I-49 Coming to Missouri

[skluth]

I'm not an engineer, but based on my driving experience "left exits" are OK if (and only if) traffic on the two branches will be moving at the same speed. What's bad is for people to be decelerating for an exit in the high-speed lane of a freeway. Left entrances are a much bigger problem: you really don't want people merging on you from the left.

I think it varies a bit more on the locality, volume, and type of traffic.  If there are a lot of trucks taking that exit, and it's a place like Chicago with heavy traffic and where the left lane usually has speeds of 80+ (when moving at all), left exits seem to be more of an issue.

In a more ideal world where MoDOT had more funding, the interchange should be built as a trumpet (with a loop for the NB US 71 to SB I-49 movement).  Though I wouldn't rule out MoDOT redoing the interchange at a later date if there are a number of crashes or a proposed development needs the missing movements.

Couldn't the missing movements be handled by the Road H interchange to the north? The partial loop ramps could be expanded to include a turnaround movement if needed.

They should immediately as imagery shows three lanes from Route H south to the future interchange. Even if it involves careening across the interstate for NB drivers needing to reverse direction to catch a left exit for SB US 71.

Like everyone else, I'm just glad they are building it. Finally.

[edwaleni]

The next priority needs to be completing I-49 in Arkansas, between Fort Smith and Texarkana. Once that is finally completed, whenever that is, I-49 will be a continuous corridor between Lafayette and Kansas City (with the exception of Shreveport, though thru traffic can easily bypass that gap via I-220)

I'm pretty sure the I-49 Inter City Connector from the current I-49/I-220 interchange down to I-20 in downtown Shreveport will get built and fully completed long before the gap between Texarkana and Fort Smith is finished.

Aside from all the miles of I-49 that has to be built, some of it winding through the Ozarks, between Texarkana and Fort Smith, one irritating gap is the segment cutting through that Red River corner of Texas. The state of Texas will probably drag its feet funding their small yet expensive portion of this route, which includes a share of a Red River bridge crossing. Given all the other road projects on Texas' to do list this I-49 project in the NE corner of the state could be way way down the list of priorities. I figure the ICC in Shreveport and even other significant parts of I-49 South of Lafayette could be completed well before that short segment in Texas is done.

TxDOT already owns most of the ROW from the state line to the Red River.  I think the opposite will happen, when ArDOT is ready for the Red River bridge and to build the connector north, Texas will do it. In the scheme of Texas highway projects, its a small project.

[mvak36]

The Tentative Letting List on the MODOT site shows the Bella Vista Bypass as part of the February 21, 2020 letting with an award date of March 2020. 

[sparker]

The next priority needs to be completing I-49 in Arkansas, between Fort Smith and Texarkana. Once that is finally completed, whenever that is, I-49 will be a continuous corridor between Lafayette and Kansas City (with the exception of Shreveport, though thru traffic can easily bypass that gap via I-220)

I'm pretty sure the I-49 Inter City Connector from the current I-49/I-220 interchange down to I-20 in downtown Shreveport will get built and fully completed long before the gap between Texarkana and Fort Smith is finished.

Aside from all the miles of I-49 that has to be built, some of it winding through the Ozarks, between Texarkana and Fort Smith, one irritating gap is the segment cutting through that Red River corner of Texas. The state of Texas will probably drag its feet funding their small yet expensive portion of this route, which includes a share of a Red River bridge crossing. Given all the other road projects on Texas' to do list this I-49 project in the NE corner of the state could be way way down the list of priorities. I figure the ICC in Shreveport and even other significant parts of I-49 South of Lafayette could be completed well before that short segment in Texas is done.

TxDOT already owns most of the ROW from the state line to the Red River.  I think the opposite will happen, when ArDOT is ready for the Red River bridge and to build the connector north, Texas will do it. In the scheme of Texas highway projects, its a small project.

That (TxDOT/ADOT I-49 strategy conference) would certainly be fun to sit in on!  I can hear it now:
     TxDOT person, in reference to I-49 Red River bridge:  "That's okay, we'll pick up the tab on this one!  You
     guys can cover bringing Loop 151 up to Interstate spec!" 
     ADOT rep:  "Yeah, you know us too well -- that's more our speed, money-wise.  Deal!"

Those that have, do; those that don't, procrastinate. 

[Henry]

The next priority needs to be completing I-49 in Arkansas, between Fort Smith and Texarkana. Once that is finally completed, whenever that is, I-49 will be a continuous corridor between Lafayette and Kansas City (with the exception of Shreveport, though thru traffic can easily bypass that gap via I-220)

I'm pretty sure the I-49 Inter City Connector from the current I-49/I-220 interchange down to I-20 in downtown Shreveport will get built and fully completed long before the gap between Texarkana and Fort Smith is finished.

Aside from all the miles of I-49 that has to be built, some of it winding through the Ozarks, between Texarkana and Fort Smith, one irritating gap is the segment cutting through that Red River corner of Texas. The state of Texas will probably drag its feet funding their small yet expensive portion of this route, which includes a share of a Red River bridge crossing. Given all the other road projects on Texas' to do list this I-49 project in the NE corner of the state could be way way down the list of priorities. I figure the ICC in Shreveport and even other significant parts of I-49 South of Lafayette could be completed well before that short segment in Texas is done.

TxDOT already owns most of the ROW from the state line to the Red River.  I think the opposite will happen, when ArDOT is ready for the Red River bridge and to build the connector north, Texas will do it. In the scheme of Texas highway projects, its a small project.

That (TxDOT/ADOT I-49 strategy conference) would certainly be fun to sit in on!  I can hear it now:
     TxDOT person, in reference to I-49 Red River bridge:  "That's okay, we'll pick up the tab on this one!  You
     guys can cover bringing Loop 151 up to Interstate spec!" 
     ADOT rep:  "Yeah, you know us too well -- that's more our speed, money-wise.  Deal!"

Those that have, do; those that don't, procrastinate. 

IMHO, even the Lafayette-New Orleans segment would have a better chance of being completed before the Texarkana-Ft. Smith one got started. I mean, at least LA is trying its very best to get it done, with the US 90 upgrades taking place and even more to come. I also believe that the in-town portions in both Shreveport and Lafayette will be done, and if it takes more than a few years to accomplish that, then so be it.

[sprjus4]

The next priority needs to be completing I-49 in Arkansas, between Fort Smith and Texarkana. Once that is finally completed, whenever that is, I-49 will be a continuous corridor between Lafayette and Kansas City (with the exception of Shreveport, though thru traffic can easily bypass that gap via I-220)

I'm pretty sure the I-49 Inter City Connector from the current I-49/I-220 interchange down to I-20 in downtown Shreveport will get built and fully completed long before the gap between Texarkana and Fort Smith is finished.

Aside from all the miles of I-49 that has to be built, some of it winding through the Ozarks, between Texarkana and Fort Smith, one irritating gap is the segment cutting through that Red River corner of Texas. The state of Texas will probably drag its feet funding their small yet expensive portion of this route, which includes a share of a Red River bridge crossing. Given all the other road projects on Texas' to do list this I-49 project in the NE corner of the state could be way way down the list of priorities. I figure the ICC in Shreveport and even other significant parts of I-49 South of Lafayette could be completed well before that short segment in Texas is done.

TxDOT already owns most of the ROW from the state line to the Red River.  I think the opposite will happen, when ArDOT is ready for the Red River bridge and to build the connector north, Texas will do it. In the scheme of Texas highway projects, its a small project.

That (TxDOT/ADOT I-49 strategy conference) would certainly be fun to sit in on!  I can hear it now:
     TxDOT person, in reference to I-49 Red River bridge:  "That's okay, we'll pick up the tab on this one!  You
     guys can cover bringing Loop 151 up to Interstate spec!" 
     ADOT rep:  "Yeah, you know us too well -- that's more our speed, money-wise.  Deal!"

Those that have, do; those that don't, procrastinate. 

IMHO, even the Lafayette-New Orleans segment would have a better chance of being completed before the Texarkana-Ft. Smith one got started. I mean, at least LA is trying its very best to get it done, with the US 90 upgrades taking place and even more to come. I also believe that the in-town portions in both Shreveport and Lafayette will be done, and if it takes more than a few years to accomplish that, then so be it.

Lafayette - New Orleans is largely 4-lane divided highway with frontage roads in many areas, and full freeways in others. A majority of that highway simply needs interchanges here and there, and overpass here and there, and a couple new location segments - all on flat terrain.

Fort Smith - Texarkana needs 100+ miles of new location freeway through mountainous / hilly terrain.

[US71]

Fort Smith - Texarkana needs 100+ miles of new location freeway through mountainous / hilly terrain.

Since there's no Walmart distribution center along there, it's probably not a priority like the Bella Vista Bypass is

[kphoger]

Fort Smith - Texarkana needs 100+ miles of new location freeway through mountainous / hilly terrain.

Since there's no Walmart distribution center not nearly as much traffic along there, it's probably not a priority like the Bella Vista Bypass is

FTFY ?

AADT on US-71 north of Mena is 2800.
AADT on US-71 south of Grannis is 3900.

AADT on US-71 through Bella Vista is in the 30,000 range.

[US71]

Fort Smith - Texarkana needs 100+ miles of new location freeway through mountainous / hilly terrain.

Since there's no Walmart distribution center not nearly as much traffic along there, it's probably not a priority like the Bella Vista Bypass is

FTFY ?

AADT on US-71 north of Mena is 2800.
AADT on US-71 south of Grannis is 3900.

AADT on US-71 through Bella Vista is in the 30,000 range.

As much as I loathe to admit it, 71 could stand the at least be 4-laned in a few more areas.

[planxtymcgillicuddy]

49 is gonna be Arkansas' answer to I-74 through NC. I doubt highly that 49 gets any farther south than Barling, at least in our lifetimes.

[mvak36]

49 is gonna be Arkansas' answer to I-74 through NC. I doubt highly that 49 gets any farther south than Barling, at least in our lifetimes.

Yes. I figure best case in my lifetime it will be two segments (KC-Barling and Texarkana-New Orleans).

[planxtymcgillicuddy]

49 is gonna be Arkansas' answer to I-74 through NC. I doubt highly that 49 gets any farther south than Barling, at least in our lifetimes.

Yes. I figure best case in my lifetime it will be two segments (KC-Barling and Texarkana-New Orleans).

49 does not need to be extended to New Orleans. I-10 already does the job between Lafayette and NOLA. If they're hellbent on building 49 southward, have it end at Fort Smith on 40, and renumber the Louisiana portion to I-51 or I-53.

[mvak36]

49 is gonna be Arkansas' answer to I-74 through NC. I doubt highly that 49 gets any farther south than Barling, at least in our lifetimes.

Yes. I figure best case in my lifetime it will be two segments (KC-Barling and Texarkana-New Orleans).

49 does not need to be extended to New Orleans. I-10 already does the job between Lafayette and NOLA. If they're hellbent on building 49 southward, have it end at Fort Smith on 40, and renumber the Louisiana portion to I-51 or I-53.

I think they're already planning to build it to there. The routing through Lafayette is the only hold up.

[planxtymcgillicuddy]

49 is gonna be Arkansas' answer to I-74 through NC. I doubt highly that 49 gets any farther south than Barling, at least in our lifetimes.

Yes. I figure best case in my lifetime it will be two segments (KC-Barling and Texarkana-New Orleans).

49 does not need to be extended to New Orleans. I-10 already does the job between Lafayette and NOLA. If they're hellbent on building 49 southward, have it end at Fort Smith on 40, and renumber the Louisiana portion to I-51 or I-53.

I think they're already planning to build it to there. The routing through Lafayette is the only hold up.

If it were up to me, that Lafayette-to-NOLA portion would be a spur route of I-10 (I-810?).....or, even pull a Texas and have I-10N over I-12 (freeing up the number for a possible corridor), I-10C on 10's current routing, and I-10S on the proposed 49 section.

[Bobby5280]

49 does not need to be extended to New Orleans. I-10 already does the job between Lafayette and NOLA. If they're hellbent on building 49 southward, have it end at Fort Smith on 40, and renumber the Louisiana portion to I-51 or I-53.

Actually I-10 really doesn't do the job. It certainly does not serve all the traffic needs for both the I-10 corridor and the US-90 corridor farther South.

I-10 East of Lafayette to New Orleans becomes its own bottleneck of sorts, thanks to those long, aging bridges with only 2 lanes in each direction. That capacity is barely efficient for I-10 traffic loads while weather and traffic conditions are good. It's another matter if a hurricane is moving toward the area and big numbers of people are trying to get the hell out of Dodge.

One of the selling points of I-49 South is an alternative hurricane evacuation route. The Westbank side of the New Orleans metro is home to a lot of people. A completed I-49 to those Westbank suburbs would give those folks a good alternate exit route. There's only 2 bridges across the Mississippi in the immediate New Orleans area. And the I-310 crossing is way out on the Western outskirts of the metro.

Next point: there is a hell of a lot of oil business and other kinds of commerce in far South Louisiana. The US-90 corridor is already Interstate quality along many segments and 4-laned at the minimum along the entire route between Lafayette and New Orleans. Just from the perspective of aiding business it's totally valid to convert US-90 to full Interstate quality between Lafayette and New Orleans.

As to the route numbering, well even I have my own problems with the I-49 designation. People leaving New Orleans on I-49 "North" will actually be driving more Southward. The whole segment between Lafayette and New Orleans is really more of an East-West route. Long ago I thought I-6 might be a good designation. It's possible I-6 may eventually end up linking Laredo and Corpus Christi. Hell, we could have two I-6 routes! One in Texas and one in Louisiana.

We already have permanently separate duplicate routes for I-74, I-76, I-84, I-86, I-88 and now I-87. I-66 almost had 2 duplicate routes. I-69 will probably have a lot of separated stubs and major route segments for a very long time. I-39 would be 2 duplicate routes if not for the only triple concurrency in the whole Interstate system. I-49 has two separate routes too, but there is a realistic yet long term shot at joining those two I-49 routes.

OTOH, I prefer conservative use of Interstate route designations. I-49 as a thru-route through Lafayette points down the US-90 corridor and eventually over to New Orleans. In the end, I don't think an extension of I-49 is going to be a problem.

I think they're already planning to build it to there. The routing through Lafayette is the only hold up.

While construction hasn't begun yet on the Lafayette Connector plans are pretty advanced on it and may be final by 2021. Meanwhile construction is proceeding on other upgrades South of Lafayette. ROW is already secure on much of the US-90 corridor between Lafayette and New Orleans. A short stretch in Avondale could be tricky. Boutte & Paradis would need some kind of bypass. Interstate quality upgrades the rest of the way into Lafayette would be fairly easy due to the already wide path of US-90 and ample property set backs in place.

Honestly, I think the I-49 South project could be completed well ahead of the segment between Fort Smith and Texarkana.

[Anthony_JK]

49 is gonna be Arkansas' answer to I-74 through NC. I doubt highly that 49 gets any farther south than Barling, at least in our lifetimes.

Yes. I figure best case in my lifetime it will be two segments (KC-Barling and Texarkana-New Orleans).

49 does not need to be extended to New Orleans. I-10 already does the job between Lafayette and NOLA. If they're hellbent on building 49 southward, have it end at Fort Smith on 40, and renumber the Louisiana portion to I-51 or I-53.

Thems. Fighting. Words.

US 90 between Lafayette and New Orleans was originally built to ultimately become a freeway. Other than the Evangeline Thruway corridor in Lafayette and the Wax Lake to the Atchafalaya River bridge segment near Morgan City, the corridor between Lafayette and Morgan City was designed to be a freeway; it was only originally built as expressway with upgradability. That process is nearly complete.

The section of US 90 from Morgan City to Raceland was built directly to freeway standards from the very beginning.

I-49 South is fully justifiable on safety and economic reasons on its own, but if you really think that the Atchafalaya Basin section of I-10 and the slog through BTR is adequate enough for Lafayette to NOLA, then can I interest you in some prime Mojave Desert swampland?



My apologies for the threadjacking, but I gotta defend my region's most important project.

[mvak36]

49 is gonna be Arkansas' answer to I-74 through NC. I doubt highly that 49 gets any farther south than Barling, at least in our lifetimes.

Yes. I figure best case in my lifetime it will be two segments (KC-Barling and Texarkana-New Orleans).

49 does not need to be extended to New Orleans. I-10 already does the job between Lafayette and NOLA. If they're hellbent on building 49 southward, have it end at Fort Smith on 40, and renumber the Louisiana portion to I-51 or I-53.

Thems. Fighting. Words.

US 90 between Lafayette and New Orleans was originally built to ultimately become a freeway. Other than the Evangeline Thruway corridor in Lafayette and the Wax Lake to the Atchafalaya River bridge segment near Morgan City, the corridor between Lafayette and Morgan City was designed to be a freeway; it was only originally built as expressway with upgradability. That process is nearly complete.

The section of US 90 from Morgan City to Raceland was built directly to freeway standards from the very beginning.

I-49 South is fully justifiable on safety and economic reasons on its own, but if you really think that the Atchafalaya Basin section of I-10 and the slog through BTR is adequate enough for Lafayette to NOLA, then can I interest you in some prime Mojave Desert swampland?



My apologies for the threadjacking, but I gotta defend my region's most important project.

Do you know of any updates of the I-49 Lafayette project? I figured I would ask since you live there.

[Anthony_JK]

49 is gonna be Arkansas' answer to I-74 through NC. I doubt highly that 49 gets any farther south than Barling, at least in our lifetimes.

Yes. I figure best case in my lifetime it will be two segments (KC-Barling and Texarkana-New Orleans).

49 does not need to be extended to New Orleans. I-10 already does the job between Lafayette and NOLA. If they're hellbent on building 49 southward, have it end at Fort Smith on 40, and renumber the Louisiana portion to I-51 or I-53.

Thems. Fighting. Words.

US 90 between Lafayette and New Orleans was originally built to ultimately become a freeway. Other than the Evangeline Thruway corridor in Lafayette and the Wax Lake to the Atchafalaya River bridge segment near Morgan City, the corridor between Lafayette and Morgan City was designed to be a freeway; it was only originally built as expressway with upgradability. That process is nearly complete.

The section of US 90 from Morgan City to Raceland was built directly to freeway standards from the very beginning.

I-49 South is fully justifiable on safety and economic reasons on its own, but if you really think that the Atchafalaya Basin section of I-10 and the slog through BTR is adequate enough for Lafayette to NOLA, then can I interest you in some prime Mojave Desert swampland?



My apologies for the threadjacking, but I gotta defend my region's most important project.

Do you know of any updates of the I-49 Lafayette project? I figured I would ask since you live there.

In the interest of getting this thread back to it's proper subject (I-49 in MO), I'll simply divert my answer to you over here:

https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=16929.msg2455657#new

[US71]

The section of US 90 from Morgan City to Raceland was built directly to freeway standards from the very beginning.

I-49 South is fully justifiable on safety and economic reasons on its own, but if you really think that the Atchafalaya Basin section of I-10 and the slog through BTR is adequate enough for Lafayette to NOLA, then can I interest you in some prime Mojave Desert swampland?

So why not make it 4-Lane US 90? Why must it be I-49?

[Bobby5280]

Why upgrade US-90 to I-49 South? Look at the reasons I listed in my previous post up-thread (#939). Throw in the factor of safety for good measure. Big chunks of the corridor are already Interstate quality. The rest of it is long overdue for upgrading.

[US71]

Why upgrade US-90 to I-49 South? Look at the reasons I listed in my previous post up-thread (#939). Throw in the factor of safety for good measure. Big chunks of the corridor are already Interstate quality. The rest of it is long overdue for upgrading.

Why can't this be accomplished by simply upgrading US 90? Simply because it's more federal $$ ?

[Bobby5280]

It doesn't make much difference to me how the highway is labeled, just so long as it's 100% Interstate quality from Lafayette to the Westbank side of New Orleans. The actual highway upgrades are the important part. Sticking an Interstate shield on it is just icing on the cake for communities along the corridor.

[kphoger]

So, specifically, what issues would not be solved by simply four-laning US-90 that would be solved by making it Interstate-quality?

[MikieTimT]

So, specifically, what issues would not be solved by simply four-laning US-90 that would be solved by making it Interstate-quality?

As long as access is maintained to those along the route, limited access is safer and can be signed faster, and having the Interstate shield is required for certain businesses/industries to move into an area, so it makes more sense to seek out Interstate status than not.  I don't know if contraflow is any easier or harder on non-limited access 4-lanes for the sake of evacuation, though.  Not every US highway needs to converted to an Interstate, but there are certainly some gaps in the IHS from its development through the late 60's that have been exacerbated by migration/immigration into the southern half of the U.S., so there are some upgrades and new terrain additions that are certainly warranted.

[sprjus4]

So, specifically, what issues would not be solved by simply four-laning US-90 that would be solved by making it Interstate-quality?

Urban segments thru towns and thru the heart of Lafayette is major chokepoints.

The rural areas are already 4-lane, a lot freeway, the remaining limited-access with cross roads.

Closing the intersections to make it continuous freeway and allow 70 mph speed limits in those areas with select cross roads would be beneficial, and then the remainder would involve bypassing / upgrading US-90 to freeway standards in towns and Lafayette which has benefits that speak for itself.

These factors combined, it's logical that the entire corridor should ultimately be built to freeway standards, not merely 4-lane which it already is. The majority of the cost is spent on bypasses and the Lafayette upgrade, the rural areas have minuscule costs compared to them.

Then to top it off, place the I-49 designation along the corridor.