I-49 Inner-city Connector(Shreveport)

[Life in Paradise]

I'm not in this thread much, so this may have an answered, why is looping it such a bad idea? 

The west end of I-220 goes over Cross Lake, which is a major source of drinking water for Shreveport.  This would cause problems if there were to be a fuel spill or major accident.  LA 3132 isn't currently interstate-compatible, and would have to be upgraded.  It would likely cost more to do that than the construction of the ICC on I-49.

I-220 is also designated as a I-20 bypass route, and carries a lot of local traffic as well. Constructing I-49 doesn't eliminate the issue of Cross Lake.

LA-3132 is virtually interstate standards, minor upgrades may be required but in no way would it equal or exceed the cost of a new urban interstate highway.

Might have to change exit ramps from I-49 to the new route to show continuity, make the current stretch of I-49 downtown to perhaps I-149, order up new mileage signs for the rest of the way north (or wait until they make I-49 from Lafayette to New Orleans on US 90's route and do the entire thing at once).

[bwana39]

I'm not in this thread much, so this may have an answered, why is looping it such a bad idea? 

Bottom line is that the cross country element of I-49 is not significantly improved by the completion of the ICC> Capacity of I-220 (and to a lesser extent LA-3132) is pretty well maxxed out. By itself, expanding the cross lake bridge on I-220 would cost more than the entire ICC.

The real issue is the ICC as a local transportation item. Downtown Shreveport needs access from North Bossier. Airline  Drive and Benton Road are both slammed. Market Street is not as busy, but still not ideal. The connector is needed to keep downtown Shreveport (and resultantly Shreveport as a whole) relevant.

[bwana39]

I'm not in this thread much, so this may have an answered, why is looping it such a bad idea? 

The west end of I-220 goes over Cross Lake, which is a major source of drinking water for Shreveport.  This would cause problems if there were to be a fuel spill or major accident.  LA 3132 isn't currently interstate-compatible, and would have to be upgraded.  It would likely cost more to do that than the construction of the ICC on I-49.

I-220 is also designated as a I-20 bypass route, and carries a lot of local traffic as well. Constructing I-49 doesn't eliminate the issue of Cross Lake.

LA-3132 is virtually interstate standards, minor upgrades may be required but in no way would it equal or exceed the cost of a new urban interstate highway.

Might have to change exit ramps from I-49 to the new route to show continuity, make the current stretch of I-49 downtown to perhaps I-149, order up new mileage signs for the rest of the way north (or wait until they make I-49 from Lafayette to New Orleans on US 90's route and do the entire thing at once).

The entirety of LA-3132 would have to be repaved and hard shoulders added. This needs done anyway, but.... The Jewella and Mansfield road intersections would have to be redone. The curve just south of Mansfield road is too sharp and would have to be rejiggered.  The intersection with I-20 has really bad geometry. There is a 45 mph element in the through movement from I-200 SB to LA-3132 SB. While it is not prohibitive and as a (mostly) no build / upgrade (but not expand) solution it would likely be less expensive than any ICC options.