AARoads Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length

Author Topic: Future I-57/US 67  (Read 166849 times)

sparker

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 6922
  • Location: Bay Area, CA
  • Last Login: Today at 02:37:04 AM
Re: Future I-57/US 67
« Reply #450 on: May 08, 2017, 02:27:06 PM »

Unless MO decides to build an extension of I-57, I don't see why this number can ever work. Not to mention that Little Rock will be another Kansas City, what with two Interstates ending that could very easily become one (I-29 and I-49, we're looking at you!).

The whole thing (I-57 S and W of I-55) is clearly and solely predicated upon completion of a Walnut Ridge-Poplar Bluff-Sikeston Interstate-grade corridor; Boozman obviously didn't want to tweak MO right now -- given their well-publicized fiscal shortfall(s) -- so he simply truncated the corridor to US 412 to avoid backlash (he'll eventually have to work with MO folks to get the rest built, so why burden them now is likely the rationale here).  Just political S.O.P.
Logged

The Ghostbuster

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2510
  • Age: 35
  • Location: Madison, WI
  • Last Login: March 12, 2020, 06:05:15 PM
Re: Future I-57/US 67
« Reply #451 on: May 08, 2017, 05:41:21 PM »

It's probably going to be a long time before future Interstate 57 makes it to Little Rock. How interested is Missouri in upgrading the US 60/67 corridor, anyway?
Logged

codyg1985

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2073
  • Age: 34
  • Location: Huntsville, AL
  • Last Login: July 08, 2020, 12:30:26 PM
Re: Future I-57/US 67
« Reply #452 on: May 08, 2017, 07:28:26 PM »

It's probably going to be a long time before future Interstate 57 makes it to Little Rock. How interested is Missouri in upgrading the US 60/67 corridor, anyway?

I am sure it is low on their priority list.

However, it wouldn't cost that much to do (compared with, say, finishing I-49 in Arkansas). There would only be about 15 miles of new four-lane to build. The rest of it could probably easily be covered to limited-access and interstate grade.
Logged
Cody Goodman
Huntsville, AL, United States

US71

  • Road Scholar , Master of Snark
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 9807
  • Sign Inspector, mad man with a camera

  • Age: 60
  • Location: On the road again
  • Last Login: July 08, 2020, 09:49:21 PM
    • The Road Less Taken
Re: Future I-57/US 67
« Reply #453 on: May 08, 2017, 08:01:55 PM »

Unless MO decides to build an extension of I-57, I don't see why this number can ever work. Not to mention that Little Rock will be another Kansas City, what with two Interstates ending that could very easily become one (I-29 and I-49, we're looking at you!).
But Doc Boozman can use it to justify his reelection (ignore what I did to your healthcare, I created I-57)
Logged
Fear itself is largely an illusion.

I-39

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1155
  • Last Login: July 07, 2020, 01:51:48 PM
Re: Future I-57/US 67
« Reply #454 on: May 08, 2017, 08:29:31 PM »

What's the big deal here? So what if the corridor becomes I-57?

Sure, it won't be completed for a while, but I like this. Yeah, it doesn't completely follow numbering guidelines, but neither does I-24 in Tennessee, I-69 south of Indianapolis, etc.

Of course, they need to focus on getting I-49 done first, but bravo for pushing for the I-57 designation.
Logged

Revive 755

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3948
  • Last Login: July 07, 2020, 10:37:42 PM
Re: Future I-57/US 67
« Reply #455 on: May 08, 2017, 09:10:36 PM »

What's the big deal here? So what if the corridor becomes I-57?

It's a poor joining of different corridors.  The US 60 corridor should have gotten one 2di number, US 67 another 2di in the future.

Yeah, it doesn't completely follow numbering guidelines, but neither does I-24 in Tennessee, I-69 south of Indianapolis, etc.

I-24 is at least closer to a straight line and did not have an existing corridor to follow northwest of Hopkinsville.
« Last Edit: May 09, 2017, 08:52:43 PM by Revive 755 »
Logged

bugo

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 6182
  • Age: 46
  • Location: Oklahoma
  • Last Login: June 15, 2020, 07:12:53 AM
    • No Frills Blog
Re: Future I-57/US 67
« Reply #456 on: May 09, 2017, 03:50:50 AM »

Should have called it I-30. It connects to I-30 via I-40 but won't connect to I-57 for many years now...idiot legislators and adolescent president.
Logged

Henry

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 5589
  • Age: 50
  • Location: Chicago, IL/Seattle, WA
  • Last Login: Today at 01:24:24 AM
    • Henry Watson's Online Freeway
Re: Future I-57/US 67
« Reply #457 on: May 09, 2017, 09:59:03 AM »

Should have called it I-30. It connects to I-30 via I-40 but won't connect to I-57 for many years now...idiot legislators and adolescent president.
Agreed on all counts!
Logged
Go Cubs Go! Go Cubs Go! Hey Chicago, what do you say? The Cubs are gonna win today!

I-39

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1155
  • Last Login: July 07, 2020, 01:51:48 PM
Re: Future I-57/US 67
« Reply #458 on: May 09, 2017, 10:03:26 AM »

It's a poor joining of different corridors.  The US 60 corridor should have gotten one 2di number, US 67 another 2di in the future.

I disagree. It's not an ideal joining, but there are worse ones.

It is unlikely US 60 will be upgraded to full interstate standards across Missouri. Same with US 67 north of Poplar Bluff. So there is no need to preserve numbers for those corridors.

Maybe I-53 would have been a bit better here, but I don't personally mind I-57. This is a long time coming and while it will be a while before it is fully finished, I'm excited.

Logged

I-39

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1155
  • Last Login: July 07, 2020, 01:51:48 PM
Re: Future I-57/US 67
« Reply #459 on: May 09, 2017, 10:04:27 AM »

Should have called it I-30. It connects to I-30 via I-40 but won't connect to I-57 for many years now...idiot legislators and adolescent president.

Maybe I-53 would have been better, since it is after all more of a north-south route.
Logged

dvferyance

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1251
  • Location: New Berlin WI
  • Last Login: July 07, 2020, 09:38:55 PM
Re: Future I-57/US 67
« Reply #460 on: May 09, 2017, 10:05:20 AM »

Should have called it I-30. It connects to I-30 via I-40 but won't connect to I-57 for many years now...idiot legislators and adolescent president.
It would depend on Missouri. It's freeway it most of Arkansas. It's mainly Missouri where the upgrades would have to be done. I think I-57 makes more sense because it runs more north and south than east and west. Sure it doesn't fit into the grid but neither does I-30.
Logged

Interstate 69 Fan

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 473
  • You cannot deny that I-69 will never be completed.

  • Age: 18
  • Location: Indianapolis, Indiana
  • Last Login: July 07, 2020, 12:54:11 PM
Re: Future I-57/US 67
« Reply #461 on: May 09, 2017, 11:04:54 AM »

Should have called it I-30. It connects to I-30 via I-40 but won't connect to I-57 for many years now...idiot legislators and adolescent president.

Interstate 57 was chosen because it is a more north-south route, rather east-west.
Logged
Apparently Iím a fan of I-69.  Who knew.

Interstate 69 Fan

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 473
  • You cannot deny that I-69 will never be completed.

  • Age: 18
  • Location: Indianapolis, Indiana
  • Last Login: July 07, 2020, 12:54:11 PM
Re: Future I-57/US 67
« Reply #462 on: May 09, 2017, 11:05:56 AM »

Should have called it I-30. It connects to I-30 via I-40 but won't connect to I-57 for many years now...idiot legislators and adolescent president.

Maybe I-53 would have been better, since it is after all more of a north-south route.

I-53 was an option, but was put down due to it being short, and 2 other terminuses being at I-53's end (I-30 on southern, I-57 on northern)
Logged
Apparently Iím a fan of I-69.  Who knew.

Wayward Memphian

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 200
  • Location: Fayetteville, AR
  • Last Login: July 05, 2020, 09:01:13 PM
Re: Future I-57/US 67
« Reply #463 on: May 09, 2017, 12:34:34 PM »

Should have called it I-30. It connects to I-30 via I-40 but won't connect to I-57 for many years now...idiot legislators and adolescent president.

Interstate 57 was chosen because it is a more north-south route, rather east-west.

If Arkansas built it out to the state line and Missouri found a way, this I-57 extention could be expanded to meet up with I-69  via  I530 and Ark 530 at Monticello and eventually extended to Monroe, Alexandria and Lake Charles.
Logged

chays

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1332
  • Age: 46
  • Location: FL
  • Last Login: July 08, 2020, 03:07:59 PM
Re: Future I-57/US 67
« Reply #464 on: May 09, 2017, 01:00:19 PM »

It's probably going to be a long time before future Interstate 57 makes it to Little Rock. How interested is Missouri in upgrading the US 60/67 corridor, anyway?
Huh?  The bill states I-57 is designated from "Interstate 40 in North Little Rock, Arkansas, to United States Route 412".  When you say "Little Rock", do you mean the city proper or the metro area?
Logged

sparker

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 6922
  • Location: Bay Area, CA
  • Last Login: Today at 02:37:04 AM
Re: Future I-57/US 67
« Reply #465 on: May 09, 2017, 04:32:39 PM »

It's probably going to be a long time before future Interstate 57 makes it to Little Rock. How interested is Missouri in upgrading the US 60/67 corridor, anyway?
Huh?  The bill states I-57 is designated from "Interstate 40 in North Little Rock, Arkansas, to United States Route 412".  When you say "Little Rock", do you mean the city proper or the metro area?

It's likely the reference is to the metro area, which includes N.L.R. and about the first 10 miles of US 67/167 north of I-40.  Both the I-30/40 and (new) 40/57 interchanges are in North Little Rock; that's always been the transportation hub of the area, dating back to railroad days (NLR has the major UP rail yard in the region). 
Logged

The Ghostbuster

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2510
  • Age: 35
  • Location: Madison, WI
  • Last Login: March 12, 2020, 06:05:15 PM
Re: Future I-57/US 67
« Reply #466 on: May 09, 2017, 05:58:34 PM »

I think the Interstate 53 designation should have gone where existing Interstate 530 is now.
Logged

Revive 755

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3948
  • Last Login: July 07, 2020, 10:37:42 PM
Re: Future I-57/US 67
« Reply #467 on: May 09, 2017, 09:04:21 PM »

It is unlikely US 60 will be upgraded to full interstate standards across Missouri. Same with US 67 north of Poplar Bluff. So there is no need to preserve numbers for those corridors.

Sure, let's not consider future developments that appear unlikely at the moment so we can repeat the mistakes made elsewhere in the country with interstate designations.  Especially when Missouri has previously wanted to build or upgrade parts of US 67 between I-55 and Poplar Bluff to a freeway.
Logged

sparker

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 6922
  • Location: Bay Area, CA
  • Last Login: Today at 02:37:04 AM
Re: Future I-57/US 67
« Reply #468 on: May 09, 2017, 09:29:15 PM »

Since it connects to the Interstate system at its south end -- and is legislatively defined as ending at US 412, there's no real reason why the existing freeway couldn't be signed as I-57 soon if not immediately -- pending the various upgrade projects that are going on along its southernmost segment.  An associated question:  will AR 440 between I-40 and the new I-57 be designated as an extension of I-440 now that it will connect to another Interstate at its northern terminus?   
Logged

capt.ron

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 243
  • Age: 49
  • Location: Central Arkansas
  • Last Login: Today at 01:07:54 AM
Re: Future I-57/US 67
« Reply #469 on: May 10, 2017, 12:29:45 PM »

Since it connects to the Interstate system at its south end -- and is legislatively defined as ending at US 412, there's no real reason why the existing freeway couldn't be signed as I-57 soon if not immediately -- pending the various upgrade projects that are going on along its southernmost segment.  An associated question:  will AR 440 between I-40 and the new I-57 be designated as an extension of I-440 now that it will connect to another Interstate at its northern terminus?   
Seeing that US 67 is about be signed as I-57, it only makes sense that AR 440 becomes I-440 since it will terminate at an interstate.
Getting back to US 67, The highway dept have completed the southbound side of 67 from  Main st to the existing 6 lane segment south of town. The old northbound lanes and overpasses have been demolished (Redmond Rd to just past Main St) . They are actually moving rather quick.
North of Jacksonville, the northbound side has jersey barriers, especially on the right shoulder side... from the Air Force Base exit to exit 16.
Exit 20 (or 21) is being worked on as well. It will be a northern bypass of Cabot (Highway 38).
Logged

Anthony_JK

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1372
  • Age: 56
  • Location: Lafayette, Louisiana
  • Last Login: July 08, 2020, 10:56:51 AM
Re: Future I-57/US 67
« Reply #470 on: May 10, 2017, 01:06:00 PM »

Should have called it I-30. It connects to I-30 via I-40 but won't connect to I-57 for many years now...idiot legislators and adolescent president.

Interstate 57 was chosen because it is a more north-south route, rather east-west.

If Arkansas built it out to the state line and Missouri found a way, this I-57 extention could be expanded to meet up with I-69  via  I530 and Ark 530 at Monticello and eventually extended to Monroe, Alexandria and Lake Charles.

Which is why it should have been designated I-53 to begin with. Let the Lake Charles-Alexandria-Monroe-Monticello-Pine Bluff-Little Rock extension be I-51. Leave I-57 for US 67 from NLR to Popular Bluff and the US 60 extension east of Popular Bluff to Sikeston. Use I-53 for US 57 up to Festus, then run with I-55 to St. Louis, then use a outer loop bypass to connect with I-64/US 40/US 61, then run an I-53 along an upgraded Avenue of the Saints (US 61/IA 28) to south of Minneapolis.
Logged

dvferyance

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1251
  • Location: New Berlin WI
  • Last Login: July 07, 2020, 09:38:55 PM
Re: Future I-57/US 67
« Reply #471 on: May 10, 2017, 02:00:26 PM »

It's a poor joining of different corridors.  The US 60 corridor should have gotten one 2di number, US 67 another 2di in the future.

I disagree. It's not an ideal joining, but there are worse ones.

It is unlikely US 60 will be upgraded to full interstate standards across Missouri. Same with US 67 north of Poplar Bluff. So there is no need to preserve numbers for those corridors.

Maybe I-53 would have been a bit better here, but I don't personally mind I-57. This is a long time coming and while it will be a while before it is fully finished, I'm excited.
What do you base your argument on? Has MODOT come out and said that? US 60 actually has many interchanges ok yes there are at grade intersections. Many of them could just be cul du saced for a very minimumal cost. A Couple of interchanges and overpasses would have to be built but when I look at it not that many. The only additional interchanges needed would be at Hwy E in Morehouse and at Hwy 153. It's not like massive upgrades are needed.
« Last Edit: May 10, 2017, 02:03:24 PM by dvferyance »
Logged

Bobby5280

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2151
  • Location: Lawton, OK
  • Last Login: July 03, 2020, 03:36:04 PM
Re: Future I-57/US 67
« Reply #472 on: May 10, 2017, 03:50:05 PM »

US-60 across Southern Missouri has a lot of freeway quality segments to it. But there is still quite a lot of work to do in making the entire route between Springfield and Sikeston Interstate quality. A lot of the most difficult work, such as the freeway to freeway US-60/US-63 interchange, was done early last decade. Back then there was a lot more work going on with "high priority corridors" and a new I-66 using the US-60 corridor was a possibility at the time.

In the past few years conservative hysteria has taken over the governments in many states, which translated to politicians whoring themselves to voters with big tax cuts. State budgets and operations got imploded in the process. For instance, Oklahoma is descending into a nightmare situation over this type of fiscal stupidity. Oklahoma wants to pass all sorts of new anti-abortion laws. But with the way they're gutting public education and any idea of affordable health care a woman of child bearing age would have to be crazy continuing to live in this damned state. The Sooner State will end up becoming the sausage festival state with no ladies in sight.

Anyway, so while there was considerable effort going on at converting the US-60 corridor into an Interstate a decade ago, most of the work has since ground to a halt. For now, the best this corridor can hope for is an busy at grade intersection being converted to a freeway exit every couple or so years. Hopefully Missouri DOT and various towns along the US-60 corridor can at least keep new developments from building too close to the existing 4-lane in order to preserve some future freeway right of way. Some states (like Oklahoma) really suck at that.
Logged

bugo

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 6182
  • Age: 46
  • Location: Oklahoma
  • Last Login: June 15, 2020, 07:12:53 AM
    • No Frills Blog
Re: Future I-57/US 67
« Reply #473 on: May 10, 2017, 06:08:17 PM »

In the past few years conservative hysteria has taken over the governments in many states, which translated to politicians whoring themselves to voters with big tax cuts. State budgets and operations got imploded in the process. For instance, Oklahoma is descending into a nightmare situation over this type of fiscal stupidity. Oklahoma wants to pass all sorts of new anti-abortion laws.

Don't forget that damn Ten Commandments monument that the Oklahoma legislature has a hard-on for.
Logged

sparker

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 6922
  • Location: Bay Area, CA
  • Last Login: Today at 02:37:04 AM
Re: Future I-57/US 67
« Reply #474 on: May 10, 2017, 06:39:59 PM »

Oklahoma wants to pass all sorts of new anti-abortion laws. But with the way they're gutting public education and any idea of affordable health care a woman of child bearing age would have to be crazy continuing to live in this damned state. The Sooner State will end up becoming the sausage festival state with no ladies in sight.

OK's politicians-in-charge sound like folks who would watch "The Handmaid's Tale" and say "Gilead?  Now why didn't we think of that first?"





Logged

 


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.