AASHTO approves US 78 extension into NE Arkansas

[freebrickproductions]

Back in October, it was shared on AARoads that the Arkansas Highway Commission had approved an extension of US 78 from Memphis, TN, to future I-57 west of Jonesboro, AR, at least partially at the request of Craighead County. Maps and the county's request are compiled here. This extension was definitely a bit controversial among the North American roadgeek community, given the strange dogleg routing to get to Jonesboro and many were, if anything, expecting US 78 to be truncated back to the Birmingham, AL, area due to I-22 having been completed between I-65 in Birmingham, and I-269 in NW Mississippi near Memphis, TN, a few years back, making the route largely redundant west of Birmingham.

Earlier this month, another person on the AARoads forum found where the AASHTO had posted the results of their Fall 2023 Meeting online, where, in it, the Special Committee on U.S. Route Numbering had approved the US 78 extension into Arkansas. As such, US 78's western end got changed from Memphis, TN, to just west of Jonesboro, AR, granting a US Route a rare extension, given that most were truncated (or even outright decommissioned) after the Interstate system started taking shape.

[Bryn666]

This is an interesting one - remind how me funding for US routes works, is it the same formula as Interstates or do the relevant state DOTs have to throw more of their own cash at them?

[WHBM]

This is an interesting one - remind how me funding for US routes works, is it the same formula as Interstates or do the relevant state DOTs have to throw more of their own cash at them?

There is a proportioning calculation, but it has inevitably become very complex as time passes. Once simple, eg Interstates got 90% of construction cost paid by the Federal government, now there are all sorts of elements in the formula for each State, for population, tax revenue, GDP above or below average, road mileage, etc. There are lengthy documents on the web for this, but it changes every year.

Not always realised is the Interstates are designed and managed by each State, within this formula. They do not belong to the Federal government. One aspect outside this is where a State of Emergency is declared, when additional funds outside the formula can be unlocked. When I was in California in the 1994 earthquake (past posts refer), which destroyed various freeway viaducts, notably the next day the State Governor referred on TV pointedly to damage on "INTERSTATE number 10" and "INTERSTATE number 5". Nobody in LA ever referred to these roads as such, they are always "The Santa Monica" or "The Golden State". But a message was being sent to Washington.

[Bryn666]

Yes, it's a frequently misunderstood thing that despite the name there are no federally owned roads in the US - federal funding grants are not ownership and this is also why the original 1957 shields prominently had the state name on them too (a sad loss IMV, they looked better).

Caltrans had been desperately trying to retrofit as much as possible before 1994 having been horribly stung by the collapse of I-880 in the 1989 earthquake. Federal funding for interstate structures had been slow in arriving prior to Northridge if my understanding is correct.

The US' biggest problem now is the Highway Trust Fund, paid for by fuel taxes, is in the red. Realistically gas prices will have to rise to make up the shortfall and ensure the vast mileage of freeways in use are maintained otherwise all that driving is going to prove quite a problem.

[WHBM]

Caltrans had been desperately trying to retrofit as much as possible before 1994 having been horribly stung by the collapse of I-880 in the 1989 earthquake. Federal funding for interstate structures had been slow in arriving prior to Northridge if my understanding is correct.

I have to say, having had a very minor perspective on these (mainly bridge) works, that they seemed to be inordinately expensive for what they delivered, and given the random nature of collapses, some treated still collapsed, many not treated stood up, there was questioning the value of them, rather than just fixing things as and when they arose. It's not as if California does not have a lot of experience of earthquake outcomes. There is of course quake-proofing of anything new at the basic level.

[Bryn666]

It's the ground conditions really, the Hanshin Expressway collapse in Kobe showed what happens when you have even retrofitted columns on liquefaction prone ground - some areas the columns effectively exploded because the ground held up but the columns didn't and others they just fell over at 45 degrees because the columns held up but the ground didn't.

The I-10 collapse was a good example of this, the deck just moved off the pillars due to the lateral forces.

[freebrickproductions]

This is an interesting one - remind how me funding for US routes works, is it the same formula as Interstates or do the relevant state DOTs have to throw more of their own cash at them?

I'd have to double check, and I recall seeing somewhere a list of how it breaks-down by highway (Interstate, US Route, State Route), but I can't seem to find that info anywhere. One source I found, which seems to be a report from Congress, said Interstate highways get 90% federal funding while non-Interstate highways get 80% Federal funding, but this report is specifically for the Federal-Aid Highway Program.
I recall US Routes receive a smaller (though still majority) share of funding from the Federal Government (around 60-75%, IIRC?) while State Routes receive a smaller amount, certainly no more than half. Someone on AARoads did remark that the US Routes in Arkansas are generally of a higher quality compared to the state routes there, which would indicate that the US Government does likely step-down Federal funding for the lower tiers of highway. I'll see about asking on AARoads and see if someone has an answer.

Yes, it's a frequently misunderstood thing that despite the name there are no federally owned roads in the US - federal funding grants are not ownership and this is also why the original 1957 shields prominently had the state name on them too (a sad loss IMV, they looked better).

Some states do still use the state name on them, I know all four states from Mississippi to South Carolina do, though these are the newer 70s-spec shields, I believe. IIRC, California still specs the original design, complete with the state name. I've seen some signage contractors list both standard and California-spec Interstate shields separately on their websites as signs they'd make.

Of course, plenty of states have decided to drop the state name from the Interstate shields. IIRC, Tennessee dropped the state name as soon as they could and basically haven't looked-back since, aside from the occasional contractor error (including the infamous "STATE" I-75 shields near Cleveland).

[freebrickproductions]

Per the AARoads forum, TDOT has recently moved the US 78 shields from the old alignment in Memphis to the current one, while ARDOT has now posted at least one assembly signing US 78's new concurrency with I-55.