Interstate 42 (W)

[Bobby5280]

Never underestimate the potential idiocy of someone on an ATV with wire cutters in his possession.

[MikieTimT]

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."

[stevashe]

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.

[kphoger]

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.

[stevashe]

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.

[kphoger]

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.

[kphoger]

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.

[Scott5114]

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?

[Bobby5280]

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.

[Scott5114]

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.

[MikieTimT]

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!

[msunat97]

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.

[edwaleni]

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

[Bobby5280]

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.

[edwaleni]

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.



While this easement ends on the east side of town, the west side continues all the way through Oklahoma.

[swake]

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.

[Bobby5280]

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.

[swake]

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.

[Bobby5280]

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.

[The Ghostbuster]

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?

[MikieTimT]

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.

[US71]

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.

[Bobby5280]

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.

[US71]

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.

[MikieTimT]

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.