11 replies to this topic

[jungletobacco]

what would it be? Preserve Tennessee's and north Georgia's moutains and parks or help Georgia's economy?! hard decision for some but an easy one for others.

[ATLman1]

I am for I-14. I think GA needs a good east-west interstate. The Columbus metro area would really benefit from this new interstate.

[jungletobacco]

so you dont care about some of the north georgia Mountain and park area being destroyed....wow

[GSP Tiger]

Why not reach both objectives?

North Georgia undoubtedly needs an interstate.  There's much traffic from Charleston, SC to Chattanooga, TN that Interstates 20, 26, 40, 75 and 85 can handle.  Many studies are complete indicating the least likely impact on the environment and how the affected counties will prosper long term.  Some vagrant groups (i.e. Stop I-3) want the area to worsen than improve it.  If I-3 cannot be built, I-24 can be extended down to Augusta.

I-14 should be built as soon as possible.  With tropical storms hitting gulf coast states in recent years, an alternative to I-10 is useful.  I can see it going through Macon, but onward to Charleston, SC, which needs better access to Atlanta.  It can connect to Myrtle Beach via a toll road to complete the route.

[jungletobacco]

i think interstate 3 and 14 is a package deal, one cant be build without the other, right?
interstate 14 should fairly easy to build but interstate 3 will be "heart surgery". starting in the Tennessee moutains and then going threw Augusta will be hard because of its density. Im I wrong?

[LizellaJacket]

I-14 good, I-3 bad.

[GSP Tiger]

jungletobacco, on Sep 24 2006, 01:48 PM, said:

i think interstate 3 and 14 is a package deal, one cant be build without the other, right?
interstate 14 should fairly easy to build but interstate 3 will be "heart surgery". starting in the Tennessee moutains and then going threw Augusta will be hard because of its density. Im I wrong?

Any north-south interstate route through Augusta would be built some miles westward.  Whoever designed I-520 years ago regret not extending it westward from its current western terminus.  They do not have effiecient roads in place to handle today's growth.

The logical solution is to build I-3 west of Augusta, curve southeast and junction with I-14, run ogether a few miles, then split off towards I-16 and Savannah.

[jungletobacco]

that has urban sprawl written all over it! I dont think augusta neesds that! how would I-14 be infused in augusta? could it start in south augusta?

[GSP Tiger]

No, it has 'plan smartly for the future'.  Countless studies were completed with routes with improbable 'urban sprawl'.

Would you like the Augusta area to be in permenant gridlock in case of a nuclear emergency?

I-14 would come into Augusta southwestward from Macon.  It would biplex with another interstate for some time.  If it heads for Orangeburg, SC, it would hook up with I-3 for some time.  If it is aiming for a route with Myrtle Beach, it would terminate at I-20 westward of Augusta.

[jungletobacco]

is that fact or just your thought? cause it sounds reasonable from.

[aboutmetro]

I think, because tourism is a huge economic engine, maybe economic development and preservation of nearby national parks aren't mutually exclusive. The trick is to provide access to the natural areas without diminishing their value in the process. This proposal http://interstate-do...-currently.html seems to be an alternative route for I-3, even though it takes a less direct route.

There's info about I-14 there too.

[davidals]

I-14 seems like a good idea; another e-w route across the south has been needed for a long time (10, 20 & 40 are all pretty much at capacity), most of the route options under discussion make sense.  The routing for 14 east of Augusta doesn't make sense - it doesn't seem to go directly anywhere, which defeats the purpose of building it in the first place, and there are not one but two geographically illiterate interstates already proposed into Myrtle Beach.  But from Augusta west to MS or LA it makes perfect sense.

I-3 on the other hand is problematic for many reasons:

a - There's starting to be serious opposition in SW North Carolina, a few county governments have already made their opposition known.
b - Not a big priority in Tennessee.
c - The numbering issue.  Everyone seems to have forgotten the numbering logic (or the directional logic) behind the interstate system, and there are reasons behind that beyond simple retentiveness.  For north-south (odd numbered) interstates, low numbers (like "3") would be West Coast numbers; the numbers go up as you go east:  I-5 (CA to WA), 15 (CA to MT), 17 (AZ), 19 (AZ), 25 (NM to WY), etc...  This just seems to be an obvious pet project.

At the very least, it should have an e-w number (it parallels I-26 not that far away, which is another issue), make it I-18.  I seriously doubt it will get built north of I-85.  The recent trend towards spontaneous interstate projects (if you want a laugh, look up the projected route for I-73 north of Greensboro NC for a glimpse of something that looks like a 4-year-old planned it) is expensive and strange; these things were supposed to be direct and conform to a certain geographical logic, so as to function both financially and as transportation/infrastructure.

The planned I-73 and I-74 were huge mistakes in NC, SC, VA and points north and west, both routes will careen back and forth across several states in a fashion that will do nothing but gobble up construction $.  The federal highway admins washed their hands of any effort at guiding the routing, and any economic benefit (which should NOT be the lone reason for building an interstate, and until recently it never was) will be obliterated because anyone with an ability to read a map will take other, more direct routes to get from point a to point b.  Those roads are terrible, terrible examples; they won't deliver on their purported benefits, and no one should be emulating that.

Edited by davidals, 25 October 2006 - 08:17 PM.