I-49 in Arkansas

[Bobby5280]

True, the US-412 corridor will never be the backbone of a cross-country Interstate, as we don't even have a handful of those going E/W anyway due to mountain ranges.  But I really don't see US-69 being anything other than a 4-lane US highway in our lifetimes as Oklahoma doesn't have the political will or the willingness to tax themselves to invest in highway infrastructure.  It may be the most direct route between Dallas and KC, but other than the occasional bypass around some of the more notorious speedtraps, I don't see any push toward making a limited access facility along any significant portion of Oklahoma or Kansas south of Ft. Scott.

The I-49 corridor doesn't even work as a good alternative for traffic on I-35 coming up through the Dallas Fort Worth metro. In order for the I-49 corridor to boast any time-saving or mileage advantage over I-35 or US-69 both the I-69 corridor and I-49 corridor must be fully completed (which will take decades). That's the only way how I-49 could possibly attract long haul truckers and other long distance commercial traffic coming up from South Texas and Mexico heading to places in the North and Northeast. And whenever I-49 is finally completed it will be traversing a significantly more mountainous route than US-69 or I-35. In the end I-49 will see a lot more use just handling regional NWA traffic than attracting vehicles from other N-S corridors.

It's going to be a long time before I-49 gets completed between Fort Smith and Texarkana. The NWA region is growing. Meanwhile the same isn't true for Fort Smith and areas on South from there. That's going to threaten any prioritization the Fort Smith to Texarkana segment of I-49 receives. Let's also not forget Texas has its own little hook of I-49 to complete (and I-49 isn't exactly a big priority for Texas). The Arkansas state legislature isn't keen on using tolls as a means of getting highways built any faster. So unless there is a giant amount of federal funding put forth for new Interstates the unfinished portion of I-49 is just as likely to languish as neglected corridors in Oklahoma.

The housing market at no point in the last 25 years in NWA has taken more than 1 or 2 year breather, without any discernible down-tick, and there aren't any shortage of job openings or new businesses starting up.  There's no bubble here, regardless of what may happen in other urban areas around the country that are overvalued.

No housing market anywhere is immune to price bubbles. And there are deeper structural issues in the market no one seems willing to admit exist. The "average" home price is the US is now over $300,000. Average wage levels aren't enough to afford such a mortgage even at current, abnormally low interest rates. Go to any American city, even here in Lawton, and you'll see just about all new homes getting built are for upper income buyers. These developers are building homes as if every American is rich.

There is a big shortage of modest, more affordable homes. No developer wants to build those. That's leaving a lot of young adults just out of high school and college stuck in apartments or living at home with parents. The situation makes it easier for them to "opt out" of the so-called American Dream of getting married, having a couple or so kids and buying a house. It's easier and cheaper to stay single. The problem is many industries, including the housing industry, depend on a revolving cycle of young adults getting married, having kids, buying homes and all that crap.

[US71]

It's going to be a long time before I-49 gets completed between Fort Smith and Texarkana. The NWA region is growing. Meanwhile the same isn't true for Fort Smith and areas on South from there. That's going to threaten any prioritization the Fort Smith to Texarkana segment of I-49 receives. Let's also not forget Texas has its own little hook of I-49 to complete (and I-49 isn't exactly a big priority for Texas). The Arkansas state legislature isn't keen on using tolls as a means of getting highways built any faster. So unless there is a giant amount of federal funding put forth for new Interstates the unfinished portion of I-49 is just as likely to languish as neglected corridors in Oklahoma.

Arkansas needs another John Paul Hammerschmidt to bring home the bacon (or pork), but I don't see that happening.

[Wayward Memphian]

The pop projections for the 2040 to 2045 time frame is 1 million for NWA.  XNA's own funded study showed that XNA would handle 2 mil  plus enplanements before then due to the folks moving here being from a distance away and why it would need 26 gates. That's right at the Memphis numbers of 2019.

[Tomahawkin]

I think those population numbers will be higher with all 4 of the population centers in NWA Annexing land to the east and west. In 20 years the Tulsa suburbs will be an hour drive from NWA if it isn't now?

[sparker]

The pop projections for the 2040 to 2045 time frame is 1 million for NWA.  XNA's own funded study showed that XNA would handle 2 mil  plus enplanements before then due to the folks moving here being from a distance away and why it would need 26 gates. That's right at the Memphis numbers of 2019.

I think those population numbers will be higher with all 4 of the population centers in NWA Annexing land to the east and west. In 20 years the Tulsa suburbs will be an hour drive from NWA if it isn't now?

Actually, those numbers, along with the time frame, are what's projected for Boise (ID) and its Treasure Valley metro area -- also getting a sizeable influx of folks relocating from CA (and, if weather patterns continue to wreak havoc nationwide, other locations as well).  NWA, as well as much of the Midwest, gets floods & tornadoes; the West gets recurring heat domes with 100+ days (as does western Canada!), and the Gulf and East Coasts see extended storm/hurricane seasons.  One moves, and, increasingly, adverse weather of one sort or the other welcomes you in your new abode!   Welcome to the new reality!

[bwana39]

It's going to be a long time before I-49 gets completed between Fort Smith and Texarkana. The NWA region is growing. Meanwhile the same isn't true for Fort Smith and areas on South from there. That's going to threaten any prioritization the Fort Smith to Texarkana segment of I-49 receives. Let's also not forget Texas has its own little hook of I-49 to complete (and I-49 isn't exactly a big priority for Texas). The Arkansas state legislature isn't keen on using tolls as a means of getting highways built any faster. So unless there is a giant amount of federal funding put forth for new Interstates the unfinished portion of I-49 is just as likely to languish as neglected corridors in Oklahoma.

My thinking is The priority list in Arkansas is
1)US-412 Upgrade (I-49 to Tulsa)
2) I-57
3) I-530. I could honestly see it completed to Monroe before I-49 between Fort Smith and Texarkana.
4) I-49 to Texarkana
Put three or four more unnamed projects in the list then.....
7) I-69

US-65 to Branson would provide a north outlet from Little Rock. US-412 could extend as a freeway across the rest of northern Arkansas. US-82 could become freeway from Texarkana to Greenville (MS).

My take is when Bob Moore is gone from the Arkansas State Highway Commission that what little support there is for I-69 as it is tentatively planned will erode to the point of nothingness. I am not saying I-69 will be completely abandoned, but it will be more direct and of service to a greater populace.

[US71]

It's going to be a long time before I-49 gets completed between Fort Smith and Texarkana. The NWA region is growing. Meanwhile the same isn't true for Fort Smith and areas on South from there. That's going to threaten any prioritization the Fort Smith to Texarkana segment of I-49 receives. Let's also not forget Texas has its own little hook of I-49 to complete (and I-49 isn't exactly a big priority for Texas). The Arkansas state legislature isn't keen on using tolls as a means of getting highways built any faster. So unless there is a giant amount of federal funding put forth for new Interstates the unfinished portion of I-49 is just as likely to languish as neglected corridors in Oklahoma.

My thinking is The priority list in Arkansas is
1)US-412 Upgrade (I-49 to Tulsa)
2) I-57
3) I-530. I could honestly see it completed to Monroe before I-49 between Fort Smith and Texarkana.
4) I-49 to Texarkana
Put three or four more unnamed projects in the list then.....
7) I-69

US-65 to Branson would provide a north outlet from Little Rock. US-412 could extend across the rest of northern Arkansas. US-82 could become freeway from Texarkana to Greenville (MS).

My take is when Bob Moore is gone from the Arkansas State Highway Commission that what little support there is for I-69 as it is tentatively planned will erode to the point of nothingness. I am not saying I-69 will be completely abandoned, but it will be more direct and of service to a greater populace.

412 already extends across north Arkansas, unless you mean upgrading it like ARDOT did from Sonora to Huntsville?

[sprjus4]

^ No, he's talking about upgrading US-412 between Springdale and Tulsa to interstate standards.

I see completing I-57 in Arkansas a higher priority, however. US-412 is at least a four lane divided route, meanwhile the proposed I-57 routing is merely a 2 lane road.

And as far as US-82, I'm more willing to bet I-69 would be built before a US-82 upgrade. I-69 has more utility than US-82 would. The most US-82 needs is a 65 mph 4 lane divided highway. It's connecting smaller towns into the interstate system, it's not carrying long distance traffic between major cities in the sense I-69 would between Memphis, Shreveport, Texarkana, Houston, Corpus Christi, Brownsville, McAllen, Laredo, etc.

[Bobby5280]

Actually, those numbers, along with the time frame, are what's projected for Boise (ID) and its Treasure Valley metro area -- also getting a sizeable influx of folks relocating from CA (and, if weather patterns continue to wreak havoc nationwide, other locations as well).  NWA, as well as much of the Midwest, gets floods & tornadoes; the West gets recurring heat domes with 100+ days (as does western Canada!), and the Gulf and East Coasts see extended storm/hurricane seasons.  One moves, and, increasingly, adverse weather of one sort or the other welcomes you in your new abode! Welcome to the new reality!

No location will ever be perfect. That's particularly true for weather; every place will have some bad form of it. The trick is figuring out which form of bad weather you can tolerate the most balanced against what ever good weather that location offers. Resources like ample clean water supply are also vital. Water is one of the things that really endangers the long term sustainability of major cities in the Southwest US.

As for population growth projections, those all have to be taken with the proverbial grain of salt. The growth projections depend on current macro/socio-economic trends to stay their course. No one really knows what will happen in the future. Right now (with all sorts of inflation in food, materials, fuel, etc going way up out of the comfort zone) the outlook appears pretty dicey.

Anyone can look at a major metro region that has been growing rapidly and steadily, perhaps for decades (like Dallas-Fort Worth) and say the growth is unstoppable. Any popular metro will keep growing ...until it doesn't.

It's kind of easy to understand why places like California are currently losing population. Much of it comes down to the cost of living and how well people in various jobs/income categories can adapt to those living costs. For a lot of people in lower wage, service industry fields the situation is becoming financially untenable. Every city in America depends just as much on restaurant cooks, cashiers, grocery store stock clerks, etc as they do on police, fire fighters and various higher income professional workers. If a city prices its bottom level workers out of town it will run into serious functional problems.

Affordability is an issue any rapidly growing metro will eventually face. The population growth itself will often result in rising living costs. Local zoning that limits any affordable housing development will amplify housing cost inflation. High income home owners love the policies since they inflate their property values. Over the long term it ramps up the misery index for those on the lower rungs of the income ladder. If they can manage to escape to a lower cost region they'll move. Some who are well-off see the possible down-turns ahead, so they cash-out: sell their homes and take their profits to a region with more balance.

And as far as US-82, I'm more willing to bet I-69 would be built before a US-82 upgrade. I-69 has more utility than US-82 would. The most US-82 needs is a 65 mph 4 lane divided highway. It's connecting smaller towns into the interstate system, it's not carrying long distance traffic between major cities in the sense I-69 would between Memphis, Shreveport, Texarkana, Houston, Corpus Christi, Brownsville, McAllen, Laredo, etc.

US-82 to the North of the Dallas-Fort Worth metro has some serious Interstate upgrade potential, simply because so much of the growth in DFW is spreading North in that direction. The segment between Gainesville and Sherman is threatening to be another difficult pickle like US-380 to the South. TX DOT was asleep at the wheel on US-380 and now has a pretty difficult upgrade situation on its hands. They're going to face the same problem with US-82 in the future. Really US-82 could be upgraded to a regional freeway (or toll road) from Henrietta and US-287 to New Boston and I-30.

[sparker]

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Don't see US 82 from US 287 east to New Boston/I-30 being upgraded to Interstate status unless US 287 Ft. Worth>Amarillo is likewise constructed.  But even with that longer corridor functioning as 82's western connection, most of the traffic on 82 (or the future I-3X) would be generated locally; a "bridge" between the two halves of the DFW-to-I-40 composite connector would be functionally pointless unless it eventually serves as a northern bypass of metro DFW with something like I-49 between Shreveport and Texarkana as the completion of that "arc".  OTOH, it's likely that many of the Interstate corridors that will be proposed over the next few decades will be similar "relief routes", as the original system, laid out as it was as "connect-the-dots" between major cities, becomes increasingly overwhelmed with the combination of shorter-distance commutes and through commercial movements.  The corridors that would draw political and popular support would likely need to be more than simple parallel facilities; they'd need to also serve areas that were and are presently overlooked by the Interstate network -- the basic rationale behind current proposals such as I-14 and the P2P.  And I-49 itself is the product of that dynamic; it's been in the works since 1991's ISTEA; tellingly, it was the 1st high-priority corridor to be designated that year -- addressing, as it did, a glaring regional gap in the original system's configuration. 

[bwana39]

And as far as US-82, I’m more willing to bet I-69 would be built before a US-82 upgrade. I-69 has more utility than US-82 would. The most US-82 needs is a 65 mph 4 lane divided highway. It’s connecting smaller towns into the interstate system, it’s not carrying long distance traffic between major cities in the sense I-69 would between Memphis, Shreveport, Texarkana, Houston, Corpus Christi, Brownsville, McAllen, Laredo, etc.

US-82 to the North of the Dallas-Fort Worth metro has some serious Interstate upgrade potential, simply because so much of the growth in DFW is spreading North in that direction. The segment between Gainesville and Sherman is threatening to be another difficult pickle like US-380 to the South. TX DOT was asleep at the wheel on US-380 and now has a pretty difficult upgrade situation on its hands. They're going to face the same problem with US-82 in the future. Really US-82 could be upgraded to a regional freeway (or toll road) from Henrietta and US-287 to New Boston and I-30.

I agree with the point that I-69 has a greater utility to the national highway grid. I am just talking about the Arkansas priorities.

US-82 from in Grayson and Fannin Counties  has the ROW in place. Cooke County is another story.  I think US 82 east of Wichita Falls should be four-lane divided highway. The setup in Grayson and Fannin counties would be an excellent pattern. This would be really nice in Arkansas too. I put US-82 across Arkansas into my analogy as to point out how low I-69 is outside of Southeast Arkansas and particularly Desha and Arkansas counties.

Yes US-380 is a mess. Even 2 decades ago no one expected over a million people in Collin County and nearly a million in Denton County.  These figures are higher than Dallas and Tarrant Counties when the original interstates were built.

I have never driven US-67 past Searcy and that was 15 years ago or so.  I get the impression from Arkansas sources (a limited opinion) that if Oklahoma will commit to US-412 being upgraded that Arkansas will follow suit. Wal*Mart wants it done. I agree that I-57 (the US-67 corridor) is a more pressing need. I just kind of think NWA has more push this time especially if Oklahoma does their part.

Arkansas wants to see I-30 and I-40 east of NLR expanded to 6 to 8 lanes. It will be as major as the upgrades on US-75 from Richardson to Anna. Pretty much EVERYTHING will need to be replaced.

[bugo]

I think those population numbers will be higher with all 4 of the population centers in NWA Annexing land to the east and west. In 20 years the Tulsa suburbs will be an hour drive from NWA if it isn't now?

According to Google maps, its about 1 hr 20 minutes from the I-44/US 412/Creek Turnpike/Will Rogers Turnpike/OK 364 (I almost forgot that one) interchange at Catoosa to the junction of US 412 and old AR 68 west of Tontitown where the divided highway ends. If Tulsa builds towards Inola and NWA builds toward Siloam Springs, it is entirely possible for it to become a 1 hour trip.

[Avalanchez71]

I think those population numbers will be higher with all 4 of the population centers in NWA Annexing land to the east and west. In 20 years the Tulsa suburbs will be an hour drive from NWA if it isn't now?

According to Google maps, its about 1 hr 20 minutes from the I-44/US 412/Creek Turnpike/Will Rogers Turnpike/OK 364 (I almost forgot that one) interchange at Catoosa to the junction of US 412 and old AR 68 west of Tontitown where the divided highway ends. If Tulsa builds towards Inola and NWA builds toward Siloam Springs, it is entirely possible for it to become a 1 hour trip.

That one hour will only be one hour for about a year.  After a year it will be a much longer trip due to the sprawl that will come along with it.

[MikieTimT]

I think those population numbers will be higher with all 4 of the population centers in NWA Annexing land to the east and west. In 20 years the Tulsa suburbs will be an hour drive from NWA if it isn't now?

According to Google maps, its about 1 hr 20 minutes from the I-44/US 412/Creek Turnpike/Will Rogers Turnpike/OK 364 (I almost forgot that one) interchange at Catoosa to the junction of US 412 and old AR 68 west of Tontitown where the divided highway ends. If Tulsa builds towards Inola and NWA builds toward Siloam Springs, it is entirely possible for it to become a 1 hour trip.

That one hour will only be one hour for about a year.  After a year it will be a much longer trip due to the sprawl that will come along with it.

I'd say closer to 12 to 15 years.  Sprawl doesn't develop quite that quickly.  It'd take a couple years of planning for development projects to get started, then there's the limitation of availability of construction companies, equipment, and workers puts somewhat of a cap on the speed of development.

[Tomahawkin]

I just forgot that it is 60 miles from Joplin to Bentonville. In 10 years that area could be a combined metropolitan statistical area...

[MikieTimT]

I just forgot that it is 60 miles from Joplin to Bentonville. In 10 years that area could be a combined metropolitan statistical area...

McDonald County would make for a sure bet in real estate right now.  Fixing to uncork in October.

[US71]

I just forgot that it is 60 miles from Joplin to Bentonville. In 10 years that area could be a combined metropolitan statistical area...

McDonald County would make for a sure bet in real estate right now.  Fixing to uncork in October.

McDonald is extremely rural for the most part. It may turn out like NW Louisiana where businesses abandoned US 71 and moved to I-49.

[Bobby5280]

Don't see US 82 from US 287 east to New Boston/I-30 being upgraded to Interstate status unless US 287 Ft. Worth>Amarillo is likewise constructed.  But even with that longer corridor functioning as 82's western connection, most of the traffic on 82 (or the future I-3X) would be generated locally; a "bridge" between the two halves of the DFW-to-I-40 composite connector would be functionally pointless unless it eventually serves as a northern bypass of metro DFW with something like I-49 between Shreveport and Texarkana as the completion of that "arc".

I see a number of possibilities happening with US-82. The most likely thing in the short term is US-82 being upgraded to a freeway between Gainesville and Sherman. TX DOT has studied building a US-82 relief route around Gainesville. The first study was for an option to the South, but others want a North option. It's possible a loop could end up being built. US-82 is already a freeway in Sherman and has had some additional improvements.

Existing US-82 between Gainesville and Sherman is currently a 4-lane divided route with four isolated freeway style exits. For much of that segment there is enough room to upgrade the main lanes and add flanking frontage roads. Closer to Gainesville it turns into a tighter squeeze; it's likely some buildings might have to be cleared.

West of Gainesville to Henrietta, that segment of US-82 would likely not be turned into an Interstate class facility unless the same was done to US-287 from at least Wichita Falls to Fort Worth, if not the whole Amarillo to Fort Worth leg.

US-82 going East of Sherman has better upgrade potential. The route is a hybrid of 4-lane freeway and divided expressway to Bonham where it drops to a hybrid Super-2 arrangement to Honey Grove. All of that can be brought up to Interstate standards fairly easily. The last stretch to Paris is regular 2-lane route. A freeway there might have to be on a new terrain alignment due to various properties hugging the corridor. I could see such a freeway upgrade connecting to Paris and then upgrading the odd Loop 286 road to full Interstate standards. Getting a new freeway built from Paris to New Boston (and I-30) would probably depend on other corridors like US-287 being further improved.

OTOH, it's likely that many of the Interstate corridors that will be proposed over the next few decades will be similar "relief routes", as the original system, laid out as it was as "connect-the-dots" between major cities, becomes increasingly overwhelmed with the combination of shorter-distance commutes and through commercial movements.

Older, long established Interstates, such as the I-81 and I-78 combo or I-84 going from PA to MA or even I-12 in LA, function as relief routes to get around major population centers. The Interstate highway network is pretty densely packed in the Northeast US. With the kind of migration that has been taking place in recent years, particularly to places like Texas, it's only natural for the highway network to improve accordingly. The DFW metro is gigantic in size and has a legitimately enormous regional population. Some corridors in the region are long overdue for improvement due to that growth. Corridors like US-82 do indeed have potential as relief routes, particularly with the possibility to connect to other emerging major junctions in places like Texarkana.

[sparker]

And as far as US-82, I'm more willing to bet I-69 would be built before a US-82 upgrade. I-69 has more utility than US-82 would. The most US-82 needs is a 65 mph 4 lane divided highway. It's connecting smaller towns into the interstate system, it's not carrying long distance traffic between major cities in the sense I-69 would between Memphis, Shreveport, Texarkana, Houston, Corpus Christi, Brownsville, McAllen, Laredo, etc.

US-82 to the North of the Dallas-Fort Worth metro has some serious Interstate upgrade potential, simply because so much of the growth in DFW is spreading North in that direction. The segment between Gainesville and Sherman is threatening to be another difficult pickle like US-380 to the South. TX DOT was asleep at the wheel on US-380 and now has a pretty difficult upgrade situation on its hands. They're going to face the same problem with US-82 in the future. Really US-82 could be upgraded to a regional freeway (or toll road) from Henrietta and US-287 to New Boston and I-30.

I agree with the point that I-69 has a greater utility to the national highway grid. I am just talking about the Arkansas priorities.

US-82 from in Grayson and Fannin Counties  has the ROW in place. Cooke County is another story.  I think US 82 east of Wichita Falls should be four-lane divided highway. The setup in Grayson and Fannin counties would be an excellent pattern. This would be really nice in Arkansas too. I put US-82 across Arkansas into my analogy as to point out how low I-69 is outside of Southeast Arkansas and particularly Desha and Arkansas counties.

Yes US-380 is a mess. Even 2 decades ago no one expected over a million people in Collin County and nearly a million in Denton County.  These figures are higher than Dallas and Tarrant Counties when the original interstates were built.

I have never driven US-67 past Searcy and that was 15 years ago or so.  I get the impression from Arkansas sources (a limited opinion) that if Oklahoma will commit to US-412 being upgraded that Arkansas will follow suit. Wal*Mart wants it done. I agree that I-57 (the US-67 corridor) is a more pressing need. I just kind of think NWA has more push this time especially if Oklahoma does their part.

Arkansas wants to see I-30 and I-40 east of NLR expanded to 6 to 8 lanes. It will be as major as the upgrades on US-75 from Richardson to Anna. Pretty much EVERYTHING will need to be replaced.

As far as upgrading US 412 east of I-49 is concerned, while the connectivity to nearby significant metro areas is largely concentrated to the west (hence the 412 I-upgrade proposal, which ends at I-49), there's also a substantial recreational area to the east in the "lake district" along US 62/412; that is also covered by the definition of HPC #8, which takes in all of US 412 east of Tulsa.  Back in the heady days of 1995-2005 (which makes everyone feel old!) when numerous corridors were being touted as potential Interstates, the E-W variant through the Ozarks that garnered the most attention was HPC #3, using US 60 from Springfield east through Poplar Bluff; this was the fabled but premature "I-66" proposal, supposedly poised to link up with its equally publicized (to the point of "Future" signage being posted) counterpart across the southern tier of KY.  Of course, that has essentially petered out; there hasn't been a peep from any of the original backers (possibly no longer in office or in a position of influence) in years.  The HPC #3 proposal originally had the effect of taking the wind out of any possible sails regarding US 412 only 50-odd miles to the south; if the former were developed, the latter would be considered redundant and unnecessary (and a bit gratuitous!).  But now that "I-66" is effectively dead or at least dormant, it wouldn't be at all surprising to find US 412 across northern AR getting some attention as to a potential major corridor, particularly if the Interstate portion west of NWA is nailed down in the next couple of years.  While NWA is a prime attractant -- and an appropriate place to terminate a corridor -- there may be a push from the towns along 412 for a general corridor upgrade -- possibly in phases (expressway, then upgrade to I-status) east to at least I-57 -- especially if the eastern half of the Springdale bypass is fully completed.  Of course, such a corridor would simply join the queue of AR projects -- likely one of the last, well after the others with existing plans.  But since MO 4-laned US 60 a few years back -- and that's likely to be the extent of that route's improvement for the foreseeable future -- there's really no competition for a cross-Ozark corridor to one following US 412, especially since it serves recreational areas that were not a factor with the US 60-based corridor to the north.  Also an advantage -- if such a corridor were to reach I-57 -- and MO declined (for their usual fiscal reasons) to take part in a 412 upgrade in their "bootheel", it could simply head down US 63 and tie in with I-555 toward Memphis.

But a lot of that would depend upon the N. AR real estate market; if there weren't concurrent economic development in the traversed areas, an upgraded 412 wouldn't be terribly cost-effective even as an expressway, much less a full-fledged Interstate.  In any case, one would hope that it would sit in the state queue until Fort Smith-to-Texarkana is at least under construction rather than serve as a project siphoning funds away from the longer-standing route.   

[bwana39]

Don't see US 82 from US 287 east to New Boston/I-30 being upgraded to Interstate status unless US 287 Ft. Worth>Amarillo is likewise constructed.  But even with that longer corridor functioning as 82's western connection, most of the traffic on 82 (or the future I-3X) would be generated locally; a "bridge" between the two halves of the DFW-to-I-40 composite connector would be functionally pointless unless it eventually serves as a northern bypass of metro DFW with something like I-49 between Shreveport and Texarkana as the completion of that "arc".

I see a number of possibilities happening with US-82. The most likely thing in the short term is US-82 being upgraded to a freeway between Gainesville and Sherman. TX DOT has studied building a US-82 relief route around Gainesville. The first study was for an option to the South, but others want a North option. It's possible a loop could end up being built. US-82 is already a freeway in Sherman and has had some additional improvements.

Existing US-82 between Gainesville and Sherman is currently a 4-lane divided route with four isolated freeway style exits. For much of that segment there is enough room to upgrade the main lanes and add flanking frontage roads. Closer to Gainesville it turns into a tighter squeeze; it's likely some buildings might have to be cleared.

West of Gainesville to Henrietta, that segment of US-82 would likely not be turned into an Interstate class facility unless the same was done to US-287 from at least Wichita Falls to Fort Worth, if not the whole Amarillo to Fort Worth leg.

US-82 going East of Sherman has better upgrade potential. The route is a hybrid of 4-lane freeway and divided expressway to Bonham where it drops to a hybrid Super-2 arrangement to Honey Grove. All of that can be brought up to Interstate standards fairly easily. The last stretch to Paris is regular 2-lane route. A freeway there might have to be on a new terrain alignment due to various properties hugging the corridor. I could see such a freeway upgrade connecting to Paris and then upgrading the odd Loop 286 road to full Interstate standards. Getting a new freeway built from Paris to New Boston (and I-30) would probably depend on other corridors like US-287 being further improved.

You haven't been to Bonham lately have you? The four lane divided  is open all the way from the Lamar County line to just east of Gainesville.  As you said, part that to the east (Lamar, Red River , & Bowie Counties) is two lanes. Actually more of it two than four.  I might add, the part in Cooke county is four lane, but it is pretty dismal. The ROW for the portion from Sherman to east of Honey Grove is a facility for a full 2+2+2+2 if they decide to build it that way.  From Sherman to Whitesboro  is not quite so wide.

From Whitesboro to the Lamar County line is a reroute done in stages between 1975 to around 2000. SH-56 was US-82 before that.

[msunat97]

Asphalt was being laid on the NB approach to the US71 overpass yesterday.

[bwana39]

. It may turn out like NW Louisiana where businesses abandoned US 71 and moved to I-49.

Where? Natchitoches is really the only place that there is any real buildup along I-49. US-71 had a FEW businesses along it, maybe more twenty years ago, but nominal vacant buildings from the past 20-25 years.  As far as that goes, the Alexandria bound traffic tended to follow LA-1 not US-71.  Hwy 1 was as good or better facility than US-71 AND it is/was shorter.  There is exactly 1 business along I-49 between Shreveport and Texarkana.  There are some oilfield businesses that were built along I-49 in Desoto Parish, but those were new activities related to the shale drilling boom not relocations due to the primary road changing.  In Shreveport, US71 & LA-1 (Youree and N. Market are still both pretty busy.) Fact of business, the business center of Shreveport is on Youree.  US-71 in Bossier looks like the outside of a military base in any other city. As far as that goes, there has been significant buildup on US-71 south of Barksdale AFB.

[Road Hog]

I too have been puzzled by the lack of services along I-49 in Louisiana. Perhaps the worst stretch of freeway in that regard east of the 100th meridian. You can't make it go by faster because the smokey bears are crawling like flies on that freeway. It's a hard 3 hours from Shreveport to Lafayette.

That freeway has been open for longer than 2 decades and once or twice I've sweated out making a gas station. Even in places like Nachitoches and Alexandria there might be one place to get gas. Once you hit Opelousas, you can get your boudin refills all day long.

[bugo]

I too have been puzzled by the lack of services along I-49 in Louisiana. Perhaps the worst stretch of freeway in that regard east of the 100th meridian. You can't make it go by faster because the smokey bears are crawling like flies on that freeway. It's a hard 3 hours from Shreveport to Lafayette.

In 1998, I was going to Florida with some friends. We were heading south on I-49 and went through the loop at I-10 towards New Orleans. We were low on gas, and were in the right lane going 55, getting ready to exit at the next exit and the blue lights came on. Cops came to the car and asked us why we were going so slowly (The speed limit was 65 at the time.) My friend told him he was looking for a gas station, and the cop told him where the closest one was and for us to have a good night. We had Arkansas tags, and I assume the cop realized we were just 3 college kids and not drug runners and let us go.

[sparker]

I too have been puzzled by the lack of services along I-49 in Louisiana. Perhaps the worst stretch of freeway in that regard east of the 100th meridian. You can't make it go by faster because the smokey bears are crawling like flies on that freeway. It's a hard 3 hours from Shreveport to Lafayette.

That freeway has been open for longer than 2 decades and once or twice I've sweated out making a gas station. Even in places like Nachitoches and Alexandria there might be one place to get gas. Once you hit Opelousas, you can get your boudin refills all day long.

The first time I used I-49 back in 1990, before it was completed through Alexandria, I was low on gas coming into that town heading north, so I filled up there.  Got to talking to the guy at the counter, and he let me know I was lucky to have refilled there, because there was nothing right on I-49 between there and Shreveport.  So subsequently I kept an eye out during my several times on 49 to see if more interim services had been added, but never noticed any significant change. 

Got to thinking when I saw the post -- is this the case with other "aftermarket" Interstates like I-22, so I did a GSV of that corridor and -- lo and behold -- saw exactly the opposite; there were services -- gas/convenience stores and occasionally restaurants -- at least at every 3rd interchange or so along the whole stretch from Memphis to Birmingham -- and definitely more within the towns.  I suppose the fact that US 78 was already a major intercity trucking corridor prior to freeway development had a lot to do with it; it's likely that some such businesses simply relocated to the freeway when it opened -- although where the freeway was close to the old road (MS 178) there were still quite a few gas stations along that road close to the crossroads that interchanged with the freeway.  That may be a skewing factor when determining such service levels; many of the currently signed newer Interstates were upgrades/overlays of existing freeways, on which services were established prior to Interstate status.  I-49 through LA, although paralleling both LA 1 and US 71 (the former much closer, of course) was aligned to the west to ostensibly avoid property acquisition near towns as well as avoidance of the Red River floodplain as much as possible.  And it's quite possible that service businesses in Natchitoches, Coushetta, and even Mansfield over on US 171, didn't have or couldn't raise the capital needed to purchase lots and effect a move over to the freeway -- so it just never happened to any extent.   This dynamic would likely be true with corridors on largely new-terrain alignment; those closely following existing commercial corridors might just "piggyback" on existing service facilities.