I-49 in Arkansas

[bugo]

I was curious what the terrain was like between Wickes and Mansfield? Would a tunnel be justified in that area?

It's rugged, mountainous terrain. They're not building a tunnel.

And routing I-49 through Hope is a stupid idea. It would be many miles out of the way, and they would have to build a new highway between Hope and Shreveport, which would be far more expensive than building a bridge.

[bwana39]

I do agree that the small part in TX will be the last section ever to be built, especially when their plate is full with projects like I-69, I-2, I-14 and I-27.

From another discussion, the Texas dip is more of ploy by Arkansas for Texas to partially fund the bridge on the Red River. From Texas' perspective, there's no incentive for them to view I-49 with any urgency.

If the bridge is a hang-up, why not overlap I-49 with I-30 to about Fulton or Hope?

I was curious what the terrain was like between Wickes and Mansfield? Would a tunnel be justified in that area?

The "TEXAS DIP" is a construct of Mike Huckabee. While it was / is assumed the bridge would be partially (mostly) paid for by Texas, it has virtually zero to do with the routing from US-71 south of Texarkana to Richmond AR. 

The originally planned route was from basically where I-49 meets AR-151 to US-59 (Lake Drive) to I-30 the proceed north through Pleasant Grove (the community and school district north of I-30 in Texarkana TX) and cross the Red River where it is currently planned. There was no plan at the time for freeway on the Arkansas (East) Side particularly north of I-30 (Arkansas Boulevard actually).

The relationship between Texarkana Arkansas and its Texas counterpart has ALWAYS been contentious. As a rule, Texarkana Texas has been a benevolent neighbor. Texarkana Arkansas has been a jealous cousin. The folks on the Texas side are not Texas zealots.  The folks in SW Arkansas (particularly Miller County) are HOGS exclusively.* See below

Mike Huckabee spent several years as the Senior Pastor of the largest church in Texarkana Arkansas. He was serving there when he initially ran for Lieutenant Governor.  When he got to be governor, he set out to right several of the perceived slights that Texarkana TX had served Texarkana Arkansas. They built the Loop (then labeled as AR-245) from US-71 on the southeast side of Texarkana AR to Arkansas Boulevard and replaced the bridges over I-30 just north of the Four-States-Fairgrounds. Texas had previously built the loop from the state line on the south side to I-30. Arkansas soon completed it so there was freeway southward from Arkansas Boulevard on the east side of Texarkana to the Texas state line and on around northward  to I-30 in Texas. The ROW north of I-30 was intact until well after the I-49 east loop was built by Arkansas

Arkansas decided unilaterally to build the freeway on around to the Texas state line on the north side. Texas has evidently purchased ROW on around to the proposed crossing. Until Arkansas makes headway to build the freeway from the Red River Crossing to the north side of Ashdown, it is kind of moot.  Arkansas tends to construct pieces so that it doesn't make sense not to build the rest. Arkansas tends to work rather quickly in both planning and beginning construction after they make a decision. Texas is not so fast.  Any suggestion that Texas is dragging or even has dragged their feet in the past on this project are inaccurate. Texas has been guilty of waiting for Arkansas to make decisions so they can coordinate work. Arkansas has and continues to be difficult to coordinate anything with and they  decide on projects then run and Texas is indeed left trying to catch up to figure out where and how to run.

*On to the Arkansas loyalty, people rarely move from Texas to Texarkana Arkansas. The perception is the schools are inferior. the infrastructure is poorer, and there are greater levels of sales taxes.  There are no hospitals on the Arkansas side and until the past decade not many doctors' offices. There are a core of folks in Texarkana Arkansas who are absolute life-long Arkansans and have contempt for Texarkana Texas and Texas in General.

[bwana39]

I was curious what the terrain was like between Wickes and Mansfield? Would a tunnel be justified in that area?

It's rugged, mountainous terrain. They're not building a tunnel.

And routing I-49 through Hope is a stupid idea. It would be many miles out of the way, and they would have to build a new highway between Hope and Shreveport, which would be far more expensive than building a bridge.

I have one small add. The I-30 bridges were UNDERBUILT as  is. Two-lanes and no room for expand them..... Built in the late 2010's!

[The Ghostbuster]

Hope is already served by Interstate 30. Rerouting Interstate 49 way out there would be ludicrous.

[bwana39]

Hope is already served by Interstate 30. Rerouting Interstate 49 way out there would be ludicrous.

THere seemed to be some crazy idea that the reason it was not getting built across the Red River yet somehow had something to do with Texas and the cost of the bridges. If history has any precedent, Arkansas will pay for little (or nothing) of the cost for the bridges themselves anyway.

[bugo]

The originally planned route was from basically where I-49 meets AR-151 to US-59 (Lake Drive) to I-30 the proceed north through Pleasant Grove (the community and school district north of I-30 in Texarkana TX) and cross the Red River where it is currently planned. There was no plan at the time for freeway on the Arkansas (East) Side particularly north of I-30 (Arkansas Boulevard actually).

Here's some confirmation that I-49 was originally going to run west of Texarkana.

From Texas Department of Transportation Highway Designation File:

U. S. HIGHWAY NO. 71

Minute Order 016701, dated 09/26/1939

From the Texas/Arkansas State Line south of Index to Texarkana.  General Redescription of Highway System.

From the Texas/Arkansas S/L north of Texarkana, southward and concurrent with US 59 to IH 30; and then continuing southward on State Line Road to its junction with US 67/US 82, a distance of approximately 8.4 miles; and also on new location from the Texas/Arkansas S/L, northwest of Texarkana, southeastward to the intersection of IH 30/US 59; then southward and concurrent with US 59 to SH 93/SL 151; then southward, eastward and concurrent with SL 151 to State Line Road, a total distance of approximately 24.6 miles. (Bowie County)  (New Description)  Section on new location added from the Texas/Arkansas State Line, northwest of Texarkana, southeastward to State Line Rd in south Texarkana.  Upon completion of the new location of US 71, the present designation of US 71 north of Texarkana, from the Texas/Arkansas State Line southward to IH 30 will be cancelled and retained as US 59; the present designation of US 71, from IH 30 southward to its junction with US 67/US 82 will be cancelled and redesignated in conjunction and cooperation with the State of Arkansas; the present designation of SL 151, from US 59.eastward to State Line Road will be cancelled and retained as US 71.

[The Ghostbuster]

If Interstate 49 had been routed along the west side of Texarkana and connected to the existing alignment via Interstate 369 and AR/TX 151, then the existing 49 alignment along the east side of Texarkana could have retained the previously-proposed Interstate 130 designation.

[bwana39]

If Interstate 49 had been routed along the west side of Texarkana and connected to the existing alignment via Interstate 369 and AR/TX 151, then the existing 49 alignment along the east side of Texarkana could have retained the previously-proposed Interstate 130 designation.

Possibly / Probably

[bugo]

I don't think Future I-130 was ever formally cancelled.

[bwana39]

I bet the Miller County Quorum Court could care less.

[Road Hog]

I bet the Miller County Quorum Court could care less.

If they have a quorum.

[bwana39]

I bet the Miller County Quorum Court could care less.

If they have a quorum.

I think they have more "Justices of the Peace" in their quorum court than we do commissioners in our commissioner's court. 9-15 + the County Judge)

[Henry]

If Interstate 49 had been routed along the west side of Texarkana and connected to the existing alignment via Interstate 369 and AR/TX 151, then the existing 49 alignment along the east side of Texarkana could have retained the previously-proposed Interstate 130 designation.

Possibly / Probably

When you think about it, it kind of makes sense that I-130 was planned for the eastern loop when I-49 was proposed to run on the western loop and thus truncate I-369.

I don't think Future I-130 was ever formally cancelled.

It was not cancelled, it was just renumbered to I-49 after the current alignment was established.

[bugo]

I don't think Future I-130 was ever formally cancelled.

It was not cancelled, it was just renumbered to I-49 after the current alignment was established.

At which AASHTO meeting did this happen?

[english si]

Why is TX/AR 151 not an Interstate?

[bwana39]

Why is TX/AR 151 not an Interstate?

In Texas, adding Interstates is the exception, not the rule. It was supposed to be I-49.

[The Ghostbuster]

I don't think AR/TX 151 needs to be an Interstate. It's fine with the number it has.

[english si]

In Texas, adding Interstates is the exception, not the rule.

The state that is planning I-14S (and a load of other bonkers spurs/alt routes of I-14) treats Interstates as an exception, not the rule? Sure!

I don't think AR/TX 151 needs to be an Interstate. It's fine with the number it has.

It's the signed route from northbound I-49 to I-30 westbound, and I-30 eastbound to southbound I-49. It's up to standards, and would have been mainline I-49 had they not build a different route. It's de facto part of the Interstate Network, so why not de jure?

Of course, I-49 was fine as US71. I-369 was fine as US59. But given they are given the blue and white, why shouldn't TX/AR151 not be given that treatment.

[sprjus4]

In Texas, adding Interstates is the exception, not the rule.

The state that is planning I-14S (and a load of other bonkers spurs/alt routes of I-14) treats Interstates as an exception, not the rule? Sure!

Yes, they do. The I-14 and I-69 systems were congressionally designated. Texas is also studying extending I-27. Those are the exceptions. Texas is loaded with non-interstate freeways that they have no intention of signing, even if they're logical 3di routes. I don't they have signed a 3di route in a long time, with the exception of I-369.

[The Ghostbuster]

I have no problem with Interstate 35E and Interstate 35W existing in Dallas and Fort Worth (given they've existed from the beginning of the Interstate System). However, I think Texas has gone off the deep end adding suffixes to new Interstate Corridors. The future Interstates 14N/S, future Interstates 27E/N/W, and the existing Interstates 69C/E/W are totally unnecessary designations. They should have kept Interstate Suffixes in the past.

[PColumbus73]

I know it'd run into legal / constitutional issues, but if the USDOT / FHWA sought to renumber the original suffixed Interstates and US routes, then there ought to be a mechanism for them to renumber or deny new suffixed routes.

If there is a case that these newly proposed suffixes create driver confusion, exacerbated by the frequency that are being proposed within Texas, then maybe the FHWA can challenge Congressionally designated interstate numbers.

[vdeane]

In Texas, adding Interstates is the exception, not the rule.

The state that is planning I-14S (and a load of other bonkers spurs/alt routes of I-14) treats Interstates as an exception, not the rule? Sure!

I don't think AR/TX 151 needs to be an Interstate. It's fine with the number it has.

It's the signed route from northbound I-49 to I-30 westbound, and I-30 eastbound to southbound I-49. It's up to standards, and would have been mainline I-49 had they not build a different route. It's de facto part of the Interstate Network, so why not de jure?

Of course, I-49 was fine as US71. I-369 was fine as US59. But given they are given the blue and white, why shouldn't TX/AR151 not be given that treatment.

I agree with you, but I feel like this can be turned around with things like "why isn't A-74(M) just part of M-74?".

[english si]

I agree with you, but I feel like this can be turned around with things like "why isn't A-74(M) just part of M-74?".

True, it does cost money to change a road's number.

[edwaleni]

Hope is already served by Interstate 30. Rerouting Interstate 49 way out there would be ludicrous.

THere seemed to be some crazy idea that the reason it was not getting built across the Red River yet somehow had something to do with Texas and the cost of the bridges. If history has any precedent, Arkansas will pay for little (or nothing) of the cost for the bridges themselves anyway.

Due to the shifting of the Red River over the intervening years, Arkansas has less river to cross on their side of the state line.  But it was my understanding that Texas has precedence for Red River bridging and TxDOT would be the lead agency if/when they decide to build them.

[Road Hog]

Hope is already served by Interstate 30. Rerouting Interstate 49 way out there would be ludicrous.

THere seemed to be some crazy idea that the reason it was not getting built across the Red River yet somehow had something to do with Texas and the cost of the bridges. If history has any precedent, Arkansas will pay for little (or nothing) of the cost for the bridges themselves anyway.

Due to the shifting of the Red River over the intervening years, Arkansas has less river to cross on their side of the state line.  But it was my understanding that Texas has precedence for Red River bridging and TxDOT would be the lead agency if/when they decide to build them.

It's not so much the shifting of the river as much as the position of the river when the boundary was set in 1836-1845 and which state has statutory control of it.