The Arkansas Highway and Transportation Department (AHTD) has proposed making a number of changes to the I-30 corridor that runs from Interstate 40 to Interstate 530. Because the "30 Crossing" project implicates numerous interests and considerations, many of the choices AHTD must make are difficult. For example, should the revamped highway remain at six lanes, or should it be expanded to eight or 10? Strong arguments exist on both sides of this question. And the same is true for many other aspects of the project. But there is at least one issue where the evidence overwhelmingly favors a particular side: The I-30/Cantrell interchange must be preserved.
One of the most fundamental principles of urban planning is that the transition between major arteries should be as seamless as possible. Failing to comply with this precept generally creates countless problems: It wastes striking amounts of commuter time, increases accidents, elevates pollution levels, undercuts business interests, and promotes traffic patterns that damage residential communities. As a result, major arteries should be directly connected absent truly compelling circumstances.
The Little Rock area is currently in full compliance with this artery transition standard. There are four major arteries in the metropolitan area--Cantrell Road, Interstate 30, Interstate 430, and Interstate 630. Under the existing design, each road is easily accessible at the five locations where they intersect:
- I-430 and I-630 in west Little Rock.
- I-430 and Cantrell in northwest Little Rock.
- I-430 and I-30 in southwest Little Rock.
- I-630 and I-30 downtown.
- Cantrell and I-30 downtown.
Unfortunately, AHTD is considering eliminating the seamless transition at the fifth intersection--Cantrell Road and I-30.
AHTD is reviewing two construction proposals for entering and exiting I-30 in the downtown area. One would retain the interchange in place today. The other, known as the "split diamond interchange," would remove the Cantrell entrance and exit and move access to the highway south to Fourth Street, Capitol Avenue, and Sixth Street. At present, there is effectively only one stoplight between Cantrell and I-30. Under the split diamond proposal, there would be four to six lights between them. Not surprisingly, such a violation of basic urban planning standards would cause numerous problems for both the local community and the broader metropolitan area.
First, travel times for commuters and others transitioning between Cantrell and I-30 would increase. This means that tens of thousands of people would spend additional time in their cars each day. How much extra? Our conservative guess is between four and six minutes per day--two to three minutes in each direction--though it could easily be more. This may not seem like much, but four minutes a day multiplied by 240 working days per year equals 16 hours per year. Six minutes a day inflates the lost time to 24 hours per year. Additionally, longer commutes will increase both gasoline usage (which costs money) and pollution. And all of these problems will be even worse if many commuters use alternative, longer paths to travel between different parts of the city, as the AHTD contemplates will happen once the Cantrell/I-30 interchange is eliminated.
Second, these greater travel times will impact businesses all along the Arkansas River in Little Rock because it will be more difficult to reach riverside communities like the Heights and Riverdale from North Little Rock and various other parts of the region. Moreover, since it will take longer to exit the neighborhoods adjacent to the river, residents of that area will be less likely to visit businesses in North Little Rock and other commercial districts, causing critical losses in sales, tax revenue, and jobs.
Third, the split diamond will damage downtown residential communities, especially the one currently growing between Third and Ninth streets. Capitol, Fourth, and Sixth will have dramatically increased traffic, more stoplights, and less (or no) parking, making this area considerably less livable. Furthermore, the split diamond will make it harder for those living downtown to access Cantrell and the interstate when they want to travel to other parts of the metropolitan area. These problems will certainly deter people from moving into the heart of the city, slowing down--if not reversing--the rebirth of central Little Rock that began 25 years ago.
Proponents of the split diamond interchange make two arguments in defense of that proposal. Neither has merit.
• They contend that moving highway access to the south will increase development in the River Market. But the area has already been growing rapidly under the present layout with the Cantrell exit and entrance. And if living downtown, parking in the city and traveling to and from downtown all become considerably more difficult, as noted above, the damage to the River Market and the surrounding area will likely be much greater than the benefits gained from having the additional walking spaces that will be created if the Cantrell entrance and exit is eliminated.
• Proponents assert that accidents will be reduced by the split diamond because the "dangerous" intersection at Cantrell and President Clinton will have considerably less traffic, increasing pedestrian safety. That seems highly unlikely. First, according to the leading study of the intersection, the crossing at Cantrell and President Clinton only had nine auto accidents over the 10-year period of the study--less than one a year. Second, there may be only a small decrease in traffic through the intersection because each alternative travel route will require far longer travel times. Third, because of the extra stoplights drivers will need to navigate to transition between Cantrell and I-30, commuters accustomed to a speedy one-light trip may rush through the four-plus new traffic lights to reach their destination, increasing accidents. Fourth, the considerable uptick in cars traveling along Fourth, Capitol, and Sixth will also likely elevate the number of accidents in the growing residential community that these streets run through. The best evidence firmly supports the conclusion that shifting highway access south from Cantrell will actually decrease safety rather than promote it.
The Third Street Merchants Association, the Downtown Little Rock Partnership, and certain other center city interests support the split diamond. Apparently they believe--wrongly in our view--that shifting the interchange south will do more good than harm for the downtown area. But even if there is some plausibility to this position, the damage to every other sector of the metropolitan area easily outweighs even the most Pollyannaish estimates of the benefits to the River Market and the immediately surrounding community. As a result, removing the Cantrell/I-30 interchange simply cannot be justified under any fair analysis of the 30 Crossing project.
It is the duty of the AHTD to consider the interests of the entire region in developing a plan for the I-30 corridor. Downtown businesses are important, to be sure. But they are only one piece of a far broader community, most of which will be irreparably damaged by the loss of the Cantrell entrance and exist. At best, shifting the interchange to Fourth, Capitol, and Sixth serves the interests of a small set of downtown businesses and a select group of residents who are fortunate enough to live within walking distance of the River Market, while hurting virtually everyone else in Pulaski County and the surrounding counties.
Joshua M. Silverstein lives in the River Market Tower at Third and Rock streets, is a former resident of Riverdale, and is a Professor of Law at the University of Arkansas at Little Rock William H. Bowen School of Law. Chris B. Johnson is a Senior Vice President and Principal Financial Officer at Dillard's, works at the Dillard's headquarters on Cantrell Road, and lives in North Little Rock.
Editorial on 07/17/2016