Exit numbers on Future I-49 Corridor.

[eXfaktor]

  the numbers don't line up for me as regards what they have up. On the freeway section from Morgan City to Raceland, the exit numbers go from 176 to 215? What could it possibly mean... unless it's an extension of I-10!

[US71]

the numbers don't line up for me as regards what they have up. On the freeway section from Morgan City to Raceland, the exit numbers go from 176 to 215? What could it possibly mean... unless it's an extension of I-10!

Maybe it's US 90 numbering and not future I-49?

[lamsalfl]

Maybe it's US 90 numbering and not future I-49?

this.

[eXfaktor]

Maybe it's US 90 numbering and not future I-49?

So you're suggesting that it lines up with the mileages for US 90? Which makes sense, but doesn't explain why they're pushing the Future 49 designation so enthusiastically

[Anthony_JK]

They are using US 90 numbering right now; I'm guessing that this is a temporary fix until the entire corridor is finished, Then they will shift to a different system.


Anthony

[Anthony_JK]

Does bring up a dilemma, though....since US 90 dovetails away from the proposed I-49 South corridor in Lafayette before the proposed freeway hits the existing I-10/I-49 interchange, I wonder how in the heck will they number those exits??

Unless, they are planning to build the segment through Lafayette last after they either complete the Raceland/Boutte/New Orleans segment or, as some have noted, simply re-route I-49 along I-310 north of Raceland and just truncate the Boutte to Westbank Expressway segment?? Maybe they think that the proposed Lafayette Regional Expressway loop will be funded and completed by then, and they will simply combine that and the rest of "I-49 South" into "I-6", and simply extend the existing I-49 designation through Lafayette proper??

Of course, all that depends on the glacier pace of LaDOTD actually completing the darn highway...at this "one interchange every two years" pace they are currently going, they should have this project finished right around....oh, 2040.   


Anthony

[Hot Rod Hootenanny]

Of course, all that depends on the glacier pace of LaDOTD actually completing the darn highway...at this "one interchange every two years" pace they are currently going, they should have this project finished right around....oh, 2040.   

Anthony

If oil would only jump back to $200 a barrel....

[mightyace]

Of course, all that depends on the glacier pace of LaDOTD actually completing the darn highway...

If oil would only jump back to $200 a barrel....

Why would that make I-49 happen faster?

[rickmastfan67]

I'm thinking he ment $20, but I could be wrong.

[mightyace]

I'm thinking he ment $20, but I could be wrong.

Hard to say.  Oil production/drilling is big in and just off the coast of Louisiana.  That's why I asked.

[Hot Rod Hootenanny]

Of course, all that depends on the glacier pace of LaDOTD actually completing the darn highway...

If oil would only jump back to $200 a barrel....

Why would that make I-49 happen faster?

Louisiana makes $$$ off of oil (when not leaking into the gulf).  Louisiana had a budget surplus after Hurricanes Katrina and Rita, not just from the hurricane recovery acts, but also because oil had jumped up to $140 a barrel by 2007/08. 
When oil dropped back down to $40-$50 a barrel, that additional money disappeared.
As to I-49, additional revenues to the state causesd by an increase in the price of oil, could be diverted to the construction of I-49. 

[mightyace]

As to I-49, additional revenues to the state causesd by an increase in the price of oil, could be diverted to the construction of I-49. 

Of course, a high increase in the price of oil for a long time would decrease the amount of road traffic and less need for I-49.

[UptownRoadGeek]

As to I-49, additional revenues to the state causesd by an increase in the price of oil, could be diverted to the construction of I-49. 

Of course, a high increase in the price of oil for a long time would decrease the amount of road traffic and less need for I-49.

Not necessarily, I-49 is mainly needed because of evacuations concerns and oil port traffic.  Other than that the highway is good enough like it is. 

[eXfaktor]

can they like just NOT call it I-49? Build the thing, that's all louisiana residents are asking, build SOMETHING major that addresses an issue, and this is one... that DOTD happens to be dragging feet on as usual

[US71]

can they like just NOT call it I-49? Build the thing, that's all louisiana residents are asking, build SOMETHING major that addresses an issue, and this is one... that DOTD happens to be dragging feet on as usual

Probably get more Federal money if they call it an Interstate

[codyg1985]

I think the exit numbers were added later after the signs were installed. The font used for the numbers themselves are Series D instead of Series E modified. Also, the gore exit signs look like they were made for two-digit exit numbers but they used the narrow Series D so that the numbers could be squeezed in.

I suppose the numbers follow US 90's mileage because it is still not certain where I-49 will end in New Orleans, right?

[froggie]

Oh, it's certain.  Right by the Superdome.  The "southernmost leg" of I-49 has long been planned along the Westbank...

[national highway 1]

Why does I-49 have to extend south of I-10? Can't it be I-810?

[codyg1985]

Why does I-49 have to extend south of I-10? Can't it be I-810?

I suppose it would make the entire I-49 corridor more valuable if it ended in New Orleans instead of Lafayette, but it really looks weird that I-49 will be turning east and southeast at Lafayette. I like Option 1 that Froggie developed for "shuffling" the interstate designations. This reroutes the interstates without creating any new 1di or 2di interstates (such as I-6) in an area that already has an intrastate I-12 and, for the time being, I-49.

I also wonder if I-49 will be signed East-West along the extension, or North-South? There were some Future I-49 corridor signs that were posted right beside the US 90 shield with both "shields" sharing the same "West" banner.

[Alex]

Why does I-49 have to extend south of I-10? Can't it be I-810?

I suppose it would make the entire I-49 corridor more valuable if it ended in New Orleans instead of Lafayette, but it really looks weird that I-49 will be turning east and southeast at Lafayette. I like Option 1 that Froggie developed for "shuffling" the interstate designations. This reroutes the interstates without creating any new 1di or 2di interstates (such as I-6) in an area that already has an intrastate I-12 and, for the time being, I-49.

I also wonder if I-49 will be signed East-West along the extension, or North-South? There were some Future I-49 corridor signs that were posted right beside the US 90 shield with both "shields" sharing the same "West" banner.

First saw those future corridor signs in 1999. 11 years later, and Interstate 49 is nowhere near ready to be signed anywhere in the New Orleans area...

Are Future Corridor signs even worth touting in situations like this? Future I-785 signs have been around for awhile, as has a Future I-285 sign between Lexington and Winston-Salem. Neither appears on the horizon anytime soon.

[codyg1985]

Why does I-49 have to extend south of I-10? Can't it be I-810?

I suppose it would make the entire I-49 corridor more valuable if it ended in New Orleans instead of Lafayette, but it really looks weird that I-49 will be turning east and southeast at Lafayette. I like Option 1 that Froggie developed for "shuffling" the interstate designations. This reroutes the interstates without creating any new 1di or 2di interstates (such as I-6) in an area that already has an intrastate I-12 and, for the time being, I-49.

I also wonder if I-49 will be signed East-West along the extension, or North-South? There were some Future I-49 corridor signs that were posted right beside the US 90 shield with both "shields" sharing the same "West" banner.

First saw those future corridor signs in 1999. 11 years later, and Interstate 49 is nowhere near ready to be signed anywhere in the New Orleans area...

I don't think any of those signs have been replaced since then, either. Every one of the signs were faded when I drove through there. I think that is telling as to how long it may take to get I-49 to New Orleans.

I think they serve a purpose to let the general public know that eventually the road will be upgraded to an interstate, but like you said, it may not be for several years or even decades before it happens.

Maybe there should be another sign that says "Distant Future I-xx Corridor."

[Revive 755]

Are Future Corridor signs even worth touting in situations like this? Future I-785 signs have been around for awhile, as has a Future I-285 sign between Lexington and Winston-Salem. Neither appears on the horizon anytime soon.

Maybe.  After all, some projects in Missouri that were supposed to wait another decade before construction started are now underway due to stimulus funds.  A similar situation could develop on other corridors should an unexpected amount of funding suddenly come available.

[froggie]

First saw those future corridor signs in 1999.

As I recall, on a roadtrip we took together...

...should an unexpected amount of funding suddenly come available.

Figure the odds.  Unless and until Congress can get over themselves and find a major new source of transportation funding, any significant funding for new corridors such as this is going to take away scarce dollars from other needed transportation projects.

[Anthony_JK]

Well, Froggie, it isn't eactly a new corridor; it's been in the plans of the state for right around 40 years now...and they have to justify building all those interchanges and upgrades to US 90 further south. 

I'd give it more than a fighting chance that we will see some funding...probably after the funding for I-49 north of Shreveport (and the proposed Inner City Connector segment through downtown Shreveport) is secured. Especially since the Baton Rouge metro loop appears to be on its last legs, and they've already funded much of the widenings of I-10 and I-12 in the Baton Rouge area.


Anthony

[Anthony_JK]

Why does I-49 have to extend south of I-10? Can't it be I-810?

I suppose it would make the entire I-49 corridor more valuable if it ended in New Orleans instead of Lafayette, but it really looks weird that I-49 will be turning east and southeast at Lafayette. I like Option 1 that Froggie developed for "shuffling" the interstate designations. This reroutes the interstates without creating any new 1di or 2di interstates (such as I-6) in an area that already has an intrastate I-12 and, for the time being, I-49.

I also wonder if I-49 will be signed East-West along the extension, or North-South? There were some Future I-49 corridor signs that were posted right beside the US 90 shield with both "shields" sharing the same "West" banner.

Considering that they are still calling this "I-49 SOUTH", I'm guessing that it will be signed as north-south, the congruent parts of US 90 signed as per the usual, such as I-49 SOUTH/US 90 EAST.  Milepost zero would probably switch from the current I-49/I-10 interchange to the I-10/Claiborne Ave/US 90 Business-Westbank Expressway interchange in New Orleans (or, if they decide to truncate the route and go along I-310, the I-10/I-310 interchange).


Anthony