http://www.thonline.com/news/breaking/article_8b68c8b2-a133-11e2-82a9-0019bb30f31a.html
Looks like the Southwest Arterial in Dubuque might finally get done sometime this century, with the state taking it over, and shifting US 52 onto a new routing.
I could see IA 32 being turned over in exchange for the SW Arterial, but both IA 32 and part of US 52? So IA 3 could end up with a hanging south end (depending how well it is signed after the transfer of maintenance?)
I'm not a big fan of the proposal, for these reasons:
- Iowa actually removed US 52 from downtown Dubuque in the 1960s and tried multiplexing it with US 20 east of Dyersville, but businesses in northern Dubuque threatened to sue the state over this so they ended up signing the old segment as Alternate US 52. After a few years, they put US 52 back on its old alignment.
- The Northwest Arterial was originally a Dubuque city street, but the state took it over in 1995. It was the Iowa DOT who gave it the IA 32 designation, widened the existing stretch to four lanes, and extended it.
- Highways with "hanging" ends are not unprecedented in Iowa -- IA 85 ends at the east city limits of Montezuma rather than US 63, IA 122 transitions into a county road at the east city limits of Mason City, and, historically, IA 183 and IA 191 ended at the north city limits of Council Bluffs before they were truncated even further in 2003. But I'm not a fan of the idea. If anything, why not keep the Northwest Arterial under state control and move IA 3 onto that?
As for putting US 52 on the SW Arterial, remember that US 52 is signed north/south in Iowa, so there will be two stretches -- a newly-created "wrong-way" multiplex with US 61/151 and part of a multiplex with US 20 -- where northbound traffic will be going south (and vice versa). If anything, US 20 should be rerouted on the SW Arterial, even though plans for a full southern bypass and new southern bridge have been dead for years.
Even though everything says the Iowa DOT isn't "in the business of local streets", and likely wouldn't do this, but why not just have IA 3 run through downtown on US 52's current route? Then the swap of the NW Arterial for the SW Arterial might be more balanced mileage-wise.
Quote from: Revive 755 on April 12, 2013, 09:16:04 PM
So IA 3 could end up with a hanging south end (depending how well it is signed after the transfer of maintenance?)
Last I was in Dubuque (2008), IA 3 was pretty well signed. I don't think that would be much of a problem.
My problem with this is signing US-52 on the arterial, for the same reasons that iowahighways gave. To me, the best number for the arterial would be an extension of IA-32.
It's official: the Iowa DOT and city of Dubuque have made an agreement to have the state build the Southwest Arterial. US 52 will be rerouted onto the Arterial and along US 20 and IA 136, and IA 3 will have a hanging end at the north city limits of Dubuque. The article does not mention what will happen to IA 32, but the map in the video implies that it will be decommissioned as well.
Iowa DOT to take over construction of Dubuque's Southwest Arterial (http://www.kwwl.com/story/23097439/2013/08/09/iowa-dot-to-take-over-construction-of-dubuques-southwest-arterial), with video from KWWL
Going back in time, here is the Dubuque Telegraph-Herald article summarizing the restoration of US 52 after a US 20/52 multiplex was attempted from 1964-1967, to the dismay of businesses in northern Dubuque: Highway 52 Is Its Old Self Again (http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=eQdRAAAAIBAJ&sjid=xsAMAAAAIBAJ&dq=highway-52%20dubuque&pg=6692%2C1736329) (October 12, 1967). Unfortunately, Google does not have the T-H issues dealing with the relocation itself.
Can I safely assume that the places where US 52 will be making its new turns will be conventional signalized intersections and not nice free-flowing interchanges (as would be done in many other states)?
:banghead:
Mike
Wouldn't IA 3 be able to be routed onto the Northwest Arterial and replace IA 32? That would solve the problem of IA 3 having a hanging end.