I-57 Approved

[I-39]

Obviously other corridors in that region need upgrading to take some of the load off I-40 between Little Rock and Memphis. The I-57 extension will help some. I think upgrades to US-69 in Oklahoma between the Red River and I-44/Big Cabin would re-route some traffic coming from DFW off of I-30.

Regarding the prospect of new East-West Interstate quality corridors in that region, I think US-60 between Springfield, MO and Sikeston, MO has the best chance of getting fully upgraded 100% to Interstate quality. US-412 between Tulsa and Springdale will upgraded to Interstate quality in some form. I don't expect US-412 East of Springdale to get upgraded though.

I'm pretty sure any meaningful upgrades to US 69 between the Red River and I-44 are dead in the water at this point. The whole corridor needs to be upgraded to Interstate standards, but that won't happen.

[Bobby5280]

I'm pretty sure any meaningful upgrades to US 69 between the Red River and I-44 are dead in the water at this point. The whole corridor needs to be upgraded to Interstate standards, but that won't happen.

I don't agree. US-69 from the Red River to Big Cabin won't be fully upgraded to Interstate standards soon at all. But over time the spot upgrades here and there will accumulate. When enough work has been done it will create a kind of momentum or critical mass to fill in the rest of the non-freeway gaps.

As I said earlier, work in Calera and McAlester is currently in progress. Other work is planned South of McAlester by the US Army Ammunition Plant. Small towns blocking progress (Atoka, Stringtown) are aging and won't be able to block progress forever. Muskogee could end up being the last holdout, but I think city leaders there will see the light about the benefits of having a complete Interstate-class North-South corridor.

[Avalanchez71]

I'm pretty sure any meaningful upgrades to US 69 between the Red River and I-44 are dead in the water at this point. The whole corridor needs to be upgraded to Interstate standards, but that won't happen.

I don't agree. US-69 from the Red River to Big Cabin won't be fully upgraded to Interstate standards soon at all. But over time the spot upgrades here and there will accumulate. When enough work has been done it will create a kind of momentum or critical mass to fill in the rest of the non-freeway gaps.

As I said earlier, work in Calera and McAlester is currently in progress. Other work is planned South of McAlester by the US Army Ammunition Plant. Small towns blocking progress (Atoka, Stringtown) are aging and won't be able to block progress forever. Muskogee could end up being the last holdout, but I think city leaders there will see the light about the benefits of having a complete Interstate-class North-South corridor.

The later the better.  I just am baffled about all the luster for the big I shield.

[Bobby5280]

I don't think US-69 between the Red River and Big Cabin necessarily needs an Interstate shield labeling it. But that corridor needs to be fully Interstate quality just from the standpoint of safety alone.

[edwaleni]

I emailed Randal Looney at FHWA on the status of I-57 in Arkansas between Walnut Ridge to Corning and this was his response.

We have a draft Environmental Impacts Statement that is currently undergoing review with our agency (Federal Highway) and the cooperating agencies on the project.  Hopefully we will be able to publish a DEIS for public review very soon.  If you have any questions or need more information, please let me know.  Thanks - Randal

[mvak36]

I would expect US-412 in Northern Arkansas to get widened to configurations like an undivided 4-lane highway or a 4-lane plus center turn lane. Converting it to limited access is going to be too tall an order in various locations with a good amount of development. It might be possible to squeeze in some limited access interchanges at important highway intersections. Otherwise I don't think it can get much better than 4-lane divided with at-grade intersections and driveways.

US-82 in Southern Arkansas would be physically easier to upgrade than US-412 in Northern Arkansas. But there is a bigger question of actual need and its relation to limited funding. I-69 is already one big mouth to feed in that part of the state. And then there's also I-49 on the Southwest side of the state.

It looks like parts of US82 and US412 will be widened in the CAP2 program. I don't know how long it will take them to do it (probably a long time) but I think both will eventually be 4 lanes across the state.

[I-39]

I'm pretty sure any meaningful upgrades to US 69 between the Red River and I-44 are dead in the water at this point. The whole corridor needs to be upgraded to Interstate standards, but that won't happen.

I don't agree. US-69 from the Red River to Big Cabin won't be fully upgraded to Interstate standards soon at all. But over time the spot upgrades here and there will accumulate. When enough work has been done it will create a kind of momentum or critical mass to fill in the rest of the non-freeway gaps.

As I said earlier, work in Calera and McAlester is currently in progress. Other work is planned South of McAlester by the US Army Ammunition Plant. Small towns blocking progress (Atoka, Stringtown) are aging and won't be able to block progress forever. Muskogee could end up being the last holdout, but I think city leaders there will see the light about the benefits of having a complete Interstate-class North-South corridor.

Muskogee killed the Interstate-grade bypass proposed there, and I don't believe anything north of there has been proposed for conversion to freeway. I agree this corridor probably would have been worth pursuing instead of I-57 perhaps, but unfortunately, I truly believe the ship has sailed on making US 69 interstate grade all the way from Big Cabin to the Red River.

[Bobby5280]

People in Muskogee stopped the current efforts to build a bypass on the West side of town. That set back does not permanently kill efforts to create an all Interstate quality corridor along US-69. ODOT could simply shift US-69 onto a new alignment farther West, outside of Muskogee city limits.

[rte66man]

People in Muskogee stopped the current efforts to build a bypass on the West side of town. That set back does not permanently kill efforts to create an all Interstate quality corridor along US-69. ODOT could simply shift US-69 onto a new alignment farther West, outside of Muskogee city limits.

Which they won't do as they wanted to use the existing Arkansas River bridges to save some money.  If they have to add in both a new river crossing and a new interchange with the Muskogee Turnpike, then you can forget about it.

[I-39]

The I-57 extension makes a full Interstate grade US 69 corridor in Oklahoma unnecessary anyway.

[sprjus4]

The I-57 extension makes a full Interstate grade US 69 corridor in Oklahoma unnecessary anyway.

Not really? US-75/69 is a major trucking corridor northeast out of Dallas up to I-44. It certainly has merits to be a freeway design throughout.

[MikieTimT]

The I-57 extension makes a full Interstate grade US 69 corridor in Oklahoma unnecessary anyway.

Not really? US-75/69 is a major trucking corridor northeast out of Dallas up to I-44. It certainly has merits to be a freeway design throughout.

US-69 north of US-160 in Kansas sure isn't a major trucking corridor.  Quite frankly was hardly any traffic at all on it Friday and Sunday when I drove it, and less than a double digit count of trucks.  Shame as it's freeway north of Ft. Scott, and they're working on 4 laning it down to US-160, with at-grade intersections, but as nice and straight as the road is, with a 5MPH faster speed limit north of Ft. Scott, it doesn't pull much of anything off I-49 in Missouri.  I have in-laws that live off I-35 SW of Shawnee, so US-69 winds up being slightly quicker than I-49 up and I-435 over the border to I-35.  Despite being a straight shot from Dallas to KC, it'll never draw the traffic with all of the 2 lanes and towns, which will likely remain the case through our lifetimes.

[sprjus4]

^ I'm referring specifically to US-69 south of I-44. Not north, which is what you're talking about.

[Revive 755]

The I-57 extension makes a full Interstate grade US 69 corridor in Oklahoma unnecessary anyway.

Not really? US-75/69 is a major trucking corridor northeast out of Dallas up to I-44. It certainly has merits to be a freeway design throughout.

It's definitely not true - US 75/US 69 serves a different area compared to a combined I-30/I-57 corridor.

Bigger problem would be that I-44 in Missouri already has a lot of sections that need more climbing lanes and/or a full widening.

[abqtraveler]

The I-57 extension makes a full Interstate grade US 69 corridor in Oklahoma unnecessary anyway.

Not really? US-75/69 is a major trucking corridor northeast out of Dallas up to I-44. It certainly has merits to be a freeway design throughout.

It's definitely not true - US 75/US 69 serves a different area compared to a combined I-30/I-57 corridor.

Bigger problem would be that I-44 in Missouri already has a lot of sections that need more climbing lanes and/or a full widening.

Converting US-75 and 69 in Oklahoma to interstate standards would provide a direct connection from Dallas to Kansas City, via Tulsa. Good candidate for a northward extension of I-45.

[sprjus4]

The I-57 extension makes a full Interstate grade US 69 corridor in Oklahoma unnecessary anyway.

Not really? US-75/69 is a major trucking corridor northeast out of Dallas up to I-44. It certainly has merits to be a freeway design throughout.

It's definitely not true - US 75/US 69 serves a different area compared to a combined I-30/I-57 corridor.

Bigger problem would be that I-44 in Missouri already has a lot of sections that need more climbing lanes and/or a full widening.

Converting US-75 and 69 in Oklahoma to interstate standards would provide a direct connection from Dallas to Kansas City, via Tulsa. Good candidate for a northward extension of I-45.

Not even via Tulsa, it would bypass the city to the east entirely. Unless you routed it along US-75/US-69 to the Indian Nation Turnpike, then northward to US-75 along there, and routed via the city to I-44.

That would provide a direct Dallas-Tulsa connection, but not a direct connection for long distance traffic to the I-44 or I-49 corridors.

[splashflash]

The I-57 extension makes a full Interstate grade US 69 corridor in Oklahoma unnecessary anyway.

Not really? US-75/69 is a major trucking corridor northeast out of Dallas up to I-44. It certainly has merits to be a freeway design throughout.

It's definitely not true - US 75/US 69 serves a different area compared to a combined I-30/I-57 corridor.

Bigger problem would be that I-44 in Missouri already has a lot of sections that need more climbing lanes and/or a full widening.

Converting US-75 and 69 in Oklahoma to interstate standards would provide a direct connection from Dallas to Kansas City, via Tulsa. Good candidate for a northward extension of I-45.

Not even via Tulsa, it would bypass the city to the east entirely. Unless you routed it along US-75/US-69 to the Indian Nation Turnpike, then northward to US-75 along there, and routed via the city to I-44.

That would provide a direct Dallas-Tulsa connection, but not a direct connection for long distance traffic to the I-44 or I-49 corridors.

For KC traffic, if US 169 continues to get improvements, as is planned in Kansas, south of Chanute, and US 75 south of Glenpool to I-40, and US 69/75 south of McAlester, it could become more competitive with I-49. 

[mvak36]

The I-57 extension makes a full Interstate grade US 69 corridor in Oklahoma unnecessary anyway.

Not really? US-75/69 is a major trucking corridor northeast out of Dallas up to I-44. It certainly has merits to be a freeway design throughout.

It's definitely not true - US 75/US 69 serves a different area compared to a combined I-30/I-57 corridor.

Bigger problem would be that I-44 in Missouri already has a lot of sections that need more climbing lanes and/or a full widening.

Converting US-75 and 69 in Oklahoma to interstate standards would provide a direct connection from Dallas to Kansas City, via Tulsa. Good candidate for a northward extension of I-45.

Not even via Tulsa, it would bypass the city to the east entirely. Unless you routed it along US-75/US-69 to the Indian Nation Turnpike, then northward to US-75 along there, and routed via the city to I-44.

That would provide a direct Dallas-Tulsa connection, but not a direct connection for long distance traffic to the I-44 or I-49 corridors.

For KC traffic, if US 169 continues to get improvements, as is planned in Kansas, south of Chanute, and US 75 south of Glenpool to I-40, and US 69/75 south of McAlester, it could become more competitive with I-49.

The planned projects are mostly passing lane projects. Not much 4-laning. https://ikewebstorage.blob.core.windows.net/files/Development-Announcements-2021/D4-southeast-regional-summary.pdf

There were projects listed to convert the rest of US69 south of Fort Scott to freeway in the Local Consult Process for the IKE program, but they didn't score high enough, when compared with other needs statewide, to get selected for project development. Scores & Map

[sprjus4]

^ Given the presence of the I-49 freeway now fully complete between I-44 and the Kansas City metro (the gap south of downtown withstanding), I'd say the priority to upgrade the corridor on the Kansas side is certainly less.

It would be nice to see the speed limit go up to 75 mph in Missouri, but it's not the end of the world.

[Henry]

Until I-49 entered the picture, I'm suspecting that there were calls to extend I-45 to Kansas City, KS. But since MO has the far bigger version, it made much more sense to continue what was then an intrastate route in LA (Lafayette to Shreveport). Maybe having both I-45 and I-49 end in the same area would be overkill, despite the KS side also having a limited-access expressway for most of its length.

[mvak36]

^ Given the presence of the I-49 freeway now fully complete between I-44 and the Kansas City metro (the gap south of downtown withstanding), I'd say the priority to upgrade the corridor on the Kansas side is certainly less.

It would be nice to see the speed limit go up to 75 mph in Missouri, but it's not the end of the world.

I don't think Kansas cares if Missouri has I-49 just to the east. They'd probably still upgrade the rest as long as the people/politicians along the route want it (and they have funding of course).

Also, at least one of the sections they built recently, I believe they were calling it an "upgradeable expressway". Here's the project fact sheet from the T-works site: https://tworks.ksdot.gov/ProjDocuments/US-69_Arma_Overview_D4_11-26-2012.pdf

[edwaleni]

^ Given the presence of the I-49 freeway now fully complete between I-44 and the Kansas City metro (the gap south of downtown withstanding), I'd say the priority to upgrade the corridor on the Kansas side is certainly less.

It would be nice to see the speed limit go up to 75 mph in Missouri, but it's not the end of the world.

I don't think Kansas cares if Missouri has I-49 just to the east. They'd probably still upgrade the rest as long as the people/politicians along the route want it (and they have funding of course).

Also, at least one of the sections they built recently, I believe they were calling it an "upgradeable expressway". Here's the project fact sheet from the T-works site: https://tworks.ksdot.gov/ProjDocuments/US-69_Arma_Overview_D4_11-26-2012.pdf

A friend of mine is a retired KDOT employee. He said they don't care what Missouri does south of KCMO. (only what they do in KCMO)

If Kansas had a larger fuel tax base he said they would have had that road 4 laned and all towns bypassed to the Oklahoma border years ago.

[Bobby5280]

None of the Google Earth imagery (dated 8/23/2021) that I see of US-69 in SE Kansas looks like "upgradeable expressway" -at least not the Texas style version of divided highways built with freeway-size medians. Most portions do look like they can be upgraded to limited access freeways maybe with or without frontage roads.

If the US-69 freeway from Kansas City to Fort Scott is extended down to Arma and Pittsburg that wouldn't leave much left to extend the freeway down to Baxter Springs and the OK border.

The US-169 corridor is another wild card. Much of it in Southern Kansas is Super-2 with some limited access exits along the way. If an all-freeway Tulsa to Kansas City link were to be built US-169 would be the most logical route.

[Road Hog]

Apologies to KC, but I see KC more as a junction and not as a destination for anything except BBQ.

Sure, it's a bigger city and will generate a good extent of commerce. It is and will be served well by highways present and future.

[Bobby5280]

There are 2.3 million people living in the Kansas City MSA. The metro is big enough to have its own NFL and MLB sports teams. In terms of transportation, not only is Kansas City is important hub in the highway network, but it is the second biggest freight rail hub in the nation behind Chicago. Intermodal movement and its interface between trains and trucks figures in pretty big with Interstate commerce.