I-14 in Louisiana

[silverback1065]

Part of the likely I-14 corridor is already a high-priority corridor (LA 28 from Alexandria west to Ft. Polk, HPC #75); it would be relatively easy for any one or more of the LA congressional delegation to extend it west to the TX line to meet their I-14 corridor and east to the Mississippi River crossing along US 84.  But that particular activity will accomplish the same as any "future Interstate" corridor -- it gives future planners a place to put such a thing.  But absent funding, the corridor/designation will just be a line on a piece of paper; at best, I-14 will be another item in a queue that already includes I-49 South, the Inner City I-49 segment in Shreveport, I-69, and possibly any number of locally prioritized projects, including a N-S US 165/425 route that someone somewhere might want to "Interstate-ize" down the line.

Another I-14 question would be whether LA will seek a joint corridor with MS -- and, if they do, whether it would be put on hold until MS decides just where the corridor works best for them -- straight across US 84 to Laurel, angled up toward Jackson, or along US 98 toward Hattiesburg.

mississippi barely has any money to build their useless section of 69, what makes you think they can come up with money to build the even more useless 14?

[sparker]

mississippi barely has any money to build their useless section of 69, what makes you think they can come up with money to build the even more useless 14?

I have zero illusions that MS has the money to buy much more than signage for their share of I-269 much less more than one outstanding Interstate corridor.  But at the federal level, their congresspeople can -- and probably will in due course -- designate such a corridor -- so the state can erect MGS's alongside US 84 (or wherever!) indicating that this is a "future I-14 corridor" -- and those same politicos will be present when the first such sign is erected.  Remember -- the I-69 corridor as a whole has been around for 23 years now, as has the I-73/74 composite corridor further southeast.  Designation is the easy part; deployment -- not so much!  It's a game of taking credit for a general concept, then kicking the can down the road when it comes to fruition; the next batch of representatives will have to deal with getting the first 80% into the project, while the state will invariably struggle with its remaining share.  The only new Interstates designated since the early '90's that have significant drivable mileage are either those that actually provide connections that weren't there before (I-22, I-49), had substantial existing freeway miles and were amenable to ready upgrading (I-22  and I-49 again plus I-41 and the western portion of eastern I-86), or were in a jurisdiction (read NC & TX) where such activities are commonplace (I-73/74; the progress on the rest [I-42, I-87] hasn't yet been terribly substantial).  Unless there's a clear & present need, it's all about location, location, location! 

[Bobby5280]

The state of Texas can build its part of I-14 from Fort Hood across to the Eastern TX border (hopefully without all the STUPID giant saw tooth zig zags in the route ). Then that can be built Eastward to Alexandria. That would be enough for my liking. Still, I want to see I-49 finished in LA and would take that as a high priority over building I-14. In Texas I think several projects would be bigger priorities than I-14 thru Central Texas. I-69 in East Texas and South Texas has already been a long running project. Then there's other corridors that deserve upgrades more than this I-14 thing. Houston-Austin via US-290 is a bigger issue. East Houston-Austin via TX-71 is even a bigger priority for Interstate style upgrading. I'll even throw out my own personal want: US-287 between Fort Worth and Amarillo getting a complete freeway upgrade (it freaking needs it).

[sparker]

The state of Texas can build its part of I-14 from Fort Hood across to the Eastern TX border (hopefully without all the STUPID giant saw tooth zig zags in the route ). Then that can be built Eastward to Alexandria. That would be enough for my liking. Still, I want to see I-49 finished in LA and would take that as a high priority over building I-14. In Texas I think several projects would be bigger priorities than I-14 thru Central Texas. I-69 in East Texas and South Texas has already been a long running project. Then there's other corridors that deserve upgrades more than this I-14 thing. Houston-Austin via US-290 is a bigger issue. East Houston-Austin via TX-71 is even a bigger priority for Interstate style upgrading. I'll even throw out my own personal want: US-287 between Fort Worth and Amarillo getting a complete freeway upgrade (it freaking needs it).

Nothing will happen regarding Austin access without Austin interests pressing for such a connection; AFAIK there haven't been any official or even preliminary moves made from those quarters.  I've always thought TX 71 would make a fine western I-12 -- but so far, no one with any clout in Austin seems to be in any hurry to improve their Houston connection.  Fully agree with the US 287 assessment -- I've been on that road so many times slogging through Childress and Quanah (Chillicothe was fun way back when when Santa Fe was running huge oil trains up from Sweetwater -- but not since the line was severed); given the level of trucks, it should be a natural for Interstate consideration (west extension of I-30, folks!).  But it seems TX interests have their mind set on other things; too bad!

[Bobby5280]

Freeway upgrades of US-290 and TX-71 between Houston and Austin would not really involve the City of Austin itself. Neither route hits within its city limits. So it's not like they can block either effort. Right now both routes are being upgraded very slowly, piece-meal fashion to Interstate quality. I think US-290 is a higher priority route than TX-71. It certainly serves a lot more people. Yet TX-71 has heavy enough traffic to warrant significant freeway quality upgrades in towns like Bastrop.

US-287 between Fort Worth and Amarillo is definitely worthy of a full blown Interstate upgrade, clear from I-40 in Amarillo down to the junction with I-45 South of Dallas. But that's another one very slowly being upgraded piece meal style. I've seen plans on the books for freeway quality upgrades both North and South of Decatur. But it doesn't look like anyone has tried tackling the issue of upgrading US-287 inside Decatur itself.

With all that stuff going on, with all the existing needs present, the whole I-14 thing seems like an extravagant and arguably wasteful luxury. I'd say to TX and LA: reserve ROW along the corridor the best you can. Enforce property set backs. But actual freeway building has higher priorities elsewhere.

[sparker]

Freeway upgrades of US-290 and TX-71 between Houston and Austin would not really involve the City of Austin itself. Neither route hits within its city limits. So it's not like they can block either effort. Right now both routes are being upgraded very slowly, piece-meal fashion to Interstate quality. I think US-290 is a higher priority route than TX-71. It certainly serves a lot more people. Yet TX-71 has heavy enough traffic to warrant significant freeway quality upgrades in towns like Bastrop.

US-287 between Fort Worth and Amarillo is definitely worthy of a full blown Interstate upgrade, clear from I-40 in Amarillo down to the junction with I-45 South of Dallas. But that's another one very slowly being upgraded piece meal style. I've seen plans on the books for freeway quality upgrades both North and South of Decatur. But it doesn't look like anyone has tried tackling the issue of upgrading US-287 inside Decatur itself.

With all that stuff going on, with all the existing needs present, the whole I-14 thing seems like an extravagant and arguably wasteful luxury. I'd say to TX and LA: reserve ROW along the corridor the best you can. Enforce property set backs. But actual freeway building has higher priorities elsewhere.

I don't think it's a matter of anyone in and around Austin attempting to block a freeway connection to Houston; it's more the fact that no one there seems to consider it enough of a priority to even bring it up for discussion, much less promote it.  And Texas, as far as corridor development goes, seems to pay attention to where locals are pointing -- which is why the Temple/Fort Hood region was able to secure the I-14 foothold in their area -- [/i]they requested it![/i]  Relative merit seems to play second fiddle in Texas; getting the PR machine rolling seems to be the initial step in any corridor-related process (a concept pioneered by the Alliance for I-69/Texas!).  Not pretty, but seemingly effective!

[Grzrd]

In the Texas thread, I posted the proposed legislation, H.R. 6111, for the corridor through Texas, and I thought I would do the same for Louisiana:

H. R. 6111
To amend the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 with respect to high priority corridors on the National Highway System, and for other purposes ....
This Act may be cited as the ``I-14 Expansion and Improvement Act of 2018''. ....
(a) Identification. ....
(2) Central louisiana corridor.--Section 1105(c) of the
        Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 is
        amended by adding at the end the following:
            ``(91) The Central Louisiana Corridor commencing at the
        logical terminus of Louisiana Highway 8 at the Sabine River
        Bridge at Burrs Crossing and generally following portions of
        Louisiana Highway 8 to Leesville, Louisiana, and then eastward
        on Louisiana Highway 28, passing in the vicinity of Alexandria,
        Pineville, Walters, and Archie, to the logical terminus of
        United States Route 84 at the Mississippi River Bridge at
        Vidalia, Louisiana.''
....
The routes referred to in ... subsections (c)(91) ... [is] designated as Interstate Route I-14 and the States of Louisiana,... shall erect signs, as appropriate and as approved by the Secretary, identifying such routes as segments of future Interstate Route I-14.''.

Not quite as ambitious as Texas.

[Anthony_JK]

I still want to know how they are going to pass this through Alexandria-Pineville.

There are three options I know of:

1) The proposed Alexandria Beltway, but that's going to be built initially as an surface arterial with little or no access control. How will they preserve the corridor for future upgrading to freeway standards?

2) Using the Cottingham Expressway (LA 28) to MacArthur Drive, then MacArthur to the I-49 North interchange, then a wrong-way concurrency along I-49 to the Pineville Expressway, then that road to a new terrain route along LA 28 to Archie. Much cheaper due to existing ROW, but maybe condusive to upgrade the entirity of MacArthur Drive between tie I-49 interchanges (or even extend further north to the US 71-165 split in Pineville)?

3) A new outer loop of the Alexandria-Pineville area, with connections between I-49 north near Boyce, US 165, I-49 just south/west of US 71, and a new terrain route with new Red River bridge heading towards Bentley, Tioga, and Ball, and a southern crossing of the Red near where the recently built KCS railroad bridge is. That would be the most expensive and the most sprawl-inducing, but it would be perfect for handling both I-14 and any potential freeway along US 165 through the area as well; plus, it would free up MacArthur Drive from being upgraded.

We will see what we will see...I guess.

[silverback1065]

i would be shocked to see a single foot of i-14 in louisiana for the next 50 years.

[jbnv]

Why not an inner-city connector from PMacArthur Drive to the Pineville Expressway?

Barring that, my money's on #2. There won't be much need for a route specifically for I-14 through Alexandria.

There are three options I know of:

1) The proposed Alexandria Beltway, but that's going to be built initially as an surface arterial with little or no access control. How will they preserve the corridor for future upgrading to freeway standards?

2) Using the Cottingham Expressway (LA 28) to MacArthur Drive, then MacArthur to the I-49 North interchange, then a wrong-way concurrency along I-49 to the Pineville Expressway, then that road to a new terrain route along LA 28 to Archie. Much cheaper due to existing ROW, but maybe condusive to upgrade the entirity of MacArthur Drive between tie I-49 interchanges (or even extend further north to the US 71-165 split in Pineville)?

3) A new outer loop of the Alexandria-Pineville area, with connections between I-49 north near Boyce, US 165, I-49 just south/west of US 71, and a new terrain route with new Red River bridge heading towards Bentley, Tioga, and Ball, and a southern crossing of the Red near where the recently built KCS railroad bridge is. That would be the most expensive and the most sprawl-inducing, but it would be perfect for handling both I-14 and any potential freeway along US 165 through the area as well; plus, it would free up MacArthur Drive from being upgraded.

We will see what we will see...I guess.

[The Ghostbuster]

How likely are we to see an Interstate 14 in Louisiana? Or Mississippi? Or Alabama? Or even Georgia? I know about the 2005 14th Amendment Highway federal designation, but I'd be shocked if Interstate 14 ever sees the light of day outside the one in Texas.

[sparker]

How likely are we to see an Interstate 14 in Louisiana? Or Mississippi? Or Alabama? Or even Georgia? I know about the 2005 14th Amendment Highway federal designation, but I'd be shocked if Interstate 14 ever sees the light of day outside the one in Texas.

As I mentioned in the corresponding I-14/MS thread, the only party promoting I-14 east of Laurel, MS is that kid from UGA who wants to overtake the old I-85 extension west of Montgomery and tack it on to a Montgomery-Columbus-Macon-Augusta corridor (essentially the GA "Fall Line" concept extended west into AL) to create a full-width corridor across the "Deep South" -- but with a shitload of multiplexes in the process (I-59, I-85, etc.).  That concept is probably a pipedream unless he can harangue some AL or GA Congressperson to cobble up the equivalent of the "HR 6111" legislation which is authorizing at least the corridor concept in three states.  But even if that occurs, the chances of that overall corridor segment reaching anything near completion in most of our lifetimes (at 68, certainly not mine!!!!) are slim indeed.   

[splashflash]

I bumped this thread that has Scott Parker, one of my favourite site scribes, as the author of the  most recent preceding comment.

https://www.nola.com/news/new-interstate-14-construction-timeline-unclear-in-louisiana/article_41d4effa-6775-11ee-852b-b3aef91abbf2.html

The Burr Ferry Bridge is scheduled to be replaced starting next year, a quarter mile downstream of the existing depression era steel truss bridge. It will be built to interstate standards, though only two lane, and aligns with the I-14 interstate (5 of them) route.

This article has small town Louisiana Mayor of Jonesville echoing Bobby about potential revitalization effects induced by a new interstate.

....

Malcolm Morris hopes the urgency shown by Texas officials will spur Louisiana to action.

"When they say they gotta build a highway in Texas, everybody starts getting ready because it's going to happen," he chuckled. "In Louisiana, you say 'OK, sure.'"

Malcolm Morris, a proponent for the construction of I-14, is pictured Monday, October 9, 2023, near the bridge over the Sabine River at the Louisiana-Texas border in Burr Ferry, La.  Well, in the article at least. MHe is 76 years old and longtime I-14 proponent.

Burr Ferry is the first step in his hope coming to fruition. The bridge is slated for replacement, which will start next year. The new version, about a quarter mile to the south of the current structure, will be up to interstate-highway standards and will eventually serve two lanes of I-14.

Once the new bridge is in place, Morris hopes it will help kick start I-14 plans. According to the designation, I-14 would roughly follow Louisiana 8 from Burr Ferry to Leesville, then probably track along Louisiana 28 to Alexandria, where it is also eagerly anticipated.
...

Randolph and others in Central Louisiana think a new interstate could help boost Central Louisiana's burgeoning clean energy sector and help diversify the region's struggling economies by making it easier to lure new manufacturers and other big job creators.

...

Jonesville is on US 84.

"Our roads are bad, our infrastructure is bad, everything is bad," she said. "You name it, we need it ... We've basically been drying up."

An interstate nearby could save the town, she said.

"If we could just get some traffic to come through here, if we get people to just stop in our little town," she said. "If we get somebody to build a Burger King, a McDonalds, anything ... we could grow again."

[bwana39]

The path through Alex is pretty much there. It is mostly mapped out. It will have to have Texas style service roads, but the room is there for them.

On the other hand, The legislature does not have any appetite for a new Interstate that has zero use in Hurricane evacuation.

[Rothman]

Jonesville is on US 84.

"Our roads are bad, our infrastructure is bad, everything is bad," she said. "You name it, we need it ... We've basically been drying up."

An interstate nearby could save the town, she said.

"If we could just get some traffic to come through here, if we get people to just stop in our little town," she said. "If we get somebody to build a Burger King, a McDonalds, anything ... we could grow again."

Narrator:  The Burger King did not save the town.

[Bobby5280]

Locally in Alexandria, LA they could at least start getting some work done on a freeway corridor I-14 could use (once the Interstate is ever eventually built thru Alexandria).

The main thing needed is limited access outlets going West and East out of Alexandria. LA-28 going West out of Alexandria is freeway-ready. Frontage Roads next to LA-28 end at Windemere Blvd, but businesses are on set-backs provided a ROW more than 300' wide. That's enough room for new frontage roads, slip ramps and even a widening of the main lanes to a 3x3 configuration.

They could improve US-71/US-165 to Interstate standards through the central part of Alexandria, pretty much without needing to acquire any additional ROW. East of the I-49/US-71 interchange it might start getting a little tricky. But a freeway upgrade following US-165 up to the Proctor & Gamble factory and Camp Beauregard Nat'l Guard Post still looks do-able. A few properties might have to be acquired and cleared, but they could built the Eastern freeway outlet along LA-116 out by the Alexandria Esler Regional Airport. Then the freeway could merge into the LA-28 corridor near Holloway. I think that's a better potential I-14 route alternative than trying to force I-14 along the US-167 corridor by downtown Alexandria.