I-49 in Arkansas

[msunat97]

The rock cut could be completed after the opening & just leave that ramp closed & 1 lane over the BVB.  The NB painting could be done this week pretty quickly.  It looks like most of the SPUI is done, but it's hard to tell with the 1 camera.

[MikieTimT]

The rock cut could be completed after the opening & just leave that ramp closed & 1 lane over the BVB.  The NB painting could be done this week pretty quickly.  It looks like most of the SPUI is done, but it's hard to tell with the 1 camera.

I've got a job in Bella Vista Friday, so I'll get a closer look then.  Article came out just today on the subject, so apparently I wasn't the only one who wondered.

BVB Lane Closures Scheduled

[Henry]

So after the BVB opens to complete the Ft. Smith-Kansas City link, what will happen next?

Something tells me that they'll work from Alma south to Texarkana, aside from the short piece of freeway that's already completed southeast of Ft. Smith. It's better this way anyway, because it's still unknown how or when TX wants to do their small part, which would make working from Texarkana north a nonstarter. Plus, the south end of new I-49/old I-540 is easily connectable to the stub in Ft. Smith, so there's that.

[O Tamandua]

I've been wondering about development between Bella Vista and Gravette along the completed BVB.  Hadn't seen this ARDOT map (which is linked in this Talk Business story today on the proposed XNA Access Highway).  There's a HUGE swath that's been cleared at Rocky Dell Hollow and Highlands (NE corner of the last Arkansas exit on the Bella Vista Bypass heading north).  I wonder if that's commercial, or where they've decided to locate the "state-of-the-art visitor's center" the 40/29 reporter from last week mentioned.  Here's the map link:

https://www.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=8d6a3fa72e6c4e47ac177db7e2a01b59

[O Tamandua]

So after the BVB opens to complete the Ft. Smith-Kansas City link, what will happen next?

Something tells me that they'll work from Alma south to Texarkana, aside from the short piece of freeway that's already completed southeast of Ft. Smith. It's better this way anyway, because it's still unknown how or when TX wants to do their small part, which would make working from Texarkana north a nonstarter. Plus, the south end of new I-49/old I-540 is easily connectable to the stub in Ft. Smith, so there's that.

Henry, this completed I-49 has been a long time in coming, and some of us still wonder if we'll see the finished product.  That being said, the money has apparently been allocated to build the section (including the Arkansas River Bridge) between Alma and Y City (west of Hot Springs) as a two lane "pre-interstate".  I will add this: the spotlight on this uncompleted section will be the brightest it has ever been in history starting this Friday.

[Rick Powell]

So after the BVB opens to complete the Ft. Smith-Kansas City link, what will happen next?

Something tells me that they'll work from Alma south to Texarkana, aside from the short piece of freeway that's already completed southeast of Ft. Smith. It's better this way anyway, because it's still unknown how or when TX wants to do their small part, which would make working from Texarkana north a nonstarter. Plus, the south end of new I-49/old I-540 is easily connectable to the stub in Ft. Smith, so there's that.

I predict in 20 years, the undone section between Ashdown and Texarkana will be the "new" BVB.

[Bobby5280]

Something tells me that they'll work from Alma south to Texarkana, aside from the short piece of freeway that's already completed southeast of Ft. Smith. It's better this way anyway, because it's still unknown how or when TX wants to do their small part, which would make working from Texarkana north a nonstarter.

The Alma-Barling segment in metro Fort Smith will (hopefully) get its 2-lane partial start in the near future. The bridge is a time-sensitive project due to the ever-present factor of cost inflation over time. The sooner they get the entire thing completed the less it will ultimately cost.

After that it's anyone's guess what AR DOT will choose to build. There is a lot of different ways to "skin the cat" on completing the Fort Smith to Texarkana leg of I-49.

If it was up to me, I'd build the bypasses for Mansfield, Waldron, Mena, De Queen and Ashdown first then connect the gaps between later. It would be for the same reason the bridge between Alma and Barling needs to be built ASAP: cost inflation as well as getting ahead of real estate development. Plus there is bound to be at least some speculative real estate squatters looking to gobble up land they think is in the ROW to make AR DOT pay even more for it. The situation will get worse the longer AR DOT puts off building the bypasses. I think the squatter factor would be guaranteed to happen if AR DOT chooses to build out I-49 in a linear fashion from Fort Smith downward. It will be more predictable where the next projects will be built. If they mix things up, building projects in different disconnected locations, it will do more to throw off the land speculators.

One thing I think AR DOT should consider: initially building out much of the Fort Smith-Texarkana I-49 leg as a Super-2 even with some at-grade intersections to cut costs. It doesn't have to be immediately signed as an Interstate. They did so with the I-530 corridor South of Pine Bluff in order to secure the ROW path. They might want to do some of the same thing here.

[GreenLanternCorps]

Something tells me that they'll work from Alma south to Texarkana, aside from the short piece of freeway that's already completed southeast of Ft. Smith. It's better this way anyway, because it's still unknown how or when TX wants to do their small part, which would make working from Texarkana north a nonstarter.

The Alma-Barling segment in metro Fort Smith will (hopefully) get its 2-lane partial start in the near future. The bridge is a time-sensitive project due to the ever-present factor of cost inflation over time. The sooner they get the entire thing completed the less it will ultimately cost.

After that it's anyone's guess what AR DOT will choose to build. There is a lot of different ways to "skin the cat" on completing the Fort Smith to Texarkana leg of I-49.

If it was up to me, I'd build the bypasses for Mansfield, Waldron, Mena, De Queen and Ashdown first then connect the gaps between later. It would be for the same reason the bridge between Alma and Barling needs to be built ASAP: cost inflation as well as getting ahead of real estate development. Plus there is bound to be at least some speculative real estate squatters looking to gobble up land they think is in the ROW to make AR DOT pay even more for it. The situation will get worse the longer AR DOT puts off building the bypasses. I think the squatter factor would be guaranteed to happen if AR DOT chooses to build out I-49 in a linear fashion from Fort Smith downward. It will be more predictable where the next projects will be built. If they mix things up, building projects in different disconnected locations, it will do more to throw off the land speculators.

One thing I think AR DOT should consider: initially building out much of the Fort Smith-Texarkana I-49 leg as a Super-2 even with some at-grade intersections to cut costs. It doesn't have to be immediately signed as an Interstate. They did so with the I-530 corridor South of Pine Bluff in order to secure the ROW path. They might want to do some of the same thing here.

If there is no other way, yes, Super-2's will allow you to get the right-of-way, however I'm not a huge fan, as it means you have to build on the same real estate twice.  But what ever is needed to get the job done....

An exception to this is the Bridge.  The bridge freeway should be built as one unit and the US 71 interchange should be completed so that you have a completed freeway from the state line to south of Fort Smith.  I don't think the uncompleted interchange could handle the volume of southbound traffic coming from the bridge.

[GreenLanternCorps]

According to our favorite iDrive Arkansas webcam, the northbound lanes of Future I-49 at the US 71 interchange are now mostly striped.

The yellow lines and dashed white lines are done.  The white line on the shoulder is partially done.

I wonder if some additional webcams are doing to pop up going North to the state line?

[Rick Powell]

If it was up to me, I'd build the bypasses for Mansfield, Waldron, Mena, De Queen and Ashdown first then connect the gaps between later. It would be for the same reason the bridge between Alma and Barling needs to be built ASAP: cost inflation as well as getting ahead of real estate development. Plus there is bound to be at least some speculative real estate squatters looking to gobble up land they think is in the ROW to make AR DOT pay even more for it. The situation will get worse the longer AR DOT puts off building the bypasses. I think the squatter factor would be guaranteed to happen if AR DOT chooses to build out I-49 in a linear fashion from Fort Smith downward. It will be more predictable where the next projects will be built. If they mix things up, building projects in different disconnected locations, it will do more to throw off the land speculators.

Arkansas could have more control over the I-49 corridor if they had the political will to do so. Several states, including FL, IL and IN (but apparently not AR according to a survey I read), have a "corridor protection" law that, once a corridor is identified and recorded, developers who want to build must notify the state DOT and the state basically has first right of refusal to buy the property, or let the development happen. It requires DOTs to "put their money where their mouth is" and be ready to pay fair market value to prevent an expensive development from happening in their corridor, but ultimately it would save money if there is a long range need to keep the corridor clear. IL's corridor protection law was affirmed by the US Supreme Court and IN copied it nearly word for word.

Of course, deciding where the corridor should go is the first step, and although some corridor protection laws don't require an environmental study, it would be a good idea to preserve a corridor that has federal environmental approval.

[O Tamandua]

From the "Build I-49" FB page - hope this image shows up - that hulk of a structure was there forever without signage at the Pineville split:

[O Tamandua]

If it was up to me, I'd build the bypasses for Mansfield, Waldron, Mena, De Queen and Ashdown first then connect the gaps between later. It would be for the same reason the bridge between Alma and Barling needs to be built ASAP: cost inflation as well as getting ahead of real estate development. Plus there is bound to be at least some speculative real estate squatters looking to gobble up land they think is in the ROW to make AR DOT pay even more for it. The situation will get worse the longer AR DOT puts off building the bypasses. I think the squatter factor would be guaranteed to happen if AR DOT chooses to build out I-49 in a linear fashion from Fort Smith downward. It will be more predictable where the next projects will be built. If they mix things up, building projects in different disconnected locations, it will do more to throw off the land speculators.

Arkansas could have more control over the I-49 corridor if they had the political will to do so.

Since you all were joking about football earlier on, now that Arkansas has beaten UT and aTm, someone ought to remind the state's leaders that Texas I-69 and I-35 will make it easier than ever to get those legions of Texas high school students (and 4-5 star recruits) to Razorback-land on a completed I-49.  Maybe that will entice them to finish it. 

[mvak36]

From the "Build I-49" FB page - hope this image shows up - that hulk of a structure was there forever without signage at the Pineville split:

I don't see it, but here's the link to picture. https://www.facebook.com/288089113623/photos/a.297333663623/10159649700508624/?type=3&theater

Also uploaded to the gallery just in case:

[Bobby5280]

If there is no other way, yes, Super-2's will allow you to get the right-of-way, however I'm not a huge fan, as it means you have to build on the same real estate twice.

In an environment where you're having to deal with funding limits it's important to focus on the most basic needs of the project. In this case it's the Right Of Way. You can't do anything else without the proposed route's ROW preserved and protected from future development. There's always going to be some jackass who makes a deal with city government people, county commissioners or whoever so he can plant a new apartment complex directly in the path of where the highway will eventually be built.

For example, the curvy, stupid (and short) Kilpatrick Turnpike extension in Oklahoma City ended up being built the way it is because various powers that be in Oklahoma were too stupid to preserve the ROW they needed for the Southern half of the Kilpatrick outer loop around the OKC metro back in the mid 1990's. Directly South of the Kilpatrick's original SW end at I-40 some jerk developer was allowed to put a housing subdivision right in the way. The powers that be didn't think at all about future highway needs. They just wanted to make a land deal right then. That and other similar deals have pretty much screwed OKC out of having a proper outer loop. Now they're trying to re-label some roads as I-240 to make their non-planning garbage look like it was all by design.

A Super-2, especially one with at-grade intersections isn't going to impress anybody. But it's an effective approach to getting the job done at securing Interstate-width ROW, including the land needed for the exits. This approach will allow more time and flexibility for things like re-locating utilities. Limited access exits can be added in various phases.

An exception to this is the Bridge.  The bridge freeway should be built as one unit and the US 71 interchange should be completed so that you have a completed freeway from the state line to south of Fort Smith.  I don't think the uncompleted interchange could handle the volume of southbound traffic coming from the bridge.

Unfortunately AR DOT does not have the funding to do that. Hence the 2-lane interim version for now.

Arkansas could have more control over the I-49 corridor if they had the political will to do so. Several states, including FL, IL and IN (but apparently not AR according to a survey I read), have a "corridor protection" law that, once a corridor is identified and recorded, developers who want to build must notify the state DOT and the state basically has first right of refusal to buy the property, or let the development happen.

I don't know if the AR state government has anything like that on the books. It sure doesn't seem like Oklahoma does. Even if Oklahoma did, the "deciders" would be such cheapskates they would let various developers overrun an identified future highway corridor with new development rather than spend the fair market money to preserve the ROW.

[MikieTimT]

According to our favorite iDrive Arkansas webcam, the northbound lanes of Future I-49 at the US 71 interchange are now mostly striped.

The yellow lines and dashed white lines are done.  The white line on the shoulder is partially done.

I wonder if some additional webcams are doing to pop up going North to the state line?

They must have done that last night as I checked it a couple of times yesterday.

I'm sure they'll add more cameras north of what they have now.  Until 2 months ago, they had one on that hill they are cleaning up the debris from facing SE.

[MikieTimT]

Just submitted a Google Maps correction for the area so they can get on fixing the route (non-satellite map) and redesignation of the BVB into I-49.  Perhaps premature, but there's likely some lag time anyway.

[O Tamandua]

Thank you, mvak36!

[mvak36]

Thank you, mvak36!

Sure. I think you posted it correctly. I looked on the Tapatalk app and I could see your picture fine. I guess I just couldn't see it on my Firefox browser.

[US71]

Interesting side note: they apparently changed the milepost from 5 to 4

2012

[ChiMilNet]

Found this video online of a virtual drive through the new connector. Quite interesting, and I noticed that there are a number of sections with only a concrete divider in the middle (in Missouri especially). However, this will be a welcome connection.

https://youtu.be/mysWvyhX6hQ

[msunat97]

Found this video online of a virtual drive through the new connector. Quite interesting, and I noticed that there are a number of sections with only a concrete divider in the middle (in Missouri especially). However, this will be a welcome connection.

https://youtu.be/mysWvyhX6hQ

Nice share.  That looks like how I normally drive!

[GreenLanternCorps]

I think they are getting ready to open it.  The video quality is lousy on my phone at the moment.  But our favorite traffic cam was showing vehicles with yellow flashing lights in the Northbound lanes and it looks like the barrels in the Southbound lanes are gone or moved.

Edit:  Nope, barrels still in Southbound, but activity in Northbound…

[US71]

I think they are getting ready to open it.  The video quality is lousy on my phone at the moment.  But our favorite traffic cam was showing vehicles with yellow flashing lights in the Northbound lanes and it looks like the barrels in the Southbound lanes are gone or moved.

MoDOT says 49 should open by 9am Friday.

Correction: it opened at 9:30 pm  this evening.

[msunat97]

I think they are getting ready to open it.  The video quality is lousy on my phone at the moment.  But our favorite traffic cam was showing vehicles with yellow flashing lights in the Northbound lanes and it looks like the barrels in the Southbound lanes are gone or moved.

MoDOT says 49 should open by 9am Friday.

Correction: it opened at 9:30 pm  this evening.

Waze showed that it was open as of this morning.  However, I didn't check after 930pm last night.  Google isn't quite there yet.

[GreenLanternCorps]

It is now light enough that our favorite traffic cam is giving nice views of the traffic on I-49.

Both Southbound lanes are open.  Traffic starting to pick up with the morning commute, but not heavy. Northbound traffic lighter still, but it is morning and most commuters should be going South at this time of day.

Southbound ramp to US 71 is still closed.

The Exit number on the sign is the I-540 number of 93, not the Exit 279 it should be.