AARoads Forum

Regional Boards => Mid-South => Topic started by: bjrush on July 04, 2014, 07:38:02 PM

Title: Highway 112
Post by: bjrush on July 04, 2014, 07:38:02 PM
I thought we could use another thread for the in progress/planned/programmed/future improvements to this main arterial in Northwest Arkansas.

I see work going on around the round brick "University of Arkansas" sign at MLK and Razorback Rd. Is this related to the widening or is it a university project to update their sign?
Title: Re: Highway 112
Post by: Arkansastravelguy on July 04, 2014, 10:02:28 PM
I'm not aware of any 112 improvements.


iPhone
Title: Re: Highway 112
Post by: bjrush on July 04, 2014, 10:09:28 PM
AHTD is planning to widen the road along Razorback Rd between MLK and Leroy Pond Dr in Fayetteville

They are currently widening along Garland Avenue between North St and Melmar Av in Fayetteville

Long-term they will widen Highway 112 between MLK and Garland/Maple intersection
Title: Re: Highway 112
Post by: Arkansastravelguy on July 04, 2014, 10:11:38 PM
Ah I forgot about the cluster on Garland lol. Will they widen Garland to 49?


iPhone
Title: Re: Highway 112
Post by: bjrush on July 04, 2014, 10:14:03 PM
I don't think that has been programmed

I wonder why AHTD chose to widen the stretch not near the interstate along Highway 112

Probably because they got the city to pay for R/W, utility relocates (took over a year on its own) and 1/2 of construction cost I imagine
Title: Re: Highway 112
Post by: US71 on July 05, 2014, 09:46:25 AM
Quote from: bjrush on July 04, 2014, 10:14:03 PM
I don't think that has been programmed

I wonder why AHTD chose to widen the stretch not near the interstate along Highway 112

Probably because they got the city to pay for R/W, utility relocates (took over a year on its own) and 1/2 of construction cost I imagine

112 serves as a gateway to the University of Arkansas, so the city wanted to "improve" it. Pretty much whatever the UofA wants, they get, including shutting down parts of Garland Ave south of Maple.
Title: Re: Highway 112
Post by: bjrush on July 19, 2014, 05:18:11 PM
Traffic shift on Garland in order to allow AHTD to obliterate the center lane and plant trees

Saturday work on the (extremely oversized) retaining wall in front of Harps continued today too

I presume a final 2" overlay or something will go over the entire project following obliteration of the center lane? If not, the dozens of pavement markings will look like crap for years to come
Title: Re: Highway 112
Post by: US71 on July 19, 2014, 07:21:32 PM
Quote from: bjrush on July 19, 2014, 05:18:11 PM
Traffic shift on Garland in order to allow AHTD to obliterate the center lane and plant trees

Saturday work on the (extremely oversized) retaining wall in front of Harps continued today too

I presume a final 2" overlay or something will go over the entire project following obliteration of the center lane? If not, the dozens of pavement markings will look like crap for years to come
Any of the new signals working yet? I was going to go up this weekend, but had something else come up.
Title: Re: Highway 112
Post by: bjrush on July 19, 2014, 09:19:11 PM
Negative so far
Title: Re: Highway 112
Post by: M86 on July 20, 2014, 01:40:04 AM
How are the various municipalities and AHTD dealing with AR 112, north of Fayetteville?  Any right of way being preserved?  Much like the "Eastern Parkway" in NWA, AR 112 between Fayetteville and Bentonville has potential to be a higher speed corridor.  I hate to say, I'm convinced that the Western Bypass in NWA won't be in my lifetime.
Title: Re: Highway 112
Post by: bjrush on July 20, 2014, 10:35:16 AM
NWARPC has concluded the western bypass doesn't have sufficient projected demand to justify its expense, so no it will never happen
Title: Re: Highway 112
Post by: US71 on July 20, 2014, 11:17:03 AM
Quote from: M86 on July 20, 2014, 01:40:04 AM
How are the various municipalities and AHTD dealing with AR 112, north of Fayetteville?  Any right of way being preserved?  Much like the "Eastern Parkway" in NWA, AR 112 between Fayetteville and Bentonville has potential to be a higher speed corridor.  I hate to say, I'm convinced that the Western Bypass in NWA won't be in my lifetime.
112 got a partial reroute at  Bentonville  (https://www.google.com/maps/place/Bentonville,+AR/@36.3327661,-94.2217468,16z/data=!4m2!3m1!1s0x87c910004ed64949:0xda808cc82425bf02) within the last couple years so it now ties directly into SW I St

Title: Re: Highway 112
Post by: M86 on July 27, 2014, 01:35:07 AM
Quote from: bjrush on July 20, 2014, 10:35:16 AM
NWARPC has concluded the western bypass doesn't have sufficient projected demand to justify its expense, so no it will never happen

Are you kidding me?  Good grief.
Title: Re: Highway 112
Post by: bjrush on July 27, 2014, 10:13:10 AM
I believe they found pretty much all the traffic just runs between Fayetteville and Bentonville, so no one would use a bypass since all the traffic originates and is heading to a destination close to the I-49 corridor
Title: Re: Highway 112
Post by: bjrush on July 27, 2014, 07:37:11 PM
Installation of curbs along Highway 112

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1273.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fy405%2Fporkerface%2FInstallingcurbs_zps34eadb12.jpg&hash=6840901c3548dfd3f89c9f520196d3aed6f433c3)

Hooray for access management!
Title: Re: Highway 112
Post by: US71 on July 27, 2014, 08:24:02 PM
Quote from: bjrush on July 27, 2014, 07:37:11 PM
Installation of curbs along Highway 112

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1273.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fy405%2Fporkerface%2FInstallingcurbs_zps34eadb12.jpg&hash=6840901c3548dfd3f89c9f520196d3aed6f433c3)

Hooray for access management!

Are there curb cuts at Maxwell or Lawson?
Title: Re: Highway 112
Post by: Wayward Memphian on July 27, 2014, 10:15:12 PM
So, when does this get extended to I-49 through the experimental farm.
Title: Re: Highway 112
Post by: bjrush on July 27, 2014, 11:15:28 PM
I don't believe that is planned or programmed
Title: Re: Highway 112
Post by: US71 on July 27, 2014, 11:32:39 PM
Quote from: bjrush on July 27, 2014, 11:15:28 PM
I don't believe that is planned or programmed
Be a major hassle around Agri Park considering they just built the tunnel on the walking trail.
Title: Re: Highway 112
Post by: M86 on July 28, 2014, 03:12:22 AM
\
Quote from: bjrush on July 27, 2014, 10:13:10 AM
I believe they found pretty much all the traffic just runs between Fayetteville and Bentonville, so no one would use a bypass since all the traffic originates and is heading to a destination close to the I-49 corridor

Oh, jeez.  Can you provide links?  With traffic counts (accident data is plus).

Title: Re: Highway 112
Post by: bjrush on July 28, 2014, 07:42:23 AM
It should all be in the Western Bypass feasibility study done by NWARPC. Check their website, there is a lot of info on there

Found it. Page 71 says even with tolls, only 5-10% of initial capital costs would ever be funded by tolls. Crash data is there too. I'm on my phone so I can't post the link. Search for "nwarpc western beltway"
Title: Re: Highway 112
Post by: M86 on August 07, 2014, 01:28:17 AM
Quote from: bjrush on July 28, 2014, 07:42:23 AM
It should all be in the Western Bypass feasibility study done by NWARPC. Check their website, there is a lot of info on there

Found it. Page 71 says even with tolls, only 5-10% of initial capital costs would ever be funded by tolls. Crash data is there too. I'm on my phone so I can't post the link. Search for "nwarpc western beltway"

https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=10296.0

^ A past thread.
I'm familiar with the Western Bypass study.  The study states that the Western Bypass is definitely needed. 

I think maybe we took each others comments wrong? 

I wasn't saying that AR 112 should be a fully-controlled access highway, but rather, it could develop into an inter-regional roadway.  Put in a raised median, have access at every half mile or mile, and throw a 50+ MPH speed limit on it.
Title: Re: Highway 112
Post by: bjrush on August 07, 2014, 07:57:31 AM
I guess I don't see where it says it is feasible. It will never be built with anything but toll money and with tolls the ridership is way too low
Title: Re: Highway 112
Post by: bjrush on August 07, 2014, 08:11:28 AM
Also, final paving work is underway and signals have been flashing yellow/red recently. It may be done in time for move in
Title: Re: Highway 112
Post by: Arkansastravelguy on August 07, 2014, 08:51:36 AM

Quote from: bjrush on August 07, 2014, 08:11:28 AM
Also, final paving work is underway and signals have been flashing yellow/red recently. It may be done in time for move in
It seems like it took them an awful long time to get it done. Kinda like the Johnson Mill Rd construction
Title: Re: Highway 112
Post by: US71 on August 07, 2014, 10:54:18 AM
Quote from: Arkansastravelguy on August 07, 2014, 08:51:36 AM

Quote from: bjrush on August 07, 2014, 08:11:28 AM
Also, final paving work is underway and signals have been flashing yellow/red recently. It may be done in time for move in
It seems like it took them an awful long time to get it done. Kinda like the Johnson Mill Rd construction

Has that finally finished?
Title: Re: Highway 112
Post by: bjrush on August 07, 2014, 11:14:34 AM
Utility relocates delayed both projects
Title: Re: Highway 112
Post by: Arkansastravelguy on August 07, 2014, 11:49:02 AM

Quote from: US71 on August 07, 2014, 10:54:18 AM
Quote from: Arkansastravelguy on August 07, 2014, 08:51:36 AM

Quote from: bjrush on August 07, 2014, 08:11:28 AM
Also, final paving work is underway and signals have been flashing yellow/red recently. It may be done in time for move in
It seems like it took them an awful long time to get it done. Kinda like the Johnson Mill Rd construction

Has that finally finished?
No it has not
Title: Re: Highway 112
Post by: bjrush on August 07, 2014, 12:17:09 PM
And once they finish they will start widening Johnson Rd from Chapman to Highway 412
Title: Re: Highway 112
Post by: US71 on August 07, 2014, 05:17:49 PM
Quote from: bjrush on August 07, 2014, 12:17:09 PM
And once they finish they will start widening Johnson Rd from Chapman to Highway 412

I remember when both roads were "Johnson Road". I'm guessing you mean "Johnson Station Rd" aka Elmore?
Title: Re: Highway 112
Post by: bjrush on August 07, 2014, 07:01:43 PM
Johnson Rd in Springdale
Title: Re: Highway 112
Post by: M86 on August 08, 2014, 01:16:54 AM
Quote from: bjrush on August 07, 2014, 07:57:31 AM
I guess I don't see where it says it is feasible. It will never be built with anything but toll money and with tolls the ridership is way too low
Page 70 of the study.

"WILL A WESTERN BELTWAY BE NEEDED?

Yes. Travel demand modeling conducted for the Western Beltway Study found that even with
construction of additional lanes on I-540, significant traffic would use a western beltway or an
alternative route by 2035. Future beltway traffic will generally accommodate vehicles
generated by new development in the western regions of Washington and Benton Counties as
well as vehicles traveling through the area. Volumes forecast for the southern beltway segment
approach 45,000 vehicles per day. This amount of traffic warrants the need for a freeway or
major arterial such as the Western Beltway."

Um, that means feasible.  If it doesn't, then we're going to be stuck in this clogged mess forever.  I wasn't necessarily saying AR 112 should be "the Western Beltway", because it can't be... Rather, it should be developed into regional corridor.  But clearly the Western Beltway is needed and warranted.

Title: Re: Highway 112
Post by: bjrush on August 08, 2014, 01:53:42 PM
QuoteUm, that means feasible.  If it doesn't, then we're going to be stuck in this clogged mess forever.  I wasn't necessarily saying AR 112 should be "the Western Beltway", because it can't be... Rather, it should be developed into regional corridor.  But clearly the Western Beltway is needed and warranted.

I don't know your background, but I can tell you from an engineer's perspective that this

QuoteHowever, toll analyses performed for the study
concluded that toll revenues would provide only a small portion of the funding needed for
construction of a western beltway. Due to major changes and uncertainty in traditional highway
funding sources, no alternative funding options could be identified.

means it is not feasible. If a project has no funding source, it is not feasible. In this context, feasible means possible. With no funding, the project is not possible

QuoteDue to these findings, a western beltway does not appear to be a solution to [I-49] congestion in the short term but would furnish relief by diverting traffic away from the facility.

This means they will widen I-49 to eight lanes before they even consider adding a beltway, because even if they added a new terrain beltway I-49 would remain congested. The project driver is to remove congestion on I-49. This proposal provides relief, but not a solution to the problem. It doesn't "answer" the "question" of I-49 congestion. This is another reason why it is not feasible
Title: Re: Highway 112
Post by: Arkansastravelguy on August 08, 2014, 05:22:37 PM
I think an eastern beltway would fly better. AR 265 is becoming a major thoroughfare and will likely continue to in the future
Title: Re: Highway 112
Post by: M86 on August 09, 2014, 02:46:19 AM
Quote from: bjrush on August 08, 2014, 01:53:42 PM
This means they will widen I-49 to eight lanes before they even consider adding a beltway, because even if they added a new terrain beltway I-49 would remain congested. The project driver is to remove congestion on I-49. This proposal provides relief, but not a solution to the problem. It doesn't "answer" the "question" of I-49 congestion. This is another reason why it is not feasible

I guess we have different definitions of "feasible".

To throw the idea out the window of a "western bypass" is ridiculous.  Northwest Arkansas has reached half a million... Little Rock MSA has 725,000.  Compare Little Rock's metro to NWA metro.  Little Rock has a very extensive freeway network... We have a 2-lane I-49 with daily accidents and frequent fatalities.  AHTD hasn't followed the outdated I-540 study from 2006.  There were a lot of mistakes made.

NWARPC/AHTD needs to realize that AR 112 should be an "inter-regional corridor"...

Unfortunately, it'll be too late by the time any "person in power" will realize this.
Title: Re: Highway 112
Post by: bjrush on August 09, 2014, 08:12:14 AM
It is not really needed enough to justify the huge expense. It will take 10 years to widen I-49 to 6 lanes. Think how long and expensive a new terrain interstate would be in addition to that. Add to that expense that it still won't alleviate traffic on I-49 and you have a non-starter.

Hell I doubt any of us live to see the US 412 bypass completed. Another useless route

But just to give you an idea of how long it took, a feasibility study in 1998 said the 412 bypass was a go. They are turning dirt in 2014. And that is only due to a funding mechanism that was unforseen at the time
Title: Re: Highway 112
Post by: US71 on August 09, 2014, 07:31:12 PM
In the mid 60's there was a proposed extension of I-540 from I-40 at Van Buren to NW Arkansas, but it took almost 30 years to be built (and on a different alignment)
Title: Re: Highway 112
Post by: US71 on August 11, 2014, 06:14:52 PM
  KNWA-TV  (http://www.nwahomepage.com/story/d/story/-/qVB1cGF3iEiQZdAUe-M6LQ) reports that 112 should be finished by the time school starts.
Title: Re: Highway 112
Post by: bjrush on August 11, 2014, 09:06:03 PM
Lol it looks like they met their deadline...before students came back!

Except it was supposed to be done before the 2013-14 school year!
Title: Re: Highway 112
Post by: US71 on August 11, 2014, 09:55:25 PM
Quote from: bjrush on August 11, 2014, 09:06:03 PM
Lol it looks like they met their deadline...before students came back!

Except it was supposed to be done before the 2013-14 school year!

D'oh!
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F1.bp.blogspot.com%2F-4xI4sAnFUXE%2FUU5jJavthcI%2FAAAAAAAAGJ0%2FQhZN-XudKXc%2Fs1600%2Foh%2Bno%2Bsmiley%2Bface.jpg&hash=b4376b21e0cc8027f54d3c362c3eb670e9a093d2)
Title: Re: Highway 112
Post by: M86 on August 11, 2014, 11:18:09 PM
Quote from: bjrush on August 09, 2014, 08:12:14 AM
It is not really needed enough to justify the huge expense. It will take 10 years to widen I-49 to 6 lanes. Think how long and expensive a new terrain interstate would be in addition to that. Add to that expense that it still won't alleviate traffic on I-49 and you have a non-starter.

Hell I doubt any of us live to see the US 412 bypass completed. Another useless route

But just to give you an idea of how long it took, a feasibility study in 1998 said the 412 bypass was a go. They are turning dirt in 2014. And that is only due to a funding mechanism that was unforseen at the time

So, do nothing based on studies?  I don't get it.
How is the 412 bypass a useless route?


Title: Re: Highway 112
Post by: bjrush on August 12, 2014, 07:44:19 AM
Truck traffic will not bypass downtown Springdale on the new route. Tyson and Georges are still in downtown Springdale

Also the part east toward the lake will never be built. Honestly the part west toward Siloam Springs will be a long time in the making too, if we ever see that

I-49 is more important than having a four lane road through steep terrain between Springdale and Beaver Lake, so I dont see it as a priority in future STIPs
Title: Re: Highway 112
Post by: US71 on August 12, 2014, 07:48:09 AM
Quote from: M86 on August 11, 2014, 11:18:09 PM
Quote from: bjrush on August 09, 2014, 08:12:14 AM
It is not really needed enough to justify the huge expense. It will take 10 years to widen I-49 to 6 lanes. Think how long and expensive a new terrain interstate would be in addition to that. Add to that expense that it still won't alleviate traffic on I-49 and you have a non-starter.

Hell I doubt any of us live to see the US 412 bypass completed. Another useless route

But just to give you an idea of how long it took, a feasibility study in 1998 said the 412 bypass was a go. They are turning dirt in 2014. And that is only due to a funding mechanism that was unforseen at the time

So, do nothing based on studies?  I don't get it.
How is the 412 bypass a useless route?


Anyone who says the 412 Bypass is a useless route, has obviously never driven through Springdale...especially during Rush Hour. I dove through yesterday around 1pm and it was a clusterfork .
Title: Re: Highway 112
Post by: bugo on August 12, 2014, 12:09:45 PM
412 through Springdale is awful.  A bypass could easily shave 30 minutes off the trip between the expressways.  Also, 412 is slowly being converted into an expressway all the way across the state, and it is becoming more attractive to long distance travelers and truckers.  The bypass is ESSENTIAL.  A Siloam Springs/West Siloam Springs bypass is also badly needed.
Title: Re: Highway 112
Post by: Arkansastravelguy on August 12, 2014, 12:54:15 PM
412/Sunset thru Springdale is IMO the worst road in NWA. The bypass (and the airport connector) is a huge part of NWAs future
Title: Re: Highway 112
Post by: bjrush on August 12, 2014, 04:34:05 PM
I don't see the bypass making US 412 through Springdale any better. The traffic generators will still be in downtown Springdale. Tyson is building a new data center north of their existing campus, for example. Industry isn't moving outside of town. Its moving in if anything. I don't see any real population density appearing east of Highway 265, probably ever

What little traffic uses US 412 as a through route through NWA will see the only real benefit of a complete US 412 bypass. I just drove US 412 between Springdale and Huntsville a few days ago. You can drive for miles without seeing a soul. Four lane US 412 between Jonesboro and Springdale should be the state's 15485th highest priority at the moment

The part between Highway 112 and I-49 will be heavily traveled and is a good investment. And a road toward the airport, but anything east of Highway 265 is a waste of money
Title: Re: Highway 112
Post by: US71 on August 12, 2014, 04:41:33 PM
Quote from: bjrush on August 12, 2014, 04:34:05 PM
I don't see the bypass making US 412 through Springdale any better. The traffic generators will still be in downtown Springdale. Tyson is building a new data center north of their existing campus, for example. Industry isn't moving outside of town. Its moving in if anything. I don't see any real population density appearing east of Highway 265, probably ever

What little traffic uses US 412 as a through route through NWA will see the only real benefit of a complete US 412 bypass. I just drove US 412 between Springdale and Huntsville a few days ago. You can drive for miles without seeing a soul. Four lane US 412 between Jonesboro and Springdale should be the state's 15485th highest priority at the moment

The part between Highway 112 and I-49 will be heavily traveled and is a good investment. And a road toward the airport, but anything east of Highway 265 is a waste of money
The AHTD wasted their money widending 412 between Springdale and Huntsville?  Rubbish.
Title: Re: Highway 112
Post by: Arkansastravelguy on August 12, 2014, 05:03:24 PM

Quote from: bjrush on August 12, 2014, 04:34:05 PM
I don't see the bypass making US 412 through Springdale any better. The traffic generators will still be in downtown Springdale. Tyson is building a new data center north of their existing campus, for example. Industry isn't moving outside of town. Its moving in if anything. I don't see any real population density appearing east of Highway 265, probably ever

What little traffic uses US 412 as a through route through NWA will see the only real benefit of a complete US 412 bypass. I just drove US 412 between Springdale and Huntsville a few days ago. You can drive for miles without seeing a soul. Four lane US 412 between Jonesboro and Springdale should be the state's 15485th highest priority at the moment

The part between Highway 112 and I-49 will be heavily traveled and is a good investment. And a road toward the airport, but anything east of Highway 265 is a waste of money
Maybe if you drove it at 3am on Christmas Day you wouldn't see anybody. While I agree it's not heavily traveled, there's a good bit of traffic on it. And 412 bypass would have traffic on it, Fedex is only a mile up the road and so is JB Hunt and it's training centers and such. A lot of truck traffic uses 264 in Lowell that would use the bypass
Title: Re: Highway 112
Post by: bjrush on August 12, 2014, 05:36:25 PM
8200 VPD (2013) at the Washington/Madison county line

7800 between Hindsville and Huntsville

4700 at Carroll/Madison county line

For reference, its 7500 on Highway 112 south of US 412 in Tontitown. If 7800 is the warrant for a 4-lane divided highway in Arkansas, we have a lot more important roads meeting that standard right here in Benton/Washington County (you know, where the people actually live)
Title: Re: Highway 112
Post by: Wayward Memphian on August 12, 2014, 08:05:24 PM
Quote from: US71 on August 12, 2014, 04:41:33 PM
Quote from: bjrush on August 12, 2014, 04:34:05 PM
I don't see the bypass making US 412 through Springdale any better. The traffic generators will still be in downtown Springdale. Tyson is building a new data center north of their existing campus, for example. Industry isn't moving outside of town. Its moving in if anything. I don't see any real population density appearing east of Highway 265, probably ever

What little traffic uses US 412 as a through route through NWA will see the only real benefit of a complete US 412 bypass. I just drove US 412 between Springdale and Huntsville a few days ago. You can drive for miles without seeing a soul. Four lane US 412 between Jonesboro and Springdale should be the state's 15485th highest priority at the moment

The part between Highway 112 and I-49 will be heavily traveled and is a good investment. And a road toward the airport, but anything east of Highway 265 is a waste of money
The AHTD wasted their money widending 412 between Springdale and Huntsville?  Rubbish.

A near interstate or interest quality 412 across Arkansas would be a great economic generator to cities that have all the ingredients to excel like Harrison and Mt. Home that are stunted due to accessibility issues. A 4 lane to US 65 along with a true limited access bypass of Harrison should be higer up there than 67 to Mo Mo and most of I-69 in terms of greater economic benefit to the state..
Title: Re: Highway 112
Post by: US71 on August 12, 2014, 08:11:18 PM
Quote from: bjrush on August 12, 2014, 05:36:25 PM


For reference, its 7500 on Highway 112 south of US 412 in Tontitown. If 7800 is the warrant for a 4-lane divided highway in Arkansas, we have a lot more important roads meeting that standard right here in Benton/Washington County (you know, where the people actually live)
There are lots of subdivisions along 112. I doubt a "bypass" along 112 would be of much help to them, and could be a hindrance.
Title: Re: Highway 112
Post by: bjrush on August 15, 2014, 02:43:17 PM
Garland looks great, AHTD! Congrats, I bet a lot of people are happy to see that one done!
Title: Re: Highway 112
Post by: US71 on September 12, 2014, 06:34:45 PM
I finally got to drive it today. I noticed several several intersections with Flashing Yellow Arrows: something which the city of Fayetteville had been adamantly against.

The signal at 112/Holly/Mt Comfort Rd signal has no Protected Left Turn (Green Arrow) on the side streets: only Flashing Yellow, Steady Yellow and Steady Red.

I also noticed the signal at 112 and Drake near the fairgrounds seems to have eliminated the "Dallas Phasing" of Steady Green Ball for Left Turns with oncoming traffic and Red for Thru Traffic.  Left turning traffic has Red Ball/Green Arrow if Thru Traffic is Red. I didn't notice if any other intersections had changed.
Title: Re: Highway 112
Post by: M86 on September 19, 2014, 11:07:15 PM
Quote from: bjrush on August 12, 2014, 05:36:25 PM
For reference, its 7500 on Highway 112 south of US 412 in Tontitown. If 7800 is the warrant for a 4-lane divided highway in Arkansas, we have a lot more important roads meeting that standard right here in Benton/Washington County (you know, where the people actually live)
Sigh.  So growth projections are nothing?  Planning ahead?  Being proactive instead of reactive?  It's like the local municipalities and AHTD are just against planning for future growth.
Title: Re: Highway 112
Post by: bjrush on September 19, 2014, 11:26:03 PM
Are you saying Madison County is going to outpace growth in north Fayetteville?
Title: Re: Highway 112
Post by: US71 on September 21, 2014, 06:44:22 PM
Quote from: bjrush on September 19, 2014, 11:26:03 PM
Are you saying Madison County is going to outpace growth in north Fayetteville?

I doubt that will ever happen. Madison County is very rural and downtown Huntsville looks dead most of the time
Title: Re: Highway 112
Post by: bjrush on October 26, 2014, 01:13:08 PM
Construction coming along nicely between Leroy Pond and MLK. I didn't go through at peak time but traffic seems to keep moving through there
Title: Re: Highway 112
Post by: bjrush on December 06, 2014, 02:13:31 PM
There continue to be whispers of a Highway 112 widening along the west side of Fayetteville and Springdale

It would be nice, but likely a huge project. They need a new alignment through there
Title: Re: Highway 112
Post by: US71 on December 06, 2014, 03:32:32 PM
Quote from: bjrush on December 06, 2014, 02:13:31 PM
There continue to be whispers of a Highway 112 widening along the west side of Fayetteville and Springdale

It would be nice, but likely a huge project. They need a new alignment through there

Van Asche is being straightened and widened behind ROTC/Grill so there will be another access to the mall and Wal-Mart.
Title: Re: Highway 112
Post by: bjrush on July 19, 2015, 06:35:53 PM
The work between Leroy Pond and MLK looks great. On to the segment along Maple Street...
Title: Re: Highway 112
Post by: US71 on July 19, 2015, 08:27:59 PM
Quote from: bjrush on July 19, 2015, 06:35:53 PM
The work between Leroy Pond and MLK looks great. On to the segment along Maple Street...

Nope. No money.
Title: Re: Highway 112
Post by: AHTD on July 21, 2015, 01:18:26 PM
Sad, but true.

We pulled the job that would have widened between Maple and Garland. The section between Leroy Pond and Maple (immediately adjacent to the stadium) is still in design phase, but alas, no money identified at this time.

The section between MLK and Leroy Pond is amazing! Nice job!
Title: Re: Highway 112
Post by: US71 on December 05, 2015, 09:45:50 AM
Quote from: AHTD on July 21, 2015, 01:18:26 PM
Sad, but true.

We pulled the job that would have widened between Maple and Garland. The section between Leroy Pond and Maple (immediately adjacent to the stadium) is still in design phase, but alas, no money identified at this time.

The section between MLK and Leroy Pond is amazing! Nice job!

I see the 112 project at the UofA is back on the  schedule  (http://www.4029tv.com/news/highway-department-receives-money-to-start-road-project/36805416?utm_campaign=4029tv&utm_content=5662f1ab04d3012c29ccd519&utm_medium=facebook&utm_source=trueAnthem:+New+Content)
Title: Re: Highway 112
Post by: bjrush on March 20, 2016, 11:46:11 AM
So I believe at one point AHTD planned to widen Hwy 112 bridge over I-49 to 5 lanes and now I am hearing just 3 lanes and a bike lane? This makes no sense. This is the chance to get in there and right size things. How many times can one entity tack on lanes to a bridge before it comes time to tear it down and start over?
Title: Re: Highway 112
Post by: bjrush on March 20, 2016, 11:47:49 AM
Quote from: US71 on December 05, 2015, 09:45:50 AM
Quote from: AHTD on July 21, 2015, 01:18:26 PM
Sad, but true.

We pulled the job that would have widened between Maple and Garland. The section between Leroy Pond and Maple (immediately adjacent to the stadium) is still in design phase, but alas, no money identified at this time.

The section between MLK and Leroy Pond is amazing! Nice job!

I see the 112 project at the UofA is back on the  schedule  (http://www.4029tv.com/news/highway-department-receives-money-to-start-road-project/36805416?utm_campaign=4029tv&utm_content=5662f1ab04d3012c29ccd519&utm_medium=facebook&utm_source=trueAnthem:+New+Content)

I believe utilities have already been moved for that section
Title: Re: Highway 112
Post by: US71 on March 20, 2016, 01:30:45 PM
Quote from: bjrush on March 20, 2016, 11:46:11 AM
So I believe at one point AHTD planned to widen Hwy 112 bridge over I-49 to 5 lanes and now I am hearing just 3 lanes and a bike lane? This makes no sense. This is the chance to get in there and right size things. How many times can one entity tack on lanes to a bridge before it comes time to tear it down and start over?
That's basically what they did to Porter Road. Also Old Greenwood Rd at 540 in Fort Smith.
Title: Re: Highway 112
Post by: bjrush on March 20, 2016, 04:55:16 PM
Just mind blowing that it will take 3.5 years to do BB0414 and we still won't have a 4 or 5 lane bridge over I-49

They are supposedly planning to make a new Hwy 112 corridor to Bville. Fat chance if they can't even manage this key improvement
Title: Re: Highway 112
Post by: US71 on March 20, 2016, 08:40:34 PM
Quote from: bjrush on March 20, 2016, 04:55:16 PM
Just mind blowing that it will take 3.5 years to do BB0414 and we still won't have a 4 or 5 lane bridge over I-49

They are supposedly planning to make a new Hwy 112 corridor to Bville. Fat chance if they can't even manage this key improvement

112 was one of the Alternates for "new" US 71 (now I-49) north of Fayetteville, and that was 30 years ago.
Title: Re: Highway 112
Post by: bjrush on November 29, 2016, 10:54:08 PM
Widening is underway on the Highway 112 bridge over I-49. I believe all they are adding is a bike lane though (courtesy City of Fayetteville)
Title: Re: Highway 112
Post by: bjrush on January 03, 2017, 11:11:50 PM
Breaking news out of Fayetteville

Highway 112 to become a city street

http://arasce.org/articles.php?id=12&bypassCookie=1 (http://arasce.org/articles.php?id=12&bypassCookie=1)
Title: Re: Highway 112
Post by: US71 on January 04, 2017, 08:50:09 AM
Quote from: bjrush on January 03, 2017, 11:11:50 PM
Breaking news out of Fayetteville

Highway 112 to become a city street

http://arasce.org/articles.php?id=12&bypassCookie=1 (http://arasce.org/articles.php?id=12&bypassCookie=1)

I wonder if they will "officially" extend 16 from 15th to MLK or if 265 will be extended?

Seems to me they are decommissioning the wrong highways. Lots of short roads that could be released to the counties, like AR 369/ Charcoal Plant Rd in Logan County.
Title: Re: Highway 112
Post by: bjrush on January 04, 2017, 10:10:49 AM
From what I understand, they would love to turn those back but the counties don't want to take them.

The cities want control over design (Fayetteville) and ability to snow plow them (Bentonville)
Title: Re: Highway 112
Post by: US71 on January 04, 2017, 10:15:17 AM
Quote from: bjrush on January 04, 2017, 10:10:49 AM
From what I understand, they would love to turn those back but the counties don't want to take them.

The cities want control over design (Fayetteville) and ability to snow plow them (Bentonville)
I find it ironic that Fayetteville wants tree-lined boulevards after years of cutting everything down.

I know Rogers removed 62B and rerouted 12 a few years back, but I figure that was to keep trucks out the old downtown area (ditto AR 72 in Bentonville)