So, don't bash me for this, but I was looking at a wikipedia page on the Interstates in Arkansas and found this purposed Interstate - I-130.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Interstate_Highways_in_Arkansas
I am wondering right about now what other shit AHTD is planning to do!
Ok, from all that I have read, I have gathered possible future projects:
I-69
I-30 Little Rock Expansion
I-49
and I-130 of all things!
Ah, AHTD and their highway obsession!
Wasn't that proposed freeway mostly or completely incorporated into I-49 alpng the east side of Texarkana, making I-130 a dead proposal?
Since Wikipedia's reliability is uneven, you're right to ask for more info. But I suspect this is a case where Wikipedia is out of date.
Quote from: oscar on March 16, 2017, 12:14:09 AM
Wasn't that proposed freeway mostly or completely incorporated into I-49 alpng the east side of Texarkana, making I-130 a dead proposal?
Since Wikipedia's reliability is uneven, you're right to ask for more info. But I suspect this is a case where Wikipedia is out of date.
Well, just like with I-69 I do believe you are correct in the fact that it may be outdated, but no I-130 is coming down from Little Rock.
Quote from: IDriveArkansas on March 16, 2017, 12:16:41 AM
but no I-130 is coming down from Little Rock.
Don't you mean I-530?
Anyway, I-130 seems like it has mostly been subsumed by I-49.
AASHTO approved I-130 in part in December 2000. Insanely, the PDF (http://route.transportation.org/Documents/2000USRN_Cmte.pdf) does not permit text selection, or the pages are just images. So here's a screenshot:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FfTyqbaT.png&hash=0ad759b89cc1e6c818c7a486108c87772abae1f2)
In my notes (don't have a source for this assertion, though), the "second part was not a future part of the Interstate System, and Texas did not submit a companion application for a good terminus in Texas".
The approved portion is now part of I-49.
Quote from: compdude787 on March 16, 2017, 12:32:47 AM
Quote from: IDriveArkansas on March 16, 2017, 12:16:41 AM
but no I-130 is coming down from Little Rock.
Don't you mean I-530?
Anyway, I-130 seems like it has mostly been subsumed by I-49.
Correct -- I-130 was a "placeholder" designation for AR 245, the original Texarkana east bypass; when the final alignment for I-49 was constructed -- some of it using the 245 alignment and the remainder veering east to the present I-30/49 interchange, I-130 became a moot issue. It's similar in concept to I-910 in the New Orleans area; just a temporary designation until I-49 construction reaches the area.
Quote from: compdude787 on March 16, 2017, 12:32:47 AM
Quote from: IDriveArkansas on March 16, 2017, 12:16:41 AM
but no I-130 is coming down from Little Rock.
Don't you mean I-530?
Anyway, I-130 seems like it has mostly been subsumed by I-49.
It is a continuation of I-30 from Little Rock towards Texas, not the 530. But, I am just blown away at the amount of projects the AHTD are starting up, like really?
QuoteInsanely
I'm not even sure that Adobe Acrobat had OCR capability in 2000...
Quote from: IDriveArkansas on March 16, 2017, 01:01:11 AM
Quote from: compdude787 on March 16, 2017, 12:32:47 AM
Quote from: IDriveArkansas on March 16, 2017, 12:16:41 AM
but no I-130 is coming down from Little Rock.
Don't you mean I-530?
Anyway, I-130 seems like it has mostly been subsumed by I-49.
It is a continuation of I-30 from Little Rock towards Texas, not the 530. But, I am just blown away at the amount of projects the AHTD are starting up, like really?
Not Little Rock. Texarkana. Originally along US 59/TX 151/AR 151/AR 225. Now mostly subsumed by I-49 and proposed I-369.
Quote from: Anthony_JK on March 16, 2017, 09:45:07 AM
Originally along US 59/TX 151/AR 151/AR 225.
That's a long route: http://www.dot.state.tx.us/tpp/hwy/sh/sh0151.htm
Quote from: NE2 on March 16, 2017, 10:27:33 AM
Quote from: Anthony_JK on March 16, 2017, 09:45:07 AM
Originally along US 59/TX 151/AR 151/AR 225.
That's a long route: http://www.dot.state.tx.us/tpp/hwy/sh/sh0151.htm
Is it possible it could relaunch or no? If it merged then oh well. I'll watch it though.
It's dead, Jim
Quote from: NE2 on March 16, 2017, 10:27:33 AM
Quote from: Anthony_JK on March 16, 2017, 09:45:07 AM
Originally along US 59/TX 151/AR 151/AR 225.
That's a long route: http://www.dot.state.tx.us/tpp/hwy/sh/sh0151.htm
Whoops. Sorry. I did mean the Inner Loop in Texarkana from I-30 to current I-49.
Which brings one question to mind: Why did they go with I-130 if it was most likely to be absorbed into I-49 in the first place?
Quote from: Anthony_JK on March 17, 2017, 12:47:36 AM
Quote from: NE2 on March 16, 2017, 10:27:33 AM
Quote from: Anthony_JK on March 16, 2017, 09:45:07 AM
Originally along US 59/TX 151/AR 151/AR 225.
That's a long route: http://www.dot.state.tx.us/tpp/hwy/sh/sh0151.htm
Whoops. Sorry. I did mean the Inner Loop in Texarkana from I-30 to current I-49.
Ok, that makes scense!
Quote from: Henry on March 17, 2017, 10:18:03 AM
Which brings one question to mind: Why did they go with I-130 if it was most likely to be absorbed into I-49 in the first place?
Considering that Arkansas uses the national MUTCD, my best guess would be just due to the numbering guidelines. It does also seem that AHTD as policies that deviate from the MUTCD slightly; even though they don't have "their own", so to speak.
Quote from: Henry on March 17, 2017, 10:18:03 AM
Which brings one question to mind: Why did they go with I-130 if it was most likely to be absorbed into I-49 in the first place?
I-49 was pie in the sky as far as Arkansas was concerned until probably 15 years ago when Louisiana got serious about building north from Shreveport. The present 49 was probably scheduled just as an expanded new-terrain US 71.
Quote from: Road Hog on March 19, 2017, 04:39:20 AM
I-49 was pie in the sky as far as Arkansas was concerned until probably 15 years ago when Louisiana got serious about building north from Shreveport. The present 49 was probably scheduled just as an expanded new-terrain US 71.
Actually, yes it was. The first section was a new US 71 from Fayetteville to Bella Vista built in the early-mid 1980's.
Alma to Fayetteville was originally proposed as a new 71, but all the little tourist traps along the old road were afraid they would lose business since no one would know "471" (or whatever number they planned) was old 71. After a lot of letter writing to AHTD, the new highway became a northern extension of I-540 to Fayetteville, but was later extended to Bella Vista.
Sadly, a lot of the old motels and restaurants perished anyway when the new road opened.
Why didn't they use "Business" US - 71 designation for the original road? Have only been on that corridor once, in the mid nineties timeframe, so certainly don't know all the details on it. Seems to be a logical solution - designate the original roadbed as "Business" while transferring the "Federal" signs to the upgraded route.
It's just like Interstate 910 in New Orleans, a temporary designation for future Interstate 49. Although like Interstate 910, Interstate 130 was never signposted. I wonder if the 130 designation should have been proposed in the first place.
Quote from: DJStephens on March 23, 2017, 03:59:43 PM
Why didn't they use "Business" US - 71 designation for the original road? Have only been on that corridor once, in the mid nineties timeframe, so certainly don't know all the details on it. Seems to be a logical solution - designate the original roadbed as "Business" while transferring the "Federal" signs to the upgraded route.
If you mean NW Arkansas, the old road IS Business 71 (or 71B as they call it). It started as AR 471 until (again) locals complained. There was (IIRC) a 6-month co-sign 471/71B.
If you mean Texarkana, 71south to I-30 was AR 245 originally. Maybe it would have been difficult to post State Line Rd as Bus 71? Maybe Texas didn't want to play along?
Interestingly I-130 was approved by AASHTO but has never been decommissioned, therefore it still exists...
Quote from: bugo on May 15, 2017, 04:50:51 AM
Interestingly I-130 was approved by AASHTO but has never been decommissioned, therefore it still exists...
Decommissioned once Interstate 49 was designated.
Quote from: Interstate 69 Fan on May 18, 2017, 11:35:47 AM
Quote from: bugo on May 15, 2017, 04:50:51 AM
Interestingly I-130 was approved by AASHTO but has never been decommissioned, therefore it still exists...
Decommissioned once Interstate 49 was designated.
Nope. Check the AASHTO minutes. It was never formally decommissioned. It still exists.
Quote from: bugo on May 19, 2017, 10:46:42 AM
Quote from: Interstate 69 Fan on May 18, 2017, 11:35:47 AM
Quote from: bugo on May 15, 2017, 04:50:51 AM
Interestingly I-130 was approved by AASHTO but has never been decommissioned, therefore it still exists...
Decommissioned once Interstate 49 was designated.
Nope. Check the AASHTO minutes. It was never formally decommissioned. It still exists.
Was it ever posted as "Future 130"? If yes, did anyone ever get a photo?
Quote from: bugo on May 19, 2017, 10:46:42 AM
Quote from: Interstate 69 Fan on May 18, 2017, 11:35:47 AM
Quote from: bugo on May 15, 2017, 04:50:51 AM
Interestingly I-130 was approved by AASHTO but has never been decommissioned, therefore it still exists...
Decommissioned once Interstate 49 was designated.
Nope. Check the AASHTO minutes. It was never formally decommissioned. It still exists.
The FHWA Interstate Highway Log does not list I-130 as an existing route; whether AASHTO still considers it an active designation for old Arkansas 245 -- or even the short stub remainder of 245 just south of I-30 -- is probably a moot point at this time since the extension of I-49 over much of that state highway. I
do have a question for AR-based posters: Is the freeway extension from the I-49 interchange south of Texarkana west into Texas (Loop 151 in that state) still on the AR books as part of AR 245?
Quote from: sparker on May 20, 2017, 04:00:54 AM
Quote from: bugo on May 19, 2017, 10:46:42 AM
Quote from: Interstate 69 Fan on May 18, 2017, 11:35:47 AM
Quote from: bugo on May 15, 2017, 04:50:51 AM
Interestingly I-130 was approved by AASHTO but has never been decommissioned, therefore it still exists...
Decommissioned once Interstate 49 was designated.
Nope. Check the AASHTO minutes. It was never formally decommissioned. It still exists.
The FHWA Interstate Highway Log does not list I-130 as an existing route; whether AASHTO still considers it an active designation for old Arkansas 245 -- or even the short stub remainder of 245 just south of I-30 -- is probably a moot point at this time since the extension of I-49 over much of that state highway. I do have a question for AR-based posters: Is the freeway extension from the I-49 interchange south of Texarkana west into Texas (Loop 151 in that state) still on the AR books as part of AR 245?
It's posted as AR 151 in field, sometimes as TO US 59 on the overhead signs.
Quote from: US71 on May 20, 2017, 09:14:56 AM
Quote from: sparker on May 20, 2017, 04:00:54 AM
Quote from: bugo on May 19, 2017, 10:46:42 AM
Quote from: Interstate 69 Fan on May 18, 2017, 11:35:47 AM
Quote from: bugo on May 15, 2017, 04:50:51 AM
Interestingly I-130 was approved by AASHTO but has never been decommissioned, therefore it still exists...
Decommissioned once Interstate 49 was designated.
Nope. Check the AASHTO minutes. It was never formally decommissioned. It still exists.
The FHWA Interstate Highway Log does not list I-130 as an existing route; whether AASHTO still considers it an active designation for old Arkansas 245 -- or even the short stub remainder of 245 just south of I-30 -- is probably a moot point at this time since the extension of I-49 over much of that state highway. I do have a question for AR-based posters: Is the freeway extension from the I-49 interchange south of Texarkana west into Texas (Loop 151 in that state) still on the AR books as part of AR 245?
It's posted as AR 151 in field, sometimes as TO US 59 on the overhead signs.
Thanks; that clears
that up! Follow-up question: is the "stub end" of former AR 245 just south of I-30 -- the original "I-130" corridor -- still on the books as AR 245, even though it's only a few blocks long?
Quote from: sparker on May 20, 2017, 11:19:48 AM
Quote from: US71 on May 20, 2017, 09:14:56 AM
Quote from: sparker on May 20, 2017, 04:00:54 AM
Quote from: bugo on May 19, 2017, 10:46:42 AM
Quote from: Interstate 69 Fan on May 18, 2017, 11:35:47 AM
Quote from: bugo on May 15, 2017, 04:50:51 AM
Interestingly I-130 was approved by AASHTO but has never been decommissioned, therefore it still exists...
Decommissioned once Interstate 49 was designated.
Nope. Check the AASHTO minutes. It was never formally decommissioned. It still exists.
The FHWA Interstate Highway Log does not list I-130 as an existing route; whether AASHTO still considers it an active designation for old Arkansas 245 -- or even the short stub remainder of 245 just south of I-30 -- is probably a moot point at this time since the extension of I-49 over much of that state highway. I do have a question for AR-based posters: Is the freeway extension from the I-49 interchange south of Texarkana west into Texas (Loop 151 in that state) still on the AR books as part of AR 245?
It's posted as AR 151 in field, sometimes as TO US 59 on the overhead signs.
Thanks; that clears that up! Follow-up question: is the "stub end" of former AR 245 just south of I-30 -- the original "I-130" corridor -- still on the books as AR 245, even though it's only a few blocks long?
"Four States Fair Parkway", but no official state highway designation.
Old AR 245 is no longer on the state system so it wouldn't have a state highway designation.
Quote from: bugo on June 24, 2017, 07:56:11 PM
Old AR 245 is no longer on the state system so it wouldn't have a state highway designation.
Except between I-49 and the Texas State Line, which is now AR 151 (but not fully signed)
Quote from: oscar on March 16, 2017, 12:14:09 AM
Wasn't that proposed freeway mostly or completely incorporated into I-49 alpng the east side of Texarkana, making I-130 a dead proposal?
Since Wikipedia's reliability is uneven, you're right to ask for more info. But I suspect this is a case where Wikipedia is out of date.
Just removed
everything I-130 on the wiki page.
I reverted your vandalism. I-130 is true history.
Maybe Interstate 369 and TX/AR 151 should have been Interstate 130. At least it would not have to wait years if not decades to connect with the mainline, as will be the case with 369.
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on December 18, 2017, 03:23:22 PM
Maybe Interstate 369 and TX/AR 151 should have been Interstate 130. At least it would not have to wait years if not decades to connect with the mainline, as will be the case with 369.
Actually -- since it does connect with a trunk Interstate at each end, the US 59-TX/AR 151 freeway might well be the long-missing
I-230! If they eventually reroute I-369 further west, such a designation would be again appropriate.
I thought it was changed permenantly once I-49 was signed through here.
A request to decommission Future I-130 was never submitted to AASHTO, so it still exists on paper.
Quote from: Hurricane Rex on December 19, 2017, 02:39:22 AM
I thought it was changed permenantly once I-49 was signed through here.
I-130 never was posted due to it becoming I-49. ARDOT may have forgotten to file the paperwork to declare it defunct, but it's dead.
Quote from: US71 on December 19, 2017, 11:50:34 AM
Quote from: Hurricane Rex on December 19, 2017, 02:39:22 AM
I thought it was changed permenantly once I-49 was signed through here.
I-130 never was posted due to it becoming I-49. ARDOT may have forgotten to file the paperwork to declare it defunct, but it's dead.
It was signed as Future I-130 back when it was AR 245. Still, you're right: The entire AASHTO-approved route of I-130 is now either I-49 or Four States Fair Boulevard (replaced as a freeway by I-49), and there's now no reason to use that number on AR 151 as AHTD had wanted. The fat lady sang on I-130, but AHTD/ARDOT didn't let AASHTO know.
I-369 should be decommissioned and the Texarkana loop from I-49 to I-30 on the west side of town should be I-230 or I-449 or some other suitable number. If I-369 is ever built to the south of Texarkana then it can end at the loop. There is absolutely no reason for I-369 to exist in its current state.
Agreed. Chances are likely I-369 won't even connect directly into the existing Texarkana loop South of I-30. Most plans put it miles West of Texarkana to serve all the industrial facilities out there and then hook over East to meet the current end of I-49 North of Texarkana. They need to give the Western half of that loop between the I-49 split and I-30 interchange a different Interstate number. If the road had been designated at I-230 rather than I-130 there would have been no problem.
Quote from: bugo on December 26, 2017, 07:58:38 PM
I-369 should be decommissioned and the Texarkana loop from I-49 to I-30 on the west side of town should be I-230 or I-449 or some other suitable number. If I-369 is ever built to the south of Texarkana then it can end at the loop. There is absolutely no reason for I-369 to exist in its current state.
Quote from: Bobby5280 on December 27, 2017, 01:07:41 PM
Agreed. Chances are likely I-369 won't even connect directly into the existing Texarkana loop South of I-30. Most plans put it miles West of Texarkana to serve all the industrial facilities out there and then hook over East to meet the current end of I-49 North of Texarkana. They need to give the Western half of that loop between the I-49 split and I-30 interchange a different Interstate number. If the road had been designated at I-230 rather than I-130 there would have been no problem.
The decidedly premature designation of I-369 over the existing US 59 freeway was simply an exercise in P.R.; it's simply a placeholder commissioned over a short piece of Interstate-standard freeway that was never likely to be part of 369's final alignment. It was signed merely to indicate that I-369 -- or the I-69 "cluster" in general -- had a foothold in the northeastern corner of TX -- no more, no less. I'd be willing to wager that somewhere down the line -- after 369 is sited on a western bypass as described above -- that the entire loop, including what's currently numbered I-369 -- is awarded a x49 or x30 -- but that won't occur for another 15-20 years at the earliest.
The other stupid thing about it is the I-369 designation only runs about 4 miles rather than the 8.75 miles down and over to the I-49 split. I assume I-369 currently ends at the exit for US-59. It's kind of annoying when an Interstate designation mysteriously ends on a freeway yet the freeway still continues forward. I-555 is another one that does that (ending in Jonesboro at the US-49 exit); the freeway becomes US-63 and travels about another 5 miles NW before turning into a 4 lane undivided highway.
Quote from: Bobby5280 on December 28, 2017, 04:45:16 PM
The other stupid thing about it is the I-369 designation only runs about 4 miles rather than the 8.75 miles down and over to the I-49 split. I assume I-369 currently ends at the exit for US-59. It's kind of annoying when an Interstate designation mysteriously ends on a freeway yet the freeway still continues forward. I-555 is another one that does that (ending in Jonesboro at the US-49 exit); the freeway becomes US-63 and travels about another 5 miles NW before turning into a 4 lane undivided highway.
Correct assumption; I-369 is only designated over that portion of freeway occupied by US 59; Loop 151 was never considered a part of the "69"-based cluster. It would be pointless, considering the route will likely be moved west a few miles, to temporarily extend it over 151 to I-49; better to wait until the new I-369 is built and then seek another designation for the whole facility between I-30 and I-49.