Print

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

[Anthony_JK]

Sad to say a horrific accident aka a T-Bone of a school bus at the Gregory light will change things. That light is set up that bad and it's only a matter of time. One person in KC holds the power to change things and he is a Congressman who could get it done with a stroke of a pen. EC controls all the neighborhoods in that area and would be able to by sheer will turn them around. As I have said before I am positive those lights will go away. Too many accidents and too much death at those lights.

I'm not so sure of that...the residents of that neighborhood and the judge who created that consent decree would have some say in whether or not it can be modified to allow for freeway construction. It's not all on Rep. Cleaver.

As much as I'd like to see that segment completed and upgraded, I have to cede to the community's wishes.


Anthony

[US71]

If somebody sues the state because of an accident at these lights and wins, does that court ruling trump the previous court ruling?

Only if enough people complain that MoDOT or the KC Street Department should "do something" to make it safer. Then it will take at least 5 years to come up with a workable solution, which will be out of date and 5 more years to come up with something else

[Gordon]

Where is 3 trails Crossing? One of the articles on MODOT site says I 49 signs will start at 3 Trails and end where the Bella Vista Bypass will Start. I can't find where it intersects 71 Hwy.

[Grzrd]

Sad to say a horrific accident aka a T-Bone of a school bus at the Gregory light will change things.

If somebody sues the state because of an accident at these lights and wins, does that court ruling trump the previous court ruling?

I reviewed an old post in this thread and it appears that everyone acknowledges that the lights create an unsafe situation, but it will literally take a "Big One" like a T-boned school bus resulting in fatalities for MoDOT to work up the courage to approach the court for a "safety exception" to the consent decree.  Apparently, high percentages of crashes and non-fatal injuries are not enough:  

In an approximate 10-minute "KC Currents" broadcast, the interviewed MoDOT representative acknowledges that Watkins Drive has a much higher average number of "rear-enders" than other highways in Missouri, BUT, in terms of fatalities, the freeway north of 55th has the highest fatality rate.  For this reason, it seems like MoDOT cannot approach the court for a "safety" exception to the court order:

KCUR FM Audio - "No Change In Store For Controversial Bruce R. Watkins Drive"

... According to the Missouri Department of Transportation, the stretch between 55th Street and Gregory averages 277 accidents per hundred million vehicle miles, higher than the state average of 170 accidents for similar roadway types ....
To paraphrase the representative from the community when questioned about the "rear-ender" statisitcs, "If you don't want an accident; don't drive the road".

EMAIL RESPONSE FROM KCSTAR WATCHDOG

Over the years, we have monitored accidents there precisely because of the stop lights, but we have not developed an ironclad case that it is a death zone ... There was a recent horrific crash on Gregory Boulevard at Watkins Drive that killed a little boy .... The death zone idea is intriguing ....
ARF!

[US71]

Where is 3 trails Crossing? One of the articles on MODOT site says I 49 signs will start at 3 Trails and end where the Bella Vista Bypass will Start. I can't find where it intersects 71 Hwy.

It used to be "Grandview Triangle": where US 71/I-435/I-470 (and US 50) all meet

[Henry]

I also am positive that enough folks will realize the folly of those lights. Like I said before when I lived in KC. I avoided those lights and that stretch at all costs.

When I lived at 71 and Bannister, I would take Prospect to work when I had to be at work at 8 because it was actually quicker than 71.  Those lights are an abomination.  One day they will be gone.  The court settlement will be overturned.  The demographics of neighborhoods change.

Court decisions that allow a portion of a highway project to be built while keeping restrictions on its design take years to be overturned. Can anyone cite a similar situation where something similar to the originally proposed highway has been built, overturning a court decision?

Watkins Drive (U.S. 71) in Kansas City will become a full freeway that can receive an interstate designation about the time I-35E in St. Paul loses its 45 mph speed limit and truck restrictions.

Which could take years, but hopefully not too many. The freeway loop of I-29/I-35/I-70/I-670 is a far better endpoint for this Interstate-to-be than I-435.

[J N Winkler]

Where is 3 trails Crossing? One of the articles on MODOT site says I 49 signs will start at 3 Trails and end where the Bella Vista Bypass will Start. I can't find where it intersects 71 Hwy.

"Three Trails Crossing" is the new lipstick-on-a-pig name for the Grandview Triangle, where US 71 crosses I-435 and where the I-49 overlap on US 71 will have its northern end.

[InterstateNG]

I also am positive that enough folks will realize the folly of those lights. Like I said before when I lived in KC. I avoided those lights and that stretch at all costs.

When I lived at 71 and Bannister, I would take Prospect to work when I had to be at work at 8 because it was actually quicker than 71.  Those lights are an abomination.  One day they will be gone.  The court settlement will be overturned.  The demographics of neighborhoods change.

Court decisions that allow a portion of a highway project to be built while keeping restrictions on its design take years to be overturned. Can anyone cite a similar situation where something similar to the originally proposed highway has been built, overturning a court decision?

Watkins Drive (U.S. 71) in Kansas City will become a full freeway that can receive an interstate designation about the time I-35E in St. Paul loses its 45 mph speed limit and truck restrictions.

Which could take years, but hopefully not too many. The freeway loop of I-29/I-35/I-70/I-670 is a far better endpoint for this Interstate-to-be than I-435.

If a key reason to extend 49 is to allow for better truck movement from New Orleans to Central and Western Canada then ending it at 435 makes a lot of sense.

[pj3970]

I also am positive that enough folks will realize the folly of those lights. Like I said before when I lived in KC. I avoided those lights and that stretch at all costs.

When I lived at 71 and Bannister, I would take Prospect to work when I had to be at work at 8 because it was actually quicker than 71.  Those lights are an abomination.  One day they will be gone.  The court settlement will be overturned.  The demographics of neighborhoods change.

Court decisions that allow a portion of a highway project to be built while keeping restrictions on its design take years to be overturned. Can anyone cite a similar situation where something similar to the originally proposed highway has been built, overturning a court decision?

Watkins Drive (U.S. 71) in Kansas City will become a full freeway that can receive an interstate designation about the time I-35E in St. Paul loses its 45 mph speed limit and truck restrictions.

Which could take years, but hopefully not too many. The freeway loop of I-29/I-35/I-70/I-670 is a far better endpoint for this Interstate-to-be than I-435.

If a key reason to extend 49 is to allow for better truck movement from New Orleans to Central and Western Canada then ending it at 435 makes a lot of sense.

Well, couldn't they just extend 49 over 435 to end at either 70 by the stadiums, 35 by Worlds of Fun, or 29 by KCI

[Henry]

I also am positive that enough folks will realize the folly of those lights. Like I said before when I lived in KC. I avoided those lights and that stretch at all costs.

When I lived at 71 and Bannister, I would take Prospect to work when I had to be at work at 8 because it was actually quicker than 71.  Those lights are an abomination.  One day they will be gone.  The court settlement will be overturned.  The demographics of neighborhoods change.

Court decisions that allow a portion of a highway project to be built while keeping restrictions on its design take years to be overturned. Can anyone cite a similar situation where something similar to the originally proposed highway has been built, overturning a court decision?

Watkins Drive (U.S. 71) in Kansas City will become a full freeway that can receive an interstate designation about the time I-35E in St. Paul loses its 45 mph speed limit and truck restrictions.

Which could take years, but hopefully not too many. The freeway loop of I-29/I-35/I-70/I-670 is a far better endpoint for this Interstate-to-be than I-435.

If a key reason to extend 49 is to allow for better truck movement from New Orleans to Central and Western Canada then ending it at 435 makes a lot of sense.

Well, couldn't they just extend 49 over 435 to end at either 70 by the stadiums, 35 by Worlds of Fun, or 29 by KCI

That would be another way to go.

[lamsalfl]

http://www.neoshodailynews.com/news/x720910752/Highway-to-change-name-soon

Article about US 71 being renamed I-49 in Missouri in 2012.

[lamsalfl]

It makes sense to use I-49 and not I-29 as the extension number because 49 fits better into the grid, and I-49 passes through far larger/important cities (including KC) and ports than I-29. 

[Henry]

It makes sense to use I-49 and not I-29 as the extension number because 49 fits better into the grid, and I-49 passes through far larger/important cities (including KC) and ports than I-29. 

You are correct on that count! Then I-29 could be used for a corridor further west, serving Wichita, Topeka, Sioux Falls, Fargo and Grand Forks if a new freeway through northern Kansas and eastern Nebraska is ever built.

[pj3970]

It makes sense to use I-49 and not I-29 as the extension number because 49 fits better into the grid, and I-49 passes through far larger/important cities (including KC) and ports than I-29. 

You are correct on that count! Then I-29 could be used for a corridor further west, serving Wichita, Topeka, Sioux Falls, Fargo and Grand Forks if a new freeway through northern Kansas and eastern Nebraska is ever built.

I agree on that 100%...besides the way I-35 runs through the region, numbering it I-49 fits the grid much better than I-29

[lamsalfl]

Not to be a buzzkill, but there will likely never be a great renumbering of the system where I-29 would be removed from hundreds of miles of interstate for a new terrain route.  That said, it's obvious I'm in support of I-49 being used from the NOLA to Lafayette segment.  In fact, I'm fine with it being labelled east/west even though it's an odd number.  Sometimes, things are what they are.  Now small reroutes like I-85 around the southside of Montgomery, sure, that's much easier.

[The High Plains Traveler]

It makes sense to use I-49 and not I-29 as the extension number because 49 fits better into the grid, and I-49 passes through far larger/important cities (including KC) and ports than I-29. 

You are correct on that count! Then I-29 could be used for a corridor further west, serving Wichita, Topeka, Sioux Falls, Fargo and Grand Forks if a new freeway through northern Kansas and eastern Nebraska is ever built.

Sounds as if you're referring to an extension and renumbering of I-135. I just don't see a justification for turning U.S. 81 into an interstate-quality freeway from Salina to York. I do agree I-29 is the route that's out of place, even given the eastward tilt of I-35; it should have been I-31 or 33, leaving a little system expansion room.  I would find turning it into I-49 more than a little jarring, though, since you go way east into Wisconsin and find I-43.

[Henry]

It makes sense to use I-49 and not I-29 as the extension number because 49 fits better into the grid, and I-49 passes through far larger/important cities (including KC) and ports than I-29. 

You are correct on that count! Then I-29 could be used for a corridor further west, serving Wichita, Topeka, Sioux Falls, Fargo and Grand Forks if a new freeway through northern Kansas and eastern Nebraska is ever built.

Sounds as if you're referring to an extension and renumbering of I-135. I just don't see a justification for turning U.S. 81 into an interstate-quality freeway from Salina to York. I do agree I-29 is the route that's out of place, even given the eastward tilt of I-35; it should have been I-31 or 33, leaving a little system expansion room.  I would find turning it into I-49 more than a little jarring, though, since you go way east into Wisconsin and find I-43.

That's exactly what I was referring to! In fact, I made a proposal based on that route in the Fictional Highways section.

And don't forget I-39 that also exists in Wisconsin, as well as Illinois.

[ShawnP]

Would this work? How about blocking the cross roads in KC on the Watkins. No Interchanges but block the cross roads to form a solid flow of traffic. Just a ideal to kick around.

[Scott5114]

Hey, J.N., do you have the plans for the I-49 shields that are going up? Any word on state name/no?

[J N Winkler]

Scott--I believe the independent-mount I-49 shields will have the state name while the guide-sign shields won't, because that is what is shown in the relevant MoDOT standard plan sheets.

MoDOT, like most state DOTs, does not consider route shields to be designable signs, so design details for shields tend to be in the standard plans if they have not been hived out to a separate sign drawings book.  Unlike Kansas DOT, MnDOT, and a number of other state DOTs, MoDOT does not bind the relevant standard plans with a construction plans set, so the big I-49 signing contract basically has sign panel details only for the large guide signs plus sign summary sheets giving quantities and locations for independent-mount shield assemblies.  The contractor will almost certainly be instructed to refer to the (separate) standard plans to fabricate these.

A slight fly in the ointment is that the current version of the highway standard plan sheets became effective only 11 days ago.  I don't know if the contractor will be expected to use the old standard plan sheets because those were what was in force at the time the contract was awarded.  I also don't know if the design for the independent-mount Interstate shield changed as part of this revision.  I suspect not, but I cannot confirm since MoDOT does not seem to archive obsolete standard plan sheets online.

[oscar]

Would this work? How about blocking the cross roads in KC on the Watkins. No Interchanges but block the cross roads to form a solid flow of traffic. Just a ideal to kick around.

Wouldn't that further slice up the community through which the Watkins passes, by making it harder to cross the Watkins from one side to the other?  Wasn't that effect on the community part of the opposition to making the Watkins a freeway in the first place?

[bugo]

Would this work? How about blocking the cross roads in KC on the Watkins. No Interchanges but block the cross roads to form a solid flow of traffic. Just a ideal to kick around.

Wouldn't that further slice up the community through which the Watkins passes, by making it harder to cross the Watkins from one side to the other?  Wasn't that effect on the community part of the opposition to making the Watkins a freeway in the first place?

That's what they said.  Even though bridges would have linked the community much better than at grades.  The real reason this road was built like it was is so Cleaver could "stick it to whitey."  Comments like "this is a white man's road going through a black man's neighborhood" is proof of this.  Funny, but I've always seen plenty of African Americans use this highway.

[ShawnP]

Well spoken Bugo. Sad thing is more and more black folks are dying on the Watkins from those intersections. I dislike those lights so much if they were replaced by Interchanges. I wouldn't mind if they didn't extend I-49 to downtown KC. Gotta get rid of those deathtraps.

[US71]

As of today, there are NO I-49 signs yet along US 71 between Pineville and I-44 at Joplin, nor along I-44 between 71 South and 71 North.

I will attempt to check 71 from I-44 to Carthage later in the week.

UPDATE:
There are 2/10 mile markers beginning at I-44. They are currently turned 90 degrees away from traffic.

I didn't note all of them between I-44 and Carthage, but only a few:

MM 46.6 I-44 West/US 71 South

MM 47.2 Cedar Road

MM 50.6 Fir Rd/ Route HH

MM 53.4 Central Ave / MO 96/MO 571/MO 171

There are no independent markers or exit signs at this time.

Still NO mile markers south of I-44.

[bearcat97]

They have added the 2/10 mile markers turned away from traffic in the Grandview/Belton area just south of Kansas City and are warning people of delays next week to add more signage.