Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Grzrd]

http://www.arkansashighways.com/ProgCon/letting/Aug%20'10%20Award%20List.PDF

Contract awarded for paving Future I-49 from 245/Arkansas Blvd. through I-30 then north and west to USS 71 at Texas state line.

[US71]

Arkansas Blvd to I-30: ALL BIDS REJECTED

I-30 to Hwy 71: ALL BIDS REJECTED

Arkansas Blvd to Hwy 71: Approved

[Grzrd]

http://www.arkansashighways.com/ProgCon/General/asread_include.aspx

Looks like they gave contractors option to bid: (1) on 2 separate projects and (2) on combined project.  Since lowest bid on combined project lower than sum of lowest bids on separate projects, all bids rejected on separate projects and approved on combined project (economies of scale?).  Is this a common practice?

[J N Winkler]

It is done occasionally in some states and never in others.  I think this is the only time AHTD has done it since they started putting plans on the Web (back in 2009, IIRC).

[Grzrd]

Thanks.  I wonder if Louisiana will take same approach for the upcoming lettings for Sections E, F, and G of I-49 North?

http://www.dotd.la.gov/lettings/lets8220.asp

Projects to be Let in the Next 6 Months - By Parish

Caddo  Sep 2010  455-09-0005  I 49  I-49 North (La 530 - La 170) Seg F  New Interstate (Segment F)  $20,000,000 to $30,000,000  3.29  Umeozulu, Joe  May 2010 

Caddo  Sep 2010  455-09-0006  I 49  I-49 North (La 170 - US 71) Seg E  New Interstate (Segment E)  $30,000,000 to $50,000,000  2.77  Umeozulu, Joe  May 2010 

Caddo  Sep 2010  455-09-0011  I 49  I-49 North (La 169 - La 530) Seg G  New Interstate (Segment G)  $30,000,000 to $50,000,000  4.78  Umeozulu, Joe  Jun 2010

LADOTD Map of I-49 North Project Area: http://www.dotd.la.gov/administration/public_info/projects/i49north/map.pdf 

[Grzrd]

I received following recent info from an AHTD rep:

Regarding the Hwy. 245/19th Street intersection, a project is currently underway that will construct an interchange with an overpass bridge.  That project will be completed in the spring of 2011.

Are there any other projects beyond completion of this intersection and new terrain to I-30 and Texas state line that need to be completed in order for Arkansas section of Loop to meet Interstate specs?

[Grzrd]

With recent flurry of info re Texarkana and Bella Vista I-49 projects (plus Missouri info re 71 to I-49 upgrade between Interstates 44 and 435), I got in an email questioning mood.  I asked TxDOT about the Texas section because I remember reading in one of the threads that the current official Arkansas highway map shows the future route of I-49 through Texas.  [Map here: http://www.arkansashighways.com/planning_research/mapping_graphics/statehwymap_state09.PDF]

BTW the map also shows "new terrain" Future I-49 continuing northward in Arkansas from Red River state line crossing all the way up to a junction with U.S. 71 just north of Wilton.

Pertinent part of the (not surprising) reply:

TxDOT has had a longstanding working relationship with AHTD, especially in the Texarkana area where so many of our highways meet.  I-49 has been planned and discussed between the two agencies for many years. 
 
The current status of the project is that AHTD is waiting on the Louisiana Department of Transportation and Development to finish its portion of the project between Shreveport and the Arkansas State Line before it can finish I-49 to the Louisiana State Line.  However, funding for I-49 through western Arkansas is limited and TxDOT has no funding available at this time for the project in Bowie County now or in the foreseeable future.  So, yes, I-49 is on the radar, but it is a distant blip unless some type of funding can be appropriated for its construction.

[Anthony_JK]

Well...they shouldn't have to wait long, because LaDOTD is already using their ARBA funds to begin construction of the portion of I-49 North to the Arkansas state line.

I'd think that TxDOT would prpobably want to withhold construction of their small segment of I-49 until funding for the Texarkana-Fort Smith segment is secured...I wouldn't think that they would be that dependent on AR and LA completing their segments of I-49 first.  Besides..don't they have that I-69 connector from Carthage to Texarkana to complete first??


Anthony

[Grzrd]

^TxDOT touched on that subject as follows:

... At one time, plans were being considered on extending Loop 151/US 59 on the Texas side north through the Pleasant Grove area and connecting with the Arkansas Loop 245.  However, commercial and residential development in the planned area has made that plan cost prohibitive.
 
There is also another corridor being studied -- I-69 -- that could have a spur coming up through East Texas along the US 59 route.  Corridor segment committees, made up of individuals appointed by local city and county governments, are currently looking at the route and will advise TxDOT on which routes would be most beneficial to the local citizens.  One possible route being looked at is an out loop around Texarkana to the west and north and would run through the planned industrial park in the former Lone Star Army Ammunition Plant.  No specific route has been identified yet and no funding is currently available for construction of such a highway.  Therefore, no schedule can be set for its construction.

[Grzrd]

Texarkana Gazette has a recent article about the new $38 million paving contract.

Paving will start on I-49
By: Brandy S. Chewning - Texarkana Gazette - Published: 08/21/2010

A $38 million contract means paving will begin soon on the Interstate 49 loop around Texarkana.
Don Donaldson, district engineer for the Arkansas Highway and Transportation Department, said the road will funnel Loop 245 traffic onto I-49 just north of Arkansas Boulevard.
The interstate will connect with U.S. Highway 71, 2 miles north of the Texarkana city limits. The intersection of County Road 55 will be relocated.
The 7.7-mile stretch will meet interstate standards as four divided lanes with controlled access.

(I do not have and will not pay for subscription to the Gazette; above was all I could read)
Here's the link: http://www.texarkanagazette.com/news/localnews/2010/08/21/paving-will-start-on-i-49-51.php

[Grzrd]

To date, I am not an Interstate shield collector.  Also, I am an exteme newbie regarding poring over construction plans.  Nevertheless, I do have a question.

AHTD recently awarded the paving contract for I-49 to U.S. 71 2 miles north of Texarkana:

(1) Looking at maps, it appears that, at the I-49/U.S. 71 junction 2 miles north of Texarkana, U.S. 71 is in Texas (although extremely close to Arkansas state line);

(2) Is (assumed already graded) ramp from U.S. 71 to I-49 entirely within Texas?;

(3) If so, does AHTD/TxDOT have plans for an I-49 reassurance shield on Texas side of state line?

(4) If so, does Texas emblazon "Texas" on its Interstate shields?

(5) If so, would this be the only "I-49/Texas" shield in existence (possibly for decades)?

Just thought this would be an interesting (and unique for a long time) oddity.

[Grzrd]

If so, would this be the only "I-49/Texas" shield in existence (possibly for decades)?

I'd think that TxDOT would probably want to withhold construction of their small segment of I-49 until funding for the Texarkana-Fort Smith segment is secured...I wouldn't think that they would be that dependent on AR and LA completing their segments of I-49 first.

On second thought, I think section of Future I-49 from I-30/Future I-49 intersection to U.S. 71 2 miles north of Texarkana has a reasonable likelihood of being designated I-130 for a long time, with section south of intersection being signed I-49.

Still the same question(s) re Texas shield(s): just substitute I-130 for I-49.

[agentsteel53]

Texas at this time does not put the state name.  we are working on it.

[Grzrd]

Texas at this time does not put the state name.  we are working on it.

Maybe you could get Texarkana local officials, in similar vein as State Line Avenue, to get AHTD and TxDOT officials to do the following on the Future I-49 2 miles north of Texarkana:

Directly on state line for lanes going from Texas to Arkansas, place an "Interstate 49 (or 130) - Texas/Arkansas" shield with Texas placed above Arkansas.

Directly on state line for lanes going from Arkansas to Texas, place an "Interstate 49 (or 130) - Arkansas/Texas"
shield with Arkansas placed above Texas.

Would certainly make Texarkana a "must" destination for roadgeeks (and all of the associated big-bucks tourista $$$).   

BTW has this ever been done elsewhere?

[agentsteel53]

BTW has this ever been done elsewhere?

I have never seen an interstate shield with two states on it.  or a US or whatnot.  This is the closest.



but clearly that was meant to be one state - New Jersey - and was just done in such a sloppy manner that the underlying state - Delaware - shows through.

[mightyace]

^^^

That could have been because New Jersey ceded some land on its side of the Delaware Memorial Bridge.

[Grzrd]

I just had to look .....

http://expandingcapacity.transportation.org/states/TX_Unlocking_Gridlock_0410.pdf

http://expandingcapacity.transportation.org/unlocking_freight/states/TX_Unlocking_Freight_0610.pdf

What!?
No mention of I-49!?           

[just kidding]   

[Grzrd]

I just noticed some info relevant to this thread in a Dec. 6, 2009 article US71 recently posted in the "I-49 in AR (Fort Smith, Bella Vista)" thread:

The only work that has been done between Texarkana and Alma are environmental-impact studies on two separate sections.
The Texarkana to De Queen section is a 36-mile leg that will have an additional 16 miles in Texas and include a new bridge over the Red River, an expense that will be shared equally between Arkansas and Texas. Total cost is expected to reach $536 million.

(http://www.allbusiness.com/government/government-bodies-offices-regional-local/13536201-1.html)

Also, in a recent Times Record Online article, AHTD director Dan Flowers seems to confirm AHTD's commitment to completing the Doddridge to LA state line segment:

Dan Flowers, Arkansas State Highway and Transportation Department director... [said]... a project is under way now to finish I-49 south of Texarkana to the Louisiana line.

(http://www.swtimes.com/special_reports/article_83924506-b78d-11df-ab48-001cc4c03286.html)

[Grzrd]

Texas at this time does not put the state name.  we are working on it.

Just checked my email inbox and found an interesting one from late Friday p.m.  Given the effort being put forth on getting "Texas" on their interstate shields, I thought this might be a "baby step" in that regard and relate to your efforts.

First my joint email to AHTD and TxDOT:

Dear [AHTD and TxDOT],

"You have both been kind to respond to my recent inquiries about Future I-49 in the Texarkana area.  In large part the "unique" quality of Texarkana results from the great cooperation between your two states.  Perhaps the greatest symbol of this cooperation is State Line Avenue.  In light of that, I just wanted to pitch a suggestion regarding AHTD's current paving project from I-30 to U.S. 71 (which I understand goes barely over the state line to connect with U.S. 71).
Would it be possible to do the following on the Future I-49 2 miles north of Texarkana? [I assume it will be signed either I-49 or I-130]:
Directly on state line for lanes going from Texas to Arkansas, place an "Interstate 49 (or 130) - "Texas/Arkansas" shield with Texas placed above Arkansas.
Directly on state line for lanes going from Arkansas to Texas, place an "Interstate 49 (or 130) - "Arkansas/Texas" shield with Arkansas placed above Texas.
My understanding is that this type of signing has never been done before in the country.  I also understand that Texas does not currently put "Texas" on its shields, but I believe Arkansas does put "Arkansas " on its shields. Perhaps AHTD could do it, with TxDOT granting permission to place "Texas" on shields.
I believe this could be a unique "Texarkana thing" that would relate well to State Line Avenue and reinforce the historic cooperation between AHTD and TxDOT.

AHTD's reply:

Thank you for your suggestions.  I am going to forward these to our District Engineer in District Three for his consideration...

No response from TxDOT yet.

I thought it was worth a shot ...

[Grzrd]

Although written from a Fort Smith perspective, below-linked article may also be relevant to SW corner of Arkansas:

"WAIT-AND-SEE
The Arkansas Highway and Transportation Department is also reserving judgment, with spokesman Glenn Bolick saying they are “taking a wait-and-see approach” to the plan.

“We would welcome any additional funding and will look forward to seeing what projects we have in Arkansas that might fit the criteria. We don't know any program specifics at this time, but with over $23 billion in anticipated needs projected over the next 10 years and only about $4 billion in expected funds to meet that demand we would certainly expect to have projects that meet any criteria,” Bolick said in an e-mail statement." (Sept. 8, 2010 The City Wire: http://www.thecitywire.com/index.php?q=node/11713).

Louisiana will complete Segment A of I-49 North next month and is currently on track to finish Segment B in March, 2011.  There is also a (perhaps overly optimistic) estimate that Segments C-I of Louisiana's I-49 North will also be ready for traffic by 2013.

Assuming any money comes from Obama's infrastructure proposal, it might make sense for Arkansas to use money to accelerate the timetable for the two remaining paving projects from Doddridge to the Louisiana state line.  It would be nice to see a true interstate link for the route.

[Grzrd]

Besides..don't they have that I-69 connector from Carthage to Texarkana to complete first??
Anthony

There is also another corridor being studied -- I-69 -- that could have a spur coming up through East Texas along the US 59 route.  Corridor segment committees, made up of individuals appointed by local city and county governments, are currently looking at the route and will advise TxDOT on which routes would be most beneficial to the local citizens.

Texarkana Committee needs to present a report in near future with recommendations for preferred route(s), bypasses, etc. for the Texarkana I-69 spur.  From the Texarkana Gazette (http://www.texarkanagazette.com/news/localnews/2010/09/12/i-69-committee-meets-tuesday-90.php):

I-69 committee meets Tuesday
Published: 09/12/2010

The local planning committee for Interstate 69 meets Tuesday in Marshall to work on a progress report for the Texas Transportation Commission.
Segment 1 of the planning corridor reaches from Bowie County to Angelina County. Plans for I-69 here focus on upgrading U.S. Highway 59 to interstate standards.
The committee will need to submit a report on the planning progress in coming months.
The committee has identified areas that will need or want bypass loops and recommended alternate access for schools, businesses and homes.

EDIT - ADDITIONAL THOUGHT

It occurs to me that Texarkana I-69 spur could, when viewed from North to South perspective, be just as easily viewed as the "Texarkana I-49 spur".  This is initially hard to do because of perecived impossibility of building Texarkana to Alma stretch of I-49.  Since the spur will essentially be an upgrade of U.S.59, the cost of it should be analogous to MoDOT's current upgrade of U.S. 71 to I-49 along the I-44 to I-435 segment, which is relatively inexpensive at $5 million to $7 million per interchange.  It seems like characterizing it as a dual-purpose "49/69" spur would better position it for funding.  Also, if good progress could be made on it, then additional pressure on feds to fund Texas to Alma I-49 section would be created because you would have both the Mexico/Houston/Galveston I-69 Corridor prong and New Orleans I-49 Corridor prong of freight traffic funneling up to Texarkana.

[Grzrd]

The local planning committee for Interstate 69 meets Tuesday in Marshall to work on a progress report for the Texas Transportation Commission.

TxDOT just sent me a reply to an email about the I-69 spur.  In essence, it states that TXDOT is so overwhelmed with maintenance issues of currently existing highways that it will take new sources of funding to cover "new" projects.  Pertinent part of reply:

Many factors can and will influence the priority of the I-69 spur corridor and its development.  Traffic demand, industrial and population growth in the area, trade and trucking routes, political influence, connecting routes, etc. all play an important part in planning and prioritizing the future highway route, but most importantly will be funding for the project and how it competes with other such projects across the state.  Under current funding conditions, funding for new roadways like the I-69 project will dry up and all available funding will only be enough to maintain the current highway systems. Some type of funding--either higher fuel taxes, bonds, tolls or some other form of innovative funding--will have to be found before project will ever be constructed.

[Grzrd]

Texarkana Committee needs to present a report in near future with recommendations for preferred route(s), bypasses, etc. for the Texarkana I-69 spur.  From the Texarkana Gazette:

http://www.texarkanagazette.com/news/localnews/2010/09/12/i-69-committee-meets-tuesday-90.php

"I-69 committee meets Tuesday
Published: 09/12/2010

The local planning committee for Interstate 69 meets Tuesday in Marshall to work on a progress report for the Texas Transportation Commission ...

It appears that the local planning committee is processing a lot of negative input about the proposed route of the Texarkana I-69 Spur, with the progess report being delayed at least another month:

I-69 study corridor postponed again
By: Brandy S. Chewning - Texarkana Gazette - Published: 09/27/2010

Consideration of a study corridor for Interstate 69 will be delayed at least another month, local transportation planners say.
The item is not on the agenda for Tuesday’s meeting of the Metropolitan Planning Organization Policy Committee.
Officials with the MPO said other agenda items have been the focus and comments received on the study corridor have caused review. It could be discussed at the next meeting.
The study corridor was the recipient of public backlash this summer when residents in the potential study area first learned of the route...

(http://www.texarkanagazette.com/news/localnews/2010/09/27/i-69-study-corridor-postponed-again-80.php)

[Grzrd]

http://www.arkansashighways.com/ProgCon/letting/Aug%20'10%20Award%20List.PDF
Contract awarded for paving Future I-49 from 245/Arkansas Blvd. through I-30 then north and west to USS 71 at Texas state line.

I came across a historical tidbit while looking for info on Texarkana I-69 Spur alternative that will be presented to Texarkana MPO on Tuesday.  The Bowie County, TX portion of the above Arkansas I-49 project will consume $100,000 in Texas funds and $400,000 of federal money: http://www.texarkanampo.org/documents/upcoming-activities/FY-2010-Annual-Listing-of-Obligated-Projects-11-02-2010.pdf  (page 5/18). Even though it is a joint project, AHTD refers to it as a US 71 project and TxDOT refers to it as a US 59 project.

How many years (decades?) will it be before Texas again spends money on actual construction of I-49 on Texas soil?

Also, it looks like I-69 Planning Corridor will allow study of feasibility of having I-69 meet I-49 at location very close to state line: http://www.texarkanampo.org/documents/upcoming-activities/I-69-Proposed-Planning-Corridor-Citizen-Alternative.pdf.  Maybe this explains the TxDOT reference to the I-49 project as a US 59 project.  Or, since 59 & 71 are duplexed from Texarkana to north of Mena, maybe TxDOT just flipped a coin?

[Grzrd]

Texarkana I-69 Spur alternative that will be presented to Texarkana MPO on Tuesday ... it looks like I-69 Planning Corridor will allow study of feasibility of having I-69 meet I-49 at location very close to state line ...

Texarkana Gazette reports that Texarkana MPO rejected proposed I-69 Planning Corridor yesterday: http://www.texarkanagazette.com/news/localnews/2010/11/10/planning-group-rescinds-i-69-backing-79.php
I could not read entire article (no subscription) & am unsure how far back this pushes planning process.