I saw something interesting today...

Apparently there's a "Proposed LA 3114" in the DOTD's Urbanized Functional Classification map for the Mandeville/Covington area.

The proposed routing is from the intersection of US 190 and LA 25 in Covington east (as if US 190's E/W portion continued east from the intersection) to LA 437, then further east to LA 21 between its intersections with LA 36 and LA 1082. According to the legend, it would be considered a "Minor Arterial." Future LA 3241, by contrast, is anticipated to be a "Principal Arterial."

I could see some point to this connection. Right now, if you're coming from Hammond/Robert/Goodbee on US 190 and you want to head northeast towards Bogalusa (or going the other way, in which case take the directions in reverse), you have a few bad options:

1. Turn north on LA 25, go to Folsom and turn east on LA 40. Although LA 25 is in good shape up to Folsom, LA 40 tends to be in not-as-good condition. It also adds a bunch of unnecessary miles.
2. Turn south on US 190, then either cut through Downtown Covington on Spur LA 437 and LA 437, then turn east (Northbound by signage) on LA 21 OR stay on US 190, cross the Bogue Falaya Bridge, turn west on Business US 190, then turn north on LA 21. Both of these options add not only mileage, but traffic to the situation.

Looking at the map, it appears therefore that the purpose of the proposed route would be as a northern high-speed bypass of Covington, with easier access as a bonus. Wonder why they haven't tried to build it yet...

In the same map and the Slidell/Lacombe one, there's a more clear-cut routing for Future LA 3241 depicted. It appears that if it cosigns with LA 1088 at all, the concurrency would only run a mile or so.

Also, a couple of interesting errors:

• LA 36 between Abita Springs and Covington is misprinted as "LA 35"
• Proposed LA 3241 is reflected properly on the Mandeville/Covington map, but printed as "Proposed LA 324" on the Slidell map.

I can tell I'm going to have a good bit of reading to do...