Texarkana (Future I-49, I-69 Spur)

[bassoon1986]

Cool though that each city is in a different state

[US71]

The June, 2013 Arkansas Highways Newsletter has a photo of an "Exit" AR 549 BGS with Houston, Shreveport and Fort Smith as the three control cities (page 5/16 of pdf):



It will be a loooooong time before there will be interstate connections to Houston and Fort Smith.

This is along I-30 (Exit 3). Both directions, there's a single exit which splits into 2 exits.

[codyg1985]

The June, 2013 Arkansas Highways Newsletter has a photo of an "Exit" AR 549 BGS with Houston, Shreveport and Fort Smith as the three control cities (page 5/16 of pdf):



It will be a loooooong time before there will be interstate connections to Houston and Fort Smith.

And not one mention at all about I-49. I contend that AHTD simply isn't serious about the concept of I-49. No Future I-49 signs to speak of, and hardly any mention of it from any of AHTD media.

[bugo]

Where is there a future I-49 sign in Arkansas?

[US71]

Where is there a future I-49 sign in Arkansas?

None, to my knowledge.

[ethanhopkin14]

-AR 245 has been  fully decommissioned. It no longer exists at all at Texarkana, replaced by Four States Fairground Road. A couple signs remain, but those are likely signs missed when AHTD changed things around (such as at State Line Rd).

Were the 296 shields removed from I-30?  If not, then I consider AR 245 a fully signed active state route.  If they were removed, it might have been because they didn't want to confuse drivers who once took AR 245 south towards Shreveport.  That would explain why the signs are still up.

The Texarkana inset from the 2013 map definitely has AR 245 designated from I-30 to AR 296; the map does not make it readily apparent whether it is designated from I-30 to AR 549:



The list of changes in Texarkana from the 2012 map reads as follows (page 4/5 of pdf) and appears to indicate that AR 245 still exists from AR 549 to AR 296:

45. Texarkana Inset: A.) New section of Hwy. 549 added.
B.) Old part of Hwy. 245 between Arkansas Blvd. & Hwy. 296 not FCA.
C.) Hwy. 245 from Jct. 549 to Arkansas Blvd. re-designated as Hwy. 549.
D.) Hwy. 245 from State Line to Jct. 549 re-designated as Hwy. 151

What does "FCA" mean? Fully Controlled Access?

Yes, "fully controlled access".  If you look at AHTD's county maps, freeways are labelled "FCA".

Did you learn about that file from the Facebook group or did you find it on your own?  I happened to upon it after downloading the actual maps and ordering my yearly 10 maps.

It is interesting to me that the interchange at Interstate 30 and State Line Dr. Still shows a cloverleaf intersection, although this has been converted to a diamond interchange.

[Grzrd]

I contend that AHTD simply isn't serious about the concept of I-49.

I also wonder how serious AHTD is about I-49.  I recently took a look at Missouri's 2011 I-49 Application Documents (page 6/8 of pdf) and noticed that, in AASHTO's letter to FHWA, it was already AASHTO's position that I-49 is a statutory numerically designated corridor (which overrides any potential concern about a dual presence of I-49 and US 49 in Arkansas):

...
Dear Mr. Mendez:
This is to advise you that AASHTO is in receipt of a formal application from the Missouri Department of Transportation to establish Interstate Route 49. Section 1105 of the Intermodal surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (ISTEA) Congress identified the north-south corridor from Kansas City, Missouri to Shreveport, Louisiana as a High Priority Corridor 1 (HPC 1) on the National Highway System. The corridor was designated as a future interstate route and further defined this corridor as Interstate Route 49 ....

Did they really run into an obstruction at AASHTO over the US 49 issue?

No Future I-49 signs

Note that the letter also expressly states that it is a "future interstate route ... further defined ... as Interstate Route 49".  It looks like AASHTO would have certainly permitted "Future I-49 Corridor" signs if AHTD had asked for them, at least as early as 2011.  AHTD can still ask for them now.

[Grzrd]

http://www.valleycentral.com/news/story.aspx?id=919619
Signs are officially going up on the 15th on the new I-69E & I-69C segments, according to this link.

(above quote from I-69 in TX thread)

I received an email from TxDOT this morning indicating that the installation of the I-369 shields will "probably" begin in the fall:

The I-369 signs near Texarkana will probably beginning being installed in the fall.

[ethanhopkin14]

http://www.valleycentral.com/news/story.aspx?id=919619
Signs are officially going up on the 15th on the new I-69E & I-69C segments, according to this link.

(above quote from I-69 in TX thread)

I received an email from TxDOT this morning indicating that I-369 shields will "probably" begin to be installed in the fall:

The I-369 signs near Texarkana will probably beginning being installed in the fall.

I will be at the signing ceremony in the Valley on the 15th. I will give a full update after.

[ethanhopkin14]

Here are my pictures from the signing this morning.:

https://plus.google.com/photos/108314424034130737389/albums/5900933620817858929

It was some fun

[Road Hog]

Good stuff!

The blue directional arrow panels under the white US shields need to be fixed, however. It looks horrible.

[ethanhopkin14]

Good stuff!

The blue directional arrow panels under the white US shields need to be fixed, however. It looks horrible.

Agreed.  I didn't like it, but tried to not let it ruin the experience.

[O Tamandua]

How do we define Tri-Interstate Cities? 3 different 'parent'/2di interstates?

So we currently have:
San Diego (5, 8, 15), Denver (25, 70, 76), San Antonio (10, 35, 37), Fort Worth (20, 30, 35W), Dallas (a 'quad': 20, 30, 35E, 45), Houston (10, 45, 69), Oklahoma City (35, 40, 44), Kansas City (29, 35, 70), Maidison (39, 90, 94), Quad Cities (74, 80, 88), Chicago (a 'quint': 55, 57, 88, 90, 94), Bloomington (39, 55, 74), St Louis (quad: 44, 55, 64, 70), Champaign (57, 72, 74), Memphis (quad: 22, 40, 55, 69), Slidell (10, 12, 59), Birmingham (quad: 20, 22, 59, 65), Atlanta (20, 75, 85), Chattanooga (24, 59, 75), Nashville (24, 40, 65), Louisville (64, 65, 71), Cincinnatti (71, 74, 75), Indianapolis (quad:65, 69, 70, 74), Gary (quad:65, 80, 90, 95), Detroit (75, 94, 96), Toledo (75, 80, 90), Cleveland (quad: 71, 77, 480, 90), Charlestown (64, 77, 79), Bedford (70, 76, 99), Harrisburg (76, 81, 83), Baltimore (quad:70, 83, 95, 97), DC (66, 270, 95), Columbia (20, 26, 77), Greensville (40, 73, 85), Scranton (quad:476, 380, 81, 84), Binghampton (81, 86, 88), Newark (78, 280, 95), New York (quad:78, 80, 87, 95), Boston (90, 93, 95)

Future ones would include Casa Grande (8, 10, 11), Texarkana (30, 49, x69), Shreveport (20, 49, 69), Meridian (20, 59, 85) and Milwaukee (43, US41, 94).

Bump.

Was looking for something else but found this.  Kansas City is now a "quad", apparently.

[Grzrd]

To take a left turn here on this forum, what is the plan for the Texas segment if I-49?

(above quote from I49 in LA thread)

Past posts in this thread (which includes discussion of I-49 in both SW Arkansas and Texas) discuss :

a link to the Executive Summary of the Final Environmental Impact Statement of I-49 from DeQueen to Texarkana (which includes the Texas I-49 segment):

https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=3321.msg135206#msg135206, and

a cost estimate for building the Red River bridge:

https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=3321.msg76274#msg76274

I don't plan on seeing the plans become reality in my lifetime.

[O Tamandua]

I don't plan on seeing the plans become reality in my lifetime.

MAN, Arkansas in so many ways, has so much going for it right now.  Hope we don't look like fools because of this.  (And as you suggest, Grzrd, Texas with their stretch up to and over the Red River might drag their feet.  It will depend upon how bad the TxDOT, authors of the map above culled by KTBS 3/Shreveport, do they really want their "I-49/I-69/Crossroads to the future".)

EDIT: Earlier this month, the American Thinker ran this piece on how, according to The Financial Times, Houston has now supplanted New York City as America's number 1 goods port (amazing, IMO).  That's part of my guess why they like the idea of this corridor.

Now we'll see who "ponys up", as the old saying went.

[Bobby5280]

I don't understand why I-49 was proposed to briefly cut into the NE corner of Texas in the first place. Did they run into a lot of opposition from property owners in and near Ogden, AR to having I-49 routed near or along the existing US-71 alignment East of the Texas state line? Why not keep the I-49 route north of Texarkana entirely in Arkansas?

Just looking at the proposed path and where AR-549 currently ends at US-71, I have to wonder if Texas would have any useful exits along I-49. Maybe one at Summerhill Rd? I could understand why Texas would place funding of a Red River Bridge project for I-49 way down on its list of priorities.

This routing of I-49 through the SE corner of Texas might have made more sense if a significant road like Future I-369 were able to tie into it (and complete a loop around Texarkana). But there's a huge amount of retail development where I-369 meets I-30 and a lot of residential development North of that.

I have a feeling Arkansas DOT will, at some point years in the future, be forced to redesign the segment of I-49 between Texarkana and Ashdown to stay within Arkansas, probably on the existing US-71/59 alignment. They might have to do that to prevent another Belle Vista like situation from developing.

[english si]

I don't understand why I-49 was proposed to briefly cut into the NE corner of Texas in the first place. Did they run into a lot of opposition from property owners in and near Ogden, AR to having I-49 routed near or along the existing US-71 alignment East of the Texas state line? Why not keep the I-49 route north of Texarkana entirely in Arkansas?

Like I-41 in IL, TX didn't think they had enough 2dis?

OK, that makes little sense what with the suffixed I-69 routes, rather than new 2dis...

[Bobby5280]

The problem is Texas doesn't appear to want their section of I-49. At least that's how the situation appears to me. The I-69 corridor and various projects in Texas' biggest cities seem to be a far greater priority.

For Arkansas I-49 would have to be one of its top priorities, and logically a bigger priority than I-69. Arkansas is seeing its best growth in the Northwestern part of the state along the I-49 corridor. I think a completed I-49 corridor would do more for the state than some of the other big projects they've been pursuing.

Arkansas has been extending the US-67 freeway from Little Rock toward Walnut Ridge, but not pushing the freeway corridor through to Southern Illinois (where it might be an extension of I-30 or I-57). They're slowly extending I-530 South from Pine Bluff to a spot where I-69 might be built, maybe a decade or two from now -especially when that bridge over the Mississippi River is figured into the situation.

The I-49 corridor is far closer to completion than I-69. And that's even counting the difficulty going on with I-49 between Lafayette and New Orleans. The segment between Fort Smith and Texarkana won't be easy or cheap to build due to the mountainous terrain along parts of the route. But the Rogers/Fayetteville/Bentonville metro has turned into a very important destination along the Interstate highway system, enough so that I would expect increasing pressure for Arkansas to get I-49 completed even if that means cutting out Texas' part of the proposed route.

[O Tamandua]

But the Rogers/Fayetteville/Bentonville metro has turned into a very important destination along the Interstate highway system, enough so that I would expect increasing pressure for Arkansas to get I-49 completed even if that means cutting out Texas' part of the proposed route.

Here's a wild one:

Northwest Arkansas (Rogers/Fayetteville/Bentonville), with three Fortune 500 companies (and their adherents) has more Fortune 500 companies than 22 states or the District of Columbia.

With two Fortune 100 company headquarters, Northwest Arkansas alone has more in that category than Arizona (Phoenix), Colorado (Denver), Florida (Miami/Fort Lauderdale, Tampa/St. Pete, Orlando, Jacksonville), Indiana (Indianapolis) or Missouri (St. Louis, Kansas City).

And that's before you factor in "S.E.C., Inc." which right now is the most highly-decorated college athletic conference (with the SEC West including member Arkansas having the last 5 of the last 6 BCS champions and 3 of the last 4 Heisman winners).

This metro area is a boom town and has been for some time.

[Bobby5280]

Anyone visiting the area between Bentonville and Fayetteville for the first time would be surprised at just how urban that region has become. There just isn't any one particular large city anchoring it all together in a traditional city & suburbs sense. Yet a visitor can drive along I-540 through places like Rogers and Springdale and see restaurants and retailers they would find only in other large cities; I'm talking 500,000+ population and over cities.

The region has grown enough that planners really need to start identifying future superhighway corridors to improve traffic movement in the area before every possible loop route from I-540/49 gets boxed in with development. For instance, I think the route between Tulsa & Springdale needs to be Interstate quality (mostly along US-412) the whole way, not just the Cherokee Turnpike leg of it. But as each year passes it will become ever more difficult to build such a thing. The development along the border in Siloam Springs would be difficult/expensive to bypass due to the terrain. Businesses in Tontitown along US-412 are close to the road. Any future freeway connection through there would have to be on a new alignment to the south of US-412.

Rogers, Lowell, Springdale, Johnson & Fayetteville already need an East loop off I-540. Looking at what's on the East edge of those cities in Google Earth makes me think building such a loop would be a very difficult proposition, both in terms of price and politics. However, the widening that is in the works for I-540 isn't going to be enough for this area for very long.

College football is another matter. There's no question the SEC is dominant in football, but that's mainly Alabama & LSU doing a lot of the domination.

[Avalanchez71]

But the Rogers/Fayetteville/Bentonville metro has turned into a very important destination along the Interstate highway system, enough so that I would expect increasing pressure for Arkansas to get I-49 completed even if that means cutting out Texas' part of the proposed route.

Here's a wild one:

Northwest Arkansas (Rogers/Fayetteville/Bentonville), with three Fortune 500 companies (and their adherents) has more Fortune 500 companies than 22 states or the District of Columbia.

With two Fortune 100 company headquarters, Northwest Arkansas alone has more in that category than Arizona (Phoenix), Colorado (Denver), Florida (Miami/Fort Lauderdale, Tampa/St. Pete, Orlando, Jacksonville), Indiana (Indianapolis) or Missouri (St. Louis, Kansas City).

And that's before you factor in "S.E.C., Inc." which right now is the most highly-decorated college athletic conference (with the SEC West including member Arkansas having the last 5 of the last 6 BCS champions and 3 of the last 4 Heisman winners).

This metro area is a boom town and has been for some time.

Last I checked the area already has I-540 running through it.  US 71 provides multiple lanes and I-49 is almost built out in MO.  First the US highway sign isn't good enough so they put up the spur interstate, I-540.  Now that isn't good enough.  Folks knew the limitations of the highway system when they moved in.  Why should other property owners' have their property divided up for the sake of these newcomers?

[O Tamandua]

But the Rogers/Fayetteville/Bentonville metro has turned into a very important destination along the Interstate highway system, enough so that I would expect increasing pressure for Arkansas to get I-49 completed even if that means cutting out Texas' part of the proposed route.

Here's a wild one:

Northwest Arkansas (Rogers/Fayetteville/Bentonville), with three Fortune 500 companies (and their adherents) has more Fortune 500 companies than 22 states or the District of Columbia.

With two Fortune 100 company headquarters, Northwest Arkansas alone has more in that category than Arizona (Phoenix), Colorado (Denver), Florida (Miami/Fort Lauderdale, Tampa/St. Pete, Orlando, Jacksonville), Indiana (Indianapolis) or Missouri (St. Louis, Kansas City).

And that's before you factor in "S.E.C., Inc." which right now is the most highly-decorated college athletic conference (with the SEC West including member Arkansas having the last 5 of the last 6 BCS champions and 3 of the last 4 Heisman winners).

This metro area is a boom town and has been for some time.

Last I checked the area already has I-540 running through it.  US 71 provides multiple lanes and I-49 is almost built out in MO.  First the US highway sign isn't good enough so they put up the spur interstate, I-540.  Now that isn't good enough.  Folks knew the limitations of the highway system when they moved in.  Why should other property owners' have their property divided up for the sake of these newcomers?

I'm guessing the other boomtowns Las Vegas and Orlando had people asking the same question.

But it may be because right now it's estimated that Northwest Arkansas/Fort Smith has a combined metro population, right now, of 784,000 people, which would be bigger than:

Des Moines/Ames (area has two thru interstates)
Wichita/Hutchinson (area has two thru interstates counting the turnpikes)
Chattanooga/Cleveland(TN) (area has three thru interstates)
Mobile/Daphne (area has two interstates, one thru)
Huntsville/Florence (area has one thru interstate)
Springfield/Branson (area has one thru interstate)
Shreveport/Texarkana (area will have 4-5 interstates, 2-3 thru ones depending upon how you count them)
Jackson/Vicksburg (area has two thru interstates)

In addition, in 30 years Northwest Arkansas alone is predicted (without Fort Smith) to have 1,000,000 people.  (Right now, Fort Smith has just under 300,000 in its metro.  If I-49 is linked some studies indicate it will grow to around 400,000+.)

So, indeed, I think it makes sense to finish at least the Bella Vista Bypass (though as always I am sorry some property owners will be impinged upon...always happens but it is a pain for some, boon for others).  And a whale of a lot of sense to finish I-49 between Fort Smith and Texarkana.  Now, whether common sense will be exercised or not...

[Bobby5280]

If the population of NW AR keeps growing at a fast pace they'll be forced to build additional superhighways. Traffic is already pretty bad in some areas there. They certainly don't want to have situations like those the cities of Austin and Phoenix faced (and are still dealing with in spite of new freeways finally being built in recent years).

I certainly like the approach used in many areas of Texas: identify a possible future freeway corridor. Secure the right of way and build a divided street with a median wide enough to hold a freeway that would/could be built 10-20 years or so in the future. In Wichita Falls it was relatively easy for them to build Kell Freeway as funds came available. The divided surface street had the right of way reserved for the freeway since at least since the 1970's.

I'm disappointed that kind of approach hasn't been used here in Oklahoma. In Oklahoma City, the Kilpatrick Turnpike would probably be a complete loop around OKC and Norman if ODOT and other powers that be had at least some foresight to secure that entire corridor while it was still pretty much undeveloped. Today Mustang, OK has grown over where OK-4 could have attached into the Kilpatrick Turnpike. All the development around Riverwind Casino south of Norman is covering up any possible upgrade of OK-9 into I-35. In the long term that loop highway may have to be completed, but if so it will cost a whole lot more than it would have thanks to lack of long term planning.

[Scott5114]

If the population of NW AR keeps growing at a fast pace they'll be forced to build additional superhighways. Traffic is already pretty bad in some areas there. They certainly don't want to have situations like those the cities of Austin and Phoenix faced (and are still dealing with in spite of new freeways finally being built in recent years).

I certainly like the approach used in many areas of Texas: identify a possible future freeway corridor. Secure the right of way and build a divided street with a median wide enough to hold a freeway that would/could be built 10-20 years or so in the future. In Wichita Falls it was relatively easy for them to build Kell Freeway as funds came available. The divided surface street had the right of way reserved for the freeway since at least since the 1970's.

I'm disappointed that kind of approach hasn't been used here in Oklahoma. In Oklahoma City, the Kilpatrick Turnpike would probably be a complete loop around OKC and Norman if ODOT and other powers that be had at least some foresight to secure that entire corridor while it was still pretty much undeveloped. Today Mustang, OK has grown over where OK-4 could have attached into the Kilpatrick Turnpike. All the development around Riverwind Casino south of Norman is covering up any possible upgrade of OK-9 into I-35. In the long term that loop highway may have to be completed, but if so it will cost a whole lot more than it would have thanks to lack of long term planning.

If it was really desired they could extend the OK-9 expressway in Cleveland County along the river for a bit and have a second bridge crossing, then tie into the current expressway west of Santa Fe Avenue (NW 24th Street in Goldsby). It would be expensive though.

Unfortunately I don't think any sort of planning here would have been possible, or at the very least really hard to pull off, since northern McClain County is a bit of mess when it comes to jurisdictions. Despite everything in that cluster having a Norman mailing address, the north side of the highway (Love's, the bank, Mason's) is all in Newcastle and the south side (Riverwind, McDonalds, Shell, the medical clinic) is in Goldsby. I don't think Goldsby even has a planning department, as it's a town of about 1,500. Meanwhile, Riverwind sits on Indian trust land, so it would have been impossible to convince the Chickasaws not to build anything on that since they don't really have a whole lot of places they can operate a casino (it is possible to get new trust land but there's a whole process to that making it more complicated than just buying a parcel of land).

[J N Winkler]

I happened to look through one of the Arkansas official state maps US 71 was handing out at the Wichita road meet last month, and realized that freeway I-540/US 71 (soon to be I-49) is entirely within the corporate limits of one city or another all the way from Exit 60 (Fayetteville) to Exit 93 (south end of projected Bella Vista Bypass)--a distance of about 33 miles.  It also looks to be more solidly urbanized than some of the city pairs Bobby5280 cites, such as Wichita/Hutchinson and Des Moines/Ames.