News:

The AARoads Wiki is live! Come check it out!

Main Menu

I-69 in MS

Started by Grzrd, June 08, 2011, 11:38:59 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Grzrd

#75
Quote from: Grzrd on September 05, 2015, 11:28:34 AM
This article, primarily about the proposed McIngvale Road interchange on I-269, also briefly mentions the proposed Star Landing interchange on I-55/69 ... :
Quote
Horn Lake Mayor Allen Latimer said, "What I'd also like to see is an interchange on Nail Road and for Starlanding."

This MDOT News Release announces plans to widen I-55 and I-55/69 in Desoto County, including construction of a new interchange for Star Landing Road beginning in mid-2019:

Quote
MDOT is currently developing plans that will increase the capacity of the Interstate 55 corridor to meet the growing transportation infrastructure needs in DeSoto County and throughout the region. These plans include two individual projects that will add additional lanes to Interstate 55 ....
The first project will widen Interstate 55 from Church Road north to State Route 302 in Southaven. The proposed plan will add one new lane in each direction in the median and two new lanes in each direction on the outside of existing Interstate 55. Construction is scheduled to begin in mid-2018. Once completed, this section of Interstate 55 will be 10 lanes.  This project will also improve the interchange at Church Road.
The second project will widen Interstate 55 from Church Road south to Commerce Street in Hernando. This project will also include a new interchange at Star Landing Road. The proposed project will add one new lane in each direction in the median and one new lane in each direction on the outside of existing Interstate 55 from Interstate 269 to Church Road, and one new lane in each direction in the median from Interstate 269 to Commerce Street. Construction is scheduled to begin in mid-2019. Once completed, Interstate 55 will be six lanes from Interstate 269 to Commerce Street and eight lanes from Interstate 269 to Church Road ....
The cost of these two construction projects is currently estimated to be $164 million combined. While MDOT anticipates beginning these two projects in 2018 and 2019, respectively, those dates depend heavily on the availability of state and federal funding.




Quote from: Grzrd on November 05, 2015, 12:43:59 PM
this November 3 article reports that Desoto County officials had a two-day fund-seeking meeting last week with Mississippi Congressmen (as well as Corps of Engineers and federal Transportation staff), with the meeting including the possibility of a Nail Road interchange .... With the plans for the Church Road interchange having not been finalized, it appears that, although the Nail Road interchange may be on life support, Desoto County officials may still have time to keep it alive.

The MDOT News Release does not mention any plans for a Nail Road interchange.  The News Release also does not mention any modifications to the I-55/I-69/Future I-269 interchange; without looking at expected traffic volumes resulting from the anticipated economic growth in the area and basing my expectation purely on the addition of I-269 traffic and lanes to I-55 and I-55/69, I would expect the possibility of one or two flyover ramps being built on the interchange.


Grzrd

#76
Quote from: Grzrd on November 10, 2015, 12:42:31 PM
This MDOT News Release .... The News Release also does not mention any modifications to the I-55/I-69/Future I-269 interchange; without looking at expected traffic volumes resulting from the anticipated economic growth in the area and basing my expectation purely on the addition of I-269 traffic and lanes to I-55 and I-55/69, I would expect the possibility of one or two flyover ramps being built on the interchange.

With projected traffic flows (and possible flyover ramps) for I-55/69 South to I-269 (carrying traffic to I-22 East) and for I-269 to I-55 South (carrying traffic from I-40 West) in my mind, I emailed MDOT and asked if there would be any major modifications to the I-55/I-69/Future I-269 interchange related to the widening of I-55/69 and I-55 from Church Road to Commerce Street.  Their response states that there are no current plans for such modification(s) to the interchange:

Quote
The interchange at I69/I55/I269 will only be changed to the extent it will be completed to give access onto and off of the future I269. Also the entire interchange will be receive a new asphalt overlay and an additional lane along I55 in both directions will become available. Currently this lane is hashed out.

Grzrd

Quote from: Grzrd on November 05, 2015, 12:43:59 PM
Quote from: Grzrd on September 05, 2015, 11:28:34 AM
This article:
Quote
Horn Lake Mayor Allen Latimer said, "What I'd also like to see is an interchange on Nail Road and for Starlanding.
Quote from: Grzrd on September 06, 2015, 01:59:47 PM
this April 8, 2014 TV video:
Quote
While there's some hope an overpass will connect Nail, Latimer says that's not good enough, I want an interchange." ....
DeSoto leaders say they don't intend to give up their pursuit of the project.
this November 3 article reports that Desoto County officials had a two-day fund-seeking meeting last week with Mississippi Congressmen (as well as Corps of Engineers and federal Transportation staff), with the meeting including the possibility of a Nail Road interchange:
Quote
Supervisor Gardner ...
"We talked specifically about Holly Springs Road and Nail Road and Church Road interchanges," said Gardner.
Quote from: yakra on September 19, 2015, 02:39:29 AM
Texas style frontage roads, mumble mumble...

This December 30 article reports that Horn Lake Mayor Latimer and the DeSoto County Board of Supervisors are still pursuing a Nail Road interchange on I-55/69:

Quote
Horn Lake Mayor Allen Latimer said his city also continues to make a steady march for progress ....
Latimer said the City of Horn Lake continues to seek county, state and federal assistance in construction of an interchange at Nail Road and Interstate 55, and in projects to control water passing within the city's boundaries.
"We would especially like to thank the DeSoto County Board of Supervisors for their support on these vital projects," Latimer said.

Maybe it is time to start designing frontage roads in the area of a possible Nail Road interchange.

Grzrd

#78
Quote from: Grzrd on November 04, 2015, 12:34:57 PM
Quote from: Grzrd on June 08, 2011, 11:38:59 PM
Clarksdale has recently installed "Future I-69 Corridor" signs along part of the SIU 11 corridor:
http://www.pressregister.com/articles/2011/04/06/news/doc4d9b12f614e3d422793615.txt
Quote
The unveiling of the "Future I-69"  signs on the U.S. Highway 61 Bypass signals that Clarksdale will become part of the interstate system stretching from Canada to Mexico, Northern Highway Commissioner Mike Tagert observed Friday.
"The sign is not a small thing,"  said Tagert. "It's a game changer for the Mississippi Delta that starts the momentum for the future."
Quote from: Grzrd on December 22, 2011, 02:10:42 PM
... planned sequential process for SIU 11 (http://sp.mdot.ms.gov/Environmental/District%201%20and%202/Archived%20Projects/Project%20Studies/I-69%20Section%2011%20-%20Robinsonville%20To%20Benoit/Executive%20Summary.pdf). [summary of progression is on page 9/18 of the pdf; page S-9 of the document]:
Quote
... Construction of the proposed I-69 SUI 11 is envisioned to be phased over the next 19 years ... The five phases (sections) are detailed in Appendix G and summarized as follows:
....
Section 3: 48.160 miles, North of SR 6 Interchange to South of SR 446 Interchange
Anticipated Letting Date: 2019
....
This November 3 article (behind paywall) reports on Clarksdale's attempt to annex land along U.S. 61/ Future I-69 and includes an assessment from one individual that frontage roads would be part of the conversion to I-69 (although not any time in the foreseeable future; that said, construction on the "North of SR 6 Interchange to South of SR 446 Interchange" phase of SIU 11 is currently scheduled to be the second construction phase of SIU 11, beginning in 2019*) ....
* This timetable is probably broken until Mississippi can find a way to increase its transportation funding.

I recently took a look at June 2014 Google StreetView imagery of Clarksdale's Future I-69 Corridor sign and was mildly surprised to see that it includes a non-neutered "Mississippi" I-69 shield.



This sign was installed before MAP-21 was enacted and allowed I-69 designations (and related shield installations) of disconnected interstate-grade sections of I-69. I think this section of the Clarksdale Bypass is interstate-grade. Given MDOT's money woes, could MDOT assert that the Clarksdale Bypass will have an interstate connection to I-69 in northern Mississippi by 2037, and, in turn, get FHWA approval to install I-69 shields now?

The Ghostbuster

So, basically, no new portions of Interstate 69 in Mississippi will be constructed anytime soon.

lordsutch

Quote from: Grzrd on February 15, 2016, 01:47:37 PM
I recently took a look at June 2014 Google StreetView imagery of Clarksdale's Future I-69 Corridor sign and was mildly surprised to see that it includes a non-neutered "Mississippi" I-69 shield.



This sign was installed before MAP-21 was enacted and allowed I-69 designations (and related shield installations) of disconnected interstate-grade sections of I-69. I think this section of the Clarksdale Bypass is interstate-grade. Given MDOT's money woes, could MDOT assert that the Clarksdale Bypass will have an interstate connection to I-69 in northern Mississippi by 2037, and, in turn, get FHWA approval to install I-69 shields now?

I think FHWA would want to see it listed in the LRTP at the very least before authorizing such a thing. My guess is MDOT's higher priorities for I-69 SIUs 11-12 are the crossing into Arkansas, for more redundancy in case of a bridge strike at Greenville or Helena, or when the Big One takes out Helena as it surely will, and bypassing Cleveland and Boyle; neither of these would connect to anything in Clarksdale. MDOT would also have to pave the shoulders to full width.

I guess it would be an excuse to move the US 49/61 crossing back to the historic intersection downtown but technically I-69's approved route doesn't encompass all of the existing bypass anyway (it veers off just south of the northern end to avoid some development along US 61).

Perhaps the best that can be hoped for to see anything much get done (not to get too political) is Hillary getting elected and resurrecting the Delta Regional Authority, which was a Clinton pet project in the 1990s and has been limping along ever since.

abqtraveler

Quote from: lordsutch on February 16, 2016, 06:52:56 PM
Quote from: Grzrd on February 15, 2016, 01:47:37 PM
I recently took a look at June 2014 Google StreetView imagery of Clarksdale's Future I-69 Corridor sign and was mildly surprised to see that it includes a non-neutered "Mississippi" I-69 shield.



This sign was installed before MAP-21 was enacted and allowed I-69 designations (and related shield installations) of disconnected interstate-grade sections of I-69. I think this section of the Clarksdale Bypass is interstate-grade. Given MDOT's money woes, could MDOT assert that the Clarksdale Bypass will have an interstate connection to I-69 in northern Mississippi by 2037, and, in turn, get FHWA approval to install I-69 shields now?

I think FHWA would want to see it listed in the LRTP at the very least before authorizing such a thing. My guess is MDOT's higher priorities for I-69 SIUs 11-12 are the crossing into Arkansas, for more redundancy in case of a bridge strike at Greenville or Helena, or when the Big One takes out Helena as it surely will, and bypassing Cleveland and Boyle; neither of these would connect to anything in Clarksdale. MDOT would also have to pave the shoulders to full width.

I guess it would be an excuse to move the US 49/61 crossing back to the historic intersection downtown but technically I-69's approved route doesn't encompass all of the existing bypass anyway (it veers off just south of the northern end to avoid some development along US 61).

Perhaps the best that can be hoped for to see anything much get done (not to get too political) is Hillary getting elected and resurrecting the Delta Regional Authority, which was a Clinton pet project in the 1990s and has been limping along ever since.

Looking at MDOT's 2015-2020 STIP, it looks like even spot upgrades for US-61 within the I-69 corridor have been taken off the table.
2-d Interstates traveled:  4, 5, 8, 10, 15, 20, 24, 25, 27, 29, 35, 39, 40, 41, 43, 45, 49, 55, 57, 64, 65, 66, 69, 70, 71, 72, 74, 75, 76(E), 77, 78, 81, 83, 84(W), 85, 87(N), 89, 90, 91, 93, 94, 95

2-d Interstates Clinched:  12, 22, 30, 37, 44, 59, 80, 84(E), 86(E), 238, H1, H2, H3, H201

Grzrd

#82
Quote from: Grzrd on June 08, 2011, 11:38:59 PM
A ROD was issued for SIU 11 in the latter part of 2010.  Here is a [snip of] a map of SIU 11:
Quote from: Grzrd on February 15, 2016, 01:47:37 PM
I recently took a look at June 2014 Google StreetView imagery of Clarksdale's Future I-69 Corridor sign and was mildly surprised to see that it includes a non-neutered "Mississippi" I-69 shield.

I was even more surprised to discover that MDOT's Five Year Plan now includes $1 million in FY 2016 preliminary engineering for I-69 SIU 11 from Clarksdale to Eagles Nest:



MDOT must be confident that some form of increased state-level funding will be forthcoming in the near future.

edit

Here is a snip from the map included in the Details section of the project listing:



Looks like it will mostly be new terrain construction.

codyg1985

That is a seemingly random spot to start.
Cody Goodman
Huntsville, AL, United States

lordsutch

Actually it makes a bit of sense, since it would connect to the north end of the existing, fully-access-controlled Clarksdale bypass and have independent utility without needing an interim connection back to existing US 61 like other shortish segments. It's one of the more built-up sections too, relatively-speaking.

codyg1985

I guess I was thinking it would make sense to start where the current I-69 stub ends, but that works, too.
Cody Goodman
Huntsville, AL, United States

lordsutch

I believe the approved plan for continuing south of MS 713 requires about 15 miles of new-terrain construction to get over to US 61 south of Tunica (the town proper) due to some 4(f) properties along the existing US 61 right-of-way. That would be a very large project to let in a single contract by MDOT standards - they only managed to do it with I-269 by using DeSoto County's bonding capacity, and Tunica County can't draw the credit to front a project that big even with the casinos.

The next bit north of Eagles Nest is an on-line upgrade of the existing four-lane to the U.S. 61/49 split, which would make it the next logical project unless SIU 12 comes to fruition first.

CanesFan27

Quote from: codyg1985 on May 10, 2016, 03:33:24 PM
I guess I was thinking it would make sense to start where the current I-69 stub ends, but that works, too.

The downside of addressing the most glaring needs/improvements first is that it can sit years and decades ready for an Interstate designation but because it's not connected exist without an Interstate shield. 

paulthemapguy

I hope US278 is routed onto the new Mississippi River bridge.  US278 needs a more direct connection between its sections east and west of the river.
Avatar is the last interesting highway I clinched.
My website! http://www.paulacrossamerica.com Now featuring all of Ohio!
My USA Shield Gallery https://flic.kr/s/aHsmHwJRZk
TM Clinches https://bit.ly/2UwRs4O

National collection status: 361/425. Only 64 route markers remain

Grzrd

Quote from: lordsutch on May 10, 2016, 03:15:22 PM
Actually it makes a bit of sense, since it would connect to the north end of the existing, fully-access-controlled Clarksdale bypass and have independent utility without needing an interim connection back to existing US 61 like other shortish segments ....
Quote from: lordsutch on May 10, 2016, 03:52:25 PM
.... The next bit north of Eagles Nest is an on-line upgrade of the existing four-lane to the U.S. 61/49 split, which would make it the next logical project unless SIU 12 comes to fruition first.

A section completed from the north end of the Clarksdale bypass to the U.S. 61/49 split could also have a dual utility as part of the Brinkley to Batesville Highway Corridor, as shown in this snip from one of the alternatives (p. 6/10 of pdf):


lordsutch

Quote from: paulthemapguy on May 10, 2016, 08:44:23 PM
I hope US278 is routed onto the new Mississippi River bridge.  US278 needs a more direct connection between its sections east and west of the river.

That has always been (quasi-officially at least) the intent, otherwise its wonky routing makes even less sense than it already does; it really should have followed the MS 8 corridor in Mississippi rather than MS 6, but that argument was lost 15 years ago.

Quote from: Grzrd on May 10, 2016, 10:07:19 PM
A section completed from the north end of the Clarksdale bypass to the U.S. 61/49 split could also have a dual utility as part of the Brinkley to Batesville Highway Corridor, as shown in this snip from one of the alternatives (p. 6/10 of pdf):



Anyone with a lick of sense will cut the hypotenuse on that one; there's a decently-maintained county road north of Marks off MS 3 (Birdie-Darling Road) that will take you over to MS 315 which was reconstructed for some reason or another to bypass Rich back in the early 2000s. MS 316 would be faster too.

froggie

Quote from: lordsutchAnyone with a lick of sense will cut the hypotenuse on that one; there's a decently-maintained county road north of Marks off MS 3 (Birdie-Darling Road) that will take you over to MS 315 which was reconstructed for some reason or another to bypass Rich back in the early 2000s. MS 316 would be faster too.

However, as a corridor, that "cutting the hypotenuse" doesn't dovetail with MDOT's goal of providing a 4-lane MS 6 between Clarksdale and Batesville.

Wayward Memphian

I would rather see the Batesville Brinkley corridor drop Brinkley in favor of Forrest City to use lots of that existing Ark 1 4-lane already there. Brinkley is pretty much dead now, they even lost their Walmart.

lordsutch

Quote from: froggie on May 11, 2016, 07:44:53 AM
However, as a corridor, that "cutting the hypotenuse" doesn't dovetail with MDOT's goal of providing a 4-lane MS 6 between Clarksdale and Batesville.

True. Although unless something has changed in the past decade, the only real short-to-medium term justification for 4-laning MS 6/US 278 west of Batesville is safety; traffic-wise passing lanes would probably suffice. Long-term I could see the connectivity added by I-69 making the corridor (along with Corridor V to the east) a decent freight bypass for traffic headed to/from Huntsville, Chattanooga, and the I-81 corridor, even with the Batesville bypass being shelved.

Grzrd

#94
Quote from: Grzrd on May 10, 2016, 02:31:03 PM
Here is a snip from the map included in the Details section of the project listing:

Looks like it will mostly be new terrain construction.

MDOT recently re-posted the I-69 SIU 11 FEIS and ROD. The FEIS explains that "development near Lyon" necessitates new terrain construction: (p.75/1447 of pdf; p. 2-22 of document):

Quote
The Western, Central, and Eastern Alternatives are identical for the middle section of the study area.  The middle section begins at the south end of the New Africa Road Interchange and ends approximately four miles south of the Coahoma/Tunica County Line.  The alternatives would use the current Clarksdale Bypass south and east of Clarksdale.  To avoid development near Lyon, the alternatives leave US 49/US 61 to the east and turn north to parallel US 49/ US 61.  They rejoin US 49/ US 61 north of Eagles Nest Road and end approximately four miles south of the Coahoma/Tunica County Line, where the three major alternatives split in the northern section. 
The following interchanges, spurs, and crossroad connectivity improvements are identified with the middle section: 
- US 49 Interchange (includes a five-lane connecting road from the interchange northwest to the Old US 61 intersection in Clarksdale)
- SR 6 Interchange 
- Eagles Nest Road Interchange 
- Eagles Nest Road Spur
 
- Coahoma Interchange; also upgrade county road west to SR 1 and SR 316 east to Jonestown

Also from the Details page, here is a snip showing the current $495 million estimated cost to complete SIU 11:



That figure may seem miniscule about a quarter-century from now.

The Ghostbuster

I have a feeling that even a quarter century from now, no more of Interstate 69 will exist in Mississippi than what already exists today. Same with Arkansas and Louisiana.

Bobby5280

I think the only hope of getting that I-69 corridor in MS & AR fast-tracked at all is if the federal government suddenly decided the Great River Bridge was a high priority and funded the project entirely. That bridge is never going to get built if it's up to Arkansas and Mississippi to arrive at some kind of agreement and pay for it themselves.

In the short term that's fine by me. If it were up to me (which it isn't), I'd prefer Arkansas concentrate on getting I-49 built. That's going to be a slow and costly enough slog. Hopefully the Arkansas river bridge by Fort Smith can be built sometime soon. At least it's not going to carry a billion dollar price tag like the I-69 bridge over the Mississippi.


Henry

One can only hope that I-69 does not end up being another I-73/I-74, seeing that TX is the most serious about building out its sections. Good to see that KY, TN and IN are also finishing their own sections as well.

Quote from: Bobby5280 on May 19, 2016, 10:28:35 AM
I think the only hope of getting that I-69 corridor in MS & AR fast-tracked at all is if the federal government suddenly decided the Great River Bridge was a high priority and funded the project entirely. That bridge is never going to get built if it's up to Arkansas and Mississippi to arrive at some kind of agreement and pay for it themselves.
And don't forget LA either. I haven't heard of any new plans to build it through there. And I have a feeling that the I-49 bridge will get built before the I-69 one does.
Go Cubs Go! Go Cubs Go! Hey Chicago, what do you say? The Cubs are gonna win today!

Wayward Memphian

I'm sure someone will get pissed, but once again, they should just go back and redraw it from Texarkana to Lake Village using the basic path of US 82, use the new bridge there as the I-69 crossing, extend 530 to Hamburg and I-69 just run all the way down to Greenville on the MS side. Any bridge money is better spent further upstream.

Anthony_JK

Quote from: Wayward Memphian on May 19, 2016, 12:37:41 PM
I'm sure someone will get pissed, but once again, they should just go back and redraw it from Texarkana to Lake Village using the basic path of US 82, use the new bridge there as the I-69 crossing, extend 530 to Hamburg and I-69 just run all the way down to Greenville on the MS side. Any bridge money is better spent further upstream.

If they are going to try that, might as well just truncate it at Monticello and extend I-530 down to I-20 in Monroe, then down US 165 to I-10 in Iowa/Lake Charles. I-69/I-369 to Texarkana, I-30 to Little Rock, and completing the US 67 freeway to Popular Bluff or Festus can fill in the remaining blanks.



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