Proposed US 412 Upgrade

[sparker]

I'd actually put my two taxable cents in for not pussyfooting around and using I-50 for the designation here.  Not just to use up that I-x0, but because at that time the Muskogee Turnpike could conceivably receive a 3di based on that designation: I-350, just about as close as one can get to the current AR 351 designation (not that anyone in OK outside ODOT and we roadgeeks likely gives a rat's ass about that turnpike number!) so as not to cause too many fits within ODOT!   

Agreed, sparker. And the spur to Cimarron could be I-150.

And ... could this mean US 412 itself could go away between I-35 and I-49 and be replaced with I-50? There are many overlaps along its route west of I-35, and it seems like shifting US 412 to surface routes parallel to the new Interstate would just increase its shared alignments with other routes. Maybe ... but probably not, at least for the short term assuming this proposal comes to fruition.

As far as truncating US 412 is concerned, it's likely that whoever the parties are that proposed and implemented the western extension through the Panhandle and on to I-25 would have a shit fit about removing the designation & signage; obviously they thought that a single designation across that part of OK and into NM was necessary for someone's purposes of navigation.  Snarky idea that blurs the Fictional line here:  If the Raton-Dumas branch of the P2P is ever approved as an Interstate corridor, designate it as the same number (I-50?) as the corridor under discussion here -- and dare the powers that be to connect them!  They're more or less (with a little tweaking in the TX panhandle) on the same latitude.  Hardly needed to address any major through traffic issues in that neck of the woods -- but that hasn't always stopped corridor designation before -- particularly in regards to congressional districts through which it would run!  At least it would be a fun (and funky) way to get from NWA to the Front Range!

I-50 would make sense as the only other E/W route in the vicinity that would be somewhat grid-compliant would be US-60 for an I-50.  And US-54/US-400 would tend to lend itself to an eventual I-60 as US-50 is too near I-70 for a couple of states in the middle of the country.  It's my belief that they came up with the whole US-4** scheme to mess with the OCD types enough to force a consideration of replacement with an eventual Interstate designation on all of the routes in question as they tend to be in consistent latitudes or radials between capital cities.

Except for US 425, which just peters out in Natchez (as US 65 used to do).  Seeing that 425 replaced (or was multiplexed with) LA 15, I for one wouldn't be surprised if either 425 or US 65 is eventually extended down that highway (aka part of the "Great River Road") toward Baton Rouge -- which would put it closer to the category as a connector between state capitals, even though the north end is in Pine Bluff, 30 miles distant from LR!

[MikieTimT]

I-50 would make sense as the only other E/W route in the vicinity that would be somewhat grid-compliant would be US-60 for an I-50.  And US-54/US-400 would tend to lend itself to an eventual I-60 as US-50 is too near I-70 for a couple of states in the middle of the country.  It's my belief that they came up with the whole US-4** scheme to mess with the OCD types enough to force a consideration of replacement with an eventual Interstate designation on all of the routes in question as they tend to be in consistent latitudes or radials between capital cities.

Except for US 425, which just peters out in Natchez (as US 65 used to do).  Seeing that 425 replaced (or was multiplexed with) LA 15, I for one wouldn't be surprised if either 425 or US 65 is eventually extended down that highway (aka part of the "Great River Road") toward Baton Rouge -- which would put it closer to the category as a connector between state capitals, even though the north end is in Pine Bluff, 30 miles distant from LR!

The 30 miles between LR and Pine Bluff would likely change designations to a 2DI from its current 3DI like I-540 between Alma and Bella Vista became I-49, if the unlikely event ever came to fruition of a freeway between Pine Bluff and Baton Rouge, assuming there's ever freeway between Pine Bluff and Monticello even.

[The Ghostbuster]

I don't think there will ever be an Interstate 50 or an Interstate 60. Those two designations were avoided to prevent conflicting with US 50 and US 60. I don't see those two designations being used unless they did it in an out-of-place "Interstate 99-like" location.

[sparker]

I-50 would make sense as the only other E/W route in the vicinity that would be somewhat grid-compliant would be US-60 for an I-50.  And US-54/US-400 would tend to lend itself to an eventual I-60 as US-50 is too near I-70 for a couple of states in the middle of the country.  It's my belief that they came up with the whole US-4** scheme to mess with the OCD types enough to force a consideration of replacement with an eventual Interstate designation on all of the routes in question as they tend to be in consistent latitudes or radials between capital cities.

Except for US 425, which just peters out in Natchez (as US 65 used to do).  Seeing that 425 replaced (or was multiplexed with) LA 15, I for one wouldn't be surprised if either 425 or US 65 is eventually extended down that highway (aka part of the "Great River Road") toward Baton Rouge -- which would put it closer to the category as a connector between state capitals, even though the north end is in Pine Bluff, 30 miles distant from LR!

The 30 miles between LR and Pine Bluff would likely change designations to a 2DI from its current 3DI like I-540 between Alma and Bella Vista became I-49, if the unlikely event ever came to fruition of a freeway between Pine Bluff and Baton Rouge, assuming there's ever freeway between Pine Bluff and Monticello even.

I'd place odds of I-57 usurping I-530 -- and eventually AR 530 -- at least as far south as the I-69 corridor at Monticello, once (a) I-57 is signed north of LR and (b) there's some definitive movement on I-69 and/or an extension south to either I-20 in Monroe, LA or I-49 down in Alexandria is planned.  I don't think there's enough traffic on US 425 south of Bastrop/US 165 to warrant an Interstate corridor marching down the banks of the Mississippi. 

I don't think there will ever be an Interstate 50 or an Interstate 60. Those two designations were avoided to prevent conflicting with US 50 and US 60. I don't see those two designations being used unless they did it in an out-of-place "Interstate 99-like" location.

It's not the actual presence of US 50 or US 60 that is the prohibitive factor here, it's the longstanding policy of not deploying an identically-numbered US and Interstate highway in the same state.  Since the US 412 corridor doesn't hit a state where US 50 is deployed (save MO's "boot heel"), such a corridor is technically possible, particularly if the Interstate portion remains west of I-49.  Likewise US 400 to the north could conceivably be a route for an I-60 designation, remaining in KS and possibly CO for its length (I don't think anyone would quibble about a few hundred yards prior to the I-44 junction!).  But the presence of the OK turnpikes and the growth of NWA as its own metro area makes the US 412 corridor the more likely of the two for near-term development.   I've iterated the rationale for the I-50 designation before; that hasn't changed.   

[MikieTimT]

It's not the actual presence of US 50 or US 60 that is the prohibitive factor here, it's the longstanding policy of not deploying an identically-numbered US and Interstate highway in the same state.  Since the US 412 corridor doesn't hit a state where US 50 is deployed (save MO's "boot heel"), such a corridor is technically possible, particularly if the Interstate portion remains west of I-49.  Likewise US 400 to the north could conceivably be a route for an I-60 designation, remaining in KS and possibly CO for its length (I don't think anyone would quibble about a few hundred yards prior to the I-44 junction!).  But the presence of the OK turnpikes and the growth of NWA as its own metro area makes the US 412 corridor the more likely of the two for near-term development.   I've iterated the rationale for the I-50 designation before; that hasn't changed.

Clearly that policy isn't really valid anymore, even in Arkansas (I-49/US-49).  It's not really that difficult in this day and age to add an I to a route designation in state databases to delineate it from its US/State highway counterpart.

[sparker]

Like the English language, technical rules concerning Interstate numbering practice have numerous exceptions; IL has hosted both US 24 and I-24 since the systems' inception.  Of course, NC takes it to an extreme with both US 74 & I-74 occupying the same alignment.  The rule wasn't predicated to keep anyone's database pristine; it was more for eliminating possible confusion for public navigation purposes (initially based on the notion that the driving public would confuse an I-50 with US 50 if the two were in close proximity).  When the initial systems' numbering was decided circa 1956-58, the concept of E-W numbers ending in zero being "special" in terms of importance was (at least IMO) oversold, leading to such things as I-80 heading to San Francisco while I-80N shot up to Portland, some 650 miles to the north.  Presently -- at least in terms of additional corridors being added -- the system is now "pre-sold"; the number "50" is just another even number in the compendium of unassigned designations.  For the US 412 corridor, I-46, 48, or 52 would work equally well in this situation; I suggested 50 for the reasons discussed upthread. 

[Avalanchez71]

Like the English language, technical rules concerning Interstate numbering practice have numerous exceptions; IL has hosted both US 24 and I-24 since the systems' inception.  Of course, NC takes it to an extreme with both US 74 & I-74 occupying the same alignment.  The rule wasn't predicated to keep anyone's database pristine; it was more for eliminating possible confusion for public navigation purposes (initially based on the notion that the driving public would confuse an I-50 with US 50 if the two were in close proximity).  When the initial systems' numbering was decided circa 1956-58, the concept of E-W numbers ending in zero being "special" in terms of importance was (at least IMO) oversold, leading to such things as I-80 heading to San Francisco while I-80N shot up to Portland, some 650 miles to the north.  Presently -- at least in terms of additional corridors being added -- the system is now "pre-sold"; the number "50" is just another even number in the compendium of unassigned designations.  For the US 412 corridor, I-46, 48, or 52 would work equally well in this situation; I suggested 50 for the reasons discussed upthread.

I really so no reason but to keep this as US 412.  Although I would personally renumber US 412 to US 66.

[sparker]

Like the English language, technical rules concerning Interstate numbering practice have numerous exceptions; IL has hosted both US 24 and I-24 since the systems' inception.  Of course, NC takes it to an extreme with both US 74 & I-74 occupying the same alignment.  The rule wasn't predicated to keep anyone's database pristine; it was more for eliminating possible confusion for public navigation purposes (initially based on the notion that the driving public would confuse an I-50 with US 50 if the two were in close proximity).  When the initial systems' numbering was decided circa 1956-58, the concept of E-W numbers ending in zero being "special" in terms of importance was (at least IMO) oversold, leading to such things as I-80 heading to San Francisco while I-80N shot up to Portland, some 650 miles to the north.  Presently -- at least in terms of additional corridors being added -- the system is now "pre-sold"; the number "50" is just another even number in the compendium of unassigned designations.  For the US 412 corridor, I-46, 48, or 52 would work equally well in this situation; I suggested 50 for the reasons discussed upthread.

I really so no reason but to keep this as US 412.  Although I would personally renumber US 412 to US 66.

(yawn) .....what else is new?  Tell that to the combined OK/AR congressional delegation who is proposing the upgrade; the views of a non-constituent should carry considerable weight there!  While this corridor is yet to be considered a fait accompli, the fact that about 70% of it is completed (assuming it uses AR 612) bodes well for its eventual development.   Just because there's an adage out there saying that "everything doesn't have to be an Interstate" doesn't mean that a few select corridors actually serving as connectors between growing metro areas don't warrant that level of service.   

[MikieTimT]

Like the English language, technical rules concerning Interstate numbering practice have numerous exceptions; IL has hosted both US 24 and I-24 since the systems' inception.  Of course, NC takes it to an extreme with both US 74 & I-74 occupying the same alignment.  The rule wasn't predicated to keep anyone's database pristine; it was more for eliminating possible confusion for public navigation purposes (initially based on the notion that the driving public would confuse an I-50 with US 50 if the two were in close proximity).  When the initial systems' numbering was decided circa 1956-58, the concept of E-W numbers ending in zero being "special" in terms of importance was (at least IMO) oversold, leading to such things as I-80 heading to San Francisco while I-80N shot up to Portland, some 650 miles to the north.  Presently -- at least in terms of additional corridors being added -- the system is now "pre-sold"; the number "50" is just another even number in the compendium of unassigned designations.  For the US 412 corridor, I-46, 48, or 52 would work equally well in this situation; I suggested 50 for the reasons discussed upthread.

I really so no reason but to keep this as US 412.  Although I would personally renumber US 412 to US 66.

(yawn) .....what else is new?  Tell that to the combined OK/AR congressional delegation who is proposing the upgrade; the views of a non-constituent should carry considerable weight there!  While this corridor is yet to be considered a fait accompli, the fact that about 70% of it is completed (assuming it uses AR 612) bodes well for its eventual development.   Just because there's an adage out there saying that "everything doesn't have to be an Interstate" doesn't mean that a few select corridors actually serving as connectors between growing metro areas don't warrant that level of service.   

I actually am a constituent and have contacted both Sen. Cotton and Sen. Boozman with my idea of numbering it I-50 to make Lowell/Springdale the numeric center of the IHS.  I can't think of any other U.S. highway that would warrant that designation that serves a larger set of areas in the middle of the country and remains grid compliant.  Think of the marketing benefits of such a designation, and it becomes an easy sell to congressmen.  It eventually will extend in length on one end or the other, although perhaps not in our lifetimes.  Now if there was only some way of changing my avatar to I-50!  That would raise a stink around here with at least one individual!

[skluth]

It's not the actual presence of US 50 or US 60 that is the prohibitive factor here, it's the longstanding policy of not deploying an identically-numbered US and Interstate highway in the same state.

I think Wisconsin trashed that policy with I-41.

[Scott5114]

I don't think there will ever be an Interstate 50 or an Interstate 60. Those two designations were avoided to prevent conflicting with US 50 and US 60. I don't see those two designations being used unless they did it in an out-of-place "Interstate 99-like" location.

If you were going to put Interstate 60 down anywhere, Oklahoma would be the place to do it, since it very much doesn't care about different route types with the same number conflicting. US 270 and OK 270 run within a few miles of each other, and I-44, US 54, US 56, US 59, and US 83 all also have state highways with the same number.

I really so no reason but to keep this as US 412.  Although I would personally renumber US 412 to US 66.

I really so no reason for you to keep throwing a tantrum on here every time a project where the government could theoretically spend money is mentioned. Starting to think you're trolling.

[Plutonic Panda]

^^^^ you're just now starting to think that!?!! Lololol.. it took my about seeing 5-6 of his posts to come to that conclusion. I'm almost certain he is. I wonder what his opinion on the billion dollar I-69 project in Texas is? Or I am VERY interested to know what he thinks about the Port to Plains Corridor.

[MikieTimT]

^^^^ you're just now starting to think that!?!! Lololol.. it took my about seeing 5-6 of his posts to come to that conclusion. I'm almost certain he is. I wonder what his opinion on the billion dollar I-69 project in Texas is? Or I am VERY interested to know what he thinks about the Port to Plains Corridor.

It is done.  Forgot about good old MS Paint and uploading avatars.

[Scott5114]

It is done.  Forgot about good old MS Paint and uploading avatars.

Heh, I actually drew up a shield and started monkeying around with your profile to try and surprise you with it, but you beat me to it.

Here it is if you want one that's a bit higher quality.

[MikieTimT]

It is done.  Forgot about good old MS Paint and uploading avatars.

Heh, I actually drew up a shield and started monkeying around with your profile to try and surprise you with it, but you beat me to it.

Here it is if you want one that's a bit higher quality.

Yours was better, so I switched.  Thanks!  It does seem a tad smaller than the standard shields for some reason, though.

[Scott5114]

You're welcome! That image is 65px high, which was the same height as your old avatar. I could make it a tad bigger if you wanted.

If you're talking about the digits, those are smaller; that's a 1956-style shield, which AHTD kept using well into the 2000s (and thus was what they were using the first few times I ventured east, so I still associate it with Arkansas). They only changed to the modern shield design when I-540 was renumbered to I-49.

[Scott5114]

^^^^ you're just now starting to think that!?!! Lololol.. it took my about seeing 5-6 of his posts to come to that conclusion. I'm almost certain he is. I wonder what his opinion on the billion dollar I-69 project in Texas is? Or I am VERY interested to know what he thinks about the Port to Plains Corridor.

Way back in his posting history I seem to remember seeing that he identified as a former Tennessee politician, so I always just assumed that the fiscal-pants-crapping song-and-dance was a holdover from that and a terminal failure to recognize that a road forum isn't going to eat his performance up the way his constituents used to. But some of his recent behavior (like posting the same shtick in the FritzOwl thread of all places) is making me second-guess that assumption.

[Plutonic Panda]

^^^^ you're just now starting to think that!?!! Lololol.. it took my about seeing 5-6 of his posts to come to that conclusion. I'm almost certain he is. I wonder what his opinion on the billion dollar I-69 project in Texas is? Or I am VERY interested to know what he thinks about the Port to Plains Corridor.

Way back in his posting history I seem to remember seeing that he identified as a former Tennessee politician, so I always just assumed that the fiscal-pants-crapping song-and-dance was a holdover from that and a terminal failure to recognize that a road forum isn't going to eat his performance up the way his constituents used to. But some of his recent behavior (like posting the same shtick in the FritzOwl thread of all places) is making me second-guess that assumption.

Fritzown and Avalanche would be hilarious to see as two challengers: when an unstoppable force meets an immovable object.

[Scott5114]

^^^^ you're just now starting to think that!?!! Lololol.. it took my about seeing 5-6 of his posts to come to that conclusion. I'm almost certain he is. I wonder what his opinion on the billion dollar I-69 project in Texas is? Or I am VERY interested to know what he thinks about the Port to Plains Corridor.

Way back in his posting history I seem to remember seeing that he identified as a former Tennessee politician, so I always just assumed that the fiscal-pants-crapping song-and-dance was a holdover from that and a terminal failure to recognize that a road forum isn't going to eat his performance up the way his constituents used to. But some of his recent behavior (like posting the same shtick in the FritzOwl thread of all places) is making me second-guess that assumption.

Fritzown and Avalanche would be hilarious to see as two challengers: when an unstoppable force meets an immovable object.

You don't have to imagine–go look.

[MikieTimT]

You're welcome! That image is 65px high, which was the same height as your old avatar. I could make it a tad bigger if you wanted.

If you're talking about the digits, those are smaller; that's a 1956-style shield, which AHTD kept using well into the 2000s (and thus was what they were using the first few times I ventured east, so I still associate it with Arkansas). They only changed to the modern shield design when I-540 was renumbered to I-49.

I think everyone else's is 80x80, but if it gets in the craw of a few OCD types, I wouldn't mind that either as I deal with doctors and lawyers all day!

[Bobby5280]

I actually am a constituent and have contacted both Sen. Cotton and Sen. Boozman with my idea of numbering it I-50 to make Lowell/Springdale the numeric center of the IHS.

Um, NO.

First off, I think it would be nothing short of ridiculous to give the US-412 route from Tulsa to I-49 the "I-50" designation (or "I-60" for that matter). While the US-412 corridor could be an Interstate quality route, it would be a MINOR, SHORT DISTANCE Interstate route, even if the designation extended West of Tulsa to I-35. That is not a MAJOR route. Most MAJOR Interstate routes span much of the nation, either East-West or North-South. This is just a dinky 2-state route, with only a tiny bit in Arkansas.

As far as the "geographical center" of the Interstate highway system goes, there are only two cities in consideration: Oklahoma City and Kansas City. That's it. My vote is OKC. But I'm in Oklahoma and perhaps a bit biased. Nevertheless, I-35 is THE central MAJOR North-South route in the middle of the Interstate highway system. And I-40 is as major an East-West corridor as any in the system. Given the shift of America's population more to the South and Central part of the US that puts even more emphasis on OKC as a critical hub city of the overall system.

I have my own fictional fantasy version of an "I-50" route, one that would go from Jacksonville, FL up to I-90 in Washington state. From Jacksonville it would overlap US-1 to Waycross, GA then follow US-82 thru Albany, GA up to Columbus. It would go thru Auburn and Birmingham. My idea of "I-50" would eat all of I-22. And it would eat I-555. My "I-50" would go thru Jonesboro and Walnut Ridge. Then it would go into Missouri onto the US-60 corridor and follow that to Springfield. The highway would multiplex with I-44 just a smidge to then go North of Carthage and Joplin on the way to Wichita. Then the route would go West to Dodge City where it would meet up with US-50, and both would co-exist well into Colorado. My "I-50" would cross I-25 in Pueblo, then go thru Cañon City and over to Grand Junction. That would result in a I-50/I-70 multiplex to the US-6 split in Green River, UT. Then "I-50" would upgrade US-6 from there up to I-15 in Provo. Then one could end that version of "I-50" there or have it overlap I-84 and I-82 to get into Washington state. Even if this concept of "I-50" made it from Jacksonville, FL to Provo, UT it would be one hell of an Interstate route.

Aside from all that fictional territory, the US-412 route as an Interstate highway really has only two legit options, either "I-46" or "I-48".

[sprjus4]

I-30, I-45.

I don't see much issue using the I-50 or I-60 designations, given there's not any good place for their usage on any major east-west corridor.

Sure, I-64 could make a good I-60, but let's not change designations after being established for 70 years now.

[Bobby5280]

There less things wrong with US-412 being re-numbered as I-46 or I-48. That would actually be much more sensible in relation to I-44 going thru Tulsa.

[Avalanchez71]

^^^^ you’re just now starting to think that!?!! Lololol.. it took my about seeing 5-6 of his posts to come to that conclusion. I’m almost certain he is. I wonder what his opinion on the billion dollar I-69 project in Texas is? Or I am VERY interested to know what he thinks about the Port to Plains Corridor.

Way back in his posting history I seem to remember seeing that he identified as a former Tennessee politician, so I always just assumed that the fiscal-pants-crapping song-and-dance was a holdover from that and a terminal failure to recognize that a road forum isn't going to eat his performance up the way his constituents used to. But some of his recent behavior (like posting the same shtick in the FritzOwl thread of all places) is making me second-guess that assumption.

I was a former Tennessee politician.  I was duly elected by the people and I did save the taxpayers money whilst in office.  I am actually considering another run next cycle.

[Rothman]

^^^^ you're just now starting to think that!?!! Lololol.. it took my about seeing 5-6 of his posts to come to that conclusion. I'm almost certain he is. I wonder what his opinion on the billion dollar I-69 project in Texas is? Or I am VERY interested to know what he thinks about the Port to Plains Corridor.

Way back in his posting history I seem to remember seeing that he identified as a former Tennessee politician, so I always just assumed that the fiscal-pants-crapping song-and-dance was a holdover from that and a terminal failure to recognize that a road forum isn't going to eat his performance up the way his constituents used to. But some of his recent behavior (like posting the same shtick in the FritzOwl thread of all places) is making me second-guess that assumption.

I was a former Tennessee politician.  I was duly elected by the people and I did save the taxpayers money whilst in office.  I am actually considering another run next cycle.

What office did you hold?