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

[bugo]

The whole loop should be I-130, and there should be an I-49/I-130 duplex and a rare 3 digit duplex, I-130 and 369.

[bassoon1986]

The whole loop should be I-130, and there should be an I-49/I-130 duplex and a rare 3 digit duplex, I-130 and 369.

Why?

[Grzrd]

why bother covering it, if it's half-undone before they even unveil the sign?

Maybe to hide the "TEXAS" on the shield, as revealed in this unveiled photo from this article:

In an effort to enhance mobility and encourage interstate trade in the region, the Texas Department of Transportation, with approval from the Texas Transportation Commission and in partnership with the Alliance for I-69 Texas, today officially designated 3.5 miles of US 59 as the new I-369 spur ....
The new I-369 spur runs along the existing US 59 for 3.5 miles, beginning at I-30 and continuing to South Lake Drive (State Highway 93).

edit

This KSLA video report has some footage from the ceremony.

[bugo]

The whole loop should be I-130, and there should be an I-49/I-130 duplex and a rare 3 digit duplex, I-130 and 369.

Why?

Because the entire loop should have a single number and I-49 and I-369 need to be continuous to I-30.

[Alps]

The whole loop should be I-130, and there should be an I-49/I-130 duplex and a rare 3 digit duplex, I-130 and 369.

Why?

Because the entire loop should have a single number and I-49 and I-369 need to be continuous to I-30.

I do think the loop should have a single number, but then use 230, which I believe is available.

[bugo]

It is already Future I-130 from I-30 to US 71 and I see no need to change the number.

[Anthony_JK]

"Future I-130" is just a placeholder on AR 549 until I-49 is eventually built from I-220 in Shreveport.

Personally, they should just keep it as US 59/TX 151/AR 151 up to AR 549 until the Shreveport to I-30 portion of I-49 is completed...then make the former segment an I-230 loop. Until an ironclad decision is made to actually BUILD I-369 from Texarkana to Carthage, there's really no need for an I-x69 shield at all.

You could just cosign I-49 with AR 549 up to I-30, then north of there use AR 549.

It makes absolutely NO SENSE to run a concurrency when it's not needed.

[bugo]

It does make sense.  Route continuity.

[Grzrd]

I recently received an email update from AHTD regarding the designation of I-49 in Arkansas:

As you can see from the attached map, we have recently requested route designation changes for several sections of the Highway 71/State Highway 549/I-540 corridor in western Arkansas.

From the attached map (NWA image is in Bella Vista, Fort Smith thread):



In addition to an I-49 designation from the Texas state line to Doddridge, it looks like they are also asking for contingent approval for the Doddridge to Louisiana state line section in advance of the anticipated May 2014 opening.  A potential glitch: did AHTD avoid repeating a mistake from several years ago and get Texas to sign off on the I-49 designation from I-30 to the Texas state line (it does go approximately 500 feet into Texas)?

[Grzrd]

This excerpt from the map on page 19 (page 25/30 of pdf) of the I-69 Advisory Committee Report and Recommendations demonstrates that both the I-369 designation for US 59 and development of the West Loop relief route are Priorities for the Segment One Committee:

This Alliance for I-69 Texas article reports on the I-369 unveiling ceremony, and it includes comments from U.S. Representative Ralph Hall about the importance of the Texarkana West Loop relief route:

Congressman Hall said progress on I-69 will provide more efficient access to destinations throughout the state and stressed that I-69 will be an important addition to the national and international mobility system.  He pointed to the need for completion of the Texarkana West Loop as a way to better serve freight movements in the region.

Maybe those thoughts are being communicated to the new I-69 Congressional Caucus in an effort to procure 95% federal funding.  TexAmericas Center, which is near where the Texarkana West Loop would tie in to I-30, certainly appears to be anticipating construction of the West Loop because it has a link to a TxDOT I-69 video on its home page.

edit

In case anyone has missed them, ethanhopkin14 recently posted some great pics from the I-369 unveiling ceremony in the "I-69 in TX" thread.

[Grzrd]

This article (behind paywall) identifies Summer 2014 as the completion date for the SW Arkansas/Louisiana link and includes two photos of construction in Arkansas near the Louisiana state line (not behind paywall):

Engineers are getting excited and gearing up for the completion of Interstate 49.
Construction of I-49 from Texarkana to Shreveport, La., should be completed next summer. Both Arkansas and Louisiana highway departments agree the project should be finished in the summer of 2014.

[ethanhopkin14]

I went to the Interstate 369 signing ceremony last Monday in Texarkana, and on they way back home I decided to drive the new Interstate 49 corridor.  I took this picture of the overpass being built south of Dodridge, AR over US 71.



I then drove the corridor best I could through northwestern Louisiana and crossed the built but closed off sections up there:


That is Ida State Line Road over Interstate 49 looking northbound.


That is the future on ramp to northbound Interstate 49 from SH 168

[Grzrd]

In addition to an I-49 designation from the Texas state line to Doddridge, it looks like they are also asking for contingent approval for the Doddridge to Louisiana state line section in advance of the anticipated May 2014 opening.  A potential glitch: did AHTD avoid repeating a mistake from several years ago and get Texas to sign off on the I-49 designation from I-30 to the Texas state line (it does go approximately 500 feet into Texas)?

FHWA has a "Designations of Future Interstate Corridors" page that contains two charts providing a comparison of FHWA responsibilities in regard to administratively created corridors with FHWA responsibilities in regard to Congressionally created corridors.  Since FHWA considers I-49 to be a Congressionally created corridor, I think the answer is that Arkansas did not need to coordinate with Texas this time around. The Congressional chart provides in relevant part:

Issue: Is coordination with affected States required prior to requesting an Interstate route number?
Answer: Not if number assigned in law (endnote vi)
Endnote vi: If the future Interstate number has been assigned in the statutory language, no coordination on route numbering is required. Otherwise, coordination is generally required if the route numbering substantially affects more than one State. If the corridor in question is completely within one State, no coordination on route numbering is required unless the highway is close to a border and coordination is administratively deemed to be necessary in the public interest. Also, even where formal coordination does not occur, notifications of various kinds are required, for example, notification to AASHTO and neighboring States.

It looks like an old barrier* no longer exists for I-49 in SW Arkansas.

edit *

From Wikipedia :

North of the junction with Highway 549 and U.S. Highway 71, Highway 245 is part of the north—south Corridor, a planned extension of Interstate 49 north to Kansas City. (This extension will also include Highway 549.) The Arkansas State Highway and Transportation Department submitted this piece, as well as its continuation west to the state line, as Interstate 130 (I-130) in fall 2000. The American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials denied the part from US 71 west to Texas, as "the state of Texas has not submitted a companion application for a suitable terminus in Texas", but the piece from US 71 north to I-30 was approved on December 8, 2000 as Future I-130.

[bugo]

[US71]

Beat me to it.

[Grzrd]

this article (behind paywall) reports that AHTD has already submitted its application to FHWA, FHWA has signaled that approval should be effective by Christmas, and that, after approval, "it will take a while longer before the new signs go up and the old ones come down"

(above quote from I-49 in AR (Bella Vista, Fort Smith) thread)

As previously posted above, FHWA approval for I-49 shields in SW Arkansas may come as soon as Christmas:

The Arkansas Highway and Transportation Department has gotten initial approval to designate two sections of highway as Interstate 49 ....
The approved sections include 73 miles of Interstate 540 from Alma north to Bella Vista and 42 miles of Arkansas 549 from Texarkana south to the Louisiana state line, said Randy Ort, a spokesmanfor the Highway Department.
The approval came from the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials at an Oct. 18 meeting in Denver.
But final approval must come from the Federal Highway Administration, which received the state's application last month ....
Scott Bennett, director of the Arkansas Highway Department, said he'd like to have final approval by Christmas, but that may be too optimistic.
Doug Hecox, a spokesman for the Federal Highway Administration, said Christmas is possible.
"I think that sounds like a very reasonable goal,"  he said ....
A 5-mile section from Doddridge to the Louisiana state line is to be done in May. Ort said it would likely be completed before the Highway Department is ready to put I-49 signs up along the route, so it has been approved for the I-49 signs.
"It just doesn't make sense to have to keep renumbering things when it's clear it's part of the interstate system,"  said Bennett, referring to Arkansas 549 south of Texarkana.

It will be nice for the Texarkana, TX I-369 to have a new Texarkana, AR I-49 neighbor.

[Grzrd]

Through acquisitions the KCS got the Louisiana and Arkansas and a railroad which runs pretty much parallel to I-49 (current, plus I-10 and future) all the way to New Orleans, and now with their still developing Mexico line they're running parallel to a future Kansas City/Mexico corridor via I-49 and I-69 .... Shows me just how critical this emerging dual I-69 and I-49 corridor is as well.

(above quote from I-69 in TX thread)

I-69 will be the main priority for TX for the forseeable future, but that doesn't mean that they aren't considering the possibility of a connection with a future I-49 to Kansas City .... I believe they ultimately get it together and find a way to make the connection work, and the Western Loop gets built with I-49 getting some Texas mileage. Just my nickel.

This Oct. 31 Texarkana Gazette article (behind paywall) reports on a Texarkana Chamber of Commerce official mentioning the possibility of an I-49/I-(3)69 interchange in the Texarkana area, as well as the possibility of Texarkana becoming a major distribution hub:

Charles Nickerson, vice president of economic development for the Texarkana Chamber of Commerce, said I-49's connection to Interstate 30 as well as possible future connection to Interstate 69, puts Texarkana in a position to be a powerful future business hub.
"Right now we're in the middle of a 350-mile radius that has access to 38 million people,"  he said. "This can make us a major hub."

An I-49/I-369 interchange may be on distant radar, but it is on radar nonetheless.

[dariusb]

I'll be so glad when I-49 opens! Yay!

[Grzrd]

Here is a news post from AHTD on the 549 Highway, adding new exit and maybe opening it in a month. http://www.arkansashighways.com/news/2013/NR%2013-109.pdf

Here's a map of the segment from the above link in Gordon's post:

While in Texarkana this weekend, I drove the Texarkana Loop (including the new Northern Loop section of AR 549), primarily to clinch I-369.  While driving south on the Arkansas side, I noticed that AR 549 is still an "exit" off of the loop.  Here is an older GSV from when AR 245 constituted most of the Loop (I think AR 245 has been replaced with "TO US 59 and I-30" on that BGS).  I guess AHTD will create the new "TO US 59 and I-30" Exit 29 BGS when they install the I-49 signage.

[Grzrd]

This Oct. 31 Texarkana Gazette article (behind paywall) reports on a Texarkana Chamber of Commerce official mentioning the possibility of an I-49/I-(3)69 interchange in the Texarkana area, as well as the possibility of Texarkana becoming a major distribution hub:

Charles Nickerson, vice president of economic development for the Texarkana Chamber of Commerce, said I-49's connection to Interstate 30 as well as possible future connection to Interstate 69, puts Texarkana in a position to be a powerful future business hub.
"Right now we're in the middle of a 350-mile radius that has access to 38 million people,"  he said. "This can make us a major hub."

This November 25 Texarkana Gazette article (behind paywall) reports on comments by I-49 International Coalition President Curt Green that the completion of I-49 through Arkansas is needed for safety reasons and that the combination of I-49 and I-(3)69 will bring a lot of goods through Texarkana:

Although he travels U.S. Highway 71 in Arkansas frequently, Curt Green, president of I-49 International Coalition, still remembers a bumper sticker that reflected the concern about the highway's safety.
The bumper sticker read, "I travel U.S. 71 in Arkansas. Pray for me." ....
"Highway 71 is considered a most dangerous road,"  Green said. "I do not know anyone in Texarkana, Ark., who has not lost someone on 71. It's a very bad highway."  ....
Although many people do not realize, the ports in Louisiana including New Orleans are where more cargo is delivered than in New York City or Los Angeles. The enlargement of the Panama Canal, which will allow double- and triple-sized ships to eventually come into the canal, will mean economic growth for those cities with roadways in place to provide easy travel to move cargo, he said.
"This is going to be a phenomenal amount of cargo that will be delivered north out of the gulf," Green said. "Locally we are working with Red River Army Depot and Lone Star, and we have a 20,000-acre industrial park to tie into."  
Green complimented the work being done in Texas to upgrade U.S. Highway 59 and Interstate 69.
"Texas is the No. 1 state in the nation, and they are blowing and going upgrading 59 and 69,"  Green said. "Having 69 ending right here in Texarkana will mean cargo coming in from Harlingen and Corpus Christi,"  he said. "This will mean that we are going to be dumping a tremendous amount of traffic and cargo to Texarkana." ....
The lack of funding makes it even more important to keep elected officials informed of what the needs of the state are, Green said.
"We need to make sure they are aware of the need and ask them to help with any possible financial help available for interstate construction,"  he said.

It looks like the I-49 International Coalition has bought into the notion that development of the I-369 corridor provides another justification for completing I-49 from Texarkana to Fort Smith.

edit 

Here is a non-pay wall version of the article: http://www.sfgate.com/news/article/Head-of-I-49-coalition-says-road-needed-soon-5009881.php

[Road Hog]

I drove the extension north of I-30 for the first time. Why is the speed limit only 65 still?

And once again, enjoyed looking at the crazy mix of Texas and Arkansas signage down US 71 coming back. Arkansas-style signs on Texas posts and vice versa.

ADD: Also, there is absolutely no I-369 signage along I-30 still. You still have to follow US 59 and then once you get on there, you'll start to see I-369 shields.

[US71]

Maybe because 549 is considered a metropolitan highway and not rural ?  I-540 is 65 through Fayetteville, but 70 otherwise.

You'll also notice there are NO Overhead signs for I-369: only independent signage

[dariusb]

With all these road projects, Texarkana will look very different in the next 20 years.

[US71]

With all these road projects, Texarkana will look very different in the next 20 years.

This would be the perfect time for Love's or Pilot to start buying up land for new truck stops

[dariusb]

I've kept reading that Texarkana is destined to be a transportation and distribution hub in the future so with all the projected truck traffic to come through the area, that wouldn't be a bad idea.