News:

The AARoads Wiki is live! Come check it out!

Main Menu

I-57 Approved

Started by US71, October 11, 2017, 09:09:35 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

edwaleni

Quote from: Road Hog on October 29, 2023, 08:37:27 PM
If I was driving in that direction overnight I would take I-20 over I-40 all night long, construction or not. I-40 is solid 18-wheelers at all hours in both lanes at 60 mph. The Convoy from Hell, basically.

Maybe ArDOT needs to build a truck only set of toll lanes from Little Rock to Memphis. Maybe that will set up a shunpike redirection of certain traffic. But I digress.


The Ghostbuster

I'm sure truckers would love to use truck-only toll lanes along Interstate 40 between Little Rock and Memphis. Just like truckers like being charged truck-only tolls along Interstate 95 in Rhode Island. Not saying it shouldn't happen, but it might be a difficult sell to the trucking industry.

Plutonic Panda

lol isn't that what weigh stations are for? Wtf

Road Hog

#1078
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on October 30, 2023, 03:30:45 PM
lol isn't that what weigh stations are for? Wtf
That's fair. The thing about weigh stations is the DOTs can look at driver logs and perform full vehicle searches on just a whisper of probable cause that they can pull out of thin air without a warrant. Thank God I'm not a long-haul trucker in the 2020s. Had to be a lot more fun in the lot lizard days.

And Arkansas loves them some weigh stations. It's rare when the border ones are closed, and they ring Little Rock with them too.

Wayward Memphian

In case some of you didn't know. A fair amount of truck traffic has already taken to US 70 at various segments as an I-40 alternative. I see lots of Fed Ex ground using 70 among others. Especially the late afternoon crush with all the dedicated runs heading back to Memphis and it's DCs.

bugo

Quote from: Wayward Memphian on November 01, 2023, 04:07:17 PM
In case some of you didn't know. A fair amount of truck traffic has already taken to US 70 at various segments as an I-40 alternative. I see lots of Fed Ex ground using 70 among others. Especially the late afternoon crush with all the dedicated runs heading back to Memphis and it's DCs.

I wonder how many trucks take US 67-167 to US 64 or US 165 to US 79 between North Little Rock and West Memphis to avoid I-40. According to Google, the 67-64 route is 18 miles longer than the I-40 route, while the 165-79 route is 25 miles longer. You have to go through a tiny bit of Bald Knob, the outskirts of Augusta, McCrory, Wynne, Parkin, Earle and Marion along the 67-64 route, but there are bypasses in place and you don't have to go through the main parts of any of these towns. The 165-79 route goes through a significant stretch in North Little Rock, but depending on which part of town you are coming from, you can take I-440 to miss most of it. You have to go through Scott, Keo, England, the edge of Clarendon, Marianna and Hughes. Under optimal traffic conditions in a car, I-40 would be a lot faster, but since a lot of trucks can't do much more than 55 anyway, taking the alternate routes wouldn't be that much slower.
Nobody is on the level of the devil.

Road Hog

Quote from: bugo on November 01, 2023, 06:14:30 PM
Quote from: Wayward Memphian on November 01, 2023, 04:07:17 PM
In case some of you didn't know. A fair amount of truck traffic has already taken to US 70 at various segments as an I-40 alternative. I see lots of Fed Ex ground using 70 among others. Especially the late afternoon crush with all the dedicated runs heading back to Memphis and it's DCs.

I wonder how many trucks take US 67-167 to US 64 or US 165 to US 79 between North Little Rock and West Memphis to avoid I-40. According to Google, the 67-64 route is 18 miles longer than the I-40 route, while the 165-79 route is 25 miles longer. You have to go through a tiny bit of Bald Knob, the outskirts of Augusta, McCrory, Wynne, Parkin, Earle and Marion along the 67-64 route, but there are bypasses in place and you don't have to go through the main parts of any of these towns. The 165-79 route goes through a significant stretch in North Little Rock, but depending on which part of town you are coming from, you can take I-440 to miss most of it. You have to go through Scott, Keo, England, the edge of Clarendon, Marianna and Hughes. Under optimal traffic conditions in a car, I-40 would be a lot faster, but since a lot of trucks can't do much more than 55 anyway, taking the alternate routes wouldn't be that much slower.
The 64 route from Bald Knob to Marion is surprisingly quick when the road is clear — but the problem is there is a lot of farm traffic on it. Tractors and combines and the like. Seems like I mention it every time this stretch of road comes up.

capt.ron

Quote from: bugo on November 01, 2023, 06:14:30 PM
Quote from: Wayward Memphian on November 01, 2023, 04:07:17 PM
In case some of you didn't know. A fair amount of truck traffic has already taken to US 70 at various segments as an I-40 alternative. I see lots of Fed Ex ground using 70 among others. Especially the late afternoon crush with all the dedicated runs heading back to Memphis and it's DCs.

I wonder how many trucks take US 67-167 to US 64 or US 165 to US 79 between North Little Rock and West Memphis to avoid I-40. According to Google, the 67-64 route is 18 miles longer than the I-40 route, while the 165-79 route is 25 miles longer. You have to go through a tiny bit of Bald Knob, the outskirts of Augusta, McCrory, Wynne, Parkin, Earle and Marion along the 67-64 route, but there are bypasses in place and you don't have to go through the main parts of any of these towns. The 165-79 route goes through a significant stretch in North Little Rock, but depending on which part of town you are coming from, you can take I-440 to miss most of it. You have to go through Scott, Keo, England, the edge of Clarendon, Marianna and Hughes. Under optimal traffic conditions in a car, I-40 would be a lot faster, but since a lot of trucks can't do much more than 55 anyway, taking the alternate routes wouldn't be that much slower.
The US 64 route would be a far more viable bypass if it weren't for those "speed trap" towns. Augusta is one. Parkin and Earle are / were notorious for speed traps back in the day. ARDOT is about to widen 64 yet again, this time in Wynne. If they would just upgrade the rest of 64 to at least a "Arkansas Freeway" and raise the speed limit from the ridiculously low 60 (to 65 or even 70) on their rural "5 lanes" highways, it would be a lot better.

Shifting gears a bit, Missouri is busy upgrading the US 160 / 67 interchange just north of the AR/MO border and they're moving on along nicely. Now that AR has finally made its mind up with its alignment, Missouri can move forward with their section from US 160 down to the state line. At least Missouri has a 60 mph limit on their 2 lane section of 67. I just can't fathom why ARDOT doggedly refuses to raise some of their rural 2 lanes from 55 to 60 (excluding super 2's like AR530). If it's limited sight lines (curves, hills, lots of trees) I understand but some 2 lanes are ruler straight with low traffic counts. C'mon ARDOT, this isn't the mid 1970's!!

The Ghostbuster


Wayward Memphian

Quote from: capt.ron on November 02, 2023, 12:56:10 AM
Quote from: bugo on November 01, 2023, 06:14:30 PM
Quote from: Wayward Memphian on November 01, 2023, 04:07:17 PM
In case some of you didn't know. A fair amount of truck traffic has already taken to US 70 at various segments as an I-40 alternative. I see lots of Fed Ex ground using 70 among others. Especially the late afternoon crush with all the dedicated runs heading back to Memphis and it's DCs.

I wonder how many trucks take US 67-167 to US 64 or US 165 to US 79 between North Little Rock and West Memphis to avoid I-40. According to Google, the 67-64 route is 18 miles longer than the I-40 route, while the 165-79 route is 25 miles longer. You have to go through a tiny bit of Bald Knob, the outskirts of Augusta, McCrory, Wynne, Parkin, Earle and Marion along the 67-64 route, but there are bypasses in place and you don't have to go through the main parts of any of these towns. The 165-79 route goes through a significant stretch in North Little Rock, but depending on which part of town you are coming from, you can take I-440 to miss most of it. You have to go through Scott, Keo, England, the edge of Clarendon, Marianna and Hughes. Under optimal traffic conditions in a car, I-40 would be a lot faster, but since a lot of trucks can't do much more than 55 anyway, taking the alternate routes wouldn't be that much slower.
The US 64 route would be a far more viable bypass if it weren't for those "speed trap" towns. Augusta is one. Parkin and Earle are / were notorious for speed traps back in the day. ARDOT is about to widen 64 yet again, this time in Wynne. If they would just upgrade the rest of 64 to at least a "Arkansas Freeway" and raise the speed limit from the ridiculously low 60 (to 65 or even 70) on their rural "5 lanes" highways, it would be a lot better.

Shifting gears a bit, Missouri is busy upgrading the US 160 / 67 interchange just north of the AR/MO border and they're moving on along nicely. Now that AR has finally made its mind up with its alignment, Missouri can move forward with their section from US 160 down to the state line. At least Missouri has a 60 mph limit on their 2 lane section of 67. I just can't fathom why ARDOT doggedly refuses to raise some of their rural 2 lanes from 55 to 60 (excluding super 2's like AR530). If it's limited sight lines (curves, hills, lots of trees) I understand but some 2 lanes are ruler straight with low traffic counts. C'mon ARDOT, this isn't the mid 1970's!!

60 mph is, in itself, a joke. Standard speed on roads like AR 14 between Newport and Payneway is 65mph. You are certainly not going to get pulled over between 56mph and 64 mph. Years of driving this road tells me that. Roads like AR 214 should be county roads.  Vast stretches of straight US and state hwy in eastern Arkansas should be 65 mph.

MikieTimT

Eastern Arkansas is the only part of Arkansas I would even consider testing the top speed of the fun car.  No reason for the legislature to broadly paint speeds limits based on the type of road alone.  Sightlines and geometry should play a larger role than it does.

sprjus4

Quote from: MikieTimT on November 02, 2023, 02:22:23 PM
Eastern Arkansas is the only part of Arkansas I would even consider testing the top speed of the fun car.  No reason for the legislature to broadly paint speeds limits based on the type of road alone.  Sightlines and geometry should play a larger role than it does.
Which makes no sense to me - didn't the legislature approve 60 mph speed limits on two-lane roads, and 65 mph on 5 lane undivided highways? Back when they approved 75 mph for interstates.

Why hasn't ArDOT acted?

edwaleni

A 100 year family farmer objects to I-57 on his land.

Calling and writing every politician seems to not be working.

https://www.kait8.com/2023/11/02/future-i-57-affect-hundreds-acres-farmers-land/

MikieTimT

Quote from: edwaleni on November 02, 2023, 11:42:31 PM
A 100 year family farmer objects to I-57 on his land.

Calling and writing every politician seems to not be working.

https://www.kait8.com/2023/11/02/future-i-57-affect-hundreds-acres-farmers-land/

Every highway project affects someone along the route at some point.  Doesn't mean the baby's thrown out with the bathwater.  Fortunately, it's only one family over a large area instead of the typical dozens, so I don't see the objection stopping or rerouting the project unless he's politically connected.  The NEPA process takes into account residential, ecological, and agricultural displacements in determining the routing, and the route through his farm was determined to be the least impactful.  Most people don't go through life owning hundreds or thousands of acres of prime agricultural land, so it won't be the sob story that would pull the national press into it.  He'll be compensated for his property and if near one of the exits, could be compensated quite well as the land value would be higher there due to commercial value of a truck stop or the like.

Road Hog

If it's a situation where his land is cut in two, ARDOT might be able to accommodate him fairly inexpensively with a box culvert that's large enough to drive a tractor through.

edwaleni

Quote from: Road Hog on November 03, 2023, 03:30:54 AM
If it's a situation where his land is cut in two, ARDOT might be able to accommodate him fairly inexpensively with a box culvert that's large enough to drive a tractor through.

I know someone who had an interstate cut through his farm back in the 1960's during the road building boom.

He had an odd shaped triangle parcel separated from his main farmland.  The State DOT bought the land they used from him, but the triangle was left behind.

The farmer said it was worthless. The DOT refused to buy him out on that leftover lot as they had no use for it.

He couldn't farm it, as not only was it somewhat small (in farming terms) but the closest underpass for equipment was a few miles away.

So the farmer has land he is taxed on, can't generate revenue from it, can't sell it either.

He just lets it grow trees, and collects firewood off of it once a year.

Wayward Memphian

Quote from: edwaleni on November 02, 2023, 11:42:31 PM
A 100 year family farmer objects to I-57 on his land.

Calling and writing every politician seems to not be working.

https://www.kait8.com/2023/11/02/future-i-57-affect-hundreds-acres-farmers-land/

So...he is saying how many acres are going to be cut off from access???  I bet this affects a couple of really good pits for duck hunting if I was guessing . Those can fetch lots of dollars via leasing.

I-39

How come Missouri hasn't started the next section of Future I-57 south of Route 158 yet? Are they negotiating getting the rest funded so they can tie into the forthcoming Arkansas segment from Corning to the state line?

edwaleni

Quote from: I-39 on November 13, 2023, 11:10:51 AM
How come Missouri hasn't started the next section of Future I-57 south of Route 158 yet? Are they negotiating getting the rest funded so they can tie into the forthcoming Arkansas segment from Corning to the state line?

Two things going on.

The money to revise the last exit (@Harviell) to interstate standards is funded but the construction start was delayed. They have installed the new roundabouts on each side, but they still need to build out the new ramps. The concrete for the new southbound lanes is being poured.

The funding for the rest (property acquisition) was line item vetoed a few months ago by the Missouri governor.

There was a large amount of new highway planning money in the recent state budget, and the budget was $1 billion over, so he took a big axe to it.

capt.ron

ARDOT has also posted information on the 67 upgrade between Exits 16 and 19. According to ARDOT, the project has letted so we should start seeing construction there next year. Along with the expansion from 4 to 6 lanes, the two exits will also be replaced (thank God!!).

Bobby5280

When is that awful crap between Exits 9 and 11 (Jacksonville) going to get re-done? US-67 is 3x3 and relatively new both North and South of that very deficient stretch of highway.

Great Lakes Roads

Quote from: Bobby5280 on November 16, 2023, 02:26:52 PM
When is that awful crap between Exits 9 and 11 (Jacksonville) going to get re-done? US-67 is 3x3 and relatively new both North and South of that very deficient stretch of highway.

ARDOT is currently reconstructing the stretch between exits 9-11 (frontage roads are currently being rebuilt)... completion date: late 2027- early 2028.
-Jay Seaburg

The Ghostbuster

That segment of the US 67/167 freeway had some ridiculously short exit and entrance ramps, the worst being Exit 10A northbound. This reconstruction project was badly needed, even without converting the corridor into Interstate 57.

Bobby5280

There is Google Street View imagery of that location from March of this year. It didn't look like any construction had started at all on it. The upgrade project is long overdue. It's one of the last segments holding the highway back from being signed as I-57.

abqtraveler

Quote from: Bobby5280 on November 16, 2023, 06:06:24 PM
There is Google Street View imagery of that location from March of this year. It didn't look like any construction had started at all on it. The upgrade project is long overdue. It's one of the last segments holding the highway back from being signed as I-57.
They were just starting the reconstruction of US-67/167 through Jacksonville in March of this year. The official groundbreaking was in April, so I would suspect in March the contractor was busy mobilizing its workforce and performing pre-construction activities (e.g., setting up field office trailers, surveying and staking, utility relocations, etc.). 

Construction is now well underway with traffic shifted into temporary patterns on both the mainline and the frontage roads.  ArDOT has several live traffic cameras in the construction zone, which offers a real-time view of the progress on that stretch.

https://idrivearkansas.com/
2-d Interstates traveled:  4, 5, 8, 10, 15, 20, 24, 25, 27, 29, 35, 39, 40, 41, 43, 45, 49, 55, 57, 64, 65, 66, 69, 70, 71, 72, 74, 75, 76(E), 77, 78, 81, 83, 84(W), 85, 87(N), 89, 90, 91, 93, 94, 95

2-d Interstates Clinched:  12, 22, 30, 37, 44, 59, 80, 84(E), 86(E), 238, H1, H2, H3, H201



Opinions expressed here on belong solely to the poster and do not represent or reflect the opinions or beliefs of AARoads, its creators and/or associates.