Interstate 369

[sprjus4]

Look at the configuration of the completed freeway exit of US-59 at FM-3129 a few miles East of Wright Patman Lake on the Southern outskirts of Texarkana. The thru lanes of US-59 are in a narrow 2-2 configuration, separated by a concrete Jersey barrier. I strongly doubt that existing exit will be modified when I-369 is routed thru that spot. Chances are good I-369 will be built through that area as a narrow OK Turnpike style 2-2 road with only a Jersey barrier separating the traffic movements.

A lot of I-69 segments - and other newer freeways in Texas - are being built like that - even continuous freeway segments - 2 lanes in each direction divided by a concrete barrier. Narrower footprint, less impacts, etc.

One difference is most of the time they build in a 10 foot left shoulder to provide some "wiggle" room, but this particular interchange only has a 4 foot left shoulder.

Nonetheless, concrete barrier or 100 foot grassy median, still the same amount of capacity, still a 75 mph speed limit, still Interstate 69, etc.

The US-75 freeway northeast of Dallas has a long stretch with that narrow design - to give an example of what a typical I-69 rural section will look like for a lot of its distance in Texas.

Parts of recently-completed I-69 continuous freeway segments (not individual interchanges) have been built with this design - such as around Bishop and Robstown.

A 30 mile stretch southeast of Houston between El Campo and Kendleton that's going to be under construction in ~5 years has this continuous barrier design - same with a 40 stretch on US-281 between the current north end of I-69C and Falfurrius.

[dariusb]

Houston is an East Texas city. There's not actually any real Southeast part of Texas. The actual South part of Texas is down in Brownsville, Harlingen, McAllen and the rest of that huge cluster of small cities that make up the Rio Grande Valley. Both Texarkana and Houston are East Texas cities. Any "Southeast" portion would be a point down in the Gulf of Mexico.

Maybe on the map it is east Texas, but Texans do not consider Houston as East Texas.  If East Texas were a state, Tyler would be the capital.  As you go further southeast from Tyler, Lufkin and Nacogdoches to the Louisiana border are considered Deep East Texas.  I don't know what Houston is considered, but I would think Southeast would be correct.  The area where Brownsville, Harlingen, McAllen is called The Valley to Texans.

the
Exactly!

[Bobby5280]

Whatever. Split hairs about region names in Texas all you like. It's still pure fantasy for anyone to suggest I-369 going into Texarkana is going to carry a 250,000 VPD load.

Initially, that's probably an accurate forecast; due to both the NIMBY factor and the concurrent desire to preserve roadside commerce as much as possible, either the format described here or some sort of elevated (berm, bridge) but narrow facility is likely to be the one deployed.  But down the line, if the principal raison d'etre of the I-369 corridor -- a conduit between Houston and I-30 -- fully plays out, traffic, particularly if dominated by large commercial vehicles, may eventually overwhelm a minimalist facility such as described.

The last 1.5 miles of I-369 before it reaches the existing Loop 151 freeway around the Southern half of Texarkana will be elevated above the existing US-59 roadway. South of Liberty-Eylau Elementary School and N Eylau School Road I-369 will probably spread out into a narrow 4-lane Interstate closely flanked by frontage roads.

Since it looks very much like TX DOT is going to go to the trouble of routing I-369 into Texarkana along the existing US-59 alignment, hopefully they'll at least over-build the last 3 or 4 miles of the approach in a configuration of 3 lanes in both directions. That goes especially for the expensive, elevated segment. Texarkana is a not a huge city. Existing I-30, I-49 and Loop 151 are all merely 2 lanes in each direction. If a 250,000 VPD number on I-369 was realistic at all then all of the freeways in Texarkana would have to be radically expanded to handle the traffic burden. IMHO, 3 lanes in both directions is probably going to be enough. Much of I-35 between Austin and DFW has been rebuilt. And I-35 is the main import route coming in from Laredo, the nation's busiest inland commercial border crossing. Yet the new portions are in a 3-3 configuration. I-369 into Texarkana is not going to out-do the activity on I-35, especially with I-49 not built between Texarkana and Fort Smith. Maybe when all of that is done, as well as I-69 thru East Texas down to the Rio Grande Valley then I-369 might be seen as a good alternative to I-35. How many decades will pass before that happens? Even then I-369 as a 3-3 road into Texarkana might suffice just fine.

[dariusb]

It is rumored that TxDOT has long range plans to six-lane I-30 the entire length from the Hunt/Rockwall county line to Texarkana.

6-laning I-30 to the AR state line would probably be a pretty good idea considering the continued growth of the DFW metroplex and possibility of other new regional freeways/toll roads connecting into I-30.

As for the forecast of I-369 attracting 275,000 AADT levels, that seems like a very tall order. I-95 in Springfield, VA approaching the Capital Beltway has a AADT level of 256,000 at its busiest point (according to a VA DOT PDF of Fairfax County AADT levels). I-95 is a monster size highway there. Nothing like that is being proposed in the Texarkana area.

Katy Freeway at its most busy point, just East of Beltway 8 is 387,144 vehicles per day. Even if Texarkana can turn into a major distribution hub I don't see traffic levels on I-369 reaching 2/3 of Katy Freeway's levels. I also doubt it will be the "largest, most impressive freeway system in all of East Texas." Katy Freeway clearly has that title currently. And Katy Freeway would only potentially be surpassed by the massive I-45 re-routing project around downtown Houston.

Bella Vista Bypass, not Bentonville.

They should have called it the Walmart Bypass.

Off topic but I love reading about highways especially the busiest ones. I read that the 3 busiest as far as traffic counts are concerned were LA's I-405, Chicago's I-290 and Toronto's 401. Recently Modesto, Merced and Stockton were added to San Francisco-Oakland_San Jose's CSA based off of commuting patterns. I can only imagine what traffic in that region's like. I read a big reason so many people are commuting from the aforementioned cities to the Bay area is because a lot of people who used to live there had to move to outlying cities because they could no longer afford to live there. Sparked probably could add more to this since he lives there. Sorry about the book report. I can get long winded and even random at times.

[dariusb]

Whatever. Split hairs about region names in Texas all you like. It's still pure fantasy for anyone to suggest I-369 going into Texarkana is going to carry a 250,000 VPD load.

Initially, that's probably an accurate forecast; due to both the NIMBY factor and the concurrent desire to preserve roadside commerce as much as possible, either the format described here or some sort of elevated (berm, bridge) but narrow facility is likely to be the one deployed.  But down the line, if the principal raison d'etre of the I-369 corridor -- a conduit between Houston and I-30 -- fully plays out, traffic, particularly if dominated by large commercial vehicles, may eventually overwhelm a minimalist facility such as described.

The last 1.5 miles of I-369 before it reaches the existing Loop 151 freeway around the Southern half of Texarkana will be elevated above the existing US-59 roadway. South of Liberty-Eylau Elementary School and N Eylau School Road I-369 will probably spread out into a narrow 4-lane Interstate closely flanked by frontage roads.

Since it looks very much like TX DOT is going to go to the trouble of routing I-369 into Texarkana along the existing US-59 alignment, hopefully they'll at least over-build the last 3 or 4 miles of the approach in a configuration of 3 lanes in both directions. That goes especially for the expensive, elevated segment. Texarkana is a not a huge city. Existing I-30, I-49 and Loop 151 are all merely 2 lanes in each direction. If a 250,000 VPD number on I-369 was realistic at all then all of the freeways in Texarkana would have to be radically expanded to handle the traffic burden. IMHO, 3 lanes in both directions is probably going to be enough. Much of I-35 between Austin and DFW has been rebuilt. And I-35 is the main import route coming in from Laredo, the nation's busiest inland commercial border crossing. Yet the new portions are in a 3-3 configuration. I-369 into Texarkana is not going to out-do the activity on I-35, especially with I-49 not built between Texarkana and Fort Smith. Maybe when all of that is done, as well as I-69 thru East Texas down to the Rio Grande Valley then I-369 might be seen as a good alternative to I-35. How many decades will pass before that happens? Even then I-369 as a 3-3 road into Texarkana might suffice just fine.

No one knows for sure what the traffic counts on Texarkana's freeways will be in the future, that's why it's called a projection because they're just guessing based off how much they THINK Texarkana will grow. For all we know Texarkana will stay a small townI. I'd rather them aim a little higher than too low and have a mountain of future transportation issues. I just hope that it gets built without too much procrastinating. You're right I-35 is something else from DFW to San Antonio. I live in Killeen so believe me I know.

[Bobby5280]

Off topic but I love reading about highways especially the busiest ones. I read that the 3 busiest as far as traffic counts are concerned were LA's I-405, Chicago's I-290 and Toronto's 401.

Just recently I did some research on that topic, mainly about a claim involving route 401 in Ontario. Portions of it in the metro Toronto area do have the greatest daily traffic loads in all of North America, ranging betwen 400,000 and 500,000 vehicles per day.

In the US the knee-jerk assumption is to credit I-405 in LA as the busiest road in the US or even in that metro area. But a recent look of Caltrans AADT figures actually showed greater VPD loads on some parts of I-10 than any counts on I-405. I-10 was the only route in the LA metro that had any portions surpassing the 350,000 VPD level. Meanwhile, farther East, parts of I-10 along Katy Freeway on the West side of Houston has VPD figures peaking at 387,000 VPD. Feel free to correct me on this, but that's a greater traffic level than anything I've seen elsewhere in the US. That includes I-95 in metro NYC and the greater Chicago area. I was all but certain I-95 going through Springfield, VA would have a AADT figure of at least 400,000 VPD, but it's only around the 250,000 level.

Recently Modesto, Merced and Stockton were added to San Francisco-Oakland_San Jose's CSA based off of commuting patterns. I can only imagine what traffic in that region's like. I read a big reason so many people are commuting from the aforementioned cities to the Bay area is because a lot of people who used to live there had to move to outlying cities because they could no longer afford to live there.

There is actually a pretty significant out-flow of people leaving California entirely because living costs have grown so hatefully absurd. The same goes for the Eastern Seaboard region (DC, NYC, Boston, Philadelphia, etc). Big cities in Texas have been a huge beneficiary of all this migration. The front range cities in Colorado have also seen a lot of growth from that migration. But living costs in those cities are also getting very stupid.

Meanwhile, the hillbillies running the state government here in Oklahoma are doing their best to keep this state backwards as much as possible. Oklahoma has a relatively warm climate and relatively very affordable living costs. But you have to think twice if you want to raise a family here since our cheapskate electorate doesn't believe in things like public schools or even making parenthood affordable at all. So if you can't afford to land somewhere in Texas, better keep going East.

[dariusb]

I can definitely believe that about Houston's I-10. Southwest freeway(I-69) has in excess of 300,000 also. Could some of the disparity in Toronto's 401 vpd have something to do with frontage roads. Do they even have those up there?

[Echostatic]

Not nearly as impressive as some of these numbers, but I-35 in Downtown Austin handles 219k VPD on a three-lane highway. It peaks at 239k in North Central Austin but the highway is 4 lanes out there. Even in the far-flung suburbs I-35 still manages ~190k VPD.

[dariusb]

Right. I'd imagine even around Temple the vpd exceeds 100,000.

[sprjus4]

I-35 in Downtown Austin handles 219k VPD on a three-lane highway. It peaks at 239k in North Central Austin but the highway is 4 lanes out there. Even in the far-flung suburbs I-35 still manages ~190k VPD.

I-95 gets around 205,000 AADT in Northern Virginia where it's only 6-lanes (3 each way). A segment north of there has around 260,000 AADT, and until a few years ago, was only 6-lanes (3 each way). It has since been widened to 8-lanes (4 each way).

VDOT refuses to expand the portion where it's only 6-lanes (3 each way) because of the privately owned & operated reversible HO/T lanes in the median that prevent any general purpose expansion. As you could imagine, that stretch of I-95 is horrible, similar to I-35 which is no better. At least Austin has a bypass for thru traffic, TX-130.

[MaxConcrete]

Meanwhile, farther East, parts of I-10 along Katy Freeway on the West side of Houston has VPD figures peaking at 387,000 VPD.

The peak on the Katy Freeway dropped to 369K vpd in 2018. I was hoping it could break through 400K since it was so close in 2017. But another oil boom may be needed to break the 400K barrier.

Looking at the map, the value on the West Loop between I-10 and US 290 looks suspiciously low at 197K vpd. That must not count the traffic on the two connectors, which have four lanes each.

http://txdot.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=75e148d784554d99bea6e8602986bfd2

[Bobby5280]

The peak on the Katy Freeway dropped to 369K vpd in 2018. I was hoping it could break through 400K since it was so close in 2017. But another oil boom may be needed to break the 400K barrier.

The first In-N-Out Burger location in the Houston area is fixing to open in Katy near I-10. Maybe that will put the VPD figures over the top.

As Houston keeps growing and more big road expansion projects happen in Houston (like the big I-45/I-69/I-10 thing downtown) it may only be a matter of time before that 400,000 VPD barrier is broken.

Looking at the map, the value on the West Loop between I-10 and US 290 looks suspiciously low at 197K vpd. That must not count the traffic on the two connectors, which have four lanes each.

That would be my guess as well. The I97K figure has to be just the thru lanes of I-610 in that staggering combo interchange between US-290, I-10 and I-610. Some of the ramp lengths are crazy. The exit ramp from I-610 to I-10 starts before I-610 even gets through the US-290 interchange.

[sparker]

The peak on the Katy Freeway dropped to 369K vpd in 2018. I was hoping it could break through 400K since it was so close in 2017. But another oil boom may be needed to break the 400K barrier.

The first In-N-Out Burger location in the Houston area is fixing to open in Katy near I-10. Maybe that will put the VPD figures over the top.

As Houston keeps growing and more big road expansion projects happen in Houston (like the big I-45/I-69/I-10 thing downtown) it may only be a matter of time before that 400,000 VPD barrier is broken.

Looking at the map, the value on the West Loop between I-10 and US 290 looks suspiciously low at 197K vpd. That must not count the traffic on the two connectors, which have four lanes each.

That would be my guess as well. The I97K figure has to be just the thru lanes of I-610 in that staggering combo interchange between US-290, I-10 and I-610. Some of the ramp lengths are crazy. The exit ramp from I-610 to I-10 starts before I-610 even gets through the US-290 interchange.

Considering the short distance on I-610 between I-10 and US 290 and the traffic volumes involved, long interweaving ramps are both inevitable and necessary.  More of the same will in all likelihood crop up just east of there when the rerouting of I-45 and I-69 around the downtown area is completed.  Complex structures such as this are S.O.P. for urban interchanges these days; out here in northern CA the 80/580/880 interchange is the most visible example -- and it actually was somewhat simplified after the '89 earthquake leveled I-880 south of there by rerouting the ramps from 880 to westbound 80 out of the original interchange's footprint. 

[dariusb]

How long do you think it will take before all of Interstates 69 and 369 are completed in Texas? A minimum of 25 years maybe?

[Bobby5280]

Under the current model of federal involvement and funding (along with the current model of legal, environmental and regulatory hell) it will probably take at least 50 years for I-69 and I-369 to get completed in Texas. If those highways are ever completed. Some major breakthroughs will be needed in all aspects of highway development and construction (cost being a big one) for the time table to be sped up at all.

By comparison, it took almost 20 years for I-49 (1977 to 1996) to be approved and built between Lafayette and Shreveport. This was back when the highway building process was much faster, less expensive and less suffocated with red tape. The rural segments were finished by the early 1990's. The section through Alexandria was one of the last segments to open. The process of building I-49 South from Lafayette towards New Orleans is going much slower.

[sprjus4]

How long do you think it will take before all of Interstates 69 and 369 are completed in Texas? A minimum of 25 years maybe?

I'll give it at least 2050 or later. Granted, sections like I-69"W", I can't see every really happening. That road as a rural 2-lane highway posted at 75 mph with very light traffic. I've driven it a few times in full length, and asides from the towns, have really never had an issue with it. The most that needs to be done (and is completed in a few areas) is dualizing the highway to 4-lanes with town bypasses. Until traffic counts grow to interstate volumes (like the proposed I-69C, I-69E, and I-69 routes have), a 4-lane highway with a 75 mph speed limit will be adequate. I think the highest priorities for I-69 need to be upgrading US-281, US-77, and US-59 (north of Victoria) to interstate highway.

[sparker]

How long do you think it will take before all of Interstates 69 and 369 are completed in Texas? A minimum of 25 years maybe?

I'll give it at least 2050 or later. Granted, sections like I-69"W", I can't see every really happening. That road as a rural 2-lane highway posted at 75 mph with very light traffic. I've driven it a few times in full length, and asides from the towns, have really never had an issue with it. The most that needs to be done (and is completed in a few areas) is dualizing the highway to 4-lanes with town bypasses. Until traffic counts grow to interstate volumes (like the proposed I-69C, I-69E, and I-69 routes have), a 4-lane highway with a 75 mph speed limit will be adequate. I think the highest priorities for I-69 need to be upgrading US-281, US-77, and US-59 (north of Victoria) to interstate highway.

Re the proposed I-69W:  it's likely that the section from Laredo to Freer will be constructed first as part of the Laredo-Corpus "branch", the portion along TX 44 often touted as a potential "I-6".  If that occurs, I for one wouldn't be surprised if that was actually signed as I-69W, with the portion between Freer and George West being shelved (and possibly I-69C north of TX 44 assuming the main I-69 label).  Laredo has always been an "anchor" of the I-69 network; chances are it won't be abandoned, just accessed in a different way.   

[dariusb]

Off topic but I wonder what states complete road projects (new freeways) fastest?

[sprjus4]

Off topic but I wonder what states complete road projects (new freeways) fastest?

North Carolina built hundreds of miles of freeways not apart of the 56 & 68 interstate systems from the 80s - early 2000s. Things have slowed down since then, but there still getting built one by one, and the state plans to upgrade & construct hundreds of miles of freeway over the next couple of decades as funding allows.

Urban beltways have been the latest major focus. Raleigh, Greensboro, Winston-Salem, and Fayetteville all still not completed / underway. Charlotte and Wilmington are now completed, but were only finished in the last 5 years.

[O Tamandua]

I know this is just a small thing, all, but here is a link I just posted on the "Texas I-69" forum:

https://www.ktre.com/2019/10/03/city-state-dignitaries-celebrate-groundbreaking-nacogdoches-i-flyover-project/

To read the article and hear residents comments, the arrival of I-69 to Nacogdoches almost seems like the greatest thing since, well, sliced bread.  But that being said, note the picture atop the article.  At first, from the angle the dignitaries with shovels are photographed at it looks like they're sinking in the east Texas red clay.  But when I got past that I noticed the "Texarkana" green highway side in the distance beyond their shoulders.

Texarkana is 6 counties away.  One would think that Marshall, much closer on U S 59 and a relatively populous destination, would have its name up there.  TXK, however, gets that honor.

Again, just a small thing.  I've no clue about future traffic counts and may not live long enough to see this come to fruition. Yet bits and piece like this convince me ever further that Texarkana is going to become a far more significant transit point than anyone realizes.

[sparker]

I know this is just a small thing, all, but here is a link I just posted on the "Texas I-69" forum:

https://www.ktre.com/2019/10/03/city-state-dignitaries-celebrate-groundbreaking-nacogdoches-i-flyover-project/

To read the article and hear residents comments, the arrival of I-69 to Nacogdoches almost seems like the greatest thing since, well, sliced bread.  But that being said, note the picture atop the article.  At first, from the angle the dignitaries with shovels are photographed at it looks like they're sinking in the east Texas red clay.  But when I got past that I noticed the "Texarkana" green highway side in the distance beyond their shoulders.

Texarkana is 6 counties away.  One would think that Marshall, much closer on U S 59 and a relatively populous destination, would have its name up there.  TXK, however, gets that honor.

Again, just a small thing.  I've no clue about future traffic counts and may not live long enough to see this come to fruition. Yet bits and piece like this convince me ever further that Texarkana is going to become a far more significant transit point than anyone realizes.

As iterated previously, a Houston-Texarkana Interstate corridor is and always has been the hearts' desire of the main backers of the I-69 "group" (the Alliance for I-69/Texas and their cohorts within TxDOT); to that end it's no surprise that Texarkana is prominently mentioned as a destination.  OTOH, there's no singular present signed route between Houston and Shreveport; rather a myriad of segueing highways (I-69 would be the first such facility), so featuring Texarkana (which, after all, does lie along US 59) rather than Shreveport on existing surface roads would be a "natural".  And for all its importance as a local commerce center, Marshall just doesn't have the cachet that Texarkana has managed to muster. 

And, after all, there's beer in Texarkana....Marshall has yet to be part of a widespread iconic idiom!
(.....apologies to the late Jerry Reed!) 

[dariusb]

I know this is just a small thing, all, but here is a link I just posted on the "Texas I-69" forum:

https://www.ktre.com/2019/10/03/city-state-dignitaries-celebrate-groundbreaking-nacogdoches-i-flyover-project/

To read the article and hear residents comments, the arrival of I-69 to Nacogdoches almost seems like the greatest thing since, well, sliced bread.  But that being said, note the picture atop the article.  At first, from the angle the dignitaries with shovels are photographed at it looks like they're sinking in the east Texas red clay.  But when I got past that I noticed the "Texarkana" green highway side in the distance beyond their shoulders.

Texarkana is 6 counties away.  One would think that Marshall, much closer on U S 59 and a relatively populous destination, would have its name up there.  TXK, however, gets that honor.

Again, just a small thing.  I've no clue about future traffic counts and may not live long enough to see this come to fruition. Yet bits and piece like this convince me ever further that Texarkana is going to become a far more significant transit point than anyone realizes.

I must say I love the progress of I-69 through Lufkin and Nacogdoches.

[dariusb]

I know this is just a small thing, all, but here is a link I just posted on the "Texas I-69" forum:

https://www.ktre.com/2019/10/03/city-state-dignitaries-celebrate-groundbreaking-nacogdoches-i-flyover-project/

To read the article and hear residents comments, the arrival of I-69 to Nacogdoches almost seems like the greatest thing since, well, sliced bread.  But that being said, note the picture atop the article.  At first, from the angle the dignitaries with shovels are photographed at it looks like they're sinking in the east Texas red clay.  But when I got past that I noticed the "Texarkana" green highway side in the distance beyond their shoulders.

Texarkana is 6 counties away.  One would think that Marshall, much closer on U S 59 and a relatively populous destination, would have its name up there.  TXK, however, gets that honor.

Again, just a small thing.  I've no clue about future traffic counts and may not live long enough to see this come to fruition. Yet bits and piece like this convince me ever further that Texarkana is going to become a far more significant transit point than anyone realizes.

As iterated previously, a Houston-Texarkana Interstate corridor is and always has been the hearts' desire of the main backers of the I-69 "group" (the Alliance for I-69/Texas and their cohorts within TxDOT); to that end it's no surprise that Texarkana is prominently mentioned as a destination.  OTOH, there's no singular present signed route between Houston and Shreveport; rather a myriad of segueing highways (I-69 would be the first such facility), so featuring Texarkana (which, after all, does lie along US 59) rather than Shreveport on existing surface roads would be a "natural".  And for all its importance as a local commerce center, Marshall just doesn't have the cachet that Texarkana has managed to muster. 

And, after all, there's beer in Texarkana....Marshall has yet to be part of a widespread iconic idiom!
(.....apologies to the late Jerry Reed!) 

It does seem like there's a push to make Texarkana the transportation hub of the Ark-La-Tex instead of Shreveport which is the largest city.

[O Tamandua]

I know this is just a small thing, all, but here is a link I just posted on the "Texas I-69" forum:

https://www.ktre.com/2019/10/03/city-state-dignitaries-celebrate-groundbreaking-nacogdoches-i-flyover-project/

To read the article and hear residents comments, the arrival of I-69 to Nacogdoches almost seems like the greatest thing since, well, sliced bread.  But that being said, note the picture atop the article.  At first, from the angle the dignitaries with shovels are photographed at it looks like they're sinking in the east Texas red clay.  But when I got past that I noticed the "Texarkana" green highway side in the distance beyond their shoulders.

Texarkana is 6 counties away.  One would think that Marshall, much closer on U S 59 and a relatively populous destination, would have its name up there.  TXK, however, gets that honor.

Again, just a small thing.  I've no clue about future traffic counts and may not live long enough to see this come to fruition. Yet bits and piece like this convince me ever further that Texarkana is going to become a far more significant transit point than anyone realizes.

As iterated previously, a Houston-Texarkana Interstate corridor is and always has been the hearts' desire of the main backers of the I-69 "group" (the Alliance for I-69/Texas and their cohorts within TxDOT); to that end it's no surprise that Texarkana is prominently mentioned as a destination.  OTOH, there's no singular present signed route between Houston and Shreveport; rather a myriad of segueing highways (I-69 would be the first such facility), so featuring Texarkana (which, after all, does lie along US 59) rather than Shreveport on existing surface roads would be a "natural".  And for all its importance as a local commerce center, Marshall just doesn't have the cachet that Texarkana has managed to muster. 

And, after all, there's beer in Texarkana....Marshall has yet to be part of a widespread iconic idiom!
(.....apologies to the late Jerry Reed!) 

With that said, sparker:

- If memory serves, the same principle is in effect in Dallas when one finally gets at the northeast edge of the Metroplex beltway(s) to I-30 and the big overhead green signs point to Texarkana as well (rather than Greenville or (less likely) Sulphur Springs).  Cachet, indeed. ">)

- Though I'm a teetotaller, interesting you should mention the beer (as the "Smokey and the Bandit" reference) given that 10 days from today the Arkansas side of Texarkana will launch the "Railyard Entertainment District", from the area of the Virtual Railfan live-24/7 "TexarCamera" (link below) to several blocks north.  I guess among other things they'll allow open carry of alcohol between bars and restaurants in the district.  Mixed emotions on that, but as the camera below shows, there's ample police presence around this area, so I hope it works out well for those involved:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pDeQhmyKvYo

[sparker]

It does seem like there's a push to make Texarkana the transportation hub of the Ark-La-Tex instead of Shreveport which is the largest city.

A push no doubt originating on the TX side of the line; any enhancement in Shreveport tends to concentrate resultant benefits to that area with little spillover into TX (or AR for that matter).  It's simply a matter of TX doing what TX does best:  ensuring benefits remain within the state boundaries (hence prioritization of I-369 over the main I-69 trunk east of the division point).  Also -- since expansion east/NE from Texarkana is limited by the Red River floodplain, most developmental activities extend west along I-30 and/or US 82.    Finally, the multitude of rail lines converging on Texarkana certainly hasn't hurt its prospects as a distribution hub.