Why are any I-75 interchange projects on the final T-SPLOST list? Especially now that Congress finally got around to passing a transportation bill? I-75 is a federal highway; shouldn’t it be paid for with federal tax dollars, not $31.5 million of “local” sales taxes?
About the transportation act, and then three T-SPLOST I-75 projects. Richard Simon reported for the Sacramento Bee 29 June 2012, Congress passes transportation bill, halts student loan rate increase. Jamie Dupree’s Washington Insider had some more detail in the AJC 28 June 2012, Congress moves highway, student loan bills. Here’s the actual H.R.4348 — MAP-21 (Enrolled Bill [Final as Passed Both House and Senate] – ENR).
In the final T-SPLOST District 11 report there are still two I-75 interchange projects:
- $19,872,610 TIA for RC11-000081 I-75 at CR 27/Lake Park-Bellville Road Interchange Improvements – Exit 2
- $11,631,517 TIA for RC11-000082 I-75 at SR 31 Interchange Replacement – Exit 11
- $31,504,127 total TIA for two I-75 interchange projects in Lowndes County
Those are just the T-SPLOST dollar amounts; not the total costs of those two projects. A third project, for exits 22 and 29, got moved to TIP money, which is federal money. Why didn’t these two also get moved to TIP and off of the T-SPLOST list?
Previously I reported on Corrected T-SPLOST Southern Region Cost Changes including a list of projects. Of three I-75 projects, two are still on the final project list of October 2011. Here’s a summary:
| Number + Name | Original Total Cost Estimate + Updated | Difference Diff% | TIA Funding (includes Inflation) | In Final List? |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| RC11-000081 I-75 at CR 27/Lake Park-Bellville Road Interchange Improvements – Exit 2 |
$38,965,901.00 $39,745,219.00 |
$779,318.00 2% |
$22,379,786 | yes |
| RC11-000082 I-75 at SR 31 Interchange Replacement – Exit 11 |
$22,806,928.00 $23,263,033.00 |
$456,105.00 1.99985% |
$13,098,977 | yes |
| RC11-000083 I-75 from North of SR 133 to Cook County Line – Exits 22 & 29 |
$44,617,196.00 $44,617,196.00 |
$0.00 0% |
$0 | no |
Finally, here are the details for each of those projects, extracted from the final report for exits 2 and 11, and from the unconstrained list for exits 22 and 29. Why are the remaining two not like the one that got moved to federal funding?
-jsq
Project Sheet
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Comments: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Comments (Please note all cost estimates are in 2011 dollars and actual costs for all phases at year of expenditure will be higher): This project is partially funded through TIA. The remaining project costs will be funded by other sources. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Public Benefit | Notes |
| Maximizing the value of Georgia’s Assets | This project could potentially maximize the full utility of an existing transportation facility(s). In some cases, bypasses will be necessary. Example benefits could be: mitigating congestion (e.g. operational improvements) and optimizing capital asset management (e.g. resurfacing, rehabilitation). The impacts would apply to this roadway segment, corridor, and/or intersection. |
| Additional Benefits | This project will benefit the traveling public by improving this intersection. This project will assist with the connectivity within the region but it will allow for the widening of I-75, a major north-south connector between Florida and the cities of Valdosta, Macon and Atlanta. These improvements will also improve the operational safety of the roadway and provide safer roads for motorists and trucks. This project is expected to be a benefit to all communities. |
Project Location
Project Sheet
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Comments: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Comments (Please note all cost estimates are in 2011 dollars and actual costs for all phases at year of expenditure will be higher): This project is partially funded through TIA. The remaining project costs will be funded by other sources. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Public Benefit | Notes |
| Ensuring Safety and Security | This project would benefit the public by potentially reducing the incidence of crashes along this roadway segment, corridor, and/or intersection. |
| Additional Benefits | Reconstructing this interchange could reduce congestion and improve operations, along with improved access to the Valdosta airport. |
Project Location
Project Sheet
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Comments: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Concept approved. Environmental underway. RW funding proposed for 2012. UTL | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Public Benefit | Notes |
| Maximizing the value of Georgia’s Assets | This project could potentially maximize the full utility of an existing transportation facility(s). In some cases, bypasses will be necessary. Example benefits could be: mitigating congestion (e.g. operational improvements) and optimizing capital asset management (e.g. resurfacing, rehabilitation). The impacts would apply to this roadway segment, corridor, and/or intersection. |
Project Location
Short Link: