I-30 project encounters opposition in Little Rock
By Roy Ockert Jr.
Nov. 10, 2015
While other cities around Arkansas, including Jonesboro, struggle to find funding for local street and bridge projects, some Little Rock residents are fighting to stop a major freeway project.
That would be on Interstate 30, which cuts through the heart of downtown Little Rock and North Little Rock. Also known as the Crossing 30 project, the Arkansas State Highway and Transportation Department is considering the widening of a 6.7-mile corridor of the interstate, including its bridge over the Arkansas River, to as many as 10 lanes. It now has six lanes.
The 10-lane option was recommended in an initial study. The project would involve revamping the already complicated interchanges that route traffic on and off the freeway on both sides of the river. Little Rock has spent many years converting the River Market and the area around the Clinton Presidential Center into pedestrian-friendly tourist attractions.
The cost would be an estimated $600 million, depending on the exact design, which by some reports would be the most expensive single project in the state department’s history. It would be paid for with funds from the half-cent sales tax approved by Arkansas voters in 2012, but the Highway Department has applied for a $200 million federal grant.
Among the first to raise an objection was state Rep. Warwick Sabin, D-Little Rock. While agreeing that repairing or replacing the old river bridge might be necessary, he said, “It seems frivolous and short-sighted to further widen a freeway at the expense of a downtown streetscape that recently has been revitalized and continues to improve. After all, many cities around the country have been doing exactly the opposite by removing interstate highways from dense urban areas.”
Various city leaders and local organizations also got involved. A Little Rock friend of mine, who is a journalist, recently told me that the opposition is coming from “progressives” who are more concerned with preserving the status quo than curing the traffic problems. That doesn’t sound like a progressive position, but labeling people can be difficult.
Last week the Little Rock Board of Directors hosted a public meeting to hear from project engineers and opponents. The engineers have already been tweaking the plans, including one change that would give a reprieve to the streetcar line that serves the River Market and Clinton Center.
A key question is how to route south-bound traffic coming off the freeway at the Cantrell exit. At present there is a strange crossing-pattern intersection that steers vehicles either onto Second Street or Cumberland Avenue, then to East Markham Street-President Clinton Avenue or LaHarpe Boulevard and on to Cantrell Road. The intersection has been identified as statistically one of the most dangerous in the region.
This is only one of the trickier questions involved in widening the corridor, which runs from Interstate 40 in North Little Rock to the I-530 and I-440 interchange on the southeastern corner of the city. Highway officials say that more than 125,000 vehicles travel the corridor daily.
I’m quite familiar with the corridor, which was opened in 1962, not long before I left Hot Springs to attend then-Arkansas State College in Jonesboro. For many years I-30 from Benton to I-40 and then 67-167 to Cabot was the only 4-lane divided highway on my trip. It was also the best way to get to downtown Little Rock.
Now I avoid it as much as possible, especially in returning to Hot Springs, where my mother still lives. Not only is I-30 congested almost all the time, but traffic accidents are frequent and tend to stop or slow movement to a crawl. Instead I skirt the eastern edge of Little Rock and the airport on I-440, which meets I-30 at the south side of the troublesome corridor.
Occasionally, I even follow that route, then go back north of I-30 and take I-630 to get to the area around the Capitol. It’s a little further but almost always faster. As with most big cities, getting around Little Rock and North Little Rock is comparatively easy because bypass routes avoid the central city.
The key question for city leaders and highway officials is whether to make significant improvements to a major freeway that cuts the downtown areas in half, accommodating local traffic but possibly also enticing through traffic to take the shortest route.
Scott Bennett, the director of the Arkansas Highway and Transportation Department, assured those attending last week’s city directors’ meeting that “we're not going to shove anything down anyone’s throats.”
Some other cities, including Boston, San Francisco, Portland, Seattle, Milwaukee and Oklahoma City, have taken an different approach by removing or relocating freeways from dense urban areas. Oklahoma City relocated I-40 five blocks to the south of its original route, replacing it with a multi-lane, slower-speed boulevard while allowing new development of the downtown areas.
Growth of a city often creates the need for wider streets and roads. At some point, though, widening a busy thoroughfare becomes a losing proposition, and the city is better off developing an alternate route to ease the congestion and allow better traffic flow, especially around heavily populated, heavily used areas.
Perhaps that’s where Little Rock is with I-30.
Roy Ockert is editor emeritus of The Jonesboro Sun. He may be reached by e-mail at royo@suddenlink.net.