Arkansas

[AHTD]

FHWA approved an Environmental Assessment and Finding on No Significant Impact. 

The USACE approved the Standard Section 404 permit for the impacts to jurisdictional waters, including wetlands. 

Compensatory wetland mitigation required by the USACE was provided at the AHTD Brushy Lake and Glaise Creek Wetland Mitigation Banks. Success monitoring is required by the USACE on all mitigation banks. 

The project is a bridge replacement project for Hwy. 79 over the White River, however, wetlands restoration is a key component of the wetland mitigation banks. 

[bjrush]

Thanks AHTD, that sounds like a real hassle. I'd love to see the response from Arkansas Game and Fish to AHTD regarding this project if it is available. I appreciate you getting this information

This is unrelated, but if someone put the project name and/or route number/section number next to these various job numbers (see link below) it would be a lot more helpful. Right now people basically have to guess and click, which takes forever since these are big PDFs

http://www.arkansashighways.com/ProgCon/General/construction_plans_include.aspx

[bjrush]

AHTD, how can I buy a teal 2014 "bible" with the standard specs from the department?

[bjrush]

Also, what is up with the wide right-turn areas from side streets onto Highway 265 in Fayetteville? A bridge was even widened to have this strange extra space.

Is the design vehicle a WB-40 for these intersections?

[US71]

Also, what is up with the wide right-turn areas from side streets onto Highway 265 in Fayetteville? A bridge was even widened to have this strange extra space.

Is the design vehicle a WB-40 for these intersections?

Where, specifically?

I know 265 is being widened north of Joyce

[bjrush]

The bridge I am referring to is over Clear Creek near Albright Rd

There is also a strange cross section at Zion Rd and at Par Ct

Also looking from above it is apparent the contractor was incompetent. Over half the road had to be ground down for drainage. I hope this was not at the taxpayers expense

[US71]

The bridge I am referring to is over Clear Creek near Albright Rd

There is also a strange cross section at Zion Rd and at Par Ct

Also looking from above it is apparent the contractor was incompetent. Over half the road had to be ground down for drainage. I hope this was not at the taxpayers expense

I found the Street view for Albright (very up to date).  A new bridge is being built to accommodate widening 265 to 4 Lanes. I don't know if it still is, but that area was closed for while to through traffic to work on the bridge.

Par Court I see a turn lane. There is/was a curve on the road near there, so that may be part of the reason it looks odd because they had to compensate when widening the road.

Zion is likely the same way: compensating for the curve created when 265 was first paved and went around Hillside Terrace.

That's my theory, at least.

[bjrush]

I heard from a reliable source that AHTD is using WB 67 for all design vehicles from now on

What a waste

[US71]

I heard from a reliable source that AHTD is using WB 67 for all design vehicles from now on

What a waste

Ummm 67 runs North-South

[bjrush]

WB 67 is a truck with a specific turning radius as specified by the AASHTO green book

[AHTD]

I heard from a reliable source that AHTD is using WB 67 for all design vehicles from now on

What a waste

Okay, this is not breaking news. We've been doing this for like the last decade or so. Exceptions include school driveway aprons where a WB 67 vehicle is not likely to track.

Here are some related tech. specs:

http://www.arkansashighways.com/forums/DV01.pdf

http://www.arkansashighways.com/forums/DV02.pdf

http://www.arkansashighways.com/forums/DV03.pdf



Why do you consider this a waste? Waste of what?

[bjrush]

A WB-67 design vehicle simply doesn't pass the common sense test in many cases. Sure, its great to be conservative but in this era of tight budgets I think we really need to be maximizing the bang for our buck. I'm an engineer, and I understand the conservatism and aversion to risk that is prevalent in the industry more than the hobbyist because I do it 8-5 every day, but sometimes we need to use common sense.

The new Highway 265 in Fayetteville includes a lot of extra asphalt to allow for a WB-67 to turn out of a subdivision. The problem is, no WB-67 is ever going to turn down those streets. The subdivisions themselves were not designed for interstate semis, they were designed for fire trucks at most.

Extra asphalt was included at the Zion/Crosover interchange; presumably for a truck to turn left from Zion onto Crossover heading north? Fine, I can understand that.

But when Zion turns east just north of the light, there is a massive turn radius allowing a truck to turn right from Zion onto northbound Crossover. But look at the road itself! There are four houses on it, no industries or commercial parcels, and there is not development potential for any of those land uses either. At full build out, there will be a subdivision there. No need to account for such a large vehicle ever making the turn described previously.

Same thing north of there at the Albright Rd intersection. Albright Rd is a local road, simple as that. There is absolutely no reason for an interstate semi to drive down Albright Rd. It is a country lane with 8 houses on it. Again, zero industry or commercial activity, and zero potential for it in the future. So why on earth was the bridge over Clear Creek widened to allow a WB-67 turn right from Albright Rd onto northbound Crossover?

Let's look south to validate my assumptions. Par Court is a subdivision road. It leads to a built-out residential subdivision. Yet AHTD included extra asphalt allowing a WB-67 to make a left turn from Par Court onto northbound Crossover Rd. When on earth would this movement ever happen?? That pavement will literally never be used.

Don't get me wrong. Overall, I love the access management included on this section (even thought the city wanted it, it'd be a 5-lane with suicide lane if up to AHTD). Except for the almost-continuous pavement grinding that the contractor had to do to allow drainage, it appears well done. But the engineer is to blame here. No WB-67 will ever use these tiny local streets. Don't use a design standard just because its a standard. Don't apply a textbook value if the conditions don't apply. The people of Arkansas put their trust in AHTD to be responsible with their money because they don't understand roadway design principles. Don't abuse that trust just to make your job easier, AHTD.

[Scott5114]

Semis occasionally make deliveries to residential areas.

[US71]

Semis occasionally make deliveries to residential areas.

Can't say I've ever seen any myself.

[bjrush]

Semis occasionally make deliveries to residential areas.

Never happened to me and I've never seen it anywhere else, either. Lived on local streets my whole life

[Brandon]

Semis occasionally make deliveries to residential areas.

Never happened to me and I've never seen it anywhere else, either. Lived on local streets my whole life

Usually they're moving trucks.

[bjrush]

I think it would be ok if a moving truck had to make a little bit wider turn once every few years.

Thats like building every bridge for the 500 year flood. Oh wait, AHTD does that too. Apparently no one ever told them the 500 year flood elevations are nothing more than a guess

[Bobby5280]

Back in my high schools days I ordered a large guitar amplifier from Carvin. It was a "full stack" featuring a 100W British style tube amp head and a pair of 4x12 speaker cabinets equipped with 100W Celestion speakers. The whole thing weighs well over 200 pounds. It was delivered to my house (which at the time was on a Marine Corps base) out of the back of a semi truck.

[Scott5114]

I guess the question is, how much money does it cost to design to the WB-67 design criteria as opposed to whatever the previous standard is? My guess is that the added cost is negligible compared to the total cost of each project, as long as we're just talking about a few square feet extra of pavement and not something like super-reinforced pavement or something like that.

[bjrush]

Well, I imagine there is a reason I have never seen this extra pavement in any other state

I doubt AHTD is on the cutting edge of a trend that is about to explode nationwide

It surely costs more than signing concurrencies would. And AHTD uses cost as a justification there

[Wayward Memphian]

And here I just thought they did they for folks having to uturn to get back the driveways and streets blocked by the  median.

[bjrush]

Work is underway to pass a law so AHTD has the authority to negotiate for and buy utility easements from property owners and then utilities buy a "share" of the easement from AHTD rather than hassling a property owner several times for each individual utility

All utility easements along state roads would go through AHTD ROW office. This is an effort to save time and money when acquiring new easements only once, requiring one property assessment and one payment to landowner

[Grzrd]

AHTD has issued an Information Release announcing the withdrawal of three projects from the January letting, primarily due to the uncertainty surrounding federal funding:

The Arkansas State Highway and Transportation Department (AHTD) has withdrawn three construction projects from the planned list of projects scheduled for consideration in its January 27, 2015 bid opening as a result of the uncertainty of Federal-aid reimbursements available from the Federal Highway Trust Fund.
The United States Department of Transportation has projected that the Federal Highway Trust Fund will run short of funds as early as July of next year without Congressional action. Because of this uncertainty, the AHTD has evaluated State and Federal funding that will be available and reduced the number of construction projects planned because of the possible inability of the Federal Highway Trust Fund to provide timely and full reimbursements to Arkansas ....
An evaluation of scheduled Federally-funded projects will occur prior to each Department letting until Congress acts to correct the funding shortfall. Additional scheduled letting dates in 2015, after January, are March 10th, April 21st, June 9th, July 21st, September 1st, October 13th, and December 1st. The Department delayed 15 projects with an estimated cost of nearly $70 million in 2014 because of the same Highway Trust Fund issue.

I suspect that this decision does not bode well for the I-69 Monticello Bypass project tentatively scheduled for March 10.

[US71]

AHTD has issued an Information Release announcing the withdrawal of three projects from the January letting, primarily due to the uncertainty surrounding federal funding:

The Arkansas State Highway and Transportation Department (AHTD) has withdrawn three construction projects from the planned list of projects scheduled for consideration in its January 27, 2015 bid opening as a result of the uncertainty of Federal-aid reimbursements available from the Federal Highway Trust Fund.
The United States Department of Transportation has projected that the Federal Highway Trust Fund will run short of funds as early as July of next year without Congressional action. Because of this uncertainty, the AHTD has evaluated State and Federal funding that will be available and reduced the number of construction projects planned because of the possible inability of the Federal Highway Trust Fund to provide timely and full reimbursements to Arkansas ....
An evaluation of scheduled Federally-funded projects will occur prior to each Department letting until Congress acts to correct the funding shortfall. Additional scheduled letting dates in 2015, after January, are March 10th, April 21st, June 9th, July 21st, September 1st, October 13th, and December 1st. The Department delayed 15 projects with an estimated cost of nearly $70 million in 2014 because of the same Highway Trust Fund issue.

I suspect that this decision does not bode well for the I-69 Monticello Bypass project tentatively scheduled for March 10.

One of the projects take off the schedule was AR 220 north of Lee Creek: the last unpaved highway in the state.  I hope it gets postponed for a long time.

[robbones]

I was on GSV on my phone and was trying to figure out if US 412B near Huntsville is just 4 characters crammed onto a 3dus or if that is a 4dus sign. My phone is being retarded and won't clarify the picture