AARoads Forum

Regional Boards => Central States => Topic started by: US71 on May 22, 2021, 02:35:11 PM

Title: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: US71 on May 22, 2021, 02:35:11 PM
Arkansas Senators John Boozman and Tom Cotton plus Senator Jim Inhoffe of Oklahoma are proposing an upgrade
 US 412  (https://talkbusiness.net/2021/05/u-s-legislators-look-to-designate-part-of-highway-412-as-future-interstate/) as an interstate Highway from I-35 to I-49.

I don't see why it's needed. Looks to me they are wasting time and effort .
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Finrod on May 22, 2021, 03:13:59 PM
Does anyone know how close the Cimarron Turnpike is to interstate standards?  That would be the segment from I-35 to Tulsa.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: US 89 on May 22, 2021, 03:21:42 PM
Does anyone know how close the Cimarron Turnpike is to interstate standards?  That would be the segment from I-35 to Tulsa.

Most of the Cimarron Turnpike has a cable barrier (https://goo.gl/maps/pzKuD7qNSo6BMbA87) or even a grass (https://goo.gl/maps/jVssjEnbAbsdVUVx7) median with no left shoulder.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Finrod on May 22, 2021, 03:33:09 PM
Would the spur to Stillwater get a 3DI?  At 8 miles it's longer than I-865 in Indiana, and has a half exit three-quarters of a mile from its west end, giving it half an exit more than I-865.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Scott5114 on May 22, 2021, 04:11:36 PM
Arkansas Senators John Boozman and Tom Cotton plus Senator Jim Inhoffe of Oklahoma are proposing an upgrade
 US 412  (https://talkbusiness.net/2021/05/u-s-legislators-look-to-designate-part-of-highway-412-as-future-interstate/) as an interstate Highway from I-35 to I-49.

I don't see why it's needed. Looks to me they are wasting time and effort .

A Tulsa to NWA corridor is going to be an increasingly important link as NWA continues to grow. Having it as an Interstate designation provides a  motivation to do something about the gap between the Cherokee Turnpike and I-49. Once you have an Interstate between Tulsa and NWA, extending it west along the road out of Tulsa to I-35 makes a whole lot of sense.

I'm all for it.

Would the spur to Stillwater get a 3DI?  At 8 miles it's longer than I-865 in Indiana, and has a half exit three-quarters of a mile from its west end, giving it half an exit more than I-865.

It could get a 3di, but don't hold your breath. OTA operates a similar spur from the H.E. Bailey Turnpike in Blanchard and Newcastle. Despite spurring off from a pre-existing Interstate and being Interstate-grade enough to carry an 80 mph speed limit, it is just called "H.E. Bailey Spur" and OTA has never applied for an Interstate designation for it.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Lyon Wonder on May 22, 2021, 04:45:51 PM
IMO, US 412 should also be upgraded as an eastern extension of I-155 in TN too between Dyersburg and I-40 in Jackson.  US 412 in TN and the above proposed upgrade between I-35 and I-49 would be the easiest sections of US 412 to upgrade to interstate standard anyway.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: froggie on May 22, 2021, 04:56:11 PM
Disagree with your last part.  An Interstate-standard US 412 between the OK/AR line and I-49 would be  rather difficult to build due to topography and development both along and away from the existing roadway.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: US71 on May 22, 2021, 05:40:42 PM
Disagree with your last part.  An Interstate-standard US 412 between the OK/AR line and I-49 would be  rather difficult to build due to topography and development both along and away from the existing roadway.

But there is a proposed /under construction 412 bypass of which AR 612 is a part.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Scott5114 on May 22, 2021, 07:42:03 PM
The only sensible number for this would be I-46. (48 would work too, but it will have a short concurrency with 44, so 48 is too high, and 42 is taken)
Title: US-412(OK)
Post by: Plutonic Panda on May 22, 2021, 08:38:20 PM
It looks like Inhofe is trying to work with Arkansas to get an interstate designation for 412 from I-35 to I-49. Lots of upgrades are needed and hopefully they can remove the tolls.

(https://tulsaworld.com/community/sandsprings/news/inhofe-others-push-to-make-stretch-of-u-s-412-an-interstate/article_0ac86114-bab0-11eb-ad5f-17d355c94a0e.html)

Quote
OKLAHOMA CITY – Federal legislation was introduced Friday to designate U.S. 412 running through Oklahoma and Arkansas as a future interstate.

The measure would give the designation to the stretch of U.S. 412 from Interstate 35 in Noble County to Interstate 49 in Springdale, Arkansas.

It was introduced by U.S. Sens. Jim Inhofe, R-Okla., John Boozman, R-Ark., and Tom Cotton, R-Ark.

“Our interstate system is the lifeblood of Oklahoma’s economy and provides the network for companies to bring materials into our critical industries, for businesses to locate in areas convenient for consumers and for commuters to get to work and school safely and reliably,” Inhofe said.

- read more here: https://tulsaworld.com/news/local/inhofe-arkansas-senators-push-to-get-interstate-designation-for-stretch-of-u-s-412/article_b9bf9be2-ba65-11eb-8c81-e3c69146bc72.html
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Plutonic Panda on May 22, 2021, 08:51:58 PM
Disagree with your last part.  An Interstate-standard US 412 between the OK/AR line and I-49 would be  rather difficult to build due to topography and development both along and away from the existing roadway.
This is going to have to happen one way or another be it an interstate designation or not. Tulsa needs to be connected to I-49(NWA) with a fully controlled access facility. Arkansas is seriously dropping the ball on this.

As for the question why is it needed, why is any interstate designation needed? I’ve long thought this to be a no brainer. I created a thread in Oklahoma section for it though not sure if it is needed or not. I suppose if this gains traction OK development of it can be tracked there. Arkansas will have the most challenging segments to construct. I’m excited for this.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: wxfree on May 22, 2021, 10:04:33 PM
I propose that it be designated I-494.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: sprjus4 on May 22, 2021, 10:09:09 PM
Does anyone know how close the Cimarron Turnpike is to interstate standards?  That would be the segment from I-35 to Tulsa.

Most of the Cimarron Turnpike has a cable barrier (https://goo.gl/maps/pzKuD7qNSo6BMbA87) or even a grass (https://goo.gl/maps/jVssjEnbAbsdVUVx7) median with no left shoulder.
The design with the cable barrier median is likely what the remainder will get, and it will be sufficient enough for designation. The I-44 extension to Texas along the Bailey Turnpike had the raised grass median design in areas remaining until recently replaced with cable barrier.
Title: Re: US-412(OK)
Post by: In_Correct on May 23, 2021, 12:01:46 AM
That is good news. Hopefully they can keep the Tolls.
Title: Re: US-412(OK)
Post by: Plutonic Panda on May 23, 2021, 12:18:26 AM
^^^ interstates should have no tolls with little to no exceptions. Tolls would defeat the entire purpose of luring development with the advantage of having an interstate designation.

The tolls need to be removed but honestly I see that has a little to no chance of happening. IMO, unfortunately, this current admin is likely to remove the requirement for no tolls on interstates so you should be happy. Im not.
Title: Re: US-412(OK)
Post by: sprjus4 on May 23, 2021, 12:43:55 AM
^

I think in this case, given the roads are already existing as toll roads, it’s not a problem. It’s not like they are proposing a new toll on an existing free highway.
Title: Re: US-412(OK)
Post by: Plutonic Panda on May 23, 2021, 12:46:03 AM
^^^ not all of the road.
Title: Re: US-412(OK)
Post by: sprjus4 on May 23, 2021, 12:59:53 AM
^^^ not all of the road.
But no new portion will be tolled. Where the toll roads already exist, they will remain. Simple.
Title: Re: US-412(OK)
Post by: Plutonic Panda on May 23, 2021, 02:48:11 AM
^^^ not all of the road.
But no new portion will be tolled. Where the toll roads already exist, they will remain. Simple.
For the most part yes you are correct though I wish Oklahoma could be the anomaly.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Scott5114 on May 23, 2021, 03:24:44 AM
Does anyone know how close the Cimarron Turnpike is to interstate standards?  That would be the segment from I-35 to Tulsa.

Most of the Cimarron Turnpike has a cable barrier (https://goo.gl/maps/pzKuD7qNSo6BMbA87) or even a grass (https://goo.gl/maps/jVssjEnbAbsdVUVx7) median with no left shoulder.
The design with the cable barrier median is likely what the remainder will get, and it will be sufficient enough for designation. The I-44 extension to Texas along the Bailey Turnpike had the raised grass median design in areas remaining until recently replaced with cable barrier.

Of course, that designation was done in 1982. FHWA was a lot less of a stickler about Interstate standards back then.
Title: Re: US-412(OK)
Post by: Scott5114 on May 23, 2021, 03:38:25 AM
I wouldn't expect to see the tolls go away any time soon, Interstate designation or no. I understand that the process that was undertaken the last time a toll was removed in Oklahoma, when the Chickasaw Turnpike was truncated and redesignated SH-7 Spur, was quite legally and politically convoluted, and that was with language in its bonds specifically enabling this a transfer from OTA to ODOT (no other turnpike has such language attached to it). ODOT basically required them to tear it out down to the roadbed and rebuild it before they'd accept the transfer.
Title: Re: US-412(OK)
Post by: Plutonic Panda on May 23, 2021, 01:43:35 PM
This is a duplicate thread.
So when/if improvements to 412 happen related to this initiative take place in Oklahoma we should discuss those improvements in the Arkansas thread?
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: edwaleni on May 23, 2021, 02:21:09 PM
IMO, US 412 should also be upgraded as an eastern extension of I-155 in TN too between Dyersburg and I-40 in Jackson.  US 412 in TN and the above proposed upgrade between I-35 and I-49 would be the easiest sections of US 412 to upgrade to interstate standard anyway.

US-412 is already a freeway between Dyersburg and Jackson, just not to interstate standards. It's only limitation is the exit ramps to it from I-40 at Jackson. Does the AADT really support this kind of upgrade?

Also what about US-412 to/from Kennett AR?  Would ArDOT turn it south to connect Paragould, or would they run it straight to Pocahontas to reconnect at Imboden?

I have driven US-412 between Portia and Hardy many times and it is rough country to punch a freeway through and that usually means lots of money.

I don't disagree on the needed updates to US-412 around Springdale (Springdale Bypass) which are in progress. ArDOT has put in a lot of passing lanes on the route to Mountain View  and updated the rest to Harrison.

But between Hardy and Imboden, get the checkbook out.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Wayward Memphian on May 23, 2021, 03:02:00 PM
Arkansas Senators John Boozman and Tom Cotton plus Senator Jim Inhoffe of Oklahoma are proposing an upgrade
 US 412  (https://talkbusiness.net/2021/05/u-s-legislators-look-to-designate-part-of-highway-412-as-future-interstate/) as an interstate Highway from I-35 to I-49.

I don't see why it's needed. Looks to me they are wasting time and effort .


I have posted on here for several years about how US 412 should be a continuation of I-22. Any new Bridge in Memphis should be the I-22 bridge along with I-555 with a Southern bypass of Jonesboro to meet up with an upgraded AR 226. Connect NWA with NEA without Conway/Little Rock and then to Memphis.  Make the exiting part through Jonesboro a 3di to I-22 and curve it up the eastern side to Paragould. A situation not unlike Fort Smith with 549.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Wayward Memphian on May 23, 2021, 03:14:46 PM
IMO, US 412 should also be upgraded as an eastern extension of I-155 in TN too between Dyersburg and I-40 in Jackson.  US 412 in TN and the above proposed upgrade between I-35 and I-49 would be the easiest sections of US 412 to upgrade to interstate standard anyway.

US-412 is already a freeway between Dyersburg and Jackson, just not to interstate standards. It's only limitation is the exit ramps to it from I-40 at Jackson. Does the AADT really support this kind of upgrade?

Also what about US-412 to/from Kennett AR?  Would ArDOT turn it south to connect Paragould, or would they run it straight to Pocahontas to reconnect at Imboden?

I have driven US-412 between Portia and Hardy many times and it is rough country to punch a freeway through and that usually means lots of money.

I don't disagree on the needed updates to US-412 around Springdale (Springdale Bypass) which are in progress. ArDOT has put in a lot of passing lanes on the route to Mountain View  and updated the rest to Harrison.

But between Hardy and Imboden, get the checkbook out.

I would just look as US 412 and the Shared US412/US 63 as a rough template and


There aren't nearly enough passing lanes these days. They just act as a drag race to inevitably  slowdown yet again behind a slow mover.

I would push  to Harrison at the very least and then to Mt. Home and upgrade US 65 to the MO line.  A lot of a new US 412/interstate would look like that stretch of US 65 from Harrison to the line.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: edwaleni on May 23, 2021, 04:15:44 PM
Arkansas Senators John Boozman and Tom Cotton plus Senator Jim Inhoffe of Oklahoma are proposing an upgrade
 US 412  (https://talkbusiness.net/2021/05/u-s-legislators-look-to-designate-part-of-highway-412-as-future-interstate/) as an interstate Highway from I-35 to I-49.

I don't see why it's needed. Looks to me they are wasting time and effort .


I have posted on here for several years about how US 412 should be a continuation of I-22. Any new Bridge in Memphis should be the I-22 bridge along with I-555 with a Southern bypass of Jonesboro to meet up with an upgraded AR 226. Connect NWA with NEA without Conway/Little Rock and then to Memphis.  Make the exiting part through Jonesboro a 3di to I-22 and curve it up the eastern side to Paragould. A situation not unlike Fort Smith with 549.

I have traveled the I-22 route many times and I do agree with the idea that I-555 is essentially a NE/SE extension of I-22.

However, my drive usually takes me to Springfield, MO and I use US-63 through West Plains & Willow Springs to get to US-60 for the 4 lane trip. (Hence my many drives through Imboden, Hardy, etc.)

Even if I was driving to/from Tulsa, I would take the Muskogee Turnpike to/from I-40, not go by way of US-412 from Memphis.

As for an idea of using the Cimmaron to Enid as a sort of extension, it looks good on paper, because it creates an alternate E-W interstate routing with a bridge at Dyersburg over the Mississippi to reach the east coast with, one that US-60 does not have today at Cairo.

I don't have a clear understanding what drives US-412 traffic today between Tulsa and NWA. Commerce? Tribal Casinos?  I would think OKDOT would be more interested in connectivity of US-69 in the Dallas-KCMO route then be looking for another eastern gateway.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Scott5114 on May 23, 2021, 06:56:08 PM
Merged the threads and put them in Central States, since all but 22 miles of it is in Oklahoma at this time.

I don't have a clear understanding what drives US-412 traffic today between Tulsa and NWA. Commerce? Tribal Casinos?  I would think OKDOT would be more interested in connectivity of US-69 in the Dallas-KCMO route then be looking for another eastern gateway.

Commerce. Tulsa is a major city, and NWA is a major metro area that developed by surprise after the ink was dry on the Interstate System plans (home to Walmart and Tyson Foods, both major companies). So the motivation here is no different than that for I-11 (completing a missing link between adjacent major metros). NWA benefits by having a quicker path to the southwest and south in I-44, and a quicker path to the north and northwest via I-35. Oklahoma benefits by having more traffic passing through and by having easier access to the I-49 corridor.

Also, note that it isn't ODOT that is the big push behind this, it's the Senators. Most of the affected roadway is under OTA jurisdiction anyway.

Much of the heavy lifting is done on Oklahoma's side (four-lane ROW secured, just needs some polish by upgrading the remaining at-grades and cleaning up things like the median on the Cimarron). I'm a little surprised that Inhofe didn't get a tad more ambitious and run it as far west as US-81 in Enid. I'm also kind of surprised that Sen. James Lankford (R-OK) didn't sign on too, but he's from OKC so I guess he doesn't care about this particular project so much.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: In_Correct on May 23, 2021, 10:49:29 PM
Perhaps they will proceed with the west side of it after the east side of it is upgraded.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Revive 755 on May 23, 2021, 11:15:06 PM
The only sensible number for this would be I-46. (48 would work too, but it will have a short concurrency with 44, so 48 is too high, and 42 is taken)

While I-46 would make sense, I suspect it could - barring any duplicate state routes - anything from 46 to 58.  It will probably be something that has the highest chance of messing up the grid in regards to other future expansions.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Scott5114 on May 23, 2021, 11:41:53 PM
The only sensible number for this would be I-46. (48 would work too, but it will have a short concurrency with 44, so 48 is too high, and 42 is taken)

While I-46 would make sense, I suspect it could - barring any duplicate state routes - anything from 46 to 58. 

Ha! You think Oklahoma or Arkansas care about that? Oklahoma has three 9As and Arkansas has eight 74s!
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Tom958 on May 24, 2021, 05:36:53 AM
Disagree with your last part.  An Interstate-standard US 412 between the OK/AR line and I-49 would be  rather difficult to build due to topography and development both along and away from the existing roadway.

But there is a proposed /under construction 412 bypass of which AR 612 is a part.

It's not at all obvious to me why AR 612 was built. It's pretty far north of Springdale, further north of Fayetteville, and pointed further north still. I would think that the proposed Interstate ought to be headed toward the region's center of gravity, near where US 412 is now, with distribution north and south via I-49.

So, has ArDOT done any sort of feasibility study for this?
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Wayward Memphian on May 24, 2021, 09:23:59 AM
Disagree with your last part.  An Interstate-standard US 412 between the OK/AR line and I-49 would be  rather difficult to build due to topography and development both along and away from the existing roadway.

But there is a proposed /under construction 412 bypass of which AR 612 is a part.

It's not at all obvious to me why AR 612 was built. It's pretty far north of Springdale, further north of Fayetteville, and pointed further north still. I would think that the proposed Interstate ought to be headed toward the region's center of gravity, near where US 412 is now, with distribution north and south via I-49.

So, has ArDOT done any sort of feasibility study for this?

Drive US 412 through Springdale at 5pm and you'll get it.


AR 612 is the future center mass. It is essentially the Washington/Benton County line.  It is where the growth from the south and north are converging and had the most open space to build it.

I'll say it again,  all of this should be dedicated as an extention of I-22 from North MS.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Scott5114 on May 24, 2021, 09:33:58 AM
I don't know why letting it stand on its own as a new number is a problem. It may well never connect to the Memphis area. Arkansas's senators support the measure, but they chose to end it at I-49 rather than try to get funding to continue it east.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: froggie on May 24, 2021, 10:16:38 AM
Disagree with your last part.  An Interstate-standard US 412 between the OK/AR line and I-49 would be  rather difficult to build due to topography and development both along and away from the existing roadway.

But there is a proposed /under construction 412 bypass of which AR 612 is a part.

It's not at all obvious to me why AR 612 was built. It's pretty far north of Springdale, further north of Fayetteville, and pointed further north still. I would think that the proposed Interstate ought to be headed toward the region's center of gravity, near where US 412 is now, with distribution north and south via I-49.

So, has ArDOT done any sort of feasibility study for this?

612 is the thus-far-built part of what has for over 20 years been intended as a US 412 Springdale bypass (https://www.ardot.gov/divisions/environmental/assessments/impact-statements-eis-assesments-ea/springdale-northern-bypass-highway-412/).  Though, as Scott noted, they didn't fund it east of I-49 (though 20 years ago it was proposed to do so).
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: mvak36 on May 24, 2021, 11:41:52 AM
I don't know why letting it stand on its own as a new number is a problem. It may well never connect to the Memphis area. Arkansas's senators support the measure, but they chose to end it at I-49 rather than try to get funding to continue it east.

Hopefully they get earmarks or something for the part of US412 east of I-49 all the way to NE Arkansas. It doesn't have to be interstate standard but they definitely to do some sort of upgrades for that whole stretch. Some of it might be funded by the Connecting Arkansas Program (CAP2), but we won't know till they post their updated projects list.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: edwaleni on May 24, 2021, 02:11:24 PM
Disagree with your last part.  An Interstate-standard US 412 between the OK/AR line and I-49 would be  rather difficult to build due to topography and development both along and away from the existing roadway.

But there is a proposed /under construction 412 bypass of which AR 612 is a part.

It's not at all obvious to me why AR 612 was built. It's pretty far north of Springdale, further north of Fayetteville, and pointed further north still. I would think that the proposed Interstate ought to be headed toward the region's center of gravity, near where US 412 is now, with distribution north and south via I-49.

So, has ArDOT done any sort of feasibility study for this?

612 is the thus-far-built part of what has for over 20 years been intended as a US 412 Springdale bypass (https://www.ardot.gov/divisions/environmental/assessments/impact-statements-eis-assesments-ea/springdale-northern-bypass-highway-412/).  Though, as Scott noted, they didn't fund it east of I-49 (though 20 years ago it was proposed to do so).

AR-612 will connect with current US-412 at Old State Road 68 west of Springdale. The plan when it is funded is to continue the bypass all the way to Sonora. But they don't own any of the land yet.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Tom958 on May 24, 2021, 04:06:51 PM
AR-612 will connect with current US-412 at Old State Road 68 west of Springdale. The plan when it is funded is to continue the bypass all the way to Sonora. But they don't own any of the land yet.

OK, here's the big picture, literally (https://www.ardot.gov/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/001966_2008.05.25_DPH_Disp_Cou.pdf). Thanks, froggie!
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: The Ghostbuster on May 24, 2021, 04:32:12 PM
I agree with making US 412 a freeway/tollway combo between Interstate 44 in Tulsa and Interstate 49 in Springdale, with no at-grade intersections, and access only at interchanges. I disagree with making this corridor an Interstate Highway. It seems like overkill to me.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Scott5114 on May 24, 2021, 05:26:23 PM
I agree with making US 412 a freeway/tollway combo between Interstate 44 in Tulsa and Interstate 49 in Springdale, with no at-grade intersections, and access only at interchanges. I disagree with making this corridor an Interstate Highway. It seems like overkill to me.

"I agree with spending several billion dollars to construct an expensive bypass in a major U.S. metro area through difficult terrain and build dozens of interchanges and overpasses along several hundred miles of roadway, but buying a few thousand dollars' worth of new signs for it? That seems like overkill to me."

Literally what?
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Tom958 on May 24, 2021, 07:52:09 PM
Literally what?

Well, virtually every inch of it would be concurrent with US 412. So there's that.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Scott5114 on May 24, 2021, 08:23:42 PM
Literally what?

Well, virtually every inch of it would be concurrent with US 412. So there's that.


Who cares? That didn't stop I-135 from being designated over US-81.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Strider on May 24, 2021, 10:00:15 PM
Just because it is a "future interstate" plan doesn't mean that it is going to be designed as an interstate. It could be interstate quality road but keeps it as US 412.

If they want to pick an interstate route... the list is very limited as the road would be between I-40 and I-44. It can be I-46 or I-48 if it begins at I-35, but not much else.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Strider on May 24, 2021, 10:02:36 PM
Arkansas Senators John Boozman and Tom Cotton plus Senator Jim Inhoffe of Oklahoma are proposing an upgrade
 US 412  (https://talkbusiness.net/2021/05/u-s-legislators-look-to-designate-part-of-highway-412-as-future-interstate/) as an interstate Highway from I-35 to I-49.

I don't see why it's needed. Looks to me they are wasting time and effort .


I have posted on here for several years about how US 412 should be a continuation of I-22. Any new Bridge in Memphis should be the I-22 bridge along with I-555 with a Southern bypass of Jonesboro to meet up with an upgraded AR 226. Connect NWA with NEA without Conway/Little Rock and then to Memphis.  Make the exiting part through Jonesboro a 3di to I-22 and curve it up the eastern side to Paragould. A situation not unlike Fort Smith with 549.

I have traveled the I-22 route many times and I do agree with the idea that I-555 is essentially a NE/SE extension of I-22.



They are not going to extend I-22 past Memphis. The interstate is labeled "Memphis to Birmingham interstate", thus only runs from Memphis to Birmingham.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: aboges26 on May 25, 2021, 12:15:04 AM
Arkansas Senators John Boozman and Tom Cotton plus Senator Jim Inhoffe of Oklahoma are proposing an upgrade
 US 412  (https://talkbusiness.net/2021/05/u-s-legislators-look-to-designate-part-of-highway-412-as-future-interstate/) as an interstate Highway from I-35 to I-49.

I don't see why it's needed. Looks to me they are wasting time and effort .


I have posted on here for several years about how US 412 should be a continuation of I-22. Any new Bridge in Memphis should be the I-22 bridge along with I-555 with a Southern bypass of Jonesboro to meet up with an upgraded AR 226. Connect NWA with NEA without Conway/Little Rock and then to Memphis.  Make the exiting part through Jonesboro a 3di to I-22 and curve it up the eastern side to Paragould. A situation not unlike Fort Smith with 549.

I have traveled the I-22 route many times and I do agree with the idea that I-555 is essentially a NE/SE extension of I-22.



They are not going to extend I-22 past Memphis. The interstate is labeled "Memphis to Birmingham interstate", thus only runs from Memphis to Birmingham.

Regardless, in order to connect the disparate segments (I-22 & I-555) it would be a pointless multiplex and a triplex along I-40 & I-55 just to break the grid.  If I-555 ever gets extended to Springfield or further to Kansas City, it would more than deserve it's own two-digit number.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Bobby5280 on May 25, 2021, 01:05:39 AM
I see very little chance of US-412 being upgraded to Interstate standards across Northern Arkansas. Most of the existing route is only a 2 lane facility. It runs a winding route with lots of hard turns along the way. There are many pockets of residential and business development built right up next to the road, leaving little if any room for expansion. The road goes through some "sensitive" tourist and scenic areas. Just upgrading all of it to a mix of 4-lane undivided/divided would be difficult.

Not far to the North, US-60 between Springfield and Sikeston is a lot farther along in development. It would be much easier to upgrade to Interstate quality.

Back on topic, I have no problem at all with US-412 being upgraded to Interstate standards between Tulsa and Springdale. That makes sense. An Interstate designation doesn't matter quite as much. But I would only find "I-46" or "I-48" acceptable if the resulting designation took over the Cimarron Turnpike all the way to I-35, that way a portion would be North of I-44. If it's only a Tulsa to Springdale Interstate then an "I-42" apart from NC's intra-state route would be fine, if not a 3-digit off-shoot from I-44. Might be an opportunity to re-designate I-444.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Scott5114 on May 25, 2021, 01:16:43 AM
The bill includes all of the highway between I-35 and Springdale.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Wayward Memphian on May 25, 2021, 05:43:55 AM
I see very little chance of US-412 being upgraded to Interstate standards across Northern Arkansas. Most of the existing route is only a 2 lane facility. It runs a winding route with lots of hard turns along the way. There are many pockets of residential and business development built right up next to the road, leaving little if any room for expansion. The road goes through some "sensitive" tourist and scenic areas. Just upgrading all of it to a mix of 4-lane undivided/divided would be difficult.

Not far to the North, US-60 between Springfield and Sikeston is a lot farther along in development. It would be much easier to upgrade to Interstate quality.

Back on topic, I have no problem at all with US-412 being upgraded to Interstate standards between Tulsa and Springdale. That makes sense. An Interstate designation doesn't matter quite as much. But I would only find "I-46" or "I-48" acceptable if the resulting designation took over the Cimarron Turnpike all the way to I-35, that way a portion would be North of I-44. If it's only a Tulsa to Springdale Interstate then an "I-42" apart from NC's intra-state route would be fine, if not a 3-digit off-shoot from I-44. Might be an opportunity to re-designate I-444.

A vast majority will have to be new road just like the non interste standards 4 lane divided segments between Siloam and Tontitown and  Sonora and Huntsville. 

At the very least this needs extended to Harrison
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Tom958 on May 25, 2021, 05:59:18 AM
Siloam Springs bypass, 14.6 miles from the end of the Cherokee Turnpike to the east end of that section of new four-lane with a sixty foot median that looks like it could be upgraded to freeway:
(https://i.imgur.com/zjn0WMD.png)


The connection to I-49, 7.6 miles, only slightly south of existing US 412. Fayetteville is the largest of the four cities of the NWA area and home of the University of Arkansas, and the route from Fayetteville westward to Tulsa via the AR 612 bypass would be ridiculous, so here's a more direct route. Ramp braids would be required between the I-46 and existing US 412 interchanges on I-49.
(https://i.imgur.com/7FxgoOI.png)
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: GaryV on May 25, 2021, 07:57:32 AM
It could be interstate quality road but keeps it as US 412.

I didn't realize US 412 was in Michigan or Ohio.

Do OK and AR fall into the NC pattern of "Interstate-izing" everything? 
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Plutonic Panda on May 25, 2021, 08:20:29 AM
^^^ lol I’m surprised(pleasantly I’ll add) this is even happening in Oklahoma to be honest. Oklahoma could use several new interstates, IMO.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Avalanchez71 on May 25, 2021, 08:24:21 AM
So isn't US 412 already four lanes across this path anyway?  What is the necessity of slapping an interstate sign up and closing off access to property? 
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: sprjus4 on May 25, 2021, 08:56:38 AM
So isn't US 412 already four lanes across this path anyway?  What is the necessity of slapping an interstate sign up and closing off access to property?
A lot of the route is already built to freeway standards, the remainder is still non-limited-access divided, then the route still goes through the towns of Siloam Springs and Tontitown / Springdale. Those towns need to be bypassed at a minimum, then at that point it's a matter of simply closing the gaps between the freeways to provide a consistent design section, and then simply establishing an interstate highway designation.

It's a logical corridor connecting the two cities, IMO, and many would agree, can't expect much from an anti-roads person though, so I mean  :sombrero:
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Avalanchez71 on May 25, 2021, 09:44:49 AM
So isn't US 412 already four lanes across this path anyway?  What is the necessity of slapping an interstate sign up and closing off access to property?
A lot of the route is already built to freeway standards, the remainder is still non-limited-access divided, then the route still goes through the towns of Siloam Springs and Tontitown / Springdale. Those towns need to be bypassed at a minimum, then at that point it's a matter of simply closing the gaps between the freeways to provide a consistent design section, and then simply establishing an interstate highway designation.

It's a logical corridor connecting the two cities, IMO, and many would agree, can't expect much from an anti-roads person though, so I mean  :sombrero:

Well they did have build something in NWA.  That was a surprise growth area.  Now you have folks that know the limitations and the growth factors.  You have to get off the big road at some time.  I know some folks want a fully-controlled access highway to their door but really the access is already now built in.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: edwaleni on May 25, 2021, 01:19:42 PM
The recent AADT studies on US-412 don't seem to justify upgrades to interstate standards between Ash Flat and Mountain Home. AADT is around 4000.

But that didn't stop ArDOT from upgrading the Walnut Ridge to Paragould ROW to a 4 lane freeway 2 years ago. It had similar usage.

The only issues is where the ROW goes through city centers. So perhaps bypasses are in order, not a wholesale upgrade.

http://www.ahtd.state.ar.us/public_meetings/2018/012313/AADT.pdf (http://www.ahtd.state.ar.us/public_meetings/2018/012313/AADT.pdf)

If anything US-412 needs some safety upgrades east of Mountain Home. The geometry and sight lines are terrible in many places and represents very old highway engineering.


Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Scott5114 on May 25, 2021, 02:21:48 PM
It could be interstate quality road but keeps it as US 412.

I didn't realize US 412 was in Michigan or Ohio.

Do OK and AR fall into the NC pattern of "Interstate-izing" everything? 


Oklahoma hasn't added a new interstate designation to a road since 1982, as far as I know. (I-235 was completed and signed after that, but it was in the Green Book so I'm not counting it.) Most new freeway corridors have carried state route numbers (SH-152, SH-74) or been unnumbered turnpikes.

So y'all should hush and let us have this one.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: mvak36 on May 25, 2021, 05:09:02 PM
It could be interstate quality road but keeps it as US 412.

I didn't realize US 412 was in Michigan or Ohio.

Do OK and AR fall into the NC pattern of "Interstate-izing" everything? 


Oklahoma hasn't added a new interstate designation to a road since 1982, as far as I know. (I-235 was completed and signed after that, but it was in the Green Book so I'm not counting it.) Most new freeway corridors have carried state route numbers (SH-152, SH-74) or been unnumbered turnpikes.

So y'all should hush and let us have this one.

I'm okay with it. I think they should keep going and get an interstate number for the Creek, Muskogee, and Kickapoo Turnpikes  :cool:.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: I-55 on May 25, 2021, 07:30:38 PM
It could be interstate quality road but keeps it as US 412.

I didn't realize US 412 was in Michigan or Ohio.

Do OK and AR fall into the NC pattern of "Interstate-izing" everything?

Most non-interstate freeways are named toll roads in OK, and there aren't many non-interstate freeways in AR. The main difference between NC and AR is that NC goes 3di crazy (I-840, I-785, I-587, I-274, I-295, I/NC-540) whereas AR is mostly building new 2dis (I-57, I-49, I-69, and potentially the Tulsa-NWA route)
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: bugo on May 25, 2021, 08:26:06 PM
Who cares? That didn't stop I-135 from being designated over US-81.

Technically, I-35W was designated over US 81. I-135 replaced I-35W. I-35W wasn't changed to I-135 until 1976.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: bwana39 on May 26, 2021, 01:50:13 PM
Guys... You are missing the trees because you see the forest.

One word explains why this is progressing and why it will happen if every other road project in Oklahoma and Arkansas grinds to a halt.


WALMART
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: MikieTimT on May 26, 2021, 02:23:37 PM
Guys... You are missing the trees because you see the forest.

One word explains why this is progressing and why it will happen if every other road project in Oklahoma and Arkansas grinds to a halt.


WALMART

And I'll give you 2 more.  Tyson and J.B. Hunt.  Like it or not, Fortune 500 companies have some pull with the jobs and tax revenue they provide.  Lots of trucks are run by those 3 companies as well.  Not to mention, there aren't many over half million people metros this close to each other in the eastern half of the U.S. that aren't connected by an Interstate or freeway of some sort.  I just wish they would have bypassed Siloam Springs back when they 6-laned it.  Would have been a cheaper and easier job then than it will be when it comes to pass.  Another reason why this will likely occur is that NWA has become a Top 90 MSA now with the continued rapid growth, which has recently just exploded in the last few months.  In fact, it just passed LR as the largest in Arkansas.  Knew it was coming, but it's finally come to pass.  LR may be the capital and very well represented with Interstates (and continued attention from ARDOT), but NWA will start to get more federal attention given its size and growth rate. 
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: bwana39 on May 26, 2021, 02:59:31 PM
Guys... You are missing the trees because you see the forest.

One word explains why this is progressing and why it will happen if every other road project in Oklahoma and Arkansas grinds to a halt.


WALMART

And I'll give you 2 more.  Tyson and J.B. Hunt.  Like it or not, Fortune 500 companies have some pull with the jobs and tax revenue they provide.  Lots of trucks are run by those 3 companies as well.  Not to mention, there aren't many over half million people metros this close to each other in the eastern half of the U.S. that aren't connected by an Interstate or freeway of some sort.  I just wish they would have bypassed Siloam Springs back when they 6-laned it.  Would have been a cheaper and easier job then than it will be when it comes to pass.  Another reason why this will likely occur is that NWA has become a Top 90 MSA now with the continued rapid growth, which has recently just exploded in the last few months.  In fact, it just passed LR as the largest in Arkansas.  Knew it was coming, but it's finally come to pass.  LR may be the capital and very well represented with Interstates (and continued attention from ARDOT), but NWA will start to get more federal attention given its size and growth rate.


Yes, I generally don't list JB Hunt and I mention Tyson and University of Arkansas. U of A is not a part of the Oklahoma equation.

As to the seeming need, all you need to do is look at Austin and see that it is not always that easy. Austin to Houston. Austin to I-10, etc. I heard someone say (not entirely as a joke) that the only reason Austin had I-35 is because it lies between Waco and San Antonio.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Avalanchez71 on May 26, 2021, 04:17:07 PM
There is no love lost for Austin in Texas.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: edwaleni on May 26, 2021, 04:53:51 PM
I would say Walmart too as a driver for this except, it's just the HQ and a distribution center.

Walmart doesn't *make* anything there except decisions.  Most of the reps that resell through Walmart, live there or grudgingly fly in every week/month.

I knew the Hershey's rep for Walmart who used to be the Mars rep until Hershey's bought them out.

Walmart was constantly nagging him to move to NWA so they could make "faster decisions" and he kept telling them I can make the same decisions by cell phone or email just as fast. He finally retired.

A large HQ and a SEC size public university can justify an upgrade in the area. But i don't see droves of trucks, buses, commuters coming from the east just to deal with Walmart, Tyson or JB Hunt.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: MikieTimT on May 26, 2021, 05:19:49 PM
I would say Walmart too as a driver for this except, it's just the HQ and a distribution center.

Walmart doesn't *make* anything there except decisions.  Most of the reps that resell through Walmart, live there or grudgingly fly in every week/month.

I knew the Hershey's rep for Walmart who used to be the Mars rep until Hershey's bought them out.

Walmart was constantly nagging him to move to NWA so they could make "faster decisions" and he kept telling them I can make the same decisions by cell phone or email just as fast. He finally retired.

A large HQ and a SEC size public university can justify an upgrade in the area. But i don't see droves of trucks, buses, commuters coming from the east just to deal with Walmart, Tyson or JB Hunt.

If anyone came from the east, they would likely be coming I-40/I-49 currently as US-412 east of Harrison is not a particularly great truck route until it merges with US-63.  There are a great number of distribution centers in NWA for Wal-Mart, not just one.  And Tyson as well as several other poultry/meat processing companies produce a great deal of product in Springdale/Benton County.  Bentonville is growing into a mountain biking mecca, to the point that folks are coming for weeks on end from states out west that most people think of more regularly as mountain biking destinations.  I'm working on a house there right now to AirBnB out as it no longer makes financial sense as a long term rental.  Things are rapidly transforming away from the tired old stereotypes of what most people think of when Arkansas comes up in conversation, and the growth isn't going to slow down.  Nothing but cranes, red dirt, and building/home frames as far as the eye can see.  Most of that stuff comes in by truck, so regardless of whether things are destined or sourced by Wal-Mart or the meat processing industry, there's more trucks up here than you'd think, and more congestion to boot.  This proposal isn't the pork that you think it is.  It's overdue.  Now, other segments of US-412, there are certainly some arguments to be made due to AADT.  But AR-612/US-412 west of Lowell/Springdale certainly has the density.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: BigOkie on May 27, 2021, 08:24:24 AM
Arkansas Senators John Boozman and Tom Cotton plus Senator Jim Inhoffe of Oklahoma are proposing an upgrade
 US 412  (https://talkbusiness.net/2021/05/u-s-legislators-look-to-designate-part-of-highway-412-as-future-interstate/) as an interstate Highway from I-35 to I-49.

I don't see why it's needed. Looks to me they are wasting time and effort .

I don't.  Given that I travel from Tulsa to Bentonville no fewer than four times a year the section between West Siloam Springs and Springdale/I-49 is hell if you hit it at the wrong time of day.  Siloam Springs itself can grind to a halt.  Not so bad once you get east of Tontitown but then Springdale is its own mess.  They're already building a 412 northern bypass in Springdale to alleviate that and it could be built to interstate standards.  Much of it is already completed as AR-612.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: andy3175 on May 27, 2021, 10:02:53 AM


It could be interstate quality road but keeps it as US 412.

I didn't realize US 412 was in Michigan or Ohio.

Do OK and AR fall into the NC pattern of "Interstate-izing" everything? 


Oklahoma hasn't added a new interstate designation to a road since 1982, as far as I know. (I-235 was completed and signed after that, but it was in the Green Book so I'm not counting it.) Most new freeway corridors have carried state route numbers (SH-152, SH-74) or been unnumbered turnpikes.

So y'all should hush and let us have this one.

Another example of a proposed Interstate in Oklahoma was considered in 1991, when Section 1074 of ISTEA included a future Interstate corridor along US 69 north of the Texas-Oklahoma state line: "upon the request of the Oklahoma State highway agency, the Secretary shall designate the portion of United States Route 69 from the Oklahoma–Texas State line to Checotah in the State of Oklahoma as a part of the Interstate System." Since this upgrade hasn't happened in 30 years, I'm not sure there's haste in Oklahoma to add more Interstate highways.

SM-G975U

Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: edwaleni on May 27, 2021, 10:39:38 AM
I would say Walmart too as a driver for this except, it's just the HQ and a distribution center.

Walmart doesn't *make* anything there except decisions.  Most of the reps that resell through Walmart, live there or grudgingly fly in every week/month.

I knew the Hershey's rep for Walmart who used to be the Mars rep until Hershey's bought them out.

Walmart was constantly nagging him to move to NWA so they could make "faster decisions" and he kept telling them I can make the same decisions by cell phone or email just as fast. He finally retired.

A large HQ and a SEC size public university can justify an upgrade in the area. But i don't see droves of trucks, buses, commuters coming from the east just to deal with Walmart, Tyson or JB Hunt.

If anyone came from the east, they would likely be coming I-40/I-49 currently as US-412 east of Harrison is not a particularly great truck route until it merges with US-63.  There are a great number of distribution centers in NWA for Wal-Mart, not just one.  And Tyson as well as several other poultry/meat processing companies produce a great deal of product in Springdale/Benton County.  Bentonville is growing into a mountain biking mecca, to the point that folks are coming for weeks on end from states out west that most people think of more regularly as mountain biking destinations.  I'm working on a house there right now to AirBnB out as it no longer makes financial sense as a long term rental.  Things are rapidly transforming away from the tired old stereotypes of what most people think of when Arkansas comes up in conversation, and the growth isn't going to slow down.  Nothing but cranes, red dirt, and building/home frames as far as the eye can see.  Most of that stuff comes in by truck, so regardless of whether things are destined or sourced by Wal-Mart or the meat processing industry, there's more trucks up here than you'd think, and more congestion to boot.  This proposal isn't the pork that you think it is.  It's overdue.  Now, other segments of US-412, there are certainly some arguments to be made due to AADT.  But AR-612/US-412 west of Lowell/Springdale certainly has the density.

Thanks for the update.  I think a lot of people can't fathom or understand what actually comes and goes out of NWA besides the Big 3.

I don't dispute the traffic on US-412 around Siloam Springs, I was there 2 years ago (recommend Barnett's Dairyette) and yes, it gets bad. Upgrades, yes. Interstate? That is what I am struggling with.
Title: Re: seeking interstate upgrade of US 412
Post by: bwana39 on May 27, 2021, 10:48:55 AM
Quote
  https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=29408.msg2619225#msg2619225
seeking interstate upgrade of US 412
« on: May 26, 2021, 08:24:16 PM »
since there's plans for a I-42 already in the books, what are the options for an east west route between Springdale and Tulsa between I-40 and 44?  Much of it is already turnpike in OK


It could be an IH-X44, IH-X49, or as a stretch an IH-X57.  As a real stretch, it could be a continuation of IH-555.  The X-49 and X-44 are viable. The others fall into the built all the way across Arkansas realm.
There is not a good 2DI for this one.  The sacrosanct IH-50 or a IH-3X. Either of those is outside their grid. If I-50 progressed past Tulsa, it could be grid compliant.

Even if  it were brought to IH standards, it would probably  remain the misplaced IH-412.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: bwana39 on May 27, 2021, 11:08:10 AM
I would say Walmart too as a driver for this except, it's just the HQ and a distribution center.

Walmart doesn't *make* anything there except decisions.  Most of the reps that resell through Walmart, live there or grudgingly fly in every week/month.

I knew the Hershey's rep for Walmart who used to be the Mars rep until Hershey's bought them out.

Walmart was constantly nagging him to move to NWA so they could make "faster decisions" and he kept telling them I can make the same decisions by cell phone or email just as fast. He finally retired.

A large HQ and a SEC size public university can justify an upgrade in the area. But i don't see droves of trucks, buses, commuters coming from the east just to deal with Walmart, Tyson or JB Hunt.

Me thinks you underestimate the size of the Walmart distribution operation and ancillaries around Bentonville. That said I agree there is more than just them in that area. To add another of several, FedEx Freight is based in nearby Harrison.

Hershey didn't buy Mars.  There was a proposed sale of Hershey to Nestle that failed to be completed several years ago.

In the US, Nestle no longer markets candy.

Mars and Hershey are less conjoined since the 00's as Mars quit buying their bulk chocolate from Hershey. 

Not sure exactly what his job change was over, but.....  Perhaps he was a Nestle Rep and took a job with either Hershey or Mars.  Perhaps he worked for a rep firm that traded alliances????
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: MikieTimT on May 27, 2021, 12:14:46 PM
I would say Walmart too as a driver for this except, it's just the HQ and a distribution center.

Walmart doesn't *make* anything there except decisions.  Most of the reps that resell through Walmart, live there or grudgingly fly in every week/month.

I knew the Hershey's rep for Walmart who used to be the Mars rep until Hershey's bought them out.

Walmart was constantly nagging him to move to NWA so they could make "faster decisions" and he kept telling them I can make the same decisions by cell phone or email just as fast. He finally retired.

A large HQ and a SEC size public university can justify an upgrade in the area. But i don't see droves of trucks, buses, commuters coming from the east just to deal with Walmart, Tyson or JB Hunt.

If anyone came from the east, they would likely be coming I-40/I-49 currently as US-412 east of Harrison is not a particularly great truck route until it merges with US-63.  There are a great number of distribution centers in NWA for Wal-Mart, not just one.  And Tyson as well as several other poultry/meat processing companies produce a great deal of product in Springdale/Benton County.  Bentonville is growing into a mountain biking mecca, to the point that folks are coming for weeks on end from states out west that most people think of more regularly as mountain biking destinations.  I'm working on a house there right now to AirBnB out as it no longer makes financial sense as a long term rental.  Things are rapidly transforming away from the tired old stereotypes of what most people think of when Arkansas comes up in conversation, and the growth isn't going to slow down.  Nothing but cranes, red dirt, and building/home frames as far as the eye can see.  Most of that stuff comes in by truck, so regardless of whether things are destined or sourced by Wal-Mart or the meat processing industry, there's more trucks up here than you'd think, and more congestion to boot.  This proposal isn't the pork that you think it is.  It's overdue.  Now, other segments of US-412, there are certainly some arguments to be made due to AADT.  But AR-612/US-412 west of Lowell/Springdale certainly has the density.

Thanks for the update.  I think a lot of people can't fathom or understand what actually comes and goes out of NWA besides the Big 3.

I don't dispute the traffic on US-412 around Siloam Springs, I was there 2 years ago (recommend Barnett's Dairyette) and yes, it gets bad. Upgrades, yes. Interstate? That is what I am struggling with.

You're certainly welcome.  Things are changing so fast in Benton County right now that even if you came every 6 months, you'd be shocked at the progress.

I get that at this point that other than the segments between Lowell and the OK border, and the portion around Tulsa are the only ones that appear to have the AATD to justify an Interstate designation.  I personally don't care whether it's 2DI or 3DI, but at least in AR, rural Interstate segments have a 10 MPH greater speed limit, which mostly has the effect of making for shorter travel times until congestion builds too much.  The AR-612 segment that is the US-412 Springdale Northern Bypass that's already open is constructed to Interstate standards, and the other 2 upcoming segments will be as well.  US-412 west of the end of the bypass is just 4 lane 65MPH with at-grade crossings for 15 miles.  Old AR-68 can serve somewhat as access for most property along there, but there likely would need to be a couple of exits between ends of the old highway for any conversion to limited access.  And then there's the whole bypassing of Siloam Springs to contend with.  They'd better get a move-on with any property acquisition there as my sister-in-law lives north of Siloam Springs, so I drive the area regularly, and there's several subdivisions in the works between her and town, so it's going to get expensive before too long.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Bobby5280 on May 27, 2021, 12:16:49 PM
Quote from: edwaleni
I don't dispute the traffic on US-412 around Siloam Springs, I was there 2 years ago (recommend Barnett's Dairyette) and yes, it gets bad. Upgrades, yes. Interstate? That is what I am struggling with.

Whether the corridor would carry an Interstate designation or not anything less than an Interstate quality super highway between I-44 in Tulsa and I-49 in Springdale is just silly. The NWA region may lack a single nationally recognizable giant-sized city, but the cluster of small cities all add up to something that feels like a giant metro anyway, including LOTS of traffic. It's similar to the big cluster of Rio Grande Valley cities in the far South end of Texas, but with a higher average income level.

Pieces of this possible future Interstate corridor have already been falling into place. The first segment of the Springdale Bypass (AR-612) is open. So the connection to I-49 is done. Now they have to extend the freeway West to US-412. This Interstate corridor legislation might help spur progress.

A new bypass around Siloam Springs is the biggest, most difficult to build, missing link on this corridor. And a freeway bypass around Siloam Springs is 100% justified. I've driven the existing road a few times. The traffic gets pretty ridiculous. How to resolve the connection thru or around Dripping Springs to the Cherokee Turnpike is another hurdle, but not as bad is Siloam Springs.

US-412 West of the Cherokee Turnpike to I-44 is a 27 mile long stretch, but one that would be simple to upgrade to Interstate standards compared to a Siloam Springs bypass project. The upgrade would be as easy as the US-71/I-49 conversion project in Western Missouri. Just eliminate the at-grade intersections with a few more diamond exits or just bridges over the highway. Looking closely at the satellite view of US-412 in that area it's easy to see where ROW is already reserved for some future freeway exits (S4115 Rd, S4140 Rd, S4160 Rd, S4170 Rd, S4240 Rd).
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: sprjus4 on May 27, 2021, 12:25:37 PM
US-412 between Tulsa and the Cherokee Turnpike is built on a limited access right of way, meaning there's no private driveways, only crossroads. Additionally, a few of the major intersections are either already grade-separated interchanges or have right of way for future interchanges.

This should be easiest, not already freeway standard, segment to upgrade. Comparable to US-60 in Missouri for the I-57 corridor.
Title: Re: seeking interstate upgrade of US 412
Post by: sprjus4 on May 27, 2021, 12:28:38 PM
Quote
  https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=29408.msg2619225#msg2619225
seeking interstate upgrade of US 412
« on: May 26, 2021, 08:24:16 PM »
since there's plans for a I-42 already in the books, what are the options for an east west route between Springdale and Tulsa between I-40 and 44?  Much of it is already turnpike in OK


It could be an IH-X44, IH-X49, or as a stretch an IH-X57.  As a real stretch, it could be a continuation of IH-555.  The X-49 and X-44 are viable. The others fall into the built all the way across Arkansas realm.
There is not a good 2DI for this one.  The sacrosanct IH-50 or a IH-3X. Either of those is outside their grid. If I-50 progressed past Tulsa, it could be grid compliant.

Even if  it were brought to IH standards, it would probably  remain the misplaced IH-412.
I-x57 or I-555 are simply never going to happen. I doubt there will be anything resembling an interstate highway built east of Springdale. I-x44 or I-x49 could work in theory, but for the whole corridor between I-35 and I-49, that's 190 miles. It would be the longest 3di in existence, taking I-476's place. Not saying it's not possible, but more likely given it's connecting two states, two interstate highways, and that length, it'll be an I-4x.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: The Ghostbuster on May 27, 2021, 12:43:53 PM
If this Interstate proposal does go through (which I'm not entirely sure that it should), maybe they should focus on upgrading and designating the Interstate 35-to-Interstate 244 first, and then focus on upgrading the Interstate 44-to-Interstate 49 segment subsequently. Also, if it goes through, I'd number the corridor Interstate 46.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Avalanchez71 on May 27, 2021, 01:34:52 PM
Some folks just don't want their property taken up as freely as all these proposals I see around here.
Title: Re: seeking interstate upgrade of US 412
Post by: bwana39 on May 27, 2021, 02:09:50 PM
Quote
  https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=29408.msg2619225#msg2619225
seeking interstate upgrade of US 412
« on: May 26, 2021, 08:24:16 PM »
since there's plans for a I-42 already in the books, what are the options for an east west route between Springdale and Tulsa between I-40 and 44?  Much of it is already turnpike in OK


It could be an IH-X44, IH-X49, or as a stretch an IH-X57.  As a real stretch, it could be a continuation of IH-555.  The X-49 and X-44 are viable. The others fall into the built all the way across Arkansas realm.
There is not a good 2DI for this one.  The sacrosanct IH-50 or a IH-3X. Either of those is outside their grid. If I-50 progressed past Tulsa, it could be grid compliant.

Even if  it were brought to IH standards, it would probably  remain the misplaced IH-412.
I-x57 or I-555 are simply never going to happen. I doubt there will be anything resembling an interstate highway built east of Springdale. I-x44 or I-x49 could work in theory, but for the whole corridor between I-35 and I-49, that's 190 miles. It would be the longest 3di in existence, taking I-476's place. Not saying it's not possible, but more likely given it's connecting two states, two interstate highways, and that length, it'll be an I-4x.

To be a tecnocrat. It would be two shorter segments. One in Arkansas and one in Oklahoma. I do however agree with you.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Scott5114 on May 27, 2021, 03:10:06 PM
There is not a good 2DI for this one.  The sacrosanct IH-50 or a IH-3X. Either of those is outside their grid. If I-50 progressed past Tulsa, it could be grid compliant.

Well, since it is proposed to go past Tulsa, 46 and 48 are options within the grid.

Why does this keep getting posted?

This is the route being proposed:
(https://i.imgur.com/SkVDCgQ.png)
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: sprjus4 on May 27, 2021, 03:35:59 PM
There is not a good 2DI for this one.  The sacrosanct IH-50 or a IH-3X. Either of those is outside their grid. If I-50 progressed past Tulsa, it could be grid compliant.

Well, since it is proposed to go past Tulsa, 46 and 48 are options within the grid.

Why does this keep getting posted?

This is the route being proposed:
(https://i.imgur.com/SkVDCgQ.png)
Apparently some believe it will not go past Tulsa even though that was obvious from the beginning.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Scott5114 on May 27, 2021, 04:01:43 PM
I feel like, if anything, the part west of Tulsa will probably be the first to get signed as an Interstate, since it's already fully controlled-access (other than possibly one or two at-grades just west of Tulsa, if I remember right). Basically all that would need to be done is to add a median Jersey barrier, like what was done to bring I-44 up to code, and possibly address some clearance issues.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Avalanchez71 on May 27, 2021, 04:08:47 PM
Looks like I-46 would be a good fit.  Do you think the tax payer would benefit from a pork project like this one?
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: bwana39 on May 27, 2021, 04:40:33 PM


It could be interstate quality road but keeps it as US 412.

I didn't realize US 412 was in Michigan or Ohio.

Do OK and AR fall into the NC pattern of "Interstate-izing" everything? 


Oklahoma hasn't added a new interstate designation to a road since 1982, as far as I know. (I-235 was completed and signed after that, but it was in the Green Book so I'm not counting it.) Most new freeway corridors have carried state route numbers (SH-152, SH-74) or been unnumbered turnpikes.

So y'all should hush and let us have this one.

Another example of a proposed Interstate in Oklahoma was considered in 1991, when Section 1074 of ISTEA included a future Interstate corridor along US 69 north of the Texas-Oklahoma state line: "upon the request of the Oklahoma State highway agency, the Secretary shall designate the portion of United States Route 69 from the Oklahoma–Texas State line to Checotah in the State of Oklahoma as a part of the Interstate System." Since this upgrade hasn't happened in 30 years, I'm not sure there's haste in Oklahoma to add more Interstate highways.

SM-G975U

Now I will sound like a Ouija ball, but all signs point toward the US 69 corridor actually getting done. Again signs point to Texas listing US-75 to the I-69 junction or the state line as IH-45. Oklahoma will likely get it done to US-70 in short order after Texas gets theirs done.   

Again... ALL SIGNS POINT...  There has been lots of discussion on various Texas threads in the Mid-south part of the board.  Texas has historically been and is slow to change numbers just to change numbers.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Scott5114 on May 27, 2021, 04:48:40 PM
Looks like I-46 would be a good fit.  Do you think the tax payer would benefit from a pork project like this one?

Duh?
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: sprjus4 on May 27, 2021, 05:26:21 PM
I feel like, if anything, the part west of Tulsa will probably be the first to get signed as an Interstate, since it's already fully controlled-access (other than possibly one or two at-grades just west of Tulsa, if I remember right). Basically all that would need to be done is to add a median Jersey barrier, like what was done to bring I-44 up to code, and possibly address some clearance issues.
Appears to be one at-grade just before the Arkansas River, otherwise the whole segment between Tulsa and I-35 is freeway standards. That one at-grade is close to an interchange and could be linked to it via a frontage road to eliminate the immediate freeway access.

Looks like I-46 would be a good fit.  Do you think the tax payer would benefit from a project like this one?
Yes, particularly the bypasses through the congested towns such as Siloam Springs that you seem to think aren’t needed.

You probably would be the one to call the Springdale Bypass a “pork” project, let alone I-49 itself.  :pan: :-D
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: sparker on May 27, 2021, 05:33:12 PM
Looks like I-46 would be a good fit.  Do you think the tax payer would benefit from a pork project like this one?

Duh?

Uhh.......we're already a relatively low-tax country compared to much of Western Civ (WTF does anyone think the "negotiations" about the funding level of an infrastructure bill entails?)  This project is actually something of a bargain; west of Tulsa is basically cleaning up an at-grade or two; while the eastern portion is about 40% done as the Cherokee Turnpike, with AR at least making an attempt at an E-W corridor with AR 612.  And I definitely agree that at least this initial project terminate at I-49 right in the heart of ongoing regional development -- providing continuous free-flow connection to Tulsa, the nearest other metro (not that some posters consider free-flow to be a worthwhile goal!). 

I'd actually put my two taxable cents in for not pussyfooting around and using I-50 for the designation here.  Not just to use up that I-x0, but because at that time the Muskogee Turnpike could conceivably receive a 3di based on that designation: I-350, just about as close as one can get to the current AR 351 designation (not that anyone in OK outside ODOT and we roadgeeks likely gives a rat's ass about that turnpike number!) so as not to cause too many fits within ODOT!   
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Tom958 on May 27, 2021, 06:00:58 PM
A new bypass around Siloam Springs is the biggest, most difficult to build, missing link on this corridor. And a freeway bypass around Siloam Springs is 100% justified. I've driven the existing road a few times. The traffic gets pretty ridiculous. How to resolve the connection thru or around Dripping Springs to the Cherokee Turnpike is another hurdle, but not as bad is Siloam Springs.

I'm amazed that ArDOT has a full-blown plan, partly implemented, for a Springdale bypass for US 412, but not for one for Siloam Springs.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: sparker on May 27, 2021, 07:34:44 PM
A new bypass around Siloam Springs is the biggest, most difficult to build, missing link on this corridor. And a freeway bypass around Siloam Springs is 100% justified. I've driven the existing road a few times. The traffic gets pretty ridiculous. How to resolve the connection thru or around Dripping Springs to the Cherokee Turnpike is another hurdle, but not as bad is Siloam Springs.

I'm amazed that ArDOT has a full-blown plan, partly implemented, for a Springdale bypass for US 412, but not for one for Siloam Springs.

Not surprising; Springdale is where the commercial and residential "action" is as the more or less midpoint of the NWA metro region; Siloam, while a historic resort, is still just a point on the E-W road to Tulsa.  But all shouldn't be considered as lost; the fact that the Bella Vista bypass actually got done -- and, like Siloam, involves input and funding sourced within another state -- indicates that while it may not be the simplest project around, it's certainly not an impossible situation. 
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Bobby5280 on May 27, 2021, 09:17:26 PM
I think the Siloam Springs bypass would potentially be easier to build than the Belle Vista Bypass. It wouldn't cover as much mileage and would thread its way around properties not worth as much money. However, if AR DOT farts around and doesn't get ROW secure for the bypass really soon they're going to see the most practical route alternatives get totally covered up with residential subdivision developments.

Basically, the Siloam Springs bypass would be easiest built to the North of town not far from Flint Creek. New housing is sprouting up in that area. If it gets too over-built that might push a bypass design to the South of Siloam Springs, where it would have to cut through more difficult, hilly territory.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Scott5114 on May 27, 2021, 09:30:08 PM
^ Thus, I imagine, why the Senators are proposing this now. It's a lot easier to convince the state and federal governments to cough up money to secure ROW when you have a Congressional mandate to do so.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: andy3175 on May 27, 2021, 10:57:36 PM
I'd actually put my two taxable cents in for not pussyfooting around and using I-50 for the designation here.  Not just to use up that I-x0, but because at that time the Muskogee Turnpike could conceivably receive a 3di based on that designation: I-350, just about as close as one can get to the current AR 351 designation (not that anyone in OK outside ODOT and we roadgeeks likely gives a rat's ass about that turnpike number!) so as not to cause too many fits within ODOT!   

Agreed, sparker. And the spur to Cimarron could be I-150.

And ... could this mean US 412 itself could go away between I-35 and I-49 and be replaced with I-50? There are many overlaps along its route west of I-35, and it seems like shifting US 412 to surface routes parallel to the new Interstate would just increase its shared alignments with other routes. Maybe ... but probably not, at least for the short term assuming this proposal comes to fruition.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Avalanchez71 on May 27, 2021, 11:16:59 PM
Looks like I-46 would be a good fit.  Do you think the tax payer would benefit from a pork project like this one?

Duh?
I was just thinking that the numbering would be a good fit but necessarily the project itself.  I don’t agree with the project and wonder if the tax payers in the area believe that a benefit will be derived from this pork project.  We are talking about using the power of eminent domain to take property.  I don’t take a light look to that issue as the road builders do.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Scott5114 on May 27, 2021, 11:22:27 PM
Looks like I-46 would be a good fit.  Do you think the tax payer would benefit from a pork project like this one?

Duh?
I was just thinking that the numbering would be a good fit but necessarily the project itself.  I don’t agree with the project and wonder if the tax payers in the area believe that a benefit will be derived from this pork project.  We are talking about using the power of eminent domain to take property.  I don’t take a light look to that issue as the road builders do.

Good thing you don't live here then, huh? As one of the tax payers in the area, I don't think they're spending enough. Taxes in OK are so low our transportation system is 30 years behind.

But then you haven't ever displayed a tendency to look at any transportation project through any perspective deeper than "Mmmmmh! Tax bad! Make bad tax man go away!"
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: sprjus4 on May 28, 2021, 06:08:56 AM
We are talking about using the power of eminent domain to take property.
We’re talking about the government fairly buying property at market value. They’re not “taking property”. The government cannot legally do that.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Plutonic Panda on May 28, 2021, 02:08:46 PM
We are talking about using the power of eminent domain to take property.
We’re talking about the government fairly buying property at market value. They’re not “taking property”. The government cannot legally do that.
Thank you thank you thank you. I can not stand when people refer to eminent domain as simply “taking property.”
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: MikieTimT on May 28, 2021, 02:26:09 PM
We are talking about using the power of eminent domain to take property.
We’re talking about the government fairly buying property at market value. They’re not “taking property”. The government cannot legally do that.
Thank you thank you thank you. I can not stand when people refer to eminent domain as simply “taking property.”

In Soviet Russia, property takes you!!
Yakov
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: The Ghostbuster on May 28, 2021, 03:42:16 PM
If the US 412 corridor become an Interstate, it would justify numbering all the exits along the Sand Springs Expressway's segment of 412 (They would be numbered as a continuation of the Cimarron Turnpike's numbers). I'd leave the duplex with 244 and its existing numbers intact (same with the duplex of 44). The Cherokee Turnpike's exits would have to be renumbered (as a continuation of the mileage from the US 412/Interstate 35 interchange). I wouldn't give a designation to the Stillwater Spur (I don't think it needs one), although I would renumber Exits 20A and 21A to 0 and 1.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Scott5114 on May 28, 2021, 04:44:44 PM
Prior Oklahoma practice in similar situations would be to truncate I-244 at downtown Tulsa and renumber the interchanges accordingly. This is what happened when I-44 was extended over I-240 in OKC in the 80s.

Likewise, prior Oklahoma practice if the interchanges on the Stillwater spur were to be renumbered, they'd likely be 1A and 1B rather than 0 and 1. Oklahoma has historically never used Exit 0; mile 1 is extended to be two miles long.

Of course, since when has Oklahoma transportation ever been self-consistent? They may yet surprise me.

I'm of two minds when it comes to numbering the Stillwater spur. On one hand, it's really just a lengthy offramp to US-177. However, it does have an intermediate interchange at Perkins Road, and experience dealing with the other unnumbered turnpike spur in the Oklahoma turnpike system shows it's kind of awkward to refer to a specific point along it (like someone calling and saying "where are you at?") without having its own name or number. This is even greater of a concern with the Cimarron spur than the Bailey spur because it is longer and passes through a more remote area.

Also, anyone want to tell me what the heck is going on with this mile marker? (https://www.google.com/maps/@36.1994073,-97.0661146,3a,18.5y,265.71h,85.48t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s4qctKFmDt3jqKsD34io52w!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3D4qctKFmDt3jqKsD34io52w%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D309.54477%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i13312!8i6656)
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Tom958 on May 28, 2021, 05:17:39 PM
Also, anyone want to tell me what the heck is going on with this mile marker? (https://www.google.com/maps/@36.1994073,-97.0661146,3a,18.5y,265.71h,85.48t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s4qctKFmDt3jqKsD34io52w!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3D4qctKFmDt3jqKsD34io52w%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D309.54477%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i13312!8i6656)

It must be seven miles west of the beginning of the Stillwater spur, which is 27 miles east of I-35.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Scott5114 on May 28, 2021, 06:07:39 PM
Also, anyone want to tell me what the heck is going on with this mile marker? (https://www.google.com/maps/@36.1994073,-97.0661146,3a,18.5y,265.71h,85.48t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s4qctKFmDt3jqKsD34io52w!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3D4qctKFmDt3jqKsD34io52w%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D309.54477%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i13312!8i6656)

It must be seven miles west of the beginning of the Stillwater spur, which is 27 miles east of I-35.

Ah, the "A" suffix is being used on all of the spur mileage, which isn't how they do it on the Bailey spur (https://www.google.com/maps/@35.2062674,-97.6323479,3a,15y,179.57h,85.29t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sJEBH1b5T3diNJpeYwu1Wjw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192). I had thought that they had decided to put the exit number for exit 20A on the milemarker instead of the gore point for some strange reason. Still, where did they get that font? Is that Eurostile...?

But again, another reason for actually giving the spurs a number of some kind—it would eliminate this weird spur-mileage nonsense.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: sparker on May 28, 2021, 06:34:51 PM
I'd actually put my two taxable cents in for not pussyfooting around and using I-50 for the designation here.  Not just to use up that I-x0, but because at that time the Muskogee Turnpike could conceivably receive a 3di based on that designation: I-350, just about as close as one can get to the current AR 351 designation (not that anyone in OK outside ODOT and we roadgeeks likely gives a rat's ass about that turnpike number!) so as not to cause too many fits within ODOT!   

Agreed, sparker. And the spur to Cimarron could be I-150.

And ... could this mean US 412 itself could go away between I-35 and I-49 and be replaced with I-50? There are many overlaps along its route west of I-35, and it seems like shifting US 412 to surface routes parallel to the new Interstate would just increase its shared alignments with other routes. Maybe ... but probably not, at least for the short term assuming this proposal comes to fruition.

As far as truncating US 412 is concerned, it's likely that whoever the parties are that proposed and implemented the western extension through the Panhandle and on to I-25 would have a shit fit about removing the designation & signage; obviously they thought that a single designation across that part of OK and into NM was necessary for someone's purposes of navigation.  Snarky idea that blurs the Fictional line here:  If the Raton-Dumas branch of the P2P is ever approved as an Interstate corridor, designate it as the same number (I-50?) as the corridor under discussion here -- and dare the powers that be to connect them!  They're more or less (with a little tweaking in the TX panhandle) on the same latitude.  Hardly needed to address any major through traffic issues in that neck of the woods -- but that hasn't always stopped corridor designation before -- particularly in regards to congressional districts through which it would run!  At least it would be a fun (and funky) way to get from NWA to the Front Range!
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: US 89 on May 29, 2021, 02:11:30 AM
Based on what I saw of the US 56/64/412 overlap in NM, I doubt they’d care too much if US 412 disappeared from their state. Half the signs between Clayton and the OK line have 56 all by itself, with no mention of 412 at all. (The other half are weird 56/412 unisigns where they’ve shrunk both numbers and squeezed them into one shield on top of each other - and I don’t recall a single reference to US 64 on that section.)
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: sparker on May 29, 2021, 05:47:53 AM
Based on what I saw of the US 56/64/412 overlap in NM, I doubt they’d care too much if US 412 disappeared from their state. Half the signs between Clayton and the OK line have 56 all by itself, with no mention of 412 at all. (The other half are weird 56/412 unisigns where they’ve shrunk both numbers and squeezed them into one shield on top of each other - and I don’t recall a single reference to US 64 on that section.)

Something tells me that the idea for US 412 was germinated elsewhere (likely OK, AR, or TN) and more or less imposed upon NM, who have decided to do little more than make a half-assed effort at signage.  Can't really blame them for not making their crews head out and post additional signs over a road that's been signed as US 56 since 1957!  If and when an Interstate is signed on the corridor from I-35 to I-49, it certainly wouldn't be inappropriate for NMDOT and ODOT to jointly request rescinding US 412 west of I-35 -- and maybe even, with ADOT concurrence, west of I-49.  But even with the long multiplex with US 62 across northern AR, it'll probably stick around east of there simply because it does carry considerable through traffic from Walnut Ridge east to Jackson, TN.  Personally, I'd renumber it as US 162 or US 170, but obviously someone with clout has decided that the "400" series of US routes should delineate the more recent multistate Midwest corridors. 
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Bobby5280 on May 30, 2021, 11:36:44 PM
Quote from: Scott5114
Ah, the "A" suffix is being used on all of the spur mileage, which isn't how they do it on the Bailey spur. I had thought that they had decided to put the exit number for exit 20A on the milemarker instead of the gore point for some strange reason. Still, where did they get that font? Is that Eurostile...?

It looks kind of like Helvetica Neue Bold Condensed to me.

Anyone else notice the new mile markers ODOT has been installing on "free" Interstate routes? A couple or so months ago we got new ones on I-44 in the Lawton area installed every half mile. They have the I-44 shield on them.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Scott5114 on May 30, 2021, 11:58:53 PM
Quote from: Scott5114
Ah, the "A" suffix is being used on all of the spur mileage, which isn't how they do it on the Bailey spur. I had thought that they had decided to put the exit number for exit 20A on the milemarker instead of the gore point for some strange reason. Still, where did they get that font? Is that Eurostile...?

It looks kind of like Helvetica Neue Bold Condensed to me.

The boxy '0' makes me think Eurostile. But it's apparently a one-off; 21A is in proper Series C.

Quote
Anyone else notice the new mile markers ODOT has been installing on "free" Interstate routes? A couple or so months ago we got new ones on I-44 in the Lawton area installed every half mile. They have the I-44 shield on them.

Those are the enhanced mile markers from the MUTCD. I got to see the first ones they put up; their beta-test segment was on I-35 from Purcell through Goldsby and into Norman. They're more or less the same markers that Missouri uses on all of their Interstates, but Missouri places them every 0.2 miles (and uses ".0" on the whole-mile markers, which ODOT omits).
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: US71 on May 31, 2021, 02:05:39 PM
Quote from: Scott5114
Ah, the "A" suffix is being used on all of the spur mileage, which isn't how they do it on the Bailey spur. I had thought that they had decided to put the exit number for exit 20A on the milemarker instead of the gore point for some strange reason. Still, where did they get that font? Is that Eurostile...?

It looks kind of like Helvetica Neue Bold Condensed to me.

Anyone else notice the new mile markers ODOT has been installing on "free" Interstate routes? A couple or so months ago we got new ones on I-44 in the Lawton area installed every half mile. They have the I-44 shield on them.

MoDOT does every 2/10 of a mile
(https://live.staticflickr.com/6120/6866217844_2a74cfa79e_d.jpg)
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Strider on May 31, 2021, 08:57:52 PM
It could be interstate quality road but keeps it as US 412.

I didn't realize US 412 was in Michigan or Ohio.

Do OK and AR fall into the NC pattern of "Interstate-izing" everything?


Really? NC doesn't interstate everything. Get your facts right, bro.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Scott5114 on May 31, 2021, 09:11:19 PM
It could be interstate quality road but keeps it as US 412.

I didn't realize US 412 was in Michigan or Ohio.

Do OK and AR fall into the NC pattern of "Interstate-izing" everything?


Really? NC doesn't interstate everything. Get your facts right, bro.

they'll get around to making your driveway a 3di at the next SCOURN meeting, chill
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Avalanchez71 on June 01, 2021, 08:13:09 AM
I could US 412 sticking around from TN into NWA.  As mentioned there is a significant amount of folks that trailblaze US 412 from Jackson to NWA.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: edwaleni on June 01, 2021, 09:41:31 AM
I could US 412 sticking around from TN into NWA.  As mentioned there is a significant amount of folks that trailblaze US 412 from Jackson to NWA.

Not likely for commercial traffic. Perhaps for leisure.

NASH-TUL either takes I-40 via Little Rock to the Muskogee Turnpike or I-24 to US-60 across Missouri (even with the Cairo Bridge involved)
MEM-KCMO doesn't even use it. They prefer I-55 to I-70 then across.

Between TUL-NWA it may be busy, but any trailblazing is done by the leisure folk, not commercial between Jackson TN and NWA.

I get why you see an opportunity west of Jackson TN, but US-412 in NEA is really an in-state arterial.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: sparker on June 01, 2021, 01:12:06 PM
It could be interstate quality road but keeps it as US 412.

I didn't realize US 412 was in Michigan or Ohio.

Do OK and AR fall into the NC pattern of "Interstate-izing" everything?


Really? NC doesn't interstate everything. Get your facts right, bro.

they'll get around to making your driveway a 3di at the next SCOURN meeting, chill

They (NCDOT and their political handlers) only request Interstate status for those freeways included in the state's "master plan" for such -- which pretty much takes in every arterial connector in the state.  In practical terms, more or less the polar opposite regarding OK practice:  the US 412 Interstate proposal had to come from its (and AR's) congressional delegation; it certainly wasn't germinated within ODOT.       
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: MikieTimT on June 02, 2021, 07:51:18 PM
Just drove US-412 today from Walnut Ridge, AR to Springdale, AR coming back from Jonesboro from a job.  Always a fun stretch of road that I'd always choose over the faster/longer jog down US-63/AR-226/US-67/US-64/I-40/I-49, but had to be at a jobsite in Little Rock just before, so that tied my hands on the route out to NEA.  It's 40 miles shorter and more to look at with curves and hills to entertain the driving enthusiast, not to mention that northern AR is pretty much a temperate rainforest this spring with lush vegetation and swollen creeks and rivers.  Really there's only 4 places where traffic was less than free flowing on a holiday week as there are more passing lanes than there used to be, but it could stand one more between Imboden and Ravenden, 1 to 2 more between Viola and Henderson, 3 more passing lanes east of US-65 in Boone County along with a northern bypass of Harrison, and 2 to 3 more in the 33 miles between Alpena and Huntsville.  That would pretty much bring parity on travel time from NEA to NWA and reduce mileage slightly over the current route by bypassing Harrison to the north.  I really don't see justification for making a limited access facility on any portion east of Harrison and west of Hardy other than perhaps the bypass portion.  But that's outside the scope of this proposal anyway.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Bobby5280 on June 03, 2021, 01:13:41 PM
I think it's plausible to do upgrades of US-412 in Northern Arkansas in various spots, like 4-laning the road where feasible or even building some grade-separated interchanges. But a full-blown Interstate upgrade from Springdale to I-55 would be overkill, not to mention very disruptive to some of the more scenic/tourist-centric locations along the way.

If this new OK-AR Interstate proposal were to be extended any direction I would prefer it go West from I-35 over to Enid and Woodward. The Enid part would be a pretty easy upgrade. Making a bypass around Enid and going West would cost more. But Woodward has a lot of potential as a distribution hub. The Southern Transcon (one of the busiest freight rail corridors in the nation) goes through Woodward.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Avalanchez71 on June 03, 2021, 01:19:51 PM
Will this project really be needed in the areas already covered by the OK turnpikes?
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Bobby5280 on June 03, 2021, 01:30:02 PM
In the case of the Cimarron Turnpike, the only thing involved would be changing signs. The Cherokee Turnpike doesn't cover all the area between Tulsa and Springdale. There are gaps that absolutely do need to be upgraded into limited access form regardless of the road being signed as an Interstate or not.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: sprjus4 on June 03, 2021, 01:35:13 PM
Will this project really be needed in the areas already covered by the OK turnpikes?
What exactly would they build? The turnpikes would be incorporated as limited access segments. The Cherokee is posted up to 80 mph. No need to build a new route where they exist.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: The Ghostbuster on June 03, 2021, 02:20:49 PM
Does anyone see US 412 between Interstate 44 and the western terminus of the Cherokee Turnpike being built as a tolled future Interstate (a western extension of the CT) or a non-tolled Interstate? I definitely see the segment east of the Cherokee Turnpike being built as a non-toll road, but am unsure of the other portion. What do you guys think?
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: sparker on June 03, 2021, 05:15:23 PM
Does anyone see US 412 between Interstate 44 and the western terminus of the Cherokee Turnpike being built as a tolled future Interstate (a western extension of the CT) or a non-tolled Interstate? I definitely see the segment east of the Cherokee Turnpike being built as a non-toll road, but am unsure of the other portion. What do you guys think?

That's probably something that'll be hashed around and volleyed back & forth between ODOT and OTA.  Best guess:  I-44 to the western end of the present Cherokee facility would simply be built as a western extension of the Cherokee, since it would tie more or less directly into both the Will Rogers (I-44) and Creek (OK 364) turnpikes at its west terminus, making for a continuous or connected turnpike run (and which may precipitate a 3di/x44 for the Creek).  East of the existing Cherokee would probably be a built as a freeway to placate local Siloam traffic (as well as giving AR drivers ample time to get off & shunpike if they want).  But since the OK "idiom" has been established with I-44: most of it toll except for metro areas, it would probably be deemed acceptable to do so with the new E-W Interstate corridor as well, since to the west it doesn't change to a toll facility until beyond the populated area and to the east a toll facility is expected at some point anyway.  I would imagine Tulsa folks are accustomed to the practice by now!
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Strider on June 03, 2021, 05:46:35 PM
It could be interstate quality road but keeps it as US 412.

I didn't realize US 412 was in Michigan or Ohio.

Do OK and AR fall into the NC pattern of "Interstate-izing" everything?


Really? NC doesn't interstate everything. Get your facts right, bro.

they'll get around to making your driveway a 3di at the next SCOURN meeting, chill

As long as you don't spread misinformation. So get your facts right.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: sprjus4 on June 03, 2021, 07:13:07 PM
Does anyone see US 412 between Interstate 44 and the western terminus of the Cherokee Turnpike being built as a tolled future Interstate (a western extension of the CT) or a non-tolled Interstate? I definitely see the segment east of the Cherokee Turnpike being built as a non-toll road, but am unsure of the other portion. What do you guys think?

That's probably something that'll be hashed around and volleyed back & forth between ODOT and OTA.  Best guess:  I-44 to the western end of the present Cherokee facility would simply be built as a western extension of the Cherokee, since it would tie more or less directly into both the Will Rogers (I-44) and Creek (OK 364) turnpikes at its west terminus, making for a continuous or connected turnpike run (and which may precipitate a 3di/x44 for the Creek).  East of the existing Cherokee would probably be a built as a freeway to placate local Siloam traffic (as well as giving AR drivers ample time to get off & shunpike if they want).  But since the OK "idiom" has been established with I-44: most of it toll except for metro areas, it would probably be deemed acceptable to do so with the new E-W Interstate corridor as well, since to the west it doesn't change to a toll facility until beyond the populated area and to the east a toll facility is expected at some point anyway.  I would imagine Tulsa folks are accustomed to the practice by now!
I would disagree, given US-412 is already a limited access highway, albeit some at grade intersections, between I-44 and the Cherokee. No new facility needs to be built. Some projects to convert the intersections to interchanges will be needed, but no major corridor wide upgrade, like a full new freeway or capturing non-limited-access right of way for frontage roads, etc. It would be pointless to toll an existing facility in this regard.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Plutonic Panda on June 03, 2021, 09:19:06 PM
It’s so sad Texas can build endless miles of toll free roads and Oklahoma can’t do anything besides toll toll toll. If ODOT is smart they’d remove the existing tolls on this portion. God forbid Tulsa gets a toll free interstate.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Bobby5280 on June 03, 2021, 10:41:27 PM
I strongly doubt Texas is 100% done with building toll roads. They're sure not removing toll gates off any of the tolled express lanes they've built in the last couple of decades. It's also worth pointing out the cost per mile in tolls is a lot higher in Texas than Oklahoma.

Quote from: sparker
That's probably something that'll be hashed around and volleyed back & forth between ODOT and OTA.  Best guess:  I-44 to the western end of the present Cherokee facility would simply be built as a western extension of the Cherokee,...

I think it's much more likely the Cherokee Turnpike will stay as-is and the section of US-412 between I-44 and that turnpike will be turned into a freeway. It will be cheaper to build. As a toll road OTA and ODOT would have to work together to add continuous frontage roads along that new section of super highway in order to maintain a free alternative US highway route. Note: Alt-412 (old US-412) runs alongside the Cherokee Turnpike.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: sparker on June 04, 2021, 05:44:26 AM
Does anyone see US 412 between Interstate 44 and the western terminus of the Cherokee Turnpike being built as a tolled future Interstate (a western extension of the CT) or a non-tolled Interstate? I definitely see the segment east of the Cherokee Turnpike being built as a non-toll road, but am unsure of the other portion. What do you guys think?

That's probably something that'll be hashed around and volleyed back & forth between ODOT and OTA.  Best guess:  I-44 to the western end of the present Cherokee facility would simply be built as a western extension of the Cherokee, since it would tie more or less directly into both the Will Rogers (I-44) and Creek (OK 364) turnpikes at its west terminus, making for a continuous or connected turnpike run (and which may precipitate a 3di/x44 for the Creek).  East of the existing Cherokee would probably be a built as a freeway to placate local Siloam traffic (as well as giving AR drivers ample time to get off & shunpike if they want).  But since the OK "idiom" has been established with I-44: most of it toll except for metro areas, it would probably be deemed acceptable to do so with the new E-W Interstate corridor as well, since to the west it doesn't change to a toll facility until beyond the populated area and to the east a toll facility is expected at some point anyway.  I would imagine Tulsa folks are accustomed to the practice by now!
I would disagree, given US-412 is already a limited access highway, albeit some at grade intersections, between I-44 and the Cherokee. No new facility needs to be built. Some projects to convert the intersections to interchanges will be needed, but no major corridor wide upgrade, like a full new freeway or capturing non-limited-access right of way for frontage roads, etc. It would be pointless to toll an existing facility in this regard.

Under other circumstances I'd tend to agree with you here, but if this new Interstate corridor is actually legislated (likely appended to the FY '22 USDOT yearly budget request as per previous corridors of this type), it might be considered at the state level as just another federally-specified "unfunded mandate" -- at which point the prospect of offsetting upgrade and/or new construction expenses with tolls might be seriously discussed during the "back & forth" deliberations I mentioned in the prior post.  It'll probably come down to whether the cost of a freeway upgrade from I-44 east to the Cherokee pike would be enough to provoke the toll discussion -- and, of course, whether the modifications necessary to actually deploy a toll facility (with a viable alternative in place as well) would in essence consume any monetary gains accrued by the lengthened toll road.   

It'll be interesting; this will be the first congressionally-designated Interstate corridor in OK -- not counting the now 30-year-old ISTEA appendage that allows ODOT to designate US 69 as an Interstate as far north as I-40, which they've essentially ignored for that period of time*.  Of course, AR already has three such corridors with which to deal (I-49, I-69, and most recently I-57), so they're basically "old hats" at the game.  How normally stingy OK responds will be quite revealing.

*Curiously, that corridor was simply "tacked on" to the ISTEA act (as section #1174), but decidedly not included within the first batch of high priority corridors -- which effectively exempted it from the maximum 80% federal share of development/construction cost that accrues to HPC's; also the codicil that ODOT needs to not only request designation but have the corridor at Interstate standards when doing so puts the ball squarely in the state's court.  Thus it's not a "cookie-cutter" Interstate corridor request like those in TX, NC, and the various other states where the congressional-designation method has been employed.
       
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Scott5114 on June 04, 2021, 01:19:02 PM
The only upgrades I could see taking place to the current turnpikes would be minor safety improvements, like upgraded median barriers, and perhaps some bridge replacements, on the Cimarron Turnpike. The Cimarron is one of the older roads in the turnpike system, and while I'm not familiar with it specifically, other toll roads of that vintage tend to have hilariously obsolete overpasses over the road, some only one lane (not one in each direction, one total!), so I wouldn't be surprised if there's some clearance issues. The current median is paved and has a cable barrier down the middle. I'm not sure if that would pass muster with FHWA, who may require it get a Jersey barrier to be compliant with Interstate standards. I think that the Cherokee is probably pretty close to Interstate standards as-is.

Meanwhile, the ODOT-maintained sections are likely to remain untolled and simply upgraded by that agency, because any sort of tolling would require transferring the road to OTA, and doing so is legally complicated. The only precedent for it was the other way (OTA to ODOT) and was likely only possible because the enabling act for the relevant turnpike explicitly allowed such a transfer. It would probably be easier for ODOT to just upgrade the roads than transfer them—they are mostly four-lane divided and just need interchanges and overpasses; it's no more than MoDOT had to do to upgrade US-71 to I-49 north of Joplin.

There is one other Interstate corridor that has been Congressionally designated in Oklahoma—the Creek Turnpike. Although years after that, the only action on it that the Transportation Commission has made has been to designate it SH-364, so apparently they're not that interested in an Interstate designation.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Avalanchez71 on June 04, 2021, 01:26:38 PM
What is the safety issues associated with this type of paved should/cable barrier versus a grass median?
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Scott5114 on June 04, 2021, 01:34:43 PM
The narrow grass medians originally built on the Cimarron Turnpike and other turnpikes of that vintage were completely ineffective at preventing cross-over accidents. See GSV (https://www.google.com/maps/@36.2185489,-96.418945,3a,75y,91.03h,87.94t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sRyncrRLokDfabDjyidXRQg!2e0!7i3328!8i1664), be sure to set history to the 2008 or 2009 captures to view the old median, then compare to present day. The cable barriers are sufficient to stop a lot of crossovers, but when struck require a crew to come out and reset/replace the pylons and retension the cables to restore them to full effectiveness. A Jersey barrier is more expensive but lower maintenance.

In any case, no taxpayer money is spent on upgrades to Oklahoma turnpikes. OTA is fully funded by toll money collected from all of the roads in the turnpike system (the Turner and Will Rogers largely subsidize the other eight turnpikes).
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Avalanchez71 on June 04, 2021, 01:42:18 PM
I am sure some OHP Troopers didn't like the grass median pave over for ticket writing purposes. 
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Scott5114 on June 04, 2021, 01:45:54 PM
If it bothered them too much, they could always request a transfer to a different troop. OHP Troop YA patrols the Cimarron Turnpike and nothing else. (Each Oklahoma turnpike has a dedicated OHP troop.)
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: sprjus4 on June 04, 2021, 01:46:22 PM
I am sure some OHP Troopers didn't like the grass median pave over for ticket writing purposes.
So are you suggesting the raised grass medians with no left shoulder were safer on 75 mph highways as opposed to a paved left shoulder and a high tension cable barrier?
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: kphoger on June 04, 2021, 01:59:31 PM
I am sure some OHP Troopers didn't like the grass median pave over for ticket writing purposes. 

I've personally had a OHP Trooper flip a U-turn across the grassy median hump of US-412 (west of US-177 before the cable barrier was installed) and give me a warning for speeding.  I think I was only doing like 81 in a 75.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Avalanchez71 on June 04, 2021, 02:41:28 PM
I am sure some OHP Troopers didn't like the grass median pave over for ticket writing purposes.
So are you suggesting the raised grass medians with no left shoulder were safer on 75 mph highways as opposed to a paved left shoulder and a high tension cable barrier?

I am not saying anything.  I was just theorizing that a Trooper or two may have had a honey hole.  I wasn't speaking to the safety past or present.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: kphoger on June 04, 2021, 02:50:37 PM
Passing a trucker, after dark, with a grassy mound immediately left of the edge line, at 75-80 mph...  Yeah, I never really felt very safe doing that.

Fast-forward a few years, and now I find myself occasionally driving in Mexico on a four-lane divided highway with a dropoff immediately right of the edge line—being passed by turnpike doubles at 65-70 mph.  I mean, I guess I'd take the grassy mound over the dropoff, but I wouldn't call either one "safe".
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: sparker on June 04, 2021, 03:34:52 PM
I am sure some OHP Troopers didn't like the grass median pave over for ticket writing purposes.
So are you suggesting the raised grass medians with no left shoulder were safer on 75 mph highways as opposed to a paved left shoulder and a high tension cable barrier?

I am not saying anything.  I was just theorizing that a Trooper or two may have had a honey hole.  I wasn't speaking to the safety past or present.

"Honey hole"  -- that's the first time I've heard that term; I suppose it would also apply to those cross-median accessways labeled "For Official Use Only" in some states.   But I'm sure the old OTA maintenance crews really loved having to deal with trooper tire tracks marring their nicely-kept grass medians!
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: In_Correct on June 05, 2021, 02:20:20 AM
I am confused. Are the Officers able to use the gaps in the Jersey Barriers to be able to turn around?

Or they can simply contact an Officer going in the opposite direction?
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Scott5114 on June 05, 2021, 04:12:07 AM
I am confused. Are the Officers able to use the gaps in the Jersey Barriers to be able to turn around?

That's the whole reason they put the gaps there. Occasionally a fire truck or ambulance will make use of one, but it's mostly cops.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: rte66man on June 06, 2021, 02:41:17 PM
Interesting......

https://oklahoma.gov/odot/citizen/newsroom/2021/june/june-transportation-commission-video-teleconference-meeting-sche.html

Quote
Friday, June 04, 2021
Media Advisory
June 3, 2021

The Oklahoma Transportation Commission’s monthly meeting is scheduled to take place as a video teleconference at 11 a.m. Monday, June 7. Members of the public and media will be able to access the web livestream video or listen by phone by following the instructions at the bottom of this release.

Items to be addressed at the meeting:
Secretary of Transportation and Oklahoma Department of Transportation Executive Director Tim Gatz will update commission members on transportation funding provisions in the state budget as well as ongoing congressional discussions about federal infrastructure funding and possible interstate designation for US-412.

I was unable to find any mention of this on the published agenda.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: bugo on June 07, 2021, 07:49:37 AM
Yes, I generally don't list JB Hunt and I mention Tyson and University of Arkansas. U of A is not a part of the Oklahoma equation.

A lot of Tulsa kids go to Arkansas when they graduate high school. Fayetteville is closer to Tulsa than Norman is. There is also some game day traffic between the two cities, because there are lots of Razorback fans in Oklahoma.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: rte66man on June 07, 2021, 07:54:04 AM
Yes, I generally don't list JB Hunt and I mention Tyson and University of Arkansas. U of A is not a part of the Oklahoma equation.

A lot of Tulsa kids go to Arkansas when they graduate high school. Fayetteville is closer to Tulsa than Norman is. There is also some game day traffic between the two cities, because there are lots of Razorback fans in Oklahoma.

+1.

You didn't mention the AQ Chicken House in Springdale . First place I ever ate battered french fries.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Bobby5280 on June 07, 2021, 04:21:32 PM
Quote from: Scott5114
The narrow grass medians originally built on the Cimarron Turnpike and other turnpikes of that vintage were completely ineffective at preventing cross-over accidents. See GSV, be sure to set history to the 2008 or 2009 captures to view the old median, then compare to present day. The cable barriers are sufficient to stop a lot of crossovers, but when struck require a crew to come out and reset/replace the pylons and retension the cables to restore them to full effectiveness. A Jersey barrier is more expensive but lower maintenance.

Back in the early 1990's there was a horrible head-on collision on I-44 near Elgin, OK that killed several people. This was due in part to the narrow grassy median about the width of a vehicle lane. The left lanes on I-44 had no interior left shoulders either. Drivers in the left lane had to be careful; any drifting around in the lane could have wheels hitting the grass at the edge of the lane at high speed. An out of control vehicle could very easily go into the opposing lanes.

I don't know if the incident near Elgin had any effect on plans, but it wasn't long after that tragedy that the concrete Jersey barrier was erected on the I-44 turnpikes from the Medicine Park exit up to the Missouri State line.

Strangely, many years passed before OTA did anything about I-44 South of Lawton. A few years ago they finally removed the stupidly dangerous narrow grassy median. They replaced that grassy strip with concrete slab and put a cable barrier in the middle of it. OTA did that because it cost half the price of a concrete Jersey barrier. I have heard some arguments that suggest a cable barrier is safer than a concrete Jersey barrier because it does more to slow and stop vehicles. An out of control vehicle will just bounce off a concrete Jersey barrier.

Most of the Cimarron Turnpike has been upgraded in a similar manner: grassy strip replaced with concrete and a cable barrier. But I think there are still a couple stretches of the turnpike that still have the old grassy medians. I think the spur going to Stillwater still has a narrow grassy median.

Quote from: Scott5114
The only upgrades I could see taking place to the current turnpikes would be minor safety improvements, like upgraded median barriers, and perhaps some bridge replacements, on the Cimarron Turnpike.

OTA also needs to do something about those old toll plazas. They'll have to do something about that anyway, given the plans to go to all-electronic tolling. Those old toll plazas are a serious bottleneck. Some are in pretty bad condition. The Walters toll booth on I-44 South of Lawton is a good example. I get nervous driving on the bridge over the top of the old toll booth due to the very poor condition of the road deck. There have been plans to re-build that plaza on the books for years, but the project just keeps getting delayed over and over.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Avalanchez71 on June 10, 2021, 09:53:47 AM
I have had the unfortunate instances of witnessing a vehicle lose control and ram a jersey barrier.  The barrier slung the vehicle around and the driver did not make it.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: sprjus4 on June 10, 2021, 11:07:44 AM
I have had the unfortunate instances of witnessing a vehicle lose control and ram a jersey barrier.  The barrier slung the vehicle around and the driver did not make it.
You’re suggesting a raised median would be safer? Where the vehicle would cross over the median into the opposing lane, crashing head on with oncoming traffic, killing both the driver at-fault and some innocent driver, as opposed to just the driver at-fault? Any loss of life is tragic, however if it has to happen, rather it be one vehicle vs. two, one of which completely without any fault.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Avalanchez71 on June 10, 2021, 04:11:14 PM
I have had the unfortunate instances of witnessing a vehicle lose control and ram a jersey barrier.  The barrier slung the vehicle around and the driver did not make it.
You’re suggesting a raised median would be safer? Where the vehicle would cross over the median into the opposing lane, crashing head on with oncoming traffic, killing both the driver at-fault and some innocent driver, as opposed to just the driver at-fault? Any loss of life is tragic, however if it has to happen, rather it be one vehicle vs. two, one of which completely without any fault.

No unfortunately I have been a witness to numerous traffic collisions both of a serious injury and fatality over the years.  I'll defer the median control systems to an engineer.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: sparker on June 10, 2021, 04:16:02 PM
I have had the unfortunate instances of witnessing a vehicle lose control and ram a jersey barrier.  The barrier slung the vehicle around and the driver did not make it.
You’re suggesting a raised median would be safer? Where the vehicle would cross over the median into the opposing lane, crashing head on with oncoming traffic, killing both the driver at-fault and some innocent driver, as opposed to just the driver at-fault? Any loss of life is tragic, however if it has to happen, rather it be one vehicle vs. two, one of which completely without any fault.

The very design of a K-rail, with its concave vertical fascia, is intended to in essence "flip" any vehicle striking it and running up its surface back onto its own side of the barrier; that is specifically supposed to minimize the chances of said vehicle crossing to the other side of the barrier.  Critics of this design have suggested that this sort of "flip" greatly increases the chances of multi-car pileups in the original direction of travel, whereas a tall straight-sided barrier would be more likely to result in the problem vehicle staying at least partially in the inside shoulder area.  Both are designed to deflect rather than absorb vehicle inertia; other methods like dual or thrie-beam installations or even cable are considerably more absorptive while keeping as much "action" on the direction-of-travel side of the road as possible.  As an aside, the old CA DOH thought that densely-planed oleander bushes (selected for their very low watering needs) made for a reasonably effective freeway median barrier, using the bush structure as a buffer.  Most of the existing examples of these, many along CA 99 in the San Joaquin Valley, have been augmented by cable or thrie-beams flanking the trunks of the bushes; this was done after several instances of large trucks crossing the median and causing major -- and often fatal -- incidents.   
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: bugo on June 10, 2021, 08:54:29 PM
Don't forget that there's an at-grade intersection on US 64 just west of the OK 151 interchange. An access road could be built that would connect to 151 and the at-grade could be removed, but I don't see anything happening to it in the near future.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: kphoger on June 11, 2021, 01:12:32 PM
Don't forget that there's an at-grade intersection on US 64 just west of the OK 151 interchange. An access road could be built that would connect to 151 and the at-grade could be removed, but I don't see anything happening to it in the near future.

Don't worry, we didn't forget.

Appears to be one at-grade just before the Arkansas River, otherwise the whole segment between Tulsa and I-35 is freeway standards. That one at-grade is close to an interchange and could be linked to it via a frontage road to eliminate the immediate freeway access.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Avalanchez71 on June 11, 2021, 01:18:40 PM
Don't forget that there's an at-grade intersection on US 64 just west of the OK 151 interchange. An access road could be built that would connect to 151 and the at-grade could be removed, but I don't see anything happening to it in the near future.

A full blown interchange isn't always warranted.  Can't they build a superstreet, a diverging diamond, a stagnated turn, Michigan Left, New Jersey Left, or a roundabout?
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: sprjus4 on June 11, 2021, 01:30:02 PM
Don't forget that there's an at-grade intersection on US 64 just west of the OK 151 interchange. An access road could be built that would connect to 151 and the at-grade could be removed, but I don't see anything happening to it in the near future.

A full blown interchange isn't always warranted.  Can't they build a superstreet, a diverging diamond, a stagnated turn, Michigan Left, New Jersey Left, or a roundabout?
I’d argue regardless of the interstate designation, this particular intersection should be closed… it’s the only at-grade separation on what is otherwise an uninterrupted freeway route between Tulsa and I-35. A simple frontage road connecting to the SR-151 interchange would suffice.

It doesn’t meet driver expectations and presents a danger with low speed traffic entering high-speed freeway lanes on what is a limited access highway.

Why would they waste money converting the intersection into an “innovated” design as opposed to simply building a connecting frontage road and associated improvements to the SH-151 interchange to accommodate it? Especially given its on a limited access highway. The goal should to remove it, not keep it. It’s not like they have to build a new interchange or overpass.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Scott5114 on June 11, 2021, 01:36:28 PM
Don't forget that there's an at-grade intersection on US 64 just west of the OK 151 interchange. An access road could be built that would connect to 151 and the at-grade could be removed, but I don't see anything happening to it in the near future.

A full blown interchange isn't always warranted.  Can't they build a superstreet, a diverging diamond, a stagnated turn, Michigan Left, New Jersey Left, or a roundabout?

How the heck did you get that bugo was advocating for an interchange at Diamond Head Drive out of his post? He mentioned building a frontage road down to 151, which would probably be way cheaper and safer than any of the things you listed (of which a diverging diamond is a full-blown interchange, and I have no idea what a "stagnated turn" is, though it sounds like it probably attracts mosquitoes).
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: The Ghostbuster on June 11, 2021, 04:14:44 PM
If Diamond Head Dr. were to be extended to OK 151, it should intersect 151 at the W. Wekiwa Rd. Of course, with the Two Rivers Trail in the way that might be a problem. Maybe more space for such an extension could be made if the OK 151 were downgraded from a free-flow trumpet interchange into a non-free-flow diamond (or some other smaller configuration) interchange.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: kphoger on June 11, 2021, 04:33:37 PM
If Diamond Head Dr. were to be extended to OK 151, it should intersect 151 at the W. Wekiwa Rd. Of course, with the Two Rivers Trail in the way that might be a problem. Maybe more space for such an extension could be made if the OK 151 were downgraded from a free-flow trumpet interchange into a non-free-flow diamond (or some other smaller configuration) interchange.

It could just parallel US-412 and OK-151 down to that point, with a sharp curve at the trailhead to form a four-way intersection with 151.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: sparker on June 11, 2021, 04:52:15 PM
If Diamond Head Dr. were to be extended to OK 151, it should intersect 151 at the W. Wekiwa Rd. Of course, with the Two Rivers Trail in the way that might be a problem. Maybe more space for such an extension could be made if the OK 151 were downgraded from a free-flow trumpet interchange into a non-free-flow diamond (or some other smaller configuration) interchange.

It could just parallel US-412 and OK-151 down to that point, with a sharp curve at the trailhead to form a four-way intersection with 151.

Driven through there several times and noted the at-grade intersection; extending any of the streets in that small subdivision over to OK 151 shouldn't be a prohibitive issue.  But that issue shouldn't have any bearing on the designation of US 412 as a future Interstate; it would, of course, need to be corrected prior to actual signage which would likely be at least a decade away.  That would be plenty of time for such a revision to be designed and constructed.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: MikieTimT on June 16, 2021, 03:07:20 PM
I'd actually put my two taxable cents in for not pussyfooting around and using I-50 for the designation here.  Not just to use up that I-x0, but because at that time the Muskogee Turnpike could conceivably receive a 3di based on that designation: I-350, just about as close as one can get to the current AR 351 designation (not that anyone in OK outside ODOT and we roadgeeks likely gives a rat's ass about that turnpike number!) so as not to cause too many fits within ODOT!   

Agreed, sparker. And the spur to Cimarron could be I-150.

And ... could this mean US 412 itself could go away between I-35 and I-49 and be replaced with I-50? There are many overlaps along its route west of I-35, and it seems like shifting US 412 to surface routes parallel to the new Interstate would just increase its shared alignments with other routes. Maybe ... but probably not, at least for the short term assuming this proposal comes to fruition.

As far as truncating US 412 is concerned, it's likely that whoever the parties are that proposed and implemented the western extension through the Panhandle and on to I-25 would have a shit fit about removing the designation & signage; obviously they thought that a single designation across that part of OK and into NM was necessary for someone's purposes of navigation.  Snarky idea that blurs the Fictional line here:  If the Raton-Dumas branch of the P2P is ever approved as an Interstate corridor, designate it as the same number (I-50?) as the corridor under discussion here -- and dare the powers that be to connect them!  They're more or less (with a little tweaking in the TX panhandle) on the same latitude.  Hardly needed to address any major through traffic issues in that neck of the woods -- but that hasn't always stopped corridor designation before -- particularly in regards to congressional districts through which it would run!  At least it would be a fun (and funky) way to get from NWA to the Front Range!

I-50 would make sense as the only other E/W route in the vicinity that would be somewhat grid-compliant would be US-60 for an I-50.  And US-54/US-400 would tend to lend itself to an eventual I-60 as US-50 is too near I-70 for a couple of states in the middle of the country.  It's my belief that they came up with the whole US-4** scheme to mess with the OCD types enough to force a consideration of replacement with an eventual Interstate designation on all of the routes in question as they tend to be in consistent latitudes or radials between capital cities.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: sparker on June 16, 2021, 04:18:40 PM
I'd actually put my two taxable cents in for not pussyfooting around and using I-50 for the designation here.  Not just to use up that I-x0, but because at that time the Muskogee Turnpike could conceivably receive a 3di based on that designation: I-350, just about as close as one can get to the current AR 351 designation (not that anyone in OK outside ODOT and we roadgeeks likely gives a rat's ass about that turnpike number!) so as not to cause too many fits within ODOT!   

Agreed, sparker. And the spur to Cimarron could be I-150.

And ... could this mean US 412 itself could go away between I-35 and I-49 and be replaced with I-50? There are many overlaps along its route west of I-35, and it seems like shifting US 412 to surface routes parallel to the new Interstate would just increase its shared alignments with other routes. Maybe ... but probably not, at least for the short term assuming this proposal comes to fruition.

As far as truncating US 412 is concerned, it's likely that whoever the parties are that proposed and implemented the western extension through the Panhandle and on to I-25 would have a shit fit about removing the designation & signage; obviously they thought that a single designation across that part of OK and into NM was necessary for someone's purposes of navigation.  Snarky idea that blurs the Fictional line here:  If the Raton-Dumas branch of the P2P is ever approved as an Interstate corridor, designate it as the same number (I-50?) as the corridor under discussion here -- and dare the powers that be to connect them!  They're more or less (with a little tweaking in the TX panhandle) on the same latitude.  Hardly needed to address any major through traffic issues in that neck of the woods -- but that hasn't always stopped corridor designation before -- particularly in regards to congressional districts through which it would run!  At least it would be a fun (and funky) way to get from NWA to the Front Range!

I-50 would make sense as the only other E/W route in the vicinity that would be somewhat grid-compliant would be US-60 for an I-50.  And US-54/US-400 would tend to lend itself to an eventual I-60 as US-50 is too near I-70 for a couple of states in the middle of the country.  It's my belief that they came up with the whole US-4** scheme to mess with the OCD types enough to force a consideration of replacement with an eventual Interstate designation on all of the routes in question as they tend to be in consistent latitudes or radials between capital cities.

Except for US 425, which just peters out in Natchez (as US 65 used to do).  Seeing that 425 replaced (or was multiplexed with) LA 15, I for one wouldn't be surprised if either 425 or US 65 is eventually extended down that highway (aka part of the "Great River Road") toward Baton Rouge -- which would put it closer to the category as a connector between state capitals, even though the north end is in Pine Bluff, 30 miles distant from LR!
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: MikieTimT on June 16, 2021, 05:57:46 PM

I-50 would make sense as the only other E/W route in the vicinity that would be somewhat grid-compliant would be US-60 for an I-50.  And US-54/US-400 would tend to lend itself to an eventual I-60 as US-50 is too near I-70 for a couple of states in the middle of the country.  It's my belief that they came up with the whole US-4** scheme to mess with the OCD types enough to force a consideration of replacement with an eventual Interstate designation on all of the routes in question as they tend to be in consistent latitudes or radials between capital cities.

Except for US 425, which just peters out in Natchez (as US 65 used to do).  Seeing that 425 replaced (or was multiplexed with) LA 15, I for one wouldn't be surprised if either 425 or US 65 is eventually extended down that highway (aka part of the "Great River Road") toward Baton Rouge -- which would put it closer to the category as a connector between state capitals, even though the north end is in Pine Bluff, 30 miles distant from LR!

The 30 miles between LR and Pine Bluff would likely change designations to a 2DI from its current 3DI like I-540 between Alma and Bella Vista became I-49, if the unlikely event ever came to fruition of a freeway between Pine Bluff and Baton Rouge, assuming there's ever freeway between Pine Bluff and Monticello even.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: The Ghostbuster on June 16, 2021, 08:19:29 PM
I don't think there will ever be an Interstate 50 or an Interstate 60. Those two designations were avoided to prevent conflicting with US 50 and US 60. I don't see those two designations being used unless they did it in an out-of-place "Interstate 99-like" location.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: sparker on June 16, 2021, 08:35:49 PM

I-50 would make sense as the only other E/W route in the vicinity that would be somewhat grid-compliant would be US-60 for an I-50.  And US-54/US-400 would tend to lend itself to an eventual I-60 as US-50 is too near I-70 for a couple of states in the middle of the country.  It's my belief that they came up with the whole US-4** scheme to mess with the OCD types enough to force a consideration of replacement with an eventual Interstate designation on all of the routes in question as they tend to be in consistent latitudes or radials between capital cities.

Except for US 425, which just peters out in Natchez (as US 65 used to do).  Seeing that 425 replaced (or was multiplexed with) LA 15, I for one wouldn't be surprised if either 425 or US 65 is eventually extended down that highway (aka part of the "Great River Road") toward Baton Rouge -- which would put it closer to the category as a connector between state capitals, even though the north end is in Pine Bluff, 30 miles distant from LR!

The 30 miles between LR and Pine Bluff would likely change designations to a 2DI from its current 3DI like I-540 between Alma and Bella Vista became I-49, if the unlikely event ever came to fruition of a freeway between Pine Bluff and Baton Rouge, assuming there's ever freeway between Pine Bluff and Monticello even.

I'd place odds of I-57 usurping I-530 -- and eventually AR 530 -- at least as far south as the I-69 corridor at Monticello, once (a) I-57 is signed north of LR and (b) there's some definitive movement on I-69 and/or an extension south to either I-20 in Monroe, LA or I-49 down in Alexandria is planned.  I don't think there's enough traffic on US 425 south of Bastrop/US 165 to warrant an Interstate corridor marching down the banks of the Mississippi. 

I don't think there will ever be an Interstate 50 or an Interstate 60. Those two designations were avoided to prevent conflicting with US 50 and US 60. I don't see those two designations being used unless they did it in an out-of-place "Interstate 99-like" location.

It's not the actual presence of US 50 or US 60 that is the prohibitive factor here, it's the longstanding policy of not deploying an identically-numbered US and Interstate highway in the same state.  Since the US 412 corridor doesn't hit a state where US 50 is deployed (save MO's "boot heel"), such a corridor is technically possible, particularly if the Interstate portion remains west of I-49.  Likewise US 400 to the north could conceivably be a route for an I-60 designation, remaining in KS and possibly CO for its length (I don't think anyone would quibble about a few hundred yards prior to the I-44 junction!).  But the presence of the OK turnpikes and the growth of NWA as its own metro area makes the US 412 corridor the more likely of the two for near-term development.   I've iterated the rationale for the I-50 designation before; that hasn't changed.   
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: MikieTimT on June 17, 2021, 12:07:27 AM

It's not the actual presence of US 50 or US 60 that is the prohibitive factor here, it's the longstanding policy of not deploying an identically-numbered US and Interstate highway in the same state.  Since the US 412 corridor doesn't hit a state where US 50 is deployed (save MO's "boot heel"), such a corridor is technically possible, particularly if the Interstate portion remains west of I-49.  Likewise US 400 to the north could conceivably be a route for an I-60 designation, remaining in KS and possibly CO for its length (I don't think anyone would quibble about a few hundred yards prior to the I-44 junction!).  But the presence of the OK turnpikes and the growth of NWA as its own metro area makes the US 412 corridor the more likely of the two for near-term development.   I've iterated the rationale for the I-50 designation before; that hasn't changed.

Clearly that policy isn't really valid anymore, even in Arkansas (I-49/US-49).  It's not really that difficult in this day and age to add an I to a route designation in state databases to delineate it from its US/State highway counterpart.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: sparker on June 17, 2021, 05:52:03 AM
Like the English language, technical rules concerning Interstate numbering practice have numerous exceptions; IL has hosted both US 24 and I-24 since the systems' inception.  Of course, NC takes it to an extreme with both US 74 & I-74 occupying the same alignment.  The rule wasn't predicated to keep anyone's database pristine; it was more for eliminating possible confusion for public navigation purposes (initially based on the notion that the driving public would confuse an I-50 with US 50 if the two were in close proximity).  When the initial systems' numbering was decided circa 1956-58, the concept of E-W numbers ending in zero being "special" in terms of importance was (at least IMO) oversold, leading to such things as I-80 heading to San Francisco while I-80N shot up to Portland, some 650 miles to the north.  Presently -- at least in terms of additional corridors being added -- the system is now "pre-sold"; the number "50" is just another even number in the compendium of unassigned designations.  For the US 412 corridor, I-46, 48, or 52 would work equally well in this situation; I suggested 50 for the reasons discussed upthread. 
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Avalanchez71 on June 17, 2021, 05:54:45 AM
Like the English language, technical rules concerning Interstate numbering practice have numerous exceptions; IL has hosted both US 24 and I-24 since the systems' inception.  Of course, NC takes it to an extreme with both US 74 & I-74 occupying the same alignment.  The rule wasn't predicated to keep anyone's database pristine; it was more for eliminating possible confusion for public navigation purposes (initially based on the notion that the driving public would confuse an I-50 with US 50 if the two were in close proximity).  When the initial systems' numbering was decided circa 1956-58, the concept of E-W numbers ending in zero being "special" in terms of importance was (at least IMO) oversold, leading to such things as I-80 heading to San Francisco while I-80N shot up to Portland, some 650 miles to the north.  Presently -- at least in terms of additional corridors being added -- the system is now "pre-sold"; the number "50" is just another even number in the compendium of unassigned designations.  For the US 412 corridor, I-46, 48, or 52 would work equally well in this situation; I suggested 50 for the reasons discussed upthread.

I really so no reason but to keep this as US 412.  Although I would personally renumber US 412 to US 66.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: sparker on June 17, 2021, 12:55:10 PM
Like the English language, technical rules concerning Interstate numbering practice have numerous exceptions; IL has hosted both US 24 and I-24 since the systems' inception.  Of course, NC takes it to an extreme with both US 74 & I-74 occupying the same alignment.  The rule wasn't predicated to keep anyone's database pristine; it was more for eliminating possible confusion for public navigation purposes (initially based on the notion that the driving public would confuse an I-50 with US 50 if the two were in close proximity).  When the initial systems' numbering was decided circa 1956-58, the concept of E-W numbers ending in zero being "special" in terms of importance was (at least IMO) oversold, leading to such things as I-80 heading to San Francisco while I-80N shot up to Portland, some 650 miles to the north.  Presently -- at least in terms of additional corridors being added -- the system is now "pre-sold"; the number "50" is just another even number in the compendium of unassigned designations.  For the US 412 corridor, I-46, 48, or 52 would work equally well in this situation; I suggested 50 for the reasons discussed upthread.

I really so no reason but to keep this as US 412.  Although I would personally renumber US 412 to US 66.

(yawn) .....what else is new?  Tell that to the combined OK/AR congressional delegation who is proposing the upgrade; the views of a non-constituent should carry considerable weight there!  While this corridor is yet to be considered a fait accompli, the fact that about 70% of it is completed (assuming it uses AR 612) bodes well for its eventual development.   Just because there's an adage out there saying that "everything doesn't have to be an Interstate" doesn't mean that a few select corridors actually serving as connectors between growing metro areas don't warrant that level of service.   
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: MikieTimT on June 17, 2021, 05:47:12 PM
Like the English language, technical rules concerning Interstate numbering practice have numerous exceptions; IL has hosted both US 24 and I-24 since the systems' inception.  Of course, NC takes it to an extreme with both US 74 & I-74 occupying the same alignment.  The rule wasn't predicated to keep anyone's database pristine; it was more for eliminating possible confusion for public navigation purposes (initially based on the notion that the driving public would confuse an I-50 with US 50 if the two were in close proximity).  When the initial systems' numbering was decided circa 1956-58, the concept of E-W numbers ending in zero being "special" in terms of importance was (at least IMO) oversold, leading to such things as I-80 heading to San Francisco while I-80N shot up to Portland, some 650 miles to the north.  Presently -- at least in terms of additional corridors being added -- the system is now "pre-sold"; the number "50" is just another even number in the compendium of unassigned designations.  For the US 412 corridor, I-46, 48, or 52 would work equally well in this situation; I suggested 50 for the reasons discussed upthread.

I really so no reason but to keep this as US 412.  Although I would personally renumber US 412 to US 66.

(yawn) .....what else is new?  Tell that to the combined OK/AR congressional delegation who is proposing the upgrade; the views of a non-constituent should carry considerable weight there!  While this corridor is yet to be considered a fait accompli, the fact that about 70% of it is completed (assuming it uses AR 612) bodes well for its eventual development.   Just because there's an adage out there saying that "everything doesn't have to be an Interstate" doesn't mean that a few select corridors actually serving as connectors between growing metro areas don't warrant that level of service.   

I actually am a constituent and have contacted both Sen. Cotton and Sen. Boozman with my idea of numbering it I-50 to make Lowell/Springdale the numeric center of the IHS.  I can't think of any other U.S. highway that would warrant that designation that serves a larger set of areas in the middle of the country and remains grid compliant.  Think of the marketing benefits of such a designation, and it becomes an easy sell to congressmen.  It eventually will extend in length on one end or the other, although perhaps not in our lifetimes.  Now if there was only some way of changing my avatar to I-50!  That would raise a stink around here with at least one individual!
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: skluth on June 17, 2021, 05:51:43 PM
It's not the actual presence of US 50 or US 60 that is the prohibitive factor here, it's the longstanding policy of not deploying an identically-numbered US and Interstate highway in the same state.

I think Wisconsin trashed that policy with I-41.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Scott5114 on June 17, 2021, 05:55:35 PM
I don't think there will ever be an Interstate 50 or an Interstate 60. Those two designations were avoided to prevent conflicting with US 50 and US 60. I don't see those two designations being used unless they did it in an out-of-place "Interstate 99-like" location.

If you were going to put Interstate 60 down anywhere, Oklahoma would be the place to do it, since it very much doesn't care about different route types with the same number conflicting. US 270 and OK 270 run within a few miles of each other, and I-44, US 54, US 56, US 59, and US 83 all also have state highways with the same number.

I really so no reason but to keep this as US 412.  Although I would personally renumber US 412 to US 66.

I really so no reason for you to keep throwing a tantrum on here every time a project where the government could theoretically spend money is mentioned. Starting to think you're trolling.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Plutonic Panda on June 17, 2021, 05:57:43 PM
^^^^ you’re just now starting to think that!?!! Lololol.. it took my about seeing 5-6 of his posts to come to that conclusion. I’m almost certain he is. I wonder what his opinion on the billion dollar I-69 project in Texas is? Or I am VERY interested to know what he thinks about the Port to Plains Corridor.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: MikieTimT on June 17, 2021, 05:59:21 PM
^^^^ you’re just now starting to think that!?!! Lololol.. it took my about seeing 5-6 of his posts to come to that conclusion. I’m almost certain he is. I wonder what his opinion on the billion dollar I-69 project in Texas is? Or I am VERY interested to know what he thinks about the Port to Plains Corridor.

It is done.  Forgot about good old MS Paint and uploading avatars.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Scott5114 on June 17, 2021, 06:05:28 PM
It is done.  Forgot about good old MS Paint and uploading avatars.

Heh, I actually drew up a shield and started monkeying around with your profile to try and surprise you with it, but you beat me to it. :sombrero:

Here it is if you want one that's a bit higher quality.
(https://i.imgur.com/KW4yLXP.png)
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: MikieTimT on June 17, 2021, 06:20:07 PM
It is done.  Forgot about good old MS Paint and uploading avatars.

Heh, I actually drew up a shield and started monkeying around with your profile to try and surprise you with it, but you beat me to it. :sombrero:

Here it is if you want one that's a bit higher quality.
(https://i.imgur.com/KW4yLXP.png)

Yours was better, so I switched.  Thanks!  It does seem a tad smaller than the standard shields for some reason, though.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Scott5114 on June 17, 2021, 06:55:21 PM
You're welcome! That image is 65px high, which was the same height as your old avatar. I could make it a tad bigger if you wanted.

If you're talking about the digits, those are smaller; that's a 1956-style shield, which AHTD kept using well into the 2000s (and thus was what they were using the first few times I ventured east, so I still associate it with Arkansas). They only changed to the modern shield design when I-540 was renumbered to I-49.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Scott5114 on June 17, 2021, 07:00:08 PM
^^^^ you’re just now starting to think that!?!! Lololol.. it took my about seeing 5-6 of his posts to come to that conclusion. I’m almost certain he is. I wonder what his opinion on the billion dollar I-69 project in Texas is? Or I am VERY interested to know what he thinks about the Port to Plains Corridor.

Way back in his posting history I seem to remember seeing that he identified as a former Tennessee politician, so I always just assumed that the fiscal-pants-crapping song-and-dance was a holdover from that and a terminal failure to recognize that a road forum isn't going to eat his performance up the way his constituents used to. But some of his recent behavior (like posting the same shtick in the FritzOwl thread of all places) is making me second-guess that assumption.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Plutonic Panda on June 17, 2021, 07:07:29 PM
^^^^ you’re just now starting to think that!?!! Lololol.. it took my about seeing 5-6 of his posts to come to that conclusion. I’m almost certain he is. I wonder what his opinion on the billion dollar I-69 project in Texas is? Or I am VERY interested to know what he thinks about the Port to Plains Corridor.

Way back in his posting history I seem to remember seeing that he identified as a former Tennessee politician, so I always just assumed that the fiscal-pants-crapping song-and-dance was a holdover from that and a terminal failure to recognize that a road forum isn't going to eat his performance up the way his constituents used to. But some of his recent behavior (like posting the same shtick in the FritzOwl thread of all places) is making me second-guess that assumption.
Fritzown and Avalanche would be hilarious to see as two challengers: when an unstoppable force meets an immovable object.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Scott5114 on June 17, 2021, 07:21:13 PM
^^^^ you’re just now starting to think that!?!! Lololol.. it took my about seeing 5-6 of his posts to come to that conclusion. I’m almost certain he is. I wonder what his opinion on the billion dollar I-69 project in Texas is? Or I am VERY interested to know what he thinks about the Port to Plains Corridor.

Way back in his posting history I seem to remember seeing that he identified as a former Tennessee politician, so I always just assumed that the fiscal-pants-crapping song-and-dance was a holdover from that and a terminal failure to recognize that a road forum isn't going to eat his performance up the way his constituents used to. But some of his recent behavior (like posting the same shtick in the FritzOwl thread of all places) is making me second-guess that assumption.
Fritzown and Avalanche would be hilarious to see as two challengers: when an unstoppable force meets an immovable object.

You don't have to imagine—go look.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: MikieTimT on June 17, 2021, 07:25:38 PM
You're welcome! That image is 65px high, which was the same height as your old avatar. I could make it a tad bigger if you wanted.

If you're talking about the digits, those are smaller; that's a 1956-style shield, which AHTD kept using well into the 2000s (and thus was what they were using the first few times I ventured east, so I still associate it with Arkansas). They only changed to the modern shield design when I-540 was renumbered to I-49.

I think everyone else's is 80x80, but if it gets in the craw of a few OCD types, I wouldn't mind that either as I deal with doctors and lawyers all day!
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Bobby5280 on June 18, 2021, 01:15:25 AM
Quote from: MikieTimT
I actually am a constituent and have contacted both Sen. Cotton and Sen. Boozman with my idea of numbering it I-50 to make Lowell/Springdale the numeric center of the IHS.

Um, NO.

First off, I think it would be nothing short of ridiculous to give the US-412 route from Tulsa to I-49 the "I-50" designation (or "I-60" for that matter). While the US-412 corridor could be an Interstate quality route, it would be a MINOR, SHORT DISTANCE Interstate route, even if the designation extended West of Tulsa to I-35. That is not a MAJOR route. Most MAJOR Interstate routes span much of the nation, either East-West or North-South. This is just a dinky 2-state route, with only a tiny bit in Arkansas.

As far as the "geographical center" of the Interstate highway system goes, there are only two cities in consideration: Oklahoma City and Kansas City. That's it. My vote is OKC. But I'm in Oklahoma and perhaps a bit biased. Nevertheless, I-35 is THE central MAJOR North-South route in the middle of the Interstate highway system. And I-40 is as major an East-West corridor as any in the system. Given the shift of America's population more to the South and Central part of the US that puts even more emphasis on OKC as a critical hub city of the overall system.

I have my own fictional fantasy version of an "I-50" route, one that would go from Jacksonville, FL up to I-90 in Washington state. From Jacksonville it would overlap US-1 to Waycross, GA then follow US-82 thru Albany, GA up to Columbus. It would go thru Auburn and Birmingham. My idea of "I-50" would eat all of I-22. And it would eat I-555. My "I-50" would go thru Jonesboro and Walnut Ridge. Then it would go into Missouri onto the US-60 corridor and follow that to Springfield. The highway would multiplex with I-44 just a smidge to then go North of Carthage and Joplin on the way to Wichita. Then the route would go West to Dodge City where it would meet up with US-50, and both would co-exist well into Colorado. My "I-50" would cross I-25 in Pueblo, then go thru Cañon City and over to Grand Junction. That would result in a I-50/I-70 multiplex to the US-6 split in Green River, UT. Then "I-50" would upgrade US-6 from there up to I-15 in Provo. Then one could end that version of "I-50" there or have it overlap I-84 and I-82 to get into Washington state. Even if this concept of "I-50" made it from Jacksonville, FL to Provo, UT it would be one hell of an Interstate route.

Aside from all that fictional territory, the US-412 route as an Interstate highway really has only two legit options, either "I-46" or "I-48".
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: sprjus4 on June 18, 2021, 01:21:47 AM
I-30, I-45.

I don’t see much issue using the I-50 or I-60 designations, given there’s not any good place for their usage on any major east-west corridor.

Sure, I-64 could make a good I-60, but let’s not change designations after being established for 70 years now.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Bobby5280 on June 18, 2021, 01:25:44 AM
There less things wrong with US-412 being re-numbered as I-46 or I-48. That would actually be much more sensible in relation to I-44 going thru Tulsa.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Avalanchez71 on June 18, 2021, 05:24:53 AM
^^^^ you’re just now starting to think that!?!! Lololol.. it took my about seeing 5-6 of his posts to come to that conclusion. I’m almost certain he is. I wonder what his opinion on the billion dollar I-69 project in Texas is? Or I am VERY interested to know what he thinks about the Port to Plains Corridor.

Way back in his posting history I seem to remember seeing that he identified as a former Tennessee politician, so I always just assumed that the fiscal-pants-crapping song-and-dance was a holdover from that and a terminal failure to recognize that a road forum isn't going to eat his performance up the way his constituents used to. But some of his recent behavior (like posting the same shtick in the FritzOwl thread of all places) is making me second-guess that assumption.

I was a former Tennessee politician.  I was duly elected by the people and I did save the taxpayers money whilst in office.  I am actually considering another run next cycle.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Rothman on June 18, 2021, 06:46:02 AM
^^^^ you’re just now starting to think that!?!! Lololol.. it took my about seeing 5-6 of his posts to come to that conclusion. I’m almost certain he is. I wonder what his opinion on the billion dollar I-69 project in Texas is? Or I am VERY interested to know what he thinks about the Port to Plains Corridor.

Way back in his posting history I seem to remember seeing that he identified as a former Tennessee politician, so I always just assumed that the fiscal-pants-crapping song-and-dance was a holdover from that and a terminal failure to recognize that a road forum isn't going to eat his performance up the way his constituents used to. But some of his recent behavior (like posting the same shtick in the FritzOwl thread of all places) is making me second-guess that assumption.

I was a former Tennessee politician.  I was duly elected by the people and I did save the taxpayers money whilst in office.  I am actually considering another run next cycle.
What office did you hold?
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Avalanchez71 on June 18, 2021, 12:40:40 PM
^^^^ you’re just now starting to think that!?!! Lololol.. it took my about seeing 5-6 of his posts to come to that conclusion. I’m almost certain he is. I wonder what his opinion on the billion dollar I-69 project in Texas is? Or I am VERY interested to know what he thinks about the Port to Plains Corridor.

Way back in his posting history I seem to remember seeing that he identified as a former Tennessee politician, so I always just assumed that the fiscal-pants-crapping song-and-dance was a holdover from that and a terminal failure to recognize that a road forum isn't going to eat his performance up the way his constituents used to. But some of his recent behavior (like posting the same shtick in the FritzOwl thread of all places) is making me second-guess that assumption.

I was a former Tennessee politician.  I was duly elected by the people and I did save the taxpayers money whilst in office.  I am actually considering another run next cycle.
What office did you hold?

Why is that germane?
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: triplemultiplex on June 18, 2021, 04:39:17 PM
Drainage commissioner!
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: NE2 on June 18, 2021, 07:08:17 PM
Catcatcher.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: sparker on June 18, 2021, 09:40:36 PM
If we're done (for the present) beating up on Dr. No, an observation might be a bit of a mood change.  Looking at the 412 corridor east of Tulsa (GSV), whoever configured the alignment did a bang-up job regarding the #1 obstacle to upgrading an existing facility -- they kept private access away from the facility, at least as far as the west end of the Cherokee pike.  East of there, from the east end of the turnpike (they might want to reconfigure that interchange to favor on/off pike movement) to West Siloam, there is private access, but everything is set back far enough to deploy frontage roads until the town itself is reached, at which point some sort of bypass would be required.  I understand that Siloam is becoming a regional retirement location, with extensive tract development extending away from present US 412; a solution will have to be devised that's locally acceptable (pardon me for being Captain Obvious here).  Chances are ARDOT will prefer something that will tie in to AR 612, so that would point to a more northern bypass of the Siloam area.  Nevertheless, the fact that the upgrades west of the pike would be relatively straightforward and not require new-terrain acquisition except for interchanges and overcrossings bodes well for the corridor project's prospects. 
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Rothman on June 18, 2021, 09:46:36 PM
^^^^ you’re just now starting to think that!?!! Lololol.. it took my about seeing 5-6 of his posts to come to that conclusion. I’m almost certain he is. I wonder what his opinion on the billion dollar I-69 project in Texas is? Or I am VERY interested to know what he thinks about the Port to Plains Corridor.

Way back in his posting history I seem to remember seeing that he identified as a former Tennessee politician, so I always just assumed that the fiscal-pants-crapping song-and-dance was a holdover from that and a terminal failure to recognize that a road forum isn't going to eat his performance up the way his constituents used to. But some of his recent behavior (like posting the same shtick in the FritzOwl thread of all places) is making me second-guess that assumption.

I was a former Tennessee politician.  I was duly elected by the people and I did save the taxpayers money whilst in office.  I am actually considering another run next cycle.
What office did you hold?

Why is that germane?
So...Class Treasurer.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: US 89 on June 19, 2021, 12:49:11 AM
^^^^ you’re just now starting to think that!?!! Lololol.. it took my about seeing 5-6 of his posts to come to that conclusion. I’m almost certain he is. I wonder what his opinion on the billion dollar I-69 project in Texas is? Or I am VERY interested to know what he thinks about the Port to Plains Corridor.

Way back in his posting history I seem to remember seeing that he identified as a former Tennessee politician, so I always just assumed that the fiscal-pants-crapping song-and-dance was a holdover from that and a terminal failure to recognize that a road forum isn't going to eat his performance up the way his constituents used to. But some of his recent behavior (like posting the same shtick in the FritzOwl thread of all places) is making me second-guess that assumption.

I was a former Tennessee politician.  I was duly elected by the people and I did save the taxpayers money whilst in office.  I am actually considering another run next cycle.
What office did you hold?

Why is that germane?

... because he was curious about it?
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: MikieTimT on June 20, 2021, 12:52:32 PM
If we're done (for the present) beating up on Dr. No, an observation might be a bit of a mood change.  Looking at the 412 corridor east of Tulsa (GSV), whoever configured the alignment did a bang-up job regarding the #1 obstacle to upgrading an existing facility -- they kept private access away from the facility, at least as far as the west end of the Cherokee pike.  East of there, from the east end of the turnpike (they might want to reconfigure that interchange to favor on/off pike movement) to West Siloam, there is private access, but everything is set back far enough to deploy frontage roads until the town itself is reached, at which point some sort of bypass would be required.  I understand that Siloam is becoming a regional retirement location, with extensive tract development extending away from present US 412; a solution will have to be devised that's locally acceptable (pardon me for being Captain Obvious here).  Chances are ARDOT will prefer something that will tie in to AR 612, so that would point to a more northern bypass of the Siloam area.  Nevertheless, the fact that the upgrades west of the pike would be relatively straightforward and not require new-terrain acquisition except for interchanges and overcrossings bodes well for the corridor project's prospects.

As far as the Arkansas mileage east of an eventual Siloam Springs Bypass, a tie in with AR-612 before takes its big bend to the south to tie back into US-412 would make for a more direct facility than converting the current US-412 between Old Highway 68 and where bypass of Siloam Springs would take a swing south.  However, the easiest path between Siloam Springs and Tontitown has pretty much been used.  Most of the terrain straight west of AR-612 is hollows and creeks, so not as easy as the Illinois River valley to push through.  There's also the Logan Cave National Wildlife Refuge that would require a fairly large swing north of to prevent oil polluting the Karst ground that feeds the caves in the area that are home to Ozark Cavefish that aren't found anywhere else.  There's enough environmental types around here that would raise a stink that it's more likely that access roads/overpasses are utilized on the already 4-laned US-412 to convert to limited access and keep traffic to the south/downstream of that sensitive area.  At the time of this writing, there's still virtually no development between Old AR 68's eastern end and about a 1/4 mile east of the airport in Siloam Springs, so it wouldn't take many overpasses/exits and access roads for that stretch anyway to make a limited access facility out of it.  Biggest hurdle is Siloam Springs and completing the western segment of AR-612/US-412 Bypass.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Anthony_JK on June 21, 2021, 12:20:06 PM
^^^^ you’re just now starting to think that!?!! Lololol.. it took my about seeing 5-6 of his posts to come to that conclusion. I’m almost certain he is. I wonder what his opinion on the billion dollar I-69 project in Texas is? Or I am VERY interested to know what he thinks about the Port to Plains Corridor.

Way back in his posting history I seem to remember seeing that he identified as a former Tennessee politician, so I always just assumed that the fiscal-pants-crapping song-and-dance was a holdover from that and a terminal failure to recognize that a road forum isn't going to eat his performance up the way his constituents used to. But some of his recent behavior (like posting the same shtick in the FritzOwl thread of all places) is making me second-guess that assumption.
Fritzown and Avalanche would be hilarious to see as two challengers: when an unstoppable force meets an immovable object.


More like when a stoppable force meets a movable object.


Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Avalanchez71 on June 21, 2021, 12:24:16 PM
The section of US 412 between Jackson and Dyersburg has no traffic lights.  Why not use this type of concept if you didn't like the superstreet, diverted left turn and roundabouts.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: sprjus4 on June 21, 2021, 01:09:24 PM
The section of US 412 between Jackson and Dyersburg has no traffic lights.  Why not use this type of concept if you didn't like the superstreet, diverted left turn and roundabouts.
Heavier traffic volumes often cause conflict with right turning traffic and crossover traffic at minor streets. Interchanges, overpasses, and frontage roads eliminate the conflicts, keep local traffic on a local traffic grid, and through traffic an uninterrupted path of travel. It’s also easier for that local traffic to enter into the through route.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: I-55 on June 23, 2021, 10:16:59 PM
The section of US 412 between Jackson and Dyersburg has no traffic lights.  Why not use this type of concept if you didn't like the superstreet, diverted left turn and roundabouts.

In order to make a free flow US-412 in the state of Arkansas it will require a new alignment because there's too much existing traffic control in Siloam and Tontitown, which will be bypassed by a freeway AR 612. Any bypass of Siloam would probably hook into the Cherokee Tpk as well so that leaves the segment of 412 between the west end of the Cherokee and I-44, which is 27 miles, or only 16% of the proposed route distance in OK. In the name of consistency of route expectations this segment ought to be upgraded, and with the aforementioned ROW and terrain situation it would not be as expensive as most projects of this type.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Avalanchez71 on June 24, 2021, 07:38:25 AM
The section of US 412 between Jackson and Dyersburg has no traffic lights.  Why not use this type of concept if you didn't like the superstreet, diverted left turn and roundabouts.

In order to make a free flow US-412 in the state of Arkansas it will require a new alignment because there's too much existing traffic control in Siloam and Tontitown, which will be bypassed by a freeway AR 612. Any bypass of Siloam would probably hook into the Cherokee Tpk as well so that leaves the segment of 412 between the west end of the Cherokee and I-44, which is 27 miles, or only 16% of the proposed route distance in OK. In the name of consistency of route expectations this segment ought to be upgraded, and with the aforementioned ROW and terrain situation it would not be as expensive as most projects of this type.

Well I am sure that these folks bought here because there is no Interstate in their respective backyards. 
https://www.google.com/maps/@36.1529665,-94.5365398,3a,75y,243.35h,93.99t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sfHZz92BSY6TC36z3VWNTVA!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DfHZz92BSY6TC36z3VWNTVA%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D177.10088%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i3328!8i1664 (https://www.google.com/maps/@36.1529665,-94.5365398,3a,75y,243.35h,93.99t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sfHZz92BSY6TC36z3VWNTVA!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DfHZz92BSY6TC36z3VWNTVA%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D177.10088%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i3328!8i1664)
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Scott5114 on June 24, 2021, 01:05:48 PM
The section of US 412 between Jackson and Dyersburg has no traffic lights.  Why not use this type of concept if you didn't like the superstreet, diverted left turn and roundabouts.

In order to make a free flow US-412 in the state of Arkansas it will require a new alignment because there's too much existing traffic control in Siloam and Tontitown, which will be bypassed by a freeway AR 612. Any bypass of Siloam would probably hook into the Cherokee Tpk as well so that leaves the segment of 412 between the west end of the Cherokee and I-44, which is 27 miles, or only 16% of the proposed route distance in OK. In the name of consistency of route expectations this segment ought to be upgraded, and with the aforementioned ROW and terrain situation it would not be as expensive as most projects of this type.

Well I am sure that these folks bought here because there is no Interstate in their respective backyards. 
https://www.google.com/maps/@36.1529665,-94.5365398,3a,75y,243.35h,93.99t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sfHZz92BSY6TC36z3VWNTVA!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DfHZz92BSY6TC36z3VWNTVA%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D177.10088%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i3328!8i1664 (https://www.google.com/maps/@36.1529665,-94.5365398,3a,75y,243.35h,93.99t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sfHZz92BSY6TC36z3VWNTVA!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DfHZz92BSY6TC36z3VWNTVA%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D177.10088%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i3328!8i1664)

And there were probably deer that settled there at one point because there were no humans in their respective backyards.

Who gives a damn?

The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, or the one.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: sprjus4 on June 24, 2021, 01:20:03 PM
The section of US 412 between Jackson and Dyersburg has no traffic lights.  Why not use this type of concept if you didn't like the superstreet, diverted left turn and roundabouts.

In order to make a free flow US-412 in the state of Arkansas it will require a new alignment because there's too much existing traffic control in Siloam and Tontitown, which will be bypassed by a freeway AR 612. Any bypass of Siloam would probably hook into the Cherokee Tpk as well so that leaves the segment of 412 between the west end of the Cherokee and I-44, which is 27 miles, or only 16% of the proposed route distance in OK. In the name of consistency of route expectations this segment ought to be upgraded, and with the aforementioned ROW and terrain situation it would not be as expensive as most projects of this type.

Well I am sure that these folks bought here because there is no Interstate in their respective backyards. 
https://www.google.com/maps/@36.1529665,-94.5365398,3a,75y,243.35h,93.99t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sfHZz92BSY6TC36z3VWNTVA!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DfHZz92BSY6TC36z3VWNTVA%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D177.10088%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i3328!8i1664 (https://www.google.com/maps/@36.1529665,-94.5365398,3a,75y,243.35h,93.99t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sfHZz92BSY6TC36z3VWNTVA!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DfHZz92BSY6TC36z3VWNTVA%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D177.10088%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i3328!8i1664)
Well, they might be in luck, because an interstate highway bypass would likely be built around the northern side of town.

And either way… who cares? In the end, the new route is either not affecting their property directly, or if it is, they will be compensated. It’s a pretty typical process for new construction or when right of way acquisition is involved.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: sparker on June 24, 2021, 01:20:54 PM
The section of US 412 between Jackson and Dyersburg has no traffic lights.  Why not use this type of concept if you didn't like the superstreet, diverted left turn and roundabouts.

In order to make a free flow US-412 in the state of Arkansas it will require a new alignment because there's too much existing traffic control in Siloam and Tontitown, which will be bypassed by a freeway AR 612. Any bypass of Siloam would probably hook into the Cherokee Tpk as well so that leaves the segment of 412 between the west end of the Cherokee and I-44, which is 27 miles, or only 16% of the proposed route distance in OK. In the name of consistency of route expectations this segment ought to be upgraded, and with the aforementioned ROW and terrain situation it would not be as expensive as most projects of this type.

Well I am sure that these folks bought here because there is no Interstate in their respective backyards. 
https://www.google.com/maps/@36.1529665,-94.5365398,3a,75y,243.35h,93.99t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sfHZz92BSY6TC36z3VWNTVA!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DfHZz92BSY6TC36z3VWNTVA%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D177.10088%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i3328!8i1664 (https://www.google.com/maps/@36.1529665,-94.5365398,3a,75y,243.35h,93.99t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sfHZz92BSY6TC36z3VWNTVA!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DfHZz92BSY6TC36z3VWNTVA%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D177.10088%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i3328!8i1664)

And there were probably deer that settled there at one point because there were no humans in their respective backyards.

Who gives a damn?

The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, or the one.

It's simply a matter of "if argument "A" based on cost isn't gaining traction, then argument "B" regarding potential imposition on NWA residents is substituted".  It's obvious this guy functions as one of the more vocal of our resident BANANA's; his reasons for staking out that position are a bit vague as to motivation.  Since there's an admirable attempt to leave political beliefs out of these discussions, we'll probably have to do a bit of creative interpolation here.  But at least the guy's consistent!   
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Scott5114 on June 24, 2021, 01:25:53 PM
It's simply a matter of "if argument "A" based on cost isn't gaining traction, then argument "B" regarding potential imposition on NWA residents is substituted".  It's obvious this guy functions as one of the more vocal of our resident BANANA's; his reasons for staking out that position are a bit vague as to motivation.  Since there's an admirable attempt to leave political beliefs out of these discussions, we'll probably have to do a bit of creative interpolation here.  But at least the guy's consistent!   

He's a former Tennessee politician. As to why he thinks we need the Tennessee politician fiscal pants-crapping song and dance here, who knows.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: sprjus4 on June 24, 2021, 01:28:54 PM
It's simply a matter of "if argument "A" based on cost isn't gaining traction, then argument "B" regarding potential imposition on NWA residents is substituted".  It's obvious this guy functions as one of the more vocal of our resident BANANA's; his reasons for staking out that position are a bit vague as to motivation.  Since there's an admirable attempt to leave political beliefs out of these discussions, we'll probably have to do a bit of creative interpolation here.  But at least the guy's consistent!   

He's a former Tennessee politician. As to why he thinks we need the Tennessee politician fiscal pants-crapping song and dance here, who knows.
It’s almost like he has some sort of political tie or interest to this region or corridor at interest. He’s noted before he would be negatively affected by expansion of I-65 which is the reason he opposes it. Not for any sound engineering reasons of course, or needs of the motoring public, which he then just disregards as the existing conditions are acceptable with no evidence to support his claims. He’ll even say taking an alternative route to avoid the interstate is something he’ll do, then say that’s why the interstate is acceptable.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: In_Correct on June 24, 2021, 01:58:33 PM
A Border Line Sock Puppet?

Also I never liked the "Not In My Back Yard" phrase. Nothing is in their back yards. Not even close! If they expanded Bus routes are they going to act as if Buses are parking in their back yards?

As for property loss: it is replaced with financial compensation so they can buy even more property. And if they have plenty of money, which they often do, they could move their houses to their new property as well.

... not unlike that Northern Exposure episode where Maurice J. Minnifield moved his house.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: MikieTimT on June 24, 2021, 03:07:56 PM
The section of US 412 between Jackson and Dyersburg has no traffic lights.  Why not use this type of concept if you didn't like the superstreet, diverted left turn and roundabouts.

In order to make a free flow US-412 in the state of Arkansas it will require a new alignment because there's too much existing traffic control in Siloam and Tontitown, which will be bypassed by a freeway AR 612. Any bypass of Siloam would probably hook into the Cherokee Tpk as well so that leaves the segment of 412 between the west end of the Cherokee and I-44, which is 27 miles, or only 16% of the proposed route distance in OK. In the name of consistency of route expectations this segment ought to be upgraded, and with the aforementioned ROW and terrain situation it would not be as expensive as most projects of this type.

Well I am sure that these folks bought here because there is no Interstate in their respective backyards. 
https://www.google.com/maps/@36.1529665,-94.5365398,3a,75y,243.35h,93.99t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sfHZz92BSY6TC36z3VWNTVA!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DfHZz92BSY6TC36z3VWNTVA%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D177.10088%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i3328!8i1664 (https://www.google.com/maps/@36.1529665,-94.5365398,3a,75y,243.35h,93.99t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sfHZz92BSY6TC36z3VWNTVA!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DfHZz92BSY6TC36z3VWNTVA%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D177.10088%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i3328!8i1664)
Well, they might be in luck, because an interstate highway bypass would likely be built around the northern side of town.

And either way… who cares? In the end, the new route is either not affecting their property directly, or if it is, they will be compensated. It’s a pretty typical process for new construction or when right of way acquisition is involved.

Topographically, it'd be much easier to develop a bypass around the north end of Smith Field and run close to Davidson Rd., then try to follow the Flint Creek valley as much as is practical back to the current eastern terminus of the Cherokee Turnpike.  You'll notice if you look at Google Maps that all of the roads on the north side of town tend to run either N/S or E/W because it is flat there, however, that is also the same draw for residential development, which is rapidly expanding that way.  South of Siloam Springs where the previous link alluded to, is not conducive for road development as it's mostly hollows leading down into the Illinois River valley.  Not impossible to develop through, but more expensive than around the north end as long as it happens before it becomes more heavily developed.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: MikieTimT on June 24, 2021, 03:20:04 PM
The section of US 412 between Jackson and Dyersburg has no traffic lights.  Why not use this type of concept if you didn't like the superstreet, diverted left turn and roundabouts.

In order to make a free flow US-412 in the state of Arkansas it will require a new alignment because there's too much existing traffic control in Siloam and Tontitown, which will be bypassed by a freeway AR 612. Any bypass of Siloam would probably hook into the Cherokee Tpk as well so that leaves the segment of 412 between the west end of the Cherokee and I-44, which is 27 miles, or only 16% of the proposed route distance in OK. In the name of consistency of route expectations this segment ought to be upgraded, and with the aforementioned ROW and terrain situation it would not be as expensive as most projects of this type.

Well I am sure that these folks bought here because there is no Interstate in their respective backyards. 
https://www.google.com/maps/@36.1529665,-94.5365398,3a,75y,243.35h,93.99t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sfHZz92BSY6TC36z3VWNTVA!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DfHZz92BSY6TC36z3VWNTVA%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D177.10088%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i3328!8i1664 (https://www.google.com/maps/@36.1529665,-94.5365398,3a,75y,243.35h,93.99t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sfHZz92BSY6TC36z3VWNTVA!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DfHZz92BSY6TC36z3VWNTVA%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D177.10088%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i3328!8i1664)

There's no Interstate in my backyard either currently, but live anywhere in a growing area long enough, and there starts to be plans to change that eventually.  There is likely to be a western beltway in NWA in 20 years or so when they max out the I-49 corridor to 8 lanes.  And that beltway would be almost certainly within 2 miles of my home, so that would certainly change the environment of my neighborhood.  Much as we'd like, there's only so much you can do to stand in the way of progress.  Seclusion within 8 miles of any existing major highway in a growing area is fleeting at best.  Just have to take your increased property value and hop a little further down the road to start the process over if unable to adapt to the changes.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: sparker on June 24, 2021, 03:46:22 PM
You know, I'm beginning to think that our erstwhile naysaying "former TN politician" had, at one point, a piece of property acquired via eminent domain -- possibly for a freeway or expressway ROW (maybe even I-840) and is, to say the least, soured on the developmental process (he's now chiming in with the IN/I-69 thread claiming IN 37 was sufficient -- talk about too little too late!). 
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Scott5114 on June 24, 2021, 03:49:48 PM
I think it's more likely he's one of those "starve the beast" types that gets indignant if the government spends a nickel on anything that doesn't directly benefit him.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: sparker on June 24, 2021, 04:19:21 PM
I think it's more likely he's one of those "starve the beast" types that gets indignant if the government spends a nickel on anything that doesn't directly benefit him.

....and obviously he sees no benefit in much of anything beyond a 2-lane (if that!) road in his vicinity (hence his objections to improvements in so-called "pristine" areas).  I'd think a horse track would suit his criteria just fine!
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: In_Correct on June 24, 2021, 09:40:08 PM
A Horse Track might make him satisfied,

As long as The Horse Track is not funded by The Government.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: MikieTimT on June 25, 2021, 09:49:10 AM
I think it's more likely he's one of those "starve the beast" types that gets indignant if the government spends a nickel on anything that doesn't directly benefit him.

....and obviously he sees no benefit in much of anything beyond a 2-lane (if that!) road in his vicinity (hence his objections to improvements in so-called "pristine" areas).  I'd think a horse track would suit his criteria just fine!

Likely retired or otherwise not required to endure commutes like many here.  When traffic isn't an impediment to timely trips to where you have to be, then why would you want taxpayer-funded improvements?  It's like Bella Vista Village up here in NWA.  It took a wholesale demographic change before what was originally a retirement community elected to build the first school in the city, obviously funded with property tax revenue.  Folks on fixed incomes in their twilight years have nothing but time on their hands to fight tooth and nail against change of any sort, but if an area is nice and cheap enough, it eventually draws younger folks too, with all of their infrastructural needs as well not too far behind.  In this case, it brought so many that there's dozens of miles of mountain bike trails cut all over Bella Vista with a tie-in to the Razorback Greenway for access to most of the rest in NWA.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Plutonic Panda on June 27, 2021, 03:58:28 AM
I think it's more likely he's one of those "starve the beast" types that gets indignant if the government spends a nickel on anything that doesn't directly benefit him.

....and obviously he sees no benefit in much of anything beyond a 2-lane (if that!) road in his vicinity (hence his objections to improvements in so-called "pristine" areas).  I'd think a horse track would suit his criteria just fine!

Likely retired or otherwise not required to endure commutes like many here.  When traffic isn't an impediment to timely trips to where you have to be, then why would you want taxpayer-funded improvements?  It's like Bella Vista Village up here in NWA.  It took a wholesale demographic change before what was originally a retirement community elected to build the first school in the city, obviously funded with property tax revenue.  Folks on fixed incomes in their twilight years have nothing but time on their hands to fight tooth and nail against change of any sort, but if an area is nice and cheap enough, it eventually draws younger folks too, with all of their infrastructural needs as well not too far behind.  In this case, it brought so many that there's dozens of miles of mountain bike trails cut all over Bella Vista with a tie-in to the Razorback Greenway for access to most of the rest in NWA.
That logic is no different than claiming “why should I have to spend money for public schools if I have no kids.” It’s selfish and ridiculous.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Tom958 on June 27, 2021, 06:47:08 AM
The section of US 412 between Jackson and Dyersburg has no traffic lights.  Why not use this type of concept if you didn't like the superstreet, diverted left turn and roundabouts.

Ha, I've created a monster!

That section of US 412 is nothing like US 412 through Siloam Springs, mainly because it doesn't pass near any sizable towns and because the interchanges were built before right-of-way acquisition became much of a problem (not that it is even now).

It is entertaining to visualize US 412 through Siloam Springs being converted into a Jersey freeway, but there's no way it'll ever happen.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: sparker on June 27, 2021, 08:26:20 AM
The section of US 412 between Jackson and Dyersburg has no traffic lights.  Why not use this type of concept if you didn't like the superstreet, diverted left turn and roundabouts.

Ha, I've created a monster!

That section of US 412 is nothing like US 412 through Siloam Springs, mainly because it does pass near any sizable towns and because the interchanges were built before right-of-way acquisition became much of a problem (not that it is even now).

It is entertaining to visualize US 412 through Siloam Springs being converted into a Jersey freeway, but there's no way it'll ever happen.

If the Congressional folks proposing the Interstate along US 412 get their wishes, there won't be a "Jersey freeway" deployed in Siloam or anywhere else on the corridor; it'll be a high-speed free-flow facility like the rest of the I-system.  Bypassing that town will likely be a PIA for all agencies involved, but even if it's a bit convoluted and/or extended in regards to how far afield it'll be aligned, a plan would eventually materialize -- since most of the rest of the overall corridor is quite straightforward as to where and how it'll be located and configured.   Except for Siloam, this corridor is relatively "low-lying fruit"!
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: MikieTimT on June 29, 2021, 12:12:28 PM
The section of US 412 between Jackson and Dyersburg has no traffic lights.  Why not use this type of concept if you didn't like the superstreet, diverted left turn and roundabouts.

Ha, I've created a monster!

That section of US 412 is nothing like US 412 through Siloam Springs, mainly because it does pass near any sizable towns and because the interchanges were built before right-of-way acquisition became much of a problem (not that it is even now).

It is entertaining to visualize US 412 through Siloam Springs being converted into a Jersey freeway, but there's no way it'll ever happen.

If the Congressional folks proposing the Interstate along US 412 get their wishes, there won't be a "Jersey freeway" deployed in Siloam or anywhere else on the corridor; it'll be a high-speed free-flow facility like the rest of the I-system.  Bypassing that town will likely be a PIA for all agencies involved, but even if it's a bit convoluted and/or extended in regards to how far afield it'll be aligned, a plan would eventually materialize -- since most of the rest of the overall corridor is quite straightforward as to where and how it'll be located and configured.   Except for Siloam, this corridor is relatively "low-lying fruit"!

The section in Arkansas that's 4-laned between the west end of the eventually completed 412 Springdale Bypass on the edge of Tontitown and where a Siloam Springs bypass would logically begin really only needs 7-9 exits/overpasses and very little in the way of access roads as the land north of US-412 can mostly be accessed by Old AR 68, and it's nearly all Ozark Natl. Forest on the south side except around where some exits would need to be for county road crossings.  Wouldn't take much to convert the section between bypasses to limited access as a result, so as much as I'd prefer a new terrain connection between the 2 northern bypasses to save 3-4 miles, it's likely not enough miles saved to justify in this case in my opinion.  It's only about 10.1 miles of road altogether between the bypasses, so it'd be pretty trivial to convert that stretch.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: sparker on July 01, 2021, 06:45:21 PM
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Pardon my lack of knowledge regarding this matter, but is the US 412 Springdale Bypass a separate concept/project from the AR 612 "stub" extending west from I-49?  Can't really tell anything from GE/GSV, since it looks like there haven't been any updates posted in recent years; the 612 facility isn't even shown!  If anyone can clear this up, it would be greatly appreciated.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: US71 on July 01, 2021, 06:52:04 PM
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Pardon my lack of knowledge regarding this matter, but is the US 412 Springdale Bypass a separate concept/project from the AR 612 "stub" extending west from I-49?  Can't really tell anything from GE/GSV, since it looks like there haven't been any updates posted in recent years; the 612 facility isn't even shown!  If anyone can clear this up, it would be greatly appreciated.

AR 612 will eventually be the 412 Springdale bypass. It will connect to current 412 east of Siloam Springs and 412 near Sonora. Right now it's just a connector from AR 112 to -49/US71
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: sparker on July 01, 2021, 07:07:30 PM
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Pardon my lack of knowledge regarding this matter, but is the US 412 Springdale Bypass a separate concept/project from the AR 612 "stub" extending west from I-49?  Can't really tell anything from GE/GSV, since it looks like there haven't been any updates posted in recent years; the 612 facility isn't even shown!  If anyone can clear this up, it would be greatly appreciated.

AR 612 will eventually be the 412 Springdale bypass. It will connect to current 412 east of Siloam Springs and 412 near Sonora. Right now it's just a connector from AR 112 to -49/US71

Thanks for the clarification!  It didn't seem terribly rational or efficient to have two separate facilities with the same goal.  Since it's planned to curve back south to present 412 east of Siloam -- and some posters have suggested that a southern bypass of that town might be more feasible, at least from the standpoint of ROW acquisition and/or ease of construction than looping north of town, the bypass might just be doable without encountering a lot of local opposition. 
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Tom958 on July 01, 2021, 10:11:41 PM
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Pardon my lack of knowledge regarding this matter, but is the US 412 Springdale Bypass a separate concept/project from the AR 612 "stub" extending west from I-49?  Can't really tell anything from GE/GSV, since it looks like there haven't been any updates posted in recent years; the 612 facility isn't even shown!  If anyone can clear this up, it would be greatly appreciated.


https://www.ardot.gov/divisions/environmental/assessments/impact-statements-eis-assesments-ea/springdale-northern-bypass-highway-412/
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: edwaleni on July 01, 2021, 11:33:56 PM
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51284231506_da946c9fcf_b.jpg)
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: sparker on July 02, 2021, 02:12:51 AM
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51284231506_da946c9fcf_b.jpg)

Cool, thanks for the map!  Saw the 540 shields, then looked at the legend date (2008); this thing has certainly been in the works for a while!  Any timetable to complete the western segment back to existing 412? 
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: MikieTimT on July 02, 2021, 12:44:56 PM
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51284231506_da946c9fcf_b.jpg)

Cool, thanks for the map!  Saw the 540 shields, then looked at the legend date (2008); this thing has certainly been in the works for a while!  Any timetable to complete the western segment back to existing 412?

Not at this point.  It was one of the projects on the continuation of the 1/2 cent sales tax, but no timelines were included in that statewide marketing push for the ballot initiative.  The western leg will undoubtedly be completed before the eastern leg, though, as it's shorter and just has one interchange with US-412 before it completes.  Can't wait for it to be done.  It'll knock a chunk off my trips to Benton County bypassing AR-112.  We'll see which comes first, AR-112 widening north of US-412, or the western Springdale Bypass leg.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: edwaleni on July 03, 2021, 08:29:22 PM
The US-412 Arkansas Study is located here:

https://www.nwarpc.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/Hwy-412-Executive-Summary-2020-4.pdf (https://www.nwarpc.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/Hwy-412-Executive-Summary-2020-4.pdf)

I can't repost the entire thing, but it does show $2.1 million FY2021 for ROW acquisition to complete the Springdale Bypass to Tontitown.

As for Siloam Springs, there were program dollars for FY2023 to take a 6 lane proposal from Tontitown west from EIS to the next level of planning.

This is probably why the politicians are waking up and wanting get it named an I route, to secure Fed funding.

Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: sparker on July 03, 2021, 08:43:41 PM
The US-412 Arkansas Study is located here:

https://www.nwarpc.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/Hwy-412-Executive-Summary-2020-4.pdf (https://www.nwarpc.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/Hwy-412-Executive-Summary-2020-4.pdf)

I can't repost the entire thing, but it does show $2.1 million FY2021 for ROW acquisition to complete the Springdale Bypass to Tontitown.

As for Siloam Springs, there were program dollars for FY2023 to take a 6 lane proposal from Tontitown west from EIS to the next level of planning.

This is probably why the politicians are waking up and wanting get it named an I route, to secure Fed funding.



Since US 412 is already part of a high priority corridor -- actually one of the original ISTEA-specified batch (#8) -- it should already be in line for federal funding.  Elevating it to future Interstate status would potentially direct considerably more attention to the concept, perhaps even to the point of initiating the exploration of a viable alignment for the Siloam bypass. 
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Avalanchez71 on July 06, 2021, 10:06:07 AM
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51284231506_da946c9fcf_b.jpg)

Cool, thanks for the map!  Saw the 540 shields, then looked at the legend date (2008); this thing has certainly been in the works for a while!  Any timetable to complete the western segment back to existing 412?

Not at this point.  It was one of the projects on the continuation of the 1/2 cent sales tax, but no timelines were included in that statewide marketing push for the ballot initiative.  The western leg will undoubtedly be completed before the eastern leg, though, as it's shorter and just has one interchange with US-412 before it completes.  Can't wait for it to be done.  It'll knock a chunk off my trips to Benton County bypassing AR-112.  We'll see which comes first, AR-112 widening north of US-412, or the western Springdale Bypass leg.

Looks like a wish list from some bureaucrat.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: sprjus4 on July 06, 2021, 10:16:14 AM
^ Except the first half of the western leg is already built  :bigass:

Hopefully the remaining western connection will be complete in the next decade.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: edwaleni on July 06, 2021, 10:42:42 AM
^ Except the first half of the western leg is already built  :bigass:

Hopefully the remaining western connection will be complete in the next decade.

ROW purchase is 2021. Pending funding 2025 for construction.

When complete this will also facilitate the XNA Access Project.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: bwana39 on July 06, 2021, 11:00:25 AM
^ Except the first half of the western leg is already built  :bigass:

Hopefully the remaining western connection will be complete in the next decade.

ROW purchase is 2021. Pending funding 2025 for construction.

When complete this will also facilitate the XNA Access Project.

It would not surprise me if this project moves ahead of schedule.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: sparker on July 06, 2021, 01:05:12 PM
^ Except the first half of the western leg is already built  :bigass:

Hopefully the remaining western connection will be complete in the next decade.

ROW purchase is 2021. Pending funding 2025 for construction.

When complete this will also facilitate the XNA Access Project.

It would not surprise me if this project moves ahead of schedule.

Distinct possibility if the Congressional proposal for Interstate status gets through Congress with the next FY funding package (these days the usual route for such proposals).  Once that's settled, it'll be up to the DOT's to follow suit by identifying in-state/local funding matches (including whatever's necessary to expedite or prioritize the project within their internal processes).  At that point it will become apparent whether the states are on the same page as their congressional delegation(s) regarding this matter.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: MikieTimT on July 06, 2021, 04:49:28 PM
^ Except the first half of the western leg is already built  :bigass:

Hopefully the remaining western connection will be complete in the next decade.

ROW purchase is 2021. Pending funding 2025 for construction.

When complete this will also facilitate the XNA Access Project.

It would not surprise me if this project moves ahead of schedule.

Distinct possibility if the Congressional proposal for Interstate status gets through Congress with the next FY funding package (these days the usual route for such proposals).  Once that's settled, it'll be up to the DOT's to follow suit by identifying in-state/local funding matches (including whatever's necessary to expedite or prioritize the project within their internal processes).  At that point it will become apparent whether the states are on the same page as their congressional delegation(s) regarding this matter.

The CAP extension would likely provide any of Arkansas' matching funds if the fed dollars ever made it through the gauntlet.  It's a high priority for the area as US-412 in Springdale has an attrocious LOS with all of the traffic lights and multiplex with US-71B for a few blocks.  And as stated, there's a more direct access road to XNA proposed off the bend to the south of the western leg.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: I-55 on July 06, 2021, 11:03:22 PM
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51284231506_da946c9fcf_b.jpg)

Cool, thanks for the map!  Saw the 540 shields, then looked at the legend date (2008); this thing has certainly been in the works for a while!  Any timetable to complete the western segment back to existing 412?

Not at this point.  It was one of the projects on the continuation of the 1/2 cent sales tax, but no timelines were included in that statewide marketing push for the ballot initiative.  The western leg will undoubtedly be completed before the eastern leg, though, as it's shorter and just has one interchange with US-412 before it completes.  Can't wait for it to be done.  It'll knock a chunk off my trips to Benton County bypassing AR-112.  We'll see which comes first, AR-112 widening north of US-412, or the western Springdale Bypass leg.

Looks like a wish list from some bureaucrat.

NWA: Plan ahead for future population growth by building out main arteries before traffic problems arise.

Nashville: Let the underbuilt freeway system get completely overrun before trying to fix it.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Avalanchez71 on July 07, 2021, 03:45:25 PM
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51284231506_da946c9fcf_b.jpg)

Cool, thanks for the map!  Saw the 540 shields, then looked at the legend date (2008); this thing has certainly been in the works for a while!  Any timetable to complete the western segment back to existing 412?

Not at this point.  It was one of the projects on the continuation of the 1/2 cent sales tax, but no timelines were included in that statewide marketing push for the ballot initiative.  The western leg will undoubtedly be completed before the eastern leg, though, as it's shorter and just has one interchange with US-412 before it completes.  Can't wait for it to be done.  It'll knock a chunk off my trips to Benton County bypassing AR-112.  We'll see which comes first, AR-112 widening north of US-412, or the western Springdale Bypass leg.

Looks like a wish list from some bureaucrat.

NWA: Plan ahead for future population growth by building out main arteries before traffic problems arise.

Nashville: Let the underbuilt freeway system get completely overrun before trying to fix it.

NWA:  Tax and spend whilst lining pockets and greasing palms.
Nashville:  Conserve funds and allocate as needed with a rainy day fund.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Plutonic Panda on July 07, 2021, 03:52:50 PM
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51284231506_da946c9fcf_b.jpg)

Cool, thanks for the map!  Saw the 540 shields, then looked at the legend date (2008); this thing has certainly been in the works for a while!  Any timetable to complete the western segment back to existing 412?

Not at this point.  It was one of the projects on the continuation of the 1/2 cent sales tax, but no timelines were included in that statewide marketing push for the ballot initiative.  The western leg will undoubtedly be completed before the eastern leg, though, as it's shorter and just has one interchange with US-412 before it completes.  Can't wait for it to be done.  It'll knock a chunk off my trips to Benton County bypassing AR-112.  We'll see which comes first, AR-112 widening north of US-412, or the western Springdale Bypass leg.

Looks like a wish list from some bureaucrat.

NWA: Plan ahead for future population growth by building out main arteries before traffic problems arise.

Nashville: Let the underbuilt freeway system get completely overrun before trying to fix it.

NWA:  Tax and spend whilst lining pockets and greasing palms.
Nashville:  Conserve funds and allocate as needed with a rainy day fund.

Clearly they haven’t allocated as needed:

https://www.wsmv.com/traffic/nashville-traffic-congestion-at-all-time-high/article_f3399024-c522-11e9-8d90-f7f7400d2825.html

Since you care so much about people’s money:

“ It's not just costing us time, it's costing us money, too. In Davidson County, drivers lost $1,221 dollars last year in wasted fuel. ”

If you aren’t a troll you should really rethink why you’re on a forum that loves roads and advocates for roads. I believe there’s other forums out there like the Tea Party where toy could happily discuss taxation is theft and all of that garbage.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: hobsini2 on July 07, 2021, 04:02:55 PM
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51284231506_da946c9fcf_b.jpg)

Cool, thanks for the map!  Saw the 540 shields, then looked at the legend date (2008); this thing has certainly been in the works for a while!  Any timetable to complete the western segment back to existing 412?

Not at this point.  It was one of the projects on the continuation of the 1/2 cent sales tax, but no timelines were included in that statewide marketing push for the ballot initiative.  The western leg will undoubtedly be completed before the eastern leg, though, as it's shorter and just has one interchange with US-412 before it completes.  Can't wait for it to be done.  It'll knock a chunk off my trips to Benton County bypassing AR-112.  We'll see which comes first, AR-112 widening north of US-412, or the western Springdale Bypass leg.

Looks like a wish list from some bureaucrat.

NWA: Plan ahead for future population growth by building out main arteries before traffic problems arise.

Nashville: Let the underbuilt freeway system get completely overrun before trying to fix it.

NWA:  Tax and spend whilst lining pockets and greasing palms.
Nashville:  Conserve funds and allocate as needed with a rainy day fund.

Clearly they haven’t allocated as needed:

https://www.wsmv.com/traffic/nashville-traffic-congestion-at-all-time-high/article_f3399024-c522-11e9-8d90-f7f7400d2825.html

Since you care so much about people’s money:

“ It's not just costing us time, it's costing us money, too. In Davidson County, drivers lost $1,221 dollars last year in wasted fuel. ”

If you aren’t a troll you should really rethink why you’re on a forum that loves roads and advocates for roads. I believe there’s other forums out there like the Tea Party where toy could happily discuss taxation is theft and all of that garbage.
We have a saying in one circle of friends of mine whenever one friend in particular goes off on his "taxation is evil", "unmitigated capitalism is good" or "Alabama football is great" rants. Feel free to use it Panda.
#BootMuke
You're welcome.
We do love our guy Mike Williams though.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Scott5114 on July 08, 2021, 12:52:32 AM
NWA:  Tax and spend whilst lining pockets and greasing palms.

It'd be pretty fucking stupid to tax and not spend, or to spend and not tax, now wouldn't it?
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: In_Correct on July 08, 2021, 04:16:46 AM
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51284231506_da946c9fcf_b.jpg)

Cool, thanks for the map!  Saw the 540 shields, then looked at the legend date (2008); this thing has certainly been in the works for a while!  Any timetable to complete the western segment back to existing 412?

Not at this point.  It was one of the projects on the continuation of the 1/2 cent sales tax, but no timelines were included in that statewide marketing push for the ballot initiative.  The western leg will undoubtedly be completed before the eastern leg, though, as it's shorter and just has one interchange with US-412 before it completes.  Can't wait for it to be done.  It'll knock a chunk off my trips to Benton County bypassing AR-112.  We'll see which comes first, AR-112 widening north of US-412, or the western Springdale Bypass leg.

Looks like a wish list from some bureaucrat.

NWA: Plan ahead for future population growth by building out main arteries before traffic problems arise.

Nashville: Let the underbuilt freeway system get completely overrun before trying to fix it.

NWA:  Tax and spend whilst lining pockets and greasing palms.
Nashville:  Conserve funds and allocate as needed with a rainy day fund.

 :angry: This is about a Beautiful Toll Road?!  :angry:
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: sprjus4 on July 08, 2021, 10:08:36 AM
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51284231506_da946c9fcf_b.jpg)

Cool, thanks for the map!  Saw the 540 shields, then looked at the legend date (2008); this thing has certainly been in the works for a while!  Any timetable to complete the western segment back to existing 412?

Not at this point.  It was one of the projects on the continuation of the 1/2 cent sales tax, but no timelines were included in that statewide marketing push for the ballot initiative.  The western leg will undoubtedly be completed before the eastern leg, though, as it's shorter and just has one interchange with US-412 before it completes.  Can't wait for it to be done.  It'll knock a chunk off my trips to Benton County bypassing AR-112.  We'll see which comes first, AR-112 widening north of US-412, or the western Springdale Bypass leg.

Looks like a wish list from some bureaucrat.

NWA: Plan ahead for future population growth by building out main arteries before traffic problems arise.

Nashville: Let the underbuilt freeway system get completely overrun before trying to fix it.

NWA:  Tax and spend whilst lining pockets and greasing palms.
Nashville:  Conserve funds and allocate as needed with a rainy day fund.

 :angry: This is about a Beautiful Toll Road?!  :angry:
???  :confused: :confused:
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: US71 on July 08, 2021, 12:56:50 PM
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51284231506_da946c9fcf_b.jpg)

Cool, thanks for the map!  Saw the 540 shields, then looked at the legend date (2008); this thing has certainly been in the works for a while!  Any timetable to complete the western segment back to existing 412? 

FWIW, a freeway up the mountain to NWA from FT Smith has been proposed  since the 1960's. I had a map that showed a proposed highway as an extension of I-540.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: MikieTimT on July 08, 2021, 01:46:53 PM
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51284231506_da946c9fcf_b.jpg)

Cool, thanks for the map!  Saw the 540 shields, then looked at the legend date (2008); this thing has certainly been in the works for a while!  Any timetable to complete the western segment back to existing 412? 

FWIW, a freeway up the mountain to NWA from FT Smith has been proposed  since the 1960's. I had a map that showed a proposed highway as an extension of I-540.

And for a few years, that's exactly what it was!  Kind of still is, until the BVB wraps up in October.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: sparker on July 08, 2021, 01:49:09 PM
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51284231506_da946c9fcf_b.jpg)

Cool, thanks for the map!  Saw the 540 shields, then looked at the legend date (2008); this thing has certainly been in the works for a while!  Any timetable to complete the western segment back to existing 412? 

FWIW, a freeway up the mountain to NWA from FT Smith has been proposed  since the 1960's. I had a map that showed a proposed highway as an extension of I-540.

Not in the least bit surprised; the US 71 corridor from KC to Shreveport (with a split south from there to Houston and NOLA) was one of the most glaring omissions of the original Interstate network, likely because of the difficulty of construction in the Ozarks and Ouachitas.  And not at all ironically, when the high priority corridor concept came about with 1991's ISTEA, it was the first corridor to be designated -- fortunately, I-49 was already a reality within LA, so it became a logical extension of that.  It's likely that if the longer I-69 had not been conceived and legislated, Shreveport (or Texarkana)-Houston would have been added to be mix as an independent corridor (I-47?). 
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: froggie on July 10, 2021, 10:33:00 AM
Not in the least bit surprised; the US 71 corridor from KC to Shreveport (with a split south from there to Houston and NOLA) was one of the most glaring omissions of the original Interstate network, likely because of the difficulty of construction in the Ozarks and Ouachitas.  And not at all ironically, when the high priority corridor concept came about with 1991's ISTEA, it was the first corridor to be designated -- fortunately, I-49 was already a reality within LA, so it became a logical extension of that.  It's likely that if the longer I-69 had not been conceived and legislated, Shreveport (or Texarkana)-Houston would have been added to be mix as an independent corridor (I-47?). 

Worth noting that the 48K system studied in the 1940s (approximately 50% larger than the system Congress initially approved) still did not include US 71 between Shreveport and Joplin.

Translation:  US 71 really was that minor back when the Interstate system was planned.  Nevermind that NWA was basically a backwater back in those days.  Didn't really pick up until Sam Walton did his thing.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: US71 on July 10, 2021, 11:25:26 AM
Not in the least bit surprised; the US 71 corridor from KC to Shreveport (with a split south from there to Houston and NOLA) was one of the most glaring omissions of the original Interstate network, likely because of the difficulty of construction in the Ozarks and Ouachitas.  And not at all ironically, when the high priority corridor concept came about with 1991's ISTEA, it was the first corridor to be designated -- fortunately, I-49 was already a reality within LA, so it became a logical extension of that.  It's likely that if the longer I-69 had not been conceived and legislated, Shreveport (or Texarkana)-Houston would have been added to be mix as an independent corridor (I-47?). 

Worth noting that the 48K system studied in the 1940s (approximately 50% larger than the system Congress initially approved) still did not include US 71 between Shreveport and Joplin.

Translation:  US 71 really was that minor back when the Interstate system was planned.  Nevermind that NWA was basically a backwater back in those days.  Didn't really pick up until Sam Walton did his thing.


and to a lesser drgree JB HUnt and Tyson.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: sparker on July 10, 2021, 06:39:17 PM
Not in the least bit surprised; the US 71 corridor from KC to Shreveport (with a split south from there to Houston and NOLA) was one of the most glaring omissions of the original Interstate network, likely because of the difficulty of construction in the Ozarks and Ouachitas.  And not at all ironically, when the high priority corridor concept came about with 1991's ISTEA, it was the first corridor to be designated -- fortunately, I-49 was already a reality within LA, so it became a logical extension of that.  It's likely that if the longer I-69 had not been conceived and legislated, Shreveport (or Texarkana)-Houston would have been added to be mix as an independent corridor (I-47?). 

Worth noting that the 48K system studied in the 1940s (approximately 50% larger than the system Congress initially approved) still did not include US 71 between Shreveport and Joplin.

Translation:  US 71 really was that minor back when the Interstate system was planned.  Nevermind that NWA was basically a backwater back in those days.  Didn't really pick up until Sam Walton did his thing.


and to a lesser drgree JB HUnt and Tyson.

Is there a published/available map of that 48K system?  If KC-Joplin was included, it would have been to (a) serve Tulsa more directly from KC and/or (b) segue to a corridor down US 69/75, eventually ending up in DFW.  I can see MacDonald and company wanting to circumvent the Ozarks and Ouachitas if possible, since aside from Fort Smith, there was virtually nothing there that would serve as a traffic generator or destination (U of A boosters notwithstanding!). 
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: US71 on July 10, 2021, 07:48:07 PM
FWIW, 71 north of Carthage has been slowly upgraded for 30+ years. MoDOT just recently replaced probably the two oldest bridges left.

http://bridgehunter.com/mo/barton/bh39898/
http://bridgehunter.com/mo/barton/bh37456/
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Route66Fan on July 11, 2021, 02:07:11 AM
Not in the least bit surprised; the US 71 corridor from KC to Shreveport (with a split south from there to Houston and NOLA) was one of the most glaring omissions of the original Interstate network, likely because of the difficulty of construction in the Ozarks and Ouachitas.  And not at all ironically, when the high priority corridor concept came about with 1991's ISTEA, it was the first corridor to be designated -- fortunately, I-49 was already a reality within LA, so it became a logical extension of that.  It's likely that if the longer I-69 had not been conceived and legislated, Shreveport (or Texarkana)-Houston would have been added to be mix as an independent corridor (I-47?). 

Worth noting that the 48K system studied in the 1940s (approximately 50% larger than the system Congress initially approved) still did not include US 71 between Shreveport and Joplin.

Translation:  US 71 really was that minor back when the Interstate system was planned.  Nevermind that NWA was basically a backwater back in those days.  Didn't really pick up until Sam Walton did his thing.
I remember reading an article in the Kansas City Star, back around December 2012, when US 71 was redesignated as I-49, where somebody, in their 80's or 90's, mentioned remembering when US 71, between Kansas City, MO & Joplin, MO, was a dirt road. I am guessing that would have been back in the 1920's-1930's.

SM-J737P
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: froggie on July 11, 2021, 09:36:43 AM
Is there a published/available map of that 48K system?  If KC-Joplin was included, it would have been to (a) serve Tulsa more directly from KC and/or (b) segue to a corridor down US 69/75, eventually ending up in DFW.  I can see MacDonald and company wanting to circumvent the Ozarks and Ouachitas if possible, since aside from Fort Smith, there was virtually nothing there that would serve as a traffic generator or destination (U of A boosters notwithstanding!). 

Yes.  Roadfan (http://www.roadfan.com/intreg5.jpg) has the map as directly taken from the 1944 Interregional Highways (https://www.enotrans.org/wp-content/uploads/membersOnly-1944-Interregional-Highways.pdf) report to Congress.

I should have elaborated further earlier, in that US 71 wasn't really proposed north of Joplin either.  Between today's I-44 and KC, the map indicates that an Interstate corridor in the 48K system would have followed US 69 instead of US 71, as well as continued south of I-44 to DFW, but that would have just as easily met your "serve KC-Tulsa more directly" comment.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: sparker on July 11, 2021, 02:30:22 PM
Is there a published/available map of that 48K system?  If KC-Joplin was included, it would have been to (a) serve Tulsa more directly from KC and/or (b) segue to a corridor down US 69/75, eventually ending up in DFW.  I can see MacDonald and company wanting to circumvent the Ozarks and Ouachitas if possible, since aside from Fort Smith, there was virtually nothing there that would serve as a traffic generator or destination (U of A boosters notwithstanding!). 

Yes.  Roadfan (http://www.roadfan.com/intreg5.jpg) has the map as directly taken from the 1944 Interregional Highways (https://www.enotrans.org/wp-content/uploads/membersOnly-1944-Interregional-Highways.pdf) report to Congress.

I should have elaborated further earlier, in that US 71 wasn't really proposed north of Joplin either.  Between today's I-44 and KC, the map indicates that an Interstate corridor in the 48K system would have followed US 69 instead of US 71, as well as continued south of I-44 to DFW, but that would have just as easily met your "serve KC-Tulsa more directly" comment.


Definitely!  As far as connectiveness in that region is concerned, the US 69 and US 71 corridors south from KC metro to then-US 66 are reasonably interchangeable (boosters from the separate states notwithstanding).  This system, close to the total system mileage today, is considerably better thought-out, particularly in the Midwest, than the 41K version eventually adopted in 1956.  But still no I-77 corridor generally along US 21 -- although portions of the originally planned I-73 route (Greensboro-Roanoke and Huntington-Columbus-Toledo) show up.  Interestingly, some 70-75 years later, many of the routes -- or portions thereof -- excised from the 48K system have been reinstated by post-chargeable additions (I-22, for instance, and, surprisingly, the I-11 corridor from Kingman to Las Vegas, only because Las Vegas was a pretty small town (about 20-25K population) when this system was cobbled together).  But it was also interesting to note the two (US 99 and US 101) corridors between Southern and Northern California coexisting!  Interstate-grade construction on the latter, especially along the Santa Barbara seacoast "shelf" and over the Cuesta grade, even to '57 criteria, would have been both physically demanding and likely the subject, years later, of environmental criticism; DOH would have had to expedite construction quickly during the early Interstate years (as they did the original Interstate portion of the L.A. freeway network) to avoid the social and legal issues that emerged by the '70's.







Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: edwaleni on July 12, 2021, 10:08:57 AM
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51307638085_47b1e3891e_b.jpg)
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: sparker on July 12, 2021, 09:02:33 PM
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51307638085_47b1e3891e_b.jpg)

Funny, I don't see a "5-lane" configuration broken out in the map legend; and "3-lane" could either mean passing lanes or a center-turn facility.  Besides that, any idea regarding the actual format the 4-lane sections entail? -- i.e., are they controlled access in any form, twinned, or simply undivided arteries?  Normally, I'd just peruse GE/GSV, but that area hasn't been updated in years! 
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: MikieTimT on July 13, 2021, 09:36:52 AM
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51307638085_47b1e3891e_b.jpg)

Funny, I don't see a "5-lane" configuration broken out in the map legend; and "3-lane" could either mean passing lanes or a center-turn facility.  Besides that, any idea regarding the actual format the 4-lane sections entail? -- i.e., are they controlled access in any form, twinned, or simply undivided arteries?  Normally, I'd just peruse GE/GSV, but that area hasn't been updated in years!

I drive this stretch regularly.  The 3 lane sections indicated are all passing/climb lanes.  Glad they are getting around to another one in eastern Boone County (F) as I'm always behind a bunch for 15 miles there.  They really need another passing lane in eastern Baxter County as well.  Those two would knock another 5-7 minutes off the trip.  Most helpful would be a northern bypass of Harrison.  That in itself would knock 10-12 minutes off the trip.  Unfortunately, not planned at this time, however, so a very long way from happening.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: edwaleni on July 13, 2021, 09:37:39 AM
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51307638085_47b1e3891e_b.jpg)

Funny, I don't see a "5-lane" configuration broken out in the map legend; and "3-lane" could either mean passing lanes or a center-turn facility.  Besides that, any idea regarding the actual format the 4-lane sections entail? -- i.e., are they controlled access in any form, twinned, or simply undivided arteries?  Normally, I'd just peruse GE/GSV, but that area hasn't been updated in years!

All I could find outside the study was a MOU from 1990 that US-412 would use existing ROW from Tontitown west to the OK border.  Other than that no engineering details.

Here is the study I am clipping from.

https://www.nwarpc.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/Hwy-412-Executive-Summary-2020-4.pdf (https://www.nwarpc.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/Hwy-412-Executive-Summary-2020-4.pdf)

Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: bugo on July 16, 2021, 09:57:20 AM

I remember reading an article in the Kansas City Star, back around December 2012, when US 71 was redesignated as I-49, where somebody, in their 80's or 90's, mentioned remembering when US 71, between Kansas City, MO & Joplin, MO, was a dirt road. I am guessing that would have been back in the 1920's-1930's.

The last stretch of US 71 to be paved between Kansas City and Joplin was the short stretch between Nevada and Milo (today's BL 49 and Route K) which was paved in 1930.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Scott5114 on August 09, 2021, 11:00:24 PM
The US-412 upgrade got merged into the pending infrastructure bill.

Quote
SEC. 11514. HIGH PRIORITY CORRIDORS ON THE NATIONAL HIGHWAY SYSTEM.
(a) HIGH PRIORITY CORRIDORS.—Section 1105(c) of the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (Public Law 102–240; 105 Stat. 2032; 133 Stat. 3018) is amended by adding at the end the following:
[...]
(96) The route that generally follows United States Route 412 from its intersection with Interstate Route 35 in Noble County, Oklahoma, passing through Tulsa, Oklahoma, to its intersection with Interstate Route 49 in Springdale, Arkansas.
[...]
(b) DESIGNATION AS FUTURE INTERSTATES.—Section 1105(e)(5)(A) of the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (Public Law 102–240; 109 Stat. 597; 133 Stat. 3018) is amended in the first sentence by striking ‘‘and subsection (c)(91)’’ and inserting ‘‘subsection (c)(91), subsection (c)(92), subsection 6 (c)(93)(A), subsection (c)(94), subsection (c)(95), subsection (c)(96), and subsection (c)(97)’’.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Plutonic Panda on August 09, 2021, 11:06:01 PM
Nice! I hope this happens sooner than later.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Scott5114 on August 09, 2021, 11:09:23 PM
It will be interesting to see if the brand new shiny SH-312 gets replaced with a 3di or if it just stays a state route turnpike for the rest of time.

A 3di in Stillwater of all places! What times we live in!
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: bugo on August 10, 2021, 08:15:01 AM
This is a little off topic, but to continue on mainline US 412 at the beginning of at least two bypasses, you must take a hard right or a hard left to get on and off at least one end of the bypass. Mountain Home and Paragould are the two I'm thinking of. Why aren't they building these bypasses with seamless connections to the through route at each end? Oklahoma did the same thing with the US 70 Durant bypass. These are going to be choke points when traffic counts go up enough.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: MikieTimT on August 10, 2021, 08:31:09 AM
This is a little off topic, but to continue on mainline US 412 at the beginning of at least two bypasses, you must take a hard right or a hard left to get on and off at least one end of the bypass. Mountain Home and Paragould are the two I'm thinking of. Why aren't they building these bypasses with seamless connections to the through route at each end? Oklahoma did the same thing with the US 70 Durant bypass. These are going to be choke points when traffic counts go up enough.

This infrastructure bill only addresses as far as Springdale/Lowell eastward.  Those bypasses you refer to don't connect to limited access facilities now, so the current endpoints of them aren't the final ones anyway should limited access ever actually make it past NWA in our lifetimes.  The Fayetteville Bypass (now Fulbright Expressway) was similar in nature until I-540/I-49 was constructed in its various phases at near its original endpoints.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: okroads on August 10, 2021, 10:50:29 AM
It will be interesting to see if the brand new shiny SH-312 gets replaced with a 3di or if it just stays a state route turnpike for the rest of time.

A 3di in Stillwater of all places! What times we live in!

As long as ODOT doesn't pull a Caltrans and number it I-312... [ducks]
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Scott5114 on August 10, 2021, 01:01:48 PM
It will be interesting to see if the brand new shiny SH-312 gets replaced with a 3di or if it just stays a state route turnpike for the rest of time.

A 3di in Stillwater of all places! What times we live in!

As long as ODOT doesn't pull a Caltrans and number it I-312... [ducks]

Nah, if anything they'll find a way to number it I-240....
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: rte66man on August 10, 2021, 01:47:59 PM
This is a little off topic, but to continue on mainline US 412 at the beginning of at least two bypasses, you must take a hard right or a hard left to get on and off at least one end of the bypass. Mountain Home and Paragould are the two I'm thinking of. Why aren't they building these bypasses with seamless connections to the through route at each end? Oklahoma did the same thing with the US 70 Durant bypass. These are going to be choke points when traffic counts go up enough.

I don't know this for certain but I seem to recall it had to do with both the land acquisition at the western end plus a dream that the bypass could extend a little north then bend west to the eastern shore of Lake Texoma. Again, I can't find any proof for that.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Scott5114 on September 18, 2021, 12:35:26 AM
Been meaning to do this for a while, just now got around to it:
(https://i.imgur.com/Gv6B1Sf.png)

The midpoint of the line connecting Springdale and the western terminus of the proposed interstate would be about halfway between where a theoretical grid-perfect I-46 and I-48 intersect I-35. The actual western terminus of the proposed interstate would be just about at the I-48 mark. Therefore, I believe this interstate should be designated I-48.

But I-50 would be close too. :D
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: MikieTimT on September 21, 2021, 12:45:24 AM
Been meaning to do this for a while, just now got around to it:
(https://i.imgur.com/Gv6B1Sf.png)

The midpoint of the line connecting Springdale and the western terminus of the proposed interstate would be about halfway between where a theoretical grid-perfect I-46 and I-48 intersect I-35. The actual western terminus of the proposed interstate would be just about at the I-48 mark. Therefore, I believe this interstate should be designated I-48.

But I-50 would be close too. :D

And since it's HPC 8 in 1991's ISTEA, it probably should be I-50.  It was originally envisioned to go east to Nashville although they just changed the western endpoint from Tulsa to I-35.  It'd be a cold day in Hades before any of US-412 west of I-35 gets bumped past a 2 lane.  It's pretty sparse out in that part of OK/NM.  Just drove it last week on on an indirect roadtrip with my brother to take his old 4Runner back up to Seattle from NWA.  Managed to skip both Kansas and Texas, although I couldn't pass up to the opportunity to take one step into Texas at the marker right off the edge of US-412.  My brother didn't have the same interest for some reason and was good with bypassing TX altogether.  Actually took several non-interstate routes on the trip, which made for a more scenic and relaxing vacation.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Bobby5280 on September 21, 2021, 12:39:32 PM
Quote from: MikieTimT
And since it's HPC 8 in 1991's ISTEA, it probably should be I-50.

I strongly hope not. The designation would suck. Might as well call it "I-1" if egos will be allowed to run wild and loose for any minor, short distance Interstate route. The resulting route would be even shorter than I-30 and connect far less populated areas. Plus the route would be a very short distance from I-40. IMHO, I-46 and I-48 are the only sensible possible designations that won't end up looking really goofy on a map.

Among the few things that makes I-30 tolerable is it originates in one of the nation's biggest metros (DFW) and its ends are at I-20 and I-40. So it still manages to function as a major Interstate in the system. An "I-50" that merely runs from Springdale thru Tulsa to end in a desolate spot along I-35 would be a waste.

Quote from: MikieTimT
It'd be a cold day in Hades before any of US-412 west of I-35 gets bumped past a 2 lane.

US-412 is 4-lane divided from I-35 to Enid to nearly 20 miles West of Enid. And then there is a couple segments of 4-lane divided road going into Woodward.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: MikieTimT on September 21, 2021, 03:06:38 PM
Quote from: MikieTimT
And since it's HPC 8 in 1991's ISTEA, it probably should be I-50.

I strongly hope not. The designation would suck. Might as well call it "I-1" if egos will be allowed to run wild and loose for any minor, short distance Interstate route. The resulting route would be even shorter than I-30 and connect far less populated areas. Plus the route would be a very short distance from I-40. IMHO, I-46 and I-48 are the only sensible possible designations that won't end up looking really goofy on a map.

Among the few things that makes I-30 tolerable is it originates in of the nation's biggest metros (DFW) and its ends are at I-20 and I-40. So it still manages to function as a major Interstate in the system. An "I-50" that merely runs from Springdale thru Tulsa to end in a desolate spot along I-35 would be a waste.

Quote from: MikieTimT
It'd be a cold day in Hades before any of US-412 west of I-35 gets bumped past a 2 lane.

US-412 is 4-lane divided from I-35 to Enid to nearly 20 miles West of Enid. And then there is a couple segments of 4-lane divided road going into Woodward.

And if Springdale/Lowell is where it ended, I'd agree, but was intended to go all the way to Nashville, which adds quite a bit of mileage.  That's not to say any of us will live long enough to see that come to fruit, but it was part of the original HPC designation.  The part from Tulsa to I-35 is what was added on a couple of months ago, so the corridor's original endpoints were at significant metros.  A centrally located E/W corridor with only I-70 to the north parallel for most of the route that ends in 2 *5 Interstates (with another intersecting) is greater than ending on 2 *0 Interstates.  Regardless, it's all fictional until a designation is codified in a resolution.  Quite frankly, other than pushing to Harrison, I think US-412 is functionally adequate at this time with the addition of some bypasses and about 3-5 more climb lanes.  I think an Interstate (or even 4-lane US 412) east of Harrison until the Mississippi River valley would ruin the character of North Central Arkansas and make it too accessible.  There's more to a state than its economy.  I'm sure I'm in the minority, though.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Plutonic Panda on September 21, 2021, 03:22:17 PM
Just for shits and giggles if there was a coast to coast I-50 it would absolutely make sense that this segment be a part of it. I don’t see the issue of an I-50 designation. Not that I’d ever expect it to be a coast to coast interstate ever but hell draft up a fantasy plan of one that goes from the east cost and ends up following 491 to terminate in Monticello(UT) to another future interstate that should be extended(I-17). Then build the parts that could actually be justified in building. No reason to do it all at once now. Many other bigger priorities exist.

But in the grand scheme of things I don’t see the issue with I-50 even if it only exists between Tulsa and Springdale for the time being.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: CoreySamson on September 21, 2021, 03:50:21 PM
Quote from: MikieTimT
And since it's HPC 8 in 1991's ISTEA, it probably should be I-50.

I strongly hope not. The designation would suck. Might as well call it "I-1" if egos will be allowed to run wild and loose for any minor, short distance Interstate route. The resulting route would be even shorter than I-30 and connect far less populated areas. Plus the route would be a very short distance from I-40. IMHO, I-46 and I-48 are the only sensible possible designations that won't end up looking really goofy on a map.

Among the few things that makes I-30 tolerable is it originates in of the nation's biggest metros (DFW) and its ends are at I-20 and I-40. So it still manages to function as a major Interstate in the system. An "I-50" that merely runs from Springdale thru Tulsa to end in a desolate spot along I-35 would be a waste.

Quote from: MikieTimT
It'd be a cold day in Hades before any of US-412 west of I-35 gets bumped past a 2 lane.

US-412 is 4-lane divided from I-35 to Enid to nearly 20 miles West of Enid. And then there is a couple segments of 4-lane divided road going into Woodward.
What if this potential I-50 extends towards Denver via Dodge City and Garden City like your Oklahoma City-Denver interstate idea you've floated around? I'd like to think that would be worthy of an x0.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Scott5114 on September 21, 2021, 03:52:19 PM
The only portion of route that the infrastructure bill currently mandates as a future interstate is Perry to Springdale. Of course, if ODOT and ArDOT want to extend the interstate of their own volition, they theoretically could.

Quote from: MikieTimT
And since it's HPC 8 in 1991's ISTEA, it probably should be I-50.

I strongly hope not. The designation would suck. Might as well call it "I-1" if egos will be allowed to run wild and loose for any minor, short distance Interstate route. The resulting route would be even shorter than I-30 and connect far less populated areas. Plus the route would be a very short distance from I-40. IMHO, I-46 and I-48 are the only sensible possible designations that won't end up looking really goofy on a map.

I don't really object to the use of the I-50 designation—where else could it be used that would actually make sense and not conflict with US-50?—but do note that since the bill doesn't specify a number, AASHTO is free to approve or decline whatever number they wish. ArDOT and ODOT can apply with I-50 if they wish, and if AASHTO feels that's inappropriate they can change the number (as they did with I-42).

Among the few things that makes I-30 tolerable is it originates in of the nation's biggest metros (DFW) and its ends are at I-20 and I-40. So it still manages to function as a major Interstate in the system. An "I-50" that merely runs from Springdale thru Tulsa to end in a desolate spot along I-35 would be a waste.

The western terminus of Interstate Whatever is pretty close to Perry on I-35. I definitely wouldn't call it desolate. Nowhere near as desolate as, say, I-20's western terminus.

Quote from: MikieTimT
It'd be a cold day in Hades before any of US-412 west of I-35 gets bumped past a 2 lane.
US-412 is 4-lane divided from I-35 to Enid to nearly 20 miles West of Enid. And then there is a couple segments of 4-lane divided road going into Woodward.

You could upgrade Enid to Perry to be Interstate grade if you wanted to, but once you get into Enid things start to get complex. I'm not even sure where the best place to put an Enid bypass would be, since there's a bunch of rail infrastructure on the north side of town and on the south side you'd either have to thread the needle between development and Vance AFB or swing way south to pass south of the base. Neither of those are likely to be anything the USAF is super thrilled about.

I think it would be good to see the US-412 corridor between Enid and Boise City be upgraded to freeway at some point to tie into the I-27 corridor, as well as to make going down the panhandle slightly less miserable. But that's never going to happen without additional legislation like this infrastructure bill that makes it so.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: The Ghostbuster on September 21, 2021, 09:26:40 PM
Could the airport and the Air Force base be relocated to accommodate an Enid bypass? I think the future Interstate corridor should terminate at Interstate 35 and not go any further west.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: MikieTimT on September 21, 2021, 09:33:42 PM
Quote from: MikieTimT
And since it's HPC 8 in 1991's ISTEA, it probably should be I-50.

I strongly hope not. The designation would suck. Might as well call it "I-1" if egos will be allowed to run wild and loose for any minor, short distance Interstate route. The resulting route would be even shorter than I-30 and connect far less populated areas. Plus the route would be a very short distance from I-40. IMHO, I-46 and I-48 are the only sensible possible designations that won't end up looking really goofy on a map.

Among the few things that makes I-30 tolerable is it originates in of the nation's biggest metros (DFW) and its ends are at I-20 and I-40. So it still manages to function as a major Interstate in the system. An "I-50" that merely runs from Springdale thru Tulsa to end in a desolate spot along I-35 would be a waste.

Quote from: MikieTimT
It'd be a cold day in Hades before any of US-412 west of I-35 gets bumped past a 2 lane.

US-412 is 4-lane divided from I-35 to Enid to nearly 20 miles West of Enid. And then there is a couple segments of 4-lane divided road going into Woodward.
What if this potential I-50 extends towards Denver via Dodge City and Garden City like your Oklahoma City-Denver interstate idea you've floated around? I'd like to think that would be worthy of an x0.

I know I'd use it going to Colorado Springs/Denver or points west more than a little.  Wouldn't be very expensive terrain to build in either compared to some of the more mountainous/swampy stretches that many of the new terrain Interstates have/are being pushed through as of late.  If it ran further north toward Kit Carson along the US-287 corridor, then only the short stretch between Dodge City and Garden City would potentially conflict with a US-50 multiplex of an I-50.  Don't know how Kansas would handle having 2 Route 50's in their state.  Arkansas has long since gotten past that particular hangup, if we ever had it to begin with.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Bobby5280 on September 21, 2021, 10:46:00 PM
Quote from: MikieTimT
And if Springdale/Lowell is where it ended, I'd agree, but was intended to go all the way to Nashville, which adds quite a bit of mileage.

I've seen "I-66" proposals that crossed Kentucky, Missouri and even parts of Kansas and New Mexico. I've seen propsals for upgrading US-412 across Arkansas in various manners, but usually no more than standard 4-lane divided rather than full Interstate quality. Such a corridor going clear to Nashville? I must have missed that HPC proposal.

Quote from: CoreySamson
What if this potential I-50 extends towards Denver via Dodge City and Garden City like your Oklahoma City-Denver interstate idea you've floated around? I'd like to think that would be worthy of an x0.

The route would look a little weird overall, a bit of a V-shape, with it having to take a fairly sharp bend going up into Kansas. If such a route were to go up to Dodge City the bend in Oklahoma would have to happen near Enid rather than Woodward. That would ruin quite a bit of the appeal of such a route for drivers coming from/thru the OKC area heading to Colorado. A direct route from Woodward to Garden City works better in that regard.

I think chances are between very slim to absolutely none the US-412 corridor would ever be upgraded fully to Interstate quality between Springdale and Walnut Ridge. But if such a thing were to happen, and I-555 was extended up to Walnut Ridge, that could be added to that fictional diagonal corridor up to Limon. That ultimate combo, an I-70 to I-40 route, would be more worthy of an I-50 designation.

Still, I think a designation as big as I-50 needs to cross at least 3 time zones or be as close to a coast-to-coast route as possible. Not too long ago I described one fictional I-50 idea that would go from Jacksonville, FL to Provo, UT. But that idea would consume I-22 and I-555. I would use US-60 across Southern Missouri (since chances are far better for US-60 to get an Interstate upgrade than US-412 in Northern Arkansas). From Joplin the route would go to Wichita and overlap US-50 a good distance thru Pueblo to Grand Junction, co-sign with I-70 to the US-6 split then go up to Provo to end at I-15. Can't see any realistic scenario for pushing the fictional route across Nevada into California.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Scott5114 on September 22, 2021, 02:24:50 AM
If it ran further north toward Kit Carson along the US-287 corridor, then only the short stretch between Dodge City and Garden City would potentially conflict with a US-50 multiplex of an I-50.  Don't know how Kansas would handle having 2 Route 50's in their state. 

They already have two K-8s, so I don't know that they'd mind so much. But the two are on opposite ends of the state (one is a short connector to OK-8, and the other is a short connector to the Nebraska border).

Could the airport and the Air Force base be relocated to accommodate an Enid bypass? I think the future Interstate corridor should terminate at Interstate 35 and not go any further west.

You know how expensive it would be to move a whole damn Air Force Base? I have a feeling it would be cheaper to just bypass it further out.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Bobby5280 on September 22, 2021, 10:57:43 AM
Vance AFB isn't very big. Still, bypassing South of the AFB would put the alignment 5 miles South of current US-412. If tunnels weren't so freakish expensive to build it could be possible to build a freeway bypass along the North edge of Vance AFB near the main gates and tunnel under the runways nearby to come back above ground past Oakwood Road. Comparitively speaking it would probably be cheaper to buy ROW needed along or near Southgate Road in order to squeeze between the AFB and South side of Enid.

Some sort of Southern bypass of Enid would probably be preferable to going North around the town. The bulk of Enid is situated on North of US-412, which would make a bypass around the North side of Enid longer than a Southern bypass.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: skluth on September 22, 2021, 12:34:21 PM
Could the airport and the Air Force base be relocated to accommodate an Enid bypass? I think the future Interstate corridor should terminate at Interstate 35 and not go any further west.

The government will close a base using BRAC (https://www.acq.osd.mil/brac/) before moving it unless someone with a lot of political power can stop it. This is especially true of small bases that can have their mission easily moved to another base. Training bases tend to be closed in every BRAC rotation. Getting a freeway in exchange for losing a base is not a deal most cities would accept.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: edwaleni on September 22, 2021, 01:16:42 PM
Vance AFB isn't very big. Still, bypassing South of the AFB would put the alignment 5 miles South of current US-412. If tunnels weren't so freakish expensive to build it could be possible to build a freeway bypass along the North edge of Vance AFB near the main gates and tunnel under the runways nearby to come back above ground past Oakwood Road. Comparitively speaking it would probably be cheaper to buy ROW needed along or near Southgate Road in order to squeeze between the AFB and South side of Enid.

Some sort of Southern bypass of Enid would probably be preferable to going North around the town. The bulk of Enid is situated on North of US-412, which would make a bypass around the North side of Enid longer than a Southern bypass.

Honestly most of the traffic on US-412 is east of Enid.  There has been some traffic growth west of Enid due to the amount of fracking in the Cimarron River basin. But when he current US-412 was built in the 1970's (now Owen Garriott Drive) it wasn't to support a large urban bypass because the amount of traffic didn't warrant it. Enid was trying to get truck traffic out of downtown because the only way in was on Market Street with the curve up to Maine Street at NOU which was built in 1936.The "Shark Bridge" was a clearance problem. The city limits of Enid in the 70's didn't go past what was then Market Street until you got to S. 7th St, so the new road simply avoided downtown.

Enid has exploded on the west and northwest side of town (probably due to oil workers) but I dont think it justifies a bypass in and of itself.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: MikieTimT on September 22, 2021, 01:34:14 PM
Quote from: MikieTimT
And if Springdale/Lowell is where it ended, I'd agree, but was intended to go all the way to Nashville, which adds quite a bit of mileage.

I've seen "I-66" proposals that crossed Kentucky, Missouri and even parts of Kansas and New Mexico. I've seen propsals for upgrading US-412 across Arkansas in various manners, but usually no more than standard 4-lane divided rather than full Interstate quality. Such a corridor going clear to Nashville? I must have missed that HPC proposal.

Quote from: CoreySamson
What if this potential I-50 extends towards Denver via Dodge City and Garden City like your Oklahoma City-Denver interstate idea you've floated around? I'd like to think that would be worthy of an x0.

The route would look a little weird overall, a bit of a V-shape, with it having to take a fairly sharp bend going up into Kansas. If such a route were to go up to Dodge City the bend in Oklahoma would have to happen near Enid rather than Woodward. That would ruin quite a bit of the appeal of such a route for drivers coming from/thru the OKC area heading to Colorado. A direct route from Woodward to Garden City works better in that regard.

I think chances are between very slim to absolutely none the US-412 corridor would ever be upgraded fully to Interstate quality between Springdale and Walnut Ridge. But if such a thing were to happen, and I-555 was extended up to Walnut Ridge, that could be added to that fictional diagonal corridor up to Limon. That ultimate combo, an I-70 to I-40 route, would be more worthy of an I-50 designation.

Still, I think a designation as big as I-50 needs to cross at least 3 time zones or be as close to a coast-to-coast route as possible. Not too long ago I described one fictional I-50 idea that would go from Jacksonville, FL to Provo, UT. But that idea would consume I-22 and I-555. I would use US-60 across Southern Missouri (since chances are far better for US-60 to get an Interstate upgrade than US-412 in Northern Arkansas). From Joplin the route would go to Wichita and overlap US-50 a good distance thru Pueblo to Grand Junction, co-sign with I-70 to the US-6 split then go up to Provo to end at I-15. Can't see any realistic scenario for pushing the fictional route across Nevada into California.

That's odd.  Almost every reference of ISTEA High Priority Corridor 8 I found online has it going into Tennessee, Nashville specifically. (Much to the chagrin of our resident US-412 Tennessee representative)

https://www.peaktraffic.org/corridors.html (https://www.peaktraffic.org/corridors.html)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_priority_corridor (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_priority_corridor)
https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/COMPS-1422/pdf/COMPS-1422.pdf (https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/COMPS-1422/pdf/COMPS-1422.pdf) (Pg. 68-71 of 158,
SEC.  1105.  HIGH  PRIORITY  CORRIDORS  ON  NATIONAL  HIGHWAY  SYSTEM,
  (c)  IDENTIFICATION OF HIGH PRIORITY CORRIDORS ON NATIONAL HIGHWAY SYSTEM.—The following are high priority corridors on the National Highway System:
      (8)  Highway  412  East-West  Corridor  from  Tulsa,  Oklahoma, through Arkansas along United States Route 62/63/65 to Nashville, Tennessee.)


And I-30 is only in 2 states, both within a single timezone, and is almost as much N-S as it is E-W.  It's one with a rather large amount of traffic, though.  Diagonals sure do mess with standards.


Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: MikieTimT on October 02, 2021, 10:11:34 AM
Now that I-49 is complete in NWA, the western leg of the US-412 bypass (Future I-50?) can start to get focus to pull the traffic off US-412/AR-112 for traffic coming and going to northbound I-49.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: bugo on October 08, 2021, 06:53:06 AM
They already have two K-8s, so I don't know that they'd mind so much. But the two are on opposite ends of the state (one is a short connector to OK-8, and the other is a short connector to the Nebraska border).

The two sections of Kansas 8 were once connected. Most of what is now US 281 was once K-8, which ran from the Nebraska line to US 36 along modern K-8, east on US 36, south on US 281, east on K-2 and south on modern K-8.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: US71 on October 27, 2021, 08:51:23 PM
Now that I-49 is complete in NWA, the western leg of the US-412 bypass (Future I-50?) can start to get focus to pull the traffic off US-412/AR-112 for traffic coming and going to northbound I-49.

Nope. ARDOT has other plans.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Rover_0 on November 07, 2021, 10:05:34 PM
From an email, the latest thing I've heard about the US-412 upgrade is that it's in the Environment and Public Works Committee of the U.S. Senate since May. Has anyone else heard anything new recently?

Does (or could) the (massive) infrastructure bill change any of that?
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: edwaleni on November 07, 2021, 10:26:12 PM
Inhofe, others push to make stretch of U.S. 412 an interstate

(https://bloximages.newyork1.vip.townnews.com/tulsaworld.com/content/tncms/assets/v3/editorial/4/77/477ea316-ba88-11eb-9150-abead8918c38/60a83bbb5a35d.image.jpg?resize=1200%2C623)

OKLAHOMA CITY — Federal legislation introduced Friday would designate U.S. 412 running through Oklahoma and Arkansas as a future interstate.

The measure would give the designation to the stretch of U.S. 412 from Interstate 35 in Noble County to Interstate 49 in Springdale, Arkansas.

The highway is known as the Sand Springs Expressway between Tulsa and Sand Springs and the Keystone Expressway west of Sand Springs.

The bill was introduced by U.S. Sens. Jim Inhofe, R-Okla., and John Boozman and Tom Cotton, both R-Ark.

“Our interstate system is the lifeblood of Oklahoma’s economy and provides the network for companies to bring materials into our critical industries, for businesses to locate in areas convenient for consumers, and for commuters to get to work and school safely and reliably,” Inhofe said.

“Designating Route 412 as an interstate would benefit Oklahoma by attracting new businesses, improving safety, enhancing freight mobility and better connecting rural and urban communities.”

While most major metropolitan areas across the nation have two or more interstate highways connecting their regions, the Tulsa metro area and the northwest Arkansas metropolitan area are both served by just one interstate highway each, Interstate 44 and Interstate 49, respectively.

“The designation would have a significant impact for Tulsa and all of northeast Oklahoma,” Tulsa Mayor G.T. Bynum said.

The interstate designation is needed to keep up with the growth of the area, proponents say.

The Oklahoma and Arkansas departments of transportation would have to fully upgrade the corridor to interstate standards, ODOT Director Tim Gatz and ADT Director Lorie Tudor wrote in a letter to Inhofe.

Both support the move, the letter says.

A significant portion of the route was designed and built to interstate standards, the letter says.

The proposal would connect three key interstate freight corridors in the heartland: Interstate 35, Interstate 44 and Interstate 49, Gatz and Tudor wrote.

“The existing US-412 route directly serves major inland ports, including the Tulsa Ports of Catoosa and Inola and Oakley’s Port 33 on the McClellan-Kerr Arkansas River Navigation System,” the letter says.

“An interstate designation on this route also improves access to the Tulsa International Airport and Northwest Arkansas Regional Airport, and will improve supply chain connectivity for major retail and industrial employers in the region, including Walmart, and numerous energy and aerospace companies.”

Terri Angier, an Oklahoma Department of Transportation spokeswoman, said the project has been talked about for a number of years.

She said the filing of the measure is a starting point.

Officials will need to determine the costs and which areas would need to be upgraded, Angier said.

More of U.S. 412 in Oklahoma than in Arkansas has already been upgraded because the Oklahoma portion includes two turnpikes — the Cimarron and the Cherokee, she said.

Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: edwaleni on November 07, 2021, 10:37:04 PM
From an email, the latest thing I've heard about the US-412 upgrade is that it's in the Environment and Public Works Committee of the U.S. Senate since May. Has anyone else heard anything new recently?

Does (or could) the (massive) infrastructure bill change any of that?

On October 6, 2021, The bill was read into the SURFACE TRANSPORTATION REAUTHORIZATION ACT OF 2021 and included in report 117-41

https://www.congress.gov/117/crpt/srpt41/CRPT-117srpt41.pdf (https://www.congress.gov/117/crpt/srpt41/CRPT-117srpt41.pdf)

The biggest issue is that the Highway Trust Fund is severely underfunded. By 2023 it will be $23 Billion in the hole. So if they don't raise the federal fuels tax, the money will have to come out of the general fund via a grant.

On the House side it got rolled into the INVEST in America bill, but it has some clauses that aren't going over to well.

For example:

"directs DOT to establish a pilot program to demonstrate a national motor vehicle per-mile user fee to restore and maintain the long-term solvency of the Highway Trust Fund and achieve and maintain a state of good repair in the surface transportation system."
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Scott5114 on November 07, 2021, 11:37:33 PM
From an email, the latest thing I've heard about the US-412 upgrade is that it's in the Environment and Public Works Committee of the U.S. Senate since May. Has anyone else heard anything new recently?

Does (or could) the (massive) infrastructure bill change any of that?

Inhofe offered an amendment, which was passed, adding a copy of the US-412 upgrade language into the infrastructure bill when it was still in the Senate. Since that bill just passed the House, the only way it doesn't happen now is if Joe Biden says so, and the chances of that are virtually nil. (Inhofe then later voted against the bill that contained his amendment. Ah, politics.)

The standalone bill you've been tracking is now redundant and therefore probably won't make it out of committee, since there's no reason for further action on it.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Road Hog on November 08, 2021, 01:40:29 AM
From an email, the latest thing I've heard about the US-412 upgrade is that it's in the Environment and Public Works Committee of the U.S. Senate since May. Has anyone else heard anything new recently?

Does (or could) the (massive) infrastructure bill change any of that?

Inhofe offered an amendment, which was passed, adding a copy of the US-412 upgrade language into the infrastructure bill when it was still in the Senate. Since that bill just passed the House, the only way it doesn't happen now is if Joe Biden says so, and the chances of that are virtually nil. (Inhofe then later voted against the bill that contained his amendment. Ah, politics.)

The standalone bill you've been tracking is now redundant and therefore probably won't make it out of committee, since there's no reason for further action on it.
So Inhofe was for it before he was against it?
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: sprjus4 on November 08, 2021, 02:24:19 AM
From an email, the latest thing I've heard about the US-412 upgrade is that it's in the Environment and Public Works Committee of the U.S. Senate since May. Has anyone else heard anything new recently?

Does (or could) the (massive) infrastructure bill change any of that?

Inhofe offered an amendment, which was passed, adding a copy of the US-412 upgrade language into the infrastructure bill when it was still in the Senate. Since that bill just passed the House, the only way it doesn't happen now is if Joe Biden says so, and the chances of that are virtually nil. (Inhofe then later voted against the bill that contained his amendment. Ah, politics.)

The standalone bill you've been tracking is now redundant and therefore probably won't make it out of committee, since there's no reason for further action on it.
So Inhofe was for it before he was against it?
He opposed the infrastructure bill in general, largely due to the fact only some $100 billion is actually going to roads, bridges, etc. but decided to include the US-412 amendment in order to get something out of it, given it was inevitably going to pass.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Avalanchez71 on November 08, 2021, 07:39:08 AM
Quote from: MikieTimT
And if Springdale/Lowell is where it ended, I'd agree, but was intended to go all the way to Nashville, which adds quite a bit of mileage.

I've seen "I-66" proposals that crossed Kentucky, Missouri and even parts of Kansas and New Mexico. I've seen propsals for upgrading US-412 across Arkansas in various manners, but usually no more than standard 4-lane divided rather than full Interstate quality. Such a corridor going clear to Nashville? I must have missed that HPC proposal.

Quote from: CoreySamson
What if this potential I-50 extends towards Denver via Dodge City and Garden City like your Oklahoma City-Denver interstate idea you've floated around? I'd like to think that would be worthy of an x0.

The route would look a little weird overall, a bit of a V-shape, with it having to take a fairly sharp bend going up into Kansas. If such a route were to go up to Dodge City the bend in Oklahoma would have to happen near Enid rather than Woodward. That would ruin quite a bit of the appeal of such a route for drivers coming from/thru the OKC area heading to Colorado. A direct route from Woodward to Garden City works better in that regard.

I think chances are between very slim to absolutely none the US-412 corridor would ever be upgraded fully to Interstate quality between Springdale and Walnut Ridge. But if such a thing were to happen, and I-555 was extended up to Walnut Ridge, that could be added to that fictional diagonal corridor up to Limon. That ultimate combo, an I-70 to I-40 route, would be more worthy of an I-50 designation.

Still, I think a designation as big as I-50 needs to cross at least 3 time zones or be as close to a coast-to-coast route as possible. Not too long ago I described one fictional I-50 idea that would go from Jacksonville, FL to Provo, UT. But that idea would consume I-22 and I-555. I would use US-60 across Southern Missouri (since chances are far better for US-60 to get an Interstate upgrade than US-412 in Northern Arkansas). From Joplin the route would go to Wichita and overlap US-50 a good distance thru Pueblo to Grand Junction, co-sign with I-70 to the US-6 split then go up to Provo to end at I-15. Can't see any realistic scenario for pushing the fictional route across Nevada into California.

That's odd.  Almost every reference of ISTEA High Priority Corridor 8 I found online has it going into Tennessee, Nashville specifically. (Much to the chagrin of our resident US-412 Tennessee representative)

https://www.peaktraffic.org/corridors.html (https://www.peaktraffic.org/corridors.html)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_priority_corridor (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_priority_corridor)
https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/COMPS-1422/pdf/COMPS-1422.pdf (https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/COMPS-1422/pdf/COMPS-1422.pdf) (Pg. 68-71 of 158,
SEC.  1105.  HIGH  PRIORITY  CORRIDORS  ON  NATIONAL  HIGHWAY  SYSTEM,
  (c)  IDENTIFICATION OF HIGH PRIORITY CORRIDORS ON NATIONAL HIGHWAY SYSTEM.—The following are high priority corridors on the National Highway System:
      (8)  Highway  412  East-West  Corridor  from  Tulsa,  Oklahoma, through Arkansas along United States Route 62/63/65 to Nashville, Tennessee.)


And I-30 is only in 2 states, both within a single timezone, and is almost as much N-S as it is E-W.  It's one with a rather large amount of traffic, though.  Diagonals sure do mess with standards.

I just did this drive and found that there are several options out there already.  We don't need an additional option.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: MikieTimT on November 08, 2021, 11:37:11 AM
From an email, the latest thing I've heard about the US-412 upgrade is that it's in the Environment and Public Works Committee of the U.S. Senate since May. Has anyone else heard anything new recently?

Does (or could) the (massive) infrastructure bill change any of that?

Inhofe offered an amendment, which was passed, adding a copy of the US-412 upgrade language into the infrastructure bill when it was still in the Senate. Since that bill just passed the House, the only way it doesn't happen now is if Joe Biden says so, and the chances of that are virtually nil. (Inhofe then later voted against the bill that contained his amendment. Ah, politics.)

The standalone bill you've been tracking is now redundant and therefore probably won't make it out of committee, since there's no reason for further action on it.

Apparently, this trucking company is pretty confident in all of this moving forward since they just bought land on the next exit to the south of where this currently terminates south of Lowell on I-49.

Trucking company buys I-49 land in Springdale for possible expansion (https://talkbusiness.net/2021/11/trucking-company-buys-i-49-land-in-springdale-for-possible-expansion/)
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: -- US 175 -- on November 08, 2021, 11:42:25 AM
Quote
"Our interstate system is the lifeblood of Oklahoma’s economy and provides the network for companies to bring materials into our critical industries, for businesses to locate in areas convenient for consumers, and for commuters to get to work and school safely and reliably,” Inhofe said.

Too bad he doesn't think so highly about any potentially-interstated part of US 69.  Sounds like he has his priorities.  :-/ :-|
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: MikieTimT on November 08, 2021, 12:01:56 PM
Quote
"Our interstate system is the lifeblood of Oklahoma’s economy and provides the network for companies to bring materials into our critical industries, for businesses to locate in areas convenient for consumers, and for commuters to get to work and school safely and reliably,” Inhofe said.

Too bad he doesn't think so highly about any potentially-interstated part of US 69.  Sounds like he has his priorities.  :-/ :-|

Maybe the largest revenue generator in Stringtown is one of his contributors.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: SkyPesos on November 08, 2021, 02:53:24 PM
Quote
"Our interstate system is the lifeblood of Oklahoma’s economy and provides the network for companies to bring materials into our critical industries, for businesses to locate in areas convenient for consumers, and for commuters to get to work and school safely and reliably,” Inhofe said.

Too bad he doesn't think so highly about any potentially-interstated part of US 69.  Sounds like he has his priorities.  :-/ :-|
He probably wants Arkansas to take the St Louis-Dallas traffic away from Oklahoma first. Currently, I-44/US 69/US 75 via OK and US 67/I-30 via AR are about the same driving time between the two cities, but the extension of I-57 along I-67 south of Poplar Bluff will definitely sway in the favor of US 67/I-30.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Scott5114 on November 08, 2021, 03:26:41 PM
Inhofe is a Tulsa homer and this is supposedly going to be his last term in office. Upgrading US-412 lets him end his career by giving something shiny to Tulsa, so that's why that's why he gives a shit about that and not US-69.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Plutonic Panda on November 08, 2021, 03:39:14 PM
I wish they’d remove tolls on this stretch to create a toll free option for Tulsa. Way too many tolls Tulsa has to deal with. Ideally every toll road would be removed. Start with 412.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: edwaleni on November 08, 2021, 04:33:34 PM
From an email, the latest thing I've heard about the US-412 upgrade is that it's in the Environment and Public Works Committee of the U.S. Senate since May. Has anyone else heard anything new recently?

Does (or could) the (massive) infrastructure bill change any of that?

Inhofe offered an amendment, which was passed, adding a copy of the US-412 upgrade language into the infrastructure bill when it was still in the Senate. Since that bill just passed the House, the only way it doesn't happen now is if Joe Biden says so, and the chances of that are virtually nil. (Inhofe then later voted against the bill that contained his amendment. Ah, politics.)

The standalone bill you've been tracking is now redundant and therefore probably won't make it out of committee, since there's no reason for further action on it.

Apparently, this trucking company is pretty confident in all of this moving forward since they just bought land on the next exit to the south of where this currently terminates south of Lowell on I-49.

Trucking company buys I-49 land in Springdale for possible expansion (https://talkbusiness.net/2021/11/trucking-company-buys-i-49-land-in-springdale-for-possible-expansion/)

Thats a good spot. Easy access to both 49 and the future bypass in each direction.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: MikieTimT on November 08, 2021, 04:47:27 PM
From an email, the latest thing I've heard about the US-412 upgrade is that it's in the Environment and Public Works Committee of the U.S. Senate since May. Has anyone else heard anything new recently?

Does (or could) the (massive) infrastructure bill change any of that?

Inhofe offered an amendment, which was passed, adding a copy of the US-412 upgrade language into the infrastructure bill when it was still in the Senate. Since that bill just passed the House, the only way it doesn't happen now is if Joe Biden says so, and the chances of that are virtually nil. (Inhofe then later voted against the bill that contained his amendment. Ah, politics.)

The standalone bill you've been tracking is now redundant and therefore probably won't make it out of committee, since there's no reason for further action on it.

Apparently, this trucking company is pretty confident in all of this moving forward since they just bought land on the next exit to the south of where this currently terminates south of Lowell on I-49.

Trucking company buys I-49 land in Springdale for possible expansion (https://talkbusiness.net/2021/11/trucking-company-buys-i-49-land-in-springdale-for-possible-expansion/)

Thats a good spot. Easy access to both 49 and the future bypass in each direction.

That exit and the Lowell exit to the north of AR-612 will fill up with businesses in or serving the trucking industry shockingly quick, I suspect.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: hurricanehink on November 10, 2021, 11:02:12 AM
Do you think the 412 interstate would tie into AK 612 to reach 49? 
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: mvak36 on November 10, 2021, 11:34:39 AM
Do you think the 412 interstate would tie into AK 612 to reach 49?

I think it would. 412 is too built up closer to I-49 so the interstate will use the bypass.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: MikieTimT on November 10, 2021, 11:39:22 AM
Do you think the 412 interstate would tie into AK 612 to reach 49?

I think it would. 412 is too built up closer to I-49 so the interstate will use the bypass.

Undoubtedly.  AR-612 is already limited access.  What remains to be seen is how it will be handled from XNA westward in AR and OK to the Cherokee Turnpike.  Siloam Springs and West Siloam Springs will have to be bypassed, which should have happened 10 years ago instead of the stupid 6 laning of US-412 through Siloam Springs.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Scott5114 on November 10, 2021, 02:02:14 PM
Do you think the 412 interstate would tie into AK 612 to reach 49? 

The interstate's west end is proposed to be at Perry, Oklahoma. There are no plans to extend it to Alaska.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: MikieTimT on November 10, 2021, 03:06:14 PM
Do you think the 412 interstate would tie into AK 612 to reach 49? 

The interstate's west end is proposed to be at Perry, Oklahoma. There are no plans to extend it to Alaska.

US-412's western end is Springer, NM at I-25.  I'd bank on none of us living long enough to see I-50 ever get past I-35.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: edwaleni on November 10, 2021, 05:07:35 PM
Inhofe is a Tulsa homer and this is supposedly going to be his last term in office. Upgrading US-412 lets him end his career by giving something shiny to Tulsa, so that's why that's why he gives a shit about that and not US-69.

"Inhofe Memorial Highway".  I can see it in green with the white font already.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: MikieTimT on November 10, 2021, 05:22:28 PM
Inhofe is a Tulsa homer and this is supposedly going to be his last term in office. Upgrading US-412 lets him end his career by giving something shiny to Tulsa, so that's why that's why he gives a shit about that and not US-69.

"Inhofe Memorial Highway".  I can see it in green with the white font already.

It'd be a little more cumbersome on the Arkansas portion, what with 2 sponsors here.  I really don't care, as long as it gets built, preferably with the turnpike portion transitioning to free.  Doubt that Oklahoma lets go of that revenue stream, though.  Wonder how long it will take to pay off the Cherokee Turnpike, or has it been already and revenue redirected?
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Scott5114 on November 10, 2021, 06:12:14 PM
Inhofe is a Tulsa homer and this is supposedly going to be his last term in office. Upgrading US-412 lets him end his career by giving something shiny to Tulsa, so that's why that's why he gives a shit about that and not US-69.

"Inhofe Memorial Highway".  I can see it in green with the white font already.

Assuming the Legislature hasn't already named a bunch of disjointed sections of it after random state troopers like they tend to do.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Bobby5280 on November 10, 2021, 07:07:23 PM
Quote
I'd bank on none of us living long enough to see I-50 ever get past I-35.

Chances are slim to none the Interstate designation over US-412 will go East of I-49 either. That is all the more reason to not waste a major designation such as "I-50" on such a short length Interstate, particularly one in close proximity to I-40.

I think it would be really funny if the resulting Interstate ended up being un-signed or even called I-412.
:D
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Scott5114 on November 10, 2021, 08:00:03 PM
Quote
I'd bank on none of us living long enough to see I-50 ever get past I-35.

Chances are slim to none the Interstate designation over US-412 will go East of I-49 either. That is all the more reason to not waste a major designation such as "I-50" on such a short length Interstate, particularly one in close proximity to I-40.

I think it would be really funny if the resulting Interstate ended up being un-signed or even called I-412.
:D

Not I-437? :P
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Plutonic Panda on November 10, 2021, 09:14:09 PM
Quote
I'd bank on none of us living long enough to see I-50 ever get past I-35.

Chances are slim to none the Interstate designation over US-412 will go East of I-49 either. That is all the more reason to not waste a major designation such as "I-50" on such a short length Interstate, particularly one in close proximity to I-40.

I think it would be really funny if the resulting Interstate ended up being un-signed or even called I-412.
:D
So where else would I-50 go then? This route seems perfectly fit for I-50.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Alex on November 10, 2021, 10:37:22 PM
Chances are slim to none the Interstate designation over US-412 will go East of I-49 either. That is all the more reason to not waste a major designation such as "I-50" on such a short length Interstate, particularly one in close proximity to I-40.
:D

No a waste is nonexistent I-50 with no corridor whatsoever to be designated as one.  So I'd take I-50 along US 412 vs. it being reserved for some fictional corridor.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Bobby5280 on November 11, 2021, 12:03:36 AM
Not all digits from 1 to 99 need to be covered in the Interstate highway system. Interstate routes whose numbers end in a five or zero need to be major routes. Springdale to a spot on I-35 kind of out in the middle of nowhere is NOT a major route. I-50 is an even more serious designation than I-40. If anything, I-40 should have been called I-50 if it was actually necessary to have an I-50 route in the Interstate system. But it isn't necessary. What's next, re-name the WA-16 freeway from Tacoma to Bremerton "Interstate 1?"

I've seen plenty of gripes in the past about I-30 and how short it is for having a major designation. This "I-50" nonsense would be even shorter and have both ends in places of far less consequence. At least I-30 dovetails into I-20 in one of the most gigantic metros in the US at its West end and dovetails into I-40 at its East end in a metro of at least some significant size. The future Interstate along US-412 has NONE of those major route functions. So it shouldn't be carrying a major route designation.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Plutonic Panda on November 11, 2021, 12:14:14 AM
In the grand scheme of things the likelihood of a multi(3+) corridor is slim to none along US-412 but that can change fast. We get serious proposals like I-27 E and W or I-11 south of I-10. So all it takes is one lawmaker to propose an extension of an I-50 from I-35 to I-25 and then it becomes non fictional?

I’ll ask again, and if the seriousness of the designation doesn’t matter because I-40 should be I-50 is real then the case is even better, where else would I-50 go?
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Alex on November 11, 2021, 07:56:00 AM
Not all digits from 1 to 99 need to be covered in the Interstate highway system. Interstate routes whose numbers end in a five or zero need to be major routes. Springdale to a spot on I-35 kind of out in the middle of nowhere is NOT a major route. I-50 is an even more serious designation than I-40. If anything, I-40 should have been called I-50 if it was actually necessary to have an I-50 route in the Interstate system. But it isn't necessary. What's next, re-name the WA-16 freeway from Tacoma to Bremerton "Interstate 1?"

I've seen plenty of gripes in the past about I-30 and how short it is for having a major designation. This "I-50" nonsense would be even shorter and have both ends in places of far less consequence. At least I-30 dovetails into I-20 in one of the most gigantic metros in the US at its West end and dovetails into I-40 at its East end in a metro of at least some significant size. The future Interstate along US-412 has NONE of those major route functions. So it shouldn't be carrying a major route designation.

Again I-50 at zero miles in length is worse than I-30. So only in a fictional world is I-50 more serious of a designation than I-40.
Barring a pipedream major expansion of the Interstate system, I-50 and I-60 will likely never be used outside of a Turnpike upgrade in OK or Parkway upgrade in KY.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: I-35 on November 11, 2021, 10:59:01 AM
So, if this I-46, I-48, etc happens, does Perry become a control city for I-35 in between Wichita and OKC?   Might be in the running with Limon for most desolate control city.  And what would be the WB control city?  Enid, which will not be on the interstate?  Or Perry, which is not at the intersection either, but at least closer to the terminus with I-35?

Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Plutonic Panda on November 11, 2021, 12:46:53 PM
To be completely honest I really could care less about the designation of the road as I care more about the physical aspect. The improvements that come along with making the road a better designed freeway as part of being an interstate is what excites me. But I don’t mind saying it I’m going to absolutely lose my shit if the powers that be suggest is to be I 50 and I absolutely will support it to do my part to see it become a reality so I can watch everyone here go crazy lol
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: bwana39 on November 11, 2021, 01:51:03 PM
To be completely honest I really could care less about the designation of the road as I care more about the physical aspect. The improvements that come along with making the road a better designed freeway as part of being an interstate is what excites me. But I don’t mind saying it I’m going to absolutely lose my shit if the powers that be suggest is to be I 50 and I absolutely will support it to do my part to see it become a reality so I can watch everyone here go crazy lol

I so completely agree with you.  I am not a great fan of give it an Interstate number.
*******************************************************************************************************************************************

BTW: I-50 was purposely skipped because  US-50 / IH-50 could hardly miss one another.  There is no plan to EVER have an IH-50. The even numbered US Highways went from smaller  numbers in the north and larger in the south.  The Interstate numbers were opposite.

Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: JayhawkCO on November 11, 2021, 01:52:15 PM
To be completely honest I really could care less about the designation of the road as I care more about the physical aspect. The improvements that come along with making the road a better designed freeway as part of being an interstate is what excites me. But I don’t mind saying it I’m going to absolutely lose my shit if the powers that be suggest is to be I 50 and I absolutely will support it to do my part to see it become a reality so I can watch everyone here go crazy lol

I so completely agree with you.  I am not a great fan of give it an Interstate number.
*******************************************************************************************************************************************

BTW: I-50 was purposely skipped because  US-50 / IH-50 could hardly miss one another.  There is no plan to EVER have an IH-50. The even numbered US Highways went from smaller  numbers in the north and larger in the south.  The Interstate numbers were opposite.

Then make it I-60 and have people go even more mental.

Chris
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Scott5114 on November 11, 2021, 02:18:44 PM
So, if this I-46, I-48, etc happens, does Perry become a control city for I-35 in between Wichita and OKC? Might be in the running with Limon for most desolate control city.

Doubtful. Oklahoma is extremely stingy with its control cities. The only in-state controls right now are OKC, Tulsa, and Lawton, which were the three largest cities in the state when the Interstates were built.

Perry has a population of 4,484, more than double Limon's. The population of Noble County, OK (which Perry is the seat of) is 10,924, almost double that of Lincoln County, CO (which Limon is not the seat of), and Noble County has a third of the land area. So while Perry would be a questionable control city choice, to be sure, it's in no way desolate in the sense that Limon is.

I don't know that I-35 control cities will change at all because of this. Certainly, northbound control cities in this case wouldn't change; anyone headed to Tulsa out of Oklahoma City would have taken I-44 instead (and anyone headed to Stillwater would have taken SH-51), so I-48 would be of little relevance to them. Southbound, you might see I-35 dual signed as Tulsa/Oklahoma City between Braman and Perry, but even that would be a little out of the ordinary for ODOT.

    And what would be the WB control city?  Enid, which will not be on the interstate?  Or Perry, which is not at the intersection either, but at least closer to the terminus with I-35?

The turnpike is currently dual signed for Stillwater and Enid, and I see no reason to change that.

I think the more interesting thing will be what the eastbound control out of Tulsa will be, and whether ODOT does anything to try to mitigate people potentially getting Springdale AR confused with Springfield MO on I-44.

BTW: I-50 was purposely skipped because  US-50 / IH-50 could hardly miss one another.  There is no plan to EVER have an IH-50. The even numbered US Highways went from smaller  numbers in the north and larger in the south.  The Interstate numbers were opposite.

The entire reason I-50 was mentioned for this route is because it is one of the few places where an I-50 would be in-grid and yet be nowhere near US-50. (US-50 doesn't meet I-35 until about 150 miles north of Perry, in Emporia, Kansas, and it doesn't meet I-49 until Kansas City, which is a whole state north of Springdale.)
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Cerlin on November 11, 2021, 04:00:45 PM
So, if this I-46, I-48, etc happens, does Perry become a control city for I-35 in between Wichita and OKC?   Might be in the running with Limon for most desolate control city.  And what would be the WB control city?  Enid, which will not be on the interstate?  Or Perry, which is not at the intersection either, but at least closer to the terminus with I-35?
I doubt Perry becomes a control city, just as Belton hasn’t really become a control city SB out of Waco or NB from Austin on I-35, even though that’s where I-14 terminates into I-35. I could be wrong but I just did that drive last weekend and didn’t recall anything relating to I-14 being a control and that interstate is relatively similar to this situation.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: edwaleni on November 12, 2021, 02:04:17 PM
West of Tulsa I would imagine the control cities to be probably Stillwater - Enid because US-412 will be cosigned with what ever I number it gets.

East of Tulsa I would expect it to be Springdale AR.

You will probably a see a mileage sign at least once with the endpoints.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: The Ghostbuster on November 12, 2021, 02:19:24 PM
I expect the control cities listed on the signs once the US 412 corridor will follow the ones listed on the existing signs along the present-day corridor. I still think the corridor should be Interstate 46 or 48 (save the 50 and 60 designations for much longer corridors that are unlikely to ever come into fruition).
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Scott5114 on November 12, 2021, 03:02:06 PM
I expect the control cities listed on the signs once the US 412 corridor will follow the ones listed on the existing signs along the present-day corridor.

Stillwater/Enid, probably, but Siloam Springs should probably go.

East of Tulsa I would expect it to be Springdale AR.

If I was in charge, I'd probably do Fayetteville or Bentonville, actually. Yes, US-412 doesn't actually go through Fayetteville/Bentonville proper, but of the three main NW AR cities, I feel like Springdale is the least well-known.

(save the 50 and 60 designations for much longer corridors that are unlikely to ever come into fruition).

If they are unlikely to ever come into fruition, why should the numbers be saved?
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: MikieTimT on November 12, 2021, 05:02:12 PM
To be completely honest I really could care less about the designation of the road as I care more about the physical aspect. The improvements that come along with making the road a better designed freeway as part of being an interstate is what excites me. But I don’t mind saying it I’m going to absolutely lose my shit if the powers that be suggest is to be I 50 and I absolutely will support it to do my part to see it become a reality so I can watch everyone here go crazy lol

Once this was designated by the 3 senators as an Interstate, I did my part to support designating it as I-50 in submissions to both senators that serve my state.  Time will tell if my eloquence made any impact.  If it were ultimately destined to end at the current 2 endpoints, I'd say that a 3di would be more appropriate, and if I-49 north of I-40 up to Bentonville is any indicator, likely would be as well as a temp designation until real progress started happening east of Springdale/Lowell.  But the HPC designation (HPC 8) that preceded it takes it to Nashville, which isn't exactly BFE.  I-35 to I-65 is a solid chunk of middle America at 680 miles, give or take.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Mapmikey on November 12, 2021, 08:04:26 PM

BTW: I-50 was purposely skipped because  US-50 / IH-50 could hardly miss one another.  There is no plan to EVER have an IH-50. 


Here's my chance to remind the world we've already officially had an I-50 in this country:

GA 520 was officially placed into the interstate system from US 17 to Jekyll Island for 1 day as I-50.  That one day was May 7, 2006.  Why there?  That's where the AASHTO US Route Numbering Committee was meeting and they were doing a vintage car ride to celebrate the 50th anniversary of the Interstates...

http://web.archive.org/web/20170202154531/https://route.transportation.org/Documents/USRN_Minutes_5-5-06.pdf
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: edwaleni on November 12, 2021, 08:06:43 PM
I guess I would say it should be a 3di based in I-44. I-444 or I-644.

It will never go farther than Enid and it will never make it across Arkansas in our lifetime.

US-412 is an interesting road. It starts no where in Tennessee and ends no where in Utah. It doesn't make it to I-25, it ends at 4th Street in downtown Springer.

Another weird factoid about US-412. The exit at Springer, Utah on I-25 going north to reach US-412? Is Exit 412. But since US-412 ends in town, the exit signage doesn't include the shield.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Mapmikey on November 12, 2021, 08:42:16 PM
I guess I would say it should be a 3di based in I-44. I-444 or I-644.

It will never go farther than Enid and it will never make it across Arkansas in our lifetime.

US-412 is an interesting road. It starts no where in Tennessee and ends no where in Utah. It doesn't make it to I-25, it ends at 4th Street in downtown Springer.

Another weird factoid about US-412. The exit at Springer, Utah on I-25 going north to reach US-412? Is Exit 412. But since US-412 ends in town, the exit signage doesn't include the shield.

Despite what signage is (and NM is Terrible), US 56-412 does end at I-25 exit 412.  The application for extending US 412 in 1994 repeatedly has the endpoint as I-25 and also explicitly says US 56 ends there, too.

There is no document for extending US 56 to I-25 available (only NM document is a rejected 1958 extensino to Santa Fe request).
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: triplemultiplex on November 12, 2021, 10:25:31 PM
This should absolutely be I-46.  It will forever be contained to Oklahoma and Arkansas.  It crosses I-44, so even numbers greater than 44 are valid.  There are no viable interstate corridors between I-40 and US 412.  I-42 is taken.  Therefore, it should get the lowest available even number greater than 40: 46.

For some reason, I am especially content with having a future triangle of consecutive interstates in northeast Oklahoma: 44, 45, 46.  (Yeah, at least 1/3rd of that is wishful thinking at this point, but whatever.)

I will go as far to say any answer to the question "What number does this get?" that isn't 46, is incorrect.

If you want an I-50, I'll pitch US 54 from Wichita to Tucumcari. (Part of a longer corridor I'd consider as an I-60 from Tucumcari, NM to Lexington, KY via Wichita & Springfield, but I digress.)
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Scott5114 on November 13, 2021, 01:18:49 AM
I will go as far to say any answer to the question "What number does this get?" that isn't 46, is incorrect.

There's an equally strong argument for 48:
Been meaning to do this for a while, just now got around to it:
(https://i.imgur.com/Gv6B1Sf.png)

The midpoint of the line connecting Springdale and the western terminus of the proposed interstate would be about halfway between where a theoretical grid-perfect I-46 and I-48 intersect I-35. The actual western terminus of the proposed interstate would be just about at the I-48 mark. Therefore, I believe this interstate should be designated I-48.

But I-50 would be close too. :D
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Rover_0 on November 13, 2021, 02:31:20 AM
I’m honestly OK with just about any even number between 46 and 58; I’d kinda like to see an even number in the 50s just to see that it can be done.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: sprjus4 on November 13, 2021, 03:56:07 AM
I’m honestly OK with just about any even number between 46 and 58; I’d kinda like to see an even number in the 50s just to see that it can be done.
I-58 would be a reasonable number for a corridor along US-58 in Virginia between Virginia Beach (replacing I-264 entirely) and I-95/I-85, IMO.

That's assuming a freeway is ever fully realized along that route to begin with, however.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Rover_0 on November 13, 2021, 11:56:39 AM
I’m honestly OK with just about any even number between 46 and 58; I’d kinda like to see an even number in the 50s just to see that it can be done.
I-58 would be a reasonable number for a corridor along US-58 in Virginia between Virginia Beach (replacing I-264 entirely) and I-95/I-85, IMO.

That's assuming a freeway is ever fully realized along that route to begin with, however.

Maybe you could have both? I’ve had the idea of extending the US-58 designation through Tennessee to replace the US-412 designation in its entirety and create a situation like I/US-41 where up-to-standard segments connecting with other Interstates are I-58 and all others are US-58.

Definitely more fit for Fictional Highways, but it’s a thought if nothing else.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: skluth on November 13, 2021, 05:05:39 PM
I’m honestly OK with just about any even number between 46 and 58; I’d kinda like to see an even number in the 50s just to see that it can be done.
I-58 would be a reasonable number for a corridor along US-58 in Virginia between Virginia Beach (replacing I-264 entirely) and I-95/I-85, IMO.

That's assuming a freeway is ever fully realized along that route to begin with, however.

Maybe you could have both? I’ve had the idea of extending the US-58 designation through Tennessee to replace the US-412 designation in its entirety and create a situation like I/US-41 where up-to-standard segments connecting with other Interstates are I-58 and all others are US-58.

Definitely more fit for Fictional Highways, but it’s a thought if nothing else.

US 58 itself is only in Virginia except for a tiny segment (about a mile) at its west end connecting to US 25E. There's already support for converting US 58 to freeway from Suffolk to I-85 (South Hill). US 58 is four lanes east of Stuart with many segments already freeway or expressway, with intermittent four lane sections west of Stuart to its western terminus. I'm not sure if it would be worth building an I-58 freeway across Virginia, but an I-58 co-signed with the current US 58 from South Hill to Suffolk would be much appreciated.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: edwaleni on November 14, 2021, 12:05:05 AM
I guess I would say it should be a 3di based in I-44. I-444 or I-644.

It will never go farther than Enid and it will never make it across Arkansas in our lifetime.

US-412 is an interesting road. It starts no where in Tennessee and ends no where in Utah. It doesn't make it to I-25, it ends at 4th Street in downtown Springer.

Another weird factoid about US-412. The exit at Springer, Utah on I-25 going north to reach US-412? Is Exit 412. But since US-412 ends in town, the exit signage doesn't include the shield.

Despite what signage is (and NM is Terrible), US 56-412 does end at I-25 exit 412.  The application for extending US 412 in 1994 repeatedly has the endpoint as I-25 and also explicitly says US 56 ends there, too.

There is no document for extending US 56 to I-25 available (only NM document is a rejected 1958 extensino to Santa Fe request).

Agreed that the signage is horrible. Exit 412 reports for Springer, but when you exit the sign only says what direction Springer is. No reporting signs for what exactly you are driving on. While maps says it is BL25, there are no signs to say that on the ground.

The next actual recognition that US 56 or US 412 even exists is this sign that I found.

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51678235068_f6f596500c_o.png)

Why they simply didn't run the signage all the way back to the actual exit is a mystery.

You would think that the beginning of a federally marked highway ( 2 no less ) to points east would garner a little more signage.

But I just read the route didn't even exist until 1982.

Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: US 89 on November 14, 2021, 01:24:24 AM
Why they simply didn't run the signage all the way back to the actual exit is a mystery.

This is New Mexico. Be grateful for any signs you do get.  :-D
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Molandfreak on November 14, 2021, 10:50:30 PM
With the risk of being chased off by an angry mob, allow me to explain why this is the perfect place for I-50, and why "I will go as far to say any answer to the question 'what number should this get' that isn't 50 is incorrect."

While it's true that the upgrade starts and ends in places that aren't exactly major, there is a gap that needs to be filled by the backbones of the Interstate system: the Tulsa metropolitan area crossed one million residents this census, and is the 55th-largest metro in the country. Of the 54 metro areas larger than Tulsa, there are only six metro areas that are not served by at least one x0 or x5 Interstate: Orlando, San Jose*, Milwaukee, Hartford, Grand Rapids, and Honolulu.

I would say the fact that designating this as I-50 would put Tulsa on a major Interstate instantly makes it less of a joke than I-30 or I-45. I-30 serves DFW (already served by I-20, I-35, and I-45) and Little Rock (already served by I-40), so excluding those leaves Texarkana, whose metro area is home to a measly 150K. And I-45 serves Dallas (again, already served by I-20, I-30, and I-35) and Houston (already served by I-10), so excluding those leaves the Huntsville micropolitan area, home to about 70K, and the Corsicana micropolitan area, home to about 50K.

There are probably no other routes in this area with a remote chance of being upgraded to a freeway within the next hundred years, and the only other state that seems to be interested in pursuing new Interstates where an I-50 would fit (North Carolina) passed on the chance to designate I-50 multiple times.

And the point of it crossing I-44 is moot, since that's to be expected of a diagonal route, and I-40 crosses it anyway.

*San Jose is served by I-280, I-480, and I-680, so you could reasonably argue I-80 indirectly serves the area.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Bobby5280 on November 14, 2021, 11:29:16 PM
The numbering design of highway systems should not be tilted toward gifting particular cities a certain number just to elevate the city's ego. That's what you're asking of burning the I-50 designation on such a short and minor Interstate route. Only a few miles of it will be in Arkansas. Hell, I-44 itself would be a better candidate of being re-named as "I-50." The span between OKC and St Louis is one of the most important diagonal legs in the entire Interstate system. But I-44 is called I-44 and that's the way it is.

Tulsa is a decent sized city, but it is not in a location that serves as a transportation hub of cross-country highways like Oklahoma City or the DFW metro. I think the US-75 corridor should be upgraded to Interstate standards from McAlester up to Tulsa (and maybe up to Bartlesville as well). But I think the US-69 corridor from the Red River to Big Cabin is in even more urgent need of Interstate quality upgrades due to the enormous amount of big rig truck traffic on it. If I-45 was ever extended North of the DFW metro I would label it along the US-69 corridor. One could split it into I-45E & I-45W routes, but that's another rabbit hole.

If I had any say in the outcome I'd designate the US-412 Interstate as I-46 or I-48. Heck, it wouldn't bother me if it was labeled as a duplicate I-42 either.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Scott5114 on November 14, 2021, 11:41:52 PM
It's way too far north for a 42, which would be roughly along the US-62 corridor east of Oklahoma City (see map above).
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: MikieTimT on November 15, 2021, 10:40:12 AM
The numbering design of highway systems should not be tilted toward gifting particular cities a certain number just to elevate the city's ego. That's what you're asking of burning the I-50 designation on such a short and minor Interstate route. Only a few miles of it will be in Arkansas. Hell, I-44 itself would be a better candidate of being re-named as "I-50." The span between OKC and St Louis is one of the most important diagonal legs in the entire Interstate system. But I-44 is called I-44 and that's the way it is.

Tulsa is a decent sized city, but it is not in a location that serves as a transportation hub of cross-country highways like Oklahoma City or the DFW metro. I think the US-75 corridor should be upgraded to Interstate standards from McAlester up to Tulsa (and maybe up to Bartlesville as well). But I think the US-69 corridor from the Red River to Big Cabin is in even more urgent need of Interstate quality upgrades due to the enormous amount of big rig truck traffic on it. If I-45 was ever extended North of the DFW metro I would label it along the US-69 corridor. One could split it into I-45E & I-45W routes, but that's another rabbit hole.

If I had any say in the outcome I'd designate the US-412 Interstate as I-46 or I-48. Heck, it wouldn't bother me if it was labeled as a duplicate I-42 either.

To me, it boils down to this.  What routing of an I-50 between I-40 and I-70 would serve more people and gather more traffic than the US-412 route in the middle part of the U.S.?  Springfield and Joplin, MO?  And where would an I-60 be routed with that same criteria?  Why in the world does it make sense to make those numbers sacrosanct if there's no reasonable alternative routing and no hope that there will ever be much in the way of other 2di's in between I-40 and I-70 in several lifetimes?  And keep in mind that Northwest Arkansas is only just now getting it's first complete 2di, and has been growing by leaps and bounds despite it's absence.  Does anyone honestly believe that the growth will now begin slowing despite the quality of life metrics and job availability showing no signs of slowing either?  Northwest Arkansas passed Springfield's population long ago despite not being on a US-x0 highway and not on a major Interstate already like Springfield, MO is.  I think there's some that assume that I-x0 interstate belong along the routes of US-x0 highways.  That has never been the case in this country as lots of I-x0 Interstates were routed along US highways that weren't close to US-x0 highways.  It's my belief that the US-4xx highways were purposefully designated as such despite the breaking of the standard methodology of designating 3di US highways as children of 2di US routes specifically to irritate/motivate into replacing the route with an Interstate route. 
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: JayhawkCO on November 15, 2021, 11:30:09 AM
US-412 is an interesting road. It starts no where in Tennessee and ends no where in Utah. It doesn't make it to I-25, it ends at 4th Street in downtown Springer.

It definitely ends nowhere in Utah.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: The Ghostbuster on November 15, 2021, 12:47:28 PM
US 412 should have been numbered US 162, and should not exist west of Guymon, OK (OK 3 also should not have gone west of its junction with US 81 south of Okarche, but that's a topic for another thread).
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: skluth on November 15, 2021, 01:52:54 PM
The numbering design of highway systems should not be tilted toward gifting particular cities a certain number just to elevate the city's ego. That's what you're asking of burning the I-50 designation on such a short and minor Interstate route. Only a few miles of it will be in Arkansas. Hell, I-44 itself would be a better candidate of being re-named as "I-50." The span between OKC and St Louis is one of the most important diagonal legs in the entire Interstate system. But I-44 is called I-44 and that's the way it is.

Tulsa is a decent sized city, but it is not in a location that serves as a transportation hub of cross-country highways like Oklahoma City or the DFW metro. I think the US-75 corridor should be upgraded to Interstate standards from McAlester up to Tulsa (and maybe up to Bartlesville as well). But I think the US-69 corridor from the Red River to Big Cabin is in even more urgent need of Interstate quality upgrades due to the enormous amount of big rig truck traffic on it. If I-45 was ever extended North of the DFW metro I would label it along the US-69 corridor. One could split it into I-45E & I-45W routes, but that's another rabbit hole.

If I had any say in the outcome I'd designate the US-412 Interstate as I-46 or I-48. Heck, it wouldn't bother me if it was labeled as a duplicate I-42 either.

To me, it boils down to this.  What routing of an I-50 between I-40 and I-70 would serve more people and gather more traffic than the US-412 route in the middle part of the U.S.?  Springfield and Joplin, MO?  And where would an I-60 be routed with that same criteria?  Why in the world does it make sense to make those numbers sacrosanct if there's no reasonable alternative routing and no hope that there will ever be much in the way of other 2di's in between I-40 and I-70 in several lifetimes?  And keep in mind that Northwest Arkansas is only just now getting it's first complete 2di, and has been growing by leaps and bounds despite it's absence.  Does anyone honestly believe that the growth will now begin slowing despite the quality of life metrics and job availability showing no signs of slowing either?  Northwest Arkansas passed Springfield's population long ago despite not being on a US-x0 highway and not on a major Interstate already like Springfield, MO is.  I think there's some that assume that I-x0 interstate belong along the routes of US-x0 highways.  That has never been the case in this country as lots of I-x0 Interstates were routed along US highways that weren't close to US-x0 highways.  It's my belief that the US-4xx highways were purposefully designated as such despite the breaking of the standard methodology of designating 3di US highways as children of 2di US routes specifically to irritate/motivate into replacing the route with an Interstate route.

You're missing the point that others are arguing, which is there is no need/desire for an I-50. Period. I won't even go into your tin foil hat conspiracy about US 4XX routes have some sinister, hidden, future-interstate purpose.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Avalanchez71 on November 15, 2021, 02:37:57 PM
The more I think of it I believe US 412 was born out of AR 12.  I think that is where they came up with the number and TN just said okay whatever sounds good to me.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Scott5114 on November 15, 2021, 03:19:27 PM
You're missing the point that others are arguing, which is there is no need/desire for an I-50. Period.

What does this mean? What would establish a need or desire for a particular interstate number?
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Molandfreak on November 15, 2021, 03:34:34 PM
You're missing the point that others are arguing, which is there is no need/desire for an I-50. Period. I won't even go into your tin foil hat conspiracy about US 4XX routes have some sinister, hidden, future-interstate purpose.
Are you the director of AASHTO? Who died and made your thoughts on the matter the final say?
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: skluth on November 15, 2021, 05:16:48 PM
You're missing the point that others are arguing, which is there is no need/desire for an I-50. Period. I won't even go into your tin foil hat conspiracy about US 4XX routes have some sinister, hidden, future-interstate purpose.
Are you the director of AASHTO? Who died and made your thoughts on the matter the final say?

My thoughts are based on this statement from the previous poster which you deleted: It's my belief that the US-4xx highways were purposefully designated as such despite the breaking of the standard methodology of designating 3di US highways as children of 2di US routes specifically to irritate/motivate into replacing the route with an Interstate route. From my POV, that's tin foil hat territory. As far as I-50, nobody has made a case to justify calling it I-50. I'm not director of AASHTO. Neither is anyone else here. What's your point?
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Molandfreak on November 15, 2021, 05:38:20 PM
You're missing the point that others are arguing, which is there is no need/desire for an I-50. Period. I won't even go into your tin foil hat conspiracy about US 4XX routes have some sinister, hidden, future-interstate purpose.
Are you the director of AASHTO? Who died and made your thoughts on the matter the final say?

My thoughts are based on this statement from the previous poster which you deleted: It's my belief that the US-4xx highways were purposefully designated as such despite the breaking of the standard methodology of designating 3di US highways as children of 2di US routes specifically to irritate/motivate into replacing the route with an Interstate route. From my POV, that's tin foil hat territory. As far as I-50, nobody has made a case to justify calling it I-50. I'm not director of AASHTO. Neither is anyone else here. What's your point?
I won’t make a judgment on the 4xx thing. That’s not what this is directed at. The point is that you’re acting like a total jackass who doesn’t know the difference between an opinion and a fact. You disagree that this road should be I-50. That’s totally fine, and Bobby5280 agrees with you. But neither of you are Supreme Court justices ruling that there can never, ever be an I-50.

I should add that I made a case for it to be I-50 beyond the fact that it’s simply a number available in the area. This is an opinion you happen to disagree with. You don’t get to say “no one has made a case for it” when I literally have.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Scott5114 on November 15, 2021, 05:45:32 PM
As far as I-50, nobody has made a case to justify calling it I-50.

Nobody has really made a case to justify not calling it I-50 either. Other than the fact it might be needed for some other, more important highway...somewhere...someday...maybe.

Enid–Springdale is an interstate corridor that's here, right now, needing a number. Any even number between 46 and 62 inclusive is wide open. If ODOT decides they want I-50, then they should get I-50. No other state has tried to claim it for a more important Interstate for the past 65 years, so that should probably indicate that there isn't one coming that we need to save the number for.

As stated above, if I got to pick the number, I'd pick 48. (Although now that I think about it, it intersects with OK-48, so that might make that particular number less likely.)
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Plutonic Panda on November 15, 2021, 05:49:12 PM
Maybe I am misunderstanding this but the beef from those opposed to signing this as I-50 stems from a hypothetical(extremely unlikely) complete renumbering of the coast to coast interstates? Otherwise I am failing to see why this should not be called anything other than I-50...
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Scott5114 on November 15, 2021, 06:21:08 PM
Maybe I am misunderstanding this but the beef from those opposed to signing this as I-50 stems from a hypothetical(extremely unlikely) complete renumbering of the coast to coast interstates? Otherwise I am failing to see why this should not be called anything other than I-50...

Not even that; the objection comes from the fact that interstates divisible by 10 are supposed to be the major east-west routes. They don't necessarily have to be coast-to-coast; 20, 30, 40, and 70 aren't and never have been planned to be (although 40 and 70 both get most of the way there, ending at I-15 instead of I-5).

The original numbering system skipped 50 and 60 because they were trying to avoid roads with those numbers potentially conflicting with US-50 and US-60, so the route that "should" have gotten I-50 is I-70. (Of course, if it had gotten that number, I-50 and US-50 would be practically right on top of each other). This means we have two major interstate numbers that have never been assigned, and which there have never been plans to assign.

The objection, then, comes from Enid–Springdale being not as lengthy or important as the other Interstate routes divisible by 10 and therefore doesn't deserve the number. To which I say, show us the route that needs the number 50 more than this one does, and show me where the plans to build that are.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Plutonic Panda on November 15, 2021, 06:39:32 PM
The objection, then, comes from Enid–Springdale being not as lengthy or important as the other Interstate routes divisible by 10 and therefore doesn't deserve the number. To which I say, show us the route that needs the number 50 more than this one does, and show me where the plans to build that are.
That's mirrors my thoughts as well. Really for I-50 to work it needs to be part of a national initiative much like I-14. One day, and I can't stretch that term enough, one day down the road a potential I-50 could be taken as far west as I-25 in Raton. Think bigger than just this small stretch. That is doable but as much as I'd like to see it anything further would likely be a political nightmare but I still have my ideas.

Same thing going further east in the future.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: MikieTimT on November 15, 2021, 08:30:22 PM
The objection, then, comes from Enid–Springdale being not as lengthy or important as the other Interstate routes divisible by 10 and therefore doesn't deserve the number. To which I say, show us the route that needs the number 50 more than this one does, and show me where the plans to build that are.
That's mirrors my thoughts as well. Really for I-50 to work it needs to be part of a national initiative much like I-14. One day, and I can't stretch that term enough, one day down the road a potential I-50 could be taken as far west as I-25 in Raton. Think bigger than just this small stretch. That is doable but as much as I'd like to see it anything further would likely be a political nightmare but I still have my ideas.

Same thing going further east in the future.

As US-412 is ISTEA HPC route #8, there are plans to eventually take it to the Nashville vicinity to I-65.  Not to say any of us will live to see it, but the corridor was enacted in legislation, which is why I don't understand why anyone states that a case hasn't been made for it.  People with much more power than any of us have done exactly that.  The funding hasn't come through as there are clearly higher priorities at this time, but that can and eventually will change.  I'd rather see it go further west to Raton myself as I'd use that portion to go to Colorado Springs on trips.  However, I'd use an eastern one much more regularly to go to Jonesboro for work or even Branson on vacations, even if it didn't make it all the way to Nashville in my lifetime.  I don't necessarily care what it's called in the short or even long term.  I just have a hard time understanding where a more deserving routing for an I-50 is as a wholesale renumbering of the grid is sure not very likely.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: MikieTimT on November 15, 2021, 08:35:19 PM
Why they simply didn't run the signage all the way back to the actual exit is a mystery.

This is New Mexico. Be grateful for any signs you do get.  :-D

My brother and I drove US-412 from I-49 to its terminus in Springer, NM about 3 months ago.  Signage is certainly sparse.  What was even more sparse was road markings as they had sealed the road for over 20 miles and didn't have so much as reflective tape marking the centerline, much less anything delineating the shoulders.  Not that it mattered as we didn't see 5 cars outside of Clayton or Springer.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: MikieTimT on November 15, 2021, 08:47:00 PM
The more I think of it I believe US 412 was born out of AR 12.  I think that is where they came up with the number and TN just said okay whatever sounds good to me.

I don't believe that's the case.  There's only 56 miles of AR-12 over 2 counties and the two roads never get within 10 miles of each other.  US-62 did take over the chunk of AR-12 from south of Eureka Springs to Salem way back in 1930, but that's a little too historical a route number to base the US-412 designation on.  Like everyone else here, I'd like to know the real logic behind the numbering as it certainly is non-standard, so all we really can do is hypothesize.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Plutonic Panda on November 15, 2021, 09:29:58 PM
I just have a hard time understanding where a more deserving routing for an I-50 is as a wholesale renumbering of the grid is sure not very likely.
Yep.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: splashflash on November 15, 2021, 11:25:56 PM
I think the US-75 corridor should be upgraded to Interstate standards from McAlester up to Tulsa (and maybe up to Bartlesville as well). But I think the US-69 corridor from the Red River to Big Cabin is in even more urgent need of Interstate quality upgrades due to the enormous amount of big rig truck traffic on it.
Muskogee, Wagoner, and Prior are all resisting US 69 upgrading.  Could swinging a new route south of Muskogee along OK 165, of interstate quality, northeast to Tahlequah and Siloam Springs on US412 be the way forward.  Arkansas is already exploring a north-south connector from the new I-49 south of Bentonville. 

The Tulsa leg could take care of traffic to there, Bentonville and perhaps Topeka, Kansas.  Muskogee would get a bypass, already existing, the route would cross the Arkansas River and perhaps follow US 62 or a Greenfield path northeasr.  Upon intersecting US 412 there would be a short jaunt near Siloam Springs.  This leg would make use of the new I-50, oops I-46, to just across into Arkansas and AK could take care of the rest.  Thought?
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Scott5114 on November 15, 2021, 11:31:58 PM
This leg would make use of the new I-50, oops I-46, to just across into Arkansas and AK could take care of the rest.  Thought?

Alaska's not doing THAT well, are they?
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Bobby5280 on November 16, 2021, 01:00:39 AM
Quote from: splashflash
Muskogee, Wagoner, and Prior are all resisting US 69 upgrading.  Could swinging a new route south of Muskogee along OK 165, of interstate quality, northeast to Tahlequah and Siloam Springs on US412 be the way forward.

That concept won't have any effect on traffic along US-69. Heavy trucks in particular will stick with US-69 to Big Cabin. It's a straight shot, even if there are at-grade intersections and even a few traffic signals along the way. I think US-69 from the Red River to Big Cabin needs to be brought up to Interstate standards as much for safety reasons as anything else.

Certain interests in several towns along the US-69 corridor are trying their best to prevent it from becoming a fully limited access, be it a freeway or another turnpike. I'm hoping for a freeway. IMHO, time is steadily eating away at the clout of the anti-freeway interests in that part of the state. The situation is very clear if you look at Oklahoma's updated redistricting maps. The OKC and Tulsa metros are the only areas in the state gaining population and state house districts. The rural areas are shedding population like crazy. Down here, state district 62 used to take up the Western half of Comanche County. The new district 62 swallowed half of Kiowa County, all of Cotton County and a little more of Comanche County.

If current population growth and migration trends continue (and I see zero signs why they wouldn't) little speed trap towns like Stringtown will be little more than ghost towns in the years ahead. The populations in those towns are aging. Not enough young people are staying in those towns to sustain the population. That's because there isn't enough job opportunities or social opportunities either. The bigger cities have that.

Muskogee is really the only town along the US-69 corridor that can effectively block freeway development in that small city over the long term. The way ODOT and other pro-freeway interests can get around that is by slowly upgrading US-69 everywhere else they can, piece by piece, between the Red River and Big Cabin. If enough of the corridor is upgraded to Interstate standards I think interests in Muskogee would change their minds. The project in Calera will add new freeway to the corridor. The stretch through McAlester could be upgraded fairly easily since there are already frontage roads in place.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Scott5114 on November 16, 2021, 01:07:36 AM
Certain interests in several towns along the US-69 corridor are trying their best to prevent it from becoming a fully limited access, be it a freeway or another turnpike. I'm hoping for a freeway. IMHO, time is steadily eating away at the clout of the anti-freeway interests in that part of the state. The situation is very clear if you look at Oklahoma's updated redistricting maps. The OKC and Tulsa metros are the only areas in the state gaining population and state house districts. The rural areas are shedding population like crazy. Down here, state district 62 used to take up the Western half of Comanche County. The new district 62 swallowed half of Kiowa County, all of Cotton County and a little more of Comanche County.

Eh...I don't feel very bullish about Oklahoma's increasing urban population actually making much of a difference in how the state government operates. Case in point, see the congressional district map. They sliced Oklahoma City like a pie to keep it from having its own district. It's harder to do that with statehouse districts but if they can glom a huge rural area onto a small fragment of urban area to keep it from being fairly represented they will.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: bugo on November 16, 2021, 03:07:45 AM
The claim that US 412 was numbered in reference to AR 12 is ridiculously false. The original US 412 ended in Walnut Ridge, which is on the other side of the state from AR 12. The US 4xx claim made above is even more ridiculous.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Plutonic Panda on November 16, 2021, 11:51:33 AM
Certain interests in several towns along the US-69 corridor are trying their best to prevent it from becoming a fully limited access, be it a freeway or another turnpike. I'm hoping for a freeway. IMHO, time is steadily eating away at the clout of the anti-freeway interests in that part of the state. The situation is very clear if you look at Oklahoma's updated redistricting maps. The OKC and Tulsa metros are the only areas in the state gaining population and state house districts. The rural areas are shedding population like crazy. Down here, state district 62 used to take up the Western half of Comanche County. The new district 62 swallowed half of Kiowa County, all of Cotton County and a little more of Comanche County.

Eh...I don't feel very bullish about Oklahoma's increasing urban population actually making much of a difference in how the state government operates. Case in point, see the congressional district map. They sliced Oklahoma City like a pie to keep it from having its own district. It's harder to do that with statehouse districts but if they can glom a huge rural area onto a small fragment of urban area to keep it from being fairly represented they will.
At least for the next decade. I’m going to hold my breath here because I have some choice words that would likely violate forum politics rules but hopefully at the least we can see a citizens lead initiative that puts in place rules for a more fair map drawing next time around.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: BroadwayExt on November 17, 2021, 12:17:51 PM
Long time listener, first time poster here. I have a couple of questions about this new interstate designation that y'all might be able to answer

1-Will the Stillwater Spur be designated as an interstate as well?

2-Does this mean that 412 will be moved to US-64 West of Tulsa and old OK-33 East of Tulsa? The whole "US-412 Scenic" thing wouldn't make as much sense anymore

Thanks!   
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: -- US 175 -- on November 17, 2021, 01:09:11 PM
Long time listener, first time poster here.

Welcome, BroadwayExt!
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Scott5114 on November 17, 2021, 01:20:03 PM
Long time listener, first time poster here. I have a couple of questions about this new interstate designation that y'all might be able to answer

Welcome to the forums! We seem to be picking up a lot of Oklahomans recently (which is awesome).

1-Will the Stillwater Spur be designated as an interstate as well?

My answer would be "maybe, but don't bet on it". It certainly could be upgraded to an Interstate when the rest of the US-412 upgrade happens (contingent, of course, on any work that may need to be done to bring it up to Interstate standards). But OTA doesn't seem to be too interested in pursuing Interstate designations for their own sake. They could have easily gotten one for the H.E. Bailey Spur, but they chose to extend SH-4 over it instead. Pursuing an Interstate designation is, of course, less likely if there is any work that has to be done to get that designation.

For what it's worth, the spur did receive a state highway number recently—SH-312.

2-Does this mean that 412 will be moved to US-64 West of Tulsa and old OK-33 East of Tulsa? The whole "US-412 Scenic" thing wouldn't make as much sense anymore

This is almost certainly not going to happen. The reason is that AASHTO has had a policy since 1926 that US routes must follow the best available route between two points. (This was mostly more relevant back in the days when the road system was a mishmash of mud and gravel roads, and the road-building apparatus was young enough that there was concern about local interests manipulating US routes to serve themselves at the expense of long-distance travelers.) That policy means if a US route is upgraded to freeway, the US route is then committed to stay on the freeway. Moving it to a surface road would be moving it to a road that is not the best available route between two points, and therefore the application to move US-412 would be declined.

There are places where the US route parallels the Interstate, like US-77 through much of Oklahoma, but in this case, the Interstate was built separately and the US route was never moved to the Interstate. States have to initiate the route-designation change process, and if they have no interest in doing so, it never gets done. (This was done by design, at least south of OKC; small towns like Wayne and Paoli wanted the setup they currently have and I believe got it written into state law.)

There is one additional wrinkle here, which is that tolled US routes are not allowed except when there is a free alternate US route nearby. That's the real reason Scenic/Alternate 412 exists. (For the Cimarron, US-64 serves the role of the free alternate.)
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Bobby5280 on November 17, 2021, 01:27:18 PM
It's an interesting question if the Cimarron Turnpike Spur to Stillwater would get an Interstate designation. If the H.E. Bailey Turnpike Spur off I-44 is any precedent then I would guess not. The Cimarron Spur is a pretty short turnpike and has only one partial exit between its parent Turnpike and its terminus at US-177.

Quote from: Scott5114
Eh...I don't feel very bullish about Oklahoma's increasing urban population actually making much of a difference in how the state government operates. Case in point, see the congressional district map. They sliced Oklahoma City like a pie to keep it from having its own district.

The cracking and packing techniques of gerrymandering are indeed on full display with US congressional districts. But I think the issues with little speed trap towns along US-69 are more of a state and local thing. A certain political party can try to do all it can to preserve the clout of itty bitty rural towns. However the population shift way from rural areas to urban/suburban is relentless.

The OKC and Tulsa metros are gaining state house districts. Everywhere rural is losing districts; seeing their district combined with one or more others. The updated state house district 61 takes up the entire OK Panhandle, plus Harper & Ellis County and a chunk of Woodward County. That's more geographical area than some small states. One state house rep gets to cover all of that. It's a visual testament to the population in those rural districts steadily dying off or migrating elsewhere. The same number of people in all those counties can be found in a tiny sliver of a district, such as district 71 in Tulsa.

Regardless of political party affiliation the interests of motorists in places like Tulsa are going to outweigh the interests in Stringtown. Anyone driving from Tulsa to Dallas would prefer an open road devoid of speed zones and traffic signals. Truckers taking US-69 from the Red River to meet I-44 in Big Cabin desire the same thing. Speed traps are universally despised. Time is not on the side of places like Stringtown.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: LM117 on November 17, 2021, 03:21:47 PM
AASHTO has had a policy since 1926 that US routes must follow the best available route between two points. (This was mostly more relevant back in the days when the road system was a mishmash of mud and gravel roads, and the road-building apparatus was young enough that there was concern about local interests manipulating US routes to serve themselves at the expense of long-distance travelers.) That policy means if a US route is upgraded to freeway, the US route is then committed to stay on the freeway. Moving it to a surface road would be moving it to a road that is not the best available route between two points, and therefore the application to move US-412 would be declined.

AASHTO doesn't seem to care about that policy as much these days, if the recent re-routings in NC are any indication.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: edwaleni on November 17, 2021, 03:57:50 PM
Do you think they are going to grandfather this type of road as an interstate?

They would have to replace miles of steel cable with J barriers.

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51687918820_de1c10e234_o.png)
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: US 89 on November 17, 2021, 04:01:58 PM
Do you think they are going to grandfather this type of road as an interstate?

They would have to replace miles of steel cable with J barriers.

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51687918820_de1c10e234_o.png)

There are portions of the HE Bailey turnpike, which became I-44 in 1982, that still have center cable barriers:

https://goo.gl/maps/b5n1sATF72g7Uymn7

I do not know if FHWA is more stringent on this type of thing now than they were 40 years ago, though.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: MikieTimT on November 17, 2021, 04:42:12 PM
Looks like this corridor is starting to pay dividends already, assuming this isn't just some ploy to grab incentives to keep this company alive long enough to be bought out by bigger fish:

Electric car company Canoo announces plans to relocate headquarters to NWA (https://www.fayettevilleflyer.com/2021/11/16/electric-car-company-canoo-announces-plans-to-relocate-to-nwa/)

They have announced earlier their manufacturing facility will be in Pryor, OK, so they are keeping all their facilities near the US-412 corridor.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: edwaleni on November 18, 2021, 08:55:27 AM

There are portions of the HE Bailey turnpike, which became I-44 in 1982, that still have center cable barriers:

https://goo.gl/maps/b5n1sATF72g7Uymn7

I do not know if FHWA is more stringent on this type of thing now than they were 40 years ago, though.

I don't think they are allowing these types of barriers anymore. The only override would be an act of Congress of course.

Anyone who thinks a 70mph truck is going to kept out of oncoming traffic with those 40 year old, 4 bolt anchors is kidding themselves.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: MikieTimT on November 18, 2021, 09:15:14 AM

There are portions of the HE Bailey turnpike, which became I-44 in 1982, that still have center cable barriers:

https://goo.gl/maps/b5n1sATF72g7Uymn7

I do not know if FHWA is more stringent on this type of thing now than they were 40 years ago, though.

I don't think they are allowing these types of barriers anymore. The only override would be an act of Congress of course.

Anyone who thinks a 70mph truck is going to kept out of oncoming traffic with those 40 year old, 4 bolt anchors is kidding themselves.

It'll take a rework of the divider for sure.  This is barely more than an "Arkansas Freeway" (5-lane), which is what we throw up whenever a 2 lane isn't sufficient anymore.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Avalanchez71 on November 18, 2021, 12:02:53 PM
Do you think they are going to grandfather this type of road as an interstate?

They would have to replace miles of steel cable with J barriers.

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51687918820_de1c10e234_o.png)

There are portions of the HE Bailey turnpike, which became I-44 in 1982, that still have center cable barriers:

https://goo.gl/maps/b5n1sATF72g7Uymn7

I do not know if FHWA is more stringent on this type of thing now than they were 40 years ago, though.

That looks like an accident waiting to happen.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Scott5114 on November 18, 2021, 01:25:52 PM

There are portions of the HE Bailey turnpike, which became I-44 in 1982, that still have center cable barriers:

https://goo.gl/maps/b5n1sATF72g7Uymn7

I do not know if FHWA is more stringent on this type of thing now than they were 40 years ago, though.

I don't think they are allowing these types of barriers anymore. The only override would be an act of Congress of course.

Anyone who thinks a 70mph truck is going to kept out of oncoming traffic with those 40 year old, 4 bolt anchors is kidding themselves.

Those barriers were built between 2013 and 2018—see street view.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: triplemultiplex on November 18, 2021, 04:21:15 PM
Better than the mound o' grass that came before.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Bobby5280 on November 18, 2021, 08:19:24 PM
Quote from: US 89
There are portions of the HE Bailey turnpike, which became I-44 in 1982, that still have center cable barriers

The H.E. Bailey Turnpike didn't have any barriers at all in its median strip for the longest time. It just had a grassy median strip about one lane wide. Very easy to cross for any motorist suffering a brain-fart. In the mid 1990's (early 1996 I think) a concrete Jersey barrier was added in the center median of I-44 turnpikes from the Medicine Park exit North of Lawton to the Missouri border. That was done shortly after a multiple fatality collision near the Elgin exit of I-44.

South of Lawton I-44 stayed the same for roughly another 20 years until they finally dug out the grassy median strip, paved over it and installed a cheaper cable barrier. That was done just a few years ago.

The Cimarron Turnpike had the grassy median strips and no cable barrier for even longer. There may be parts of the turnpike that still have nothing more than the strip of grass in the median. Google Earth imagery from 2019 shows that to be the case.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Scott5114 on November 18, 2021, 08:33:02 PM
When I clinched the Indian Nation Turnpike (SH-375) on August 28, they were actively installing the cable barrier on parts of it. I believe other parts were still raised grass, with no work being done to change that at the time. I seem to recall there was even part of it with the raised grass median posted at 80 MPH.

I'm generally in favor of cable barriers, but with a median that narrow, especially a paved median, a Jersey barrier would be greatly appreciated.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: US 89 on November 19, 2021, 12:34:54 PM
I didn't realize the Bailey turnpike originally also had that ugly median hill with no left shoulder or any sort of barrier. I knew they were around on portions of the INT and Cimarron but didn't know there were more of them out there. Looking around on GSV I'm seeing it on parts of other turnpikes too like the Muskogee and Cherokee.

Aside from the urban turnpikes (Creek/Kilpatrick/Kickapoo), were all the Oklahoma turnpikes originally built with that median design?
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Scott5114 on November 19, 2021, 01:31:46 PM
The Chickasaw wasn't. :P

And I don't think the Cherokee was either, as it was built at the same time as the Creek and Kilpatrick turnpikes.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Bobby5280 on November 19, 2021, 05:04:17 PM
Quote from: Scott5114
I'm generally in favor of cable barriers, but with a median that narrow, especially a paved median, a Jersey barrier would be greatly appreciated.

OTA is installing cable barriers because they cost 50% less than the concrete Jersey barriers. Of course they spun the choice in the news by saying the cable barrier slows down a vehicle that loses control and enters the median. The theory is vehicles just "bounce" off concrete barriers and remain out of control. The cable barriers are still a cost cutting choice.

A few years ago I did see a motorist (who I think was drunk) drift into the concrete median and put his car up on its right two wheels. It looked just like one of those car stunts in the movies. Amazingly he didn't crash out when the car came back down level (it sure sent out some sparks though). I called 911 and gave dispatch the car's plate number. I'd been watching this clown while driving back from OKC after a night out. He did his car stunt a few miles North of the Elgin exit on I-44. My girlfriend and I couldn't believe the guy didn't crash, especially with the way he had been driving for dozens of miles.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: rte66man on November 21, 2021, 09:17:17 PM
I didn't realize the Bailey turnpike originally also had that ugly median hill with no left shoulder or any sort of barrier. I knew they were around on portions of the INT and Cimarron but didn't know there were more of them out there. Looking around on GSV I'm seeing it on parts of other turnpikes too like the Muskogee and Cherokee.

Aside from the urban turnpikes (Creek/Kilpatrick/Kickapoo), were all the Oklahoma turnpikes originally built with that median design?

Yes. The Turner was the first in 1953 and it had the raised grassy median. When the Will Rogers opened in 1958 it also had the raised median. As noted above, the Bailey had it when it opened in 1964. That was acceptable at the time. I can remember seeing accidents on the Turner where cars had tipped over as there was no inner shoulder. If your concentration lapsed, it wasn't hard to drift into the median.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: edwaleni on November 21, 2021, 11:30:00 PM
TxDOT study on cable barriers installed on I-10.


MnDOT cable median installation results.


Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: MikieTimT on November 22, 2021, 07:53:51 PM
Cable barriers probably are better for energy absorption for the party in the midst of the accident.  But, it'd be a tough sell to convince me that with median widths like this that broken post parts flying through oncoming traffic's windshields is a reasonable tradeoff, assuming that the vehicle itself didn't still intrude into the oncoming lanes with higher angles of impact, even temporarily.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: bugo on November 23, 2021, 08:21:19 AM
The OTA built turnpikes using 1950s standards into the 1970s. They had raised grassy medians and no left shoulders. The Cimarron Turnpike, which was opened in 1975, is built to very similar standards as the Turner, Turnpike, which was opened in 1953. The only 4 lane divided rural turnpike that wasn't built with the narrow grassy medians was the Cherokee Turnpike, which was opened in 1991.

I have noticed that the Turner Turnpike is extremely straight, with long straight stretches and very few curves. The Will Rogers Turnpike, which opened in 1957, doesn't feature the long straight stretches and has more gentle curves than the Turner Turnpike does. The post-1960 turnpikes are generally curvier than the Turner Turnpike, but there is a 7 mile long arrow straight stretch on the southern part of the Muskogee Turnpike.

This is a quote from the Oklahoma turnpike Wikipedia page:

Quote
Shortly after the Turner Turnpike was built in 1953, the Oklahoma Turnpike Authority proposed other toll roads including one to be built from Oklahoma City north to the Kansas border near Braman to tie in with the southern terminus of the Kansas Turnpike at the state line. That routing was included as part of the Federal Highway Act of 1956 which created the Interstate Highway System. As a result, the OTA could not obtain financing to build that proposed turnpike and turned the initial plans including surveys and blueprints over to the Oklahoma Department of Transportation in 1956 for the construction of I-35 as a freeway on that same alignment, which was completed in several stages between 1958 and 1962.

I question this claim, because I-35 was built with conventional medians instead of narrow raised grassy medians.. If the quote is accurate, then the ODOH significantly modified the OTA's original plans.

Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: MikieTimT on November 29, 2021, 03:24:32 PM
Found an article about the bypassing of Siloam Springs.  Apparently, there was an AHTD study back in 2004 before they 6-laned the road through town that had some alternatives they considered.  I'd wager that the alternatives would also be considered assuming no developments impeded on them in the interim.  I can't seem to find where the study was referenced in the article below, though.

https://hl.nwaonline.com/news/2021/may/30/what-a-future-interstate-could-mean-for-siloam/ (https://hl.nwaonline.com/news/2021/may/30/what-a-future-interstate-could-mean-for-siloam/)
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: MikieTimT on November 30, 2021, 10:32:54 AM
Contacted the city administrator by email, and he was kind enough to email me the PDF of the study that was done in '04.  There were 3 different bypass routes considered, but apparently the comments by locals swayed them towards the 6-laning they did instead.

https://misc.transport.road.narkive.com/C5tPsmXj/no-us-412-siloam-springs-bypass-to-be-built (https://misc.transport.road.narkive.com/C5tPsmXj/no-us-412-siloam-springs-bypass-to-be-built)

Here is a picture of the bypass options from 2004.  I didn't know how to upload the full PDF to the Gallery as I couldn't find this study anywhere online, so just saved a snip of the map.  Corridor B was the most inexpensive alternative.

(https://i.imgur.com/1tFYKni.jpg)







Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: bwana39 on December 02, 2021, 09:48:28 PM
I think they would have to replace the cables with Jersey Barriers or something of the sort to provide absolute separation. These opposite direction mainlanes separated by just cables just would not cut it.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: sprjus4 on December 02, 2021, 10:35:07 PM
I think they would have to replace the cables with Jersey Barriers or something of the sort to provide absolute separation. These opposite direction mainlanes separated by just cables just would not cut it.
It was done on an existing section of I-44 recently, south of Lawton, IIRC.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Bobby5280 on December 03, 2021, 01:03:29 AM
Nearly all of I-44 South of Lawton is just cable barriers. There are some stretches featuring concrete Jersey barriers, but those are usually segments passing over creeks. I'm guessing there are certain bridge standards that must be upheld in those cases. South of the US-70 exit at Randlett I-44 spreads out with a wider median, but there is still a cable barrier running down one of the roadway edges to prevent crossover accidents. The same is true for I-44 within Lawton.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Road Hog on December 03, 2021, 11:40:09 PM
This Bloomberg think piece might provide some push for an E-W corridor in NWA:

https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2021-11-30/austin-s-mega-growth-rubs-off-on-walmart-s-arkansas?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=socialflow-organic&utm_content=view&cmpid%3D=socialflow-twitter-view
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: MikieTimT on December 04, 2021, 01:26:54 AM
This Bloomberg think piece might provide some push for an E-W corridor in NWA:

https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2021-11-30/austin-s-mega-growth-rubs-off-on-walmart-s-arkansas?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=socialflow-organic&utm_content=view&cmpid%3D=socialflow-twitter-view

I hope that what has happened in Austin doesn't happen here now that the secret's starting to get out.  We are getting lots of visitors from Austin and Dallas especially in our BnB, as well as some from Oklahoma, so it's inevitable that the traffic counts are going to increase between NWA and Tulsa.  Most coming from Texas are likely bypassing the turnpikes and shunting over I-40 and I-49 from US-69, though.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Tom958 on December 04, 2021, 05:30:02 AM
This is a quote from the Oklahoma turnpike Wikipedia page:

Quote
Shortly after the Turner Turnpike was built in 1953, the Oklahoma Turnpike Authority proposed other toll roads including one to be built from Oklahoma City north to the Kansas border near Braman to tie in with the southern terminus of the Kansas Turnpike at the state line. That routing was included as part of the Federal Highway Act of 1956 which created the Interstate Highway System. As a result, the OTA could not obtain financing to build that proposed turnpike and turned the initial plans including surveys and blueprints over to the Oklahoma Department of Transportation in 1956 for the construction of I-35 as a freeway on that same alignment, which was completed in several stages between 1958 and 1962.

I question this claim, because I-35 was built with conventional medians instead of narrow raised grassy medians.. If the quote is accurate, then the ODOH significantly modified the OTA's original plans.

I don't. Having a largely-completed set of plans for a narrow-median turnpike in hand would be hugely helpful in designing the eventual forty-foot-median Interstate highway.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: rte66man on December 04, 2021, 04:30:42 PM
This is a quote from the Oklahoma turnpike Wikipedia page:

Quote
Shortly after the Turner Turnpike was built in 1953, the Oklahoma Turnpike Authority proposed other toll roads including one to be built from Oklahoma City north to the Kansas border near Braman to tie in with the southern terminus of the Kansas Turnpike at the state line. That routing was included as part of the Federal Highway Act of 1956 which created the Interstate Highway System. As a result, the OTA could not obtain financing to build that proposed turnpike and turned the initial plans including surveys and blueprints over to the Oklahoma Department of Transportation in 1956 for the construction of I-35 as a freeway on that same alignment, which was completed in several stages between 1958 and 1962.

I question this claim, because I-35 was built with conventional medians instead of narrow raised grassy medians.. If the quote is accurate, then the ODOH significantly modified the OTA's original plans.

I don't. Having a largely-completed set of plans for a narrow-median turnpike in hand would be hugely helpful in designing the eventual forty-foot-median Interstate highway.

Problem is that 35 wasn't built on the same proposed path of the Northern Turnpike. I'll have to dig it up but the line I saw ran further west of where 35 ended up.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: MikieTimT on January 07, 2022, 10:38:38 AM
Amazon coming to play in Wal-Mart's backyard.  They've bought a warehouse in Lowell for last mile fulfillment.

https://www.nwaonline.com/news/2021/dec/29/amazon-has-plans-in-states-nw-area-nwaonline/ (https://www.nwaonline.com/news/2021/dec/29/amazon-has-plans-in-states-nw-area-nwaonline/)

Positioned right in the middle of US-71B, the AR-MO railroad, and the current Lowell I-49 exit and where the Springdale Northern Bypass will cross US-71B when they extend it eastward.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: The Ghostbuster on January 11, 2022, 05:05:57 PM
There's been a debate about whether this corridor should become Interstate 46/48/50. Although I prefer 46, as long as it doesn't become Interstate 412, I could live with any of the three designations.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Plutonic Panda on January 11, 2022, 06:48:03 PM
Has there been a debate outside of this message board?
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: The Ghostbuster on January 11, 2022, 07:36:43 PM
I was referring to the debate on this message board. Since the US 412-to-Interstate proposal was only initiated last May, it will probably be a while before a number for the corridor is proposed, picked, and designated.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: NE2 on January 12, 2022, 09:36:24 AM
Problem is that 35 wasn't built on the same proposed path of the Northern Turnpike. I'll have to dig it up but the line I saw ran further west of where 35 ended up.
http://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=osu.32435013129754&seq=21
Looks pretty damn close, allowing for simplifications at the scale of the map.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: rte66man on January 12, 2022, 01:16:47 PM
Problem is that 35 wasn't built on the same proposed path of the Northern Turnpike. I'll have to dig it up but the line I saw ran further west of where 35 ended up.
http://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=osu.32435013129754&seq=21
Looks pretty damn close, allowing for simplifications at the scale of the map.

You are correct. I seem to have confused the original Southern proposal with the northern.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: MikieTimT on January 12, 2022, 02:21:16 PM
I was referring to the debate on this message board. Since the US 412-to-Interstate proposal was only initiated last May, it will probably be a while before a number for the corridor is proposed, picked, and designated.

It's almost assuredly a decade out from making any headway, at least, without a funding source secured.  Oklahoma seems to struggle with projects that aren't tolled, although 99 miles of the 166 miles in OK are already turnpikes, so they only need to figure out the other 67 miles, and Arkansas needs to figure out a bypass of Siloam Springs and how best to convert the remaining miles to limited access from either the edge of Tontitown or where AR-612 bends south on the planned western segment.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: swake on January 12, 2022, 07:02:20 PM
I was referring to the debate on this message board. Since the US 412-to-Interstate proposal was only initiated last May, it will probably be a while before a number for the corridor is proposed, picked, and designated.

It's almost assuredly a decade out from making any headway, at least, without a funding source secured.  Oklahoma seems to struggle with projects that aren't tolled, although 99 miles of the 166 miles in OK are already turnpikes, so they only need to figure out the other 67 miles, and Arkansas needs to figure out a bypass of Siloam Springs and how best to convert the remaining miles to limited access from either the edge of Tontitown or where AR-612 bends south on the planned western segment.

US-412 does not need that much work in Oklahoma.

It's 176 miles long and the current build is:

Sections with minor or zero needed upgrades (140 miles):

Sections in need of major renovations/new construction (36 miles):
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: MikieTimT on January 24, 2022, 11:44:38 PM
Sections in need of major renovations/new construction (36 miles):
  • 27 miles of divided but only partially limited access highway between Tulsa and the Cherokee turnpike. This section would not be too hard to upgrade using existing roadway and has some limited access exits already in place.
  • 9 miles of mixed divided and non-divided highway east of the Cherokee going through West Siloam Springs. This section will at least partially require a new and very expensive bypass.

The 27 miles between Tulsa and the Cherokee Turnpike are also punishing and in need of resurfacing in my opinion.

The Siloam Springs Bypass should have happened back when ARDOT decided to 6-lane US-412 through Siloam Springs, which was a short-sighted mistake.  Public opinion in Siloam Springs held a little too much sway in this case, probably also in conjunction with Oklahoma not getting on board with their short portion around West Siloam Springs.  This whole interstate redesignation would likely be fast-tracked as low-hanging fruit to make several politicians look good for re-election if it had happened when it made the most sense to do it.  Arkansas sure does get the shaft on road projects being surrounded by perpetually broke transportation departments for several needed large interstate corridors, exception being Texas.

Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Plutonic Panda on January 25, 2022, 01:31:09 AM
Isn’t Inhofe “retiring” soon? I’d imagine this being his pet project he would want to have this completed before he leaves office as a part of his legacy.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Scott5114 on January 25, 2022, 01:38:03 AM
Isn’t Inhofe “retiring” soon? I’d imagine this being his pet project he would want to have this completed before he leaves office as a part of his legacy.

His current term doesn't expire until 2027, when he'll be 92 years old. He says he doesn't plan to run for re-election in 2026, but I wouldn't be surprised if he changes his mind.

It might be kind of a tall order to get all of this done by 2027, especially in Oklahoma. About the best they could do is pick a number and slap some shields on the Cherokee Turnpike and the portions of existing I-244 and I-44 the route overlaps.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Plutonic Panda on January 25, 2022, 01:45:24 AM
I wonder if we’ll get any “future I-XX” signs.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: MikieTimT on January 25, 2022, 05:09:23 PM
I wonder if we’ll get any “future I-XX” signs.

Likely when they pick a number, they'll have one handy for the photo op and ready to put at logical checkpoints shortly thereafter.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Bobby5280 on January 25, 2022, 06:59:25 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda
I wonder if we’ll get any “future I-XX” signs.

Considering the proposed route runs through Tulsa I think there is a reasonably good chance "Future I-XX" signs could be erected in a few key places along the way. They would likely be ground-mounted, stand-alone signs no different in nature than signs naming a stretch of highway after someone or something.

Quote from: MikieTimT
Likely when they pick a number, they'll have one handy for the photo op and ready to put at logical checkpoints shortly thereafter.

Very often signs made for photo ops are a crap shoot. There's no telling if the one-off signs would be made to proper MUTCD specifications, both in terms of design layout and materials specified. Any "Future I-XX" signs installed out in the field are supposed to adhere to proper specs. Signs for photo ops don't necessarily have to do that. Some politician, business guy or connected person volun-told to get a sign for the photo op would be prone to just call up any random sign company to do the work. Some sign companies might take the project seriously and try to do a good job. Many other sign companies wouldn't give two shits about following proper specs or even looking up the specs in the first place.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: MikieTimT on January 25, 2022, 07:08:12 PM
This latest one that I could find in the region wasn't too shabby.

(https://wehco.media.clients.ellingtoncms.com/img/photos/2018/02/23/DWvhzqJVAAA0urU_t800.jpg?90232451fbcadccc64a17de7521d859a8f88077d)
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Bobby5280 on January 25, 2022, 07:20:17 PM
That sign looks okay. I can't tell for sure if they used Type III retro-reflective sheeting. There is maybe a slight glimmer of it possibly in the "I-57" letters. Otherwise the colors look pretty flat and non-reflective. The Interstate 57 shield looks a bit big for the space available; I think the shields are supposed to have a little more negative space around them than that. Kerning looks too tight on the "FUTURE I-57" letters. Also the word "Future" doesn't need to be on the sign twice. The "Future I-57" message is alright, but I would have used the word "INTERSTATE" on the I-57 shield.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Scott5114 on January 25, 2022, 08:10:27 PM
That one bugs me because the inner and outer radii of rounding on the corners don't match. The inner radius should be the outer radius minus the distance between the edges of them. (So a sign with a 1" radius on the blank and a quarter-inch border should have a ¾" radius of rounding on the border.)

Ever since Jake Bear taught me how that works I can't unsee it whenever someone else whiffs it.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: skluth on January 25, 2022, 08:31:23 PM
That one bugs me because the inner and outer radii of rounding on the corners don't match. The inner radius should be the outer radius minus the distance between the edges of them. (So a sign with a 1" radius on the blank and a quarter-inch border should have a ¾" radius of rounding on the border.)

Ever since Jake Bear taught me how that works I can't unsee it whenever someone else whiffs it.
Honestly, I hadn't noticed the corners until you mentioned it. But I'm not that concerned about spec-perfect signs. I'm fine with Clearview and button copy.

I'm guessing it's a group of Future I-57 boosters based on their lapel stickers. They look like a group of Jaycees or Rotarians. It is fun to think it might happen.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: abqtraveler on January 25, 2022, 09:19:15 PM
I wonder if we’ll get any “future I-XX” signs.

Likely when they pick a number, they'll have one handy for the photo op and ready to put at logical checkpoints shortly thereafter.
I'm curious as to what number they would apply for. The route east of Tulsa falls between I-40 and I-44, which would nominally make it a candidate for I-42. But...I-42 has already been taken for the conversion of US-70 to interstate in North Carolina.  Maybe I-46?
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: bwana39 on January 25, 2022, 09:19:40 PM
This latest one that I could find in the region wasn't too shabby.

(https://wehco.media.clients.ellingtoncms.com/img/photos/2018/02/23/DWvhzqJVAAA0urU_t800.jpg?90232451fbcadccc64a17de7521d859a8f88077d)

 the next to farthest to the right is the Chairman of the Arkansas Highway Commission. Robert S. Moore, Jr.
The shorter guy is Dick Tramell
The tall guy in the middle is Alec Farmer...

Looks like current and former members of the Arkansas Highway Commission with some others thrown in...
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Bobby5280 on January 26, 2022, 01:16:04 AM
Quote from: Scott5114
That one bugs me because the inner and outer radii of rounding on the corners don't match. The inner radius should be the outer radius minus the distance between the edges of them. (So a sign with a 1" radius on the blank and a quarter-inch border should have a ¾" radius of rounding on the border.)

Most big green sign panels have squared corners while the white reflective border has radiused corners. Most vector drawing applications (Adobe Illustrator, CorelDRAW, Affinity Designer, etc) have commands to enter in a specific corner radius on the corners of an object such as a rectangle. They also have path offset commands to create a duplicate path a specific distance inside or outside the source path. Most industry specific sign design apps can do the same thing. Just a couple or so clicks and you're done (perhaps with slightly different approaches depending on the software application). Whoever designed that Future I-57 sign didn't follow MUTCD/SHS specs for borders and corners.

Quote from: abqtraveler
I'm curious as to what number they would apply for. The route east of Tulsa falls between I-40 and I-44, which would nominally make it a candidate for I-42. But...I-42 has already been taken for the conversion of US-70 to interstate in North Carolina.  Maybe I-46?

I would prefer I-46 or I-48. Hell, it wouldn't bother me if it was a second I-42 for that matter. I wouldn't put it past one or more politicians to attempt using the I-50 designation, despite this being a short, non-major Interstate route.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Plutonic Panda on January 26, 2022, 01:26:39 AM
I hate to rehash this but I will do it anyways.

Bobby, what’s to stop this from becoming a long distance route one day and where would you have I-50 go without remembering other interstates?

Furthermore I present a better question, what’s more likely:

Renumbering other interstates?

Or this road being named I-50 and going from I-49 to I-25?
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: MikieTimT on January 26, 2022, 05:35:33 AM
I hate to rehash this but I will do it anyways.

Bobby, what’s to stop this from becoming a long distance route one day and where would you have I-50 go without remembering other interstates?

Furthermore I present a better question, what’s more likely:

Renumbering other interstates?

Or this road being named I-50 and going from I-49 to I-25?

HPC #8 was originally planned to go from Tulsa to Nashville along US-412.  Since they've extended interstate designation westward past Tulsa all the way to I-35, then I-25 isn't out of the question eventually, and might even happen before it reaches I-57 and I-55, much less I-65 by Nashville as the terrain isn't that difficult to traverse, comparatively speaking.  After I-57 is completed, I could actually see the push to make the portion of US-412 between Walnut Ridge, AR and Hayti, MO a short 75 mile temporary 3di interstate like I-49 in NWA was (I-540) before becoming subsumed into I-46/I-48/I-50 when the plan eventually moves forward to fill the gap between Springdale and Walnut Ridge, long into the future.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: abqtraveler on January 26, 2022, 09:07:04 AM
I hate to rehash this but I will do it anyways.

Bobby, what’s to stop this from becoming a long distance route one day and where would you have I-50 go without remembering other interstates?

Furthermore I present a better question, what’s more likely:

Renumbering other interstates?

Or this road being named I-50 and going from I-49 to I-25?

It'll never make it to I-25 because New Mexico will never build it.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: edwaleni on January 26, 2022, 09:55:51 AM
I hate to rehash this but I will do it anyways.

Bobby, what’s to stop this from becoming a long distance route one day and where would you have I-50 go without remembering other interstates?

Furthermore I present a better question, what’s more likely:

Renumbering other interstates?

Or this road being named I-50 and going from I-49 to I-25?

It'll never make it to I-25 because New Mexico will never build it.

Agreed. Not needed west of Enid. You are more likely to see a new N/S route (Del Rio to Pueblo via Lubbock) than an E/W route extension. Just not justified.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: rte66man on January 26, 2022, 12:54:21 PM
I hate to rehash this but I will do it anyways.

Bobby, what’s to stop this from becoming a long distance route one day and where would you have I-50 go without remembering other interstates?

Furthermore I present a better question, what’s more likely:

Renumbering other interstates?

Or this road being named I-50 and going from I-49 to I-25?

It'll never make it to I-25 because New Mexico will never build it.

Agreed. Not needed west of Enid. You are more likely to see a new N/S route (Del Rio to Pueblo via Lubbock) than an E/W route extension. Just not justified.

I don't think it's needed west of I-35. The existing 4 lane expressway from there to Enid is more than adequate to handle current and future traffic.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Plutonic Panda on January 26, 2022, 01:28:41 PM
It’s not needed now. Half a century forward? We’ve had infrastructure projects we planned for almost 100 years in advance(looking at you second ave subway). Texas is already working with New Mexico to build out the port to plains corridor which would bring a new interstate close to the Oklahoma panhandle. It’s up to Oklahoma from there to decide to build a new freeway to connect to it. NM building their part seems more likely to happen then Oklahoma building my proposal.

Point is I think that is more likely to happen than renumbering other interstates. So then where would I-50 go? This is the most logical place to put it even if the other “proposed” extensions like a route from I-35 to a future I-17 north extension is a pipe dream and sits as nothing more than a proposal on a map for the next century. Though I’m sure if you even merely proposed it 80 years into the future you’d still have environmentalists shitting their pants.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Bobby5280 on January 26, 2022, 02:23:12 PM
Even half a century forward there is very little chance this US-412 Interstate would ever be extended outside the I-35 to I-49 span. It's a short distance route. Calling that thing "I-50" would be like building an Interstate quality highway from Tacoma to Port Angeles and calling that "I-1". Why not? Where else is it going to go?

Why does there even have to be an Interstate 50? There is no I-60 either. I don't think we'll ever use up all 99 possible two-digit route Interstate designations, certainly not in any manner that fits the grid. In the fictional roads area I had one I-50 idea that involved a Salt Lake City to Jacksonville, FL route (Provo, Green River, Grand Junction, Pueblo, Wichita, Springfield, Memphis, Birmingham, Columbus, Albany, Waycross, Jacksonville). A good bit of it would go outside grid logic (and consume I-22 as well as I-555), but it would cross just as much country as I-70. Some segments of that corridor concept will get built out to Interstate quality under different names; others are likely to never happen at all. Very little of this US-412 Interstate idea would exist outside Oklahoma. I know I-45 is a major Intra-State route, but that's Houston to DFW. And there is legit potential to extend I-45 Northward.

There is a number of possible future improved corridors in the region of Western OK, Western KS, Eastern CO and the TX Panhandle. I-27 may have a long term shot at being extended North into Colorado and up to Limon. I strongly believe Denver and Oklahoma City need a direct diagonal Interstate link just like what I-44 does between OKC and St Louis. That would benefit the broader Interstate system for long haul traffic. Major destinations get linked in those concepts. Maybe if that Denver-OKC route was ever built the new US-412 Interstate could be extended West to Woodward to merge into it. But not otherwise. With the current grid arrangement in place there isn't any justification to extend a US-412 freeway West as far as Woodward, much less any points farther West than that. Traffic counts aren't there to justify it. The road isn't traveling direct to big enough destinations.

Likewise, a US-412 Interstate going well East of Springdale is a non-starter. It could be extended as far as Huntsville. Past there such an effort would run into a whole lot of resistance.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: MikieTimT on January 26, 2022, 03:33:25 PM
Even half a century forward there is very little chance this US-412 Interstate would ever be extended outside the I-35 to I-49 span. It's a short distance route. Calling that thing "I-50" would be like building an Interstate quality highway from Tacoma to Port Angeles and calling that "I-1". Why not? Where else is it going to go?

Why does there even have to be an Interstate 50? There is no I-60 either. I don't think we'll ever use up all 99 possible two-digit route Interstate designations, certainly not in any manner that fits the grid. In the fictional roads area I had one I-50 idea that involved a Salt Lake City to Jacksonville, FL route (Provo, Green River, Grand Junction, Pueblo, Wichita, Springfield, Memphis, Birmingham, Columbus, Albany, Waycross, Jacksonville). A good bit of it would go outside grid logic (and consume I-22 as well as I-555), but it would cross just as much country as I-70. Some segments of that corridor concept will get built out to Interstate quality under different names; others are likely to never happen at all. Very little of this US-412 Interstate idea would exist outside Oklahoma. I know I-45 is a major Intra-State route, but that's Houston to DFW. And there is legit potential to extend I-45 Northward.

There is a number of possible future improved corridors in the region of Western OK, Western KS, Eastern CO and the TX Panhandle. I-27 may have a long term shot at being extended North into Colorado and up to Limon. I strongly believe Denver and Oklahoma City need a direct diagonal Interstate link just like what I-44 does between OKC and St Louis. That would benefit the broader Interstate system for long haul traffic. Major destinations get linked in those concepts. Maybe if that Denver-OKC route was ever built the new US-412 Interstate could be extended West to Woodward to merge into it. But not otherwise. With the current grid arrangement in place there isn't any justification to extend a US-412 freeway West as far as Woodward, much less any points farther West than that. Traffic counts aren't there to justify it. The road isn't traveling direct to big enough destinations.

Likewise, a US-412 Interstate going well East of Springdale is a non-starter. It could be extended as far as Huntsville. Past there such an effort would run into a whole lot of resistance.

By the same token, why does an x0/x5 have to be a transcon by your logic?  There's several exceptions to that rule already, and just because we don't foresee growth of an area over a 2-3 decade timeframe doesn't mean that it won't happen.  Heck, 3 decades ago, folks would have laughed if you said that Benton/Washington/Madison county in Arkansas would be on the verge of being a Top 100 metro area in 2022/23, but here we are.  In 3 decades, Northeast Arkansas might well be in a Top 150 metro area the way things are growing there now with Jonesboro's growth and all the new steel mills going in to the east of it, and you'd better believe that there would be a push to connect the top 2 growing areas of Arkansas just like there's a push to beef up the connection to Tulsa now.  Once I-57 is done, I'd be shocked if the portion from Walnut Ridge to Hayti doesn't get a big push anyway as there's only one non-navigable river crossing, and then with I-155 there, the Mississippi River has a serviceable crossing for whatever makes sense to Tennessee, whether it be just push down to Jackson and call it a day, or run across US-70/70A from Dyersburg and run into Nashville proper without jumping south and then climb back north along I-40, which would likely need a 6 laning by then anyway.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Scott5114 on January 26, 2022, 04:06:48 PM
Now, I'm not going to be put out too much if this gets the number 46 or 48. But this project would likely be the only good opportunity to use the number 50 in a way that both makes sense with the grid and doesn't conflict with US-50. If we miss the opportunity to request the number now, chances are some other state isn't going to be as shy about it in the future and put somewhere that makes less sense, conflicts with US-50, or both, and probably isn't going to be transcontinental either.

And let's be real—this proposed interstate is about 200 miles long, with plausible destinations for extension on either end. I-97 it ain't. Sure, it's ⅔ the length of I-30 right now. But again...would you rather the I-50 number be used for this or get written into law to be some 7-mile spur in North Carolina?
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Plutonic Panda on January 26, 2022, 04:19:21 PM
Yeah that is more or less my stance. It makes sense here.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: abqtraveler on January 26, 2022, 04:27:32 PM
Now, I'm not going to be put out too much if this gets the number 46 or 48. But this project would likely be the only good opportunity to use the number 50 in a way that both makes sense with the grid and doesn't conflict with US-50. If we miss the opportunity to request the number now, chances are some other state isn't going to be as shy about it in the future and put somewhere that makes less sense, conflicts with US-50, or both, and probably isn't going to be transcontinental either.

And let's be real—this proposed interstate is about 200 miles long, with plausible destinations for extension on either end. I-97 it ain't. Sure, it's ⅔ the length of I-30 right now. But again...would you rather the I-50 number be used for this or get written into law to be some 7-mile spur in North Carolina?
Let's not forget there are still plenty of parkways in Kentucky that could be signed as I-50, should the KYTC get around to converting them to interstate standards.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: skluth on January 26, 2022, 04:59:59 PM
It could also be I-22, with the current I-22 subsuming I-555. This might give added incentive to complete a freeway between NWA and Walnut Ridge (and possibly build a new Mississippi River crossing west of Millington to I-55). An eastward extension of whatever interstate US 412 becomes could be extended down I-555 and end near Memphis with a similar situation as I-29 and I-49 in Kansas City (or I-44 and I-64 once did in St Louis before I-64 was extended to Wentzville).

I was against this being I-50 at first, but I've come around to not really caring about it. I never liked I-30, I-45, and I-85 for not being long enough for a X-country number so I don't see why I-50 shouldn't be the same. As others pointed out, it's not like I-50 can be used logically in many other places. There could potentially be both an I-50 and US 50 in Missouri depending on if an how it's extended east, but there already is an I-72 and MO 72 so I don't think that will be an issue as the two "50's" would be far enough apart that there would be minimal confusion. It might be a larger issue should it reach WV and VA depending on routing.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: US 89 on January 26, 2022, 07:16:48 PM
I give zero shits what they number this as long as it's two digits and even.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: sprjus4 on January 26, 2022, 08:44:44 PM
I give zero shits what they number this as long as it's two digits and even.
It would be concerning if this was designated a north-south route.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Scott5114 on January 26, 2022, 08:45:22 PM
I give zero shits what they number this as long as it's two digits and even.

A second I-44? :-D
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Bobby5280 on January 26, 2022, 09:13:29 PM
Quote from: Scott5114
Now, I'm not going to be put out too much if this gets the number 46 or 48. But this project would likely be the only good opportunity to use the number 50 in a way that both makes sense with the grid and doesn't conflict with US-50. If we miss the opportunity to request the number now, chances are some other state isn't going to be as shy about it in the future and put somewhere that makes less sense, conflicts with US-50, or both, and probably isn't going to be transcontinental either.

It's pretty sad the only "good" argument for naming this US-412 Interstate "I-50" is a preemptive turn-and-burn of the designation before some politician elsewhere in the country dreams up an even more ridiculous use for the number.

Of course, given the fact there are detached duplicate 2-digit Interstates in various parts of the US (I-76, I-87, I-74, etc) if the I-50 syndrome is an ego-driven thing there is really nothing to stop a politician in Kentucky from renaming a parkway as I-50 even if the number gets used on US-412 here in Oklahoma.

I guess we can thank Bud Shuster and the nonsense known as I-99 for that crap. It kind of makes me regret even mentioning the "I-1" idea in Tacoma. Some jackass might see that in a web search and run with it.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Road Hog on January 26, 2022, 09:13:49 PM
It could also be I-22, with the current I-22 subsuming I-555. This might give added incentive to complete a freeway between NWA and Walnut Ridge (and possibly build a new Mississippi River crossing west of Millington to I-55). An eastward extension of whatever interstate US 412 becomes could be extended down I-555 and end near Memphis with a similar situation as I-29 and I-49 in Kansas City (or I-44 and I-64 once did in St Louis before I-64 was extended to Wentzville).

I was against this being I-50 at first, but I've come around to not really caring about it. I never liked I-30, I-45, and I-85 for not being long enough for a X-country number so I don't see why I-50 shouldn't be the same. As others pointed out, it's not like I-50 can be used logically in many other places. There could potentially be both an I-50 and US 50 in Missouri depending on if an how it's extended east, but there already is an I-72 and MO 72 so I don't think that will be an issue as the two "50's" would be far enough apart that there would be minimal confusion. It might be a larger issue should it reach WV and VA depending on routing.
I would be against calling it I-22 if the mileage north of I-40 exceeds the mileage south of it. Diagonal interstates generally violate the grid, but there needs to be a base definition.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: MikieTimT on January 27, 2022, 11:48:29 AM
I would be against calling it I-22 if the mileage north of I-40 exceeds the mileage south of it. Diagonal interstates generally violate the grid, but there needs to be a base definition.

True, but the grid needs violating as diagonal interstates are a good idea if you care anything about mileage efficiency when traveling.  Since we seem to have a running theme with the 20 series outside of I-20, I-22 continuing on as a diagonal to the northwest as far as makes sense isn't bothersome.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: The Ghostbuster on January 27, 2022, 04:18:49 PM
The only 3 numbers the US 412 corridor could get is 46, 48 or 50. Personally, I would have continued the US 412 Interstate across Arkansas all the way to the Interstate 55/Interstate 155 interchange, but the traffic counts likely don't warrant it. Whatever number the US 412 corridor gets, the Interstate designation will likely be added in two phases: The Interstate 35-to-Interstate 44 segment would be designated first, since that segment is already a freeway/tollway combo for nearly its entire length. The Interstate 44-to-Interstate 49 segment would be designated later, since the upgrades would have to be far more extensive for that segment to be part of the Interstate System.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Scott5114 on January 27, 2022, 04:29:16 PM
Theoretically 52, 54, 56, 58 are options, but they're increasingly less sensible the higher you go. 60 and 62 would conflict with US routes in both states so they're off the table, and all higher numbers between there and 70 are already used.

I think the first appearance of whatever the new number is will be a renumbering of the east-west portion of I-244 and the concurrency with I-44 to the SH-364 interchange, as that is the only part that unquestionably meets Interstate standard (by virtue of already being an Interstate). You could also probably slap a second discontiguous segment on the Cherokee, as it's new enough it probably meets Interstate standard.

The Cimarron will probably need some minor upgrades to meet Interstate standard, which OTA may drag their feet on because they're not getting additional revenue out of the infrastructure bill.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: MikieTimT on January 27, 2022, 04:30:57 PM
The only 3 numbers the US 412 corridor could get is 46, 48 or 50. Personally, I would have continued the US 412 Interstate across Arkansas all the way to the Interstate 55/Interstate 155 interchange, but the traffic counts likely don't warrant it. Whatever number the US 412 corridor gets, the Interstate designation will likely be added in two phases: The Interstate 35-to-Interstate 44 segment would be designated first, since that segment is already a freeway/tollway combo for nearly its entire length. The Interstate 44-to-Interstate 49 segment would be designated later, since the upgrades would have to be far more extensive for that segment to be part of the Interstate System.

Looks like they could just about go ahead and relabel the I-35 to I-44 segment.  Just a quick reroute of Diamond Head Rd. to the end of Keystone Dam would finish it out for limited access.  Are the ramps everywhere good enough for interstate designation, or are some a project like US-67 (Future I-57) in Jacksonville?
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Scott5114 on January 27, 2022, 04:39:27 PM
I think the main problems with the Cimarron are going to be the median (is a cable barrier over a paved median (https://www.google.com/maps/@36.3921983,-97.1148779,3a,31.3y,252.05h,87.98t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1scKBxQC70PgV8TemLEHAOEA!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DcKBxQC70PgV8TemLEHAOEA%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D48.06164%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192) good enough for Interstate standard?) and possibly bridge clearances (it was built in an era where OTA was pretty cavalier about bridge standards).
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: sprjus4 on January 27, 2022, 04:44:11 PM
You could also probably slap a second discontiguous segment on the Cherokee, as it's new enough it probably meets Interstate standard.
It violates the main standard of not being connected to any other interstate highway segment.

I think the main problems with the Cimarron are going to be the median (is a cable barrier over a paved median (https://www.google.com/maps/@36.3921983,-97.1148779,3a,31.3y,252.05h,87.98t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1scKBxQC70PgV8TemLEHAOEA!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DcKBxQC70PgV8TemLEHAOEA%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D48.06164%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192) good enough for Interstate standard?)
I-44 south of Lawton says it should work.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Scott5114 on January 27, 2022, 05:06:32 PM
You could also probably slap a second discontiguous segment on the Cherokee, as it's new enough it probably meets Interstate standard.
It violates the main standard of not being connected to any other interstate highway segment.

Historically, that rule has sort of gone out the window with these written-into-law Interstate segment designations (see the South Texas I-2/69E/69C complex).

I think the main problems with the Cimarron are going to be the median (is a cable barrier over a paved median (https://www.google.com/maps/@36.3921983,-97.1148779,3a,31.3y,252.05h,87.98t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1scKBxQC70PgV8TemLEHAOEA!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DcKBxQC70PgV8TemLEHAOEA%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D48.06164%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192) good enough for Interstate standard?)
I-44 south of Lawton says it should work.

I-44 south of Lawton was also added to the Interstate system in the mid-80s, when standards were looser. FHWA may not be so forthcoming with design waivers these days.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: skluth on January 27, 2022, 05:11:49 PM
The only 3 numbers the US 412 corridor could get is 46, 48 or 50. Personally, I would have continued the US 412 Interstate across Arkansas all the way to the Interstate 55/Interstate 155 interchange, but the traffic counts likely don't warrant it. Whatever number the US 412 corridor gets, the Interstate designation will likely be added in two phases: The Interstate 35-t

Never underestimate the power of business to push through new and upgraded highways regardless of current traffic. I wouldn't be surprised if JB Hunt and especially Walmart pushed for a North Arkansas four lane highway/ freeway to improve their connectivity to the interstate system east of the Mississippi. It could connect to both the future I-30/57 along the US 67 corridor and the I-555 corridor to Memphis. I wouldn't expect it until at least 2040 given the rate Arkansas builds highways and there's some fairly difficult terrain to cross (though not as difficult as I-49 between Ft Smith and Texarkana).

You could also probably slap a second discontiguous segment on the Cherokee, as it's new enough it probably meets Interstate standard.
It violates the main standard of not being connected to any other interstate highway segment.

Historically, that rule has sort of gone out the window with these written-into-law Interstate segment designations (see the South Texas I-2/69E/69C complex).
It also won't matter as long as lawmakers propose a segment that connects to the system. It's not like politicians are shy about making promises for potential new highways to constituents regardless of how soon they might see it.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: sprjus4 on January 27, 2022, 05:13:00 PM
Historically, that rule has sort of gone out the window with these written-into-law Interstate segment designations (see the South Texas I-2/69E/69C complex).
As far as I'm aware, that is the only instance of the rule being violated - besides instances in the 1960s and 70s were isolated segments of completed highway were designated before connecting segments were constructed.

Additionally, those three interstates do connect each other, form a complex of 117 total miles of freeway, and traverse an expansive metropolitan area.

A bit different than an isolated 32 mile rural segment of freeway that is a component of an otherwise arterial divided highway.

I-44 south of Lawton was also added to the Interstate system in the mid-80s, when standards were looser. FHWA may not be so forthcoming with design waivers these days.
Perhaps. They may grant an exception given the project to replace the median was recent, and the freeway otherwise meets interstate standards.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Bobby5280 on January 27, 2022, 10:23:50 PM
Quote from: Scott5114
I think the first appearance of whatever the new number is will be a renumbering of the east-west portion of I-244 and the concurrency with I-44 to the SH-364 interchange, as that is the only part that unquestionably meets Interstate standard (by virtue of already being an Interstate). You could also probably slap a second discontiguous segment on the Cherokee, as it's new enough it probably meets Interstate standard.

It's also possible the route designation will appear on the AR-612 freeway stub in Springdale going West off of I-49. It would be a political move to get a visual place holder on the map for the East end of that Interstate designation.

Quote from: Scott5114
The Cimarron will probably need some minor upgrades to meet Interstate standard, which OTA may drag their feet on because they're not getting additional revenue out of the infrastructure bill.

I think the upgrades needed are somewhat substantial. Extensive work on shoulders is needed, including work on some bridges. That can get pricey. There is even an at-grade street intersection just West of the OK-151 interchange.

Some portions of the Cimarron Turnpike near the Stillwater Spur may still have those narrow grassy median strips with no cable barrier. OTA has worked to replace some of that with concrete in cable barriers in the past couple or so years.

Quote from: Scott5114
I think the main problems with the Cimarron are going to be the median (is a cable barrier over a paved median good enough for Interstate standard?) and possibly bridge clearances (it was built in an era where OTA was pretty cavalier about bridge standards).
Quote from: sprjus4
I-44 south of Lawton says it should work.
Quote from: Scott5114
I-44 south of Lawton was also added to the Interstate system in the mid-80s, when standards were looser. FHWA may not be so forthcoming with design waivers these days.

The OKC to Wichita Falls leg of I-44 was added in 1982. For much of that time the H.E. Bailey Turnpike had only the narrow grassy median. Not long after a multiple fatality collision near Elgin in the mid 1990's the grassy median was paved over and a concrete Jersey barrier was added. That barrier work was completed on I-44 turnpikes from the Medicine Park exit (North of Lawton) up to the Missouri border. The segment of I-44 South of Lawton has had the grassy median nonsense until the 2014-15 time frame when it was finally covered with concrete and equipped with a cable barrier. Considering how recently that treatment was added it must be good enough for current Interstate standards.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: MikieTimT on January 28, 2022, 07:30:19 AM
It's also possible the route designation will appear on the AR-612 freeway stub in Springdale going West off of I-49. It would be a political move to get a visual place holder on the map for the East end of that Interstate designation.

Arkansas has a history with I-49 getting signed before connecting with it's other segments, case in point the portion from Alma to Bella Vista.  However, it also has had issues with getting the designation it wanted from  AASHTO in that it originally had to call it I-540 as they didn't approve the original submission of I-49 when AHTD asked for it back in the late 1990's.  That has caused the cluster of a mile marker and exit number scheme that I-49 north of I-40 has, which they made worse recently by removing 3 correct exit numbers on the BVB and replacing with incorrect exit numbers to keep the scheme for what now seems like the foreseeable future.  So, unless the route number gets Congressionally designated like I-57 did in northeastern AR and southeast MO, I wouldn't expect the lead to come from the Arkansas side even if it makes more concrete steps towards the OK border.  The Siloam Springs Bypass will inevitably become another Bella Vista Bypass scenario with its coordination between 2 poor states to cross the border around a city taking probably well over a decade with one state having the money before the other state has it.  The good thing is that now with the Bella Vista Bypass completed finally, there is now a template for success to refer to going forward on how to do it.  Even if I don't personally consider it done until they fix the mile markers and exit numbers.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: MikieTimT on January 28, 2022, 09:40:36 AM
Quote from: Scott5114
Now, I'm not going to be put out too much if this gets the number 46 or 48. But this project would likely be the only good opportunity to use the number 50 in a way that both makes sense with the grid and doesn't conflict with US-50. If we miss the opportunity to request the number now, chances are some other state isn't going to be as shy about it in the future and put somewhere that makes less sense, conflicts with US-50, or both, and probably isn't going to be transcontinental either.

It's pretty sad the only "good" argument for naming this US-412 Interstate "I-50" is a preemptive turn-and-burn of the designation before some politician elsewhere in the country dreams up an even more ridiculous use for the number.

Of course, given the fact there are detached duplicate 2-digit Interstates in various parts of the US (I-76, I-87, I-74, etc) if the I-50 syndrome is an ego-driven thing there is really nothing to stop a politician in Kentucky from renaming a parkway as I-50 even if the number gets used on US-412 here in Oklahoma.

I guess we can thank Bud Shuster and the nonsense known as I-99 for that crap. It kind of makes me regret even mentioning the "I-1" idea in Tacoma. Some jackass might see that in a web search and run with it.

It's not the only good argument.  As delineated in the wording of the legislation, it wouldn't make sense to use I-50.  However, there is much evidence outside of just this legislation that there are plans, for good reason too I might add, to extend eastward from I-49.  ISTEA made all of US-412 from Tulsa to Nashville HPC #8, which means that the intent is to upgrade it to 4 lanes throughout.  I don't necessarily care for the portion that drops south of I-40 at Jackson into that connection to Nashville, but since I have no power or money and thus no sway in the matter, what I think isn't germane in the grand scheme of things.  But HPC #8 is codified in legislation, so those that do have sway have made it so.  No money was dedicated as part of it, so it's certainly an unfunded mandate and thus the states in question, all of which are on the more impoverished side of the spectrum with higher priority considerations which they are rightly focused on, have not pushed very hard on this early 90's vision of the road system.

However, Arkansas does ultimately plan to make US-412 a 4 lanes across the state regardless of what happens with the bordering states.  See page 7 of 60:https://www.nwarpc.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/Hwy-412-Executive-Summary-2020-4.pdf (https://www.nwarpc.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/Hwy-412-Executive-Summary-2020-4.pdf)

Funding obviously limits the rate in which it will occur, and thus it will happen piecemeal and around the higher density areas first without federal assistance greater than what it's currently getting.  And a 4 lane facility can take multiple forms, but if it's an Interstate for a portion of it, and there's enough large or growing metros in the desired path, then it makes sense to consider limited access at as early a stage as possible for the remainder to be good financial stewards.  There are bypasses for Harrison planned, a bypass of Paragould in the works, but otherwise currently just some climb lanes in the more remote and craggy sections.  However, there's a need to address some bridges and other structures in eastern AR due to flooding and seismic resiliency regardless of the timing of any 4-laning, so it makes sense to consider just going ahead with an upgrade to 4 lane at that time regardless of AADT when the vision calls for it anyway ultimately.  That will happen in eastern AR before the midsections Huntsville and Harrison and Mountain Home to Black Rock.  I think that when the bypass of Harrison is completed, it will knock 15 minutes off the trip all by itself and start drawing traffic off I-40, US-64, and Future I-57, increasing the AADT of US-412 even in the remote sections of Arkansas.  I absolutely hate having to take I-49, I-40, US-64, and US-67/AR-226 to Jonesboro from NWA, but that's currently the shortest way, and I usually schedule a stop in Little Rock to take care of some onsite work to cut out the US-64 portion and make a little more money.  On my return trip, I almost always go back west over US-412 for a change in scenery, but it comes at a 30-40 minute penalty on time despite being over 40 miles less mileage.  This road will get upgraded despite traffic counts due to accident counts, especially those involving semis, which happen at double the national rate.  It's part of Arkansas' 4 lane grid vision and the current facility is dangerous and inadequate for the growing needs of the area.

It's only a matter of time before US-412 is 4 laned completely across Arkansas.  Probably won't happen before I retire from traveling gigs and thus I generally won't personally benefit from the vision, but my kids will.  A good part of what we work on isn't for our benefit, but to setup the next generation with a better foundation than what we had to blow past our successes.  4 laning US-412 will happen regardless of label.  The EIHS needs beefing up in this area for resiliency sake with the possibility of earthquake, flood, fire, and ice closing down I-40 as well as the current creaky US-412 eastern Arkansas infrastructure as it stands.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Bobby5280 on January 29, 2022, 11:55:47 AM
Quote from: MikieTimT
It's not the only good argument.  As delineated in the wording of the legislation, it wouldn't make sense to use I-50.  However, there is much evidence outside of just this legislation that there are plans, for good reason too I might add, to extend eastward from I-49.  ISTEA made all of US-412 from Tulsa to Nashville HPC #8, which means that the intent is to upgrade it to 4 lanes throughout.

Lots of those High Priority Corridors drawn up in legislation 20+ years ago are never going to happen, certainly not as full-blown Interstate routes. Lots of federal legislation ends up scuttled.

Arkansas may intend to upgrade US-412 across Northern Arkansas to 4 lanes, but the 4 lanes can be anything from an undivided 4-lane street to something divided with freeway exits. Chances are very minimal US-412 will upgraded to 100% limited access between Springdale (I-49) and Hayti (I-55). Simple undivided 4-lane upgrades will be difficult to build. I would expect people in the town of Henderson, just East of Mountain Home, would raise hell about highway construction through there.

There is a much better chance for US-60 across Southern Missouri from Springfield to Sikeston to get upgraded to full Interstate standards. But they've already been working on that corridor, building spot upgrades here and there, for decades. And it still has a long way to go before being an Interstate-class facility. US-412 across Northern Arkansas is a very long way behind US-60 in Southern Missouri in terms of corridor development.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Scott5114 on January 29, 2022, 02:22:41 PM
Problem is, US-60 across southern Missouri, while it serves kind of the same general purpose as US-412 would, is currently very awkward to get to from the NW Arkansas metro. You either have to make an L-shaped route using I-49 and and I-44, or take the winding US-412 route to US-65 and go through Branson. Neither are really appealing. That's probably why when I lived in Springfield I never really heard of people going to NW Arkansas, or people from NW Arkansas visiting Springfield, very often, despite the metros being fairly close to one another.

In an ideal world, you could do a diagonal route between Bentonville and Springfield, but that goes through a lot of very rugged terrain, and the White and James rivers both kind of get in the way. It would also involve plowing through what few suburbs Springfield has.

Part of the problem with US-412 east of I-49 is that it's a very winding road. It's hard to build up much speed there since you're just going to have to brake again to go around another curve. If that stretch is ever going to be four-laned, it's going to have to be done from scratch on a new, straighter alignment anyway. If you're going to go to that trouble, you may as well make it a limited-access corridor, or at least take steps to make it so that it could become one in the future.

Upgrading US-412 to the future I-57 corridor makes some degree of sense, because that would make accessing US-65 to Springfield easier, and give a nice diagonal route up to Kentucky and the Midwest for NW Arkansas residents. 
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Bobby5280 on January 29, 2022, 07:16:58 PM
I didn't mean to suggest US-60 would be an alternative corridor for US-412. The main reason why I brought it up is that US-60 is a somewhat similar corridor in the same general region. Missouri has been working on upgrading it for a long time yet it is still nowhere near finished. US-412 is much farther behind with similar upgrades. US-60 just illustrates how daunting a challenge it would be to upgrade US-412 across Northern Arkansas.

IIRC, US-60 across Southern Missouri was also part of a High Priority Corridor and proposals to radically extend I-66.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: MikieTimT on January 29, 2022, 07:17:44 PM
Quote from: MikieTimT
It's not the only good argument.  As delineated in the wording of the legislation, it wouldn't make sense to use I-50.  However, there is much evidence outside of just this legislation that there are plans, for good reason too I might add, to extend eastward from I-49.  ISTEA made all of US-412 from Tulsa to Nashville HPC #8, which means that the intent is to upgrade it to 4 lanes throughout.

Lots of those High Priority Corridors drawn up in legislation 20+ years ago are never going to happen, certainly not as full-blown Interstate routes. Lots of federal legislation ends up scuttled.

Arkansas may intend to upgrade US-412 across Northern Arkansas to 4 lanes, but the 4 lanes can be anything from an undivided 4-lane street to something divided with freeway exits. Chances are very minimal US-412 will upgraded to 100% limited access between Springdale (I-49) and Hayti (I-55). Simple undivided 4-lane upgrades will be difficult to build. I would expect people in the town of Henderson, just East of Mountain Home, would raise hell about highway construction through there.

There is a much better chance for US-60 across Southern Missouri from Springfield to Sikeston to get upgraded to full Interstate standards. But they've already been working on that corridor, building spot upgrades here and there, for decades. And it still has a long way to go before being an Interstate-class facility. US-412 across Northern Arkansas is a very long way behind US-60 in Southern Missouri in terms of corridor development.

US-60 may be easier to turn into an interstate between the endpoints you stated above, but it certainly doesn't connect anything major (Springfield is a major metro area with a pretty stagnant population over the last decade, Sikeston not so much and shrinking since the 90's) while staying on a general latitude, while US-412 does, at least across a couple of states.  US-60 takes a dive to the southwest halfway across Oklahoma (and drops south of US-412 past its concurrency with it past Enid, OK) until it intersects I-40 at Amarillo, so it doesn't make a case as a transcon any more than US-412 does, so anyone with aspirations of reserving I-50 for US-60 would have trouble finding anything more than the portion across Missouri that even somewhat retains a rough latitude.  Missouri also doesn't have a recent history of doing much at all in the way of roadbuilding that didn't involve Arkansas and will update a portion of that very segment for the I-57 project that they'll also share with Arkansas.  That being said, an x44 or x57 between Springfield and Poplar Bluff does make some sense as much of the hard work has already been done.  I don't really see the push past Springfield westward however, unless there was some sort of economic growth between it and Wichita, jumping off the US-60 and onto US-160/400 lateral.
 
As far as Henderson, AR goes, it's an tiny unincorporated retirement community with a handful of people, so the stink they raise will be proportional to how loud they are, not due to any political influence the community has.  It's not like it couldn't be bypassed to the south anyway fairly easily since Mountain Home's 4 lane divided bypass, itself easily converted to limited access and already has a grade separated exit with AR-5, runs to the south.

US-412 between the Huntsville and Harrison, and also from Harrison to Hardy at least, will have to be built on completely new alignment as funding permits between the city bypassing that has already been planned or undertaken all across northern Arkansas as is typical ARDOT fashion, but the current US-412 facility, unsuitable for the traffic counts it already has, will continue to serve everything in between.  The current work to put climb lanes on US-412 is pretty much like they did with US-71 in NWA before it was wholesale replaced with I-49.  Buying time until the real plan can get started.  Having any portion of US-412 in Arkansas as an Interstate will prod consideration to continue it on.

None of this happens within the next 15 years (other than some potential city bypasses, especially Harrison, which everyone, especially my Asian wife, would like to avoid driving through) given I-49 and I-57's priorities. Also, Little Rock's roads are always a perpetual priority in Arkansas despite its growth being slower than even Springfield's metro area, but US-412's upgrade is going to happen due to growth patterns that barely bother to pause growth during recessions whereas all of southern Missouri, other than the 10% growth in the Springfield metro and also the counties between Joplin and NWA, has stagnated or even shrunk, good times and bad.  If you look at the population changes by county for the last 10 years and likely even further back, nearly every single county in Oklahoma and Arkansas along the US-412 corridor, except for the panhandle of Oklahoma, has been growing.  That necessitates addressing the transportation bottlenecks the region has.

(https://www.census.gov/content/dam/Census/library/stories/2021/08/more-than-half-of-united-states-counties-were-smaller-in-2020-than-in-2010-figure-1.jpg)
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: MikieTimT on January 29, 2022, 07:43:33 PM
Problem is, US-60 across southern Missouri, while it serves kind of the same general purpose as US-412 would, is currently very awkward to get to from the NW Arkansas metro. You either have to make an L-shaped route using I-49 and and I-44, or take the winding US-412 route to US-65 and go through Branson. Neither are really appealing. That's probably why when I lived in Springfield I never really heard of people going to NW Arkansas, or people from NW Arkansas visiting Springfield, very often, despite the metros being fairly close to one another.

Agreed

In an ideal world, you could do a diagonal route between Bentonville and Springfield, but that goes through a lot of very rugged terrain, and the White and James rivers both kind of get in the way. It would also involve plowing through what few suburbs Springfield has.

Part of the problem with US-412 east of I-49 is that it's a very winding road. It's hard to build up much speed there since you're just going to have to brake again to go around another curve. If that stretch is ever going to be four-laned, it's going to have to be done from scratch on a new, straighter alignment anyway. If you're going to go to that trouble, you may as well make it a limited-access corridor, or at least take steps to make it so that it could become one in the future.

^^^^
This

Upgrading US-412 to the future I-57 corridor makes some degree of sense, because that would make accessing US-65 to Springfield easier, and give a nice diagonal route up to Kentucky and the Midwest for NW Arkansas residents.

US-65 is 4 lane divided with few at-grade intersections from Harrison to I-44, and it would be trivial to upgrade to a limited access facility.  FedEx Freight (LTL branch of FedEx) is headquartered in Harrison, so there's trucking benefits to upgrading the roads fanning out from it, although that by itself isn't enough an impetus.  Wal-Mart Store number 2 is there as well, so there's that too.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Bobby5280 on January 29, 2022, 10:51:38 PM
Quote from: MikieTimT
US-60 may be easier to turn into an interstate between the endpoints you stated above, but it certainly doesn't connect anything major (Springfield is a major metro area with a pretty stagnant population over the last decade, Sikeston not so much and shrinking since the 90's) while staying on a general latitude, while US-412 does, at least across a couple of states.

Neither US-60 across Southern Missouri or US-412 across Northern Arkansas are particularly significant corridors. There is a difficult case to make for upgrading either corridor to full Interstate standards.

When Missouri's portion of US-60 was included as part of a much larger I-66 proposal it had much more potential. I think that was one of the motivations for MO DOT to upgrade nearly all of it to 4-lane divided and have sporadic stretches of freeway and limited access exits. Perhaps when I-57 is built up thru Poplar Bluff and over to Sikeston it might provide some extra incentive to do more limited access spot upgrades along the route. Nevertheless, without a larger multi-state big picture effort it's going to be a long time before US-60 across Southern Missouri is fully an Interstate-quality freeway, much less something that carries an Interstate number.

There is little point of upgrading US-412 East of Springdale to Interstate standards. If AR DOT is going to 4-lane it, I'll bet the end product ends up being a LOT of undivided 4-lane road. There are no major destinations along US-412 going East of Springdale. Memphis would be the next one to the East. But motorists in NWA would be better off taking I-49 down to Fort Smith and I-40 across. US-412 takes such a curvy, winding path from Springdale to Walnut Ridge there would likely be little in the way of mileage/time savings versus the existing I-49/I-40 route.

BTW, Henderson wouldn't be the only town with residents crying foul about highway construction thru their areas. There are other spots along the way with scenic/recreational use locals there wouldn't want adversely affected. Then there's the other usual matter of small towns not wanting to be fully bypassed by a highway either. Henderson is an obvious example because of the Norfolk Lake area there. Even building a non-divided 4-lane road there will likely meet a lot of resistance.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: US 89 on January 29, 2022, 11:13:11 PM
I don't know that it needs to be interstate standard, but if Arkansas is going to spend money on road improvements in the northeast part of the state, I think it'd be better spent on four-laning US 63. That is the main route from Kansas City and much of the western part of the US to Memphis and points southeast, and as a result in my experience there is a fair bit of truck traffic on it. Part of it is concurrent with US 412, so maybe something happens with it?
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: skluth on January 30, 2022, 12:35:12 PM
I don't know that it needs to be interstate standard, but if Arkansas is going to spend money on road improvements in the northeast part of the state, I think it'd be better spent on four-laning US 63. That is the main route from Kansas City and much of the western part of the US to Memphis and points southeast, and as a result in my experience there is a fair bit of truck traffic on it. Part of it is concurrent with US 412, so maybe something happens with it?
Upgrading the highway between Cherokee Village and Walnut Ridge for US 412 also upgrades US 63 between the same two towns. The only other two lane segment of US 63 in Arkansas is a short but not easy to upgrade segment north from Hardy to Missouri.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: skluth on January 30, 2022, 01:02:07 PM
(text deleted)
Little Rock's roads are always a perpetual priority in Arkansas despite its growth being slower than even Springfield's metro area
Just wanted to point out that Little Rock is still experiencing decent growth, especially when compared to the rest of Arkansas. It's just not the explosive growth of NWA. Little Rock grew by 4.7% during the teens. The metro grew 6.9%. Both are still better than Arkansas as a whole which only grew by 3.3%. Little Rock's metro is growing over twice the rate of the state. Little Rock isn't close to the near 25% growth of NWA (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metropolitan_statistical_area), but that doesn't mean Little Rock isn't experiencing growing pains.  I'd be more concerned about the 70% of Arkansas counties that lost population (https://senate.arkansas.gov/senate-news/posts/2021/august/new-census-shows-33-percent-population-growth-in-arkansas/#:~:text=In%20Arkansas%2C%20cities%20gained%20population,which%20grew%20by%2021.1%20percent.) yet still want new highways.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: US 89 on January 30, 2022, 01:02:58 PM
I don't know that it needs to be interstate standard, but if Arkansas is going to spend money on road improvements in the northeast part of the state, I think it'd be better spent on four-laning US 63. That is the main route from Kansas City and much of the western part of the US to Memphis and points southeast, and as a result in my experience there is a fair bit of truck traffic on it. Part of it is concurrent with US 412, so maybe something happens with it?
Upgrading the highway between Cherokee Village and Walnut Ridge for US 412 also upgrades US 63 between the same two towns. The only other two lane segment of US 63 in Arkansas is a short but not easy to upgrade segment north from Hardy to Missouri.

Right. I guess I'm saying that instead of upgrading US 412 with a side benefit of improving US 63, they should be upgrading US 63 with a side benefit of improving US 412. Obviously Missouri would also have to do some work south of West Plains, but as far as that area goes, US 63 seems more worthy of improving than 412.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: skluth on January 30, 2022, 04:03:57 PM
I don't know that it needs to be interstate standard, but if Arkansas is going to spend money on road improvements in the northeast part of the state, I think it'd be better spent on four-laning US 63. That is the main route from Kansas City and much of the western part of the US to Memphis and points southeast, and as a result in my experience there is a fair bit of truck traffic on it. Part of it is concurrent with US 412, so maybe something happens with it?
Upgrading the highway between Cherokee Village and Walnut Ridge for US 412 also upgrades US 63 between the same two towns. The only other two lane segment of US 63 in Arkansas is a short but not easy to upgrade segment north from Hardy to Missouri.

Right. I guess I'm saying that instead of upgrading US 412 with a side benefit of improving US 63, they should be upgrading US 63 with a side benefit of improving US 412. Obviously Missouri would also have to do some work south of West Plains, but as far as that area goes, US 63 seems more worthy of improving than 412.
I agree US 63 should be four lanes; I also wanted it four lanes from Rolla to Cabool when I lived in St Louis. I remember US 51 becoming much busier south of the Illinois River once the I-39 Lincoln Bridge was built which made the need for finishing I-39 between Peru and Bloomington an even higher priority. From my POV, I'd prioritize upgrading US 62/63/412 from Cherokee Village to Walnut Ridge and see how that affects traffic. I wouldn't be surprised to see even more truck traffic use US 63 if the only two lane stretch was for under 20 miles.

I do wonder if Missouri's effort to upgrade US 67 to the Arkansas line (https://www.modot.org/futureI57) will prompt Arkansas to prioritize upgrading the rest of US 67 north of Walnut Ridge (or Pocahontas if the routing stays north of the Black River) over US 412 in NE Arkansas.

Humorous observation: Someone messed up US 412 in the database for Google Maps. It's currently showing a BUS for Business Route above the shield the entire length of US 412.  :-/
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Bobby5280 on January 30, 2022, 04:56:48 PM
US-63 in NE Arkansas has more potential as a long distance corridor since it points directly to I-555 and I-22. I'd like to see I-22 extended farther SE from Birmingham down thru Opelika; Columbus, GA; Albany, GA; Waycross, GA and Jacksonville, FL. Nearly all the existing route from Birmingham to Jacksonville is divided 4-lane. But it would probably carry a lot more traffic as an Interstate.

US-63 drops to mostly 2-lanes NW of Walnut Ridge up to Willow Springs and the junction with US-60. If that was upgraded to 4-lane divided then there would at least be a divided highway going from Springfield, MO down to Jacksonville, FL. From Springfield highway links can be improved to Kansas City and/or Wichita.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: MikieTimT on January 30, 2022, 09:36:52 PM
Humorous observation: Someone messed up US 412 in the database for Google Maps. It's currently showing a BUS for Business Route above the shield the entire length of US 412.  :-/

Submitted a request to correct this in Google Maps for the entire route.  It's only at certain zoom levels that this seems to be incorrect.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: edwaleni on January 31, 2022, 12:19:29 AM
Coming from the east, we never use US-412 past Imboden. Always go up to West Plains and take US-60 to Springfield. If headed to NWA, its I-40 to I-49.

Coming from the north its I-49, but coming from Springfield, sometimes we will take US-60 through Republic and Monett for the scenic route.

I have driven both US-62 and US-412 east of NWA. US-62 is really for tourism traffic for places like Eureka Springs, all the AirBnB and condos on North Beaver Lake, Pea Ridge, etc.

But if you want to make good time, use US-412 east of Springdale. The geometry is much more modern, has overtake lanes and shoulders. Something US-62 is missing east of Pea Ridge.

Once I had to go to Berryville and Green Forest, but I took US-412 from Springdale and AR-21 through Cabanal. Much faster, much safer.

But US-412 east of Alpena where US-65 meets up south of Branson @ Harrison, on bad days its a spider web of RV's, towed fifth wheels, boat trailers, semi-trucks, all headed to Bull Shoals and Mountain Home.

I simply avoid it.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Bobby5280 on January 31, 2022, 10:11:36 AM
Quote from: MikieTimT
Submitted a request to correct this in Google Maps for the entire route.  It's only at certain zoom levels that this seems to be incorrect.

The error has been present at pretty much any level in Google Earth where US-412 shields are actually visible. Zoomed out far they're replaced by other shields that overlap US-412 on the same route.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Plutonic Panda on January 31, 2022, 05:57:03 PM
Arkansas Democrat Gazelle Article(paywall): https://www.arkansasonline.com/news/2022/jan/30/portion-of-us-412-in-arkansas-oklahoma-designated/
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: MikieTimT on January 31, 2022, 10:11:07 PM
Arkansas Democrat Gazelle Article(paywall): https://www.arkansasonline.com/news/2022/jan/30/portion-of-us-412-in-arkansas-oklahoma-designated/

Methinks the route indicated through Siloam Springs is not actually going to be making the interstate designation as indicated.

(https://wehco.media.clients.ellingtoncms.com/imports/adg/photos/200522234_HIGHWAY-412-INTERSTATE-DESIGNATION.jpg)
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Plutonic Panda on January 31, 2022, 10:16:41 PM
Why?
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: MikieTimT on January 31, 2022, 11:18:10 PM
Why?

It's going to require a bypass.  The lines shown are running right through the middle of Siloam Springs, which is where US-412 is currently 6-laned through with hundreds of driveways directly accessing the road, precluding any way to convert to limited access where it is currently.  As has been stated numerous times upthread, Siloam Springs will require a bypass, likely to the north if they can actually get the ROW that's most conducive topographically before it all fills up with subdivisions.  This image isn't accurate on the Arkansas side in Siloam Springs, nor with the part that's shown east of I-49.  Since its source is an Arkansas media outlet, you'd think they'd get the small part of this Interstate that's actually in Arkansas right, but alas...
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Anthony_JK on February 01, 2022, 12:56:05 AM
Why?

It's going to require a bypass.  The lines shown are running right through the middle of Siloam Springs, which is where US-412 is currently 6-laned through with hundreds of driveways directly accessing the road, precluding any way to convert to limited access where it is currently.  As has been stated numerous times upthread, Siloam Springs will require a bypass, likely to the north if they can actually get the ROW that's most conducive topographically before it all fills up with subdivisions.  This image isn't accurate on the Arkansas side in Siloam Springs, nor with the part that's shown east of I-49.  Since its source is an Arkansas media outlet, you'd think they'd get the small part of this Interstate that's actually in Arkansas right, but alas...

I'm guessing that line shown is simply a general description of the corridor, and not a final alignment; and that a Siloam Springs bypass is on the table.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: edwaleni on February 01, 2022, 12:56:46 AM
Why?

It's going to require a bypass.  The lines shown are running right through the middle of Siloam Springs, which is where US-412 is currently 6-laned through with hundreds of driveways directly accessing the road, precluding any way to convert to limited access where it is currently.  As has been stated numerous times upthread, Siloam Springs will require a bypass, likely to the north if they can actually get the ROW that's most conducive topographically before it all fills up with subdivisions.  This image isn't accurate on the Arkansas side in Siloam Springs, nor with the part that's shown east of I-49.  Since its source is an Arkansas media outlet, you'd think they'd get the small part of this Interstate that's actually in Arkansas right, but alas...

What if they elevate it like they do in Texas? Use frontage roads below for the local access?

As it stands now, their only saving grace for a bypass is to use a power line easement. But they will have to consume private property even with that approach.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: sprjus4 on February 01, 2022, 12:58:02 AM
Why?

It's going to require a bypass.  The lines shown are running right through the middle of Siloam Springs, which is where US-412 is currently 6-laned through with hundreds of driveways directly accessing the road, precluding any way to convert to limited access where it is currently.  As has been stated numerous times upthread, Siloam Springs will require a bypass, likely to the north if they can actually get the ROW that's most conducive topographically before it all fills up with subdivisions.  This image isn't accurate on the Arkansas side in Siloam Springs, nor with the part that's shown east of I-49.  Since its source is an Arkansas media outlet, you'd think they'd get the small part of this Interstate that's actually in Arkansas right, but alas...

What if they elevate it like they do in Texas? Use frontage roads below for the local access?

As it stands now, their only saving grace for a bypass is to use a power line easement. But they will have to consume private property even with that approach.
Texas would likely bypass the town.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: skluth on February 01, 2022, 10:43:13 AM
Why?

It's going to require a bypass.  The lines shown are running right through the middle of Siloam Springs, which is where US-412 is currently 6-laned through with hundreds of driveways directly accessing the road, precluding any way to convert to limited access where it is currently.  As has been stated numerous times upthread, Siloam Springs will require a bypass, likely to the north if they can actually get the ROW that's most conducive topographically before it all fills up with subdivisions.  This image isn't accurate on the Arkansas side in Siloam Springs, nor with the part that's shown east of I-49.  Since its source is an Arkansas media outlet, you'd think they'd get the small part of this Interstate that's actually in Arkansas right, but alas...

I'm guessing that line shown is simply a general description of the corridor, and not a final alignment; and that a Siloam Springs bypass is on the table.
I agree. I wouldn't put an official stamp of approval on an unofficial newspaper graphic.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: yakra on February 02, 2022, 11:20:22 AM
A southern 4-lane bypass of Light in western Greene County AR opened in November 2020.
Google shows the old route as 412 Business (though this doesn't necessarily mean much (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=29375.msg2702744#msg2702744)), with no changes to AR228.
OSM, OTOH shows old 412 as a plain county road with no known name or number, with 228 truncated to the bypass.
All of this is too new to have made it into the Greene county map or ARDOT's Road Inventory shapefiles.

Has anyone checked this out in the field?
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: edwaleni on February 02, 2022, 03:13:27 PM
Here is the locale of the power line easement south of Siloam Springs. I am not saying the bypass would follow it religiously, but it does provide a clear path through several residential developments south of town.

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51859097710_9321647193_o.png)

If it is used, I would assume a gradual curve to reach it by purchasing private property.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: dvferyance on February 04, 2022, 08:59:48 PM
^^^ lol I’m surprised(pleasantly I’ll add) this is even happening in Oklahoma to be honest. Oklahoma could use several new interstates, IMO.
I would like to see I-45 extended into Oklahoma.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Plutonic Panda on February 04, 2022, 09:25:10 PM
^^^ lol I’m surprised(pleasantly I’ll add) this is even happening in Oklahoma to be honest. Oklahoma could use several new interstates, IMO.
I would like to see I-45 extended into Oklahoma.
This seems like an obvious one too. Coburn should have went big.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: skluth on February 05, 2022, 12:48:03 PM
Here is the locale of the power line easement south of Siloam Springs. I am not saying the bypass would follow it religiously, but it does provide a clear path through several residential developments south of town.

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51859097710_9321647193_o.png)

If it is used, I would assume a gradual curve to reach it by purchasing private property.

That's a good concept to bypass Siloam Springs. There's enough undeveloped land west of US 59 and east of AR 16 that finding a ROW in either direction from that corridor would be relatively simple.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: yakra on February 07, 2022, 12:55:57 PM
A southern 4-lane bypass of Light in western Greene County AR opened in November 2020.
Google shows the old route as 412 Business (though this doesn't necessarily mean much (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=29375.msg2702744#msg2702744)), with no changes to AR228.
OSM, OTOH shows old 412 as a plain county road with no known name or number, with 228 truncated to the bypass.
All of this is too new to have made it into the Greene county map or ARDOT's Road Inventory shapefiles.

Has anyone checked this out in the field?

Quote from: https://www.ardot.gov/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/06-06-2018-AdmCir2018-09.pdf
  • The bypassed and obliterated portions of Highway 412, Section 8 will be removed from the State Highway System.
  • The section of Highway 228, Section 5 between existing Highway 412 and the newly constructed roadway to become Highway 412 will be removed from the State Highway System.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: edwaleni on February 07, 2022, 04:17:03 PM
https://www.jonesborosun.com/times_dispatch/news/light-bypass-opens-as-412-construction-continues/article_be71aeb4-a1d0-58a4-ad88-fe6dcec87155.html (https://www.jonesborosun.com/times_dispatch/news/light-bypass-opens-as-412-construction-continues/article_be71aeb4-a1d0-58a4-ad88-fe6dcec87155.html)

December 2, 2020.

Construction on the expansion of Highway 412 between Walnut Ridge and Highway 141 in Greene County continues, but those who drive the route noticed a major change last week when the Arkansas Department of Transportation opened the bypass around Light.

“We opened the Light bypass last Monday,” Brad Smithee, district engineer with ARDOT, said. “This will really be the only section that will move to the five lane layout until we begin final paving.”


Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: bwana39 on February 07, 2022, 10:18:57 PM
https://www.nwaonline.com/news/2022/feb/07/arkansas-oklahoma-to-partner-on-us-412-interstate/?fbclid=IwAR3FM0W4Vcgv0cbc0vD2b2DojTE85gpjUkwjWa5xF7n1vk8c90VTEE7fJuE

Forget the US-412 Interstate upgrade. The real meat in this piece is ARDOT is Opening a regional office in NWA.

It tells you they are serious about improving traffic access in NWA which may pass metro Little Rock in population in just a decade or two.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: skluth on February 08, 2022, 10:55:29 AM
https://www.nwaonline.com/news/2022/feb/07/arkansas-oklahoma-to-partner-on-us-412-interstate/?fbclid=IwAR3FM0W4Vcgv0cbc0vD2b2DojTE85gpjUkwjWa5xF7n1vk8c90VTEE7fJuE

Forget the US-412 Interstate upgrade. The real meat in this piece is ARDOT is Opening a regional office in NWA.

It tells you they are serious about improving traffic access in NWA which may pass metro Little Rock in population in just a decade or two.
I thought the most interesting part was "the quarter-cent sales tax dedicated to highways." Right now there's this thread (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=29161.0) happening about alternatives to the gas tax for highway funding. I think we'll see more of this as EV numbers increase.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Bobby5280 on February 08, 2022, 10:51:17 PM
If electric vehicle purchases and use increase a great deal it could lead to the traditional gasoline tax being replaced (or supplemented) by a hell of a lot of RFID toll tag readers on everything from limited access highways down to ordinary 2 lane highways and even city streets.

I still think EVs are going to be a niche product for a long time. It's not practical to drive one of those things on a long road trip. I might be able to drive from Lawton to OKC, around the city a bit and back to Lawton on a single charge. But driving from Lawton to DFW is out. Gotta re-charge while down there and re-charging takes a lot more time than filling a gasoline tank. It would be a real pain in the ass for me to drive from Oklahoma to see relatives in Colorado. It's roughly 600 miles each way, with the halfway point being out in some fairly remote areas. Aside from the range limits EVs are still pretty expensive, especially considering the features in the vehicle you get for the money.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: triplemultiplex on February 09, 2022, 10:38:47 AM
When I first read "Light bypass", I thought it had something to do with gravitational lensing. ;)
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: MikieTimT on February 09, 2022, 01:53:49 PM
Quote from: MikieTimT
Submitted a request to correct this in Google Maps for the entire route.  It's only at certain zoom levels that this seems to be incorrect.

The error has been present at pretty much any level in Google Earth where US-412 shields are actually visible. Zoomed out far they're replaced by other shields that overlap US-412 on the same route.

Got an email this morning that Google accepted my change request for US-412B to US-412.  Looks like it's showing correctly again now.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: yakra on February 09, 2022, 02:16:05 PM
...and now we have vanilla US412 right thru the center of Light, with no designation on the bypass. :ded:
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: MikieTimT on February 24, 2022, 03:59:50 PM
Push to make NWA a center of transportation and logistics innovation, making this upgrade all the more worthwhile.

Arkansas launches plan to become the Silicon Valley of transportation (https://www.axios.com/local/nw-arkansas/2022/02/23/arkansas-plan-silicon-valley-of-transportation)
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Bobby5280 on February 24, 2022, 04:09:11 PM
Flying cars? That'll be the day.
:crazy:

Motorists are dangerous enough as it is being stuck on the ground driving on roads. I'm skeptical we'll be seeing mass production flying car factories getting built any time soon.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: MikieTimT on February 24, 2022, 05:27:38 PM
Flying cars? That'll be the day.
:crazy:

Motorists are dangerous enough as it is being stuck on the ground driving on roads. I'm skeptical we'll be seeing mass production flying car factories getting built any time soon.

Drones can already be somewhat autonomous in flying as it is, and flying cars likely will just be scaled up drones.  I can see it happening just as soon as, if not sooner than, autonomous driving cars.

They've actually got both autonomous delivery vehicles and autonomous grocery delivery drones operating in NWA already on a small scale.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Plutonic Panda on February 24, 2022, 05:29:33 PM
I had read there are rumors Sen. Inhofe is retiring very soon. In the past the legislature is specifically issued bonds for ODOT to use. I wonder if Inhofe will do anything to expedite this before his retirement. . .
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: rte66man on February 24, 2022, 06:47:31 PM
I had read there are rumors Sen. Inhofe is retiring very soon. In the past the legislature is specifically issued bonds for ODOT to use. I wonder if Inhofe will do anything to expedite this before his retirement. . .

Not a rumor. He announced he will finish out this session of Congress and retire in December.
https://www.news9.com/story/6217ebdf3ab0b60729551579/reports:-us-sen-jim-inhofe-to-resign-seat-next-week
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Bobby5280 on February 24, 2022, 07:05:26 PM
Quote from: MikieTimT
Drones can already be somewhat autonomous in flying as it is, and flying cars likely will just be scaled up drones.  I can see it happening just as soon as, if not sooner than, autonomous driving cars.

A flying car big enough to hold one or more people along with some cargo (or stuff bought while shopping) is far more complicated a matter than a drone only big enough to deliver a package from Amazon.

Again, I repeat the extremely important factor of safety. "Flying cars" aren't going to be any kind of automatic plug-and-play vehicle. Training and licensing for those vehicles will likely be very different from that of standard motor vehicle licenses. Anyone using those vehicles may need something more akin to a pilot's license. Insurance will be far different and likely more costly. Maintenance and safety inspection standards will have to be far higher than that of traditional motor vehicles.

Even with all the rules and regulations one would expect to be in place human nature remains a wild card. Regardless if a flying car is automated the "pilot" will have to constantly pay attention in case he needs to manually take control. Semi-autonomous electric vehicles make up a very small percentage of vehicles currently on the road. Yet there are lots of stories of people crashing their Teslas while doing stupid things behind the wheel.

Quote from: Plutonic Panda
I had read there are rumors Sen. Inhofe is retiring very soon. In the past the legislature is specifically issued bonds for ODOT to use. I wonder if Inhofe will do anything to expedite this before his retirement. . .

It looks like any efforts to upgrade US-412 into a named Interstate highway between I-35 and I-49 are not related at all to the OTA's Access Oklahoma 15-year plan. Inhofe has some clout with making deals related to highway projects. It's possible he may focus on the US-412 project. However, he is getting pretty old and his wife has had health issues, pulling him away from some of his duties.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Plutonic Panda on February 24, 2022, 08:55:21 PM
What I’m thinking is Inhofe seems to be championing this road upgrade and maybe he’d want to get it done before he leaves. Sort of like a last farewell.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Scott5114 on March 05, 2022, 10:10:38 PM
I was just on the Cimarron a couple of days ago. There's still some of the classic raised median around Exit 22. This will have to be fixed before it can become an Interstate.
(https://i.imgur.com/Q3Sn6fX.jpg)

Most of the rest of it has been paved over and a cable barrier installed in the median. I don't know if this setup meets standards or not.
(https://i.imgur.com/XDJF2st.jpg)
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Bobby5280 on March 06, 2022, 01:32:58 AM
I think I made the point about the narrow grassy median needing attention earlier in the thread. But the issue is worth repeating. As for the cheap looking cable barrier (to replace the narrow grassy strip), it seemed to be "good enough" for I-44 South of Lawton down to the US-70 Randlett exit.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Scott5114 on March 06, 2022, 02:09:30 PM
I think I made the point about the narrow grassy median needing attention earlier in the thread. But the issue is worth repeating. As for the cheap looking cable barrier (to replace the narrow grassy strip), it seemed to be "good enough" for I-44 South of Lawton down to the US-70 Randlett exit.

There is a procedural difference between replacing a very substandard median with a substandard one on an already-designated Interstate, versus having a substandard median on a proposed newly-designated Interstate.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Bobby5280 on March 06, 2022, 06:08:10 PM
If I recall correctly, the main difference was cost. A concrete Jersey barrier was double the cost of a cable barrier. Then there is the added safety argument that cable barriers will slow or stop an out of control vehicle whereas a concrete Jersey barrier will just make a vehicle bounce off and still be out of control.

I'm not a fan of the cable barriers for replacing the grassy strip. Even if one can argue the cable barrier is safer it still looks cheap. When a vehicle crashes into one the barrier has to be repaired immediately. Over time and with enough vehicle contacts all that dollar savings over concrete barriers could be depleted.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: rte66man on March 06, 2022, 08:19:52 PM
I was just on the Cimarron a couple of days ago. There's still some of the classic raised median around Exit 22. This will have to be fixed before it can become an Interstate.
(https://i.imgur.com/Q3Sn6fX.jpg)

Most of the rest of it has been paved over and a cable barrier installed in the median. I don't know if this setup meets standards or not.
(https://i.imgur.com/XDJF2st.jpg)
I was just on the Cimarron a couple of days ago. There's still some of the classic raised median around Exit 22. This will have to be fixed before it can become an Interstate.
(https://i.imgur.com/Q3Sn6fX.jpg)

Most of the rest of it has been paved over and a cable barrier installed in the median. I don't know if this setup meets standards or not.
(https://i.imgur.com/XDJF2st.jpg)

According to the 5 Year CIP, the remaining raised medians will be replaced as follows:
2022 - Cimarron Spur (to Stillwater)

I believe the remaining mainline medians are already budgeted.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: edwaleni on March 07, 2022, 09:50:14 AM
I covered it elsewhere but after looking at some research on cable barriers by TxDOT and some others, you would be surprised how well these work.

Unlike Jersey barriers where the kinetic energy simply forces the mass back into the highway, these cable barriers distribute that energy farther down the cables and keep the crashing vehicle in place like a spider web.

The one issue I can find in reviewing the data is that the cables in many cases obstructs the driver side door and first responders have to cut it. This is dangerous as the cable is essentially distributing that energy where cutting it can cause a whiplash. (sort of like an arrestor cable on an aircraft carrier failing)
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Plutonic Panda on March 07, 2022, 09:56:19 AM
I’d rather hit a Jersey barrier than one of these. Granted they’re also better than running into oncoming traffic.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: triplemultiplex on March 07, 2022, 03:01:56 PM
Both are better than a furrow of grass that begins immediately at the left fog line.
Those old grass medians look like the kind of thing you'd see police cars flipping off of in Smokey and the Bandit.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Scott5114 on March 07, 2022, 03:45:59 PM
I covered it elsewhere but after looking at some research on cable barriers by TxDOT and some others, you would be surprised how well these work.

Unlike Jersey barriers where the kinetic energy simply forces the mass back into the highway, these cable barriers distribute that energy farther down the cables and keep the crashing vehicle in place like a spider web.

The one issue I can find in reviewing the data is that the cables in many cases obstructs the driver side door and first responders have to cut it. This is dangerous as the cable is essentially distributing that energy where cutting it can cause a whiplash. (sort of like an arrestor cable on an aircraft carrier failing)

Oh, my concern here is not that cable barriers don't work. I've seen probably the same TxDOT video you have. My concern is that, because the cables deform from a straight line when catching a car, because the physical median width is so narrow here, the car might still end up partially in the oncoming lane.

That, and I don't think this particular setup exists outside of Oklahoma, so I have no idea if FHWA would approve a new Interstate designation on a road with a median like this. I know Bobby says there's a stretch of I-44 like this in southwest Oklahoma, but the I-44 designation would have already been approved for that stretch of highway (when standards are lower) and the cable barriers would have been installed afterward.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: kphoger on March 07, 2022, 03:54:39 PM
I know Bobby says there's a stretch of I-44 like this in southwest Oklahoma, but the I-44 designation would have already been approved for that stretch of highway (when standards are lower) and the cable barriers would have been installed afterward.

Yeah, quite a bit of I-44 in southwestern Oklahoma was retrofitted with a cable barrier within the last decade.

But, you know, that's the same highway that has a 75mph speed limit with a hard curb on the inside (https://goo.gl/maps/nfaEk1bkGMDDsD1L7), so how much should we really expect?
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: edwaleni on March 07, 2022, 05:09:29 PM
Both are better than a furrow of grass that begins immediately at the left fog line.
Those old grass medians look like the kind of thing you'd see police cars flipping off of in Smokey and the Bandit.

Or:

TJ Hooker
Hunter
A-Team
Hardcastle & McCormick
Riptide

and any show written by Stephen J. Cannell
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Scott5114 on March 07, 2022, 05:24:43 PM
I know Bobby says there's a stretch of I-44 like this in southwest Oklahoma, but the I-44 designation would have already been approved for that stretch of highway (when standards are lower) and the cable barriers would have been installed afterward.

Yeah, quite a bit of I-44 in southwestern Oklahoma was retrofitted with a cable barrier within the last decade.

But, you know, that's the same highway that has a 75mph speed limit with a hard curb on the inside (https://goo.gl/maps/nfaEk1bkGMDDsD1L7), so how much should we really expect?

Heh. Based on the location of that curb, it looks like their first attempt at fixing the raised grass median was to swap it with a curb and a raised paved median. OTA is something else.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: kphoger on March 07, 2022, 06:15:20 PM
Both are better than a furrow of grass that begins immediately at the left fog line.
Those old grass medians look like the kind of thing you'd see police cars flipping off of in Smokey and the Bandit.

Even better is when the grass overgrows the yellow line, or they've recently mown the grass and the clippings obscure it.  Especially when you're passing a trucker pulling double trailers at 80 mph.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Bobby5280 on March 07, 2022, 11:09:45 PM
I don't know what the hell the OTA was thinking about adding that hard curb to the median on I-44 coming into Chickasha. That is a real head-scratcher. It sure makes you pay attention, or just stay in the right lane.

Quote from: kphoger
Yeah, quite a bit of I-44 in southwestern Oklahoma was retrofitted with a cable barrier within the last decade.

The turnpikes that carry I-44 in Oklahoma all had the narrow grassy strip to the edge of the left lane until the late 1990's. Some terrible accidents, including a multiple fatality incident near Elgin forced the OTA to take action. Around 1996-97 they began adding the concrete Jersey barrier starting North of Lawton just past the Medicine Park exit and going all the way up to the Missouri border. IIRC the process took a year or two to complete.

I-44 South of Lawton remained as is with the grassy median strip. OTA didn't start fixing that issue until around 2014. That's the stretch with that cheap looking cable barrier. To me the solid 5-lane wide roadway with such a miniscule looking barrier makes the turnpike roadway seem a little like a surface street. The thump-thump-thump of those concrete joints in the road adds to that street feel.

Quote from: Scott5114
Oh, my concern here is not that cable barriers don't work. I've seen probably the same TxDOT video you have. My concern is that, because the cables deform from a straight line when catching a car, because the physical median width is so narrow here, the car might still end up partially in the oncoming lane.

One thing I don't like about the cable barriers is they offer no room for error. If you drift into one, even just the smallest bit your vehicle is probably going to get tangled into it big time. A concrete Jersey barrier with that slanted wall design will give a motorist a small chance of getting away without too much of a scrape. It's possible for the wheels to touch it slightly, jolting the driver back into the lane. Plenty of vehicles do make hard contact with the barrier though.

A couple or so years ago I did see one guy North of the Elgin exit drift into the Jersey barrier, launching his two left wheels up in the air. The car was running diagonally for a brief moment (just like a movie stunt) before banging down and sending out some sparks. I think the driver was drunker than Cooter Brown. It didn't look like the vehicle body touched the barrier at all. The suspension probably suffered some serious damage from the hit though.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Plutonic Panda on March 07, 2022, 11:57:45 PM
^^^ that is crazy because about 7 years ago before I moved to LA I was coming back from Medicine Park camping trip and something very similar happened to a truck in front of me. The guys truck was fucked but still running. He was rollin balls so I offered to give him a ride so he wouldn’t get a DUI and I drove him to Chickasha. Good times.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Bobby5280 on March 08, 2022, 12:20:55 AM
I called 911 on the guy I watched hit the barrier. My girlfriend and I were driving home after a road trip to OKC; we watched a movie while there and it was late when we were getting close to home. We had been watching this drunk motorist slowly weaving lane to lane for some time; I think even before we passed through Chickasha. All I could do was hang back at a distance. I was afraid to attempt passing him. I wasn't all that surprised the guy finally had some kind of accident. Still, it was astonishing and morbidly funny to see a movie style car stunt, a car driving diagonally on its right wheels, playing out in real life.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Plutonic Panda on March 08, 2022, 01:09:39 AM
Must be a lot of impaired drivers on that road.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Scott5114 on March 08, 2022, 02:23:14 AM
Must be a lot of impaired drivers on that road.

If you had nothing to look forward to but going to Chickasha you'd probably get shitfaced too.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Plutonic Panda on March 08, 2022, 03:47:28 AM
Must be a lot of impaired drivers on that road.

If you had nothing to look forward to but going to Chickasha you'd probably get shitfaced too.
If you can hold the liquor OKC isn’t to far up the road 😂
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: kphoger on March 08, 2022, 09:48:33 AM

Must be a lot of impaired drivers on that road.

If you had nothing to look forward to but going to Chickasha you'd probably get shitfaced too.

From my experience last year, I'm assuming that the Braum's in Chickasha is the redneck capital of America.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: kphoger on March 08, 2022, 09:49:57 AM
To me the solid 5-lane wide roadway with such a miniscule looking barrier makes the turnpike roadway seem a little like a surface street.

When I first saw the cable barrier going in along I-44, I thought I'd feel that way too.  But, now that it's been completed, I don't.  To me, it still feels very much like a normal freeway.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: edwaleni on March 08, 2022, 09:58:42 AM

Must be a lot of impaired drivers on that road.

If you had nothing to look forward to but going to Chickasha you'd probably get shitfaced too.

From my experience last year, I'm assuming that the Braum's in Chickasha is the redneck capital of America.

Where do the local farmers go for breakfast to talk about their problems in Chickasha?
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: kphoger on March 08, 2022, 10:15:39 AM
Farmers and rednecks are not necessarily the same group of people, in my experience.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Rothman on March 08, 2022, 01:01:45 PM
Farmers and rednecks are not necessarily the same group of people, in my experience.
^This.

Also, every mention of Braum's in this thread makes me hungry.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Bobby5280 on March 08, 2022, 01:21:20 PM
Quote from: Scott5114
If you had nothing to look forward to but going to Chickasha you'd probably get shitfaced too.

I'm pretty sure that drunk motorist was heading back to the Lawton area after getting shit-faced in Oklahoma City. He left the Interstate at the Medicine Park exit.

Quote from: kphoger
Farmers and rednecks are not necessarily the same group of people, in my experience.

A bunch of those guys are all hat, no cattle.

Quote from: kphoger
When I first saw the cable barrier going in along I-44, I thought I'd feel that way too.  But, now that it's been completed, I don't.  To me, it still feels very much like a normal freeway.

It still looks cheap to me. OTA has done as little as they can with their segment of I-44 between Lawton and the Red River. South of the US-70 Exit for Randlett ODOT rebuilt a good stretch of I-44 passing in front of the two casinos. That's actually some decent road. I also like how I-44 looks between OKC and Tulsa where they've finished the widening to 3x3 configuration. I-44 South of Lawton looks very low rent compared to that. And we still have that gawd-awful toll plaza at Walters; the OK-5 bridge going over it looks like it's about to fall apart. Even with the turnpikes set to go to all cash-less tolling I expect OTA to leave that shitty toll plaza as is, forcing everyone to still slow down to 30mph even with no human beings present there anymore.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: kphoger on March 08, 2022, 01:48:05 PM
It still looks cheap to me.

This (https://goo.gl/maps/MxVvPHrB4r4x4M9aA) doesn't look any worse than this (https://goo.gl/maps/yrmspaMMQjsNWUzD8) to me.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Bobby5280 on March 08, 2022, 01:56:56 PM
That pavement on I-8 West of Yuma looks like it's in better shape than I-44 South of Lawton. While there is no cable barrier present the median on I-8 looks wider. Still, that part of I-8 is certainly way down on the list of priorities for Caltrans.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Scott5114 on March 08, 2022, 04:47:21 PM
I wouldn't call the Oklahoma turnpikes cheap, but all of them built before the 1990s do feel hilariously outdated, even in comparison to the Kansas Turnpike, which was built around the same time but has aged more gracefully. Many of the county roads passing over the Oklahoma turnpikes have one-lane bridges, which is scary as shit, especially when you don't know the area very well.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: plain on March 08, 2022, 05:16:45 PM
Many of the county roads passing over the Oklahoma turnpikes have one-lane bridges, which is scary as shit, especially when you don't know the area very well.

No shit!! And I thought the old overpasses on the Pennsylvania Turnpike was narrow!


PA
https://maps.app.goo.gl/S47End5a8yHCqDgt6

OK
https://maps.app.goo.gl/X5GixyNvZ9Vujjyb9
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Scott5114 on March 08, 2022, 05:45:29 PM
This one (https://www.google.com/maps/@35.2765552,-97.6054327,3a,75y,100.44h,85.74t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sNwxhGdqn4NIsGydCxJa4AA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) is the one I've had to deal with the most. Right in the middle of town, and good luck seeing if there's oncoming traffic.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: SoonerCowboy on March 08, 2022, 06:31:15 PM
Many of the county roads passing over the Oklahoma turnpikes have one-lane bridges, which is scary as shit, especially when you don't know the area very well.

No shit!! And I thought the old overpasses on the Pennsylvania Turnpike was narrow!


PA
https://maps.app.goo.gl/S47End5a8yHCqDgt6

OK
https://maps.app.goo.gl/X5GixyNvZ9Vujjyb9

Thanks for the comparison, that Oklahoma bridge is some sketchy shit. I think I would drive straight down the middle and hope no one is coming from the other way.  :bigass:
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: SoonerCowboy on March 08, 2022, 06:34:57 PM
Must be a lot of impaired drivers on that road.

If you had nothing to look forward to but going to Chickasha you'd probably get shitfaced too.


OMG Scott, that's the best laugh I've had all day.    :clap:
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Road Hog on March 08, 2022, 06:50:44 PM
If you think those overpasses are narrow now, imagine what it was like driving those 1960s and early 1970s land yachts back in the day.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: MikieTimT on March 08, 2022, 06:53:30 PM
This one (https://www.google.com/maps/@35.2765552,-97.6054327,3a,75y,100.44h,85.74t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sNwxhGdqn4NIsGydCxJa4AA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) is the one I've had to deal with the most. Right in the middle of town, and good luck seeing if there's oncoming traffic.

And good luck being held legally accountable for whatever the unreadable signs on either end of that bridge allegedly warned against.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Scott5114 on March 08, 2022, 07:02:04 PM
This one (https://www.google.com/maps/@35.2765552,-97.6054327,3a,75y,100.44h,85.74t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sNwxhGdqn4NIsGydCxJa4AA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) is the one I've had to deal with the most. Right in the middle of town, and good luck seeing if there's oncoming traffic.

And good luck being held legally accountable for whatever the unreadable signs on either end of that bridge allegedly warned against.

They're warnings about fines for throwing things off the bridge, so I would imagine that the poor condition of the signage wouldn't be much of a defense. I've only ever seen those signs on OTA bridges; ODOT bridges don't have them.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Bobby5280 on March 08, 2022, 07:06:47 PM
https://www.google.com/maps/@35.2619194,-97.6377882,3a,75y,257.52h,68.2t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s2r1sA3VoRQvFfOSKCrGLkA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192 (https://www.google.com/maps/@35.2619194,-97.6377882,3a,75y,257.52h,68.2t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s2r1sA3VoRQvFfOSKCrGLkA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)

This particular bridge got broadsided by the May 3, 1999 F5 tornado. The Google Street View image is looking WSW in the direction at the field from where the tornado approached. That monster tornado gouged most of the top soil off the field. The concrete Jersey barrier on I-44 had what looked like bite marks knocked out of it. OTA patched that, but the concrete patches were visible for years. I think OTA replaced that barrier when that part of the turnpike was resurfaced. For a long time that one lane bridge over I-44 was stained with red clay soil. It's kind of amazing the bridge withstood 300mph+ winds, only getting cosmetic damage.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: rte66man on March 08, 2022, 07:44:13 PM
https://www.google.com/maps/@35.2619194,-97.6377882,3a,75y,257.52h,68.2t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s2r1sA3VoRQvFfOSKCrGLkA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192 (https://www.google.com/maps/@35.2619194,-97.6377882,3a,75y,257.52h,68.2t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s2r1sA3VoRQvFfOSKCrGLkA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)

This particular bridge got broadsided by the May 3, 1999 F5 tornado. The Google Street View image is looking WSW in the direction at the field from where the tornado approached. That monster tornado gouged most of the top soil off the field. The concrete Jersey barrier on I-44 had what looked like bite marks knocked out of it. OTA patched that, but the concrete patches were visible for years. I think OTA replaced that barrier when that part of the turnpike was resurfaced. For a long time that one lane bridge over I-44 was stained with red clay soil. It's kind of amazing the bridge withstood 300mph+ winds, only getting cosmetic damage.

Yes, all of the Jersey barrier was replaced for the 5 mile stretch of new pavement south from "South" US62
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: MikieTimT on March 15, 2022, 03:59:21 PM
https://www.nwaonline.com/news/2022/feb/07/arkansas-oklahoma-to-partner-on-us-412-interstate/?fbclid=IwAR3FM0W4Vcgv0cbc0vD2b2DojTE85gpjUkwjWa5xF7n1vk8c90VTEE7fJuE

Forget the US-412 Interstate upgrade. The real meat in this piece is ARDOT is Opening a regional office in NWA.

It tells you they are serious about improving traffic access in NWA which may pass metro Little Rock in population in just a decade or two.
I thought the most interesting part was "the quarter-cent sales tax dedicated to highways." Right now there's this thread (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=29161.0) happening about alternatives to the gas tax for highway funding. I think we'll see more of this as EV numbers increase.

I think the EV transition will start accelerating due to world events and potential longer term disruptions to the fossil fuels we currently know and love.  Arkansas landed an EV manufacturer a few weeks ago not far off US-412 down I-55 in NEA nearby to the massive new steel plants sprouting up along the Mississippi River.  With the relatively cleanly sourced steel locally available and with plans to start mining lithium from the brines of south Arkansas, there seems to be a renaissance of manufacturing in the state as of late, with a fair amount of it coming to historically depressed areas.

Envirotech Vehicles Announces Osceola, Arkansas as Site of its State-of-the-Art Manufacturing Facility (https://evtvusa.com/news/envirotech-vehicles-announces-osceola-arkansas/)

We'll see if it all comes to fruition as not many EV companies have grown into sustainable entities yet.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: kphoger on March 15, 2022, 04:32:07 PM
I think the EV transition will start accelerating due to world events and potential longer term disruptions to the fossil fuels we currently know and love.

Because the countries that mine materials used in batteries are never plagued by politics, war, or supply chain disruptions...
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Scott5114 on March 15, 2022, 04:35:21 PM
I think the EV transition will start accelerating due to world events and potential longer term disruptions to the fossil fuels we currently know and love.

Because the countries that mine materials used in batteries are never plagued by politics, war, or supply chain disruptions...

Well, he did mention in his post that apparently they have found at least one of those materials in Arkansas. Now, Arkansas is definitely plagued by politics, but I don't know about war...
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: abqtraveler on March 16, 2022, 09:58:40 AM
I think the EV transition will start accelerating due to world events and potential longer term disruptions to the fossil fuels we currently know and love.

Because the countries that mine materials used in batteries are never plagued by politics, war, or supply chain disruptions...
Or the countries that provide those materials are sworn enemies of America "[cough] China!"
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Plutonic Panda on March 16, 2022, 12:03:24 PM
I think the EV transition will start accelerating due to world events and potential longer term disruptions to the fossil fuels we currently know and love.

Because the countries that mine materials used in batteries are never plagued by politics, war, or supply chain disruptions...

Well, he did mention in his post that apparently they have found at least one of those materials in Arkansas. Now, Arkansas is definitely plagued by politics, but I don't know about war...
Same thing in SoCal on the salton sea although I’ve always dreamed of it becoming it’s originally conceived idea of paradise.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: skluth on March 16, 2022, 07:23:43 PM
I think the EV transition will start accelerating due to world events and potential longer term disruptions to the fossil fuels we currently know and love.

Because the countries that mine materials used in batteries are never plagued by politics, war, or supply chain disruptions...

Well, he did mention in his post that apparently they have found at least one of those materials in Arkansas. Now, Arkansas is definitely plagued by politics, but I don't know about war...
Same thing in SoCal on the salton sea although I’ve always dreamed of it becoming it’s originally conceived idea of paradise.
The Salton Sea will never be a paradise again. The Salton Sea's worst problem is the salts along the edges of the lake become a toxic dust from the agricultural pollutants used by Imperial Valley farms. The algae blooms are a secondary concern, but still an issue. However, below the lake is believed to be one of the largest lithium resources on the planet with an estimated one to six million metric tons of lithium (https://www.mining.com/new-project-to-investigate-if-californias-lithium-valley-is-the-worlds-largest-brine-source-of-lithium/) contained in the brine trapped in the sand below the lake bottom. The Salton Sea lies in a gap between the North American and Pacific Plates and the brine has been collecting in the gap for millennia. 
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: US 89 on March 16, 2022, 07:44:07 PM
The Salton Sea lies in a gap between the North American and Pacific Plates and the brine has been collecting in the gap for millennia. 

And for that reason, the Salton Sea should actually be higher - over 200 feet higher. Matter of fact, the entire Imperial Valley should be underwater. That geological feature is what forms the Gulf of California, and it extends all the way up to somewhere around Indio CA. The only reason the Gulf doesn't go that far north is because over a few million years, the Colorado River deposited so much sediment into the basin that enough of it accumulated to build a low, broad ridge above sea level dividing the basin in two: the Gulf of California basin to the south and the Salton Sink to the north. This was fascinating to learn for the first time as it's not really something you easily get from a typical road map, but look at a satellite view and the picture of a SW-flowing Colorado River into a NW/SE-oriented depression quickly becomes apparent.

The current Salton Sea is there because our own canals failed 100 years ago and delivered the full volume of a flooding undammed Colorado River into the Salton Sink over a span of about two years. It should never have existed to begin with.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: edwaleni on March 19, 2022, 11:41:15 PM

The current Salton Sea is there because our own canals failed 100 years ago and delivered the full volume of a flooding undammed Colorado River into the Salton Sink over a span of about two years. It should never have existed to begin with.

Agreed. And if it wasn't for the Southern Pacific Railroad at the time, the water would still be flowing west. Now it's named after a minor pop star of the 1960's whose ex-wife keeps the Palm Springs plastic surgery clinics on quick dial.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: The Ghostbuster on April 11, 2022, 10:59:54 PM
Does anyone know when we might hear some news about what Interstate number the US 412 corridor will receive in the future? The suspense is killing me.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Scott5114 on April 12, 2022, 04:38:34 AM
Does anyone know when we might hear some news about what Interstate number the US 412 corridor will receive in the future? The suspense is killing me.

Remember, it took ODOT the better part of a decade to build a single stack interchange. These are not people that move quickly.

I think it's likely to be years on down the road. ODOT/ArDOT haven't even finished conducting their study to see what upgrades would be needed to get an Interstate designation on this corridor. If there's a substantial amount of work, I doubt they'll make any decision about that at all until after that's funded and possibly even completed. The only thing that might change that is if ArDOT is eager to get a number for some reason.

If the work is expensive enough, ODOT may well just not pursue the designation. It wouldn't be the first time they took no action on a designated Interstate corridor.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: MikieTimT on April 12, 2022, 08:56:03 AM
Does anyone know when we might hear some news about what Interstate number the US 412 corridor will receive in the future? The suspense is killing me.

Arkansas has some recent experience now at this point with multistate interstate projects.  They will want to designate their portion as soon as there's a completion between logical termini (at least the connection between I-49 and I-44) or the gap is small enough to be inevitably closed within a decade or so.  But at this point, the facility isn't designated with a number either in legislation like the I-57 segment between Sikeston and Little Rock, and no request has been made for any of the portion that's completed as a limited access facility, like Arkansas did back in the early 90's with I-49 with AASHTO that was initially rejected, forcing the temporary I-540 designation of the US-71 replacement between Bentonville and Alma.

There's still the western Springdale Bypass gap at minimum to close if ARDOT determines that the current US-412 divided highway between Tontitown and Siloam Springs is the best alternative to connect the border to the current limited access facility that ties into I-49 at Lowell, but regardless of whether or not that portion is converted to a limited access facility with overpasses and access roads, Siloam Springs/West Siloam Springs at a minimum will have to be bypassed, so since that will require coordination with both states logistically and financially, I wouldn't expect any news on much of any of the rest of the project until that coordination gets fleshed out, unless Oklahoma wants to push hard on the I-35 to I-44 segment as that wouldn't take much in the way of actual construction to be able to designate that portion as I-48/I-50.

I think with the facility ultimately (at least with this current designation) being just shy of 200 miles and across 2 states that it winds up being a 2di without question in my mind.  And my avatar shows my thoughts on the matter given that this winds up being the first portion of HPC-8 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intermodal_Surface_Transportation_Efficiency_Act) that gets done.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: kphoger on April 20, 2022, 04:15:13 PM

It still looks cheap to me.

This (https://goo.gl/maps/MxVvPHrB4r4x4M9aA) doesn't look any worse than this (https://goo.gl/maps/yrmspaMMQjsNWUzD8) to me.

Or...  Just found this one...  How about this on I-90 (https://goo.gl/maps/yFhXJj3RJopkr8Mc9)?  How is I-44 really any worse?
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Scott5114 on April 20, 2022, 05:18:53 PM

It still looks cheap to me.

This (https://goo.gl/maps/MxVvPHrB4r4x4M9aA) doesn't look any worse than this (https://goo.gl/maps/yrmspaMMQjsNWUzD8) to me.

Or...  Just found this one...  How about this on I-90 (https://goo.gl/maps/yFhXJj3RJopkr8Mc9)?  How is I-44 really any worse?

Yellow-line to yellow-line distances:

I-90: 40 feet
I-8: 37 feet
I-44: 17 feet
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: kphoger on April 20, 2022, 06:02:24 PM



It still looks cheap to me.

This (https://goo.gl/maps/MxVvPHrB4r4x4M9aA) doesn't look any worse than this (https://goo.gl/maps/yrmspaMMQjsNWUzD8) to me.

Or...  Just found this one...  How about this on I-90 (https://goo.gl/maps/yFhXJj3RJopkr8Mc9)?  How is I-44 really any worse?

Yellow-line to yellow-line distances:

I-90: 40 feet
I-8: 37 feet
I-44: 17 feet

I was especially referring to the oncoming grain truck on the frontage road, with nothing but a barbed-wire fence in between.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: I-55 on April 21, 2022, 03:22:47 AM



It still looks cheap to me.

This (https://goo.gl/maps/MxVvPHrB4r4x4M9aA) doesn't look any worse than this (https://goo.gl/maps/yrmspaMMQjsNWUzD8) to me.

Or...  Just found this one...  How about this on I-90 (https://goo.gl/maps/yFhXJj3RJopkr8Mc9)?  How is I-44 really any worse?

Yellow-line to yellow-line distances:

I-90: 40 feet
I-8: 37 feet
I-44: 17 feet

I was especially referring to the oncoming grain truck on the frontage road, with nothing but a barbed-wire fence in between.

White line to white line is still ~30 feet
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: kphoger on April 21, 2022, 09:19:29 AM
I'm assuming a cable barrier is better at actually corralling an errant vehicle than a plain barbed-wire fence is, though, right?
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Bobby5280 on April 21, 2022, 10:01:26 AM
If the cable barrier is built to proper specifications it will be far more effective than an ordinary barbed wire fence at preventing an out of control vehicle from crossing over into opposing lanes.

Cable barriers are using much heavier gauge cables, multiple lines in a larger twisted cable. And there's usually 3 or 4 of those twisted cables running from post to post. A barbed wire fence just uses single strands of plain barbed wire. Cable barriers have far more posts than a typical barbed wire fence. Plus the cable barrier posts are metal.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: edwaleni on April 21, 2022, 10:23:09 AM
If the cable barrier is built to proper specifications it will be far more effective than an ordinary barbed wire fence at preventing an out of control vehicle from crossing over into opposing lanes.

Cable barriers are using much heavier gauge cables, multiple lines in a larger twisted cable. And there's usually 3 or 4 of those twisted cables running from post to post. A barbed wire fence just uses single strands of plain barbed wire. Cable barriers have far more posts than a typical barbed wire fence. Plus the cable barrier posts are metal.

Cable Barrier = cars/trucks
Barbed Wire = Animals, deer, cattle
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Rothman on April 21, 2022, 11:19:27 AM


If the cable barrier is built to proper specifications it will be far more effective than an ordinary barbed wire fence at preventing an out of control vehicle from crossing over into opposing lanes.

Cable barriers are using much heavier gauge cables, multiple lines in a larger twisted cable. And there's usually 3 or 4 of those twisted cables running from post to post. A barbed wire fence just uses single strands of plain barbed wire. Cable barriers have far more posts than a typical barbed wire fence. Plus the cable barrier posts are metal.

Cable Barrier = cars/trucks
Barbed Wire = Animals, deer, cattle, HighwayStar

My work is done here.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: MikieTimT on April 21, 2022, 12:42:17 PM
I guess they figure that there isn't much traffic on the access road apparently to justify a full cable barrier.  At least barbed wire will keep ATVs/UTVs from hopping on the Interstate!
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Bobby5280 on April 21, 2022, 01:29:35 PM
Never underestimate the potential idiocy of someone on an ATV with wire cutters in his possession.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: MikieTimT on April 21, 2022, 01:47:20 PM
Never underestimate the potential idiocy of someone on an ATV with wire cutters in his possession.

... and then utters the phrase, "Here, hold my beer."
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: stevashe on April 22, 2022, 11:59:20 AM
I'm assuming a cable barrier is better at actually corralling an errant vehicle than a plain barbed-wire fence is, though, right?

Thing is, the extra distance (30 vs 17 feet) means there is a much lower likelihood of needing to stop an errant vehicle in the first place! Not to mention since there is more than just pavement between the lanes, that unpaved area will serve to slow the speed of any vehicle crossing over. Plus, in the case of the frontage road, there are slower speeds already in the first place.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: kphoger on April 22, 2022, 12:11:59 PM
Plus, in the case of the frontage road, there are slower speeds already in the first place.

...which only really matters if the errant vehicle isn't the one on the Interstate.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: stevashe on April 22, 2022, 12:26:16 PM
Plus, in the case of the frontage road, there are slower speeds already in the first place.

...which only really matters if the errant vehicle isn't the one on the Interstate.

Well I assumed we were mainly talking about a potential collision between cars since otherwise the frontage road being there doesn't make much of a difference, in which case there is always a vehicle not on the interstate involved.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: kphoger on April 22, 2022, 12:29:05 PM


Plus, in the case of the frontage road, there are slower speeds already in the first place.

...which only really matters if the errant vehicle isn't the one on the Interstate.

Well I assumed we were mainly talking about a potential collision between cars since otherwise the frontage road being there doesn't make much of a difference, in which case there is always a vehicle not on the interstate involved.

I assumed you brought up the lower speed on the frontage road because an errant vehicle is less likely to due damage—or likely to go as far to begin with—if it's slow-moving.  I also had in mind, however, a vehicle going 75 mph down the Interstate and going off the road in the other direction—into the frontage road.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: kphoger on April 22, 2022, 12:30:28 PM
My point in all this is that I really don't see much of a problem with either of them.  When I first saw the cable barriers on I-44, I grimaced.  But that phase passed.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Scott5114 on April 22, 2022, 06:05:18 PM
I don't have much of a problem with cable barrier itself. I do have a problem with the 17' median width, especially since it's paved (not that unpaved medians do much more to slow down cars, but it's not like the paving helps matters).

Going back to the subject of the thread, which is the Cimarron, not the H.E. Bailey...I just measured a section of the median near the Morrison exit and got 15'. Interstate standard is 50' with no barrier, or 10' with a barrier. The question is, does FHWA consider a cable barrier sufficient to make that compliant with standard, or must OTA upgrade it to a Jersey barrier, as they did on the Turner and Will Rogers?
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Bobby5280 on April 22, 2022, 08:54:45 PM
I don't think cable barriers existed back in the mid 1990's when the concrete Jersey barriers were added to the Turner and Will Rogers turnpikes (and H.E. Bailey between Lawton and OKC).

IIRC, current Interstate designs require a certain amount of inner left shoulder next to the left travel lane. Something like 4' to 6' in width. I think I-44 South of Lawton complies with that. The grassy median is slightly larger than a 12' highway lane. All the OTA did was just replace the grassy median strip with concrete. Still, it kind of makes the turnpike look like a 5-lane street with a cable barrier down the middle of what looks like could be a center turn lane. The Cimarron Turnpike is getting the same treatment. It's just getting built out at a slower pace.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Scott5114 on April 22, 2022, 09:04:26 PM
Assuming the cable barrier is 1 foot wide, that'd still leave 7' on either side for inner shoulders. Which is probably why they paved it.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: MikieTimT on April 24, 2022, 10:05:29 PM
It almost seems like a couple of 5 lane "Arkansas Freeways" could be a cable barrier and some grade separation/access road building away from getting promoted to Interstate status with this criteria!
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: msunat97 on July 08, 2022, 07:36:59 AM
Does anyone have a map of the proposed connection from existing 412 to the new 612 (Springdale bypass)?  I can’t find anything recent online.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: edwaleni on July 08, 2022, 12:03:03 PM
Does anyone have a map of the proposed connection from existing 412 to the new 612 (Springdale bypass)?  I can’t find anything recent online.

http://www.ahtd.state.ar.us/environmental/environmental_studies/001966/MapInfo.aspx (http://www.ahtd.state.ar.us/environmental/environmental_studies/001966/MapInfo.aspx)
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Bobby5280 on July 08, 2022, 12:35:05 PM
What's going to be interesting is how ArDOT and ODOT bridge the gap between the Springdale Bypass and the existing Cherokee Turnpike. Very obviously, Siloam Springs will need a new terrain bypass going around the North or South side of the town. It would be a tight squeeze to upgrade the existing US-412 highway segment from Dripping Springs over to the edge of West Siloam Springs. It might be easier to just create a new terrain bypass around that as well.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: edwaleni on July 08, 2022, 01:38:37 PM
What's going to be interesting is how ArDOT and ODOT bridge the gap between the Springdale Bypass and the existing Cherokee Turnpike. Very obviously, Siloam Springs will need a new terrain bypass going around the North or South side of the town. It would be a tight squeeze to upgrade the existing US-412 highway segment from Dripping Springs over to the edge of West Siloam Springs. It might be easier to just create a new terrain bypass around that as well.

In another thread I proposed that ArDOT use an existing powerline easement that runs south of Siloam Springs to the Oklahoma border.

While the easement itself is not wide enough in total, it does reduce the overall property requirements which will improve the approvals.

I marked up a sat view showing where the easement could be used.

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51859097710_a35057df05_c.jpg)

While this easement ends on the east side of town, the west side continues all the way through Oklahoma.

Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: swake on July 08, 2022, 08:25:13 PM
What's going to be interesting is how ArDOT and ODOT bridge the gap between the Springdale Bypass and the existing Cherokee Turnpike. Very obviously, Siloam Springs will need a new terrain bypass going around the North or South side of the town. It would be a tight squeeze to upgrade the existing US-412 highway segment from Dripping Springs over to the edge of West Siloam Springs. It might be easier to just create a new terrain bypass around that as well.

OTA is already authorized to extend the Cherokee Turnpike to the Arkansas state line. They are just going to match up to whatever Arkansas does.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Bobby5280 on July 08, 2022, 11:24:46 PM
OTA and ArDOT had better start talking about possible alignments (if they're not doing so already). That area of Arkansas is growing. The more time those agencies waste farting around not deciding on anything will make connecting the Cherokee Turnpike and Springdale Bypass that much harder.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: swake on July 09, 2022, 02:00:23 PM
OTA and ArDOT had better start talking about possible alignments (if they're not doing so already). That area of Arkansas is growing. The more time those agencies waste farting around not deciding on anything will make connecting the Cherokee Turnpike and Springdale Bypass that much harder.

The joint study is supposed to start next month. It also includes ODOT for the free sections of the road in Oklahoma that need upgrades, mostly between Catoosa and Locust Grove.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Bobby5280 on July 09, 2022, 11:32:43 PM
The segment of US-412 between Catoosa (I-44) and the beginning of the Cherokee Turnpike will be relatively easy to upgrade. It's the problems to the East of the Cherokee Turnpike's East terminus that will be much harder to solve.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: The Ghostbuster on July 11, 2022, 12:29:28 PM
I wonder what the new exit numbers of the existing Cherokee Turnpike will become once it eventually gets its future Interstate designation, assuming the Cimarron Turnpike's exits stay the same and the segment of the Sand Springs Expressway (and segments east of it) are numbered as a continuation of the Cimarron Turnpike's exit sequence?
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: MikieTimT on July 11, 2022, 03:51:34 PM
OTA and ArDOT had better start talking about possible alignments (if they're not doing so already). That area of Arkansas is growing. The more time those agencies waste farting around not deciding on anything will make connecting the Cherokee Turnpike and Springdale Bypass that much harder.

The longer this takes, the more likely that Siloam Springs is bypassed to the south.  I have a sister-in-law that lives up on Dawn Hill north of town, and there's more subdivisions going in between Cheri Whitlock St. and Davidson Rd. along N Hico St. and N Country Club Rd., so it's only a matter of time before the development starts in earnest along Dawn Hill Rd., which would essentially make ROW acquisition unaffordable to the north without going almost up to Lake Swepco and then back south to the Flint Creek valley.  It'd still have to cut through the old country club up there, which has higher than average house values, although it certainly isn't what it was back 20 years ago in relevance and upkeep.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: US71 on July 12, 2022, 10:23:13 AM
The segment of US-412 between Catoosa (I-44) and the beginning of the Cherokee Turnpike will be relatively easy to upgrade. It's the problems to the East of the Cherokee Turnpike's East terminus that will be much harder to solve.

412 is still divided  to near West Siloam Springs at the big curve but would have to be upgraded to eliminate the at-grade intersections.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Bobby5280 on July 12, 2022, 01:08:28 PM
The 5 mile segment of US-412 outside of West Siloam Springs could be upgraded to Interstate standards. But the trick is how to dovetail the Springdale Bypass into it. They can't just hang a hard left or right near the Cherokee Casino. The bypass connection into existing US-412 will have to be made farther into Oklahoma. Siloam Springs looks like quite a hurdle. More development is spreading on the Northern side of town. There is less of that to the South, but the downside is the terrain is more hilly and challenging. It looks like any Interstate quality connection going into Oklahoma will require a few miles of new terrain highway before it can connect back into the existing US-412 route.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: US71 on July 12, 2022, 01:46:09 PM
The 5 mile segment of US-412 outside of West Siloam Springs could be upgraded to Interstate standards. But the trick is how to dovetail the Springdale Bypass into it. They can't just hang a hard left or right near the Cherokee Casino. The bypass connection into existing US-412 will have to be made farther into Oklahoma. Siloam Springs looks like quite a hurdle. More development is spreading on the Northern side of town. There is less of that to the South, but the downside is the terrain is more hilly and challenging. It looks like any Interstate quality connection going into Oklahoma will require a few miles of new terrain highway before it can connect back into the existing US-412 route.

I always thought the curve would be a good space, but I have no idea what's on the other sides.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: MikieTimT on July 12, 2022, 01:56:43 PM
The 5 mile segment of US-412 outside of West Siloam Springs could be upgraded to Interstate standards. But the trick is how to dovetail the Springdale Bypass into it. They can't just hang a hard left or right near the Cherokee Casino. The bypass connection into existing US-412 will have to be made farther into Oklahoma. Siloam Springs looks like quite a hurdle. More development is spreading on the Northern side of town. There is less of that to the South, but the downside is the terrain is more hilly and challenging. It looks like any Interstate quality connection going into Oklahoma will require a few miles of new terrain highway before it can connect back into the existing US-412 route.

I always thought the curve would be a good space, but I have no idea what's on the other sides.

I'd be surprised if the Springdale Bypass dovetails at all directly with what shoots across the state line.  My money's on the existing 4 lane divided highway being converted to limited access as there aren't many crossroads to deal with, and access really isn't an issue with Old Highway 68 still to the north and mainly Ozark Natl. Forest to the south.  There aren't even any drives from adjoining properties that connect directly to it at all.  It would look better from a map and mileage perspective to shoot straight west from where the Springdale Bypass is set to swing straight south, but the terrain between there and and north side of Siloam Springs where the easier bypass would be (at least for now) is just as full of creeks and hollows as the south side of Siloam Springs would be on a southern bypass.  Not to mention Logan Cave is right near the logical new terrain route and has some endangered blind cavefish in it, so it's off limits from a development standpoint for ecological reasons.  It's all karst subterrain, so it's tough to keep nasty stuff (which interstates carry a fair amount of) out of the water around there and not impact underground ecosystems.  I'd personally rather it route that way from an engineering standpoint, but there's enough environmentalists around here that would put the kibosh to that plan.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: swake on July 12, 2022, 05:28:29 PM
The 5 mile segment of US-412 outside of West Siloam Springs could be upgraded to Interstate standards. But the trick is how to dovetail the Springdale Bypass into it. They can't just hang a hard left or right near the Cherokee Casino. The bypass connection into existing US-412 will have to be made farther into Oklahoma. Siloam Springs looks like quite a hurdle. More development is spreading on the Northern side of town. There is less of that to the South, but the downside is the terrain is more hilly and challenging. It looks like any Interstate quality connection going into Oklahoma will require a few miles of new terrain highway before it can connect back into the existing US-412 route.

My guess is that it will be all new road as extension of the Cherokee turnpike. The Cherokee is already authorized by state law to be built to the Arkansas state line. The OTA can build it at any time, they just need to know where.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Henry on July 13, 2022, 12:59:53 PM
The 5 mile segment of US-412 outside of West Siloam Springs could be upgraded to Interstate standards. But the trick is how to dovetail the Springdale Bypass into it. They can't just hang a hard left or right near the Cherokee Casino. The bypass connection into existing US-412 will have to be made farther into Oklahoma. Siloam Springs looks like quite a hurdle. More development is spreading on the Northern side of town. There is less of that to the South, but the downside is the terrain is more hilly and challenging. It looks like any Interstate quality connection going into Oklahoma will require a few miles of new terrain highway before it can connect back into the existing US-412 route.

My guess is that it will be all new road as extension of the Cherokee turnpike. The Cherokee is already authorized by state law to be built to the Arkansas state line. The OTA can build it at any time, they just need to know where.
The way I see it, they would be better off building to the north, despite the growing development. Plus the Springdale bypass is already to the north of existing US 412, so it really doesn't make any sense to make a sudden dive to the south just to avoid the development, plus it would be more expensive due to the terrain. In a nutshell, the northern route is the only one that makes sense.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: The Ghostbuster on July 13, 2022, 01:09:48 PM
Since the Springdale Bypass is not planned to be extended westward (or eastward) any time soon, I hope too much development doesn't pop up in the meantime. Do they have the right-of-way for the future extensions locked up so that structures won't be built in their path only to be later torn down?
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Bobby5280 on July 13, 2022, 04:42:37 PM
Looking at the area from Google Earth it does not look like ArDOT, ODOT or OTA have made any efforts to secure ROW for a future Interstate.

Quote from: MikieTimT
I'd be surprised if the Springdale Bypass dovetails at all directly with what shoots across the state line.  My money's on the existing 4 lane divided highway being converted to limited access as there aren't many crossroads to deal with, and access really isn't an issue with Old Highway 68 still to the north and mainly Ozark Natl. Forest to the south.

Are you suggesting upgrading US-412 directly through West Siloam Springs and Siloam Springs?
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: edwaleni on July 14, 2022, 12:05:25 AM
The 5 mile segment of US-412 outside of West Siloam Springs could be upgraded to Interstate standards. But the trick is how to dovetail the Springdale Bypass into it. They can't just hang a hard left or right near the Cherokee Casino. The bypass connection into existing US-412 will have to be made farther into Oklahoma. Siloam Springs looks like quite a hurdle. More development is spreading on the Northern side of town. There is less of that to the South, but the downside is the terrain is more hilly and challenging. It looks like any Interstate quality connection going into Oklahoma will require a few miles of new terrain highway before it can connect back into the existing US-412 route.

My guess is that it will be all new road as extension of the Cherokee turnpike. The Cherokee is already authorized by state law to be built to the Arkansas state line. The OTA can build it at any time, they just need to know where.
The way I see it, they would be better off building to the north, despite the growing development. Plus the Springdale bypass is already to the north of existing US 412, so it really doesn't make any sense to make a sudden dive to the south just to avoid the development, plus it would be more expensive due to the terrain. In a nutshell, the northern route is the only one that makes sense.

Springdale Bypass is planned to go back south and realign with US-412 west of Tontitown. It's already on the books, the route went through the EIS, they are awaiting funding.

I would imagine that when it is built out that far there will be a stub put in place (around Old Route 68) to connect it to a future update to US-412 when it is placed into interstate standards to Oklahoma.

Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: MikieTimT on July 14, 2022, 10:31:47 AM
Looking at the area from Google Earth it does not look like ArDOT, ODOT or OTA have made any efforts to secure ROW for a future Interstate.

Quote from: MikieTimT
I'd be surprised if the Springdale Bypass dovetails at all directly with what shoots across the state line.  My money's on the existing 4 lane divided highway being converted to limited access as there aren't many crossroads to deal with, and access really isn't an issue with Old Highway 68 still to the north and mainly Ozark Natl. Forest to the south.

Are you suggesting US-412 directly through West Siloam Springs and Siloam Springs?

Not at all.  All I'm saying is that there is almost assuredly not going to be any new terrain construction of US-412 between the Springdale Bypass and what becomes the Siloam Springs Bypass.  There's going to be the dip south already for the western leg of the Springdale Bypass, so they'll almost definitely convert the existing US-412 between Tontitown and Siloam Springs to limited access due to financial and ecological constraints.  If it appears that a southern bypass of Siloam Springs looks undesirable due to topology, a quick view of the terrain using Google Maps Terrain Layer between the current end of AR-612 at AR-112 and the north side of Siloam Springs will confirm it's just as bad but over longer distance.  So the desire to have an I-4X/I-50 that goes from Lowell straight across the north side of Siloam Springs and West Siloam Springs and neatly ties into the existing east end of the Cherokee Turnpike is pretty much a roadgeek fantasy.  Maybe in a world where Arkansas was a rich state and Siloam Springs was bypassed to the north over a decade ago when it made much more sense than the stupid 6-laning through the gut of town and allowing all of the development to take the most level terrain, it could have been different.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Bobby5280 on July 14, 2022, 04:56:07 PM
I know the proposed Interstate upgrade between the West end of the Springdale Bypass will likely overlap the existing US-412 divided highway some distance going West toward Siloam Springs. The big question is: where will the alignment be placed as it crosses the OK/AR border?

An in-town route through Siloam Springs and West Siloam Springs is impossible. Some kind of bypass will be necessary. Going around the North side of town looks easier from an engineering stand point. The downside is it will add more length to the bypass. But a bypass around the North side of Siloam Springs doesn't have to immediately come back down to existing US-412 on the Oklahoma side of the border. In Oklahoma, existing US-412 between Dripping Springs and West Siloam Springs could be upgraded to Interstate standards, but some properties next to the road would still have to be taken (especially if frontage roads were to be added). If the US-412 Interstate upgraded route crosses the border well North of town it could just cut a new terrain path over to the existing turnpike and shave a couple or so miles off the route in the process.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: MikieTimT on July 15, 2022, 06:43:22 PM
I know the proposed Interstate upgrade between the West end of the Springdale Bypass will likely overlap the existing US-412 divided highway some distance going West toward Siloam Springs. The big question is: where will the alignment be placed as it crosses the OK/AR border?

An in-town route through Siloam Springs and West Siloam Springs is impossible. Some kind of bypass will be necessary. Going around the North side of town looks easier from an engineering stand point. The downside is it will add more length to the bypass. But a bypass around the North side of Siloam Springs doesn't have to immediately come back down to existing US-412 on the Oklahoma side of the border. In Oklahoma, existing US-412 between Dripping Springs and West Siloam Springs could be upgraded to Interstate standards, but some properties next to the road would still have to be taken (especially if frontage roads were to be added). If the US-412 Interstate upgraded route crosses the border well North of town it could just cut a new terrain path over to the existing turnpike and shave a couple or so miles off the route in the process.

At this point, it'll have to be well north of town.  Like south of Lake Swepco (Lake Flint Creek on Google Maps, but no one local calls it that), but I figure likely just to the south of the dam on the south side as it bumps up to Gentry on the north side.  It could then follow the north edge of Little Flint Creek until it gets to Flint Creek and then continue along the edge of the Flint Creek valley all the way to the east end of the Cherokee Turnpike.  I don't see it going south of Siloam Springs Lake anymore with all of the development in progress without buying up some newly built and as a result quite expensive residential housing, unless they do a southern bypass altogether.  It wouldn't shock me for them to take a northern bypass a little further north to the south side of Colcord as the terrain is easier that way and then circle back to Kansas to tie in.  Probably adds about 3-4 miles, but cheaper dirtwork for a couple of cheapskate states.  I guess we'll see in the not too distant future when they finish their study.  I'm almost of the mindset that a southern bypass is getting more and more likely the longer it takes to secure ROW, but with that said, there's lots of dirt moving on the east side of Siloam Springs now down AR-16 along Kenmoore, with more likely as soon as they finish with all the open pasture around them.  That'll necessitate a sharp bend south for a southern bypass, making its routing just as ugly as the Springdale Bypass when it finishes.  All I can say is, both states better find some money for this fast, or the bypasses either direction are going to take sharper swings along longer bypasses.  Benton County is still booming.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: rte66man on July 16, 2022, 09:11:25 AM
How about something approximately like this:
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/52219829541_1017c6f469.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2nyuh1D)

IMO you wouldn't want to go any further north.

p.s. I really can't draw in this app.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Bobby5280 on July 16, 2022, 04:17:49 PM
What I had in mind was a little more like this:
(https://i.imgur.com/jvQVWJv.jpg)

Sorry for the small image size; I forget what the forum size limit is, so I set the width at 800px. Also I don't know why Hurricane Express has a pin drop on it. I must have clicked on something before taking the screen shot.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Alps on July 17, 2022, 12:26:24 AM
Please do not go into Fictional territory. Wait for them to announce something.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Road Hog on July 17, 2022, 08:32:49 PM
The boss has spoken. All street level through Siloam! Breezewood will be jelly AF.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: rte66man on July 17, 2022, 08:47:43 PM
Please do not go into Fictional territory. Wait for them to announce something.

I went by the title of the thread "PROPOSED US412 Upgrade". Silly me.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: swake on July 17, 2022, 10:41:42 PM
Fictional and predictive are two different things.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Alps on July 18, 2022, 12:42:50 AM
Fictional and predictive are two different things.
yes, and showing "this is what I'd like to see" is fictional. predictive is "this is what i believe the DOT is going to come out with" and that really doesn't ever have a basis in reality so thread to be locked shortly if we can't get back on topic thx
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: swake on July 18, 2022, 02:16:49 PM
I haven't posted here long and maybe I am confused, but how is discussing the possible paths of a planned upgrade to a highway some kind of violation of forum guidelines?

These posts are certainly on the topic of "proposed 412 upgrade". I can't find in the forum guidelines where "fictional" is mentioned at all. And while there is a fictional roads sub-forum this highway is not fictional, it exists. A bill in congress was passed last year to upgrade this highway to an interstate and a study for upgrade is going on now.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: The Ghostbuster on July 18, 2022, 03:07:41 PM
I have started a Fictional Highways thread on the future Siloam Springs bypass: https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=31840.0.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Scott5114 on July 18, 2022, 04:08:09 PM
I haven't posted here long and maybe I am confused, but how is discussing the possible paths of a planned upgrade to a highway some kind of violation of forum guidelines?

These posts are certainly on the topic of "proposed 412 upgrade". I can't find in the forum guidelines where "fictional" is mentioned at all. And while there is a fictional roads sub-forum this highway is not fictional, it exists. A bill in congress was passed last year to upgrade this highway to an interstate and a study for upgrade is going on now.

In general all speculation goes to Fictional Highways and the main forums are reserved for factual information. The reason being we don't want people getting confused and seeing the speculative maps here and assuming that they represent what is really getting built. That can lead to misinformation. Additionally, there are some members who follow these threads who are interested only in what is getting built and find the speculation to be a waste of time.

We already have 30 some-odd rules in the rules list. I'm sure it's long enough there are some people that don't bother reading the whole thing. Adding rules codifying things that should be obvious, like "please post things in the correct subforum", would just make that more likely.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: In_Correct on July 19, 2022, 02:02:07 AM
Quote
Map:

For what it is worth, Bobby5280's map would be the best option so far. This highway upgrade is not fictional; It seems to be a result of the letter that I typed to Senators requesting more Beautiful
Toll Roads be constructed. Perhaps I shall include that map of the bypass in my next letter. Also to make the Unofficial Proposed Map not be misunderstood as Official, it ought to be spun off in its own thread where a Poll is included about which one is best. I would gladly vote for that Map.

Quote
Rules:

The Fictional is the most confusing about aaroads. It is so confusing, that one of my discussions about Wichita Falls was moved to Fictional. I now try to include links to the sources. I remember a time when a thread was locked while the Rules were being revised. I understand it is not possible to type every rule for every possibility until they actually happen. However, not typing them be cause people do not want to read them is a bad reason. Literacy must be encouraged.

Quote
Edit:

Even if it is not on the Rules, perhaps they have their own dedicated Post, such as this one.

https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=1809.0


Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: MikieTimT on July 22, 2022, 10:56:08 AM
Before Oklahoma is able to sign anything east of the western I-44 interchange, they really need to straighten out the janky westbound US-412 interchange with OK-66.  Nothing interstate grade should have to slow down to 45 to keep semis from flipping over.

https://goo.gl/maps/SUjj4GPLqPo859Ab7 (https://goo.gl/maps/SUjj4GPLqPo859Ab7)

Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: swake on July 22, 2022, 12:24:06 PM
Before Oklahoma is able to sign anything east of the western I-44 interchange, they really need to straighten out the janky westbound US-412 interchange with OK-66.  Nothing interstate grade should have to slow down to 45 to keep semis from flipping over.

https://goo.gl/maps/SUjj4GPLqPo859Ab7 (https://goo.gl/maps/SUjj4GPLqPo859Ab7)

That is already an interstate, it's I-44 itself. ODOT does have some work planned for that interchange in 2024.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: stevashe on July 23, 2022, 03:01:46 PM
Nothing interstate grade should have to slow down to 45 to keep semis from flipping over.

I-90 in Montana would like to have a word with you. (https://goo.gl/maps/C832ya7iPGFU4dgRA)
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: edwaleni on July 23, 2022, 09:20:49 PM
Nothing interstate grade should have to slow down to 45 to keep semis from flipping over.

I-90 in Montana would like to have a word with you. (https://goo.gl/maps/C832ya7iPGFU4dgRA)

Too funny. I have a video somewhere of me traversing that very segment in the St Regis ravine in the dead of winter with snow up to my axles following a semi-truck (he was my plow so to speak) so I can make it to Missoula.

No plows. No sand. It was brutal. No 45mph then. It was strictly 10mph if that. Anti-lock brakes were worthless. What a memory.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Revive 755 on July 23, 2022, 10:17:37 PM
Nothing interstate grade should have to slow down to 45 to keep semis from flipping over.

I-90 in Montana would like to have a word with you. (https://goo.gl/maps/C832ya7iPGFU4dgRA)

I-55 easily beats I-90:

One 20 mph section at the west end of the PSB in St. Louis.  (https://goo.gl/maps/HgbwF4c7xEEfS9q16)  Northbound through the same interchange is only 25 mph. (https://goo.gl/maps/unK5txogRJsdyGkg6)

There's also the 25 mph mainline loop on I-55 in Memphis. (https://goo.gl/maps/kL3fnbqTxw3RoMGb9)  Southbound at that same location is only 25 mph. (https://goo.gl/maps/Bra5Z8ym1M8LQHep7)
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: MikieTimT on July 25, 2022, 06:19:39 PM
Nothing interstate grade should have to slow down to 45 to keep semis from flipping over.

I-90 in Montana would like to have a word with you. (https://goo.gl/maps/C832ya7iPGFU4dgRA)

Terrain sort of dictates that speed there on I-90.  If you look at Google Maps Street View on I-44 (https://goo.gl/maps/ZUuTi8nmRdCJQrvn9) there, I find that the terrain between both ends of the bend is slightly less difficult to traverse than much of the topology of Illinois.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: MikieTimT on July 25, 2022, 06:23:46 PM
Nothing interstate grade should have to slow down to 45 to keep semis from flipping over.

I-90 in Montana would like to have a word with you. (https://goo.gl/maps/C832ya7iPGFU4dgRA)

I-55 easily beats I-90:

One 20 mph section at the west end of the PSB in St. Louis.  (https://goo.gl/maps/HgbwF4c7xEEfS9q16)  Northbound through the same interchange is only 25 mph. (https://goo.gl/maps/unK5txogRJsdyGkg6)

There's also the 25 mph mainline loop on I-55 in Memphis. (https://goo.gl/maps/kL3fnbqTxw3RoMGb9)  Southbound at that same location is only 25 mph. (https://goo.gl/maps/Bra5Z8ym1M8LQHep7)

I avoid driving through Memphis on the way to I-22 as a result of this very travesty in addition to the crazy drivers on I-240/I-55.  To say nothing of the perpetual state of road construction through there.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: swake on July 25, 2022, 07:52:19 PM
Nothing interstate grade should have to slow down to 45 to keep semis from flipping over.

I-90 in Montana would like to have a word with you. (https://goo.gl/maps/C832ya7iPGFU4dgRA)

Terrain sort of dictates that speed there on I-90.  If you look at Google Maps Street View on I-44 (https://goo.gl/maps/ZUuTi8nmRdCJQrvn9) there, I find that the terrain between both ends of the bend is slightly less difficult to traverse than much of the topology of Illinois.

That odd curve has nothing to do with topography. Before the Creek Turnpike extension built a new I-44/US-412 interchange a mile to the east that curve was part of the old I-44/US-412/OK-66 interchange. The through lanes came from the northeast on I-44 instead of from the east on US-412 and ODOT has never fixed it.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: I-55 on July 28, 2022, 06:39:17 PM
Nothing interstate grade should have to slow down to 45 to keep semis from flipping over.

I-90 in Montana would like to have a word with you. (https://goo.gl/maps/C832ya7iPGFU4dgRA)

Terrain sort of dictates that speed there on I-90.  If you look at Google Maps Street View on I-44 (https://goo.gl/maps/ZUuTi8nmRdCJQrvn9) there, I find that the terrain between both ends of the bend is slightly less difficult to traverse than much of the topology of Illinois.

That odd curve has nothing to do with topography. Before the Creek Turnpike extension built a new I-44/US-412 interchange a mile to the east that curve was part of the old I-44/US-412/OK-66 interchange. The through lanes came from the northeast on I-44 instead of from the east on US-412 and ODOT has never fixed it.

And you can still see the old lanes on satellite on the northeast side of the interchange. Feels like the abandoned PA turnpike without hills.
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Scott5114 on July 28, 2022, 06:50:26 PM
Nothing interstate grade should have to slow down to 45 to keep semis from flipping over.

I-90 in Montana would like to have a word with you. (https://goo.gl/maps/C832ya7iPGFU4dgRA)

Terrain sort of dictates that speed there on I-90.  If you look at Google Maps Street View on I-44 (https://goo.gl/maps/ZUuTi8nmRdCJQrvn9) there, I find that the terrain between both ends of the bend is slightly less difficult to traverse than much of the topology of Illinois.

That odd curve has nothing to do with topography. Before the Creek Turnpike extension built a new I-44/US-412 interchange a mile to the east that curve was part of the old I-44/US-412/OK-66 interchange. The through lanes came from the northeast on I-44 instead of from the east on US-412 and ODOT has never fixed it.

And you can still see the old lanes on satellite on the northeast side of the interchange. Feels like the abandoned PA turnpike without hills.

(https://i.imgur.com/QBmVORS.jpg)
(https://i.imgur.com/M2BfA4j.jpg)
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Alps on July 28, 2022, 11:28:38 PM
Nothing interstate grade should have to slow down to 45 to keep semis from flipping over.

I-90 in Montana would like to have a word with you. (https://goo.gl/maps/C832ya7iPGFU4dgRA)

Terrain sort of dictates that speed there on I-90.  If you look at Google Maps Street View on I-44 (https://goo.gl/maps/ZUuTi8nmRdCJQrvn9) there, I find that the terrain between both ends of the bend is slightly less difficult to traverse than much of the topology of Illinois.

That odd curve has nothing to do with topography. Before the Creek Turnpike extension built a new I-44/US-412 interchange a mile to the east that curve was part of the old I-44/US-412/OK-66 interchange. The through lanes came from the northeast on I-44 instead of from the east on US-412 and ODOT has never fixed it.

And you can still see the old lanes on satellite on the northeast side of the interchange. Feels like the abandoned PA turnpike without hills.

(https://i.imgur.com/QBmVORS.jpg)
(https://i.imgur.com/M2BfA4j.jpg)
was this from a certain monday road meet
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: Scott5114 on July 29, 2022, 11:52:34 AM
was this from a certain monday road meet

It may be from a certain Monday road meet. :P
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: stevashe on July 29, 2022, 03:37:01 PM
Nothing interstate grade should have to slow down to 45 to keep semis from flipping over.

I-90 in Montana would like to have a word with you. (https://goo.gl/maps/C832ya7iPGFU4dgRA)

Terrain sort of dictates that speed there on I-90.  If you look at Google Maps Street View on I-44 (https://goo.gl/maps/ZUuTi8nmRdCJQrvn9) there, I find that the terrain between both ends of the bend is slightly less difficult to traverse than much of the topology of Illinois.

You are absolutely correct, but since your original wording made it sound like no interstate anywhere should ever have 45 mph curves and you gave no exceptions, I thought I'd have a bit of fun poking a hole in that statement  :-P
Title: Re: Proposed US 412 Upgrade
Post by: DJStephens on July 31, 2022, 12:08:28 PM
Contacted the city administrator by email, and he was kind enough to email me the PDF of the study that was done in '04.  There were 3 different bypass routes considered, but apparently the comments by locals swayed them towards the 6-laning they did instead.

https://misc.transport.road.narkive.com/C5tPsmXj/no-us-412-siloam-springs-bypass-to-be-built (https://misc.transport.road.narkive.com/C5tPsmXj/no-us-412-siloam-springs-bypass-to-be-built)

Here is a picture of the bypass options from 2004.  I didn't know how to upload the full PDF to the Gallery as I couldn't find this study anywhere online, so just saved a snip of the map.  Corridor B was the most inexpensive alternative.

(https://i.imgur.com/1tFYKni.jpg)

Sounds very similar to events in Muskogee, OK.  Where they have tabled/backburned a potential high grade bypass that should have at least the ROW preserved for.