the House's latest budget plan. In addition, $15 million would be set aside for a pharmaceutical center in St. Louis, $1 million for the Powell Hall renovation, $3 million for a Kirkwood Community Center and $48 million for widening I-44.
Missouri House budget backs push to widen Interstate 70, renovate Powell Symphony Hall
QuoteHouse Budget Committee Chairman Cody Smith, R-Carthage, unveiled the latest list of brick-and-mortar projects Tuesday, including $15 million for a pharmaceutical center in St. Louis, $3 million for Kirkwood's community center, $1 million for Powell Symphony Hall – and $859 million to upgrade the interstate near Wentzville, Columbia and Kansas City.
Earlier versions had taken some of that amount for projects on Interstate 44, but in the latest spending blueprint those also are funded at about $48 million. All told, the construction spending outlined in the plan amounts to $2.8 billion.
The state is currently sitting on a surplus estimated at about $5 billion. And new revenue figures show the state could add another $1 billion in unspent tax receipts before the end of the fiscal year, giving budget writers even more of a cushion heading into the final weeks of the legislative session.
https://www.stltoday.com/news/local/govt-and-politics/missouri-house-budget-backs-push-to-widen-interstate-70-renovate-powell-symphony-hall/article_bb7972b4-5264-58f3-a8b0-bee3b314b65d.html#tracking-source=home-top-story (https://www.stltoday.com/news/local/govt-and-politics/missouri-house-budget-backs-push-to-widen-interstate-70-renovate-powell-symphony-hall/article_bb7972b4-5264-58f3-a8b0-bee3b314b65d.html#tracking-source=home-top-story)
That's great to hear. Hopefully it passes the state Senate as well.
I'm going to ask that difficult question. Is widening I-70 necessary?
It likely is. Interstate 70 in Missouri probably should be a minimum of three lanes in each direction for the entire 250.16-mile length.
Quote from: kernals12 on April 11, 2023, 09:32:53 PM
I'm going to ask that difficult question. Is widening I-70 necessary?
Widening proposals go back at least to when I moved to St Louis in 1987. Proposals have included some downright crazy ideas, including a parallel four-lane highway for trucks inside the four lanes of I-70. (Not sure of how they planned to do this as the current ROW is not wide enough for another four lanes inside the current highway, especially through Columbia.) Six lanes are really needed at this point as I-70 is a fairly busy truck corridor and connects the two largest metros in the state and the two largest between Chicago and DFW. STL is the #21 and KC the #31 largest metro in the US.
(https://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/freight/freight_analysis/nat_freight_stats/docs/10factsfigures/images/fig3_6.jpg)
You can see in the FHA graphic above (https://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/freight/freight_analysis/nat_freight_stats/docs/10factsfigures/figure3_6.htm) that I-44 has a bit more truck traffic though it has less overall traffic. The truck traffic makes a reasonable case to make I-44 six lanes as it's quite hilly as it goes through the Ozarks between Springfield and St Louis.
Quote from: skluth on April 12, 2023, 11:32:54 AM
Widening proposals go back at least to when I moved to St Louis in 1987. Proposals have included some downright crazy ideas, including a parallel four-lane highway for trucks inside the four lanes of I-70. (Not sure of how they planned to do this as the current ROW is not wide enough for another four lanes inside the current highway, especially through Columbia.) Six lanes are really needed at this point as I-70 is a fairly busy truck corridor and connects the two largest metros in the state and the two largest between Chicago and DFW. STL is the #21 and KC the #31 largest metro in the US.
(https://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/freight/freight_analysis/nat_freight_stats/docs/10factsfigures/images/fig3_6.jpg)
You can see in the FHA graphic above (https://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/freight/freight_analysis/nat_freight_stats/docs/10factsfigures/figure3_6.htm) that I-44 has a bit more truck traffic though it has less overall traffic. The truck traffic makes a reasonable case to make I-44 six lanes as it's quite hilly as it goes through the Ozarks between Springfield and St Louis.
Trucks are a much greater bottleneck, on 4 lane interstates anyway, than cars due to governors on most of the fleet company tractors causing miles of 1-2 MPH speed differentials on trucks passing each other. I-40 between LR and Memphis is even worse for that, but I-44 isn't too far behind.
Quote from: kernals12 on April 11, 2023, 09:32:53 PM
I'm going to ask that difficult question. Is widening I-70 necessary?
For what it's worth, here are some numbers:
(https://i.imgur.com/PI8M8lg.png)
Quote from: froggie on March 22, 2011, 12:01:27 PM
With 'typical' values, a 30K ADT roughly corresponds to LOS C. Desireable in a rural area, but definitely under-capacity overall or in an urban area.
Quote from: skluth on April 12, 2023, 11:32:54 AM
Quote from: kernals12 on April 11, 2023, 09:32:53 PM
I'm going to ask that difficult question. Is widening I-70 necessary?
Widening proposals go back at least to when I moved to St Louis in 1987. Proposals have included some downright crazy ideas, including a parallel four-lane highway for trucks inside the four lanes of I-70. (Not sure of how they planned to do this as the current ROW is not wide enough for another four lanes inside the current highway, especially through Columbia.) Six lanes are really needed at this point as I-70 is a fairly busy truck corridor and connects the two largest metros in the state and the two largest between Chicago and DFW. STL is the #21 and KC the #31 largest metro in the US.
(https://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/freight/freight_analysis/nat_freight_stats/docs/10factsfigures/images/fig3_6.jpg)
You can see in the FHA graphic above (https://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/freight/freight_analysis/nat_freight_stats/docs/10factsfigures/figure3_6.htm) that I-44 has a bit more truck traffic though it has less overall traffic. The truck traffic makes a reasonable case to make I-44 six lanes as it's quite hilly as it goes through the Ozarks between Springfield and St Louis.
Meh. That graphic is ancient now.
^^^^ I'd like to see an updated version of that map.
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on April 12, 2023, 02:01:09 PM
^^^^ I'd like to see an updated version of that map.
The way things are going demographically with Russia, China, and Europe in general, by 2040 our largest trading partners are likely Canada and Mexico, which will draw more traffic through Texas, Southern California, Washington State, Michigan, and New York.
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on April 12, 2023, 02:01:09 PM
^^^^ I'd like to see an updated version of that map.
Best I could find
2015
(https://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/freight/freight_analysis/nat_freight_stats/images/lo_res_jpg/nhslnghultrktraf2015.jpg)
Projection for 2040
(https://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/freight/freight_analysis/nat_freight_stats/docs/12factsfigures/images/fig3_12.jpg)
2017 data:
Estimated Average Daily FAF Volumes for Trucks on National Highway System (https://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/freight/freight_analysis/faf/faf_truck_volumes_2017/Estimated%20Average%20Daily%20FAF%20Truck%20Volume%20(1_All%20Commodities)%202017.pdf)
Estimated FAF Flow for Trucks Going To, From, and Within Missouri on National Highway System (https://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/freight/freight_analysis/state_info/missouri/Missouri_InOut_2017.pdf)
Estimated FAF Flow for Trucks Passing Through Missouri on National Highway System (https://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/freight/freight_analysis/state_info/missouri/Missouri_Thru_2017.pdf)
They were speaking about the I-70 expansion projects on the news today: https://www.kmbc.com/article/getting-into-gear-i-70-project-back-in-the-budget-heart-of-the-matter/43602488
They have a transcript of the video in the same link, but what Jason Hancock said in the video caught my attention (sorry for the all caps but that's how the transcript is shown):
QuoteBUT, JASON, WE KNOW THAT THERE WAS SOME CONSTERNATION EVEN AMONG REPUBLICANS THIS SESSION. WHY THE ABOUT FACE? I THINK THE HOUSE BUDGET COMMITTEE SORT OF BEGAN TO REALIZE THAT THIS MIGHT BE A ONCE IN A LIFETIME OPPORTUNITY TO TO FIX A PROBLEM THAT'S BEEN NEGLECTED IN THIS STATE FOR FOUR YEARS, IN YEARS. I MEAN, I-70, THERE'S BEEN REPORTS GOING BACK 20, 30 YEARS SAYING IT NEEDS TO BE REBUILT, IT NEEDS TO BE EXPANDED. AND I THINK THE GOVERNOR'S OFFICE BEGAN TO LEAN ON PEOPLE AS WELL. I THINK ANOTHER POSSIBLE MOTIVATION WAS THAT THE SENATE IS LOOKING AT DOING THE WHOLE THING. YOU KNOW, THAT THEY'RE LOOKING AT MAYBE PUTTING MORE MONEY IN BORROWING, USING FUNDS FROM RETIRED BONDS AND JUST GETTING THIS DONE, YOU KNOW, LIKE STATE LINE TO STATE LINES ALL THE WAY. AND I THINK THE HOUSE WANTED TO AT LEAST HAVE THEIR PROPOSAL, THEIR PLAN IN PLACE SO THAT THEY HAVE A NEGOTIATING POSITION, BECAUSE I DON'T THINK THERE'S ANY THERE'S NO STARTING FROM ZERO HERE. I THINK SOMETHING IS GOING TO GO TOWARDS FIXING UP I-70 IN THIS BUDGET. IT'S JUST A MATTER OF OF SCALE NOW.
:popcorn:
Quote from: mvak36 on April 16, 2023, 07:40:33 PM
They were speaking about the I-70 expansion projects on the news today: https://www.kmbc.com/article/getting-into-gear-i-70-project-back-in-the-budget-heart-of-the-matter/43602488
They have a transcript of the video in the same link, but what Jason Hancock said in the video caught my attention (sorry for the all caps but that's how the transcript is shown):
QuoteBUT, JASON, WE KNOW THAT THERE WAS SOME CONSTERNATION EVEN AMONG REPUBLICANS THIS SESSION. WHY THE ABOUT FACE? I THINK THE HOUSE BUDGET COMMITTEE SORT OF BEGAN TO REALIZE THAT THIS MIGHT BE A ONCE IN A LIFETIME OPPORTUNITY TO TO FIX A PROBLEM THAT'S BEEN NEGLECTED IN THIS STATE FOR FOUR YEARS, IN YEARS. I MEAN, I-70, THERE'S BEEN REPORTS GOING BACK 20, 30 YEARS SAYING IT NEEDS TO BE REBUILT, IT NEEDS TO BE EXPANDED. AND I THINK THE GOVERNOR'S OFFICE BEGAN TO LEAN ON PEOPLE AS WELL. I THINK ANOTHER POSSIBLE MOTIVATION WAS THAT THE SENATE IS LOOKING AT DOING THE WHOLE THING. YOU KNOW, THAT THEY'RE LOOKING AT MAYBE PUTTING MORE MONEY IN BORROWING, USING FUNDS FROM RETIRED BONDS AND JUST GETTING THIS DONE, YOU KNOW, LIKE STATE LINE TO STATE LINES ALL THE WAY. AND I THINK THE HOUSE WANTED TO AT LEAST HAVE THEIR PROPOSAL, THEIR PLAN IN PLACE SO THAT THEY HAVE A NEGOTIATING POSITION, BECAUSE I DON'T THINK THERE'S ANY THERE'S NO STARTING FROM ZERO HERE. I THINK SOMETHING IS GOING TO GO TOWARDS FIXING UP I-70 IN THIS BUDGET. IT'S JUST A MATTER OF OF SCALE NOW.
Here's an article about what the state Senate wants to do: https://www.ksdk.com/article/news/politics/i-70-multi-billion-dollar-facelift-across-missouri/63-23b9431f-8657-4231-ae28-2d5744145dab
According to the Improve I-70 (https://www.modot.org/improvei70/home) site, the estimated remaining unfunded portions (if the governor's $859 million request is approved) is $1.891 billion. Will be interesting to see what comes out of the negotiations between the House and the Senate.
This is just my opinion, but it sounds like the minimum that will get approved is the $859 million for the governor's request, knock on wood. Anything after that would be icing on the cake.
https://missouriindependent.com/2023/04/19/missouri-senate-committee-triples-funding-for-widening-i-70-across-the-state/
https://news.stlpublicradio.org/government-politics-issues/2023-04-18/i-70-widening-moves-forward-in-house-senate-wants-to-expand-it-to-include-the-whole-road
I found something interesting in the version of the budget that passed the Missouri House. There was an amendment that passed that included $2.5 million for a study to improve US36 to I-72.
https://house.mo.gov/billtracking/bills231/amendpdf/0019H03.16H.pdf
QuoteAMEND House Committee Substitute for House Bill 19, Page 14, Section 19.317, Line 4 by:
inserting immediately thereafter the following:
"Section 19.318. To the Department of Transportation
For an engineering study related to improvements to upgrade the U.S. Highway 36 corridor to
Interstate 72
From Budget Stabilization Fund (0522)............................................................$2,500,000";
Not sure how much of the corridor they will study if this makes it through the Senate.
If anyone cares, here's the link to the House Bill: https://house.mo.gov/Bill.aspx?bill=HB19&year=2023&code=R. I believe this is the same bill where they included the funding for I-70 but I haven't been able to find a text for the bill.
EDIT: Found some other info on what is in the House bill.
https://www.kansascity.com/news/politics-government/article274504616.html
QuoteThe construction budget passed by the House Thursday includes a combined $48 million for an environmental study and improvements to I-44. It also includes $20 million of state funding toward a $200 million park planned atop Kansas City's I-670.
Couldn't they put an extension of Interstate 72 on the back burner? Improving Interstate 70 should be a much higher priority.
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on April 20, 2023, 03:17:42 PM
Couldn't they put an extension of Interstate 72 on the back burner? Improving Interstate 70 should be a much higher priority.
It's just a study. It doesn't mean construction is anytime soon.
Honestly, if they have money to put towards a study for US36 conversion, then I am hoping they put something towards building the Hannibal Bypass in this bill. I think that is a more urgent need.
Quote from: mvak36 on April 20, 2023, 01:51:47 PM
If anyone cares, here's the link to the House Bill: https://house.mo.gov/Bill.aspx?bill=HB19&year=2023&code=R. I believe this is the same bill where they included the funding for I-70 but I haven't been able to find a text for the bill.
Found what got sent to the Senate (https://house.mo.gov/billtracking/bills231/hlrbillspdf/0019H.03P.pdf). Here is what is included in the House bill for MODOT. These could all change once this bill goes through the Senate. In addition to the projects already mentioned, there is some funding for the Hannibal Bypass and the Future I-57 corridor.
Quote
Section 19.300. To the Department of Transportation
2 For the planning, design, land acquisition, utility relocation, and
3 construction of an exit from U.S. Highway 50 in or near the city of
4 Lone Jack
From General Revenue Fund (0101). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $1,866,000
Section 19.301. To the Department of Transportation
2 For the planning, design, land acquisition, utility relocation, and
3 construction of interchange improvements to Route 370 at Salt
4 River Road
From General Revenue Fund (0101). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $6,600,000
Section 19.303. To the Department of Transportation
2 For the planning, design, land acquisition, utility relocation, and
3 construction of capacity improvements on Interstate 44 between
4 U.S. Highway 13 and U.S. Highway 65
From General Revenue Fund (0101). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $28,000,000
Section 19.304. To the Department of Transportation
2 For an environmental impact study related to improvements to the
3 Interstate 44 corridor
From General Revenue Fund (0101). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $20,000,000
Section 19.306. To the Department of Transportation
2 For distribution to a county with more than two hundred thousand but
3 fewer than two hundred thirty thousand inhabitants, for the
4 planning, design, and construction of a bridge and improvements
5 to the two roads connected by said bridge, as well as other
6 intersection improvements related to an economic development
7 project
From General Revenue Fund (0101). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $12,000,000
Section 19.307. To the Department of Transportation
2 For the maintenance and repair of minor and low volume routes
From General Revenue Fund (0101). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $100,000,000
Section 19.308. To the Department of Transportation
2 For Interstate 70 capacity improvements
From General Revenue Fund (0101). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $859,000,000
Section 19.309. To the Department of Transportation
2 For right of way acquisition and utility improvements in Butler County
3 along U.S. Highway 67 from County Road 352 south to the
4 Arkansas state Line
From General Revenue Fund (0101). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $10,000,000
Section 19.310. To the Department of Transportation
2 For the planning, design, land acquisition, utility relocation, and
3 construction of a bypass around the city of Hannibal on U.S.
4 Highway 61
From General Revenue Fund (0101). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $2,000,000
Section 19.311. To the Department of Transportation
2 For capital improvements and maintenance and repair to a joint-use
3 military and civilian airport located in a county with more than
4 eighty thousand but fewer than one hundred thousand inhabitants
5 and with a county seat with more than seventy thousand but fewer
6 than eighty thousand inhabitants
From Budget Stabilization Fund (0522). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $1,200,000
Section 19.312. To the Department of Transportation
2 For the planning, design, and construction of an airport terminal in a city
3 with more than thirty-six thousand five hundred but fewer than
4 forty thousand inhabitants, provided that local matching funds
5 must be provided on a 50/50 state/local basis
From Budget Stabilization Fund (0522). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $350,000
Section 19.313. To the Department of Transportation
2 For the planning, design, and construction of a multimodal facility and
3 extension of a rail spur to serve said facility in a county with more
4 than seventy thousand but fewer than eighty thousand inhabitants,
5 provided that local matching funds must be provided on a 50/50
6 state/local basis
From Budget Stabilization Fund (0522). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $2,000,000
Section 19.314. To the Department of Transportation
2 For road improvements in a county with more than nine thousand nine
3 hundred but fewer than eleven thousand inhabitants and with a
4 county seat with fewer than two hundred inhabitants
From General Revenue Fund (0101). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $2,366,000
Section 19.315. To the Department of Transportation
2 For the planning, design, land acquisition, utility relocation, and
3 construction of a bypass around the city of Macon on U.S.
4 Highway 63
From General Revenue Fund (0101). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $2,500,000
Section 19.316. To the Department of Transportation
2 For distribution to a city with more than eleven thousand but fewer than
3 twelve thousand five hundred inhabitants and located in a county
4 with more than one million inhabitants, for the planning, design,
5 and construction of a four lane bridge with a multipurpose trail,
6 provided that local matching funds must be provided on a 50/50
7 state/local basis
From General Revenue Fund (0101). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $2,000,000
Section 19.317. To the Department of Transportation
2 For a corridor location and environmental impact study for a new west
3 corridor related to Central City Road in Jasper County
From General Revenue Fund (0101). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $1,100,000
Section 19.318. To the Department of Transportation
2 For an engineering study related to improvements to upgrade the U.S.
3 Highway 36 corridor to Interstate 72
From Budget Stabilization Fund (0522). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $2,500,000
...
Section 19.423. To the Department of Economic Development
2 For the planning, design, and construction of a park above an interstate in
3 a city with more than four hundred thousand inhabitants and
4 located in more than one county, provided that local matching
5 funds must be provided on a 50/50 state/local basis
From Budget Stabilization Fund (0522). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $20,000,000
Quote from: mvak36 on April 20, 2023, 04:15:04 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on April 20, 2023, 03:17:42 PM
Couldn't they put an extension of Interstate 72 on the back burner? Improving Interstate 70 should be a much higher priority.
It's just a study. It doesn't mean construction is anytime soon.
Honestly, if they have money to put towards a study for US36 conversion, then I am hoping they put something towards building the Hannibal Bypass in this bill. I think that is a more urgent need.
A study for conversion can come to the conclusion that an interstate conversion isn't necessary or won't be necessary for decades. It could simply be a way to prevent future connections to US 36, from business driveways to subdivision entrances. It could also highlight the places where it may be easier to build it now before it becomes completely untenable (like around I-35 in Cameron). Better to catch these problems now before being left with a situation like US 412 in Siloam Springs.
It's also possible this is to placate some whiny state legislator. There's not an assembly in existence that doesn't have at least a few whiny members. Given my experiences living in Missouri for most of my adult life, I'd guess this is more likely than my first paragraph hypotheses.
I agree that a Hannibal bypass and six-laning I-70 are far more important than a cross-state I-72. I'd also add six-laning I-44, fixing the I-70/US 63 clusterf***, finishing US 50 as four lanes across the state, and even making US 63 four lanes south of Jeff City are all higher priorities than a cross-state I-72.
Funding of $2.5M for a Macon bypass for US 63 is on the list.
That would likely be an eastern bypass of Macon, since a western bypass would run through Macon Lake and the Long Branch State Park.
Having worked for the OK Legislature, I just love that other states use language such as "for a city more than 25,000 but less than 25,200". Everybody knows where it is supposed to go but no one wants to go on record as voting for someone else's project.
Quote from: rte66man on April 21, 2023, 05:49:15 PM
Having worked for the OK Legislature, I just love that other states use language such as "for a city more than 25,000 but less than 25,200". Everybody knows where it is supposed to go but no one wants to go on record as voting for someone else's project.
That's childish.
Quote from: rte66man on April 21, 2023, 05:49:15 PM
Having worked for the OK Legislature, I just love that other states use language such as "for a city more than 25,000 but less than 25,200". Everybody knows where it is supposed to go but no one wants to go on record as voting for someone else's project.
Lol. I thought it was odd when I saw it too. I would think that these project names would come out eventually.
Quote from: mvak36 on April 22, 2023, 10:05:34 AM
Quote from: rte66man on April 21, 2023, 05:49:15 PM
Having worked for the OK Legislature, I just love that other states use language such as "for a city more than 25,000 but less than 25,200". Everybody knows where it is supposed to go but no one wants to go on record as voting for someone else's project.
Lol. I thought it was odd when I saw it too. I would think that these project names would come out eventually.
Getting to the root of this is like getting to the root of anything:
Just follow the money.
I have to give Mr. Armstrong props for coming up with a proposal to extend I-29 to Cape Girardeau, I don't see this idea being taken seriously. If anything, I would love to see an interstate connecting Kansas City and Memphis one day.
QuoteA local man presented his proposal to extend I-29 to Cape Girardeau to the Southeast Metropolitan planning Organization.
Cape Girardeau Resident Carl Armstrong says he is frustrated with the lack of progress in the region and this expansion will solve three problems that are affecting growth.
Armstrong told the board of directors that difficult airline access in the Cape Girardeau area, road access from the new Mississippi bridge, and a long span of minimal city area growth have affected the region's progress. He says the problems are interrelated and expanding I-29 further southeast creates an easier way for people to travel. After his presentation, nobody from the board had questions, but Armstrong said he's hopeful they're receptive.
"I hope that they will do something with it," Armstrong said. "I think the key to the proposal is to quit looking at this as one area of Missouri and one area of Illinois and one area of Kentucky, but to look at it as a combined region, and tourism wise it has an awful lot to offer."
https://www.kfvs12.com/2023/02/15/sempo-board-hears-i-29-expansion-proposal/
Quote from: afguy on April 29, 2023, 10:57:17 PM
I have to give Mr. Armstrong props for coming up with a proposal to extend I-29 to Cape Girardeau, I don't see this idea being taken seriously. If anything, I would love to see an interstate connecting Kansas City and Memphis one day.
QuoteA local man presented his proposal to extend I-29 to Cape Girardeau to the Southeast Metropolitan planning Organization.
Cape Girardeau Resident Carl Armstrong says he is frustrated with the lack of progress in the region and this expansion will solve three problems that are affecting growth.
Armstrong told the board of directors that difficult airline access in the Cape Girardeau area, road access from the new Mississippi bridge, and a long span of minimal city area growth have affected the region's progress. He says the problems are interrelated and expanding I-29 further southeast creates an easier way for people to travel. After his presentation, nobody from the board had questions, but Armstrong said he's hopeful they're receptive.
"I hope that they will do something with it," Armstrong said. "I think the key to the proposal is to quit looking at this as one area of Missouri and one area of Illinois and one area of Kentucky, but to look at it as a combined region, and tourism wise it has an awful lot to offer."
https://www.kfvs12.com/2023/02/15/sempo-board-hears-i-29-expansion-proposal/
I don't see any path that an extended interstate could take to Cape Girardeau without at least some of it being an open land new-build. Meanwhile, there already is I-55 so the man can't say the city is unserved. I-57 is nearby and is due to be extended. Paducah has I-24. I really don't understand what his concern is or what he thinks could be accomplished by taking an interstate from the other side of the state and pulling it diagonally and out-of-grid all the way over to his area. If the man thinks there are economic issues to be addressed, he really needs to approach the local economic development board/group about them, instead of thinking that MODOT will agree to throwing $$$ they don't have toward building an interstate they're very likely not going to agree is needed. The silence from that board after the man's presentation really spoke volumes.
How the hell does this guy think to get Interstate 29 to Cape Girardeau? Even if an Interstate were built between Kansas City and Cape Girardeau, it would likely have an even second digit.
Back in the day (circa 1990), MODOT had a plan to build a four lane highway to every city >5000 in Missouri. This meant a rare tax increase vote that passed, but the end result didn't live up to promises and severely damaged MODOTs reputation. Included in the proposal was a four lane MO 8 from St James to Park Hills and a four lane MO 72 from Fredericktown to Cape. I guess with enough intoxicants I can imagine these improvements could be part of an I-29 extension, but Ghostbuster is right that any interstate from KC to Cape would be an even number.
Quote from: afguy on April 29, 2023, 10:57:17 PM
I have to give Mr. Armstrong props for coming up with a proposal to extend I-29 to Cape Girardeau, I don't see this idea being taken seriously. If anything, I would love to see an interstate connecting Kansas City and Memphis one day.
QuoteA local man presented his proposal to extend I-29 to Cape Girardeau to the Southeast Metropolitan planning Organization.
Cape Girardeau Resident Carl Armstrong says he is frustrated with the lack of progress in the region and this expansion will solve three problems that are affecting growth.
Armstrong told the board of directors that difficult airline access in the Cape Girardeau area, road access from the new Mississippi bridge, and a long span of minimal city area growth have affected the region's progress. He says the problems are interrelated and expanding I-29 further southeast creates an easier way for people to travel. After his presentation, nobody from the board had questions, but Armstrong said he's hopeful they're receptive.
"I hope that they will do something with it," Armstrong said. "I think the key to the proposal is to quit looking at this as one area of Missouri and one area of Illinois and one area of Kentucky, but to look at it as a combined region, and tourism wise it has an awful lot to offer."
https://www.kfvs12.com/2023/02/15/sempo-board-hears-i-29-expansion-proposal/
Kansas City to Cape Girardeau is already served by I-70 and I-55... I-70 has its issues. Instead of pouring billions of dollars into a redundant route that would be adequately served by at most a 4 lane divided highway, how about improving I-70 and widening to 6 lanes?
If the proposal is to better serve the areas along the proposed corridor, and not just for long haul, then widening to a four lane 65 mph divided highway would easily accomplish this.
An Interstate cutting straight to Cape Girardeau would be stymied by tremendous 4f issues, given the public lands it would have to traverse.
Quote from: skluth on May 01, 2023, 10:54:26 AM
Back in the day (circa 1990), MODOT had a plan to build a four lane highway to every city >5000 in Missouri. This meant a rare tax increase vote that passed, but the end result didn't live up to promises and severely damaged MODOTs reputation. Included in the proposal was a four lane MO 8 from St James to Park Hills and a four lane MO 72 from Fredericktown to Cape. I guess with enough intoxicants I can imagine these improvements could be part of an I-29 extension, but Ghostbuster is right that any interstate from KC to Cape would be an even number.
I don't think an interstate will ever happen all the way to KC. The four lane highways that you mentioned seem like a better idea. A good way to get to I-44 and, if they make US63 a four lane highway between Rolla and US 50, Jeff City. I wouldn't hold my breath for this to get done anytime soon. Too many priorities elsewhere around the state.
The biggest "missing" interstate piece in the SEMO/SoIL/WKY region aka the Cape Girardeau-Paducah-Carbondale TV DMA is an Interstate, with a new MS River bridge, straight from Paducah to Sikeston. Trying to finangle it in via the existing I-24 OH and I-57 MS River bridges across deep Southern IL ends up with a very high cost due to the terrain, not to mention cutting right thru the Shawnee Forest, probably to the point it isn't worth it
I would think the I-57 extension into Little Rock will help the SEMO region - sure more directly to Sikeston and Poplar Bluff but could benefit Cape and others in the area
I think a more realistic number for the guy's proposal would be 24, and route it from Marion to Cape and then onto KC. Yes it will have an out of the way dog-leg, and is Fictional board material, but its better than an I-29 to Cape proposal
Quote from: afguy on April 29, 2023, 10:57:17 PM
I have to give Mr. Armstrong props for coming up with a proposal to extend I-29 to Cape Girardeau, I don't see this idea being taken seriously. If anything, I would love to see an interstate connecting Kansas City and Memphis one day.
QuoteA local man presented his proposal to extend I-29 to Cape Girardeau to the Southeast Metropolitan planning Organization.
Cape Girardeau Resident Carl Armstrong says he is frustrated with the lack of progress in the region and this expansion will solve three problems that are affecting growth.
Armstrong told the board of directors that difficult airline access in the Cape Girardeau area, road access from the new Mississippi bridge, and a long span of minimal city area growth have affected the region's progress. He says the problems are interrelated and expanding I-29 further southeast creates an easier way for people to travel. After his presentation, nobody from the board had questions, but Armstrong said he's hopeful they're receptive.
"I hope that they will do something with it," Armstrong said. "I think the key to the proposal is to quit looking at this as one area of Missouri and one area of Illinois and one area of Kentucky, but to look at it as a combined region, and tourism wise it has an awful lot to offer."
https://www.kfvs12.com/2023/02/15/sempo-board-hears-i-29-expansion-proposal/
I couldn't help but notice the mention to the 1991-2015 attempt to bring a western I-66 to the region that was in the video. This interstate would have likely crossed the Ohio at Paducah and the MS River at Cape, cutting through Shawnee National Forest.
But if this man wants an extended I-29 from the west, you'd have the issues cutting through Shawnee times ten. Any road to Cape coming from the west/northwest would have to cut through the rugged Courtois Hills & St. Francois Mountains. What I'd do is have an interstate that starts in Columbia and follows US 63 & MO 72 to Salem. From there, there's no easy answer as for how to route an interstate. I guess it would follow MO-72 from Salem to MO-21, where it would then make a Centerville-Annapolis-Marble Hill-Cape G. Line. Aside from locals, the only traffic that would enter/exit such a sparsely populated area would be lead mine trucks and tourists going to the many state parks in the area.
Quote from: ozarkman417 on May 02, 2023, 04:19:48 PM
Quote from: afguy on April 29, 2023, 10:57:17 PM
I have to give Mr. Armstrong props for coming up with a proposal to extend I-29 to Cape Girardeau, I don't see this idea being taken seriously. If anything, I would love to see an interstate connecting Kansas City and Memphis one day.
QuoteA local man presented his proposal to extend I-29 to Cape Girardeau to the Southeast Metropolitan planning Organization.
Cape Girardeau Resident Carl Armstrong says he is frustrated with the lack of progress in the region and this expansion will solve three problems that are affecting growth.
Armstrong told the board of directors that difficult airline access in the Cape Girardeau area, road access from the new Mississippi bridge, and a long span of minimal city area growth have affected the region's progress. He says the problems are interrelated and expanding I-29 further southeast creates an easier way for people to travel. After his presentation, nobody from the board had questions, but Armstrong said he's hopeful they're receptive.
"I hope that they will do something with it," Armstrong said. "I think the key to the proposal is to quit looking at this as one area of Missouri and one area of Illinois and one area of Kentucky, but to look at it as a combined region, and tourism wise it has an awful lot to offer."
https://www.kfvs12.com/2023/02/15/sempo-board-hears-i-29-expansion-proposal/
I couldn't help but notice the mention to the 1991-2015 attempt to bring a western I-66 to the region that was in the video. This interstate would have likely crossed the Ohio at Paducah and the MS River at Cape, cutting through Shawnee National Forest.
But if this man wants an extended I-29 from the west, you'd have the issues cutting through Shawnee times ten. Any road to Cape coming from the west/northwest would have to cut through the rugged Courtois Hills & St. Francois Mountains. What I'd do is have an interstate that starts in Columbia and follows US 63 & MO 72 to Salem. From there, there's no easy answer as for how to route an interstate. I guess it would follow MO-72 from Salem to MO-21, where it would then make a Centerville-Annapolis-Marble Hill-Cape G. Line. Aside from locals, the only traffic that would enter/exit such a sparsely populated area would be lead mine trucks and tourists going to the many state parks in the area.
Depending on the routing, it wouldn't be that difficult except between I-44 and US 67. US 50 between KC and Jeff City is so flat it feels like Illinois or Kansas. It's mostly rolling hills on US 63 to Rolla and the MO 72 corridor east of Fredericktown is similar; a bit challenging but not a serious obsticle. But there are no good corridors between I-44 and US 67 southwest of St Louis County. Regardless, it's fictional and a moot point because it's not happening. There is just not much traffic that needs to go between those two points and drivers can use either I-70 (as pointed out by sprjus4) or US 60 to reach destinations west of I-49.
Has the extra $$$ for 70 passed the legislature?
Quote from: ARMOURERERIC on May 02, 2023, 05:37:35 PM
Has the extra $$$ for 70 passed the legislature?
Still in the Senate as of now. Senate and House will have to get together and come to an agreement on how much to fund.
Quick Recap: The House passed the governor's $859 million request but the Senate wants to do the whole stretch between Blue Springs and Wentzville, with the rest of the money coming from bonds. https://missouriindependent.com/2023/04/19/missouri-senate-committee-triples-funding-for-widening-i-70-across-the-state/
https://www.missourinet.com/2023/05/02/parson-supports-missouri-senates-plan-to-widen-i-70/
QuoteSenate Appropriations Committee Chair Lincoln Hough, R-Springfield, is proposing to use $1.4 billion in state funding and borrow $1.4 billion to complete the I-70 project. Hough explained the dramatic difference between the House and Senate's budget.
"All of these capital investments are one-time infrastructure transformative projects in my opinion," he explained. "Again, I've said it a hundred times, but I think when you have, when you have one-time money, you don't build long-term budget changes and budget recommendations. So, as much as it is possible, the committee, and the entire Senate, made investments with one-time money and one-time large infrastructure projects."
Senate President Pro Tem Caleb Rowden, R-Columbia, said that the budget will pass before this coming Friday's deadline.
"We did it in a way that doesn't bankrupt the state when we, inevitably, come back down to early as it relates to revenues, but that budget and the budget that is inevitably going to pass before (this) Friday, is something, I think, everybody can be proud of," he said.
House and Senate budget negotiations are expected early this week, with Friday being the deadline for the legislature to pass a balanced state budget proposal.
Now we just hurry up and wait to see what comes out on Friday.
https://abc17news.com/politics/missouri-politics/2023/05/03/missouri-lawmakers-agree-to-fund-i-70-expansion-across-entire-state/
QuoteState senators and representatives came to an agreement on how to fund the Interstate 70 expansion proposed by the governor and several other highway projects.
In a Wednesday evening legislative conference, lawmakers put $2.8 billion toward expanding Interstate 70 across the state. This is more than the House and governor's recommendations, which was just enough to add an extra lane in Columbia and the suburban areas of St. Louis and Kansas City.
Lawmakers also agree to add $5 million for an environmental study on Highway 63 from Cabool to Houston and $20 million for an environmental study on the Interstate 44 corridor. These studies are in anticipation of possible future projects.
Republican Sen. Caleb Rowden, of Columbia, said he wanted to see the expansion fully funded.
"My assumption is if we only did half the project this year, we'd never do the other half, and so I just think it I think we stretch a little bit, get it done, get that money accounted for and get the thing done, so hopefully that's where we end up," Rowden said.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DB79HuYbemw
I believe now we just need to wait on the budget to be passed and signed by the governor.
Quote from: mvak36 on May 04, 2023, 12:00:37 AM
https://abc17news.com/politics/missouri-politics/2023/05/03/missouri-lawmakers-agree-to-fund-i-70-expansion-across-entire-state/
QuoteState senators and representatives came to an agreement on how to fund the Interstate 70 expansion proposed by the governor and several other highway projects.
In a Wednesday evening legislative conference, lawmakers put $2.8 billion toward expanding Interstate 70 across the state. This is more than the House and governor's recommendations, which was just enough to add an extra lane in Columbia and the suburban areas of St. Louis and Kansas City.
Lawmakers also agree to add $5 million for an environmental study on Highway 63 from Cabool to Houston and $20 million for an environmental study on the Interstate 44 corridor. These studies are in anticipation of possible future projects.
Republican Sen. Caleb Rowden, of Columbia, said he wanted to see the expansion fully funded.
"My assumption is if we only did half the project this year, we'd never do the other half, and so I just think it I think we stretch a little bit, get it done, get that money accounted for and get the thing done, so hopefully that's where we end up," Rowden said.
I believe now we just need to wait on the budget to be passed and signed by the governor.
This funding is in House Bill 4 (https://house.mo.gov/Bill.aspx?bill=HB19&year=2023&code=R) now.
From the text of the bill: https://house.mo.gov/billtracking/bills231/hlrbillspdf/0004H.05S.pdf
Quote
Section 4.428. To the Department of Transportation
For all expenditures associated with the planning, designing, constructing,
reconstructing, rehabilitating and repairing three lanes in each
direction on I-70 to be funded from state road bond proceeds
From the State Road Fund I-70 Project Bond Proceeds Fund (0323).. . . . . . . . . $1,400,000,000
Section 4.429. To the Department of Transportation
For all expenditures associated with the planning, designing, constructing,
reconstructing, rehabilitating and repairing three lanes in each
direction on I-70 pursuant to a financing agreement between the
Commission and the Office of Administration
From State Road Fund I-70 Project Fund (0324).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $1,400,000,000
I'm not sure of the status of the remaining projects listed in House Bill 19 that I posted a few weeks ago.
It goes to the governor now.
https://www.stltoday.com/news/local/govt-and-politics/missouri-lawmakers-send-50-billion-spending-plan-to-governors-desk/article_c9084888-eb87-11ed-86fd-d304ce78f8a0.html
Do you think the governor will sign it or veto it?
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on May 05, 2023, 08:13:55 PM
Do you think the governor will sign it or veto it?
Knock on wood, I think he will sign it. At least I would hope so since he asked for funding for the 3 sections.
Quote from: mvak36 on April 20, 2023, 06:09:20 PM
Quote from: mvak36 on April 20, 2023, 01:51:47 PM
If anyone cares, here's the link to the House Bill: https://house.mo.gov/Bill.aspx?bill=HB19&year=2023&code=R. I believe this is the same bill where they included the funding for I-70 but I haven't been able to find a text for the bill.
Found what got sent to the Senate (https://house.mo.gov/billtracking/bills231/hlrbillspdf/0019H.03P.pdf). Here is what is included in the House bill for MODOT. These could all change once this bill goes through the Senate. In addition to the projects already mentioned, there is some funding for the Hannibal Bypass and the Future I-57 corridor.
Quote
Section 19.300. To the Department of Transportation
2 For the planning, design, land acquisition, utility relocation, and
3 construction of an exit from U.S. Highway 50 in or near the city of
4 Lone Jack
From General Revenue Fund (0101). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $1,866,000
Section 19.301. To the Department of Transportation
2 For the planning, design, land acquisition, utility relocation, and
3 construction of interchange improvements to Route 370 at Salt
4 River Road
From General Revenue Fund (0101). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $6,600,000
Section 19.303. To the Department of Transportation
2 For the planning, design, land acquisition, utility relocation, and
3 construction of capacity improvements on Interstate 44 between
4 U.S. Highway 13 and U.S. Highway 65
From General Revenue Fund (0101). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $28,000,000
Section 19.304. To the Department of Transportation
2 For an environmental impact study related to improvements to the
3 Interstate 44 corridor
From General Revenue Fund (0101). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $20,000,000
Section 19.306. To the Department of Transportation
2 For distribution to a county with more than two hundred thousand but
3 fewer than two hundred thirty thousand inhabitants, for the
4 planning, design, and construction of a bridge and improvements
5 to the two roads connected by said bridge, as well as other
6 intersection improvements related to an economic development
7 project
From General Revenue Fund (0101). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $12,000,000
Section 19.307. To the Department of Transportation
2 For the maintenance and repair of minor and low volume routes
From General Revenue Fund (0101). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $100,000,000
Section 19.308. To the Department of Transportation
2 For Interstate 70 capacity improvements
From General Revenue Fund (0101). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $859,000,000
Section 19.309. To the Department of Transportation
2 For right of way acquisition and utility improvements in Butler County
3 along U.S. Highway 67 from County Road 352 south to the
4 Arkansas state Line
From General Revenue Fund (0101). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $10,000,000
Section 19.310. To the Department of Transportation
2 For the planning, design, land acquisition, utility relocation, and
3 construction of a bypass around the city of Hannibal on U.S.
4 Highway 61
From General Revenue Fund (0101). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $2,000,000
Section 19.311. To the Department of Transportation
2 For capital improvements and maintenance and repair to a joint-use
3 military and civilian airport located in a county with more than
4 eighty thousand but fewer than one hundred thousand inhabitants
5 and with a county seat with more than seventy thousand but fewer
6 than eighty thousand inhabitants
From Budget Stabilization Fund (0522). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $1,200,000
Section 19.312. To the Department of Transportation
2 For the planning, design, and construction of an airport terminal in a city
3 with more than thirty-six thousand five hundred but fewer than
4 forty thousand inhabitants, provided that local matching funds
5 must be provided on a 50/50 state/local basis
From Budget Stabilization Fund (0522). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $350,000
Section 19.313. To the Department of Transportation
2 For the planning, design, and construction of a multimodal facility and
3 extension of a rail spur to serve said facility in a county with more
4 than seventy thousand but fewer than eighty thousand inhabitants,
5 provided that local matching funds must be provided on a 50/50
6 state/local basis
From Budget Stabilization Fund (0522). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $2,000,000
Section 19.314. To the Department of Transportation
2 For road improvements in a county with more than nine thousand nine
3 hundred but fewer than eleven thousand inhabitants and with a
4 county seat with fewer than two hundred inhabitants
From General Revenue Fund (0101). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $2,366,000
Section 19.315. To the Department of Transportation
2 For the planning, design, land acquisition, utility relocation, and
3 construction of a bypass around the city of Macon on U.S.
4 Highway 63
From General Revenue Fund (0101). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $2,500,000
Section 19.316. To the Department of Transportation
2 For distribution to a city with more than eleven thousand but fewer than
3 twelve thousand five hundred inhabitants and located in a county
4 with more than one million inhabitants, for the planning, design,
5 and construction of a four lane bridge with a multipurpose trail,
6 provided that local matching funds must be provided on a 50/50
7 state/local basis
From General Revenue Fund (0101). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $2,000,000
Section 19.317. To the Department of Transportation
2 For a corridor location and environmental impact study for a new west
3 corridor related to Central City Road in Jasper County
From General Revenue Fund (0101). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $1,100,000
Section 19.318. To the Department of Transportation
2 For an engineering study related to improvements to upgrade the U.S.
3 Highway 36 corridor to Interstate 72
From Budget Stabilization Fund (0522). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $2,500,000
...
Section 19.423. To the Department of Economic Development
2 For the planning, design, and construction of a park above an interstate in
3 a city with more than four hundred thousand inhabitants and
4 located in more than one county, provided that local matching
5 funds must be provided on a 50/50 state/local basis
From Budget Stabilization Fund (0522). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $20,000,000
This bill also passed yesterday. Section 19.308, the I-70 funding, was removed here and moved to HB 4 (with almost 2 billion more in funding). Sections 19.311, 19.312, 19.313, and 19.423 got removed. I'm not sure if they got moved to some other bill or not.
Text of bill: https://house.mo.gov/billtracking/bills231/hlrbillspdf/0019S.05F.pdf
These items got added:
Quote
Section 19.320. To the Department of Transportation
2 For the maintenance, repair, and upgrades to Long Branch Drive located
3 in any county with more than fourteen thousand but fewer than
4 fifteen thousand seven hundred inhabitants and with a county seat
5 with more than four thousand nine hundred but fewer than five
6 thousand five hundred inhabitants, provided that no local match be
7 required
8 From Budget Stabilization Fund (0522). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $2,750,000
Section 19.321. To the Department of Transportation
2 For improvements, renovations, maintenance and repair at an airport
3 located in any county with more than fifty thousand but fewer than
4 sixty thousand inhabitants and with a county seat with more than
5 seventeen thousand but fewer than twenty-one thousand
6 inhabitants, provided that no local matching funds be required
7 From Budget Stabilization Fund (0522). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $850,000
Also, saw this quote in the KC Star Article (https://www.kansascity.com/news/politics-government/article275105391.html) about the budget:
Quote"This is probably a six, maybe seven-year-long project," said state Sen. Lincoln Hough, a Springfield Republican who chaired the budget committee in the Senate. "So, maybe I should apologize up front for the traffic, but I think the end result is going to be something that, quite frankly, generationally will transform that artery across the state."
I will wait till we get estimates from MODOT for this, but that's a pretty impressive timeframe for widening that long of a stretch if they can do it in 6 years.
MODOT has updated their Improve I-70 page: https://www.modot.org/improvei70/home
Quote
Missouri's FY2024 budget from the General Assembly and supported by Governor Parson provides General Revenue for the costs to plan, design, construct, reconstruct, rehabilitate and repair three lanes in each direction on approximately 200 miles of Interstate 70, from Blue Springs to Wentzville.
Next steps:
MoDOT will designate an overall project team to guide the I-70 work across the state. This website will continue to serve as the information source for updates and public input as the plan for design and construction is developed.
Environmental Documents Updated: approximately 1 year
Environmental documents to be re-evaluated to identify any changes in the road and its conditions, traffic and environmental impacts since the studies were originally completed in 2005. Some sections of I-70 are already underway, but others will have to start now that the full funding has been identified. This process will take about a year to get the documents updated.
Project Development: approximately 1 year
Project Development will take another year to begin the design process and determine how the work should be broken into segments. MoDOT will work with the private sector on plans to sequence project delivery based on traffic impacts and industry capacity to get the best value.
Construction: approximately 4-5 years
The project development phase will determine how the 200 miles will be divided up into various sized contracts. It's expected it will take 4-5 years to complete all the construction contracts dependent upon contractor and material availability.
...
Project Goals
The overall goal of the Improve I-70 project across Missouri is "to provide a safe, efficient, environmentally sound and cost-effective transportation facility that responds to corridor needs as well as expectations of a national interstate."
Specifically, the focus is on the following:
Roadway Capacity–Increase roadway capacity to improve the general operating conditions and reliability of I-70.
Traffic Safety–Reduce the number and severity of traffic-related crashes occurring along I-70 across the state.
Roadway Design Features–Upgrade roadway design features along I-70, including interchanges, roadway alignment and roadway cross sections.
System Preservation–Preserve the I-70 facility through continued and ongoing rehabilitation and maintenance activities of pavement and bridges.
Goods Movement–Improve the efficiency of freight movement on I-70.
Access to Recreational Facilities–Facilitate motorist use of nearby regional facilities through improved accessibility.
National Security– Maintain the important role the I-70 corridor plays in the nation's defenses.
In addition, the updated analysis of I-70 will include:
Transportation Innovation — Upgrade the design to include technology for connectivity, intelligent transportation systems and other emerging transportation innovations.
Governor Parson and the General Assembly have provided a once in a lifetime investment into this critical transportation corridor. These 200 miles of I-70 are some of the first interstate to be built in the country 60 years ago. This is a monumental challenge to deliver, but MoDOT is the transportation expert. Along with our private sector partners in engineering and construction, we will deliver.
https://www.missourinet.com/2023/05/10/missouris-widening-of-i-70-could-be-right-around-the-corner/
Quote
The shovels could come out soon to mark the start of widening Interstate-70 in Missouri. The state legislature has passed a state operating budget proposal that would designate $2.8 billion to widen Interstate-70 to at least three lanes in both directions from Blue Springs to Wentzville.
Missouri Senate Appropriations Committee Chair Lincoln Hough, R-Springfield, said I-70 is one of the more "shovel ready" projects in Missouri.
"You've seen already roughly a billion dollars' worth of investment on that. You saw the project in and around the Columbia area," he said. "You know we've had some bridge projects in the St Louis area that have started and, quite frankly, that eases some of the, kind of, structural mechanics of putting it all together in a pretty robust timeline."
He estimates that the project could formally begin this fall.
"I would imagine that we have significant progress in putting this thing together probably by the fall, if not early winter of this year," he explained. "I mean, you know, these budget bills start in July when our new fiscal year will start. I imagine there's going to be a pretty expedited effort on MoDOT and OA (Missouri Office of Administration) is where the other portion of that debt bonding is, is located in our budget to start working together and getting that moving."
If this is true, I wonder what section he is talking about.
From what I could find, maybe it is this project (https://www.modot.org/improvei70Columbia) since they're close to being done with the re-evaluation of environmental studies.
Article from today's STL Post-Dispatch about $2.5 million being set aside to study extending I-72 west to St. Joseph.
Missouri could be poised to gain another interstate highwayQuoteThe push to widen Interstate 70 to three lanes across Missouri's mid-section has spawned a renewed bid to upgrade another cross-state roadway to expressway standards.
As part of the state's proposed budget, Missouri lawmakers approved $2.5 million to study the conversion of U.S. Route 36 into Interstate 72 between Hannibal in the east and St. Joseph in the west.
Also included in the spending plan being reviewed by Gov. Mike Parson are projects aimed improving travel on the route around Hannibal and Macon.
Parson, who backed an increase in the state's gas tax to boost road construction, is expected to sign the measure, although he did warn that he may veto some "fluff" in the budget.
https://www.stltoday.com/news/local/govt-and-politics/missouri-could-be-poised-to-gain-another-interstate-highway/article_89373b7a-f987-11ed-985d-6be7252aa846.html
Quote from: afguy on May 23, 2023, 03:18:00 PM
Article from today's STL Post-Dispatch about $2.5 million being set aside to study extending I-72 west to St. Joseph.
[siDoug tone.
b]Missouri could be poised to gain another interstate highway[/b][/size]
QuoteThe push to widen Interstate 70 to three lanes across Missouri's mid-section has spawned a renewed bid to upgrade another cross-state roadway to expressway standards.
As part of the state's proposed budget, Missouri lawmakers approved $2.5 million to study the conversion of U.S. Route 36 into Interstate 72 between Hannibal in the east and St. Joseph in the west.
Also included in the spending plan being reviewed by Gov. Mike Parson are projects aimed improving travel on the route around Hannibal and Macon.
Parson, who backed an increase in the state's gas tax to boost road construction, is expected to sign the measure, although he did warn that he may veto some "fluff" in the budget.
https://www.stltoday.com/news/local/govt-and-politics/missouri-could-be-poised-to-gain-another-interstate-highway/article_89373b7a-f987-11ed-985d-6be7252aa846.html
I just found this story. They even used a picture from Dougtone's Flickr collection.
This is an article from January of this year discussing the potential of upgrading the James River Fwy, along with US 65 and 360 to an interstate loop called I-244.
Less drag to your drive? Six lanes, millions of dollars and a big vision for James River FreewayQuoteFrom Republic to Rogersville and about 24.5 miles in between, millions of dollars are being poured into making U.S. Highway 60 bigger, safer and easier to use.
Some projects are tied to an ambitious vision of converting James River Freeway into an interstate loop in Springfield – renaming and reclassifying it as Interstate 244. This would create a more streamlined south passage with six lanes to complement the I-44 corridor, and potentially lower drive times for locals and people who pass through Springfield.
An interstate highway conversion could happen in a matter of years. Or it might be decades from now, depending on how quickly parts of three highways can be brought to federal interstate standards, how quickly local governments can fund highway improvement projects and how hard Springfield's transportation planners push for the status change.
Money is being spent to widen and improve U.S. Highway 60 in Greene County, but not all of the work is directly tied to the development of the future I-244. When it comes to making a better, wider Highway 60, getting several government groups together at the same table is necessary. Greene County Second District Commissioner John C. Russell was appointed to the Greene County Commission in 2019. He became the chair of the Ozarks Transportation Organization (OTO) Board of Directors in 2022.
https://sgfcitizen.org/economy-growth/transportation/less-drag-to-your-drive-six-lanes-millions-of-dollars-and-a-big-vision-for-james-river-freeway/
Quote from: afguy on May 24, 2023, 09:56:48 PM
Some projects are tied to an ambitious vision of converting James River Freeway into an interstate loop in Springfield – renaming and reclassifying it as Interstate 244. This would create a more streamlined south passage with six lanes to complement the I-44 corridor, and potentially lower drive times for locals and people who pass through Springfield.
An interstate highway conversion could happen in a matter of years. Or it might be decades from now, depending on how quickly parts of three highways can be brought to federal interstate standards, how quickly local governments can fund highway improvement projects and how hard Springfield's transportation planners push for the status change.
*Thinks*
The whole of James River and US65 around Springfield is already interstate quality??
Basically a Rose by any other name? I guess you can make the 60/65 turn four lanes through the interchange, but everything is free flow now.
I'm not "against" the loop renaming, but there's a part of me that likes the triangle with the three different US routes on each side...
I'm more interested in the capacity improvements. (Namely Campbell and US60 and street level bypasses)
Although I wouldn't mind an Interstate 244 (or some other Interstate designation) along the James River Freeway, is an Interstate designation really needed? There was a thread on this subject: https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=19956.0, although it has been dormant since 2017. If an Interstate designation is not pursued, I would settle for numbering the exits on the James River and the Schoolcraft Freeways.
I find it interesting that Springfield wants the freeways south and east of the city to be an interstate but St Louis and St Charles Counties have no interest in MO 370 being an interstate despite it being built to interstate standards and connecting I-70 with I-270 (and with I-270 being the best way to bypass the St Louis metro). Honestly, if the point is for there to be just one highway designation to go around Springfield, MO 360 could be designated for the entire length. It could even be made a loop around the city by making it concurrent with I-44. Put up big signs calling it Circle 360 which would be a great name for a highway anyway.
AASHTO would only have allowed the existing MO 370 freeway to receive an Interstate designation if the designation was Interstate 870. Missouri refused the 870 designation, and the freeway is a state highway to this day. This isn't unprecedented since MO 249 and MO 364 are also state highways that could have potentially been Interstate Highways of the same numbers.
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on May 25, 2023, 05:25:57 PM
AASHTO would only have allowed the existing MO 370 freeway to receive an Interstate designation if the designation was Interstate 870. Missouri refused the 870 designation, and the freeway is a state highway to this day. This isn't unprecedented since MO 249 and MO 364 are also state highways that could have potentially been Interstate Highways of the same numbers.
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on May 25, 2023, 05:25:57 PM
AASHTO would only have allowed the existing MO 370 freeway to receive an Interstate designation if the designation was Interstate 870. Missouri refused the 870 designation, and the freeway is a state highway to this day. This isn't unprecedented since MO 249 and MO 364 are also state highways that could have potentially been Interstate Highways of the same numbers.
At least in the case of MO249, it is/was planned to be the ultimate routing of I-49. (It's been years since I've seen any reference to the plans though..) (See Arkansas 549 now I-49)
Quote from: intelati49 on May 25, 2023, 08:48:53 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on May 25, 2023, 05:25:57 PM
AASHTO would only have allowed the existing MO 370 freeway to receive an Interstate designation if the designation was Interstate 870. Missouri refused the 870 designation, and the freeway is a state highway to this day. This isn't unprecedented since MO 249 and MO 364 are also state highways that could have potentially been Interstate Highways of the same numbers.
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on May 25, 2023, 05:25:57 PM
AASHTO would only have allowed the existing MO 370 freeway to receive an Interstate designation if the designation was Interstate 870. Missouri refused the 870 designation, and the freeway is a state highway to this day. This isn't unprecedented since MO 249 and MO 364 are also state highways that could have potentially been Interstate Highways of the same numbers.
At least in the case of MO249, it is/was planned to be the ultimate routing of I-49. (It's been years since I've seen any reference to the plans though..) (See Arkansas 549 now I-49)
Yes, that was one of the projects they would have done if that sales tax increase in 2014 had passed. The I-244 in Springfield was also one of those projects. I don't remember how much they had for funding for that though so I'm not sure how much work is left to be done on both projects. The MO-249/BL 49 will have to upgrade the interchange with I-49 in Carthage for sure (not sure about the rest of the corridor).
Quote from: mvak36 on May 26, 2023, 01:46:31 PM
Quote from: intelati49 on May 25, 2023, 08:48:53 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on May 25, 2023, 05:25:57 PM
AASHTO would only have allowed the existing MO 370 freeway to receive an Interstate designation if the designation was Interstate 870. Missouri refused the 870 designation, and the freeway is a state highway to this day. This isn't unprecedented since MO 249 and MO 364 are also state highways that could have potentially been Interstate Highways of the same numbers.
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on May 25, 2023, 05:25:57 PM
AASHTO would only have allowed the existing MO 370 freeway to receive an Interstate designation if the designation was Interstate 870. Missouri refused the 870 designation, and the freeway is a state highway to this day. This isn't unprecedented since MO 249 and MO 364 are also state highways that could have potentially been Interstate Highways of the same numbers.
At least in the case of MO249, it is/was planned to be the ultimate routing of I-49. (It's been years since I've seen any reference to the plans though..) (See Arkansas 549 now I-49)
Yes, that was one of the projects they would have done if that sales tax increase in 2014 had passed. The I-244 in Springfield was also one of those projects. I don't remember how much they had for funding for that though so I'm not sure how much work is left to be done on both projects. The MO-249/BL 49 will have to upgrade the interchange with I-49 in Carthage for sure (not sure about the rest of the corridor).
Having just driven that route a couple of weeks ago, I'm reasonably certain that the interchange with I-49 at Carthage is the only holdup. Everything else appears to be to Interstate standards, at least as I viewed it while driving past as 65mph!
Quote from: fhmiii on May 30, 2023, 05:14:00 PM
Quote from: mvak36 on May 26, 2023, 01:46:31 PM
Quote from: intelati49 on May 25, 2023, 08:48:53 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on May 25, 2023, 05:25:57 PM
AASHTO would only have allowed the existing MO 370 freeway to receive an Interstate designation if the designation was Interstate 870. Missouri refused the 870 designation, and the freeway is a state highway to this day. This isn't unprecedented since MO 249 and MO 364 are also state highways that could have potentially been Interstate Highways of the same numbers.
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on May 25, 2023, 05:25:57 PM
AASHTO would only have allowed the existing MO 370 freeway to receive an Interstate designation if the designation was Interstate 870. Missouri refused the 870 designation, and the freeway is a state highway to this day. This isn't unprecedented since MO 249 and MO 364 are also state highways that could have potentially been Interstate Highways of the same numbers.
At least in the case of MO249, it is/was planned to be the ultimate routing of I-49. (It's been years since I've seen any reference to the plans though..) (See Arkansas 549 now I-49)
Yes, that was one of the projects they would have done if that sales tax increase in 2014 had passed. The I-244 in Springfield was also one of those projects. I don't remember how much they had for funding for that though so I'm not sure how much work is left to be done on both projects. The MO-249/BL 49 will have to upgrade the interchange with I-49 in Carthage for sure (not sure about the rest of the corridor).
Having just driven that route a couple of weeks ago, I'm reasonably certain that the interchange with I-49 at Carthage is the only holdup. Everything else appears to be to Interstate standards, at least as I viewed it while driving past as 65mph!
IIRC there's a couple older dimensionally deficit bridges along 171.
And there are design constraints along existing I-49.
I've worked up a few mocks years ago (like 2012-2013), but I've never seen a graphical depiction from MoDOT or a city..
Pixel 7a
https://www.modot.org/node/28859
QuoteJEFFERSON CITY — The draft FY 2024-2028 Statewide Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) was presented to the Missouri Highways and Transportation Commission today. The draft five-year program includes funding from General Revenue — passed by the Missouri General Assembly — to widen and improve I-70, fix low-volume minor roads, upgrade railroad safety crossings and more. A 30-day public review and comment period begins today.
The STIP makes available $14 billion of federal and state revenues for all modes of transportation over the next five years. Of the $14 billion, the draft STIP details $10.5 billion in road and bridge construction contractor awards, averaging approximately $2.1 billion per year. It also includes a record $3.4 billion in state General Revenue funded projects from the General Assembly subject to governor approval of the final budget.
"Over the past two years, the cost of doing transportation improvements has experienced record inflation ranging from 20-30%. Aside from the new funding from the General Assembly, this year's program didn't add a significant number of projects to the last two years as we manage the fiscal constraints of the funding," said MoDOT Director Patrick McKenna. "We are able to continue our asset management efforts while also making critical improvements and upgrades to corridors and safety features across the state."
The draft FY 2024-2028 STIP lists transportation projects planned by state and regional planning agencies for fiscal years 2024-2028 (July 1, 2023 - June 30, 2028) and reflects the transportation needs of communities across the state.
The proposed program is available for public review. Those interested in seeing the program or offering comments can contact MoDOT by email to STIPcomments@modot.mo.gov, by calling customer service at 1-888-ASK-MoDOT (275-6636), or by mail to Transportation Planning, Program Comments, P.O. Box 270, Jefferson City, MO 65102. The program is also available on MoDOT's website: https://www.modot.org/DRAFTSTIP. The formal comment period ends July 6, 2023.
Following the public review period, the comments will be presented to the Commission. The Commission will review the comments and the final transportation program before considering it for approval at its July 12 meeting.
The legislatively designated and funded initiatives are located at: https://www.modot.org/sites/default/files/documents/Sec04bLDFI.pdf. These are all pending the governor's signature.
Tentative I-70 construction start date per above link:
Blue Springs to Odessa: FY25
Odessa to Boonville: FY27
Boonville to Rte 740 (Stadium Blvd) in Columbia: FY26
Rte 740 (Stadium Blvd) to Route Z (Columbia): FY24
Route Z (Columbia) to Warrenton: FY27
Warrenton to I-64: FY25
That's a nice timeline. Hopefully they move the left exit in Columbia to the right side.
So is the entirety of I-70 between St. Louis and Kansas City set to be widened over the next 5 or so years? Or just certain portions?
Quote from: sprjus4 on June 07, 2023, 08:05:57 PM
So is the entirety of I-70 between St. Louis and Kansas City set to be widened over the next 5 or so years? Or just certain portions?
I believe it's a high majority. (And there's a doubt in my mind of that 5 year timeline)
Quote from: intelati49 on June 07, 2023, 09:20:10 PM
Quote from: sprjus4 on June 07, 2023, 08:05:57 PM
So is the entirety of I-70 between St. Louis and Kansas City set to be widened over the next 5 or so years? Or just certain portions?
I believe it's a high majority. (And there's a doubt in my mind of that 5 year timeline)
The whole stretch between Blue Springs and Wentzville will be widened. Those dates I posted are just the tentative start dates for the construction. They are still subject to change. I also don't know how long each project would take.
Quote from: mvak36 on June 08, 2023, 08:59:48 AM
Quote from: intelati49 on June 07, 2023, 09:20:10 PM
Quote from: sprjus4 on June 07, 2023, 08:05:57 PM
So is the entirety of I-70 between St. Louis and Kansas City set to be widened over the next 5 or so years? Or just certain portions?
I believe it's a high majority. (And there's a doubt in my mind of that 5 year timeline)
The whole stretch between Blue Springs and Wentzville will be widened. Those dates I posted are just the tentative start dates for the construction. They are still subject to change. I also don't know how long each project would take.
Even if these start dates are realized, it will probably be 2030 before the last section is completed. As with most infrastructure projects, we can probably expect delays. It could be 2033 or even 2035 before everything is finally done.
Quote from: mvak36 on June 07, 2023, 01:59:50 PM
https://www.modot.org/node/28859
QuoteJEFFERSON CITY — The draft FY 2024-2028 Statewide Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) was presented to the Missouri Highways and Transportation Commission today. The draft five-year program includes funding from General Revenue — passed by the Missouri General Assembly — to widen and improve I-70, fix low-volume minor roads, upgrade railroad safety crossings and more. A 30-day public review and comment period begins today.
The STIP makes available $14 billion of federal and state revenues for all modes of transportation over the next five years. Of the $14 billion, the draft STIP details $10.5 billion in road and bridge construction contractor awards, averaging approximately $2.1 billion per year. It also includes a record $3.4 billion in state General Revenue funded projects from the General Assembly subject to governor approval of the final budget.
"Over the past two years, the cost of doing transportation improvements has experienced record inflation ranging from 20-30%. Aside from the new funding from the General Assembly, this year's program didn't add a significant number of projects to the last two years as we manage the fiscal constraints of the funding," said MoDOT Director Patrick McKenna. "We are able to continue our asset management efforts while also making critical improvements and upgrades to corridors and safety features across the state."
The draft FY 2024-2028 STIP lists transportation projects planned by state and regional planning agencies for fiscal years 2024-2028 (July 1, 2023 - June 30, 2028) and reflects the transportation needs of communities across the state.
The proposed program is available for public review. Those interested in seeing the program or offering comments can contact MoDOT by email to STIPcomments@modot.mo.gov, by calling customer service at 1-888-ASK-MoDOT (275-6636), or by mail to Transportation Planning, Program Comments, P.O. Box 270, Jefferson City, MO 65102. The program is also available on MoDOT's website: https://www.modot.org/DRAFTSTIP. The formal comment period ends July 6, 2023.
Following the public review period, the comments will be presented to the Commission. The Commission will review the comments and the final transportation program before considering it for approval at its July 12 meeting.
The legislatively designated and funded initiatives are located at: https://www.modot.org/sites/default/files/documents/Sec04bLDFI.pdf. These are all pending the governor's signature.
Tentative I-70 construction start date per above link:
Blue Springs to Odessa: FY25
Odessa to Boonville: FY27
Boonville to Rte 740 (Stadium Blvd) in Columbia: FY26
Rte 740 (Stadium Blvd) to Route Z (Columbia): FY24
Route Z (Columbia) to Warrenton: FY27
Warrenton to I-64: FY25
Looking through the KC project list (https://www.modot.org/sites/default/files/documents/SEC0403KansasCityTMA_0.pdf), there is a project to replace one of the MO291 bridges over the Missouri River. Tentative start date is FY26.
Project Number: 4P3471
Description from Draft STIP: Bridge replacement over the Missouri River. Project involves bridge L0568.
It looks like it's the Northbound bridge (https://marc2.org/tr_rtp/projectdetails.aspx?PID=1389).
Quote from: mvak36 on June 08, 2023, 09:30:51 AM
It looks like it's the Northbound bridge (https://marc2.org/tr_rtp/projectdetails.aspx?PID=1389).
IIRC the NB bridge was closed for a while when I was up there. Caused a medium fuss..
Quote from: intelati49 on June 08, 2023, 10:07:02 AM
Quote from: mvak36 on June 08, 2023, 09:30:51 AM
It looks like it's the Northbound bridge (https://marc2.org/tr_rtp/projectdetails.aspx?PID=1389).
IIRC the NB bridge was closed for a while when I was up there. Caused a medium fuss..
Now that you mention it, I do remember that. I think it happened in 2015 or so. I remember MODOT saying they didn't have enough funding to replace the bridge.
Quote from: mvak36 on June 08, 2023, 10:15:29 AM
Quote from: intelati49 on June 08, 2023, 10:07:02 AM
Quote from: mvak36 on June 08, 2023, 09:30:51 AM
It looks like it's the Northbound bridge (https://marc2.org/tr_rtp/projectdetails.aspx?PID=1389).
IIRC the NB bridge was closed for a while when I was up there. Caused a medium fuss..
Now that you mention it, I do remember that. I think it happened in 2015 or so. I remember MODOT saying they didn't have enough funding to replace the bridge.
That is the older span from when MO-291 used to be 2 lanes. The southbound span is wider and has a shoulder for breakdowns or other stopped vehicles. I'm sure this will be a smaller-scale version of the Chain of Rocks Bridge replacement.
Quote from: fhmiii on June 08, 2023, 01:58:42 PM
That is the older span from when MO-291 used to be 2 lanes. The southbound span is wider and has a shoulder for breakdowns or other stopped vehicles. I'm sure this will be a smaller-scale version of the Chain of Rocks Bridge replacement.
Good to know. Are you referring to the replacement of the old Chain or Rocks bridge or the one on I-270?
I should probably get up there again one of these days and drive on the truss bridge before it gets replaced. I'm guessing the new one won't be a truss. Maybe something similar to what they're doing on the I-70 Rocheport bridge.
Quote from: mvak36 on June 08, 2023, 02:24:59 PM
Quote from: fhmiii on June 08, 2023, 01:58:42 PM
That is the older span from when MO-291 used to be 2 lanes. The southbound span is wider and has a shoulder for breakdowns or other stopped vehicles. I'm sure this will be a smaller-scale version of the Chain of Rocks Bridge replacement.
Good to know. Are you referring to the replacement of the old Chain or Rocks bridge or the one on I-270?
I should probably get up there again one of these days and drive on the truss bridge before it gets replaced. I'm guessing the new one won't be a truss. Maybe something similar to what they're doing on the I-70 Rocheport bridge.
Yes, I meant the "New" bridge on I-270, where they're going to build one span and the drop the old one. Probably something similar here, but just one side.
I likewise doubt the new span will be a truss, which is too bad. Bridges are losing all character to these ugly concrete monstrosities. The Buck O'Neill Bridge replacement is going from a steel arch to a concrete highway bridge. It's going to change and detract from our skyline, and all it would take is some minor cosmetic additions to make these bridges more appealing.
Rocheport bridge update: It looks like they've shifted the westbound traffic onto the new bridge. Eastbound will be shifted to the new bridge next month.
https://www.modot.org/node/28812
QuoteThe shift of the eastbound lanes of I-70 to the new bridge is anticipated for late July. Following that traffic shift, demolition of the old Rocheport Bridge and construction of the new eastbound bridge can begin. Completion of the entire project is expected in late 2024.
I-70 widening is official now as Gov. Parsons signed the budget today.
Missouri Gov. Mike Parson signs budget with $2.8B plan to expand I-70 across the stateQuoteMissouri Gov. Mike Parson on Friday signed a roughly $51 billion budget for the next fiscal year that fully funds a massive expansion of Interstate 70 but cuts half a million in items sought by lawmakers. The $2.8 billion highway plan would extend the interstate from two lanes each way to three across the state from Blue Springs in Jackson County to Wentzville near St. Louis. It's substantially more ambitious than the $859 million proposal Parson sought at the start of the year which would have expanded the highway in three specific spots near Kansas City, Columbia and St. Louis. "With this budget, our administration has done the right thing — the conservative thing — to make strategic investments and maintain responsible spending," Parson said in a statement. Half of the highway expansion will be paid for with general revenue and the other half through bonds repaid over 15 years.
https://www.kansascity.com/news/politics-government/article276897048.html
Quote from: afguy on June 30, 2023, 06:50:26 PM
I-70 widening is official now as Gov. Parsons signed the budget today.
Missouri Gov. Mike Parson signs budget with $2.8B plan to expand I-70 across the state
Quote. The $2.8 billion highway plan would extend the interstate from two lanes each way to three across the state from Blue Springs in Jackson County to Wentzville near St. Louis. ...Half of the highway expansion will be paid for with general revenue and the other half through bonds repaid over 15 years.
https://www.kansascity.com/news/politics-government/article276897048.html
About time. Interesting bonds.. anyone have insight in the financials?
I'm reminded of the "doughnut" hole q few years back (a period of limited spending following a 'boom' period)
Awesome! This is truly something other states like California could never do in the current situation. They just decided to widen the entire thing across the state and in a pretty reasonable time frame. So stuff like this can absolutely be done it just takes will.
While I'm excited to see the much needed I-70 expansion moving forward, I'm disappointed that the governor vetoed funds for studying the expansion of I-44 and making safety improvements to U.S. 63.
QuoteBut, Parson vetoed $28 million to study a widening of Interstate 44, as well as similar projects seeking to improve traffic flow near Hannibal and on U.S. Route 63 near Cabool. They had been inserted into the spending blueprint to win votes from rural lawmakers who don't represent districts near I-70.
The governor also cut $2.5 million to study the conversion of U.S. Route 36, an east-west route across northern Missouri, to interstate highway status.
While spending down some of the state's more than $6 billion surplus was a priority for lawmakers before normal budgetary pressures begin to return, Parson said some of the legislative earmarks placed in the blueprint should be handled by local governments.
https://www.stltoday.com/news/local/government-politics/parson-cuts-more-than-a-half-billion-dollars-from-massive-missouri-state-budget/article_4d28a1d4-1794-11ee-8003-3fa0a44f8907.html#tracking-source=home-top-story
$28 million just for a study of widening I-44? Throughout the entire state? Did I-70 have a study that expensive? That seems a bit much.
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on June 30, 2023, 09:53:44 PM
$28 million just for a study of widening I-44? Throughout the entire state? Did I-70 have a study that expensive? That seems a bit much.
Heh. Tens of millions were spent studying just the little length of the I-81 viaduct, so $28m for the entire length of I-44 in MO is a bargain. :D
Quote from: Rothman on June 30, 2023, 10:56:19 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on June 30, 2023, 09:53:44 PM
$28 million just for a study of widening I-44? Throughout the entire state? Did I-70 have a study that expensive? That seems a bit much.
Heh. Tens of millions were spent studying just the little length of the I-81 viaduct, so $28m for the entire length of I-44 in MO is a bargain. :D
I'm wondering if it is the entire length though. I've definitely been in situations where I've thought it could use it.
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on July 01, 2023, 01:22:21 AM
Quote from: Rothman on June 30, 2023, 10:56:19 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on June 30, 2023, 09:53:44 PM
$28 million just for a study of widening I-44? Throughout the entire state? Did I-70 have a study that expensive? That seems a bit much.
Heh. Tens of millions were spent studying just the little length of the I-81 viaduct, so $28m for the entire length of I-44 in MO is a bargain. :D
I'm wondering if it is the entire length though. I've definitely been in situations where I've thought it could use it.
A $2.5M study for I-72 was also vetoed. I do wonder if the I-44 study had been closer to $2.5M vs $28M that it would not have been vetoed. It would be difficult politically to veto an interstate study for $2.5 million and not veto a study costing eleven times more, even if the two studies are completely different. (Never underestimate the irrational logic of voters.)
Yeah that was more or less my thinking as well other than not knowing too much about I-72 or where it would even run. I need to refresh my memory on that one.
Quote from: Rothman on June 30, 2023, 10:56:19 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on June 30, 2023, 09:53:44 PM
$28 million just for a study of widening I-44? Throughout the entire state? Did I-70 have a study that expensive? That seems a bit much.
Heh. Tens of millions were spent studying just the little length of the I-81 viaduct, so $28m for the entire length of I-44 in MO is a bargain. :D
It's not like there's a recent(ish) study of I-44 from OK to STL Planning for Progress (https://www.modot.org/i-44-planning-progress)
Quote from: intelati49 on July 01, 2023, 01:58:58 PM
Quote from: Rothman on June 30, 2023, 10:56:19 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on June 30, 2023, 09:53:44 PM
$28 million just for a study of widening I-44? Throughout the entire state? Did I-70 have a study that expensive? That seems a bit much.
Heh. Tens of millions were spent studying just the little length of the I-81 viaduct, so $28m for the entire length of I-44 in MO is a bargain. :D
It's not like there's a recent(ish) study of I-44 from OK to STL Planning for Progress (https://www.modot.org/i-44-planning-progress)
That's actually a pretty comprehensive study, even if it is 15 years old. I guess MODOT could just say "This is what we said 15 years ago. It's worse now."
Quote from: skluth on July 01, 2023, 06:26:32 PM
That's actually a pretty comprehensive study, even if it is 15 years old. I guess MODOT could just say "This is what we said 15 years ago. It's worse now."
I've been over the PDF several times over. Joplin/Neosho/Rolla is the stretch I know best.
I-70 is 100% worse, but there are parts of 44 that need improvement still.. MO66 to Springfield could probably be 6 lanes right now. More climbing lanes..
Did the Missouri I-57 project end up fully funded in this budget? 2-lane US 67 upgraded to Interstate Standard from Poplar Bluff to the Arkansas line, and 4-lane US 60 upgrades to eliminate at-grade access between Poplar Bluff and Sikeston?
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on July 01, 2023, 12:43:50 PM
Yeah that was more or less my thinking as well other than not knowing too much about I-72 or where it would even run. I need to refresh my memory on that one.
I-72 would connect Qunicy, IL and Hannibal, MO with either Cameron or St Joseph, MO along what is currently the US-36 corridor.
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on June 30, 2023, 07:31:13 PM
Awesome! This is truly something other states like California could never do in the current situation. They just decided to widen the entire thing across the state and in a pretty reasonable time frame. So stuff like this can absolutely be done it just takes will.
Is any of this shovel ready?
Quote from: intelati49 on July 01, 2023, 06:28:50 PM
Quote from: skluth on July 01, 2023, 06:26:32 PM
That's actually a pretty comprehensive study, even if it is 15 years old. I guess MODOT could just say "This is what we said 15 years ago. It's worse now."
I've been over the PDF several times over. Joplin/Neosho/Rolla is the stretch I know best.
I-70 is 100% worse, but there are parts of 44 that need improvement still.. MO66 to Springfield could probably be 6 lanes right now. More climbing lanes..
I used to live in St Louis so I'm more familiar with the other side of the state. I-44 is at least six lanes out to the exits for Washington and Union (MO 100 and US 50) as most of the commuter traffic comes in on those two highways. But that's just after the highway really starts to get hilly and it stays hilly until well past Fort Wood. It may not be as busy as between Joplin and Springfield but it's a busy truck corridor so it's common to get stuck behind a truck passing another truck through the hills. Both I-44 and I-70 should probably be six lanes across the state, mostly because both carry huge amounts of freight. The other interstates are fine as four lane freeways and I can't see that changing even if I-57 is built between Little Rock and Sikeston.
I agree that I-70 needs six lanes even more but Jefferson city politicians should set it up so that I-44 highway expansion is prioritized as the next expansion project to get more statewide support. Heck, it may be the one thing you could get both parties to agree on.
Quote from: ARMOURERERIC on July 03, 2023, 05:19:26 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on June 30, 2023, 07:31:13 PM
Awesome! This is truly something other states like California could never do in the current situation. They just decided to widen the entire thing across the state and in a pretty reasonable time frame. So stuff like this can absolutely be done it just takes will.
Is any of this shovel ready?
Per the schedule posted a few posts back the first project starts next year and the final one starts by like 2027/28 so I'd imagine some of it and most soon will be.
What amazes me is it seems like they just started talking about after identifying a clear need less than six months ago and then decided it is time. Now it signed and much of it will be completed before 2030 with all it U/C by then.
Meanwhile here in Southern California we have wide open spaces in a desert with an interstate that's been overdue for a widening for the better part of the last several decades and the only plan we can come up with is a short distance, part time shoulder lane that they aren't even updating us on. I would argue I-15 should be 4 lanes each way but we can't even get Caltrans to make it 3. Much of it already is they would just need to fill in the gaps. Oh but don't worry that bullet train is schedule to start construction by the end of the year..... for the 5th year in a row.
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on July 04, 2023, 03:57:48 PM
Quote from: ARMOURERERIC on July 03, 2023, 05:19:26 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on June 30, 2023, 07:31:13 PM
Awesome! This is truly something other states like California could never do in the current situation. They just decided to widen the entire thing across the state and in a pretty reasonable time frame. So stuff like this can absolutely be done it just takes will.
Is any of this shovel ready?
Per the schedule posted a few posts back the first project starts next year and the final one starts by like 2027/28 so I'd imagine some of it and most soon will be.
What amazes me is it seems like they just started talking about after identifying a clear need less than six months ago and then decided it is time. Now it signed and much of it will be completed before 2030 with all it U/C by then.
Meanwhile here in Southern California we have wide open spaces in a desert with an interstate that's been overdue for a widening for the better part of the last several decades and the only plan we can come up with is a short distance, part time shoulder lane that they aren't even updating us on. I would argue I-15 should be 4 lanes each way but we can't even get Caltrans to make it 3. Much of it already is they would just need to fill in the gaps. Oh but don't worry that bullet train is schedule to start construction by the end of the year..... for the 5th year in a row.
This is the difference between a state that has debt at less than 1/3 of its annual budget ($16.34MMM vs $51.8MMM) and a state that has debt at 175% of its annual budget ($520MMM vs $296MMM).
Ah whatever. Statistics can be used to paint any picture you want. California just had a 100+ billion dollar surplus. They could have funded a huge amount of the SF-LA HSR line. They could have widened I-15 and built the LA-LV HSR line with that and paid for Nevada's portion. Now supposedly there's a deficit. Point is California could get it done just as easily as Missouri did they just don't want to. Caltrans isn't too keen on taking much initiative to widen freeways anymore in counties that aren't actively trying to do like Orange County. It's pretty clear the state just doesn't give a fuck.
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on July 05, 2023, 09:31:19 AM
Ah whatever. Statistics can be used to paint any picture you want. California just had a 100+ billion dollar surplus. They could have funded a huge amount of the SF-LA HSR line. They could have widened I-15 and built the LA-LV HSR line with that and paid for Nevada's portion. Now supposedly there's a deficit. Point is California could get it done just as easily as Missouri did they just don't want to. Caltrans isn't too keen on taking much initiative to widen freeways anymore in counties that aren't actively trying to do like Orange County. It's pretty clear the state just doesn't give a fuck.
Okay, not to get into a political/economic discussion but since your brought it up, California's surplus was due to its extremely progressive income tax system, with particularly high triggers for taxes on high earners and the wealthy, as system that is tremendously volatile. The budget surplus had more to do with executive bonuses, capital gains, and other "wealth taxes" that boomed in 2021 after the Covid restrictions were loosened but slackened significantly the following year. It had very little to do with responsible fiscal management. And then they didn't use that surplus to pay down their debt in any meaningful way.
There's also an issue of political priorities. If you're going to take on substantially more debt at a substantially higher interest rate, you put it where you think it'll do the most good, politically. In California, widening highways isn't a priority. High speed rail and other things are. If California wasn't in debt at 175% of its annual budget, and therefore a much greater financial risk to lenders, it might be more willing to spend some of that debt on lesser priorities like widening Interstates.
So widening a freeway that apparently is in such a need of widening its bought the attention of governors, mayors, and billionaires not to mention the millions of SoCal residents that use it and experience severe congestion isn't a political priority? I just don't buy that. At any rate we're talking a 100 billion dollar surplus. I highly doubt widening I-15 would have cost anywhere near even 1/4 of that.
I rest my case here but I want to add I find your use of the term "progressive" interesting to say the least.
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on July 05, 2023, 11:08:10 AM
So widening a freeway that apparently is in such a need of widening its bought the attention of governors, mayors, and billionaires not to mention the millions of SoCal residents that use it and experience severe congestion isn't a political priority? I just don't buy that. At any rate we're talking a 100 billion dollar surplus. I highly doubt widening I-15 would have cost anywhere near even 1/4 of that.
I rest my case here but I want to add I find your use of the term "progressive" interesting to say the least.
"Progressive tax" is the term of art for income tax rates that increase with total taxable source (income, purchases, property, etc.). It's commonly used throughout the English-speaking world. The rate increases or "progresses" as the tax source value rises -- as opposed to a flat tax structure, or a "regressive" system that taxes at a higher rate as the value of the taxable source decreases. There's nothing "interesting" about my use of the word because it's the term is used widely to describe this form of taxation.
As for widening I-15, it might be something most people "recognize is needed" and that some people think for themselves as being "a priority," but isn't a "political priority" because it's not being built while other things are. Just like widening I-44 is "recognized as a need" and is a "priority" for some in Missouri, but it's not a "political priority" because it's not even going to be studied.
The word "priority" means "first or prior to other things," or if you want the Oxford definition, "the fact or condition of being regarded or treated as more important." Since other stuff is getting done and these things aren't, then they are by definition
not priorit(ies).
We are rapidly moving away from the topic at hand, so if you want to discuss it privately, I invite you to do so now.
https://www.modot.org/node/29991
Quote
Improve I-70 Industry Meeting
Any industry partner is welcome to attend
The Missouri Department of Transportation (MoDOT) has scheduled an Industry Kickoff Information Session for the Improve I-70 Program. Details for this event are provided below. Any industry partner is welcome to attend. Advanced sign-ups are not needed for this event. This meeting is in person and a virtual option is not being offered.
Date: Monday, July 10
Time: 10 a.m. to 11:30 a.m.
Networking Session: 10 a.m. to 10:30 a.m. Industry Session: 10: a.m. to 11:30 a.m.
Location: MoDOT Central District - Muri Room 1511 Missouri Blvd. Jefferson City, MO 65102
Topics to be discussed:
Project overview
Funding
Program goals
Conflict of interest Schedule overview Procurement method(s) Q&A
Stretch of I-70 in St. Charles, Warren counties may be first to be widened under $2.8B upgradeQuoteState highway officials expect to begin construction a year from now on the recently funded $2.8 billion widening of Interstate 70 – and a segment in St. Charles and Warren counties is in the running to be the first phase.
Eric Kopinski, the Missouri Department of Transportation's I-70 program coordinator, said Wednesday that stretches of the cross-state highway in the Columbia and suburban Kansas City areas also are being considered for the initial work.
"One of those, we're hopeful, will be under construction this time next year and then soon after that, every six months we'll be awarding a project that will be pretty substantial in size," he said in an interview outside a meeting of the state Highways and Transportation Commission, which oversees MoDOT.
https://www.stltoday.com/news/local/government-politics/stretch-of-i-70-in-st-charles-warren-counties-may-be-first-to-be-widened/article_0adc9fbe-20e6-11ee-aa61-539cb540aa6f.html#tracking-source=home-the-latest
Quote from: afguy on July 12, 2023, 10:44:24 PM
Stretch of I-70 in St. Charles, Warren counties may be first to be widened under $2.8B upgrade
QuoteState highway officials expect to begin construction a year from now on the recently funded $2.8 billion widening of Interstate 70 – and a segment in St. Charles and Warren counties is in the running to be the first phase.
Eric Kopinski, the Missouri Department of Transportation's I-70 program coordinator, said Wednesday that stretches of the cross-state highway in the Columbia and suburban Kansas City areas also are being considered for the initial work.
"One of those, we're hopeful, will be under construction this time next year and then soon after that, every six months we'll be awarding a project that will be pretty substantial in size," he said in an interview outside a meeting of the state Highways and Transportation Commission, which oversees MoDOT.
https://www.stltoday.com/news/local/government-politics/stretch-of-i-70-in-st-charles-warren-counties-may-be-first-to-be-widened/article_0adc9fbe-20e6-11ee-aa61-539cb540aa6f.html#tracking-source=home-the-latest
MODOT should just start crews at each end of the state, one in Wentzville and one in Blue Springs and meet in the middle like the Transcontinental Railroad. Even better would be to have four crews with the other two going each direction out of Columbia. The portion through Columbia will be the worst since a bypass wasn't built years ago when it was still mostly farmland north of I-70 and there is no median on I-70 through the city. But it doesn't take long to get through Columbia even when traffic is bad so if that's the last of the highway to get six lanes it's not a huge deal.
https://www.koamnewsnow.com/news/joplin-news-first/bridge-repairs-complete-all-i-44-lanes-ramps-open-at-fidelity-contractor-crews-have-completed/article_bf589e48-21ae-11ee-a644-7b66f0bee976.html
Sorry if someone else already mentioned it but I wondered if the short expressway section of MO-100 at Wildwood was once part of bigger road project plan who was cancelled?
Not really road related, but posting it here since this is one of the things that wasn't vetoed by the governor along with the I-70 project.
https://www.modot.org/node/32269
QuoteJEFFERSON CITY — Today, the Missouri Department of Transportation unveiled an independent report with recommendations to address passive rail crossings in Missouri, specifically on the three rail lines that carry passenger rail. Following the June 27, 2022, tragic Amtrak crash near Mendon, Mo., that took the lives of four people, Missouri has responded with the new FY2024 budget signed by Gov. Mike Parson providing an historic $50 million General Revenue investment. The data-driven report outlines the plan to work with the railroads and the communities who own the local roads at the 47 remaining passive public rail crossings in Missouri.
"Railroads in Missouri serve as a vital component sustaining and growing the economy in Missouri, but there are more than 1,400 locations in Missouri where roads cross these tracks without warning lights and gates," said MoDOT Director Patrick McKenna. "This new historic level of General Revenue approved by the Governor and General Assembly provides an opportunity to focus on the highest priority needs on the three railroad lines that carry passenger rail."
The three passenger rail routes operated by Amtrak through Missouri are the Southwest Chief on BNSF line and Missouri River Runner and Texas Eagle on the UP lines. The study recommends various improvements to enhance safety, reduce exposure and eliminate grade crossing conflict points. Recommendations vary for each location, in terms of complexity and cost, ranging from advanced warning enhancements, crossing realignment, approach grade improvements, flashing lights and gates upgrades, closures, new roadway connections, and ADA sidewalk enhancements.
"These changes are critical to address safety along these passenger rail lines in Missouri," said Director McKenna. "We look forward to working with the railroads and the communities who own these local roads to work through and finalize plans and agreements to make these safety improvements."
In addition to the focus on the 47 passenger rail crossings, funding will be available to local communities to apply for additional advanced signage on roads as drivers approach a railroad crossing. These crossings could already have lights and gates, but additional advance warnings signs can further alert drivers to the situation ahead.
The next MoDOT study will focus on four railroad corridors across the state that carry freight only. MoDOT will also be working with railroads on a potential grants to address passive crossings on these other lines through Missouri.
Full details and the crossing-specific recommendations, advance signing program and other future studies are available online at https://www.modot.org/missouri-railroad-safety-crossing-plan .
The announcement was attended by National Transportation Safety Board Chair Jennifer Homendy and Federal Railroad Administrator Amit Bose, who pledged their support to work with Missouri on these important safety enhancements.
Project website: https://www.modot.org/missouri-railroad-safety-crossing-plan
Quote from: Stephane Dumas on July 19, 2023, 06:52:30 PM
Sorry if someone else already mentioned it but I wondered if the short expressway section of MO-100 at Wildwood was once part of bigger road project plan who was cancelled?
I don't recall much of a plan going east of MO 109 except for adding another overpass without and interchange, possibly at Taylor Road. To the west there was at least a later plan (which seems to have died) for a MO 100 realignment to a new interchange on I-44 between the eastern MO 100 interchange at Gray Summit(253) and the Pacific Exit (257). I cannot recall whether this was a new two lane road, lower type four lane road, or expressway grade.
Speculation: There was not much of plan to go eastward since there was supposed to be a higher type Outer Belt that would have passed near Wildwood. IIRC the earlier version would have been closer to MO 340 on a trajectory towards the I-270 interchange with Page Avenue, while the later version would have stayed closer to MO 109 and ended near the Missouri River crossing on US 40.
EDIT 1 Looking through the older maps available in https://www.google.com/books/edition/US_50_Bypass_Jefferson_Barracks_Bridge_M/pZU1AQAAMAAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=FAP%20410%20eis&pg=RA2-PP13&printsec=frontcover (https://www.google.com/books/edition/US_50_Bypass_Jefferson_Barracks_Bridge_M/pZU1AQAAMAAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=FAP%20410%20eis&pg=RA2-PP13&printsec=frontcover) it doens't look like there was much planned for MO 100 back in the early to mid 1970's.
EDIT 2 An EIS for the existing expressway section of MO 100 only mentions a plan for "a dual lane highway from Interstate 244 westerly to State Road T". https://www.google.com/books/edition/Route_100_St_Louis/p841AQAAMAAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=%22Route%20100%22%20Missouri&pg=PP1&printsec=frontcover (https://www.google.com/books/edition/Route_100_St_Louis/p841AQAAMAAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=%22Route%20100%22%20Missouri&pg=PP1&printsec=frontcover)
https://www.modot.org/node/32587
Quote
Public invited to meetings to kickoff Statewide Improve I-70 Program
JEFFERSON CITY — The Missouri Department of Transportation is inviting the public to preliminary information meetings to learn more about MoDOT's Statewide Improve I-70 Program. Missouri's FY2024 budget from the General Assembly signed into law by Governor Parson provides $2.8 billion in General Revenue for the costs to build a third lane of Interstate 70 across the state. The program will plan, design, construct, reconstruct, rehabilitate, and add three lanes in each direction on approximately 200 miles of I-70, from Blue Springs to Wentzville.
The public is invited to attend the informational meetings to learn about the proposed plan and next steps for I-70. Please note these are open house style meetings, and no formal presentations will be made. The public can attend the meetings anytime during the advertised hours, and the information will be the same at each location.
MoDOT is currently in the planning stage of the Improve I-70 Program. MoDOT engineers will share preliminary information about the goals for improving I-70, possible construction schedules for the 200 miles, and next steps. MoDOT is interested in gathering feedback from the public regarding I-70's current condition, construction staging, and other general comments they may have. Public input is important ahead of the design phase of the work.
For those who are unable to attend a meeting in person, an online comment form is available at www.modot.org/public-involvement. The comment period online will be open from Monday, Aug. 28, through Friday, Sept. 22, 2023. The open house meeting dates, times and locations are as follows:
Monday, Aug. 28, 2023, 4 p.m. to 6 p.m. — Wentzville City Hall Board of Alderman Meeting Room located at 1001 Schroeder Creek Boulevard, Wentzville, MO.
Tuesday, Aug. 29, 2023, 4 p.m. to 6 p.m. — Warren County Administration Building located at 101 Mockingbird Lane, Warrenton, MO.
Wednesday, Aug. 30, 4 p.m. to 6 p.m. — Concordia Community Center located at 802 S. Gordon Street, Concordia, MO.
Thursday, Aug. 31, 5 p.m. to 7 p.m., Jonesburg Elementary School Gym located 106 Smith Rd., Jonesburg, MO.
Tuesday, Sept. 5, 4 p.m. to 6 p.m. — Jackson County Fire Protection District Education Center located at 4715 W U.S. 40 Highway, Blue Springs, MO.
Wednesday, Sept. 6, 5 p.m. to 7 p.m. — Battle High School Auxiliary Gym, located at 7575 St. Charles, Rd., Columbia, MO.
Thursday, Sept. 7, 5 p.m. to 7 p.m. — Hannah Cole Primary School Gym, located at 1700 W. Ashley Rd., Boonville, MO.
Officially signed by the governor and starts construction next summer:
https://www.komu.com/news/midmissourinews/gov-parson-visits-columbia-to-ceremonially-sign-i-70-expansion-amended-nil-bills/article_5169b2d8-3b93-11ee-9723-6bec27a86702.html
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on August 16, 2023, 01:38:45 PM
Officially signed by the governor and starts construction next summer:
https://www.komu.com/news/midmissourinews/gov-parson-visits-columbia-to-ceremonially-sign-i-70-expansion-amended-nil-bills/article_5169b2d8-3b93-11ee-9723-6bec27a86702.html
I'm not sure if I'm misunderstanding this but didn't he already sign the bill back in June? It seemed like the thing yesterday was more for show. Kind of like a ribbon cutting for a bill signing lol.
That's what I thought too. But I wasn't sure. At any rate, it says construction on one of the segments a set to begin next summer so that's exciting. I love how Missouri can find the money to widen entire fucking interstate at once across the whole state of Colorado can't do it in small segments without a toll lane.
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on August 16, 2023, 01:38:45 PM
Officially signed by the governor and starts construction next summer:
https://www.komu.com/news/midmissourinews/gov-parson-visits-columbia-to-ceremonially-sign-i-70-expansion-amended-nil-bills/article_5169b2d8-3b93-11ee-9723-6bec27a86702.html
https://www.missourinet.com/2023/08/17/modot-wants-to-share-their-plan-on-i-70s-third-lane-listen/
From this audio interview, the program director for the I-70 project said that the project is broken into 6 different segments and the first one they identified is from Route 63 in Columbia to Kingdom City. They are tentatively scheduled to start in Spring 2024.
^^^ great news! All we need now is to send the powers that be who made this happen to California for a bit so they can widen I-15 ;)
They need to come take a good look at Virginia too on I-81... and before the terrain arguments come up, at least the segment between Christiansburg (Exit 118) and north of Roanoke (Exit 150) could be widened to 6, if not 8 lanes, with the money being used for 200 miles of flat I-70 in Missouri.
Maybe Virginia should have moved forward with the Interstate 81 toll proposal that lawmakers rejected in early 2019. Or maybe the truck lane proposal from a couple decades ago should have been implemented. Frankly, I doubt using traditional funding methods will get additional lanes added to the Interstate 81 corridor anytime soon.
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on August 22, 2023, 09:06:45 PM
Maybe Virginia should have moved forward with the Interstate 81 toll proposal that lawmakers rejected in early 2019.
No, because they are already doing that. The Interstate 81 Corridor Improvement Plan was originally to be funded by toll revenue, but it was ultimately decided to raise fuel taxes along the I-81 corridor along with various truck fees to fund the $2.2 billion (I believe) project.
All that project is largely doing is safety improvements with acceleration / deceleration lane improvements, flashing chevrons, a few bridge replacements, etc. Widening between Exit 118 and Exit 150 to 6 lanes is included but is seemingly getting delayed more and more.
The 2019 toll proposal would not have widened the whole highway through the state.
If tolls are implemented on I-81 at all, then it better be for full length widening from Tennessee to West Virginia, which I would support. That was the proposal in the early 2000s, traditional 6 lane widening throughout the state with 8 lanes near Roanoke and Harrisonburg, along with the other proposal for truck only lanes. It's a shame neither of those ever came to fruition.
Virginia is getting
something right though in the widening department - 29 miles of I-64 between Bottoms Bridge and Williamsburg will be widened to six lanes by 2027-2028 or so. That will complete a minimum of six lanes between Hampton Roads and Richmond by the end of the decade.
https://rva757connects.com/i64-gap-project
https://www.virginiadot.org/projects/richmond/i-64-gap-segment-a-widening.asp
https://www.virginiadot.org/projects/hampton-roads/i-64-gap-c.asp
Quote from: mvak36 on August 09, 2023, 10:41:20 AM
https://www.modot.org/node/32587
Quote
Public invited to meetings to kickoff Statewide Improve I-70 Program
JEFFERSON CITY — The Missouri Department of Transportation is inviting the public to preliminary information meetings to learn more about MoDOT's Statewide Improve I-70 Program. Missouri's FY2024 budget from the General Assembly signed into law by Governor Parson provides $2.8 billion in General Revenue for the costs to build a third lane of Interstate 70 across the state. The program will plan, design, construct, reconstruct, rehabilitate, and add three lanes in each direction on approximately 200 miles of I-70, from Blue Springs to Wentzville.
The public is invited to attend the informational meetings to learn about the proposed plan and next steps for I-70. Please note these are open house style meetings, and no formal presentations will be made. The public can attend the meetings anytime during the advertised hours, and the information will be the same at each location.
MoDOT is currently in the planning stage of the Improve I-70 Program. MoDOT engineers will share preliminary information about the goals for improving I-70, possible construction schedules for the 200 miles, and next steps. MoDOT is interested in gathering feedback from the public regarding I-70's current condition, construction staging, and other general comments they may have. Public input is important ahead of the design phase of the work.
For those who are unable to attend a meeting in person, an online comment form is available at www.modot.org/public-involvement. The comment period online will be open from Monday, Aug. 28, through Friday, Sept. 22, 2023. The open house meeting dates, times and locations are as follows:
Monday, Aug. 28, 2023, 4 p.m. to 6 p.m. — Wentzville City Hall Board of Alderman Meeting Room located at 1001 Schroeder Creek Boulevard, Wentzville, MO.
Tuesday, Aug. 29, 2023, 4 p.m. to 6 p.m. — Warren County Administration Building located at 101 Mockingbird Lane, Warrenton, MO.
Wednesday, Aug. 30, 4 p.m. to 6 p.m. — Concordia Community Center located at 802 S. Gordon Street, Concordia, MO.
Thursday, Aug. 31, 5 p.m. to 7 p.m., Jonesburg Elementary School Gym located 106 Smith Rd., Jonesburg, MO.
Tuesday, Sept. 5, 4 p.m. to 6 p.m. — Jackson County Fire Protection District Education Center located at 4715 W U.S. 40 Highway, Blue Springs, MO.
Wednesday, Sept. 6, 5 p.m. to 7 p.m. — Battle High School Auxiliary Gym, located at 7575 St. Charles, Rd., Columbia, MO.
Thursday, Sept. 7, 5 p.m. to 7 p.m. — Hannah Cole Primary School Gym, located at 1700 W. Ashley Rd., Boonville, MO.
They've posted the meeting materials on the site: https://www.modot.org/improvei70/public-involvement
Tentative Schedule: https://www.modot.org/sites/default/files/documents/Improve%20I-70%20Public%20Meeting%20Displays%204_0.pdf
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/gallery/12408_28_08_23_9_06_30.png)
Quote from: mvak36 on August 22, 2023, 02:01:42 PM
https://www.missourinet.com/2023/08/17/modot-wants-to-share-their-plan-on-i-70s-third-lane-listen/
From this audio interview, the program director for the I-70 project said that the project is broken into 6 different segments and the first one they identified is from Route 63 in Columbia to Kingdom City. They are tentatively scheduled to start in Spring 2024.
They have a project site for this section: https://www.modot.org/improvei70/columbiakingdomcity
Just completed I-49 in the state.
MDOT needs to add a I-49 shield on Route H in Pineville at the SB freeway entrance ramp. They obviously forgot it was signed solely as US 71 SB due to it originally ending immediately south of it before the bypass got built into AR. Meanwhile NB I-49 is signed from Route H, but SB isn’t.
Is there a difference between one and two letter secondary route signings.
I've noticed in Goodman along I-49 thst Exit 17 is signed for Route B and Route BB. It seems Route BB is an old alignment of Route C west of MO 59 that recently got changed with Route C being truncated to MO 59. Now BB is the part from I-49 to MO 59.
Don't understand why Route B don't get extended to MO 59 instead of creating a short Route BB.
Quote from: roadman65 on September 17, 2023, 07:37:26 PM
Is there a difference between one and two letter secondary route signings.
I've noticed in Goodman along I-49 thst Exit 17 is signed for Route B and Route BB. It seems Route BB is an old alignment of Route C west of MO 59 that recently got changed with Route C being truncated to MO 59. Now BB is the part from I-49 to MO 59.
Don't understand why Route B don't get extended to MO 59 instead of creating a short Route BB.
I'm not aware of any real difference between one-letter and two-letter routes.
I do think it's strange that B Hwy wasn't simply extended to 59. However, it's very common for these routes to change designations at a major junction (or even a minor junction). To the north of there is my family's usual route between Wichita and Branson. Where we cross over I-49 north of Carthage, M Hwy changes to N Hwy. At the Jasper junction, H Hwy turns into K Hwy at I-49. North of Lamar, DD Hwy turns into EE Hwy. Irwin, V Hwy to C Hwy. Sheldon, N Hwy to B Hwy. And so on and so forth. This is not limited to I-49, but is very common statewide.
Has anyone seen the License Plate Wall inside the I-44 EB Welcome Center near Joplin?
Also I saw signs on I-49. Obviously it don’t have a welcome Center at the AR Border yet ( nor to my knowledge have any rest areas in MO being new to the system) but at Pineville it has for an affiliate Welcome Center off the freeway. I’m assuming that it’s a public private partnership thing until MoDOT decides to build normal rest areas on its latest interstate designation.
Quote from: ShawnP on September 03, 2012, 06:12:02 PM
I still see a need for 1 south bound and 2 North Bound rest areas(includes welcome center). Now MoDot has become anti rest area and will probably won't build any even including a welcome center.
Quote from: roadman65 on September 20, 2023, 09:14:14 AM
I'm assuming that it's a public private partnership thing until MoDOT decides to build normal rest areas on its latest interstate designation.
Well, |ShawnP| is no longer an active member, but I wonder if his opinion has changed on the matter.
Quote from: roadman65 on September 20, 2023, 09:14:14 AM
Has anyone seen the License Plate Wall inside the I-44 EB Welcome Center near Joplin?
Also I saw signs on I-49. Obviously it don't have a welcome Center at the AR Border yet ( nor to my knowledge have any rest areas in MO being new to the system) but at Pineville it has for an affiliate Welcome Center off the freeway. I'm assuming that it's a public private partnership thing until MoDOT decides to build normal rest areas on its latest interstate designation.
Arkansas had a welcome center planned at the northern Gravette exit, but I'm not sure on timelines as it was funded at one point, but may have been pulled. I can't find it in the ARDOT 2023-2026 STIP, so it apparently didn't make the cut when the STIP was finalized. There's still the tiny one open in Bella Vista, but that one is certainly useless for trucks, which aren't even allowed to enter as small as it is.
https://maps.app.goo.gl/AZYQCsjv8zyUA3QM9
I was noticing this sign where US 159 meets I-29. I don’t know if it’s the name Rulo or just that NE is a funny abbreviation. Plus there is also a Falls City, NE that is a county seat in Nebraska for Richardson County, NE , just beyond Rulo that was skipped over for this.
Quote from: kphoger on September 25, 2023, 09:54:58 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on September 23, 2023, 02:32:51 PM
NE is a funny abbreviation
wut
I don't know. Just that a Capital N and E together don't seem right. Sounds better for New England. However, I know that NB is taken in Canada, yes, nothing else is available.
Quote from: roadman65 on September 25, 2023, 06:03:33 PM
Quote from: kphoger on September 25, 2023, 09:54:58 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on September 23, 2023, 02:32:51 PM
NE is a funny abbreviation
wut
I don't know. Just that a Capital N and E together don't seem right. Sounds better for New England. However, I know that NB is taken in Canada, yes, nothing else is available.
State abbreviations are (usually) the first two letters of a state's name, or the normal abbreviation of the state's name. Nebraska is "NE" because of its first two letters, while South Dakota is "SD" because of how you'd normally abbreviate it.
Missouri should be MI, but Michigan. So it should be MS, but Mississippi. So it became MO.
Arizona should be AR, but Arkansas.
Alaska should be AL, but Alabama. Why it didn't get "AA" or "AS," I'm not certain. Is American Samoa "AS?"
Also not sure why Pennsylvania is "PA" instead of "PE." Maybe they didn't want to confuse it with Phys Ed?
https://youtu.be/dLECCmKnrys?si=0EN-3VlYNxZggXMZ
Quote from: fhmiii on September 25, 2023, 06:38:16 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on September 25, 2023, 06:03:33 PM
Quote from: kphoger on September 25, 2023, 09:54:58 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on September 23, 2023, 02:32:51 PM
NE is a funny abbreviation
wut
I don't know. Just that a Capital N and E together don't seem right. Sounds better for New England. However, I know that NB is taken in Canada, yes, nothing else is available.
State abbreviations are (usually) the first two letters of a state's name, or the normal abbreviation of the state's name. Nebraska is "NE" because of its first two letters, while South Dakota is "SD" because of how you'd normally abbreviate it.
Missouri should be MI, but Michigan. So it should be MS, but Mississippi. So it became MO.
Arizona should be AR, but Arkansas.
Alaska should be AL, but Alabama. Why it didn't get "AA" or "AS," I'm not certain. Is American Samoa "AS?"
Also not sure why Pennsylvania is "PA" instead of "PE." Maybe they didn't want to confuse it with Phys Ed?
I'm sure there was some arbitrary postal department process that distilled the older 3-4 letter abbreviations that existed before the current 2 letter abbreviations came about when zip codes were developed.
https://www.thoughtco.com/state-abbreviations-1691753 (https://www.thoughtco.com/state-abbreviations-1691753)
Quote from: fhmiii on September 25, 2023, 06:38:16 PM
Also not sure why Pennsylvania is "PA" instead of "PE." Maybe they didn't want to confuse it with Phys Ed?
It was already a longstanding abbreviation for Pennsylvania. Along with the typical truncation method of abbreviating words (chop it off after a few letters), the contraction method is also quite common (include the final letter). For example, with first names, James becomes Jas, William becomes Wm, etc. It was this latter convention that led to Pennsylvania having been abbreviated as Penna and as Pa long before the post office standardized state abbreviations.
Quote from: fhmiii on September 25, 2023, 06:38:16 PM
State abbreviations are (usually) the first two letters of a state's name, or the normal abbreviation of the state's name. Nebraska is "NE" because of its first two letters
Nebraska has traditionally been abbreviated as Neb. The post office went with NB, but Canada requested that it be changed in 1969, to avoid confusion with New Brunswick.
I'm aware of how Nebraska gots its abbreviation.
I just said it looks funny. I wasn't being critical of it. Not saying I agree nor disagree with it. I'm totally aware it's logical to use it.
Hey at least it's better than EWR for Newark, NJ on FAA airport codes.
Quote from: fhmiii on September 25, 2023, 06:38:16 PM
Also not sure why Pennsylvania is "PA" instead of "PE." Maybe they didn't want to confuse it with Phys Ed?
Prince Edward Island
Let's talk about Missouri roads again. Abbreviations for states are what they are and let's not hypothesize here. We have the off topic to do that.
I'm all for the I-44 Joplin Welcome Center license plate wall. If anyone visited that facility most likely saw it. If not they have a whole wall with various tags mounted to it inside the facility. It's cool to check out.
A Welcome Center license plate wall? That's a new one for me. I've never seen one myself, but then again, I have very rarely been at a rest area or welcome center.
Quote from: roadman65 on September 26, 2023, 09:52:22 AM
I'm aware of how Nebraska gots its abbreviation.
I just said it looks funny. I wasn't being critical of it. Not saying I agree nor disagree with it. I'm totally aware it's logical to use it.
Hey at least it's better than EWR for Newark, NJ on FAA airport codes.
EWR is because all the"N" codes are reserved for the US Navy
Quote from: bwana39 on October 02, 2023, 07:53:30 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on September 26, 2023, 09:52:22 AM
I'm aware of how Nebraska gots its abbreviation.
I just said it looks funny. I wasn't being critical of it. Not saying I agree nor disagree with it. I'm totally aware it's logical to use it.
Hey at least it's better than EWR for Newark, NJ on FAA airport codes.
EWR is because all the"N" codes are reserved for the US Navy
Then ditch IATA and use ICAO: KEWR.
Quote from: bwana39 on October 02, 2023, 07:53:30 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on September 26, 2023, 09:52:22 AM
I'm aware of how Nebraska gots its abbreviation.
I just said it looks funny. I wasn't being critical of it. Not saying I agree nor disagree with it. I'm totally aware it's logical to use it.
Hey at least it's better than EWR for Newark, NJ on FAA airport codes.
EWR is because all the"N" codes are reserved for the US Navy
Same reason Nashville is BNA and New Orleans is MSY, that N reservation for Naval air stations
The
fictional yet plausible explanation for how New Orleans got assigned MSY is better than the factual/actual reason: New Orleans and Southern Louisiana is where the Mississippi River Delta is, as it empties into the Gulf of Mexico. A river delta looks like an upper case "Y" letter, and it is the Mississippi River, hence MSY
Factually, the current New Orleans Airport is named for Moisant Stock Yards, which is because a daredevil pilot named John Moisant crashed and died on the agricultural land the airport was later built on
That said, if anyone wants a more detailed airport codes thread, probably better for the Travel board, unless discussing MCI, STL, or other Show-Me State airports
Quote from: fhmiii on September 25, 2023, 06:38:16 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on September 25, 2023, 06:03:33 PM
Quote from: kphoger on September 25, 2023, 09:54:58 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on September 23, 2023, 02:32:51 PM
NE is a funny abbreviation
wut
I don't know. Just that a Capital N and E together don't seem right. Sounds better for New England. However, I know that NB is taken in Canada, yes, nothing else is available.
State abbreviations are (usually) the first two letters of a state's name, or the normal abbreviation of the state's name. Nebraska is "NE" because of its first two letters, while South Dakota is "SD" because of how you'd normally abbreviate it.
Missouri should be MI, but Michigan. So it should be MS, but Mississippi. So it became MO.
Arizona should be AR, but Arkansas.
Alaska should be AL, but Alabama. Why it didn't get "AA" or "AS," I'm not certain. Is American Samoa "AS?"
Also not sure why Pennsylvania is "PA" instead of "PE." Maybe they didn't want to confuse it with Phys Ed?
MI(chigan)
M(
i)N(nesota)
M(
i)S(sissippi)
M(
iss)O(uri)
M(
on)T(ana)
Can someone tell me anything about the Treemonisha Sculpture at the Interstate 44/Interstate 55 interchange in Saint Louis? I just saw it for the first time today on Google Maps and would like to know more about it.
A historic bridge now.
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/50645270881_281dc56eb1_k.jpg)
If I'm not mistaken very recently this structure was imploded and traffic shifted onto one of its replacement structures.
I-70 near Rocheport.
^We already have a thread on this. (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=28044.msg2868297#msg2868297)
Quote from: 74/171FAN on October 08, 2023, 07:07:26 PM
^We already have a thread on this. (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=28044.msg2868297#msg2868297)
Thanks. I couldn't remember where I saw the info regarding this. Now that I saw this i remember viewing it here in that thread.
Anyway a reminder photo. Many bridges and roads get changed constantly. I'm sure we all manage to capture a moment along a road, not knowing at the time, your picture will be worth something in the future. This was one I was lucky to obtain in 2020 and it's now a historic place in the road enthusiast community.
Funny thing was I was originally going to post this photo in that particular thread, but decided here to do it instead. If I had posted it there I would have saw that and my caption for it would have been different instead of looking for validation on where I saw previous information.
I wonder will the final plan include finishing the US 71 Freeway and putting a cap over it similar to the park caps on I-696 in Metro Detroit.
Kansas City plans to reconnect 71 Highway neighborhoods, improve safetyQuoteReconnecting Kansas City neighbors: That's the goal for Mayor Quinton Lucas' U.S. 71 Highway project.
Last August, Kansas City received a $5 million federal grant to study improvements along 71 Highway, particularly from 85th Street to Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard.
City leaders said construction of this east Kansas City highway displaced homeowners and forced businesses to close. Now they're working to reverse the division it's caused "Although we cannot right all past wrongs, we know that we can do better," Lucas said Wednesday. The initial focus for 71 Highway was to give commuters a direct link to downtown Kansas City, but construction in the 1990s caused other issues.
The highway split through neighborhoods and left families in the area to deal with loud traffic and safety concerns. The intersections on 71 Highway are among the city's most dangerous when it comes to crashes. "This is going to connect more neighborhoods. This is going to reinvigorate businesses up and down the Prospect Corridor, which were sorely lost when this highway came through this community," Kansas City councilman Darrell Curls said Wednesday.
https://fox4kc.com/news/kansas-city-plans-to-reconnect-71-highway-neighborhoods-improve-safety/
Are they going to ask the neighborhoods for permission to overturn the court order preventing the signals from being removed at E. Gregory Blvd., E. 59th St., and E. 55th St.? I don't see how any improvements can be implemented to the US 71 corridor between E. 85th St. and Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd. without the court order being overturned.
Quote from: Gnutella on October 03, 2023, 03:16:15 AM
Quote from: fhmiii on September 25, 2023, 06:38:16 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on September 25, 2023, 06:03:33 PM
Quote from: kphoger on September 25, 2023, 09:54:58 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on September 23, 2023, 02:32:51 PM
NE is a funny abbreviation
wut
I don't know. Just that a Capital N and E together don't seem right. Sounds better for New England. However, I know that NB is taken in Canada, yes, nothing else is available.
State abbreviations are (usually) the first two letters of a state's name, or the normal abbreviation of the state's name. Nebraska is "NE" because of its first two letters, while South Dakota is "SD" because of how you'd normally abbreviate it.
Missouri should be MI, but Michigan. So it should be MS, but Mississippi. So it became MO.
Arizona should be AR, but Arkansas.
Alaska should be AL, but Alabama. Why it didn't get "AA" or "AS," I'm not certain. Is American Samoa "AS?"
Also not sure why Pennsylvania is "PA" instead of "PE." Maybe they didn't want to confuse it with Phys Ed?
MI(chigan)
M(i)N(nesota)
M(i)S(sissippi)
M(iss)O(uri)
M(on)T(ana)
Missouri was always abbreviated MO when I was growing up in the days before the standard USPS abbreviations. It was always "St. Louis, Mo." when we would send mail there. Pennsylvania was always "Pa."or "Penna.".
Quote from: afguy on October 11, 2023, 05:57:13 PM
I wonder will the final plan include finishing the US 71 Freeway and putting a cap over it similar to the park caps on I-696 in Metro Detroit.
Kansas City plans to reconnect 71 Highway neighborhoods, improve safety
QuoteReconnecting Kansas City neighbors: That's the goal for Mayor Quinton Lucas' U.S. 71 Highway project.
Last August, Kansas City received a $5 million federal grant to study improvements along 71 Highway, particularly from 85th Street to Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard.
City leaders said construction of this east Kansas City highway displaced homeowners and forced businesses to close. Now they're working to reverse the division it's caused "Although we cannot right all past wrongs, we know that we can do better," Lucas said Wednesday. The initial focus for 71 Highway was to give commuters a direct link to downtown Kansas City, but construction in the 1990s caused other issues.
The highway split through neighborhoods and left families in the area to deal with loud traffic and safety concerns. The intersections on 71 Highway are among the city's most dangerous when it comes to crashes. "This is going to connect more neighborhoods. This is going to reinvigorate businesses up and down the Prospect Corridor, which were sorely lost when this highway came through this community," Kansas City councilman Darrell Curls said Wednesday.
https://fox4kc.com/news/kansas-city-plans-to-reconnect-71-highway-neighborhoods-improve-safety/
Fox 4 once again finds a way to spend nearly 5 minutes saying almost nothing. They just repeated the aspirational language of the politicians but gave no real information. I looked and KMBC-9 spent 3 minutes doing almost exactly the same thing (while managing to sound ridiculously pretentious about it).
What kind of infrastructure improvements? Are they planning to build bridges or insert new intersections? Will US-71 continue to be a major expressway, upgraded to a freeway, or will it be reduced to something more like a parkway?
No wonder so few people watch the local news anymore. There's so little actual news in it.
Quote from: fhmiii on October 12, 2023, 08:34:07 AM
Quote from: afguy on October 11, 2023, 05:57:13 PM
I wonder will the final plan include finishing the US 71 Freeway and putting a cap over it similar to the park caps on I-696 in Metro Detroit.
Kansas City plans to reconnect 71 Highway neighborhoods, improve safety
QuoteReconnecting Kansas City neighbors: That's the goal for Mayor Quinton Lucas' U.S. 71 Highway project.
Last August, Kansas City received a $5 million federal grant to study improvements along 71 Highway, particularly from 85th Street to Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard.
City leaders said construction of this east Kansas City highway displaced homeowners and forced businesses to close. Now they're working to reverse the division it's caused "Although we cannot right all past wrongs, we know that we can do better," Lucas said Wednesday. The initial focus for 71 Highway was to give commuters a direct link to downtown Kansas City, but construction in the 1990s caused other issues.
The highway split through neighborhoods and left families in the area to deal with loud traffic and safety concerns. The intersections on 71 Highway are among the city's most dangerous when it comes to crashes. "This is going to connect more neighborhoods. This is going to reinvigorate businesses up and down the Prospect Corridor, which were sorely lost when this highway came through this community," Kansas City councilman Darrell Curls said Wednesday.
https://fox4kc.com/news/kansas-city-plans-to-reconnect-71-highway-neighborhoods-improve-safety/
Fox 4 once again finds a way to spend nearly 5 minutes saying almost nothing. They just repeated the aspirational language of the politicians but gave no real information. I looked and KMBC-9 spent 3 minutes doing almost exactly the same thing (while managing to sound ridiculously pretentious about it).
What kind of infrastructure improvements? Are they planning to build bridges or insert new intersections? Will US-71 continue to be a major expressway, upgraded to a freeway, or will it be reduced to something more like a parkway?
No wonder so few people watch the local news anymore. There's so little actual news in it.
There is a project in Tier 2 of the Unfunded Needs list (https://www.modot.org/sites/default/files/documents/High-Priority%20Unfunded%20Needs%202023_draft_2.pdf) (page 22 of the pdf) for 30.25 million. This project is Part 1 of 2. Part 2 of 2 is listed in Tier 3 of the same document (pg 33 of pdf) for $90.75 million. So maybe they are looking to make it a freeway?
Also, I'm not sure how they can do this stuff without the court order being removed so I am curious to see what comes out of this whole thing.
It will be interesting to see what they propose. I would imagine since US 71 is the responsibility of MoDOT, Kansas City would have to work with state. I'm hoping MoDOT and the city both join forces to get the court order overturned. If the order was overturned, I could see MoDOT perhaps pursuing a design for US 71 similar to I-35E in St. Paul. On another note, I took this screenshot from Mileage Mike's youtube page and a saw a new overhead sign gantry on I-35. Does any know if MoDOT is adopting these new gantries statewide?
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/53256370998_e93a8d9098_o.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2p95PF5)I-70 (https://flic.kr/p/2p95PF5) by Brandon Dolley (https://www.flickr.com/photos/125122378@N05/), on Flickr
Quote from: afguy on October 13, 2023, 07:26:47 PM
It will be interesting to see what they propose. I would imagine since US 71 is the responsibility of MoDOT, Kansas City would have to work with state. I'm hoping MoDOT and the city both join forces to get the court order overturned. If the order was overturned, I could see MoDOT perhaps pursuing a design for US 71 similar to I-35E in St. Paul. On another note, I took this screenshot from Mileage Mike's youtube page and a saw a new overhead sign gantry on I-35. Does any know if MoDOT is adopting these new gantries statewide?
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/53256370998_e93a8d9098_o.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2p95PF5)I-70 (https://flic.kr/p/2p95PF5) by Brandon Dolley (https://www.flickr.com/photos/125122378@N05/), on Flickr
It looks like they must have changed it for the Buck O'Neil Bridge project.
As for your question, this is what they put in on I-435 during the expansion project 3 years ago: https://maps.app.goo.gl/N5mYvpsRkjfH5P1d6. They have the same at the I-435/I-70 interchange (https://maps.app.goo.gl/mcJTNZXLpE1ETghT8). I am not sure if this gantry was just for this project or if they have this style anywhere else.
MoDOT is conducting a conceptual study of possible improvements to I-70 between the Missouri River and North Hanley Road. Money is already budgeted to reconstruct the I-70/I-270 interchange and the St. Charles Rock Rd Bridge over I-70. Public meetings will begin next month with a final conceptual report being released in Fall 2024.
https://www.modot.org/improve-i-70-conceptual-study-st-louis
Quote from: afguy on October 17, 2023, 04:05:32 PM
MoDOT is conducting a conceptual study of possible improvements to I-70 between the Missouri River and North Hanley Road. Money is already budgeted to reconstruct the I-70/I-270 interchange and the St. Charles Rock Rd Bridge over I-70. Public meetings will begin next month with a final conceptual report being released in Fall 2024.
https://www.modot.org/improve-i-70-conceptual-study-st-louis
Hopefully this includes C/D lanes between MO 141 and I-270. Traffic entering I-70 EB from MO 141 have less than half a mile to cross 3 lanes of (heavy) traffic exiting off to I-270, and vice versa. One of the few instances I've legitimately felt nervous while driving.
Quote from: afguy on October 17, 2023, 04:05:32 PM
MoDOT is conducting a conceptual study of possible improvements to I-70 between the Missouri River and North Hanley Road. Money is already budgeted to reconstruct the I-70/I-270 interchange and the St. Charles Rock Rd Bridge over I-70. Public meetings will begin next month with a final conceptual report being released in Fall 2024.
https://www.modot.org/improve-i-70-conceptual-study-st-louis
70 is going to be a mess the next 6 to 7 years with this project, the expansion between Blue Springs and Wentzville, and the I-70 in KC project. Hopefully they also find the funding for the I-70/I-64/US61 interchange and do that construction around the same time as the projects in the St. Louis area.
Kansas City and the US DOT announced a partnership today that could lead to $15 billion of transportation projects getting funding from the feds. The highlights for me were the proposed rail line between downtown Kansas City and the Airport, the east-west streetcar line and improvements for I-35 on the west side and U.S. 71.
USDOT partners with Kansas City for future infrastructure projectsQuoteThe Emerging Projects Agreement focuses on $15 billion worth of Kansas City projects designed to improve the infrastructure throughout the area. The partnership will help with work for an east-west KC Streetcar extension, which hopes to connect underserved communities with health care and jobs.
U.S. Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg said the department hopes to bring safer, cleaner and modern transportation to Kansas City.
"I've had the chance to see firsthand the great strides Kansas City is taking to modernize their infrastructure, and this agreement will help advance that work for years to come," Buttigieg said.
Kansas City Mayor Quinton Lucas said he's honored to have a partnership with USDOT to improve the community. "I am thrilled about our collaboration to bring billions of dollars to our community to make improvements," Lucas said. According to Lucas, the improvements include reconnecting communities once torn apart by highway construction, creating a rapid transit system from the airport to the city, and making critical repairs to our bridges.
Here are some of the projects that could benefit:
A fixed, 21-mile rail line from downtown Kansas City to the airport ($10.5 billion)
An east-west streetcar extension ($1.5 billion)
Reconnecting the eastside, a study of 71 Highway's impact ($1.6 billion)
Reconnecting the westside, a study of I-35's impact ($1.5 billion)
Construction of the South Loop Park over I-670 ($314 million)
Blue River Watershed safety and connectivity improvements ($123 million)
The city will get funding from Transportation Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act (TIFIA) loans, Railroad Rehabilitation and Improvement Financing (RRIF), Private Activity Bonds (PABs) and technical assistance grants.
https://fox4kc.com/news/usdot-partners-with-kansas-city-for-future-infrastructure-projects/
The rail line to the airport is interesting, but I wonder what route they're going to use to get it there? Obviously there's the route that goes up I-29, but will they be able to use it? I think it would be very difficult to get sufficient right of way between NW 64th St (MO-45) and Tower Drive, especially in Platte Woods.
The less-obvious but probably more practical route would be up the US-169 corridor and then across to the airport somewhere north of 96th Street. They could potentially follow the old inter-urban rail route near Waukomis Drive and Green Hills Road, but a lot of that has already been developed without any real passage through north of MO-152.
Also, will it be "just" an airport connector, or would it be a true Metro project? For $10 billion, I'd expect it to be the latter, along with connections further south.
Quote from: afguy on October 24, 2023, 03:45:16 PM
Kansas City and the US DOT announced a partnership today that could lead to $15 billion of transportation projects getting funding from the feds. The highlights for me were the proposed rail line between downtown Kansas City and the Airport, the east-west streetcar line and improvements for I-35 on the west side and U.S. 71.
USDOT partners with Kansas City for future infrastructure projects
QuoteThe Emerging Projects Agreement focuses on $15 billion worth of Kansas City projects designed to improve the infrastructure throughout the area. The partnership will help with work for an east-west KC Streetcar extension, which hopes to connect underserved communities with health care and jobs.
U.S. Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg said the department hopes to bring safer, cleaner and modern transportation to Kansas City.
"I've had the chance to see firsthand the great strides Kansas City is taking to modernize their infrastructure, and this agreement will help advance that work for years to come," Buttigieg said.
Kansas City Mayor Quinton Lucas said he's honored to have a partnership with USDOT to improve the community. "I am thrilled about our collaboration to bring billions of dollars to our community to make improvements," Lucas said. According to Lucas, the improvements include reconnecting communities once torn apart by highway construction, creating a rapid transit system from the airport to the city, and making critical repairs to our bridges.
Here are some of the projects that could benefit:
A fixed, 21-mile rail line from downtown Kansas City to the airport ($10.5 billion)
An east-west streetcar extension ($1.5 billion)
Reconnecting the eastside, a study of 71 Highway's impact ($1.6 billion)
Reconnecting the westside, a study of I-35's impact ($1.5 billion)
Construction of the South Loop Park over I-670 ($314 million)
Blue River Watershed safety and connectivity improvements ($123 million)
The city will get funding from Transportation Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act (TIFIA) loans, Railroad Rehabilitation and Improvement Financing (RRIF), Private Activity Bonds (PABs) and technical assistance grants.
https://fox4kc.com/news/usdot-partners-with-kansas-city-for-future-infrastructure-projects/
I'm curious to see what they will do with US71. Maybe build a park over the highway like St. Louis or what they're planning on the South Loop.
Quote from: mvak36 on October 25, 2023, 10:23:09 AM
Quote from: afguy on October 24, 2023, 03:45:16 PM
Here are some of the projects that could benefit:
A fixed, 21-mile rail line from downtown Kansas City to the airport ($10.5 billion)
An east-west streetcar extension ($1.5 billion)
Reconnecting the eastside, a study of 71 Highway's impact ($1.6 billion)
Reconnecting the westside, a study of I-35's impact ($1.5 billion)
Construction of the South Loop Park over I-670 ($314 million)
Blue River Watershed safety and connectivity improvements ($123 million)
The city will get funding from Transportation Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act (TIFIA) loans, Railroad Rehabilitation and Improvement Financing (RRIF), Private Activity Bonds (PABs) and technical assistance grants.
https://fox4kc.com/news/usdot-partners-with-kansas-city-for-future-infrastructure-projects/
I'm curious to see what they will do with US71. Maybe build a park over the highway like St. Louis or what they're planning on the South Loop.
Not sure, but I've seen proposals where the Royals get moved over to Downtown. Near/replacing the Old KC Star Print building
Quote from: intelati49 on October 25, 2023, 10:38:33 AM
Quote from: mvak36 on October 25, 2023, 10:23:09 AM
Quote from: afguy on October 24, 2023, 03:45:16 PM
Here are some of the projects that could benefit:
A fixed, 21-mile rail line from downtown Kansas City to the airport ($10.5 billion)
An east-west streetcar extension ($1.5 billion)
Reconnecting the eastside, a study of 71 Highway's impact ($1.6 billion)
Reconnecting the westside, a study of I-35's impact ($1.5 billion)
Construction of the South Loop Park over I-670 ($314 million)
Blue River Watershed safety and connectivity improvements ($123 million)
The city will get funding from Transportation Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act (TIFIA) loans, Railroad Rehabilitation and Improvement Financing (RRIF), Private Activity Bonds (PABs) and technical assistance grants.
https://fox4kc.com/news/usdot-partners-with-kansas-city-for-future-infrastructure-projects/
I'm curious to see what they will do with US71. Maybe build a park over the highway like St. Louis or what they're planning on the South Loop.
Not sure, but I've seen proposals where the Royals get moved over to Downtown. Near/replacing the Old KC Star Print building
The location (one of two finalists) is at approximately 12th and Cherry, roughly a quarter mile northeast of the KC Star building. The other finalist location is in North Kansas City. The Royals were set to announce on September 23rd, but then delayed it. We haven't heard anything since.
Does anyone know what the acronym FLOCK stands for in Oak Hill, Kansas City spanning I-670 just west of Summit Street near I-35. That tall pedestrian crossing over the freeway is named the FLOCK Bridge, but the Goog ( as per usual) is no help.
Quote from: roadman65 on November 06, 2023, 10:44:26 AM
Does anyone know what the acronym FLOCK stands for in Oak Hill, Kansas City spanning I-670 just west of Summit Street near I-35. That tall pedestrian crossing over the freeway is named the FLOCK Bridge, but the Goog ( as per usual) is no help.
http://www.kcrivertrails.org/
QuoteOn the north end of this trail segment you will discover a decorative pedestrian bridge that gives you an excellent view of Kaw Valley as it connects the oldest parks in Kansas City. The bridge itself features spectacular iron work that depicts the frequent flock of birds seen in the area.
So it's not an acronym. It's a title given by an architect to define the nature of his work.
Shouldn't be capitalized though. If he did this in the past here on this forum, he would be chastised for sure by a certain user on here who got annoyed at bad spelling lol.
Here is something. Unlike the other bridges in Kanas City, that use cantilever or cables, this one is a typical design.
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/53316173493_e601cc1b13_k.jpg)
Someone brought up the new Buck O' Neil Crossing recently as that new structure will resemble the MO Route 9 Bridge like here.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/54480415@N08/53328304383/
Another thing interesting that you don't see states do, is let other jurisdictions place their property within themselves.
Here in the above link (until I get to my other computer to post the photo) is a KDOT gantry in Missouri. You can tell the difference in the photo as the opposing side has the MDOT overhead gantry style as Missouri likes to use single supports where Kansas likes truss supports like many other states like to use.
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/53328304383_4f3dd73e06_c.jpg)
Quote from: roadman65 on November 12, 2023, 07:29:55 PM
https://www.flickr.com/photos/54480415@N08/53328304383/
Another thing interesting that you don't see states do, is let other jurisdictions place their property within themselves.
Here in the above link (until I get to my other computer to post the photo) is a KDOT gantry in Missouri. You can tell the difference in the photo as the opposing side has the MDOT overhead gantry style as Missouri likes to use single supports where Kansas likes truss supports like many other states like to use.
It's on a viaduct, right at the border (despite the signage in the near distance -- county clinchers know not to trust signage being right at the border...). Not sure this is so earth-shattering.
Well considering that the bridge railings change at the KDOT gantry and the MDOT assembly on the left is before it, I'd say your observation is correct. Considering that state line sign is just barely beyond that might have some merit for using "county line" over " entering" as the sign poles might be why KDOT didn't place it at the proper location.
In Florida where rivers are the county lines, you often see a "entering x county" sign on the base of the waterway crossing some several hundred feet prior to the actual border, even though many hundreds of feet away. The Escambia- Santa Rosa border on I-10 in Florida is one great example. The EB " Entering Santa Rosa County" sign is located at the US 90 overpass on the west shore of the very wide bay that is the boundary of the two counties. US 90 far from straddles the county line as signage would make you think otherwise.
Quote from: Rothman on November 12, 2023, 07:38:37 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on November 12, 2023, 07:29:55 PM
https://www.flickr.com/photos/54480415@N08/53328304383/
Another thing interesting that you don't see states do, is let other jurisdictions place their property within themselves.
Here in the above link (until I get to my other computer to post the photo) is a KDOT gantry in Missouri. You can tell the difference in the photo as the opposing side has the MDOT overhead gantry style as Missouri likes to use single supports where Kansas likes truss supports like many other states like to use.
It's on a viaduct, right at the border (despite the signage in the near distance -- county clinchers know not to trust signage being right at the border...). Not sure this is so earth-shattering.
There's Iowa signage in South Dakota: (we haven't ever used Clearview (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4964502,-96.4818269,3a,15y,124.43h,90.88t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sz2ewUDo7RIuQlTM8QraFdw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu) so it's more common than you would think.
There is a MoDOT VMS on the Illinois side of the Stan Musial Bridge/I-70 WB
Quote from: roadman65 on November 11, 2023, 02:52:46 PM
Here is something. Unlike the other bridges in Kanas City, that use cantilever or cables, this one is a typical design.
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/53316173493_e601cc1b13_k.jpg)
Someone brought up the new Buck O' Neil Crossing recently as that new structure will resemble the MO Route 9 Bridge like here.
Since the two major metro areas in Missouri straddle the state line, there's a lot of cooperation between several of the departments, especially transportation. MODOT and KSDOT work together (not always well, but they try) on a number of things, including overhead signage, construction signage, etc.
And yes, the Buck O'Neill Bridge (formerly the Broadway Bridge) is in the process of being replaced with a standard highway bridge and it kills my soul just a little bit every time I see it.
I like how the current Buck O' Neil graces the Missouri River from the Lewis & Clark Viaduct with the new tall tower of the I-29/35 bridge behind it. Those arches look nice. They were aesthetically appealing for sure. Now I can't imagine what a modern freeway bridge will make the river view look like.
Edit: Yes I can.
https://maps.app.goo.gl/ooCL6PWobrNZiJyHA
GSV shows how the new bridge already ruins the view.
https://historicbridges.org/bridges/browser/?bridgebrowser=missouri/broadway/
The Historic Bridges website rates the State of Missouri being very bad at preserving historic bridges.
I see two new bridges being constructed over W. 5th St. and W. 4th St. just west of the US 169 viaduct. Are they planning to reroute US 169 to meet Interstates 35 and 70 via the freeway-to-freeway interchange?
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on November 14, 2023, 12:00:57 PM
I see two new bridges being constructed over W. 5th St. and W. 4th St. just west of the US 169 viaduct. Are they planning to reroute US 169 to meet Interstates 35 and 70 via the freeway-to-freeway interchange?
Looks like it's only going to directly connect (freeway connections) to I35N/S. There's only street level connection to I-70.
I recently remembered "Hey, I haven't looked at LcLoudmouth recently." It's the same area, but "Before the Buck O'Neil bridge" (https://www.linecreekloudmouth.com/blog/2023/02/the-8th-street-tunnel.html) is the first picture
The governor was in Joplin on Friday to celebrate the completion of one of the bridges in his "Focus on Bridges" project. During his news conference he mentioned that expanding I-44 from Joplin to St. Louis would be the state's next priority and that more details will follow during his state of the state address next month. I'm looking forward to seeing what the governor has planned.
Governor marks completion of bridge projects, says I-44 expansion nextQuoteWith approval of the funding of a major expansion of Interstate 70 to six lanes across most of Missouri from St. Louis to Kansas City in the offing, Parson said it is time to turn the state's attention to Interstate 44.
"We've talked about that ever since I've been in Jefferson City. and now it's going to come to fruition," Parson said. "Now with I-70 off the table, the good news for you in Southwest Missouri, I-44 is next. You will see vast improvement in that in the coming years. And I will tell you this, in the State of the State Address, I'm not supposed to be telling what I'm going to be saying, but I-44 will be mentioned."
Parson said he expects there to be "a huge amount of support" for working on I-44 from St. Louis to Joplin, a project that has been discussed for years.
"I don't think there's any question you've got I-70 funded, you've got I-44 next in line," Parson said. "We're already starting the process, we're building overpasses, we're doing work on I-44 actually working our way to that time when we're going to expand I-44. So I think there will be talk about that, there will be more talk about other projects in the state, I-55 and such."
https://www.joplinglobe.com/news/business/governor-marks-completion-of-bridge-projects-says-i-44-expansion-next/article_5173ec70-9625-11ee-8d51-d7f6f3b8036e.html
Missouri is expanding roughly 200 miles of I-70 to six lanes across the state, and may now have a similar project with hundreds of miles of I-44?
Wow, quite impressive. Some other states need to take note. I-40 Little Rock to Memphis, I-81 Virginia / Tennessee, just to name a couple.
Quote from: sprjus4 on December 11, 2023, 02:37:46 AM
Missouri is expanding roughly 200 miles of I-70 to six lanes across the state, and may now have a similar project with hundreds of miles of I-44?
Wow, quite impressive. Some other states need to take note. I-40 Little Rock to Memphis, I-81 Virginia / Tennessee, just to name a couple.
Arkansas is expanding I-40 to 6 lanes, but in typical Arkansas piecemeal fashion as funds allow. The first segments of I-40 to get the treatment are at the ends, from I-440 to the Kerr exit, and from I-55 North to the Jennette exit on the east end. Nothing else in the 2023-2026 STIP, so don't hold your breath for anything more unless Biden wants to try to Inflation Reduction Act part 2 his way to another term.
$278M overhaul of I-270 in north St. Louis County almost done(https://bloximages.newyork1.vip.townnews.com/stltoday.com/content/tncms/assets/v3/editorial/3/27/32702822-ac01-5479-afdb-68ae781fb790/5f4aaee1c7145.image.jpg?resize=750%2C500)
QuoteGov. Mike Parson and other speakers are scheduled to join Missouri Department of Transportation officials at a ribbon-cutting event Tuesday morning in Hazelwood to celebrate the $278 million project's impending completion.
"It is exciting that we are now seeing the results of decades of advocacy work," Rebecca Zoll, president and CEO of North County Inc., a local booster group, said Monday. "This infrastructure improvement was critical to the north St. Louis County community."
Zoll said the changes have improved safety and access along the 8-mile stretch of the interstate between North Lindbergh Boulevard in Hazelwood and Lewis and Clark Boulevard in Bellefontaine Neighbors. Among other things, a new eastbound lane and new westbound lane were added along that stretch, increasing the total to four or five on each side. Some other work was done as far west as McDonnell Boulevard and east to Bellefontaine Road. Eight interchanges were rebuilt, 12 bridges on and over the highway replaced, and seven new spans constructed.
Moreover, the north and south outer roads — known as Dunn and Pershall roads — were converted from two-way to one-way roads between Hanley/Graham roads and Old Halls Ferry Road. Eliminated were exits where eastbound drivers on Dunn had to stop and yield to cars coming off the highway. In another change, shared-use sidewalk paths for pedestrians and bicyclists were added along segments of Dunn and Pershall.
MoDOT has said the affected stretch, built in the 1960s, handles about 140,000 vehicles daily, of which 18% are heavy trucks. It's a major freight route both through and inside the metro area.
A MoDOT spokeswoman, Nina Thompson, said while the project is substantially completed, a few tasks still need to be carried out by the end of the year.
She said those include some lane striping and seeding, sodding and backfilling in nearby grassy areas. "It's like the icing on the cake," she said.
https://www.stltoday.com/news/local/business/278m-overhaul-of-i-270-in-north-st-louis-county-almost-done/article_d6b04636-985f-11ee-bf0f-9f9c4ded3a95.html
State Rep. Cody Smith said the I-44 expansion between Joplin and St. Louis could cost as much as $9 billion and that a funding plan would take at least a year to develop.
I-44 Expansion a Key Legislative Challenge for Missouri in 2024Quote"Although we are already starting to process or start doing overpasses, we start doing work on I-44 actually working our way to that time when we're going to expand I-44. So I think there'll be more talks about that," said Parson. It's already a focus for the Missouri Department of Transportation.
MoDOT has been studying the issues for years, like the growing number of vehicles on the road, which can lead to a traffic slowdown and potentially dangerous conditions.
"Congestion around some of the cities is bordering on just dangerous at this point. And so I think we need to look at, you know, long term, a third lane on my 44 but in the short term, at least trying to alleviate some of that congestion," said MO Rep. Cody Smith, (R).
MoDOT reports also look at the number and severity of I-44 wrecks, along with the associated property damage, injuries and deaths. The Jasper County section of the interstate alone tops the state average for fatal crashes.
Smith says it's an important debate at the state level, but not likely one with an easy fix.
"So we think it could cost as much as about 9 billion to completely reconstruct I-44. So that gives you a sense of context about the scale. If I-70 was about three and I-44 is about nine then that tells you kind of all you need to know about the length and the traffic and the use of I 44 itself," said Smith.
Smith says it's likely to take more than a year to develop a plan and funding for the complete I-44 overhaul.
https://www.fourstateshomepage.com/local-news/joplin-news/i-44-expansion-a-key-legislative-challenge-for-missouri-in-2024/#:~:text=KSNF%2FKODE%20%E2%80%94%20Massive%20construction%20to,an%20expensive%20challenge%20to%20address.
Quote
BILL FILED IN JEFFERSON CITY WOULD CHANGE I-44/I-70 NAMES
A proposed bill to be considered in the next Missouri General Assembly would flipflop the names of interstates 70 and 44 running through the state.
House Bill-2067 pre-filed on Wednesday by Representative Don Mayhew would change the name of Interstate-70 from the Kansas-Missouri state line to the Missouri-Illinois line to Interstate-44.
The bill would also change the name of Interstate-44 stretching from its current boundary in the St. Louis area to the Missouri-Oklahoma line to Interstate-70.
The short two paragraph introduction of the bill goes no further with any other information provided for the proposed changes to the names of the two interstates.
The 2024 General Assembly begins at 12-noon on Wednesday, January 3rd.
Anyone know what this is about?
https://www.krmsradio.com/bill-filed-in-jefferson-city-would-change-i-44-i-70-names/ (https://www.krmsradio.com/bill-filed-in-jefferson-city-would-change-i-44-i-70-names/)
Quote from: I-35 on December 22, 2023, 08:52:22 PM
Quote
BILL FILED IN JEFFERSON CITY WOULD CHANGE I-44/I-70 NAMES
A proposed bill to be considered in the next Missouri General Assembly would flipflop the names of interstates 70 and 44 running through the state.
House Bill-2067 pre-filed on Wednesday by Representative Don Mayhew would change the name of Interstate-70 from the Kansas-Missouri state line to the Missouri-Illinois line to Interstate-44.
The bill would also change the name of Interstate-44 stretching from its current boundary in the St. Louis area to the Missouri-Oklahoma line to Interstate-70.
The short two paragraph introduction of the bill goes no further with any other information provided for the proposed changes to the names of the two interstates.
The 2024 General Assembly begins at 12-noon on Wednesday, January 3rd.
Anyone know what this is about?
https://www.krmsradio.com/bill-filed-in-jefferson-city-would-change-i-44-i-70-names/ (https://www.krmsradio.com/bill-filed-in-jefferson-city-would-change-i-44-i-70-names/)
What the actual
Quote from: intelati49 on December 22, 2023, 08:53:59 PM
Quote from: I-35 on December 22, 2023, 08:52:22 PM
Quote
BILL FILED IN JEFFERSON CITY WOULD CHANGE I-44/I-70 NAMES
A proposed bill to be considered in the next Missouri General Assembly would flipflop the names of interstates 70 and 44 running through the state.
House Bill-2067 pre-filed on Wednesday by Representative Don Mayhew would change the name of Interstate-70 from the Kansas-Missouri state line to the Missouri-Illinois line to Interstate-44.
The bill would also change the name of Interstate-44 stretching from its current boundary in the St. Louis area to the Missouri-Oklahoma line to Interstate-70.
The short two paragraph introduction of the bill goes no further with any other information provided for the proposed changes to the names of the two interstates.
The 2024 General Assembly begins at 12-noon on Wednesday, January 3rd.
Anyone know what this is about?
https://www.krmsradio.com/bill-filed-in-jefferson-city-would-change-i-44-i-70-names/ (https://www.krmsradio.com/bill-filed-in-jefferson-city-would-change-i-44-i-70-names/)
What the actual
My head lost some brain cells from reading that
Quote from: Great Lakes Roads on December 22, 2023, 09:02:32 PM
Quote from: intelati49 on December 22, 2023, 08:53:59 PM
Quote from: I-35 on December 22, 2023, 08:52:22 PM
Quote
BILL FILED IN JEFFERSON CITY WOULD CHANGE I-44/I-70 NAMES.
Anyone know what this is about?
https://www.krmsradio.com/bill-filed-in-jefferson-city-would-change-i-44-i-70-names/ (https://www.krmsradio.com/bill-filed-in-jefferson-city-would-change-i-44-i-70-names/)
What the actual
My head lost some brain cells from reading that
It's enough for me to drop everything and write a letter.
My first (in quite some time?) for this subject
Come on dude
Committees
Member of Conservation and Natural Resources
Chair of Transportation Accountability
Member of on Government Accountability
Member of Subcommittee on Appropriations - Public Safety, Corrections, Transportation and Revenue
Co-chair of on Transportation Oversight
I'm very interested to know what his reasoning behind this is. What happens at the state lines when those highways revert back to their original numbers? Is this some sort of game? Some gotcha aimed at the feds? Did he fall and hit his head?
This is nothing more than a political stunt. I-44 runs through his district and more than likely he's doing this because the state funded improvements to I-70 over I-44. If this state rep knew anything, he would know I-70 was far more of a pressing need as it connects the state's two biggest cities and is an important east-west transcontinental route. The governor earlier this month already said now that the I-70 widening is funded, I-44 would be the next challenge. So, I really don't know what State Rep. Mayhew is trying to prove with this bill.
MoDOT is scaling back their planned widening of I-49 in Cass County. Originally, the widening was to go from 155th Street to North Cass Parkway, but now it will only go from 155th Street to MO-58. Local officials are rightfully upset about the decision and the lack of communication from MoDOT about the decision. Hopefully, MoDOT changes their minds.
Plan to widen part of I-49 in Cass County downsizedQuoteA plan to widen a section of Interstate 49 in Cass County is scaled back. Now leaders from the impacted communities want answers.
Political and civic leaders from Raymore, Belton, Grandview, and Cass County attended the Missouri Highways and Transportation Commission meeting Thursday.
The group wanted answers after the commission cut plans to widen I-49 to three lanes from 155th Street to North Cass Parkway.
The commission approved a plan in July 2022. It earmarked $10 billion to improve highways, roads, and bridges across the state of Missouri. That plan also included $71 million to widen the six miles on I-49 surrounding Belton.
Originally, the project was scheduled to begin in the summer of 2024.
Since plans were announced, the Cass County leaders said the commission cut the project in half. Instead of expanding I-49 all the way to Raymore, the plan is to stop the expansion at MO-58 in Belton.
"This decision appears shortsighted and will present numerous issues to the entire southern region of Kansas City," Turnbow said.
During the meeting, the mayors and civic leaders told the commission they believed the decision to change the project was made without consulting anyone in the impacted communities. The group also pointed out that development decisions and building projects have been made because of the plan to widen I-49.
Each speaker asked that the commission reinstate the entirety of the I-49 project's scope and timeline, according to Turnbow.
Members of the commission apologized for the lack of communication and said the concerns had been heard. They did not say whether they would reconsider widening the entire stretch of I-49.
https://www.kctv5.com/2023/12/07/plan-widen-part-i-49-cass-county-downsized/
Article on the I-70 expansion which officially begins this spring.
https://www.modot.org/node/39665
Quote
MoDOT Celebrates Completion of Gov. Parson's Focus on Bridges Program
JEFFERSON CITY – The Missouri Department of Transportation today celebrated the completion of Gov. Mike Parson's Focus on Bridges program that restored or replaced 250 of the state's poorest bridges over the last four years. Established in 2019, the Focus on Bridges program was one of Gov. Parson's first major investments in transportation infrastructure.
The final project replaced the Blue Ridge Boulevard bridge over Interstate 70 in Independence and made interchange improvements to the ramps and approaches. The bridge will officially reopen to motorists on Dec. 22, just four years after the first bridge under the program opened on Dec. 20, 2019, in Iron County.
"Infrastructure has been a top priority since day one, and four years ago, we set out to replace 250 of our poorest bridges through the Focus on Bridges program," Gov. Parson said. "Today, we are proud to celebrate the 250th bridge completed as promised. From St. Louis to Springfield, from the Bootheel to the great Northwest, this program benefited Missourians everywhere. Focus on Bridges is a bold, one-of-a-kind program that leveraged general revenue to make far reaching improvements to our infrastructure for the first time in generations. While there is more to do, we know we have made a real difference and created a lasting model that will continue to serve Missourians now and into the future."
MoDOT is responsible for maintaining 10,424 bridges on the state system, the sixth most in the nation. The average age of the bridges is 49 years, and most of them were designed to last 50 years. Prior to Governor Parson's focus on infrastructure, the number of bridges rated as "poor" using Federal Highway Administration criteria, were increasing year over year rather than declining as now seen in Missouri. Currently there are 804 bridges that have been rated "poor" using Federal Highway Administration criteria, down 19 from a year ago.
"The completion of the Focus on Bridges program is an example of the progress being made to Missouri's bridges and Gov. Parson's commitment to moving Missouri forward," MoDOT Director Patrick McKenna said. "I applaud the governor for his leadership and commitment to improving Missouri's bridges and roadways. We will continue to work towards reducing the number of poor bridges in Missouri as additional federal and state revenue becomes available."
Gov. Parson's Focus on Bridges program was truly innovative and was made possible through a $50 million appropriation from General Revenue as well as $301 million in bond revenue approved by the Missouri General Assembly in 2019. Maintaining the state's bridges helps provide a world-class transportation system that is safe, innovative, and reliable.
Quote from: intelati49 on December 22, 2023, 09:05:16 PM
Quote from: Great Lakes Roads on December 22, 2023, 09:02:32 PM
Quote from: intelati49 on December 22, 2023, 08:53:59 PM
Quote from: I-35 on December 22, 2023, 08:52:22 PM
Quote
BILL FILED IN JEFFERSON CITY WOULD CHANGE I-44/I-70 NAMES.
Anyone know what this is about?
https://www.krmsradio.com/bill-filed-in-jefferson-city-would-change-i-44-i-70-names/ (https://www.krmsradio.com/bill-filed-in-jefferson-city-would-change-i-44-i-70-names/)
What the actual
My head lost some brain cells from reading that
It's enough for me to drop everything and write a letter.
He talks!
But it doesn't look great. I will have a gander at the numbers and make a point by point rebuttal.
"I-44 has 9 times the freight of I-70"
Maybe the fraction of freight, but I-70 is at least twice the volume last I saw.
MODOT received $92,883,609 from the INFRA grant program (https://www.transportation.gov/sites/dot.gov/files/2024-01/INFRA%20Fact%20Sheets%20FY%202023-2024_Final_0.pdf) for the Improve I-70 Project.
From Page 18 of the pdf:
Quote
Project Description:
This project will fund three segments of the larger program to reconstruct 191 miles of I-70 across Missouri. The scope of this project includes reconstruction of Segment A (Blue Springs to Odessa), Segment D (Route 63 to Route 54), Segment F (Warrenton to I-64), including new truck parking facilities and truck parking information systems, ITS additions, wildlife crossing and pollinator habitat conservation, and other enhancements such as broadband infrastructure, solar panels, and smart work zone information systems. The project also includes workforce programs for disadvantaged communities.
Quote from: mvak36 on January 25, 2024, 01:37:52 PM
MODOT received $92,883,609 from the INFRA grant program (https://www.transportation.gov/sites/dot.gov/files/2024-01/INFRA%20Fact%20Sheets%20FY%202023-2024_Final_0.pdf) for the Improve I-70 Project.
From Page 18 of the pdf:
Quote
Project Description:
This project will fund three segments of the larger program to reconstruct 191 miles of I-70 across Missouri. The scope of this project includes reconstruction of Segment A (Blue Springs to Odessa), Segment D (Route 63 to Route 54), Segment F
(Warrenton to I-64), including new truck parking facilities and truck parking information systems, ITS additions, wildlife crossing and pollinator habitat conservation, and other enhancements such as broadband infrastructure, solar panels, and smart work zone information systems. The project also includes workforce programs for disadvantaged communities.
How close are any of these projects to being shovel ready.
Quote from: ARMOURERERIC on January 26, 2024, 11:53:21 AM
Quote from: mvak36 on January 25, 2024, 01:37:52 PM
MODOT received $92,883,609 from the INFRA grant program (https://www.transportation.gov/sites/dot.gov/files/2024-01/INFRA%20Fact%20Sheets%20FY%202023-2024_Final_0.pdf) for the Improve I-70 Project.
From Page 18 of the pdf:
Quote
Project Description:
This project will fund three segments of the larger program to reconstruct 191 miles of I-70 across Missouri. The scope of this project includes reconstruction of Segment A (Blue Springs to Odessa), Segment D (Route 63 to Route 54), Segment F
(Warrenton to I-64), including new truck parking facilities and truck parking information systems, ITS additions, wildlife crossing and pollinator habitat conservation, and other enhancements such as broadband infrastructure, solar panels, and smart work zone information systems. The project also includes workforce programs for disadvantaged communities.
How close are any of these projects to being shovel ready.
The widening projects themselves are going to start in 2024 and 2025. But it looks like the grant they won isn't for the widening itself, so I'm not sure how far along in the design process the above bolded improvements are.
https://www.modot.org/node/40537
Quote
Governor Parson's Improve I-70 Plan Receives Federal Funding
JEFFERSON CITY – Today, during his final State of the State Address, Governor Mike Parson, alongside Congressman Sam Graves, announced that Missouri has secured a $92.8 million Infrastructure for Rebuilding America (INFRA) grant to improve Interstate-70.
Missouri will use the INFRA grant for specific Improve I-70 projects, including truck parking, Intelligent Transportation System (ITS), work zone safety technology, and workforce development, all to enhance the efforts of adding an additional lane to I-70.
"For decades the expansion of I-70 was talked about in the State Capitol. After decades of inaction, our administration, with the help of the General Assembly, secured a historic investment of $2.8 billion last year to add a third lane across our state," said Governor Parson. "This additional grant money will help us build upon our historic investment and continue our administration's commitment to improving our state's infrastructure. We thank Congressman Graves for his leadership in securing this grant, the largest transportation grant Missouri has ever received."
The overall goal of the Improve I-70 project across Missouri is to provide a safe, efficient, environmentally sound, and cost-effective transportation facility that responds to corridor needs as a national interstate. Missouri's FY2024 budget from the General Assembly supported by Governor Parson provides $2.8 billion in General Revenue for the costs to plan, design, construct, reconstruct, rehabilitate, and repair three lanes in each direction on nearly 200 miles of I-70, from Blue Springs to Wentzville.
"Thanks to the leadership of Congressman Graves, this grant award acknowledges the national importance of the Improve I-70 corridor," said MoDOT Director Patrick McKenna. "MoDOT submitted an aggressive application for the Improve I-70 program through a federal project discretionary grant opportunity to add to the historic funding provided by the General Assembly and Governor Parson. With the award of this grant, it will allow the Improve I-70 corridor to enhance safety, increase technology, and improve innovation throughout the first three projects."
The first Improve I-70 project's contract is scheduled to be presented to the Missouri Highways and Transportation Commission for approval at its February 14, 2024 meeting. The first phase of the project includes the segment of interstate from Route 63 in Columbia to Route 54 in Kingdom City. Construction on this first segment could start as early as summer 2024. The second project will focus on the segment from Warrenton to Wentzville and the third from Blue Springs to Odessa. Projects two and three are scheduled to be under construction in 2025.
"This grant will enable MoDOT to further stretch the funding for I-70 to include additions such as additional truck parking along I-70, and additional cameras and digital message boards used to help communicate to I-70 travelers," said MoDOT Improve I-70 Program Director Eric Kopinski. "We will also be looking at items to enhance technology and communication efforts through smart work zone features to advise motorists during construction."
Article from last month highlighting the $20 million the state set aside to study improvements to I-44. The part I found most interesting is that Franklin County commissioner Tim Brinker wants to see HWY 47 up to freeway standards between I-44 and I-70, thus making it a "western arc" freeway bypass of Metro STL. Personally, I think the idea is silly.
QuoteThe last major examination of the I-44 corridor was a 2008 "Purpose and Need Study," officials said. The 2010 expansion from four to six lanes of I-44 from near Six Flags to the Highway 100 Washington interchange, approximately five miles of work, was the only significant work after the 2008 study, O'Connor said. "I believe this project was already in the works prior to the 2008 study being completed though the study did highlight the need to complete these improvements," he said. Eventually, Brinker would like to see an "Interstate 470" bringing Highway 47 up to freeway standards between I-70 in Warrenton and I-44 in St. Clair." People think I jest when I say this, but there is a vision of 44 to 70 on this," he said. "There's that kind of interest out there throughout the U.S., quite frankly. And with the 70 construction going on, it's going to push some traffic patterns from a freight expressway to take the 44 route instead, in terms of timeliness, etc. I've already had people approach me on this that are in the industry, and (I) say we welcome any and all traverse through Franklin County, in lieu of St. Charles and Warren, those counties north."
https://www.emissourian.com/local_news/i-44-improvements-could-be-on-tap/article_583fce40-a4c4-11ee-b6ef-d7f46b3bbbf0.html
Quote from: afguy on January 26, 2024, 05:47:30 PM
Article from last month highlighting the $20 million the state set aside to study improvements to I-44. The part I found most interesting is that Franklin County commissioner Tim Brinker wants to see HWY 47 up to freeway standards between I-44 and I-70, thus making it a "western arc" freeway bypass of Metro STL. Personally, I think the idea is silly.
QuoteThe last major examination of the I-44 corridor was a 2008 "Purpose and Need Study," officials said. The 2010 expansion from four to six lanes of I-44 from near Six Flags to the Highway 100 Washington interchange, approximately five miles of work, was the only significant work after the 2008 study, O'Connor said. "I believe this project was already in the works prior to the 2008 study being completed though the study did highlight the need to complete these improvements," he said. Eventually, Brinker would like to see an "Interstate 470" bringing Highway 47 up to freeway standards between I-70 in Warrenton and I-44 in St. Clair." People think I jest when I say this, but there is a vision of 44 to 70 on this," he said. "There's that kind of interest out there throughout the U.S., quite frankly. And with the 70 construction going on, it's going to push some traffic patterns from a freight expressway to take the 44 route instead, in terms of timeliness, etc. I've already had people approach me on this that are in the industry, and (I) say we welcome any and all traverse through Franklin County, in lieu of St. Charles and Warren, those counties north."
https://www.emissourian.com/local_news/i-44-improvements-could-be-on-tap/article_583fce40-a4c4-11ee-b6ef-d7f46b3bbbf0.html
Yeah I don't think they need it anytime soon. Maybe something from Union down to I-44 but I'm not sure that needs a freeway. Also, I'm pointing out the obvious but there's already a 470 in Missouri.
During the governor's State of the State speech he did mention that they will have more funding for I-44 with the grant that they received for I-70.
https://www.ky3.com/2024/01/26/much-needed-improvements-could-be-coming-i-44-through-missouri/
Quote
SPRINGFIELD, Mo. (KY3) - Much-needed improvements could be coming to I-44 throughout Missouri.
On Wednesday, Governor Parson announced more money for projects to improve the interstate in the Missouri State of the State address. Governor Parson announced more federal funding for the I-70 expansion project after Congressman Sam Graves secured another $90 million in federal funding.
Parson says the extra cash will free up state money to help refurbish I-44.
"We will be receiving over $90 million in additional funds to put towards projects on I-70," said Governor Mike Parson. "With these additional funds and those savings, we are announcing our recommendation to establish the I-44 Improvement Fund."
In the address, Governor Parson made that new push to make I-44 better and safer.
"We aren't just laying the foundation to expand and improve one interstate across our state but two interstates," said Gov. Parson.
MoDOT representatives say Missouri's 2024 budget has already provided $20 million for a study of more than 250 miles of I-44 from the Oklahoma state line to the Franklin County-St Louis County line.
"We are in the process of hiring two consultants to work on this study and pick up from the last time the corridor was studied in 2008," said MoDOT Communications Director Linda Horn. "This is the next step in reviewing the needs of I-44 and preparing for future projects to improve safety and reliability."
Truck drivers who drive I-44 almost every day say the improvements are overdue.
"We have about two or three big blowouts on 44 just in the last month," said truck driver Rob Law. "Most recently, a huge nail caused the blowout."
Law says he hopes the funding happens.
"I want to see improvements with the pavement, at least," said Law.
Quote from: mvak36 on January 27, 2024, 01:25:54 PMYeah I don't think they need it anytime soon. Maybe something from Union down to I-44 but I'm not sure that needs a freeway.
There's been a decent push to at least four lane MO 47 between I-44 and Washington for a while. While a full freeway might not be the highest need in Missouri, there are some good arguments for one:
- The growth in St. Charles in Lincoln Counties.
- I-270 needs relief. A higher-type corridor further inward is unlikely to be developed.
- It would allow an all-freeway bypass route for the next time flooding closes I-44 between MO 109 and I-270
Quote from: Revive 755 on January 27, 2024, 10:53:52 PM
Quote from: mvak36 on January 27, 2024, 01:25:54 PMYeah I don't think they need it anytime soon. Maybe something from Union down to I-44 but I'm not sure that needs a freeway.
There's been a decent push to at least four lane MO 47 between I-44 and Washington for a while. While a full freeway might not be the highest need in Missouri, there are some good arguments for one:
- The growth in St. Charles in Lincoln Counties.
- I-270 needs relief. A higher-type corridor further inward is unlikely to be developed.
- It would allow an all-freeway bypass route for the next time flooding closes I-44 between MO 109 and I-270
Fair enough. I just wasn't sure if they'd build a freeway to start off with. If they build a 4-lane, hopefully they preserve the ROW to convert it to freeway in the future.
That bypass would have been useful a couple of Thanksgivings ago. They had VMS signs in Columbia saying that there were accidents and heavy traffic near Wentzville and to avoid the area. I probably should have stayed on I-70 until I got closer, but I ended up taking US 63 to Jeff City and US50 east to I-44.
Quote from: ARMOURERERIC on January 26, 2024, 11:53:21 AM
Quote from: mvak36 on January 25, 2024, 01:37:52 PM
MODOT received $92,883,609 from the INFRA grant program (https://www.transportation.gov/sites/dot.gov/files/2024-01/INFRA%20Fact%20Sheets%20FY%202023-2024_Final_0.pdf) for the Improve I-70 Project.
From Page 18 of the pdf:
Quote
Project Description:
This project will fund three segments of the larger program to reconstruct 191 miles of I-70 across Missouri. The scope of this project includes reconstruction of Segment A (Blue Springs to Odessa), Segment D (Route 63 to Route 54), Segment F
(Warrenton to I-64), including new truck parking facilities and truck parking information systems, ITS additions, wildlife crossing and pollinator habitat conservation, and other enhancements such as broadband infrastructure, solar panels, and smart work zone information systems. The project also includes workforce programs for disadvantaged communities.
How close are any of these projects to being shovel ready.
I'm curious myself. I understand it's a design-build project, but I would think we'd have basic interchange geometry on paper by now if they plan to break ground on the Columbia to Kingdom City (https://www.modot.org/improvei70/columbiakingdomcity) and Warrenton to Wentzville (https://www.modot.org/improvei70/warrentonwentzville) sections this summer and fall, respectively. Maybe we'll get a PDF of plans next week after the commission selects the design-build team for the Route 63 to Route 54 - Columbia to Kingdom City route.
Quote from: Sani on February 07, 2024, 01:33:59 PMI'm curious myself. I understand it's a design-build project, but I would think we'd have basic interchange geometry on paper by now if they plan to break ground on the Columbia to Kingdom City (https://www.modot.org/improvei70/columbiakingdomcity) and Warrenton to Wentzville (https://www.modot.org/improvei70/warrentonwentzville) sections this summer and fall, respectively. Maybe we'll get a PDF of plans next week after the commission selects the design-build team for the Route 63 to Route 54 - Columbia to Kingdom City route.
It looks like access to preliminary design information may require bothering someone at MoDOT (there's an almost identically worded statement for Columbia to Kingdom City):
QuoteFor industry access to information such as the sign in sheet and presentation from the industry meeting, please email improvei70@modot.mo.org and request access to Improve I-70: Warrenton to Wentzville's industry Sharepoint site.
https://www.modot.org/node/41153
Quote
JEFFERSON CITY – Today the Missouri Department of Transportation announced the selection of two consultants to lead an environmental study of the more than 250 miles of Interstate 44 from the Oklahoma state line to the Route 100 East interchange near Gray Summit in Franklin County.
The selected consultants, Hg Consult, Inc. and Garver, will each study a stretch of the corridor, which has been divided into two sections for the purpose of the study: Hg Consult will study the stretch from the Oklahoma state line to the Route 17 interchange near St. Robert, and Garver will study from St. Robert to the Route 100 East interchange at Gray Summit.
"I-44 was completed in 1966 and serves as an important corridor for not only passenger travel but a key commercial trucking corridor in Missouri," said MoDOT Assistant Southwest District Engineer Greg Chapman. "This study is a critical step to prepare for future projects on I-44 that will focus on improving safety and reliability in this vital east-west link across Missouri."
The goal of the study is to update and validate the outcomes of the 2008 Purpose and Need Study and provide the opportunity for public input from stakeholders along the I-44 corridor. The study will also divide the more than 250 miles of the I-44 corridor into logical segments for further study and prioritize those segments for more detailed design and ultimately for construction when funds are available.
Missouri's FY2024 budget from the General Assembly, signed into law by Gov. Parson, provides $20 million of General Revenue for the environmental study.
Project Website: https://www.modot.org/forward44
From MoDOT today:
QuoteContractor Selected for the First Improve I-70 Project (https://www.modot.org/node/41414)
Section from Columbia to Kingdom City to start in early summer
JEFFERSON CITY – The Missouri Highways and Transportation Commission (MHTC) has selected Millstone Weber as the apparent best-value proposer and Design-Build contractor of the first project in MoDOT's Improve I-70 Program. Negotiations to finalize the contract are currently in progress. Improve I-70: Columbia to Kingdom City will build a third lane in each direction and improve the 20-mile stretch of Interstate 70 between U.S. 63 in Columbia and U.S. 54 in Kingdom City beginning in summer 2024. This $405 million project is the first of several projects which will widen and improve the I-70 corridor.
Missouri's FY2024 budget from the General Assembly signed into law by Governor Parson provides $2.8 billion in General Revenue for the costs to build a third lane of I-70 across the state. The program will plan, design, construct, reconstruct, rehabilitate, and add a third lane in each direction on nearly 200 miles of I-70, from Blue Springs to Wentzville.
"Today's contractor selection marks the beginning of this generational opportunity to improve I-70, which serves as a critical economic east-west corridor across Missouri," said MHTC Chairman Terry Ecker. "This is a major challenge to deliver, but our MoDOT team working alongside the private sector partners in engineering and construction will deliver."
The selected team, including contractor Millstone Weber and designer Jacobs, competed against one other design-build team. The winning proposal showed not only an understanding of the engineering and design endeavors set out before the teams, but it also highlighted an understanding of the local, statewide, and national importance of an improved I-70. The winning proposal includes new concrete pavement on all three lanes of I-70 in each direction for the 20-mile section between Columbia and Kingdom City, wider inside and outside shoulders, and improved interchange designs at the U.S. 63 and U.S. 54 interchanges at I-70. Additionally, throughout construction two lanes of travel will be available for both directions of I-70 during peak hours.
The U.S. 63 and I-70 interchange proposal includes:
- Two new direct connection ramps (northbound U.S. 63 to westbound I-70 and eastbound I-70 to southbound U.S. 63)
- Four new roundabouts
- The U.S. 54 and I-70 interchange proposal includes two new bridges and a new and improved interchange.
"We could not be more humbled and excited. This is a huge deal for everyone who drives this stretch of interstate and uses these interchanges. We will do everything in our power – and then some – to reward the confidence being shown in us to deliver this critical project," said Bob Leingang, vice president, and chief engineer of Millstone Weber.
Design-Build is a project delivery method that combines both the design and construction phases into one contract. The selected contract team completes the design and construction in parallel instead of in succession, which saves time and resources. The goals for the Columbia to Kingdom City project include:
- Deliver the project by December 31, 2027, within the program budget of $405 million.
- Provide a third lane of travel for eastbound and westbound Interstate 70 from Columbia to Kingdom City.
- Improve I-70/US 63 and I-70/US 54 Interchanges providing for better traffic flow and movement of freight.
- Improve the interstate while modernizing the existing pavement and bridges.
- Minimize construction impacts through communication and construction staging while maintaining safety and mobility.
- Provide expanded employment opportunities to a diverse workforce.
MoDOT plans to host additional public information meetings in central Missouri in spring 2024 ahead of construction where project plans and traffic control details for project #1 will be shared. Construction is scheduled to begin in summer 2024 with an anticipated completion in late 2027. For more information on the Improve I-70 Program, visit www.modot.org/improvei70.
For more information, call MoDOT at 888-ASK-MODOT (275-6636) or visit www.modot.org. To receive the latest statewide news and text alerts, signup for e-updates.
Ozarks Community Bridge Will become toll free on April 30th:
https://abc17news.com/news/transportation/2024/02/12/toll-to-be-removed-from-lake-of-the-ozarks-community-bridge-by-april-30/
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on February 14, 2024, 10:17:07 PM
Ozarks Community Bridge Will become toll free on April 30th:
https://abc17news.com/news/transportation/2024/02/12/toll-to-be-removed-from-lake-of-the-ozarks-community-bridge-by-april-30/
Wow! A tolled facility that actually sunsets after the bonds are paid off! Clearly a different mindset than Oklahoma.
Here is the winning proposal for the I-70/US 63 area:
Info: https://www.modot.org/improvei70/columbiakingdomcity (https://www.modot.org/improvei70/columbiakingdomcity)
Video: https://www.modot.org/media/46316 (https://www.modot.org/media/46316)
This looks like a band-aid to me. It doesn't really help access from WB I-70 to US 63 at all.
^ The new direct ramp to WB I-70 is exiting NB US 63 on the left?
It looks like there will be two access routes to 63 from westbound I-70, one at a new roundabout at the intersection of Clark Lane and Hanover Boulevard east of 63, and one at a new roundabout on Clark Lane just west of 63. I'll be curious how they sign it -- northbound traffic take the first exit, southbound take the second? Is one better than the other for accessing local businesses along Clark?
MoDOT hopes to advance I-229 plan, hear public feedback by spring 2024QuoteThe Missouri Department of Transportation is wrapping up an environmental assessment of the Interstate 229 corridor, which is the next step needed to move the project forward.
The environmental assessment evaluates the potential impacts or consequences of a plan before it happens. Marty Liles, Northwest district engineer for MoDOT, said the study has taken some time, but the proper research needs to be done to complete a project of this caliber.
Multiple bridge alternatives were presented in 2022, but MoDOT favors the "Existing Corridor" route, which would remove the bridge and replace it. "The alternative that we're taking forward (and writing in our environmental assessment document) was basically to remove the bridge, build a new roadway in the same alignment as where the bridge is, but actually put it on the ground," Liles said.
Liles said the alternative would allow traffic to flow two lanes in each direction, similar to the current situation and in the same location. An exact blueprint is not in place for the build just yet.
Right now, Interstate 229 is over 40 years old, and it received a C- rating at its April 2021 inspection. Troubles have popped up over time, including when a portion of the pavement buckled due to the summer heat.
While many in the community supported the option to keep I-229 and repair it in its current form, the risk of having to completely replace the bridge in 20 years, and the near $200 million price tag, the alternatives rose above for MoDOT leaders. As the department readies to present the findings of the environmental assessment to the Federal Highway Administration by the end of 2023, Liles pointed out that one of the biggest concerns the study highlighted is with stoplights and traffic.
"We're minimizing the stoplights, trying to figure out ways how agricultural equipment, truck traffic can actually get from the fields down to the stockyards, to the grain elevators without actually going through a lot of stoplights," Liles said.
After the Federal Highway Administration approves the assessment, MoDOT will turn back to the community for input on the project. He expects this to happen in St. Joseph sometime during the spring of 2024.
https://www.newspressnow.com/news/local_news/modot-hopes-to-advance-i-229-plan-hear-public-feedback-by-spring-2024/article_ffac0404-9ea3-11ee-8e96-63fb581a72af.html
Here's a story about adding lanes to I-70 between US 54 and US 63.
https://www.ksdk.com/article/traffic/modot-interstate-70-improvement-project/63-5f469d41-1f28-4808-bae5-5027d9687563?fbclid=IwAR2GNFFp_4cfNTxsxBI-jlhr3DisZoTk8j0-ZlHM3zBLKvocfzKtfQuy2ws
Springfield/Greene County's Kansas Expressway has (finally) been extended south to Plainview Road. The section from Republic Rd to Weaver Rd opened Feb 5, and the section from Weaver to Plainview Rd opened at some point in the last week and a half.
Currently, it is only a two-lane road with a large sidewalk next to it, but some groundwork to add the other carriageway is already present.
For some context (this took me a minute to find), "Kansas Expressway" is an arterial road just west of US-160 along the US-60 southern loop of Springfield that was just extended southward.
Quote from: sprjus4 on February 26, 2024, 08:58:18 PM
For some context (this took me a minute to find), "Kansas Expressway" is an arterial road just west of US-160 along the US-60 southern loop of Springfield that was just extended southward.
Yeah. The stretch isn't (won't be?) on the Missouri system. MO13 exits east onto James River Freeway and turns into a (3 way?? US160/60/MO13) concurrency.
The I-55 widening project in Jefferson County kicked off today.
Quotehe start of construction for the $246 million I-55 Corridor Improvements Project was celebrated today with an official groundbreaking ceremony.
The ceremony took place at the Herculaneum Fire Department at 11 a.m. with I-55 Corridor Improvements Project Director Justin Wolf moderating the event.
"Today as we celebrate beginning construction of the I-55 Design-Build Project, we want to acknowledge the many internal and external partners who have worked diligently to take this project from the start of a conceptual study in summer of 2021, through the study and planning phase, and design-build procurement, to today where we are breaking ground on this $246 million investment in Jefferson County," said I-55 Project Director, Justin Wolf.
The Missouri Department of Transportation Director Patrick McKenna along with the Missouri Highways and Transportation Commissioner Francis G. Slay joined state and local elected officials, and the KCI Construction team to break ground as construction begins for the I-55 corridor upgrades between Route Z and Route 67 interchanges in Jefferson County.
"This is one of the largest projects in Jefferson County, this project is a of great importance to the daily lives of everyone living, working, and commuting along the corridor. These improvements will help the 70,000 vehicles who use this stretch of the interstate daily," said MoDOT Director, Patrick McKenna. "The MoDOT team has met with community partners, elected officials, local businesses and general citizens get input needed to complete the plans for the I-55 Corridor Improvements. This is an ongoing process and MoDOT will continue to inform and educate the public about the construction schedule and major milestones through completion of the project."
In the upcoming weeks the public will see work begin on I-55 from US 67 to north of Central Avenue along with continuation of the earthwork taking place at the I-55/US 67 interchange.
https://www.modot.org/node/42868
I-35 could see improvements and I-57 could extended after I-70 and I-44 are upgraded.
https://www.myozarksonline.com/transportation-director-wants-more-for-interstates/
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on March 12, 2024, 06:12:44 PM
I-35 could see improvements and I-57 could extended after I-70 and I-44 are upgraded.
https://www.myozarksonline.com/transportation-director-wants-more-for-interstates/
Where does it say in that article that they could see improvements? All I got from reading it is that he said they
need improvements—not that they might actually
get those improvements.
Quote from: kphoger on March 12, 2024, 07:03:09 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on March 12, 2024, 06:12:44 PM
I-35 could see improvements and I-57 could extended after I-70 and I-44 are upgraded.
https://www.myozarksonline.com/transportation-director-wants-more-for-interstates/
Where does it say in that article that they could see improvements? All I got from reading it is that he said they need improvements—not that they might actually get those improvements.
The audio sample from the director is also short. Is there a more complete version? And is the sample an interview? A speech? Regular MoDOT public meetings? Legislature hearing audio? Not a lot of hard information at that link
Quote from: intelati49 on February 26, 2024, 09:05:17 PM
Quote from: sprjus4 on February 26, 2024, 08:58:18 PM
For some context (this took me a minute to find), "Kansas Expressway" is an arterial road just west of US-160 along the US-60 southern loop of Springfield that was just extended southward.
Yeah. The stretch isn't (won't be?) on the Missouri system. MO13 exits east onto James River Freeway and turns into a (3 way?? US160/60/MO13) concurrency.
This new section is maintained by Greene County. For some additional context, this expansion has been 30 years in the making. NIMBYism and environmental concerns prevented the project from going forward until 2022.
House budget plan could mean less of an increase for Missouri colleges, more for I-44(https://bloximages.newyork1.vip.townnews.com/stltoday.com/content/tncms/assets/v3/editorial/7/ec/7ecbd2b5-bccf-5c4f-9918-760c556b17f2/5e94879a10136.image.jpg?resize=1200%2C758)
QuoteThe top House budget negotiator unveiled a pared-down version of Gov. Mike Parson's spending proposal Thursday, saying his plan funnels less money to colleges and universities in exchange for more money for road building.
Rep. Cody Smith, a Carthage Republican, said the proposed $50 billion package focuses on "fiscally conservative policies that highlight the importance of spending within our means."
A year after the Legislature put nearly $3 billion into the long-sought widening of Interstate 70, the House budget earmarks $727 million to rebuild the Interstate 44 corridor, which runs southwest from St. Louis to Joplin on Missouri's western border.
Smith, a candidate for state treasurer, said initial work on the interstate likely will focus on the Springfield and Joplin area before moving eastward toward Rolla. "Through collaborative efforts and thorough analysis, we are addressing Missouri's pressing needs while ensuring accountability and transparency in our budgetary decisions," Smith said.
https://www.stltoday.com/news/local/government-politics/house-budget-plan-could-mean-less-of-an-increase-for-missouri-colleges-more-for-i/article_10e8d04a-e21e-11ee-903b-17411042ec56.html#tracking-source=home-top-story
This article provides more details about the I-44 funding plan. Under this proposal 13 miles of I-44 would be rebuilt on Springfield's north side. This would be far larger in scope than what MoDOT originally proposed to widen. MoDOT's plan only called for widening I-44 between the Kansas Expressway and U.S. 65. If things go like they did last year for funding I-70, we might get funding to widen I-44 from Joplin to Rolla.
Springfield-area I-44 rebuild and expansion included in state House budget proposalQuoteInterstate 44 through the north side of Springfield — from the West Bypass/Highway 160 interchange to the Highway 125 interchange in Strafford — would be rebuilt and expanded to three lanes in each direction under a state budget proposal unveiled Thursday, March 14 in the state Capitol.
The proposal from Missouri House Budget Committee Chairman Cody Smith includes $727.5 million for major reconstruction projects along Interstate 44 in southwest Missouri, including work in Springfield as well as at the I-49 interchange in Joplin and also in the Rolla-St. James area.
In Springfield, funds would be included to rebuild and improve the I-44 interchange with Highway 13/Kansas Expressway. Earlier plans called for the removal of the existing diverging diamond (the first built in the United States) and replace it with a flyover ramp, among other improvements.
Overall, Smith's state spending plan for fiscal 2025 cuts $2 billion from the proposal Gov. Mike Parson made in January, largely through adjustments for the depletion of pandemic-era federal funding and the decline in Medicaid enrollment.
The plan to set aside money for improvements on I-44 mirrors last year's $2.8 billion appropriation to widen Interstate 70 from Blue Springs to Wentzville. That plan, which saw the first contract awarded last month, is funded half with general revenue surplus and half with borrowed funds.
Smith wants to set aside $363.75 million in general revenue, and the same amount in bond funds, for projects in the Joplin, Springfield and Rolla areas.
https://sgfcitizen.org/economy-growth/transportation/springfield-area-i-44-rebuild-and-expansion-included-in-state-house-budget-proposal/
Missouri is just getting shit done. Props to them. Seriously when this is all said and done, and I-70 and I-44 are completely widened other states like California need to wake the fuck up and take notes. Not that they care anyways.
But Colorado and Oklahoma, I'm looking at you who seems to be unable to build new roads or lanes without tolls. Colorado in particular.
I honestly wouldn't be surprised if Oklahoma tried to pull some 3rd lane toll bullshit on I-35 like CDOT is with I-25.
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on March 18, 2024, 07:52:03 PM
Missouri is just getting shit done.
Now there's something I never expected to read!
Quote from: kphoger on March 18, 2024, 09:01:29 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on March 18, 2024, 07:52:03 PM
Missouri is just getting shit done.
Now there's something I never expected to read!
Lol. I won't believe it until the budget gets passed and the governor signs it. But I never thought something like last year would ever happen, so I'll take it. Hopefully the next governor will continue the focus on improving the roads.
Article from the Joplin Globe detailing the Joplin project that would be part of the I-44 expansion. I like the fact that the I-44/I-49 interchange rebuild will include flyover ramps.
(https://newstalkkzrg.wpenginepowered.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/03/Joplin-I-44-Project.jpg)
QuoteIn the Joplin area, the plan would earmark $291 million to widen the interstate to six lanes between the Fidelity interchange south of Carthage and the I-44/I-49/Missouri 249 interchange, and start rebuilding the Fidelity interchange from a cloverleaf to a series of four flyovers to carry traffic between the highways.
Marcus Edwards, vice president of recruiting at CFI, said the changes will mean safer travel along I-44 for truck drivers and others.
"I-44, as you drive down that, the lanes are the standard width, but they don't look the same," Edwards said. "They look skinnier because they're so congested, so adding those extra lanes going east and west is going to be very helpful."
Smith, R-Carthage, said lawmakers driving on the interstate every week for their commute to Jefferson City can see the need for I-44 to be upgraded as quickly as possible. "The I-49 and I-44 interchange (at Fidelity) is one of the busiest, probably in the country," Smith said. "That's a very expensive overhaul, and it has been in MoDOT's plan for some time now. Injecting some additional cash in there will help move it forward more quickly. Additionally, six lanes between that intersection and the 249 exit here in Joplin will help alleviate congestion a great deal. If you just get out on the interstate today and you travel a little bit across and through Joplin, you'll see that traffic gets slower and backs up and it's more congested, just like it is in Springfield and Rolla. Some additional investments here and specifically the injection of cash to get started earlier will help alleviate those things more quickly."
Missouri Department of Transportation Director Patrick McKenna was at the news conference along with many employees of CFI and a few state representatives from Southwest Missouri.
McKenna said MoDOT is already investing $500 million in I-44, but that money is going for preservation and maintenance, not expansion. He cited freight volume "particularly here in Joplin" and the convergence of I-44 and I-49 and economic growth in Springfield as reason for expanding those areas.
McKenna said the Fidelity interchange of I-49/I-44 was built with a cloverleaf design that worked well when traffic volumes were lower but not with the volume rising dramatically.
He also said MoDOT has divided the upgrades to the Fidelity interchange into five phases.
https://www.joplinglobe.com/news/local_news/lawmaker-earmarks-727-million-to-i-44-reconstruction/article_222fd56a-e61f-11ee-b762-ab44a438b2ed.html
Not that I would oppose that because obviously I do like fully directional interchanges. I just wonder why they wouldn't take care of the I-44/I-49/249 interchange and make that a fully directional one first. Seems like they could also build a freeway to freeway system interchange at Business 49 and interstate 49.
Unless they're planning to eventually convert MO 59 to a freeway further south.
I doubt MO 59 will ever be converted into a freeway, since Interstate 49 is several miles to the west. The interchange at US 60/Business 60, and underpasses at Pineville Rd. and Oak Tree Rd. are likely the only ones that will ever existing along the 59 corridor. As for the two interchanges between Interstates 44 and 49, I believe both should be converted into full-stack interchanges and do away with the cloverleaves entirely.
Quote from: mvak36 on March 19, 2024, 09:12:41 AM
Quote from: kphoger on March 18, 2024, 09:01:29 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on March 18, 2024, 07:52:03 PM
Missouri is just getting shit done.
Now there's something I never expected to read!
Lol. I won't believe it until the budget gets passed and the governor signs it. But I never thought something like last year would ever happen, so I'll take it. Hopefully the next governor will continue the focus on improving the roads.
I won't believe it until shovels hit the ground honestly..
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on March 22, 2024, 09:25:47 AM
Not that I would oppose that because obviously I do like fully directional interchanges. I just wonder why they wouldn't take care of the I-44/I-49/249 interchange and make that a fully directional one first. Seems like they could also build a freeway to freeway system interchange at Business 49 and interstate 49.
Unless they're planning to eventually convert MO 59 to a freeway further south.
I'm more interested in the EB/NB flyover ramp at this location.
If you can get the MO171/MO249/I49 situation figured out, then that would help everything else out.
Quote from: intelati49 on March 23, 2024, 09:14:17 AMQuote from: mvak36 on March 19, 2024, 09:12:41 AMQuote from: kphoger on March 18, 2024, 09:01:29 PMQuote from: Plutonic Panda on March 18, 2024, 07:52:03 PMMissouri is just getting shit done.
Now there's something I never expected to read!
Lol. I won't believe it until the budget gets passed and the governor signs it. But I never thought something like last year would ever happen, so I'll take it. Hopefully the next governor will continue the focus on improving the roads.
I won't believe it until shovels hit the ground honestly..
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on March 22, 2024, 09:25:47 AMNot that I would oppose that because obviously I do like fully directional interchanges. I just wonder why they wouldn't take care of the I-44/I-49/249 interchange and make that a fully directional one first. Seems like they could also build a freeway to freeway system interchange at Business 49 and interstate 49.
Unless they're planning to eventually convert MO 59 to a freeway further south.
I'm more interested in the EB/NB flyover ramp at this location.
If you can get the MO171/MO249/I49 situation figured out, then that would help everything else out.
MO-171/249 is the only way I ever get through Carthage when traveling I-49. The congestion on the concurrency of I-44/49 and the tight cloverleaf with north I-49 makes it worthwhile to suffer through the traffic lights northbound to get back on I-49 at Carthage from MO-171. Southbound, and it isn't even close as there's no traffic light to slow you down to get onto MO-171. If they could figure out how to route the freeway between the curve just west of Exit 47 on MO-171 and the curve just to the west of Exit 55 on I-49 with bridging the Spring River and overpassing it would even be the shortest distance and a logical rerouting of I-49 to skip the concurrency altogether with I-44 and the segment south of that curve down to I-44. Could make a 3DI out of that stretch to I-44 and remove the concurrency, and that fixes it better anyways. Trouble is, that direct connection would have to be predominantly bridge/overpasses for 2.75 miles to make the cutoff work, so not cheap, and thus probably never going to happen. Oh well, we can dream...
Quote from: MikieTimT on March 27, 2024, 04:26:25 PMQuote from: intelati49 on March 23, 2024, 09:14:17 AMQuote from: mvak36 on March 19, 2024, 09:12:41 AMQuote from: kphoger on March 18, 2024, 09:01:29 PMQuote from: Plutonic Panda on March 18, 2024, 07:52:03 PMMissouri is just getting shit done.
Now there's something I never expected to read!
Lol. I won't believe it until the budget gets passed and the governor signs it. But I never thought something like last year would ever happen, so I'll take it. Hopefully the next governor will continue the focus on improving the roads.
I won't believe it until shovels hit the ground honestly..
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on March 22, 2024, 09:25:47 AMNot that I would oppose that because obviously I do like fully directional interchanges. I just wonder why they wouldn't take care of the I-44/I-49/249 interchange and make that a fully directional one first. Seems like they could also build a freeway to freeway system interchange at Business 49 and interstate 49.
Unless they're planning to eventually convert MO 59 to a freeway further south.
I'm more interested in the EB/NB flyover ramp at this location.
If you can get the MO171/MO249/I49 situation figured out, then that would help everything else out.
MO-171/249 is the only way I ever get through Carthage when traveling I-49. The congestion on the concurrency of I-44/49 and the tight cloverleaf with north I-49 makes it worthwhile to suffer through the traffic lights northbound to get back on I-49 at Carthage from MO-171. Southbound, and it isn't even close as there's no traffic light to slow you down to get onto MO-171. If they could figure out how to route the freeway between the curve just west of Exit 47 on MO-171 and the curve just to the west of Exit 55 on I-49 with bridging the Spring River and overpassing it would even be the shortest distance and a logical rerouting of I-49 to skip the concurrency altogether with I-44 and the segment south of that curve down to I-44. Could make a 3DI out of that stretch to I-44 and remove the concurrency, and that fixes it better anyways. Trouble is, that direct connection would have to be predominantly bridge/overpasses for 2.75 miles to make the cutoff work, so not cheap, and thus probably never going to happen. Oh well, we can dream...
I know MoDOT does have long range plans to rebuild the MO 249/I-49 as a freeway-to-freeway interchange and convert M 249 to an interstate. It's currently listed on MoDOT's unfunded priority list under Tier 2.
https://www.modot.org/sites/default/files/documents/High-Priority%20Unfunded%20Needs%202023_0.pdf
Quote from: MikieTimT on March 27, 2024, 04:26:25 PMMO-171/249 is the only way I ever get through Carthage when traveling I-49. The congestion on the concurrency of I-44/49 and the tight cloverleaf with north I-49 makes it worthwhile to suffer through the traffic lights northbound to get back on I-49 at Carthage from MO-171. Southbound, and it isn't even close as there's no traffic light to slow you down to get onto MO-171. If they could figure out how to route the freeway between the curve just west of Exit 47 on MO-171 and the curve just to the west of Exit 55 on I-49 with bridging the Spring River and overpassing it would even be the shortest distance and a logical rerouting of I-49 to skip the concurrency altogether with I-44 and the segment south of that curve down to I-44. Could make a 3DI out of that stretch to I-44 and remove the concurrency, and that fixes it better anyways. Trouble is, that direct connection would have to be predominantly bridge/overpasses for 2.75 miles to make the cutoff work, so not cheap, and thus probably never going to happen. Oh well, we can dream...
This is so true. While on first blush it would seem to be a good idea to have I-49 traffic avoid Joplin, when seeing the roadway in practice, we can see that it makes far more sense to avoid a conjoining of two major interstate routes with the 40/49 concurrency. Why should 49 traffic exit itself? This other routing makes more sense.
The Missouri House passed their version of the Missouri budget today. It will now head to the senate, where it will face more changes. While most of the focus when it comes to transportation has been on I-44, the Kansas City Star had this sentence in their article about the House passed budget. "The budget also includes $53 million for improvements to the Interstate 35, Interstate 29 and U.S. 169 corridor in Clay, Jackson and Platte counties." I'm wondering what improvements they have planned for the I-29/I-35 corridor.
https://www.kansascity.com/news/politics-government/article287378485.html#storylink=cpy
Quote from: afguy on April 04, 2024, 06:24:14 PMThe Missouri House passed their version of the Missouri budget today. It will now head to the senate, where it will face more changes. While most of the focus when it comes to transportation has been on I-44, the Kansas City Star had this sentence in their article about the House passed budget. "The budget also includes $53 million for improvements to the Interstate 35, Interstate 29 and U.S. 169 corridor in Clay, Jackson and Platte counties." I'm wondering what improvements they have planned for the I-29/I-35 corridor.
https://www.kansascity.com/news/politics-government/article287378485.html#storylink=cpy
This is the project site for it: https://www.modot.org/us-route-169-interstate-29-and-interstate-35-conceptual-study-platte-and-clay
From their meeting last fall (https://www.modot.org/sites/default/files/documents/PEL%20Factsheet%20and%20Study%20Overview%20Fall%202023.pdf), they said they will go into NEPA once funding has been identified. So, I am not sure what the final design will be, but I guess we'll find out if this passes the legislature and the governor signs it.
The Missouri Senate is now taking their turn with the budget. So far funding for Amtrak service between Kansas City and St. Joseph and adding a third daily train between St. Louis and Kansas City have been nixed. The senate plan would however provide $60 million to go toward the conversion of U.S. 67 near Poplar Bluff into I-57. Also, Senator Lincoln Hough, who chairs the Senate Appropriations Committee, said changes would be made to the House plan for funding I-44 expansion. Now whether that means more money for the plan or not remains to be seen.
Missouri Senate weighs in on budget, adds highway funding and raises for low-income workersQuoteAfter months of waiting, the Senate Appropriations Committee's work marks the beginning of the final push toward passage of a massive package of bills that keep state government operating, with money for schools, roads and social services.
Among changes promised by Sen. Lincoln Hough, R-Springfield, who chairs the powerful panel, is the restoration of Gov. Mike Parson's call for universities to get a 3% increase in their state funding, up from the 2% level endorsed by the House.
Hough also said the Senate version will offer a different approach to improving Interstate 44. The House budget called for $728 million to widen the heavily traveled, cross-state route in key spots near Springfield, Joplin and Rolla."Governor Parson and I met last week to discuss the plan and we agreed on some changes," Hough said.
Also on tap is the expansion of U.S. Route 67 near Poplar Bluff to pave the way for transforming the roadway into Interstate 57 to the Missouri-Arkansas border. The Senate plan would bring spending on the expansion to $60 million with the possibility of additional federal dollars on the way.
Left by the wayside is a request by the Missouri Department of Transportation to add Amtrak service from Kansas City to St. Joseph and Kansas City to southwest Missouri.
The $38 million passenger rail plan also would have added a third daily train between St. Louis and Kansas City, but neither the House nor Senate funded the idea.
The Senate proposal, which will be debated at the committee level over the next two to three days, will give more than 40,000 state employees 3.2% raises, as was recommended by the governor.
https://www.stltoday.com/news/local/government-politics/missouri-senate-weighs-in-on-budget-adds-highway-funding-and-raises-for-low-income-workers/article_3e2402ca-01b6-11ef-a743-a351d387c3a2.html#tracking-source=home-top-story (https://www.stltoday.com/news/local/government-politics/missouri-senate-weighs-in-on-budget-adds-highway-funding-and-raises-for-low-income-workers/article_3e2402ca-01b6-11ef-a743-a351d387c3a2.html#tracking-source=home-top-story)