Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[froggie]

I've seen proposals for a cloverleaf/partial-directional at I-59/MS 42.  A long-term goal of MDOT is to bring any freeway-grade connection to 49 north of Hattiesburg in at the 59/42 interchange.

Was that on the PDF?  I can't get to the PDF out here.

[Grzrd]

I've seen proposals for a cloverleaf/partial-directional at I-59/MS 42 ...
Was that on the PDF?  I can't get to the PDF out here.

Yes, on page 74. Also, I don't know if you are able to see snips in posts, but in this post I included a snip of page 74 (a listing of New Capacity Projects) that includes the I-59/MS 42 interchange in the list.  No details are provided about the respective projects.

[Grzrd]

The June 12 Transportation Needs Legislative Update .... (page 18/26 of pdf):

(above quote from Mississippi thread)

An August 8 Task Force Transportation Update suggests that there will not even be ROW acquisition for any sections of I-69 SIU 11 from Robinsonville to Benoit during the 2015-2017 time frame (page 74/76 of pdf):

However, it looks like there are plans to add lanes to I-55/I-69 from MS 304 to MS 302.

In looking at the above two lists, MDOT does consider I-69 as an immediate capacity need.  Given all of the current construction on I-269 that is scheduled to conclude around 2018, as well as the listed potential I-55/I-69 widening, I suppose it is not too surprising that I-69 SIU 11 ROW acquisition is not on MDOT's 2015-17 additional funding wish list.

[richllewis]

The presentation put out by MDOT enumerating needs is just another way of drumming up support for funding  in the Mississippi Legislature. Frankly I smell a tax increase in the works. And I suppose that MDOT will get some more money related to HB 481. This bill as passed by the legislature concerned DUI's and DUI adjudication and DUI interlock devices and Drivers license fees for these devices. I do not know if increased taxes will pass muster with the Governor we have since he is against raising Taxes. But Roads will have to be fixed, widened, and new roads need construction money so someone will come up with something to provide funding for MDOT

[froggie]

Also, I don't know if you are able to see snips in posts, but in this post I included a snip of page 74 (a listing of New Capacity Projects) that includes the I-59/MS 42 interchange in the list.

If it's a small enough graphic (KB-wise moreso than pixel-wise), I usually can.  That said, I have the PDF tagged for download the next time we hit port.

[Grzrd]

There is also a non-interstate grade widening of SR 8 from Rosedale to Cleveland scheduled for 2029.
(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]

In looking at the above two lists, MDOT does consider I-69 as an immediate capacity need.  Given all of the current construction on I-269 that is scheduled to conclude around 2018, as well as the listed potential I-55/I-69 widening, I suppose it is not too surprising that I-69 SIU 11 ROW acquisition is not on MDOT's 2015-17 additional funding wish list.

The presentation put out by MDOT enumerating needs is just another way of drumming up support for funding  in the Mississippi Legislature. Frankly I smell a tax increase in the works.

In this September 10 guest column,  Dick Hall, transportation commissioner of the Central District for the state of Mississippi, paints a bleak picture for I-69 SIU 11's future prospects:

.... the Mississippi Legislature created (by a margin of one vote) the 1987 Four-Lane Highway Program which resulted in the construction of over one thousand miles of new four-lane highways which are basically paid for. I do not know of another state in the nation which can make such a claim. Because of this, our economy and quality of life have improved to a level we have never enjoyed before. Unfortunately, those of us in the Legislature at that time set the fuel tax at a flat 18 cents per gallon, instead of making it a percentage which would have allowed for the inflation we have experienced over the last quarter of a century. As a result, the cost of highway construction has increased 300 percent while the revenue available to cover this cost has only increased 30 percent.
I don’t care what kind of business you are trying to run.  Those numbers won’t work. 
The other mistake made was the absence of any provision for the maintenance of the system being built. About the dumbest thing anyone can do is to make a major capital investment and not maintain it ....
There are other needed facilities we don’t have the resources to even start—certainly not I-69. The only active construction project underway in our District III (which encompasses 9 counties in the Delta) is the four-laning of Highway 8 between Cleveland and Ruleville.

Maybe the MS 8 four-laning between Cleveland and Ruleville is setting the stage for the future four-laning of the I-69 Corridor section of MS 8. 

The linked column was written in September, which appears to make it part of a coordinated effort with the ongoing Task Force study (at least he referred to I-69 as a "needed facility").  That said, if Mississippi does not change its funding mechanism for highways, then it will be a looooong time before I-69 will be built in Mississippi.

[Grzrd]

MDOT's 2012-15 Draft STIP does not project much activity for the "non-I-269" part of the I-69 Corridor.  Basically, repayment of the debt service on the bonds for the paving of SIU 10 MS 304/I-69 from I-55 to US 61 is scheduled for 2012-15 (page 55/305 of the pdf).  I did not see any scheduled projects for SIU 11 in Bolivar, Coahoma, or Tunica counties.

In this September 10 guest column,  Dick Hall, transportation commissioner of the Central District for the state of Mississippi, paints a bleak picture for I-69 SIU 11's future prospects:

There are other needed facilities we don’t have the resources to even start—certainly not I-69.

MDOT has posted its Draft 2015-2019 STIP, and as expected, it does not include any I-69 SIU 11 projects.

[WashuOtaku]

MDOT has posted its Draft 2015-2019 STIP, and as expected, it does not include any I-69 SIU 11 projects.

Not surprising, it doesn't do much for Mississippi and Arkansas is no where ready yet.  It appears the I-69 that exists for for the sole benifit of Tennessee.  Maybe they should reciprocate and complete their section of I-22.   

[Henry]

MDOT has posted its Draft 2015-2019 STIP, and as expected, it does not include any I-69 SIU 11 projects.

Not surprising, it doesn't do much for Mississippi and Arkansas is no where ready yet.  It appears the I-69 that exists for for the sole benifit of Tennessee.  Maybe they should reciprocate and complete their section of I-22.   

True, but where I-22 will end is an ongoing guessing game. Will it continue into Memphis, or turn west onto I-269 and meet I-55 there? As for I-69, I have a feeling that it will never be completed in our lifetimes, or our children's or grandchildren's, for that matter.

[Grzrd]

This TV video reports that, although money woes may delay the project for years, MDOT is proceeding with the development of a preliminary Right of Way plan to widen I-55/I-69 in DeSoto County (I-69 SIU 9a), in part because of an expected increase in traffic that will be generated by the completion of I-269 (I-69 SIU 9b):

the Mississippi Department of Transportation has begun the very earliest stages of adding new lanes to Interstate 55, all the way from Goodman Road to North Hernando.
”What we’re doing now is, very preliminary. It’s a couple of contracts to consulting and engineering firms to develop the Right of Way plan,” said District Engineer Mitch Turner.
He says that’s the first step, paving the way for actual construction down the road.
The expansion plan will eventually connect with I-69 and 269 just north of Hernando, and eventually ease new traffic arriving from east and west on the new highway due for completion in 2017.
Turner says it could take years to turn the first shovel of dirt, but it’s a notable development.
“It’s a step in the right direction. It all depends on money. It’s gonna depend on money and priorities in the state.”

Even though the report simply refers to the stretch of interstate as I-55, it does include shots of side-by-side I-55 and I-69 shields:



At the end of the report, the news anchor notes that I-69 will one day connect to TN 385 (Future I-269) to create a loop around Memphis.

MDOT has posted its Draft 2015-2019 STIP

Apparently, the ROW work for the I-55/I-69 widening was added to the Memphis MPO TIP on December 26, 2013 (page 305/398 of pdf):

[Grzrd]

A ROD was issued for SIU 11 in the latter part of 2010.

This article (behind paywall) reports on recent efforts by the Delta Council.  It mentions that the Delta Council was part of the successful lobbying effort for the completion of I-269 ... :

The Delta Council successfully lobbied, with others, to secure financing to complete the Interstate 269 Memphis, Tenn., bypass ... The council, however, remains concerned about legislative failures to secure future funds to maintain roadways.

(above quote from I-69 Mississippi River Bridge thread)

An August 8 Task Force Transportation Update suggests that there will not even be ROW acquisition for any sections of I-69 SIU 11 from Robinsonville to Benoit during the 2015-2017 time frame (page 74/76 of pdf)

The Delta Council has a Corridor 18 (I-69) resolution (link can be found on linked page) setting forth its strategy for initial SIU 11 corridor preservation:

Delta Council urges the Mississippi Department of Transportation to utilize any available funds to initiate real estate acquisition along the I-69 alignment on those segments of I-69 in SIU (Section of Independent Utility) 11 which are not located within the existing U.S. 61 four-lane alignment, as their initial order of priority for I-69 real estate acquisition.

This seems like a minimal, sensible first step for advancing SIU 11, but it does not appear that MDOT has the money for even this small proposed step.

[ElPanaChevere]

I think I saw this somewhere, that the interstate between Jackson and Gulfport/Biloxi would be numbered I-63 or something?

Also, does anyone know the status of I-310 (that road that's supposed to go to the Gulf of Gulfport)? I'd say just make the interstate from Jackson down to Gulfport/Biloxi and have it tie into either this I-310 or I-110, possibly take it over like I-69 is going to do with I-164 in Evansville, Indiana.


My last question is, do they know when they're going to have a bridge across the Mississippi for I-69? I've just heard/read articles that said that they've chosen a site, but that's all she wrote...

[froggie]

I think I saw this somewhere, that the interstate between Jackson and Gulfport/Biloxi would be numbered I-63 or something?

No.  MDOT's proposal is for an Interstate-grade facility, but they don't have even close to the level of funding that is required to build it.  If there's been a route number attached to the proposal, it is the dream of some local politician and not anything official from MDOT.

Also, does anyone know the status of I-310 (that road that's supposed to go to the Gulf of Gulfport)?

Being planned and designed as MS 601.  The push to make it an Interstate comes from local officials, but the initial design will not be Interstate grade south of about 28th St.

My last question is, do they know when they're going to have a bridge across the Mississippi for I-69? I've just heard/read articles that said that they've chosen a site, but that's all she wrote…

Because funding…(or lack of it)

[msunat97]

From the Arkansas side of things, there is not a plan to build the I-69 Mississippi River bridge any time soon.  I'm 40 & I don't expect to see it in my lifetime.

[Grzrd]

Rumor has it that I-69 has been shortened again.  I was just talking to Chris Lawrence and he says that the signs that announce the Start/End of I-69 have been moved back to the Tunica/DeSoto County Line once again (the original place) from the previous location @ the old MS-304 intersection area.  Does anybody have picture proof of this?

Bump to this question and it was probably answered elsewhere (I missed the answer if so), but this May 2013 Google Maps Street View imagery from NB MS 713 shows the sign for the Desoto County state line with the "Begin 69" sign visible in the distance.

[DesotoCountyDawg]

Rumor has it that I-69 has been shortened again.  I was just talking to Chris Lawrence and he says that the signs that announce the Start/End of I-69 have been moved back to the Tunica/DeSoto County Line once again (the original place) from the previous location @ the old MS-304 intersection area.  Does anybody have picture proof of this?

Bump to this question and it was probably answered elsewhere (I missed the answer if so), but this May 2013 Google Maps Street View imagery from NB MS 713 shows the sign for the Desoto County state line with the "Begin 69" sign visible in the distance.

Yes it has been moved.  I farm next to I-69 and go past that sign several times daily.  It has been moved further north than its original spot.  The signs were originally placed just north of the old MS HWY 304 intersection. 

[rte66man]

Rumor has it that I-69 has been shortened again.  I was just talking to Chris Lawrence and he says that the signs that announce the Start/End of I-69 have been moved back to the Tunica/DeSoto County Line once again (the original place) from the previous location @ the old MS-304 intersection area.  Does anybody have picture proof of this?

Bump to this question and it was probably answered elsewhere (I missed the answer if so), but this May 2013 Google Maps Street View imagery from NB MS 713 shows the sign for the Desoto County state line with the "Begin 69" sign visible in the distance.

Yes it has been moved.  I farm next to I-69 and go past that sign several times daily.  It has been moved further north than its original spot.  The signs were originally placed just north of the old MS HWY 304 intersection. 

This is where the END sign was in March 2013:
https://secure.flickr.com/photos/rte66man/8739180615/in/set-72157633482601269

[Grzrd]

Rumor has it that I-69 has been shortened again.  I was just talking to Chris Lawrence and he says that the signs that announce the Start/End of I-69 have been moved back to the Tunica/DeSoto County Line once again (the original place) from the previous location @ the old MS-304 intersection area.  Does anybody have picture proof of this?

Bump to this question and it was probably answered elsewhere (I missed the answer if so), but this May 2013 Google Maps Street View imagery from NB MS 713 shows the sign for the Desoto County state line with the "Begin 69" sign visible in the distance.

Yes it has been moved.  I farm next to I-69 and go past that sign several times daily.  It has been moved further north than its original spot.  The signs were originally placed just north of the old MS HWY 304 intersection.

FWIW the Statewide Map (last modified on June 11, 2012) seems to show Start/End at the old MS 304 location:



Is anyone aware of an official explanation for the movement of the Start/End shields into Desoto County?

[rickmastfan67]

What I find interesting with that picture from the map is that they show a I-69 shield in TN, when it isn't posted there yet and is just I-55 (posted wise).

[froggie]

Is anyone aware of an official explanation for the movement of the Start/End shields into Desoto County?

I'm not 100%, but it's possible that MDOT "jumped the gun" and FHWA dialed them back...

[rte66man]

Rumor has it that I-69 has been shortened again.  I was just talking to Chris Lawrence and he says that the signs that announce the Start/End of I-69 have been moved back to the Tunica/DeSoto County Line once again (the original place) from the previous location @ the old MS-304 intersection area.  Does anybody have picture proof of this?

Bump to this question and it was probably answered elsewhere (I missed the answer if so), but this May 2013 Google Maps Street View imagery from NB MS 713 shows the sign for the Desoto County state line with the "Begin 69" sign visible in the distance.

Yes it has been moved.  I farm next to I-69 and go past that sign several times daily.  It has been moved further north than its original spot.  The signs were originally placed just north of the old MS HWY 304 intersection.

FWIW the Statewide Map (last modified on June 11, 2012) seems to show Start/End at the old MS 304 location:

After looking again at the map, why is 69 marked as the Great River Road?  That symbol s/b on US61 instead.

[Stephane Dumas]

After looking again at the map, why is 69 marked as the Great River Road?  That symbol s/b on US61 instead.

I guess it might be shown as an access routing to the Great River Road for people who want a easiest access from I-55.

[Grzrd]

Mississippi disagrees wrt I-69 at I-55.

I-55 has C/D lanes and the interchange is much newer (with, I believe, less tight ramps); plus the likely directional split of traffic is different, you have a much later design year in play, and when FHWA signed off on the interchange, the loop routing for I-69 proper via SIU 9 was still a possibility.
But other than that, exactly the same.

(above quote from I-69 in KY thread)

PS: I-69 was built with a cloverleaf loop at I-55 in Mississippi. There's no reason the one in Kentucky can't stay.

PPS:  that was designed and construction began before I-69 was approved.

PPPS: so was the cloverleaf in Kentucky.

(above quote from I-69 Ohio River Bridge thread)

I'm not sure what MDOT has in mind, but the MDOT Five Year Project Plan indicates that they intend to do something with the I-55 NB loop ramp:



Since the project type is listed as "Construction" and the estimated cost is $200,000, I'm guessing that they only intend to do minor upgrades to the ramp.  On the other hand, the scope of work is not defined (a study for a flyover ramp?).

[lordsutch]

Since the project type is listed as "Construction" and the estimated cost is $200,000, I'm guessing that they only intend to do minor upgrades to the ramp.  On the other hand, the scope of work is not defined (a study for a flyover ramp?).

Might just be a resurfacing job. There's a similar project listed for I-59 at US 49 in Forrest County.

[NE2]

After looking again at the map, why is 69 marked as the Great River Road?  That symbol s/b on US61 instead.

Sloppy cartography. Here's the 2000 map: