Proposed US 412 Upgrade

[intelati49]

Hey, I can actually make it..

Anyone have documents for the eastern stretch ,
(Springdale to US65 or beyond?)

SM-G715U1

[msunat97]

Here's a link to the Arkansas Highway Department site project page https://www.ardot.gov/divisions/environmental/assessments/impact-statements-eis-assesments-ea/springdale-northern-bypass-highway-412/

Hopefully the link works

[The Ghostbuster]

US 412 will probably permanently remain in its existing configuration east of the proposed eastern terminus of the Springdale North Bypass, so we can toss any ideas of upgrades east of there to Fictional Highways.

[intelati49]

US 412 will probably permanently remain in its existing configuration east of the proposed eastern terminus of the Springdale North Bypass, so we can toss any ideas of upgrades east of there to Fictional Highways.

My idea was the stretch that was upgraded to a four lane expressway. I haven't ever seen the study documents with the recommendations

Edit: Here's a later study. (post improvements) https://www.nwarpc.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/Hwy-412-Executive-Summary-2020-4.pdf

[edwaleni]

US 412 will probably permanently remain in its existing configuration east of the proposed eastern terminus of the Springdale North Bypass, so we can toss any ideas of upgrades east of there to Fictional Highways.

My idea was the stretch that was upgraded to a four lane expressway. I haven't ever seen the study documents with the recommendations

Edit: Here's a later study. (post improvements) https://www.nwarpc.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/Hwy-412-Executive-Summary-2020-4.pdf

US-412 to the east does not come close to meeting any 4 lane improvements based on that study. Inadequate traffic. Remember studies sometime tell authorities more what NOT to do.

[intelati49]

US 412 will probably permanently remain in its existing configuration east of the proposed eastern terminus of the Springdale North Bypass, so we can toss any ideas of upgrades east of there to Fictional Highways.

My idea was the stretch that was upgraded to a four lane expressway. I haven't ever seen the study documents with the recommendations

Edit: Here's a later study. (post improvements) https://www.nwarpc.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/Hwy-412-Executive-Summary-2020-4.pdf

US-412 to the east does not come close to meeting any 4 lane improvements based on that study. Inadequate traffic. Remember studies sometime tell authorities more what NOT to do.

I had thought the study area overlapped with the area of interest for the public meeting. I wanted to get a 201# view of the traffic to compare/contrast the needs

Pixel 7a

[MikieTimT]

US 412 will probably permanently remain in its existing configuration east of the proposed eastern terminus of the Springdale North Bypass, so we can toss any ideas of upgrades east of there to Fictional Highways.

My idea was the stretch that was upgraded to a four lane expressway. I haven't ever seen the study documents with the recommendations

Edit: Here's a later study. (post improvements) https://www.nwarpc.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/Hwy-412-Executive-Summary-2020-4.pdf

US-412 to the east does not come close to meeting any 4 lane improvements based on that study. Inadequate traffic. Remember studies sometime tell authorities more what NOT to do.

It doesn't currently meet the traffic counts in many folks mind based on numbers alone.  However, those that live in the region know that this is simply due to geometry and lack of lanes in the current facility, not due to lack of activity in the area itself.  I travel from NWA to Jonesboro at least twice a year for work at branch of a firm, and I take this road despite the fact that it isn't the quickest way currently between the two locations, in fact it is 30 minutes longer of a trip.  However, it is 40 miles shorter, more scenic, much fewer trucks currently, and far less ASP patrolling than the I-49/I-40/US-64/US-67 route nearly to Little Rock that Google Maps routes you as the quickest way.  Just the addition of 2 passing lanes in each direction on US-412 east of Mtn. Home over the past 8 years has trimmed 5-10 minutes off the previous time, and with the projects in the current STIP, should trim another 5 minutes off the trip minimum.  What would be the biggest difference-maker would be a northern bypass of Harrison to eliminate the slog through that congested mess.  Once that happens, despite the fact that there is technically a complete limited access route currently between Springdale and Jonesboro that everyone currently uses, but despises, there will be a notable uptick in traffic on US-412 between the 2 fastest growing regions of the state, even with 2  lanes segments remaining and being routed through the gut of every town other than Huntsville, Harrison, and Mtn. Home.

Sometimes the numbers don't tell the whole tale.  Drive both routes and you'll see what I mean.  I'm not suggesting interstate all the way across the northern counties of Arkansas, but 4 lane divided is and should be the goal east of I-49.

[The Ghostbuster]

Are there any additional bypasses of US 412 planned east of Springdale, like the existing bypasses of Mountain Home and Paragould?

[edwaleni]

US 412 will probably permanently remain in its existing configuration east of the proposed eastern terminus of the Springdale North Bypass, so we can toss any ideas of upgrades east of there to Fictional Highways.

My idea was the stretch that was upgraded to a four lane expressway. I haven't ever seen the study documents with the recommendations

Edit: Here's a later study. (post improvements) https://www.nwarpc.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/Hwy-412-Executive-Summary-2020-4.pdf

US-412 to the east does not come close to meeting any 4 lane improvements based on that study. Inadequate traffic. Remember studies sometime tell authorities more what NOT to do.

It doesn't currently meet the traffic counts in many folks mind based on numbers alone.  However, those that live in the region know that this is simply due to geometry and lack of lanes in the current facility, not due to lack of activity in the area itself.  I travel from NWA to Jonesboro at least twice a year for work at branch of a firm, and I take this road despite the fact that it isn't the quickest way currently between the two locations, in fact it is 30 minutes longer of a trip.  However, it is 40 miles shorter, more scenic, much fewer trucks currently, and far less ASP patrolling than the I-49/I-40/US-64/US-67 route nearly to Little Rock that Google Maps routes you as the quickest way.  Just the addition of 2 passing lanes in each direction on US-412 east of Mtn. Home over the past 8 years has trimmed 5-10 minutes off the previous time, and with the projects in the current STIP, should trim another 5 minutes off the trip minimum.  What would be the biggest difference-maker would be a northern bypass of Harrison to eliminate the slog through that congested mess.  Once that happens, despite the fact that there is technically a complete limited access route currently between Springdale and Jonesboro that everyone currently uses, but despises, there will be a notable uptick in traffic on US-412 between the 2 fastest growing regions of the state, even with 2  lanes segments remaining and being routed through the gut of every town other than Huntsville, Harrison, and Mtn. Home.

Sometimes the numbers don't tell the whole tale.  Drive both routes and you'll see what I mean.  I'm not suggesting interstate all the way across the northern counties of Arkansas, but 4 lane divided is and should be the goal east of I-49.

Don't disagree, at least on road geometry,  especially around Imboden. From even a 2 lane perspective, its a troublesome route. Boat and RV traffic around Harrison and Mountain Home easily justify themselves. 

[swake]

ODOT is conducting a public meeting on 6/6 in downtown Tulsa on the 412 upgrade.

https://tulsaworld.com/news/community/sand-springs/public-hearing-planned-on-converting-u-s-412-to-interstate-highway/article_63c2e646-fcc0-11ed-8301-5f36c1abc3b1.html

Project docs will be posted here on 6/7:
http://odot.org/US412interstateDesignationStudy

[Plutonic Panda]

Reminder: public meeting is today at 4:30 in Tulsa:

Cyntergy Community Space, 1st Floor
810 S. Cincinnati Avenue
Tulsa, Oklahoma 74119

https://oklahoma.gov/odot/programs-and-projects0/public-meetings-and-hearings0/public-meetings-and-hearings/20230606.html

[debaterthatchases]

Update: A fair share of NIMBY's showed up but I got to talk to Randle White, the ODOT District 8 Engineer about the Upgrades. I was told that the New BGS sign citing Springdale as a control city was a fluke, and that wasn't really that intentional. Also expect an upgrade to the US69 interchange, as he said the current interchange will most likely not meet new traffic requirements. (He said redesign, so maybe we get Flyovers?) Overall, this will be a fairly easy upgrade from ODOT's end, with the only trouble spots being the Flint Creek area and West Siloam Springs. I was also told that the redesigned interchange at US-412 and US-69 will have a future I-45 extension in mind. I'll add later if I remember anything else as the meeting lasts until 6:30p tonight.

[Plutonic Panda]

That's exciting to hear about I-45.

[Plutonic Panda]

They will also have a few other inner changes in the Tulsa area to reconstruct as well, which won't be cheap, but sorely needed. Examples include SH-11(is that part of the Gilcrease loop?) and the interchange at Sheridan Rd.

They will also likely have to address the segment through Greenwood and come up with a long term plan which would be great if they could tunnel it but at minimum something will need to be done to address that issue. So it seems like the segment through Tulsa will have some issues to work out but should be fairly simple as long as they can get the money.

[debaterthatchases]

I'm under the impression that any Tulsa area changes minus removing At grade interchanges and the addition of a left shoulder between the NW leg of the IDL and the Adams Rd exit in Sand Springs are on the back burner and aren't required for this project since both of the problem areas are still Interstate Standard (I-244 designation currently)

Also to answer your question SH11 is part of the Gilcrease Expwy. Also the random line item for the LL Tisdale Expwy being stated as SH11 was a mistake according to Randle and there are no current plans to realign SH11.

[bugo]

They will also likely have to address the segment through Greenwood and come up with a long term plan which would be great if they could tunnel it but at minimum something will need to be done to address that issue. So it seems like the segment through Tulsa will have some issues to work out but should be fairly simple as long as they can get the money.

There's nothing to address. The neighborhood isn't there anymore. That ship sailed 50 years ago. This is a bunch of nothing.

[bugo]

I-244 is not built to modern Interstate standards.

[Plutonic Panda]

They will also likely have to address the segment through Greenwood and come up with a long term plan which would be great if they could tunnel it but at minimum something will need to be done to address that issue. So it seems like the segment through Tulsa will have some issues to work out but should be fairly simple as long as they can get the money.

There's nothing to address. The neighborhood isn't there anymore. That ship sailed 50 years ago. This is a bunch of nothing.

I disagree. It's an urban stretch of interstate that needs to be redesign. The better fit the needs of the neighborhood it replaced even if it isn't there anymore. You can't just destroy a neighborhood and then say hey, there's no concern valid because the neighborhood we destroyed isn't there anymore. That's ridiculous.

[The Ghostbuster]

What would you do to redesign Interstate 244 to modern-design standards, Plutonic Panda?

[Plutonic Panda]

What would you do to redesign Interstate 244 to modern-design standards, Plutonic Panda?

I mean apart from some of the interchanges I mentioned it seems like much of I-244 already is up to par for the most part just a few key areas need to be improved namely the segment through Greenwood. If not a tunnel then a depressed freeway with a park cap would suffice. Otherwise it looks like ODOT is already planning on addressing existing issues like the deficient interchange at OK-66.

The only reason I really think a plan should be in place for the section of the interstate would be to help spur development and put to bed any ridiculous talk of a Freeway removal.

[swake]

The project documents say they will apply to AASHTO for interstate designation this fall.

And in Oklahoma you have a better chance of the state requiring CRT education for all students than for the north leg of the IDL to be removed.

[Bobby5280]

Also expect an upgrade to the US69 interchange, as he said the current interchange will most likely not meet new traffic requirements. (He said redesign, so maybe we get Flyovers?) Overall, this will be a fairly easy upgrade from ODOT's end, with the only trouble spots being the Flint Creek area and West Siloam Springs. I was also told that the redesigned interchange at US-412 and US-69 will have a future I-45 extension in mind.

I'm all for upgrading US-69 to Interstate standards from the Red River up to Big Cabin & I-44. But the existing US-69/US-412 interchange is in a bad spot for a possible I-45 extension. There is too much development immediately to the North of the interchange along US-69 going up thru Chouteau. A new-terrain bypass around Chouteau, including a new US-69/US-412 interchange, will be necessary.

And in Oklahoma you have a better chance of the state requiring CRT education for all students than for the north leg of the IDL to be removed.

The South and East sides of the IDL were re-built recently. So they're not getting torn out any time soon. And I see zero practical way at all for I-244 to be removed on the West and North sides of the IDL.

That spot isn't Rochester, NY. That location happens to be a pretty significant highway junction. Downtown Tulsa just happens to be in the middle of it. There are serious generators of vehicle traffic inside the IDL (BOK Center, ONE OK Field, Cains Ballroom, Cox Convention Center, OK State Univ Med Center, various hotels, the arts district, etc). Converting the super highways that converge on downtown Tulsa into at-grade boulevards with lots of traffic lights would be extremely stupid. The new urbanists have fantasies that people like me would visit Tulsa by driving up to the outskirts, parking clear out in Sapulpa and then taking a light rail train the rest of the way into downtown. No. If it's that much of a pain in the ass to visit I won't come there at all.

As I've said before, these new urbanist types don't practice what they preach. These policy makers will tell all us ordinary folks we need to take mass transit. After their speech their private car service takes them wherever they need to go. Hypocrites. There is no glamour in riding a city bus. A bus system is about all a small to mid-size city can afford. There are plenty of downsides to riding subways or light rail trains too.

[sprjus4]

I'm all for upgrading US-69 to Interstate standards from the Red River up to Big Cabin & I-44. But the existing US-69/US-412 interchange is in a bad spot for a possible I-45 extension. There is too much development immediately to the North of the interchange along US-69 going up thru Chouteau. A new-terrain bypass around Chouteau, including a new US-69/US-412 interchange, will be necessary.

For that area, I could see them using the existing interchange, then veering to the west on new alignment north of the interchange area, and still bypassing the town.

[debaterthatchases]

As far as I know, the I-45 extension would only be up to 412, hence the interchange redesign. A future extension up to I-44 might be in the cards, but as another said there isn't much development north of Pryor requiring an interstate. The big challenge of the Muskogee bypass has several solutions, but the one ODOT is considering is upgrading OK-165 to Freeway standards and a US-69/OK-351 interchange redesign, effectively using Peak Blvd/Muskogee Turnpike as the bypass.There isn't much Muskogee residents could do to stop a bypass using existing ROW.

[bugo]

They will also likely have to address the segment through Greenwood and come up with a long term plan which would be great if they could tunnel it but at minimum something will need to be done to address that issue. So it seems like the segment through Tulsa will have some issues to work out but should be fairly simple as long as they can get the money.

There's nothing to address. The neighborhood isn't there anymore. That ship sailed 50 years ago. This is a bunch of nothing.

I disagree. It's an urban stretch of interstate that needs to be redesign. The better fit the needs of the neighborhood it replaced even if it isn't there anymore. You can't just destroy a neighborhood and then say hey, there's no concern valid because the neighborhood we destroyed isn't there anymore. That's ridiculous.

Trying to "reconnect" something that hasn't existed in two generations is much more ridiculous. There's literally one church and a college north of the highway. I don't think the folks who live in the gentrified apartments at Greenwood and Archer are going to be walking to an African American church, and if they did, the underpass is wide open and lit up at night.

Your suggestion is about as ridiculous as saying that they should build a tunnel through Sideling Hill, even though the roadcut has been there for decades. The hill is no longer there, so you wouldn't be preserving or reconnecting anything, because what was once there is gone forever.

Have you ever been to this part of Tulsa?