AARoads Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

New rules for political content in signatures and user profiles. See this thread for details.

Author Topic: I-69 in MS  (Read 83082 times)

abqtraveler

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 340
  • US-85 runs thru Albuquerque, but only on paper

  • Location: Albuquerque, NM
  • Last Login: August 10, 2020, 11:57:56 PM
Re: I-69 in MS
« Reply #200 on: July 30, 2020, 08:50:52 AM »

You won't see any more I-69 work in Mississippi until you start seeing significant and larger Federal outlays to the states for roadwork.  MDOT can't afford it on their own.

Mississippi can't afford to maintain the roads and bridges they currently have. Look at the hundreds of bridges that are either closed or weight restricted because they need to be replaced, but there's no money to replace them.
Logged
2-d Interstates traveled:  4, 5, 8, 10, 15, 20, 24, 25, 27, 29, 35, 37, 39, 40, 41, 43, 45, 49, 55, 57, 64, 65, 66, 69, 70, 71, 74, 75, 76(E), 77, 78, 81, 83, 85, 87(N), 89, 90, 91, 93, 94, 95

2-d Interstates Clinched:  12, 22, 30, 44, 59, 80, 84(E), 86(E), 238, H1, H2, H3, H201

I-55

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 55
  • "We're in Mississippi now, bump your speed up"

  • Location: Indiana
  • Last Login: August 10, 2020, 11:23:19 PM
Re: I-69 in MS
« Reply #201 on: July 30, 2020, 11:55:40 AM »

You won't see any more I-69 work in Mississippi until you start seeing significant and larger Federal outlays to the states for roadwork.  MDOT can't afford it on their own.

Mississippi can't afford to maintain the roads and bridges they currently have. Look at the hundreds of bridges that are either closed or weight restricted because they need to be replaced, but there's no money to replace them.

Mississippi's lack of funding is evident in their police as well. For the number of times I've driven from Southaven to Jackson and from Jackson to Tuscaloosa I am surprised I have yet to see a cop on either route. It explains why Mississippi has the lowest speed enforcement and some of the faster freeway drivers. But with the design of the interstates in rural MS, they could easily handle speed limits of 80 or higher, which would likely generate revenue (not much but still more) via gas taxes to maybe help fund projects like I-69 or any of the roads connecting Lakeland Dr to I-20 in Rankin County.

I don't expect any more work on I-69 in MS until it is a complete route from Memphis to Indianapolis. Mississippi ain't  just going to build I-69 until there is pressure from neighboring states to complete it, especially not with the financial issues preventing MDOT from fixing roads that already exist
Logged
I have Unbridled Spirit driving on the Crossroads of America to the Heart of Dixie. I listen to the Soundtrack of America as I receive the South's Warmest Welcome, then driving Hog Wild to Show Me through the Land of Lincoln, back through the Bluegrass to Almost Heaven, and I Found it Here.

Finrod

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 249
  • Age: 51
  • Location: Atlanta GA
  • Last Login: August 10, 2020, 02:03:20 PM
Re: I-69 in MS
« Reply #202 on: August 01, 2020, 09:35:07 PM »

I agree with the general sentiments expressed here so far; Mississippi is unlikely to do anything further with I-69 until there's movement on the river bridge, and I don't think anything will happen there until Arkansas finishes acquiring ROW from Monticello to the state line-- which they are progressing on, but slowly.  At that point Arkansas will have 40 miles of ROW ready to slap an interstate onto, with a connection to an I-530 extension likely as well, whereas Mississippi presumably has most of what it needs for its unfinished I-69, save the money to actually build it.  Maybe we'll see some movement then.
Logged
Internet member since 1987.

Hate speech is a nonsense concept; the truth is hate speech to those that hate the truth.

People who use their free speech to try to silence others' free speech are dangerous fools.

sparker

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 7049
  • Location: Bay Area, CA
  • Last Login: Today at 04:53:08 AM
Re: I-69 in MS
« Reply #203 on: August 02, 2020, 04:46:04 AM »

I agree with the general sentiments expressed here so far; Mississippi is unlikely to do anything further with I-69 until there's movement on the river bridge, and I don't think anything will happen there until Arkansas finishes acquiring ROW from Monticello to the state line-- which they are progressing on, but slowly.  At that point Arkansas will have 40 miles of ROW ready to slap an interstate onto, with a connection to an I-530 extension likely as well, whereas Mississippi presumably has most of what it needs for its unfinished I-69, save the money to actually build it.  Maybe we'll see some movement then.

FWIW, north of Clarksburg I-69 was supposed to be constructed on new terrain slightly east and parallel to existing US 61.  But so far the segment south from there to near Cleveland, where it was to turn west toward the Mississippi River bridge, has received scant if any attention regarding alignment (overlaying US 61 or a resumption of new-terrain format) -- or much of anything.  Has there been any mention of any existing studies -- or has any activity, including the most preliminary regarding such alignment, been postponed or even shelved for the time being?  My best guess is that it's something that has been "kicked down the road" for the 25 years it's been a future Interstate corridor simply because there's little or no money for studies much less ROW acquisition or any other field activity.  But posters from the region may know otherwise! 
Logged

Anthony_JK

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1380
  • Age: 56
  • Location: Lafayette, Louisiana
  • Last Login: August 09, 2020, 10:24:46 AM
Re: I-69 in MS
« Reply #204 on: August 02, 2020, 10:43:37 AM »

IIRC, that segment was originally supposed to be a direct overlay/conversion/upgrade of existing US 61/US 49 to Interstate grade.
Logged

sparker

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 7049
  • Location: Bay Area, CA
  • Last Login: Today at 04:53:08 AM
Re: I-69 in MS
« Reply #205 on: August 02, 2020, 09:05:06 PM »

IIRC, that segment was originally supposed to be a direct overlay/conversion/upgrade of existing US 61/US 49 to Interstate grade.


Makes sense -- GSV shows most of the towns already bypassed by an expressway-grade US 61;  avoidance of as much ROW acquisition as is feasible would make the eventual project more fiscally viable. 
Logged

abqtraveler

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 340
  • US-85 runs thru Albuquerque, but only on paper

  • Location: Albuquerque, NM
  • Last Login: August 10, 2020, 11:57:56 PM
Re: I-69 in MS
« Reply #206 on: August 03, 2020, 10:50:40 AM »

IIRC, that segment was originally supposed to be a direct overlay/conversion/upgrade of existing US 61/US 49 to Interstate grade.


Makes sense -- GSV shows most of the towns already bypassed by an expressway-grade US 61;  avoidance of as much ROW acquisition as is feasible would make the eventual project more fiscally viable.

Since they already have the ROD signed for the segment that includes Clarksdale, I'm a bit surprised that MDOT isn't going after some low-hanging fruit in the form of making incremental upgrades to sections of US-61 that I-69 will eventually encompass. I could see simple upgrades, like widening shoulders that could occur during resurfacing projects, while some grade separations and utility relocations could also be done at a relatively low cost.
Logged
2-d Interstates traveled:  4, 5, 8, 10, 15, 20, 24, 25, 27, 29, 35, 37, 39, 40, 41, 43, 45, 49, 55, 57, 64, 65, 66, 69, 70, 71, 74, 75, 76(E), 77, 78, 81, 83, 85, 87(N), 89, 90, 91, 93, 94, 95

2-d Interstates Clinched:  12, 22, 30, 44, 59, 80, 84(E), 86(E), 238, H1, H2, H3, H201

sparker

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 7049
  • Location: Bay Area, CA
  • Last Login: Today at 04:53:08 AM
Re: I-69 in MS
« Reply #207 on: August 03, 2020, 03:44:10 PM »

IIRC, that segment was originally supposed to be a direct overlay/conversion/upgrade of existing US 61/US 49 to Interstate grade.


Makes sense -- GSV shows most of the towns already bypassed by an expressway-grade US 61;  avoidance of as much ROW acquisition as is feasible would make the eventual project more fiscally viable.

Since they already have the ROD signed for the segment that includes Clarksdale, I'm a bit surprised that MDOT isn't going after some low-hanging fruit in the form of making incremental upgrades to sections of US-61 that I-69 will eventually encompass. I could see simple upgrades, like widening shoulders that could occur during resurfacing projects, while some grade separations and utility relocations could also be done at a relatively low cost.

Even simple upgrades such as described carry costs that MDOT just can't handle along with regular maintenance of the routes under their jurisdiction.  Such improvements would have to be programmed years in advance within the state's STIP program, which out of necessity spreads such things around the state.  As far as any new freeway development, MS "blew its wad" with the I-69 spur, I-269, and the upgrades to US 78 to make it I-22; combined, that was a huge level of expenditure for a perennially strapped agency; even though those projects received an 80% federal share, coming up with the additional 20% has always been the stumbling block for large-scale projects -- the basic reason why Interstate additions -- on a nationwide basis -- are relatively few and far between. 
Logged

froggie

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 11158
  • Location: Greensboro, VT
  • Last Login: Today at 11:12:06 AM
    • Froggie's Place
Re: I-69 in MS
« Reply #208 on: August 04, 2020, 10:09:35 AM »

^ It wasn't just the freeway projects you mentioned.  Mississippi's entire 4-laning program (i.e. US 45, US 82, MS 25, etc etc) is now coming of an age where it needs significant maintenance, and funding that maintenance was never considered when the state Legislature approved the program in 1987 and subsequently expanded it in 2001.
Logged

edwaleni

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 741
  • Last Login: August 10, 2020, 04:33:48 PM
Re: I-69 in MS
« Reply #209 on: August 04, 2020, 01:33:59 PM »

IIRC, that segment was originally supposed to be a direct overlay/conversion/upgrade of existing US 61/US 49 to Interstate grade.


Makes sense -- GSV shows most of the towns already bypassed by an expressway-grade US 61;  avoidance of as much ROW acquisition as is feasible would make the eventual project more fiscally viable.

Since they already have the ROD signed for the segment that includes Clarksdale, I'm a bit surprised that MDOT isn't going after some low-hanging fruit in the form of making incremental upgrades to sections of US-61 that I-69 will eventually encompass. I could see simple upgrades, like widening shoulders that could occur during resurfacing projects, while some grade separations and utility relocations could also be done at a relatively low cost.

Even simple upgrades such as described carry costs that MDOT just can't handle along with regular maintenance of the routes under their jurisdiction.  Such improvements would have to be programmed years in advance within the state's STIP program, which out of necessity spreads such things around the state.  As far as any new freeway development, MS "blew its wad" with the I-69 spur, I-269, and the upgrades to US 78 to make it I-22; combined, that was a huge level of expenditure for a perennially strapped agency; even though those projects received an 80% federal share, coming up with the additional 20% has always been the stumbling block for large-scale projects -- the basic reason why Interstate additions -- on a nationwide basis -- are relatively few and far between.

In the past 15 years MDOT has taken on a lot of planned and unplanned projects.

Hurricane Katrina required a replacement Biloxi Bay Bridge ($339 million)
US-82 bridge at Greenville ($336 million)
Bay St Louis Bridge restoration (cost unknown)
Completion of I-269/I-69 Bypass
I-55 Expansion in Madison County
I-22 from Fulton to Byhalia

The one thing is their reliance on Facebook for recent updates and no bid/project portal on the web. (But lots of stories about their commissioners)

This doesn't sound like a state teetering for money.
Logged

sprjus4

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 4689
  • Location: Hampton Roads, VA
  • Last Login: Today at 12:10:24 PM
Re: I-69 in MS
« Reply #210 on: August 04, 2020, 02:21:26 PM »

In the past 15 years MDOT has taken on a lot of planned and unplanned projects.

Hurricane Katrina required a replacement Biloxi Bay Bridge ($339 million)
US-82 bridge at Greenville ($336 million)
Bay St Louis Bridge restoration (cost unknown)
Completion of I-269/I-69 Bypass
I-55 Expansion in Madison County
I-22 from Fulton to Byhalia
Additionally, in the late 1990s and early 2000s, around 30 miles of I-10 through Gulfport and Biloxi were expanded to 6 lanes.
Logged

Echostatic

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 44
  • Concrete > Asphalt

  • Age: 14
  • Location: Austin, TX
  • Last Login: August 10, 2020, 07:33:57 PM
Re: I-69 in MS
« Reply #211 on: August 04, 2020, 02:34:10 PM »

Don't forget the I-55 three-laning from I-20 to Byram. That project had some serious cost overruns.

Hot Rod Hootenanny

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2051
  • Diplomat of Solid Sound

  • Age: 45
  • Location: Middle of Nowhere, Ohio
  • Last Login: August 05, 2020, 09:28:58 PM
    • 20th Century roadfan material
Re: I-69 in MS
« Reply #212 on: August 04, 2020, 07:15:32 PM »


In the past 15 years MDOT has taken on a lot of planned and unplanned projects.

Hurricane Katrina required a replacement Biloxi Bay Bridge ($339 million)
US-82 bridge at Greenville ($336 million)
Bay St Louis Bridge restoration (cost unknown)
Completion of I-269/I-69 Bypass
I-55 Expansion in Madison County
I-22 from Fulton to Byhalia

The one thing is their reliance on Facebook for recent updates and no bid/project portal on the web. (But lots of stories about their commissioners)

This doesn't sound like a state teetering for money.


How many of those projects were funded strictly through the state?
I'm pretty sure the Feds reimbursed Mississippi for anything Katrina related.
New US 82 bridge at Greenville, same thing.
Turning US 78 into I-22, how much of that was paid through the Appalachian corridors?

Even the Greenville - Leland bypass for US 82 only came back to life because the Mississippi got federal money to pay for it.

So that leaves widening I-55 north of Jackson, I-69/269, and as mentioned elsewhere, the 4-laning of many US highways within the state.

Cotton and tourism can't pay for every wish.
Logged
National Champion: 2001, 2002, 2004 x 2, 2008 X 3, 2009, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014 X 2, 2015 x 3, 2016, 2017, & 2019.
I was OSU-LSU, before OSU-LSU was cool.

sprjus4

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 4689
  • Location: Hampton Roads, VA
  • Last Login: Today at 12:10:24 PM
Re: I-69 in MS
« Reply #213 on: August 04, 2020, 07:21:26 PM »


In the past 15 years MDOT has taken on a lot of planned and unplanned projects.

Hurricane Katrina required a replacement Biloxi Bay Bridge ($339 million)
US-82 bridge at Greenville ($336 million)
Bay St Louis Bridge restoration (cost unknown)
Completion of I-269/I-69 Bypass
I-55 Expansion in Madison County
I-22 from Fulton to Byhalia

The one thing is their reliance on Facebook for recent updates and no bid/project portal on the web. (But lots of stories about their commissioners)

This doesn't sound like a state teetering for money.


How many of those projects were funded strictly through the state?
I'm pretty sure the Feds reimbursed Mississippi for anything Katrina related.
New US 82 bridge at Greenville, same thing.
Turning US 78 into I-22, how much of that was paid through the Appalachian corridors?

Even the Greenville - Leland bypass for US 82 only came back to life because the Mississippi got federal money to pay for it.

So that leaves widening I-55 north of Jackson, I-69/269, and as mentioned elsewhere, the 4-laning of many US highways within the state.

Cotton and tourism can't pay for every wish.
I-10?
Logged

Hot Rod Hootenanny

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2051
  • Diplomat of Solid Sound

  • Age: 45
  • Location: Middle of Nowhere, Ohio
  • Last Login: August 05, 2020, 09:28:58 PM
    • 20th Century roadfan material
Re: I-69 in MS
« Reply #214 on: August 04, 2020, 07:24:50 PM »

Logged
National Champion: 2001, 2002, 2004 x 2, 2008 X 3, 2009, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014 X 2, 2015 x 3, 2016, 2017, & 2019.
I was OSU-LSU, before OSU-LSU was cool.

edwaleni

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 741
  • Last Login: August 10, 2020, 04:33:48 PM
Re: I-69 in MS
« Reply #215 on: August 04, 2020, 09:03:57 PM »

MDOT Report on I-55 Expansion


Yes, I know its not I-69, but I wanted to show they seem to have money (somewhere)
Logged

sprjus4

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 4689
  • Location: Hampton Roads, VA
  • Last Login: Today at 12:10:24 PM
Re: I-69 in MS
« Reply #216 on: August 05, 2020, 12:48:05 AM »


I-10?

What about I-10?
30 miles of I-10 widening from 4 to 6 lanes between Gulfport and Biloxi in the early 2000s.
Logged

sparker

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 7049
  • Location: Bay Area, CA
  • Last Login: Today at 04:53:08 AM
Re: I-69 in MS
« Reply #217 on: August 05, 2020, 05:14:56 AM »

Turning US 78 into I-22, how much of that was paid through the Appalachian corridors?

The original 1980's US 78 freeway in MS was funded through ARC auspices; the upgrade to I-22 was eligible for up to the present maximum 80% federal share via its definition in the language authorizing High Priority Corridor #45 (2004), which appended the I-22 designation to the corridor.
Logged

abqtraveler

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 340
  • US-85 runs thru Albuquerque, but only on paper

  • Location: Albuquerque, NM
  • Last Login: August 10, 2020, 11:57:56 PM
Re: I-69 in MS
« Reply #218 on: August 05, 2020, 09:15:37 AM »

Turning US 78 into I-22, how much of that was paid through the Appalachian corridors?

The original 1980's US 78 freeway in MS was funded through ARC auspices; the upgrade to I-22 was eligible for up to the present maximum 80% federal share via its definition in the language authorizing High Priority Corridor #45 (2004), which appended the I-22 designation to the corridor.

Most of the projects listed in the thread above were largely covered by federal funds. Local tax revenues generated by the Tunica casinos were used to finance the completed section of I-69, while counties to the east fronted the money through the sale of bonds to complete I-269. But here's what I find baffling: Mississippi has a real problem coming up with the money to maintain its existing roads and bridges, let alone build new stuff, yet in the past 15 years there's hasn't been any real discussion among state lawmakers about raising revenue to rehabilitate and expand Mississippi's highway network.  Instead, the government of Mississippi has punted to either the federal government, or to counties and cities to pay the freight for road and bridge projects.

This goes back to the broader problem with the I-69 as a whole, where Congress passed legislation mandating its construction, yet provided no funding to states to get it built. Some states like Texas, Kentucky, and Indiana have figured out how to move their sections of I-69 forward, while the remaining states pretty much threw up their hands and are saying to the feds, "Either give us money to build I-69, or come down here and make us build it."
Logged
2-d Interstates traveled:  4, 5, 8, 10, 15, 20, 24, 25, 27, 29, 35, 37, 39, 40, 41, 43, 45, 49, 55, 57, 64, 65, 66, 69, 70, 71, 74, 75, 76(E), 77, 78, 81, 83, 85, 87(N), 89, 90, 91, 93, 94, 95

2-d Interstates Clinched:  12, 22, 30, 44, 59, 80, 84(E), 86(E), 238, H1, H2, H3, H201

GreenLanternCorps

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 335
  • What's behind me, is not important!

  • Age: 54
  • Location: Ohio
  • Last Login: Today at 10:17:45 AM
Re: I-69 in MS
« Reply #219 on: August 05, 2020, 10:15:18 AM »

Just for reference, I'm reposting the map of Future(?) I-69 in Mississippi from the first page of this thread, nine pages and nine years ago...

Logged

edwaleni

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 741
  • Last Login: August 10, 2020, 04:33:48 PM
Re: I-69 in MS
« Reply #220 on: August 05, 2020, 01:16:47 PM »

Mississippi has committed to the Amtrak New Orleans to Mobile service restoration.

They are paying to update the stations and restore the track. So there is money in there "somewhere".

https://www.al.com/news/mobile/2020/01/mississippi-cities-to-mobile-commit-to-amtraks-gulf-coast-return.html
Logged

bwana39

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 208
  • Location: Near Texarkana TX
  • Last Login: August 09, 2020, 10:18:32 PM
Re: I-69 in MS
« Reply #221 on: August 05, 2020, 06:01:45 PM »

Turning US 78 into I-22, how much of that was paid through the Appalachian corridors?

The original 1980's US 78 freeway in MS was funded through ARC auspices; the upgrade to I-22 was eligible for up to the present maximum 80% federal share via its definition in the language authorizing High Priority Corridor #45 (2004), which appended the I-22 designation to the corridor.

Most of the projects listed in the thread above were largely covered by federal funds. Local tax revenues generated by the Tunica casinos were used to finance the completed section of I-69, while counties to the east fronted the money through the sale of bonds to complete I-269. But here's what I find baffling: Mississippi has a real problem coming up with the money to maintain its existing roads and bridges, let alone build new stuff, yet in the past 15 years there's hasn't been any real discussion among state lawmakers about raising revenue to rehabilitate and expand Mississippi's highway network.  Instead, the government of Mississippi has punted to either the federal government, or to counties and cities to pay the freight for road and bridge projects.

This goes back to the broader problem with the I-69 as a whole, where Congress passed legislation mandating its construction, yet provided no funding to states to get it built. Some states like Texas, Kentucky, and Indiana have figured out how to move their sections of I-69 forward, while the remaining states pretty much threw up their hands and are saying to the feds, "Either give us money to build I-69, or come down here and make us build it."

The broader problem is Mississippi. About three million people.  If you allocate rest of this road at 10% state share, it is only about 30.00 per person, but absent the 90% Federal money, it balloons to around $300.00 per Person (about $725.00 per family averaged... much less for some far more for others). Then comes the Great river Bridge. Giving MS HALF of the anticipated $1 billion price tag, that makes another $167.00 per person. 

Yes, there are federal funds out there. Most of them are discretionary within limits. For Mississippi (or any other state as far as that goes) where does this project's (I-69) priority fall within the state's priorities. While the project may have a great deal of local priority in the delta, how much importance does it have in Biloxi, Tupelo, Jackson, or even the suburban counties immediately south of Memphis.   The bottom line is this road goes through highly agricultural counties with little other industry. then to the one of the lower income, agricultural areas of Arkansas.  From a Mississippi point of view, it is also a close overlap with I-55.

Unless the national importance is stressed far more (by the way of 90% or greater  DESIGNATED federal funding, ) This is not likely to be much of a priority in Jackson.   I think MDOT knows as well as we do that they have built more, better roads than they can maintain.  They aren't likely to dig into their own pockets to spend on a new Cadillac when they are barely able to keeping their Buick running.  They MIGHT figure out how to chip in a small portion to match a diamond studded carrot above their heads.
Logged

silverback1065

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3147
  • Age: 30
  • Location: Indianapolis
  • Last Login: August 09, 2020, 11:41:21 AM
Re: I-69 in MS
« Reply #222 on: August 05, 2020, 08:59:04 PM »

Mississippi doesn't even need any new roads like this.
Logged

froggie

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 11158
  • Location: Greensboro, VT
  • Last Login: Today at 11:12:06 AM
    • Froggie's Place
Re: I-69 in MS
« Reply #223 on: August 05, 2020, 11:37:57 PM »


I-10?

What about I-10?
30 miles of I-10 widening from 4 to 6 lanes between Gulfport and Biloxi in the early 2000s.

Largely paid for by a tax on the casinos.  I was stationed there at the time.
Logged

I-55

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 55
  • "We're in Mississippi now, bump your speed up"

  • Location: Indiana
  • Last Login: August 10, 2020, 11:23:19 PM
Re: I-69 in MS
« Reply #224 on: August 09, 2020, 02:17:39 AM »

Mississippi doesn't even need any new roads like this.

Mississippi's road network is good enough for what it is. The only places that may require attention are Jackson, Gulfport, and Southaven metros. Divided highways connecting major cities, no major traffic problems anywhere in the state, sparse rural highway traffic, and no winter weather like the midwest or northeast to create potholes leave no demands for more new routes. What is I-69 going to do for US-61? Nothing other than raise the speed limit by 5 mph. I consider the signing of I-22 to be the completion of Mississippi's highway network. Until there is a dramatic traffic or population change, things ain't broke, so don't fix em.
Logged
I have Unbridled Spirit driving on the Crossroads of America to the Heart of Dixie. I listen to the Soundtrack of America as I receive the South's Warmest Welcome, then driving Hog Wild to Show Me through the Land of Lincoln, back through the Bluegrass to Almost Heaven, and I Found it Here.

 


Opinions expressed here on belong solely to the poster and do not represent or reflect the opinions or beliefs of AARoads, its creators and/or associates.