ROADWORK: Consider shifting whole freeway

How can IDOT consider the ‘issues’ of U.S. 95 in the future without knowing if the Huetter Bypass/Alternate to 95 North -South Route is constructed and in what configuration? Certainly the 95/I-90 intersection is not ideal but altering it so there is no direct access from 95 onto Appleway seems to reflect an incredibly harsh reality for the businesses along Appleway.

The article mentions the widening of I-90 to four lanes each way to approximately Fourth Street and including work on the bridges at Huetter and Atlas. Why not spend the money NOW, with that work, to put in the interchange at Huetter even if the street remains one lane in each direction for a while? See what traffic flow changes come about from an alternative to 95?

Certainly waiting for Coeur Terre (Phase ONE, 440 acres: 2,800 homes, 200,000+ square feet office/retail, two schools) will not make anything less crowded. There is an opportunity to get AHEAD of 440 approved acres and attempt to consider the 600+ remaining ‘unapproved/undetermined’ Phase TWO acreage. The east/west traffic patterns will also change dramatically, and even more so, if there is no Huetter Interchange.

IF a SPUI is the answer for 95/I-90, consider shifting whole freeway in a gradual ‘bend’ to the south, moving the center of the freeway at the I-95 southward so a bridge with a SPUI in the center of it could be at grade at Appleway (not beyond), and would be elevated farther south on 95 but certainly still ‘at grade’ by Ironwood. No access onto 95 is there now.

HOWARD BURNS

Post Falls