Proposed US 412 Upgrade

[MikieTimT]

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/

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.

[The Ghostbuster]

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.

[Plutonic Panda]

Has there been a debate outside of this message board?

[The Ghostbuster]

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.

[NE2]

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.

[rte66man]

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.

[MikieTimT]

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.

[swake]

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):

• 16 miles of currently signed interstate though Tulsa (244/44)
  
• 100 miles of turnpike
• 24 miles of existing limited access highway west of Tulsa. I think there is a single at grade road by Keystone Lake in this section that could likely be closed or rerouted.

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.

[MikieTimT]

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.

[Plutonic Panda]

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.

[Scott5114]

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.

[Plutonic Panda]

I wonder if we'll get any "future I-XX"  signs.

[MikieTimT]

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.

[Bobby5280]

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.

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.

[MikieTimT]

This latest one that I could find in the region wasn't too shabby.

[Bobby5280]

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.

[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.)

Ever since Jake Bear taught me how that works I can't unsee it whenever someone else whiffs it.

[skluth]

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.

[abqtraveler]

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?

[bwana39]

This latest one that I could find in the region wasn't too shabby.

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...

[Bobby5280]

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.

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.

[Plutonic Panda]

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?

[MikieTimT]

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.

[abqtraveler]

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.

[edwaleni]

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.