AHTD has posted the Preliminary 2013-16 STIP (http://www.arkansashighways.com/stip/2013-2016/2013-2016_Prelim_STIP.pdf) on its website.
edit - I changed title of this thread to create a catch-all thread for "smaller" Arkansas topics that might be similar to the "state name" threads elsewhere in this Forum. The Preliminary STIP seems to be appropriate for such a thread.
Move Arkansas Forward has a Proposed Constitutional Fact Sheet #1 (http://www.movearkansasforward.com/pdf/TurnbackBooklet.pdf) that lists by region the four-lane highway projects that would be supported by the half-cent sales tax to be voted on in November (pages 6-7/88 of pdf; pages 4-5 of document):
Quote
Four-Lane Projects of Regional Significance
South Arkansas
- Completion of widening US Hwy 425 to four lanes from Hamburg to the Louisiana line
- Completion of widening US Hwy 167 to four lanes between I-530 and El Dorado
- Beginning the widening of US Hwy 82 to four lanes between Magnolia and El Dorado
Central Arkansas
- Completion of widening I-40 to six lanes between Little Rock and Conway
- Widening of US Hwy 70 to four lanes between I-30 and Hot Springs
- Completion of widening US Hwy 64 to four lanes between Conway and Beebe
- Completion of widening US Hwy 67 to six lanes from Jacksonville to Cabot
- Improvements to I-30 connecting Little Rock and North Little Rock, including widening the I-30 Arkansas River Bridge (120,000 cars a day)
- Continuation of widening US Hwy 270 to four lanes from Hot Springs westward
Northwest Arkansas
- Widening I-540 to six lanes between Fayetteville and Bentonville
- Completion of the initial two lanes of the ultimate four lanes of the Bella Vista bypass
- Beginning four-lane construction of the US Hwy 412 Springdale bypass from I-540 to the Northwest Arkansas Regional Airport (XNA) connector
Northeast Arkansas
- Completion of widening US Hwy 412 to four lanes between Paragould and Walnut Ridge
East Arkansas
- Continuation of widening US Hwy 49 to four lanes from Brinkley southward toward Helena-West Helena
I-49 is well-represented with the I-540 widening and the BVB in Northwest Arkansas. No I-69 projects are listed in South Arkansas; it looks like a major effort is underway to upgrade the US 82 corridor first (it looks like the US 425 project would include an overlap with US 82).
Quote from: Grzrd on June 19, 2012, 11:18:56 AM
- Widening of US Hwy 70 to four lanes between I-30 and Hot Springs
This is badly needed. The current route is curvy and 2 lanes with alternate passing lanes (welfare Missouri "4 lane.") Hopefully they'll straighten out some of the curves but I doubt they will. This road needs to be built as a divided route, but I'm guessing that AHTD will simply build a 5 lane undivided road along the current alignment.
Quote
- Continuation of widening US Hwy 270 to four lanes from Hot Springs westward
This one is needed as well. It will be difficult to widen some of 270, as it runs through the side of a hill near an arm of Lake Hamilton and either the hill will have to be cut out further or the road will have to be built up to the north. I am guessing that the next stage of construction will end at the Lake Hamilton/Ouachita River bridge, which is already 4 lanes. Hopefully the new road will be 5 lanes instead of 4 lanes (there's no chance that it will be divided) because there are a lot of roads and driveways along this stretch of highway.
Quote
I-49 is well-represented with the I-540 widening and the BVB in Northwest Arkansas. No I-69 projects are listed in South Arkansas; it looks like a major effort is underway to upgrade the US 82 corridor first (it looks like the US 425 project would include an overlap with US 82).
No mention of the Monticello Bypass? The eastern half is shown on the 2012 Arkansas road map as being under construction, while the western half is shown as proposed.
Thank you for the update...
The AHTD website is absolutely ridiculous.
As always, glad to see the Little Rock area is represented well. Of Course. Awesome... that whole "most Interstate miles per capita" still hasn't set in.
Do the AHTD look at traffic counts/accident reports? I mean really... Is that a factor for them? *chirp, chirp*
Talked to Scott Bennett this evening. I asked if he would consider shrinking the highway system to a more appropriate size and he said it has been strongly considered. He said there has been a small effort to make "deals" with counties such as "we put in a pricy bridge, you take over x miles of light traffic roads". Of course, he was also concerned with the politics involved of trying to take away people's state highways.
At least he understands the system needs to shrink. He also mentioned how important maintenance of the system is vs new construction. A very nice guy
Wow, US 425 upgrade! There was a 4 laning of a road to nowhere on the LA side when AR used to say they definitely wouldn't widen the highway but I'm sure the I-69 projects helped to decide this one
I see that the 245 Loop around the east end of Texarkana is being connected to I-30 with a new alignment. I am guessing that I-49 will use the east end of the loop rather than the Texas side.
I was just there and everything looks great! I did not get to see the east side of town, as I went around the US 59 side and saw the new fully directional flyovers at the I-30 interchange with US 59.
Quote from: bjrush on September 20, 2012, 10:34:25 PM
Talked to Scott Bennett this evening. I asked if he would consider shrinking the highway system to a more appropriate size and he said it has been strongly considered. He said there has been a small effort to make "deals" with counties such as "we put in a pricy bridge, you take over x miles of light traffic roads". Of course, he was also concerned with the politics involved of trying to take away people's state highways.
At least he understands the system needs to shrink. He also mentioned how important maintenance of the system is vs new construction. A very nice guy
If you talk to him again, you should point out how ridiculous it is to have eight highways with the number "74".
Quote from: Scott5114 on October 10, 2012, 05:50:30 AM
If you talk to him again, you should point out how ridiculous it is to have eight highways with the number "74".
I actually mentioned that and he laughed and said something like "yeah there sure is some crazy stuff out there"
Quote from: roadman65 on September 27, 2012, 10:39:25 PM
I see that the 245 Loop around the east end of Texarkana is being connected to I-30 with a new alignment. I am guessing that I-49 will use the east end of the loop rather than the Texas side.
Yes. It will cross US 59/71 near Miller County 55, then cross briefly into Texas before re-entering Arkansas near Ogden.
Quote from: bjrush on October 10, 2012, 09:11:33 AM
Quote from: Scott5114 on October 10, 2012, 05:50:30 AM
If you talk to him again, you should point out how ridiculous it is to have eight highways with the number "74".
I actually mentioned that and he laughed and said something like "yeah there sure is some crazy stuff out there"
at least, they are in kind of a straight line.
still not the worst abuse of the number 74 in any given state. North Carolina, I'm looking at you...
Quote from: agentsteel53 on October 10, 2012, 12:21:58 PM
Quote from: bjrush on October 10, 2012, 09:11:33 AM
Quote from: Scott5114 on October 10, 2012, 05:50:30 AM
If you talk to him again, you should point out how ridiculous it is to have eight highways with the number "74".
I actually mentioned that and he laughed and said something like "yeah there sure is some crazy stuff out there"
at least, they are in kind of a straight line.
still not the worst abuse of the number 74 in any given state. North Carolina, I'm looking at you...
It's complicated. I'll have to pull put my maps, but it seems like AR 74 may have been one continuous route at one time, though with lots of multiplexes. Somewhere along the way, it got chopped up and pieces given to counties to maintain.
Then you have AR 60 which has at least 5 sections that rarely come close to connecting (except near Rudy).
Quote from: US71 on October 10, 2012, 12:28:05 PM
Quote from: agentsteel53 on October 10, 2012, 12:21:58 PM
Quote from: bjrush on October 10, 2012, 09:11:33 AM
Quote from: Scott5114 on October 10, 2012, 05:50:30 AM
If you talk to him again, you should point out how ridiculous it is to have eight highways with the number "74".
I actually mentioned that and he laughed and said something like "yeah there sure is some crazy stuff out there"
at least, they are in kind of a straight line.
still not the worst abuse of the number 74 in any given state. North Carolina, I'm looking at you...
It's complicated. I'll have to pull put my maps, but it seems like AR 74 may have been one continuous route at one time, though with lots of multiplexes. Somewhere along the way, it got chopped up and pieces given to counties to maintain.
Then you have AR 60 which has at least 5 sections that rarely come close to connecting (except near Rudy).
Also Highway 88, which just about crosses the state if you connect all the segments.
Quote from: Road Hog on October 11, 2012, 01:45:38 AM
Also Highway 88, which just about crosses the state if you connect all the segments.
I think it would only go from the OK Line to Hot Springs. ;)
Then you have three (or four on a technicality) 45's, which actually
was one continuous route at one time
Info on the proposal to increase the sales tax in Arkansas to pay for road projects...link included.
http://www.arkansashighways.com/2012_hcstax/issue_1.aspx (http://www.arkansashighways.com/2012_hcstax/issue_1.aspx)
They need to raise the taxes. I-49 is sorely needed, and fatalities will continue to pile up on US 71 until they finish I-49. Some of the completed interstates are falling apart as well. I-69 isn't that big of a priority to me.
Quote from: bugo on October 29, 2012, 01:30:37 PM
They need to raise the taxes.
Not a popular line with politicians these days
I would love for US 425 to be constructed as a controlled-access highway where it passes through forest, bumping up the speed limit to 70 MPH.
TRIP, a Washington, D.C. nonprofit, has issued a report, The Top 40 Transportation Projects to Support Economic Growth and Quality of Life in Arkansas (http://www.tripnet.org/docs/Arkansas_Economic_Development_TRIP_Report_Oct_2012.pdf). The list includes 20 miles of the I-69 Monticello Bypass, completion of I-49 from Doddridge to the Louisiana state line, and completion of two lanes of the Bella Vista Bypass.
I took a trip to North Arkansas last weekend. It's been awhile since I've driven on the roads I was on, and made some notable observations:
1) US 167 is greatly improved with more 4-lane running south of Little Rock, and the 60 m.p.h. speed limit on the 5-lane rural portions. Definitely made the trip home quicker. :clap:
2) On US 63 north of El Dorado (ex-AR 15 between El Dorado & Pine Bluff), there has been a flood of clearview on it's control point mileage signs, and the new signs put up to label ALL of the creeks flowing under the bridges.
3) The new 4-lane divided stretch of US 167 in El Dorado now has AR 7 signs running concurrent with US 167 (another great change :nod:), but the signs stop showing up south of US 82. What's funny: there are no US 63 signs on the new stretch on the south-bound lanes from the Warren exit to US 82. :-D
4) The Ouachita River "dump" on US 167 is now a 60 m.p.h. 5-lane miracle...never thought I would see this improvement. :colorful:
Quote from: cjk374 on November 04, 2012, 11:14:05 AM
I took a trip to North Arkansas last weekend. It's been awhile since I've driven on the roads I was on, and made some notable observations:
1) US 167 is greatly improved with more 4-lane running south of Little Rock, and the 60 m.p.h. speed limit on the 5-lane rural portions. Definitely made the trip home quicker. :clap:
2) On US 63 north of El Dorado (ex-AR 15 between El Dorado & Pine Bluff), there has been a flood of clearview on it's control point mileage signs, and the new signs put up to label ALL of the creeks flowing under the bridges.
3) The new 4-lane divided stretch of US 167 in El Dorado now has AR 7 signs running concurrent with US 167 (another great change :nod:), but the signs stop showing up south of US 82. What's funny: there are no US 63 signs on the new stretch on the south-bound lanes from the Warren exit to US 82. :-D
4) The Ouachita River "dump" on US 167 is now a 60 m.p.h. 5-lane miracle...never thought I would see this improvement. :colorful:
Any signs of progress on the Sheridan Bypass?
They don't seem to lack much. It looks like all they need to do is tie it in to US 167 on the north & south ends. It looked like the bypass will be a 4-land divided road.
Quote from: Grzrd on June 19, 2012, 11:18:56 AM
Move Arkansas Forward has a Proposed Constitutional Fact Sheet #1 (http://www.movearkansasforward.com/pdf/TurnbackBooklet.pdf) that lists by region the four-lane highway projects that would be supported by the half-cent sales tax to be voted on in November (pages 6-7/88 of pdf; pages 4-5 of document):
Quote
Four-Lane Projects of Regional Significance
South Arkansas
- Completion of widening US Hwy 425 to four lanes from Hamburg to the Louisiana line
- Completion of widening US Hwy 167 to four lanes between I-530 and El Dorado
- Beginning the widening of US Hwy 82 to four lanes between Magnolia and El Dorado
Central Arkansas
- Completion of widening I-40 to six lanes between Little Rock and Conway
- Widening of US Hwy 70 to four lanes between I-30 and Hot Springs
- Completion of widening US Hwy 64 to four lanes between Conway and Beebe
- Completion of widening US Hwy 67 to six lanes from Jacksonville to Cabot
- Improvements to I-30 connecting Little Rock and North Little Rock, including widening the I-30 Arkansas River Bridge (120,000 cars a day)
- Continuation of widening US Hwy 270 to four lanes from Hot Springs westward
Northwest Arkansas
- Widening I-540 to six lanes between Fayetteville and Bentonville
- Completion of the initial two lanes of the ultimate four lanes of the Bella Vista bypass
- Beginning four-lane construction of the US Hwy 412 Springdale bypass from I-540 to the Northwest Arkansas Regional Airport (XNA) connector
Northeast Arkansas
- Completion of widening US Hwy 412 to four lanes between Paragould and Walnut Ridge
East Arkansas
- Continuation of widening US Hwy 49 to four lanes from Brinkley southward toward Helena-West Helena
This article (http://ozarksfirst.com/fulltext?nxd_id=725282) reports that Issue No.1 was approved by the voters:
Quote
Arkansas ballot Issue No. 1 has been approved by voters.
With 63-percent of the vote counted, the measure was passing 58-percent to 42-percent.
Quote from: Grzrd on November 07, 2012, 07:13:16 AM
Arkansas ballot Issue No. 1 has been approved by voters.
:cheers:
Quote from: Grzrd on November 07, 2012, 07:13:16 AM
Quote
Arkansas ballot Issue No. 1 has been approved by voters.
With 63-percent of the vote counted, the measure was passing 58-percent to 42-percent.
I really hope AHTD spends the money on the projects they have promised and not waste it on pet projects.
I've never heard what happens if the bonds aren't paid off in 10 years...do our taxes stay raised (likely) or does the state eat the cost (unlikely)?
Quote from: msunat97 on November 08, 2012, 09:21:16 AM
I've never heard what happens if the bonds aren't paid off in 10 years...do our taxes stay raised (likely) or does the state eat the cost (unlikely)?
Bonds are being paid for by a 1/2 cent sales tax (but not on groceries, fuel, or medicine). When the bonds are paid off, the sales tax is supposed to expire.
Quick road update from my holiday travels...
Hwy 82 East of Lake Village is progressing. There is one bridge that is being widened. That is the last thing to be done before 82 is four laned from the new Greenville river bridge to Lake Village.
There is a long section of I-530 southbound under total replacement in North Jefferson county. It'll probably be mid 2013 before that's reopened.
Quote from: msunat97 on November 23, 2012, 09:14:02 AM
There is a long section of I-530 southbound under total replacement in North Jefferson county. It'll probably be mid 2013 before that's reopened.
I've not been able to find much on AHTD's website, but it appears all of 530 is due for work at some point in the future.
Back in 1997-98, I worked for T.L. James Construction when they were working on I-530 between US 79 and US 63 (then known as AR 15). They also built the "Althiemer Road" (US 63/79 that runs from The Pines Mall over the lock & dam to Althiemer) & widened US 65 from US 425 south to Moscow. One of the highway inspectors I worked with told me that when they built the 4-lane US 65 between Little Rock & Pine Bluff, the contractors were having terrible weather while trying to do the dirt work. They were in such a hurry to get the highway built, the contractors were, literally, dragging the concrete pavers with bulldozers over the muddy roadbed! :pan: I'm glad AHTD is FINALLY correcting this problem after 50 (?) years. I just hope they repave the whole stretch with concrete. I also wish they would build a north bound ramp for exit 10 to give people a chance to get on US 167 south to El Dorado.
Quote from: US71 on November 07, 2012, 10:55:58 AM
Quote from: Grzrd on November 07, 2012, 07:13:16 AM
Quote
Arkansas ballot Issue No. 1 has been approved by voters.
With 63-percent of the vote counted, the measure was passing 58-percent to 42-percent.
I really hope AHTD spends the money on the projects they have promised and not waste it on pet projects.
AHTD recently solicited a REQUEST FOR LETTERS OF INTEREST (http://www.arkansashighways.com/consultant_services/advertisements/ad_fy2012/Request%20for%20LOI%20-%20Program%20Manager.pdf) for firms to serve as Project Managers for the sales tax program:
Quote
Notice is hereby given that the Arkansas State Highway and Transportation Department (AHTD) is seeking letters of interest from qualified consulting firms capable of functioning as Program Managers (PMs) for the One-Half Cent State Sales Tax Program (Program) .... A list of the highway improvements to be constructed can be found at www.arkansashighways.com. It is anticipated that most of these improvements will be under contract within 5 years.
It sounds like they really do intend to stick to the projects on the list.
AHTD also made a similar request for financial advisors (http://www.arkansashighways.com/consultant_services/advertisements/2012%20Financial%20Advisor%20RFP.pdf) to advise AHTD on the program.
I'm ready for some of this work to get moving a little faster. The 6 lane I-40 expansion between Conway & Little Rock is all in Faulkner county. I'd like to see something happen around the 40/430 interchange & start working towards Conway.
Quote from: Grzrd on December 02, 2012, 12:26:38 AM
AHTD recently solicited a REQUEST FOR LETTERS OF INTEREST (http://www.arkansashighways.com/consultant_services/advertisements/ad_fy2012/Request%20for%20LOI%20-%20Program%20Manager.pdf) for firms to serve as Project Managers for the sales tax program .... AHTD also made a similar request for financial advisors (http://www.arkansashighways.com/consultant_services/advertisements/2012%20Financial%20Advisor%20RFP.pdf) to advise AHTD on the program.
Quote from: Gordon on April 30, 2013, 10:19:23 PM
Back in Jan. 31 the Highway commissioners voted to accept the staff's members to enter into negotiations with Garver LLC in North Little Rock to serve as the program manager for the 1/2 cent sales tax program. Also to use Stephen's Inc. in Little Rock to serve as the Financial advisor and bond Company for this project.
(bottom quote from I-49 in AR (Bella Vista, Fort Smith) (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=3324.msg218671#msg218671) thread)
This article (http://www.theconstructionindex.co.uk/news/view/atkins-wins-us-transport-contracts) reports that, instead of Garver, Atkins, in partnership with Brown & Gay Engineers and Fugro Consultants, has been selected to provide on-call construction services for AHTD:
Quote
In Arkansas, Atkins, in partnership with Brown & Gay Engineers and Fugro Consultants, has been selected to provide on-call construction services for the Arkansas State Highway & Transportation Department (AHTD).
Under the terms of the contract, Atkins will provide AHTD with a complete range of construction management and inspection services. The contract specifically calls for Atkins to support a new programme that will use a temporary sales tax to fund a US$1.8bn, ten-year project to build and improve four-lane highways throughout the state.
Atkins practice manager Chris Campbell said: "This partnership gives Atkins a new level of presence in a region of the country that is anticipating much growth. Arkansas is making extensive highway improvements through 2018 and beyond, and we are gratified to be able to take part in the state's transportation progress."
Now the wait begins to see which project will be first .....
edit
Quote from: Grzrd on June 20, 2013, 12:30:06 PM
AHTD has released the 2013 Arkansas Highway map (http://www.arkansashighways.com/planning_research/mapping_graphics/2013%20AR%20State%20Highway%20Map%20-%20State%20Side.pdf)
(above quote from Texarkana (Future I-49, I-69 Spur) (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=3321.msg228336#new) thread)
AHTD also provides a a list of changes from the 2012 map (http://www.arkansashighways.com/news/2013/NR%2013-188.pdf) (pages 2-4/5 of pdf).
Another good article in the Arkansas Democrat Gazette about 3 billion for state roads in the interstate repair program and the the 1/2 cent sale tax for road improvements. Scott Bennett expected that bond sales for the that program to have bond sales in September, with the first 2 projects to let before the the end of the year. Then another the 1st part of 2014. the program will ramp up in late 2015. Also in 2015 the legislative session will get a serious look for more money on roads. I hope in the the first 3 jobs are to finish the 2 lane Bella Villa bypass. Still the AHTD has not shown a list of the jobs and sequence.
Quote from: Gordon on July 19, 2013, 09:50:02 PM
I hope in the the first 3 jobs are to finish the 2 lane Bella Villa bypass. Still the AHTD has not shown a list of the jobs and sequence.
AHTD has posted a PowerPoint presentation from the July 24, 2013 AHTD Commission Business Meeting (http://www.arkansashighways.com/PowerPoints/2013/072413_Commission%20Meeting%20Powerpoint.pdf) and the entire CAP Program Schedule can be found on page 43/61 of the pdf. As O Tamandua has previously posted in another thread (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=3324.msg235111#msg235111), the first three projects are related to the Bella Vista Bypass.
Quote from: CanesFan27 on April 26, 2013, 11:40:03 AM
"It is also suggested that AHTD and MDOT coordinate with FHWA to designate I-69 (including the Mississippi River Bridge) as a Project of National and Regional Significance:"
Be interesting if they will then apply for TIGER IV (TIGER 2013) funding.
(above quote from I-69 Mississippi River Bridge (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=6153.msg217910#msg217910) thread)
Quote from: Gordon on August 04, 2013, 11:07:14 AM
FY 2013 TIGER Grants
DOT is authorized to award $473.847 million in TIGER Discretionary Grants ...
It looks to me that the Bella Vista Bypass would qualify for the other 2 lanes from Tiger 2013. I wonder if the AHTD put in an application.
(above quote from I-49 in AR (Bella Vista, Fort Smith) (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=3324.msg237263#msg237263) thread)
AHTD recently emailed me a pdf summarizing AHTD TIGER Grant Requests and Grants Received over the years. For 2013 TIGER V, AHTD has requested grants for utility relocation and work on Highway 92. AHTD neither applied for another BVB grant nor, as lead agency, applied for any type of Great River Bridge grant:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FLOSurrz.png&hash=dcd42b46db0b63e5c64bf17e2c8205654fb35e8d)
Interesting that AHTD has thrown in the towel and is calling it Future I-49 in documentation now.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffarm6.staticflickr.com%2F5461%2F9533119999_76fc49b738_c.jpg&hash=efee286068ae195468f44361555a4385e3e10638)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffarm4.staticflickr.com%2F3719%2F9535908712_7537e4d246_c.jpg&hash=58e8043bd22efe323a8f60c18f8be1d9bfa62ebd)
Two signs along AR 549 near Texarkana that are now officially historic. I imagine that the AR 249 NB shield has been replaced with a new AR 549 shield and the AR 245 shield is now a SB AR 151 shield since the next phase of the future I-49 is completed
Quote from: roadman65 on August 18, 2013, 12:31:27 AM
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffarm6.staticflickr.com%2F5461%2F9533119999_76fc49b738_c.jpg&hash=efee286068ae195468f44361555a4385e3e10638)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffarm4.staticflickr.com%2F3719%2F9535908712_7537e4d246_c.jpg&hash=58e8043bd22efe323a8f60c18f8be1d9bfa62ebd)
Two signs along AR 549 near Texarkana that are now officially historic. I imagine that the AR 249 NB shield has been replaced with a new AR 549 shield and the AR 245 shield is now a SB AR 151 shield since the next phase of the future I-49 is completed
Not quite:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffarm6.staticflickr.com%2F5342%2F8936430084_cc3ab904bf_c_d.jpg&hash=3a55c22e09227dab5736e58dd126c225a3af2f8e)
AHTD fucks up again. They're giving the OTA a run for their money.
Today on the Araknsas gov. Transparency site it showed that on the AR. 4 lane Highway sales/use tax that it accumulated $20,699,963.58. So the 1/2 cent tax is moving along for 1st jobs to bid. Along the bond money that will be purchased in September they can start road jobs.
630/430 update http://www.arkansashighways.com/news/2013/NR%2013-306.pdf
AHTD has posted its October 10 presentation to the Conway Area Chamber of Commerce (http://www.arkansashighways.com/PowerPoints/2013/101013_SEB_ConwayChamber.pdf). Included in the presentation are updates on the I-40 Conway South interchange, the Conway Western Loop, and the US 64 Vilonia Bypass.
Great read Grzrd!
Was there not anything other than Houston suitable enough to be used as a control city in Texarkana. It's almost like Memphis, TN being used as a control city in Chicago.
Quote from: UptownRoadGeek on November 04, 2013, 02:59:37 PM
Was there not anything other than Houston suitable enough to be used as a control city in Texarkana. It's almost like Memphis, TN being used as a control city in Chicago.
There ain't much out there in East Texas.
Quote from: Road Hog on November 05, 2013, 12:14:48 AM
Quote from: UptownRoadGeek on November 04, 2013, 02:59:37 PM
Was there not anything other than Houston suitable enough to be used as a control city in Texarkana. It's almost like Memphis, TN being used as a control city in Chicago.
There ain't much out there in East Texas.
Marshall, Carthage, Jefferson, Nacogdoches...that's about it.
Tyler?
Quote from: bugo on November 05, 2013, 01:57:39 PM
Tyler?
But US 59 doesn't go through Tyler, though...271 and 69 do ;)
But US 59 is the route to take to get to Tyler. Anal control cities are anal.
There's also Lufkin. I would probably use "Nacogdoches - Lufkin" as they're both about the same size and fairly close to one another. Barring that, err toward Lufkin since the name is shorter and it's larger by a few thousand people.
Quote from: NE2 on November 05, 2013, 02:21:08 PM
But US 59 is the route to take to get to Tyler.
Nope. Not for me.
Quote from: US71 on November 05, 2013, 07:14:19 PM
Quote from: NE2 on November 05, 2013, 02:21:08 PM
But US 59 is the route to take to get to Tyler.
Nope. Not for me.
How would you go from Texarkana to Tyler then? I-30 to Mt. Pleasant?
I was definitely thinking Lufkin or Marshall at the least. If TxDOT saw fit to sign Cleveland as a control city then those two are definitely contenders, then again we're talking about AHDT. Shouldn't I-30 be referenced on the sign as well since Dallas is there?
Quote from: US71 on November 05, 2013, 02:06:16 PM
Quote from: bugo on November 05, 2013, 01:57:39 PM
Tyler?
But US 59 doesn't go through Tyler, though...271 and 69 do ;)
Quote from: Road Hog on November 05, 2013, 12:14:48 AM
Quote from: UptownRoadGeek on November 04, 2013, 02:59:37 PM
Was there not anything other than Houston suitable enough to be used as a control city in Texarkana. It's almost like Memphis, TN being used as a control city in Chicago.
There ain't much out there in East Texas.
Quick update on the Hwy 82 4-lane project South of Lake Village. The new bridge on 82 is completed at the creek that feeds into Lake Chicot. It was dark so I couldn't tell the progress of the other side of the road. I hope 82 is 4 laned by this time next year. Now if Mississippi can find some $$$ to 4 lane the Greenville bypass...
This Nov. 29 article (http://www.baxterbulletin.com/article/20131130/NEWS01/311300019/Group-hopes-preserve-historic-Arkansas-bridge) reports on efforts to save the US 67 bridge over the Black River:
Quote
.... The U.S. 67 bridge over the Black River in Randolph County opened in 1934 and is a landmark in the area. The span has a swivel pivot in the middle, which was used to turn the two-lane bridge to accommodate river traffic.
The swivel was welded closed when U.S. 67 became a divided road. In August, The Arkansas State Highway and Transportation department notified Pocahontas officials that the bridge, which handles about 25,000 vehicles daily, needed to be replaced because of structural deficiencies.
Five Rivers Historic Preservation will receive $425,000 in state money to repair and oversee the bridge. Group president Bill Carroll said the organization is considering creating a walking trail across the bridge to connect two downtown parks.
Quote from: Grzrd on December 04, 2013, 08:32:18 PM
This Nov. 29 article (http://www.baxterbulletin.com/article/20131130/NEWS01/311300019/Group-hopes-preserve-historic-Arkansas-bridge) reports on efforts to save the US 67 bridge over the Black River:
Quote
.... The U.S. 67 bridge over the Black River in Randolph County opened in 1934 and is a landmark in the area. The span has a swivel pivot in the middle, which was used to turn the two-lane bridge to accommodate river traffic.
The swivel was welded closed when U.S. 67 became a divided road. In August, The Arkansas State Highway and Transportation department notified Pocahontas officials that the bridge, which handles about 25,000 vehicles daily, needed to be replaced because of structural deficiencies.
Five Rivers Historic Preservation will receive $425,000 in state money to repair and oversee the bridge. Group president Bill Carroll said the organization is considering creating a walking trail across the bridge to connect two downtown parks.
It would be great if it could be preserved. :)
Arkansas tends to be good about preserving bridges if the effort is shown to have it preserved. I was disappointed that the locals didn't show much interest in saving the two truss spans on AR 7 north of Dover.
Has there ever been a proposal to build a freeway from West Memphis to Lake Village to open up Arkansas to industrialization along the Mississippi River? Seems likes the state could greatly benefit from the great river. Water woes out west will probably lead to greater population growth along the MS and OH rivers too eventually.
Somehow I don't see a lot of people moving from California to Phillips County, Arkansas. I think direct potable reuse is a more effective future solution
Thought some of y'all that live out of state may want to see the IdriveArkansas signs that AHTD has covered the state with
This one on I-40 not far east of the I-440 junction
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/2d/IDriveArkansas_sign_along_I-40.jpg/800px-IDriveArkansas_sign_along_I-40.jpg)
Thanks for noticing!
These signs have been going up the last several weeks around the state and are being placed in major corridors and entry points to the state.
Look for a presence in the app store for IDRIVEARKANSAS in the next few weeks!
Quote from: AHTD on January 08, 2014, 10:23:50 AM
Thanks for noticing!
These signs have been going up the last several weeks around the state and are being placed in major corridors and entry points to the state.
Look for a presence in the app store for IDRIVEARKANSAS in the next few weeks!
Happy, happy, joy, joy! I just found MoDOT's last month and was hoping Arkansas would soon follow. :)
Quote from: AHTD on January 08, 2014, 10:23:50 AM
Thanks for noticing!
These signs have been going up the last several weeks around the state and are being placed in major corridors and entry points to the state.
Look for a presence in the app store for IDRIVEARKANSAS in the next few weeks!
Excellent!
A few questions, if you don't mind.
Is AHTD going to launch a Facebook page? And, is their Twitter account (@AHTD) going to cover the whole state, and not just a select area?
And, finally, is arkansashighways.com going to be re-done?
At this time, AHTD will not be launching a Facebook page and yes, the Twitter account does cover the entire state. The reason you don't see many tweets about incidents (accidents) in NWA is because we do not receive the information from Arkansas State Police.
A majority of news releases about activity in this area are generated locally by the district. This too will change as we work to improve our methods. We tweet all of our news releases and breaking information about the state highway system as it becomes available. You see a majority from central Arkansas because it is the low-hanging fruit that's easy to pick. We will be working to include more information from more areas of the state.
Yes, www.arkansashighways.com (http://www.arkansashighways.com) will be redone. We are working to complete the www.idrivearkansas.com (http://www.idrivearkansas.com) site first and will follow-up with native apps for Apple, Android and Windows. Improvements to www.arkansashighways.com (http://www.arkansashighways.com) will allow the public to follow the genesis of a project from planning to completion.
Understand we have a way to go before this happens, but we do realize the existing site needs an update and will work toward that goal. In the meantime, we are happy to be a part of this forum and welcome questions and comments about the Arkansas highway system. We will also routinely provide information as it becomes available.
Thank you! This is music to my ears! I love the openness...
Two thumbs up from me!
Now please change your roadway lighting policy. There is no reason why county/city/etc should provide lighting on an Interstate, especially in urban areas.
No need to card AHTD ... It is indeed 100 ... founded in 1913. (I looked it up.)
That's correct!
We celebrated 100 years last April. You can read all about it in the March 2013 issue of Arkansas Highways Magazine (see below).
http://www.arkansashighways.com/Magazine/2013/March/ARHighwaysMag_March2013_web.pdf (http://www.arkansashighways.com/Magazine/2013/March/ARHighwaysMag_March2013_web.pdf)
Be advised this is almost a 16MB PDF and it's best to download directly to your desktop and flip through it that way. We are currently working on making this publication available as an e-book, which will allow folks to flip through the pages on tablets, etc.
AHTD: It would be nice if your organization would sign ALL of the highways that share a stretch of road. It is nearly impossible to follow certain highways from end to end just by signage alone. This includes US highways, which is inexcusable.
Quote from: bugo on January 13, 2014, 02:03:11 PM
AHTD: It would be nice if your organization would sign ALL of the highways that share a stretch of road. It is nearly impossible to follow certain highways from end to end just by signage alone. This includes US highways, which is inexcusable.
Agreed. I've even talked to AHTD engineers... They won't budge... Dothan, Alabama signage is NOT an excuse! It's ridiculous.
Quote from: AHTD on January 09, 2014, 12:29:39 AM
At this time, AHTD will not be launching a Facebook page and yes, the Twitter account does cover the entire state. The reason you don't see many tweets about incidents (accidents) in NWA is because we do not receive the information from Arkansas State Police.
Why? Hire me! I'll do a Facebook page for AHTD! Good grief.
The Twitter does not cover the entire state... Rename the Twitter to @AHTDLittleRock, or @AHTDCentralAR
So, how do you receive info about incidents and accidents there?
Quote from: AHTD on January 13, 2014, 01:44:27 PM
That's correct!
We celebrated 100 years last April. You can read all about it in the March 2013 issue of Arkansas Highways Magazine (see below).
http://www.arkansashighways.com/Magazine/2013/March/ARHighwaysMag_March2013_web.pdf (http://www.arkansashighways.com/Magazine/2013/March/ARHighwaysMag_March2013_web.pdf)
Be advised this is almost a 16MB PDF and it's best to download directly to your desktop and flip through it that way. We are currently working on making this publication available as an e-book, which will allow folks to flip through the pages on tablets, etc.
I used to read the back issues in the U of A Library when I was in college :)
Arkansas State Police will alert us via email or our radio dispatch about an incident. ASP deals with the incidents, we deal with maintenance of the right of way. We are currently working out a method by which incidents reported by ASP will automatically appear on IDRIVEARKANSAS.
Not all ASP Troops regularly report activity. It's something they are working through as well.
Additionally, news releases for much of NWA are published from our district office in Barling and most of them are not Tweeted. That too will be remedied.
Quote from: M86 on January 14, 2014, 12:49:00 AM
Quote from: AHTD on January 09, 2014, 12:29:39 AM
At this time, AHTD will not be launching a Facebook page and yes, the Twitter account does cover the entire state. The reason you don't see many tweets about incidents (accidents) in NWA is because we do not receive the information from Arkansas State Police.
Why? Hire me! I'll do a Facebook page for AHTD! Good grief.
The Twitter does not cover the entire state... Rename the Twitter to @AHTDLittleRock, or @AHTDCentralAR
So, how do you receive info about incidents and accidents there?
But if they hire me, I can document and report all the missing exit signs and sign errors. As well as provide cool photos for the highway maps ;)
Oh Cool, we have more U of A Alum on here. I lived in Fayetteville for 6 years until 2009, been back in Atlanta for 5 years now. In your opinion, Whats the biggest pressing issue for IH-540/IH-49 in NWA???...This is probably OT so I could ask the same in the 540 thread...
Quote from: Tomahawkin on January 14, 2014, 08:05:29 PM
Oh Cool, we have more U of A Alum on here. I lived in Fayetteville for 6 years until 2009, been back in Atlanta for 5 years now. In your opinion, Whats the biggest pressing issue for IH-540/IH-49 in NWA???...This is probably OT so I could ask the same in the 540 thread...
I've been in Ft Smith since 2006, after 20+ in Fayettenam ;)
Hard to narrow 540/49 down to just one issue.
I know, there are many! Just as bad as Atlanta but on a smaller scale population/land area-wise
Hey AHTD,
Does the Department plan to start using design-build contracts? It could accelerate some projects significantly...may even be beneficial for I-49 work
Quote from: bjrush on January 29, 2014, 03:05:23 PM
Hey AHTD,
Does the Department plan to start using design-build contracts? It could accelerate some projects significantly...may even be beneficial for I-49 work
Please do.
Is this foreign to AHTD?
Quote from: bjrush on January 29, 2014, 03:05:23 PM
Hey AHTD,
Does the Department plan to start using design-build contracts? It could accelerate some projects significantly...may even be beneficial for I-49 work
See our design-build policy here: http://www.arkansashighways.com/forums/DB_Policy.pdf (http://www.arkansashighways.com/forums/DB_Policy.pdf)
At this time we are planning to use this project delivery method for improving the Interstate 30 Arkansas River crossing in Little Rock.
During the last October Commission meeting, a minute order was approved to hire a consultant to perform the environmental work necessary for this project: http://www.arkansashighways.com/forums/Minute_Order_2013-114.pdf (http://www.arkansashighways.com/forums/Minute_Order_2013-114.pdf)
Quote from: M86 on January 30, 2014, 01:15:28 AM
Quote from: bjrush on January 29, 2014, 03:05:23 PM
Hey AHTD,
Does the Department plan to start using design-build contracts? It could accelerate some projects significantly...may even be beneficial for I-49 work
Please do.
Is this foreign to AHTD?
To supplement AHTD's response - DB is not the typical operation mode of most agencies. Very few projects actually go DB. Whether that's because it's still relatively new, and DOTs are slow to change as a whole (institutional knowledge mentality), or whether it has something to do with the quality of the final product being more controllable through DBB (design-bid-build), or whether it has something to do with allowing two contractors to get the work instead of one... each DOT has its own reasons.
DBB is often the most expensive and slowest method possible. The only benefit it has is it is 100% fair
DB allows for faster and sometimes cheaper contracts, usually of higher quality. The main problem with DB is that the project scope often begins very loose. However, AHTD is far from the average clueless owner. They know what they want. I think DB could really provide an innovative solution to some of Arkansas's upcoming projects
Thanks for the responses. I spewed my mouth (aka hands on keyboard) before reviewing all the facts.
I definitely think DB would work with some AR projects.
Quote from: bjrush on January 30, 2014, 10:13:28 PM
DBB is often the most expensive and slowest method possible. The only benefit it has is it is 100% fair
It is based solely on price (low-bidder). Design-build takes other things into consideration, such as past performance and the quality of the proposal. It is a lot of work on the front-end for the owner/agency that prepares the request for proposal (RFP) that goes out to the contracting community because you have to provide enough detail in the RFP to ensure that the owner gets what they want, but without designing it. Think performance-based specifications instead of prescriptive-based specifications (i.e. I want my concrete to not fail from heavy application of roadway anti-icing chemicals vs. I want a compressive strength of 4000 psi).
AHTD,
What is the plan for the US 412 bypass? I see the first phase between Hwy 112 and I-540/US 62/US 71 is projected to be complete late 2018 on the Connecting Arkansas Program website. How will this route be signed, will there be full access to I-540/US 62/US 71, and what is the next phase?
I guess east to US 71B?
The initial segment of the Springdale northern bypass is currently scheduled to be let sometime this fall. It will be a four-lane divided, fully-controlled access facility from I-540 to State Highway 112. Actually, it will extend just past State Highway 112 and terminate at the point where a new connector to XNA is planned, but public access will terminate at State Highway 112 until said connector is constructed. The connector is not an AHTD project.
Additional funding for other parts of the bypass have not been identified and at this time no other phase is in the works.
Thanks!
Any speculation on the route number, since it will be many years before a US 412 designation happens along a completed bypass facility?
Quote from: bjrush on February 03, 2014, 03:10:51 PM
Thanks!
Any speculation on the route number, since it will be many years before a US 412 designation happens along a completed bypass facility?
I'm going to take a wild guess and say SPUR 412. I-530 at Pine Bluff was "Spur US 65" until completed. There was also, for a brief time, an unmarked AR 471 Spur at Fayetteville.
(oh dear! Am I dating myself?)
Quote from: AHTD on January 09, 2014, 12:29:39 AM
Yes, www.arkansashighways.com (http://www.arkansashighways.com) will be redone. We are working to complete the www.idrivearkansas.com (http://www.idrivearkansas.com) site first and will follow-up with native apps for Apple, Android and Windows. Improvements to www.arkansashighways.com (http://www.arkansashighways.com) will allow the public to follow the genesis of a project from planning to completion.
Understand we have a way to go before this happens, but we do realize the existing site needs an update and will work toward that goal. In the meantime, we are happy to be a part of this forum and welcome questions and comments about the Arkansas highway system. We will also routinely provide information as it becomes available.
Recognizing that this is probably still a ways off, here are some ideas of some stuff on other state DOT sites that I've found helpful. Maybe you could pass it on to the website guys.
First of all, it's becoming more and more common for state DOTs to provide a full archive of every official state map that has been produced. (Oklahoma (http://www.odot.org/maps/state/archive-a.htm) and Missouri both do this, for instance.) Such an archive exists for Arkansas (http://ftp://ftp.geostor.arkansas.gov/geostor_raster_02/AHTD_MAP_SERIES/STATEWIDE/), but it would be nice to have it more easily accessible on the AHTD website, instead of on a FTP server somewhere.
The big thing that would be helpful is a summary of actions affecting each highway designation (i.e. realigning it, shortening it, extending it, renumbering it...). In Texas and Oklahoma, these are Transportation Commission actions, and are available online. Here's an example (http://www.okladot.state.ok.us/memorial/legal/sh74.htm) of Oklahoma's pages like this. For some highways (mainly US highways) they have scans up of the actual commission actions, too, with supporting documents like AASHTO requests and maps.
Both of these are extremely helpful for researching the history of highways.
Quote from: Scott5114 on February 07, 2014, 05:10:01 AM
First of all, it's becoming more and more common for state DOTs to provide a full archive of every official state map that has been produced. (Oklahoma (http://www.odot.org/maps/state/archive-a.htm) and Missouri both do this, for instance.) Such an archive exists for Arkansas (http://ftp://ftp.geostor.arkansas.gov/geostor_raster_02/AHTD_MAP_SERIES/STATEWIDE/), but it would be nice to have it more easily accessible on the AHTD website, instead of on a FTP server somewhere.
...? http://www.arkansashighways.com/planning_research/mapping_graphics/archived_tourist_maps/archived_tourist_maps.aspx
A link to the other site would have course be useful, as it has county maps (and perhaps a few state maps that aren't on the AHTD site?).
Quote from: Scott5114 on February 07, 2014, 05:10:01 AM
The big thing that would be helpful is a summary of actions affecting each highway designation (i.e. realigning it, shortening it, extending it, renumbering it...).
If you care enough, you can go through the minute orders (http://www.arkansashighways.com/minute_orders/minute_orders.aspx) yourself.
I want to see pre-1953 minute orders on the site. Do they exist? Have they been digitized?
Won't I-30 rebuild in LR be the biggest project AHTD has ever let to date?
I'm not sure its prudent to try out a new delivery method on an already-sure-to-be-extremely challenging project.
The I-30 corridor from U.S. 67/167 (on I-40) to the South Terminal interchange is ballparked at about 300+ million. Not only does the project propose to widen the river crossing to 8, maybe 10 lanes, it will also include a new flyover from southbound U. S. 67/167 to I-40.
This new construction will deposit that southbound traffic on the inside lanes of I-40 and allow through traffic on I -40 to proceed without a weave.
The EIS will be let separately- and very soon! The consultant awarded this contract will not be eligible to pursue the design-build contract. Funding for this project will come from the half-cent sales tax program and it is the last on the list for now.
Quote from: AHTD on February 24, 2014, 11:14:27 PM
The I-30 corridor from U.S. 67/167 (on I-40) to the South Terminal interchange is ballparked at about 300+ million. Not only does the project propose to widen the river crossing to 8, maybe 10 lanes, it will also include a new flyover from southbound U. S. 67/167 to I-40.
This new construction will deposit that southbound traffic on the inside lanes of I-40 and allow through traffic on I -40 to proceed without a weave.
That flyover is badly needed. Are HOV lanes in the mix as well?
We do not have any HOV lanes planned at this time.
That Figures! OTOH IH-40 Should be tolled for the fact of how much (East-West) cross-country traffic uses that route. Especially since the State of Arkansas Badly needs the money for interstate improvements especially in NW Arkansas, Among other areas...but that wont happen til 2075...
Quote from: Tomahawkin on March 02, 2014, 01:52:33 PM
That Figures! OTOH IH-40 Should be tolled for the fact of how much (East-West) cross-country traffic uses that route. Especially since the State of Arkansas Badly needs the money for interstate improvements especially in NW Arkansas, Among other areas...but that wont happen til 2075...
Funny you should mention that, the consultant performing a toll study on I-40 presented its findings last week. Wasn't in the meeting but will pass along info once its available.
AHTD, on your CAP website, Job CA0902 doesn't seem right... And the maps do not match up.
Is Job CA0902 from Exit 85 (Walton/Walnut) to Exit 88 (Central Ave)? If so, the CAP website has some details wrong.
[font=]"This project proposes to widen Highway 71 to six lanes, extending generally from Highway 62/102 to Highway 72 in Bentonville, and constructing auxiliary lanes from Highway 62/102 to Southeast Walton Boulevard." [/font]
The widening project is approximately from Exit 86 (Highway 62/102) to Exit 88 (Central Avenue/Highway 72). The auxiliary lanes is from Exit 85 (Walton/Walnut) to Exit 86 (Highway 62/102). So the full project is generally from Exit 85 to Exit 88, but part of it is widening, and part of it is auxiliary lanes.
City of Fayetteville hosting an input session on tge Wedington Drive exit
Not sure what this is but it looks, um, interesting
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.fayettevilleflyer.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2013%2F03%2Froundabout.jpg&hash=d2a3247d59341579cd23dcc8576177dbf74e77de)
Someone from Burns & McDonald said a diverging diamond is not a good fit here. As with lots of NWAs engineering projects, people see something somewhere else and think Arkansas is feckless if we don't apply the cool new specialized solution to every interchange in the state
I don't know what to do at Wedington but honestly the signals aren't the problem from my experience. It is the number of vehicles at rush hour
IMO, it's the whole intersection including 540 and the service roads. This area was overbuilt early on and has been (IMO) a clusterduck for a long time.
MB886
I'm not going to lie, though...roundabouts work really well on freeway-to-freeway interchanges, but that one above...don't know what to think.
Quote from: bjrush on March 14, 2014, 09:58:21 PM
City of Fayetteville hosting an input session on tge Wedington Drive exit
Not sure what this is but it looks, um, interesting
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.fayettevilleflyer.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2013%2F03%2Froundabout.jpg&hash=d2a3247d59341579cd23dcc8576177dbf74e77de)
Someone from Burns & McDonald said a diverging diamond is not a good fit here. As with lots of NWAs engineering projects, people see something somewhere else and think Arkansas is feckless if we don't apply the cool new specialized solution to every interchange in the state
I don't know what to do at Wedington but honestly the signals aren't the problem from my experience. It is the number of vehicles at rush hour
First question: Is this design from AHTD or the City of Fayetteville? I don't understand all of these cities doing interchanges. It makes no sense. They can provide valuable feedback and input, but a city should not be designing an interchange on an Interstate.
That roundabout is a bad idea. I can not imagine that working. I know it's a heavy southbound to westbound and a heavy eastbound to northbound.
https://www.arkansashighways.com/planning_research/statewide_planning/Studies/1-11-105%20I-540%20Improvement%20Study.pdf
Page 108 is Wedington from the study in 2006. Is AHTD still going by this study, or just going with the flow now?
And the signals are an issue... More so, the closeness of intersections. Cul-de-sac Shiloh Drive, on both sides, and reroute access via Salem Road/Steamboat Drive... From Google Imagery, it's possible. Put in a SPUI.
With the SPUI, do a triple left from eastbound Wedington to northbound I-540... Have the right most lane merge into the center lane along the ramp.
For southbound to westbound, have dual rights. The dual rights will have free movements while the eastbound to northbound, and the westbound to southbound movements occur.
Sorry, it is AHTD. I see how my OP would've been confusing.
QuoteThe Arkansas State Highway and Transportation Department is asking for residents' input in designing plans to improve the interchange at Interstate 540 and Wedington Drive in west Fayetteville.
A public meeting is scheduled from 4-7 p.m. Thursday, March 20 in the cafeteria at Asbell Elementary School, 1500 N. Sang Ave.
The interchange is part of the Wedington Corridor Neighborhood Master Plan, which was drafted last year after a weeklong series of meetings designed to help city planners understand how residents want to see future development in the growing area west of I-540.
http://www.fayettevilleflyer.com/2014/03/14/state-plans-public-meeting-to-discuss-wedington-interchange-improvements/ (http://www.fayettevilleflyer.com/2014/03/14/state-plans-public-meeting-to-discuss-wedington-interchange-improvements/)
The city came to us with this idea last summer and presented it to our design engineers. We modeled it and determined this is not a workable solution, mainly because not enough right-of-way exists in that area to accommodate a roundabout.
Quote from: AHTD on March 16, 2014, 09:25:21 PM
The city came to us with this idea last summer and presented it to our design engineers. We modeled it and determined this is not a workable solution, mainly because not enough right-of-way exists in that area to accommodate a roundabout.
Thank you, AHTD, for discarding that idea. I was getting worried for a moment.
And multi-lane roundabouts in heavy-traffic areas are toxic! Just no.
Question for AHTD...what's the latest on the Highway 82 construction south of Lake Chicot? They were still working on the bridge over a creek that feeds the lake.
Should be wrapping this up soon!
Do you know why there is no access management along that segment in Lake Village? Does every single house need access to a left turn lane?
This would've been a great opportunity to plant some trees in the median and beautify an entrance to Arkansas with some magnolia trees or something. Instead, people are welcomed by a 62' section of asphalt and 99% of the traffic using the TWLTL is Old Man Bob and Old Lady Susie turning into to his/her lakehouse. Missed opportunity for a statement project IMO
Quote from: bjrush on March 17, 2014, 08:47:02 PM
Do you know why there is no access management along that segment in Lake Village? Does every single house need access to a left turn lane?
This would've been a great opportunity to plant some trees in the median and beautify an entrance to Arkansas with some magnolia trees or something. Instead, people are welcomed by a 62' section of asphalt and 99% of the traffic using the TWLTL is Old Man Bob and Old Lady Susie turning into to his/her lakehouse. Missed opportunity for a statement project IMO
According to Google Maps Streetview, the imagery is from June 2008 concerning the section you are talking about (At least I think? I just typed in Lake Village). The good ol' 5 laner Arkansas Highway... Hey, at least there are sidewalks! Roadway lighting, as always, is nowhere to be found.
Why are there no cars on that road? (Going by Streetview) It's like a barren waste-land of asphalt. That's just sad...
I think it's more aesthetics than access management issues... And AHTD usually doesn't give a flip about aesthetics. But I understand what you are saying. Is there a group of some sort with the Lake Village community? Do you know if AHTD had a public meeting concerning the improvements through that area?
Saw this on Facebook:
AHTD suspends 10 planned construction projects (http://www.thv11.com/story/news/local/2014/03/19/ahtd-suspends-planned-construction-projects/6600417/)
QuoteThe ten Federal-aid projects that have been pulled from the Department's April bid letting total approximately $60 million and include:
- Chicot County - Highway 165/Rehabilitation of 4.3 miles
- Franklin County - City Street/Connect Hillbilly Lane to Hwy. 23 (Mulberry)
- Independence County - Highway 167/Widening 5.0 miles
- Pulaski County - Highway 70 (Roosevelt Rd.)/Bridge replacement (LR)
- Pulaski County - City Street (Remount Rd.)/Bridge replacement (NLR)
- Various - Highways 67, 84, 79, 7, 82/Bridge painting
- Conway County - HIghways 9 & 9B/Traffic signal upgrade (Morrilton)
- Craighead County - Highway 226/Cash Bypass Base and Surfacing
- Lawrence County - Highway 63/Widening 1.5 miles
- Garland County - County Road 79/Bridge Replacement
Here is our news release on the subject.
http://www.arkansashighways.com/news/2014/NR%2014-062.pdf (http://www.arkansashighways.com/news/2014/NR%2014-062.pdf)
Quote from: getemngo on March 20, 2014, 02:22:19 AM
Saw this on Facebook:
AHTD suspends 10 planned construction projects (http://www.thv11.com/story/news/local/2014/03/19/ahtd-suspends-planned-construction-projects/6600417/)
QuoteThe ten Federal-aid projects that have been pulled from the Department's April bid letting total approximately $60 million and include:
- Chicot County - Highway 165/Rehabilitation of 4.3 miles
- Franklin County - City Street/Connect Hillbilly Lane to Hwy. 23 (Mulberry)
- Independence County - Highway 167/Widening 5.0 miles
- Pulaski County - Highway 70 (Roosevelt Rd.)/Bridge replacement (LR)
- Pulaski County - City Street (Remount Rd.)/Bridge replacement (NLR)
- Various - Highways 67, 84, 79, 7, 82/Bridge painting
- Conway County - HIghways 9 & 9B/Traffic signal upgrade (Morrilton)
- Craighead County - Highway 226/Cash Bypass Base and Surfacing
- Lawrence County - Highway 63/Widening 1.5 miles
- Garland County - County Road 79/Bridge Replacement
If they are going to suspend any projects, I think they chose the right ones.
The Cash Bypass makes me laugh... I wonder who even put that forward. And that extension of US 67 as a fully-controlled access highway. That has to be Arkansas's "Highway to No Where"
What is a shame that do nothing Congress holding up Jobs for economy our better roads. Same for naming I 49 in Arkansas, It can't be that Complicated, More red tape and dragging out something.
Here is the conundrum about the Cash bypass....
An improved U.S. 67 will follow existing alignment, most of which is through a less-populated area than the city of Jonesboro. The folks in this northeast Arkansas city have to use State Highway 226 to get to the improved U.S. 67. The problem with that is much of the highway is in a low-lying area and is usually THE FIRST state highway to close when flooding occurs.
The project on the Cash bypass is not just a bypass around the four-way stop with flashing lights, it's also an elevated stretch of road (think bridge) that will carry traffic across the floodplain.
And although Missouri had to back away from a prior commitment to four-laning U.S. 67 to the state line, which has caused us to rethink how we will get to the state line from Walnut Ridge, conversations are still very much alive and happening about completing this stretch of highway. Stay tuned!
Comments back from Fayetteville City Council. They think there are too few median breaks on their proposal for the Wedington corridor
Sounds like AHTD has an aggressive access management plan. Good for them!
Quote from: bjrush on April 02, 2014, 03:16:27 PM
Comments back from Fayetteville City Council. They think there are too few median breaks on their proposal for the Wedington corridor
Sounds like AHTD has an aggressive access management plan. Good for them!
*High Five*
Fayetteville is going to retain a non-growth stigma. Didn't they pass some sort of building height ordinance recently?
They don't care about traffic movement.
And within the next decade or two, Springdale is going to surpass Fayetteville when it comes to population... According to some projections.
We need the Western Bypass... about 5 years ago. Little Rock does not need any more Interstate/controlled-access highways... I'm looking at that northern 440 to 430 connection. Not. Needed.
Focus on the traffic counts and accident counts in the state. I-540 will blow you away. It's a death trap.
Quote from: M86 on April 05, 2014, 02:09:53 AM
Quote from: bjrush on April 02, 2014, 03:16:27 PM
Comments back from Fayetteville City Council. They think there are too few median breaks on their proposal for the Wedington corridor
Sounds like AHTD has an aggressive access management plan. Good for them!
*High Five*
Fayetteville is going to retain a non-growth stigma. Didn't they pass some sort of building height ordinance recently?
They don't care about traffic movement.
And within the next decade or two, Springdale is going to surpass Fayetteville when it comes to population... According to some projections.
We need the Western Bypass... about 5 years ago. Little Rock does not need any more Interstate/controlled-access highways... I'm looking at that northern 440 to 430 connection. Not. Needed.
Focus on the traffic counts and accident counts in the state. I-540 will blow you away. It's a death trap.
Fayetteville passed a sign ordinance in the 1970's, which is why Cracker Barrel is in Springdale, not Fayetteville: they were denied a waiver for their pole sign. I don't know of any building restrictions, but I believe most new buildings have to meet certain energy conservation requirements.
They need to be "non-growth" for a while: growth almost outstrips demand. New restaurants move in and build, older ones close and remain vacant or are a constant revolving door. Things need to calm down for a while.
Quote from: US71 on April 05, 2014, 11:21:15 AM
Quote from: M86 on April 05, 2014, 02:09:53 AM
Quote from: bjrush on April 02, 2014, 03:16:27 PM
Comments back from Fayetteville City Council. They think there are too few median breaks on their proposal for the Wedington corridor
Sounds like AHTD has an aggressive access management plan. Good for them!
*High Five*
Fayetteville is going to retain a non-growth stigma. Didn't they pass some sort of building height ordinance recently?
They don't care about traffic movement.
And within the next decade or two, Springdale is going to surpass Fayetteville when it comes to population... According to some projections.
We need the Western Bypass... about 5 years ago. Little Rock does not need any more Interstate/controlled-access highways... I'm looking at that northern 440 to 430 connection. Not. Needed.
Focus on the traffic counts and accident counts in the state. I-540 will blow you away. It's a death trap.
Fayetteville passed a sign ordinance in the 1970's, which is why Cracker Barrel is in Springdale, not Fayetteville: they were denied a waiver for their pole sign. I don't know of any building restrictions, but I believe most new buildings have to meet certain energy conservation requirements.
They need to be "non-growth" for a while: growth almost outstrips demand. New restaurants move in and build, older ones close and remain vacant or are a constant revolving door. Things need to calm down for a while.
This is what I was thinking of: http://www.4029tv.com/news/arkansas/fayetteville-leaders-to-vote-on-new-building-height-restrictions/23257682
And I take back what I said about Fayetteville. While it does have the stagnant feel, I think revitalization is key. Spruce up old neighborhoods, especially the College Ave/Whatever-Else-It-Is-Called-In-Fayetteville corridor. Improve core residential areas.
And a side note: Re-do street names to match up. 71B has a crap-load of street names, Thompson, 8th, Bloomington, College, School, Archibald something or other... Coordination... Really the key to everything!
I agree with what has been posted here about Fayetteville. Except no city is "non growth" in NWA. Fayetteville is just more "pro infill", which is good. I guess you could also call them "anti-sprawl", which is also good. We dont want Fayetteville losing its character and becoming a mini Kansas City or Dallas
For example:
Everything at the mill district
Various kum-n-go projects
Entire redevelopment of Township & College intersection
The Domain
Sterling Frisco
Quote from: bjrush on April 06, 2014, 09:26:52 AM
I agree with what has been posted here about Fayetteville. Except no city is "non growth" in NWA. Fayetteville is just more "pro infill", which is good. I guess you could also call them "anti-sprawl", which is also good. We dont want Fayetteville losing its character and becoming a mini Kansas City or Dallas
For example:
Everything at the mill district
Various kum-n-go projects
Entire redevelopment of Township & College intersection
The Domain
Sterling Frisco
IMO, Fayetteville lost its character years ago. I left 6 years ago because I saw little reason to stay. Township & College is the perfect example of bulldozing everything in the name of (corporate) money. That's all I'm going to say.
Quote from: bjrush on April 06, 2014, 09:26:52 AM
I agree with what has been posted here about Fayetteville. Except no city is "non growth" in NWA. Fayetteville is just more "pro infill", which is good. I guess you could also call them "anti-sprawl", which is also good. We dont want Fayetteville losing its character and becoming a mini Kansas City or Dallas
For example:
Everything at the mill district
Various kum-n-go projects
Entire redevelopment of Township & College intersection
The Domain
Sterling Frisco
I haven't been to Fayetteville in years, but on a map it looks severely landlocked with municipalities of varying sizes on all sides. So I don't know if it can sprawl much more.
I went to Springfield, MO today (From Rogers, AR)... I took US 62/AR 37 in Arkansas, to MO 37 and US 60.
I came back the same way, but the way back included a rainstorm.
I know US 62 is going to be expanded from Gateway to the end of the 5 laner in Avoca... I didn't need highway signage to know when I entered Arkansas. The pavement markings were my mark. Faded and almost non-existent.
That drive from the MO border to my home was white-knuckled.
I saw attempts of reflectors on the road... It's like AHTD wanted to install them and then just gave up (I've seen this on US 62/Hudson Road in Rogers, after they did the overlay... There's reflectors on one side of the road for a while, then just nothing).
Quote from: M86 on April 07, 2014, 02:24:30 AM
I went to Springfield, MO today (From Rogers, AR)... I took US 62/AR 37 in Arkansas, to MO 37 and US 60.
I came back the same way, but the way back included a rainstorm.
I know US 62 is going to be expanded from Gateway to the end of the 5 laner in Avoca... I didn't need highway signage to know when I entered Arkansas. The pavement markings were my mark. Faded and almost non-existent.
That drive from the MO border to my home was white-knuckled.
I saw attempts of reflectors on the road... It's like AHTD wanted to install them and then just gave up (I've seen this on US 62/Hudson Road in Rogers, after they did the overlay... There's reflectors on one side of the road for a while, then just nothing).
Any signs of the Garfield Bypass yet?
Quote from: US71 on April 08, 2014, 10:06:43 PM
Quote from: M86 on April 07, 2014, 02:24:30 AM
I went to Springfield, MO today (From Rogers, AR)... I took US 62/AR 37 in Arkansas, to MO 37 and US 60.
I came back the same way, but the way back included a rainstorm.
I know US 62 is going to be expanded from Gateway to the end of the 5 laner in Avoca... I didn't need highway signage to know when I entered Arkansas. The pavement markings were my mark. Faded and almost non-existent.
That drive from the MO border to my home was white-knuckled.
I saw attempts of reflectors on the road... It's like AHTD wanted to install them and then just gave up (I've seen this on US 62/Hudson Road in Rogers, after they did the overlay... There's reflectors on one side of the road for a while, then just nothing).
Any signs of the Garfield Bypass yet?
Not quite to Garfield, but I saw the dirt work for the bypass that goes to the south of the Pea Ridge National Military Park... Maybe that same bypass is for Garfield? It's close to me, I can check it out later.
All I know is that US 62 from Rogers to Eureka Springs needs some TLC... aka shoulders and guard rails... I shouldn't have to have a panic attack going to my beloved Eureka Springs! :)
Quote from: M86 on April 09, 2014, 01:46:54 AM
Quote from: US71 on April 08, 2014, 10:06:43 PM
Quote from: M86 on April 07, 2014, 02:24:30 AM
I went to Springfield, MO today (From Rogers, AR)... I took US 62/AR 37 in Arkansas, to MO 37 and US 60.
I came back the same way, but the way back included a rainstorm.
I know US 62 is going to be expanded from Gateway to the end of the 5 laner in Avoca... I didn't need highway signage to know when I entered Arkansas. The pavement markings were my mark. Faded and almost non-existent.
That drive from the MO border to my home was white-knuckled.
I saw attempts of reflectors on the road... It's like AHTD wanted to install them and then just gave up (I've seen this on US 62/Hudson Road in Rogers, after they did the overlay... There's reflectors on one side of the road for a while, then just nothing).
Any signs of the Garfield Bypass yet?
Not quite to Garfield, but I saw the dirt work for the bypass that goes to the south of the Pea Ridge National Military Park... Maybe that same bypass is for Garfield? It's close to me, I can check it out later.
All I know is that US 62 from Rogers to Eureka Springs needs some TLC... aka shoulders and guard rails... I shouldn't have to have a panic attack going to my beloved Eureka Springs! :)
Don't look down? ;)
Over the years, a few improvements have been made, but I'm guessing the terrain makes it difficult in places. I hate getting behind tourist buses west of ES as they try to navigate the curves and hills.
Quote from: US71 on April 09, 2014, 10:48:20 AM
Quote from: M86 on April 09, 2014, 01:46:54 AM
Quote from: US71 on April 08, 2014, 10:06:43 PM
Quote from: M86 on April 07, 2014, 02:24:30 AM
I went to Springfield, MO today (From Rogers, AR)... I took US 62/AR 37 in Arkansas, to MO 37 and US 60.
I came back the same way, but the way back included a rainstorm.
I know US 62 is going to be expanded from Gateway to the end of the 5 laner in Avoca... I didn't need highway signage to know when I entered Arkansas. The pavement markings were my mark. Faded and almost non-existent.
That drive from the MO border to my home was white-knuckled.
I saw attempts of reflectors on the road... It's like AHTD wanted to install them and then just gave up (I've seen this on US 62/Hudson Road in Rogers, after they did the overlay... There's reflectors on one side of the road for a while, then just nothing).
Any signs of the Garfield Bypass yet?
Not quite to Garfield, but I saw the dirt work for the bypass that goes to the south of the Pea Ridge National Military Park... Maybe that same bypass is for Garfield? It's close to me, I can check it out later.
All I know is that US 62 from Rogers to Eureka Springs needs some TLC... aka shoulders and guard rails... I shouldn't have to have a panic attack going to my beloved Eureka Springs! :)
Don't look down? ;)
Over the years, a few improvements have been made, but I'm guessing the terrain makes it difficult in places. I hate getting behind tourist buses west of ES as they try to navigate the curves and hills.
I'm usually in the passenger seat... I'll drive it, but I'll go too slow for the "locals" traveling along 62. US 62 needs guard rails, on the route to Eureka Springs. There's no excuse to not install them.
Greetings to all
I have a question for AHTD:
I'm still trying to figure out where they will put the extra 2 lanes for US 67 through Jacksonville due to the fact that there is barely any room. For those of you that may not know this route, the freeway is separated by a concrete divider from Exit 11 to south of the city. Plus, the shoulders are [very] narrow within the city. The frontage roads are also very close to the highway, not to mention the VERY short on / off ramps (reminds me of the ramps on I-5 in LA county, CA). They would have to replace an overpass (10B) in order to shoehorn in the extra 2 lanes. Now, north of Jacksonville, there is definitely room for the widening.
I'm just curious on how the Jacksonville portion will be handled.
Also, I have read on this thread that there will be a new flyover from SB US 67 to I-40. I still remember the old ramps that exited from the left lane of US 67 to I-40; the "not so old" flyover was constructed and opened in the late 1990's / 2000 which exited from the right lane (no. 3 lane) of SB 67 to I-40 east. Where will this new flyover be constructed?
Good progress being made on Don Tyson Parkway
Image from April 11, 2014
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1273.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fy405%2Fporkerface%2FTakingshape_zps427bff98.jpg&hash=2bd84ebd7deb5bdbfdb613d7f4f677d17f68dfb4)
AHTD, will all future Arkansas Interstate overpasses include this state outline on the retaining wall? I see one on the flyover in Fayetteville too. Please say yes!!!
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1273.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fy405%2Fporkerface%2FArkansasoutline_zps42344454.jpg&hash=2c379cf00a696bb9e4592c1b9110ae670cdbec48)
Quote from: capt.ron on April 11, 2014, 12:56:27 PM
Greetings to all
I have a question for AHTD:
I'm still trying to figure out where they will put the extra 2 lanes for US 67 through Jacksonville due to the fact that there is barely any room. For those of you that may not know this route, the freeway is separated by a concrete divider from Exit 11 to south of the city. Plus, the shoulders are [very] narrow within the city. The frontage roads are also very close to the highway, not to mention the VERY short on / off ramps (reminds me of the ramps on I-5 in LA county, CA). They would have to replace an overpass (10B) in order to shoehorn in the extra 2 lanes. Now, north of Jacksonville, there is definitely room for the widening.
I'm just curious on how the Jacksonville portion will be handled.
Also, I have read on this thread that there will be a new flyover from SB US 67 to I-40. I still remember the old ramps that exited from the left lane of US 67 to I-40; the "not so old" flyover was constructed and opened in the late 1990's / 2000 which exited from the right lane (no. 3 lane) of SB 67 to I-40 east. Where will this new flyover be constructed?
Let's just say the widening of U.S. 67/167 through Jacksonville requires a lot of right of way acquisition. And that not only includes the third lane (we are widening to the outside here because there is already a barrier wall), but frontage roads too. We will start by replacing the Redmond Road and Main Street overpasses and the stretch of road between them. Hoping to let a contract for that later this year. Sectional replacement (repair) of the route between Main Street and Highway 5 in Cabot will be let in June. This will hopefully tide us over until the other projects along the route are let.
As for the U.S. 67/167 southbound to I-40, while design has not begun, the thought is the flyover will be above the I-40 eastbound flyover. It will come down where the I-40 westbound lanes currently sit. This will allow SB 67/167 traffic to flow without interruption to Interstate 30. The I-40 thru lanes will be shifted to the north.
Quote from: AHTD on April 14, 2014, 05:32:49 PM
Quote from: capt.ron on April 11, 2014, 12:56:27 PM
Greetings to all
I have a question for AHTD:
I'm still trying to figure out where they will put the extra 2 lanes for US 67 through Jacksonville due to the fact that there is barely any room. For those of you that may not know this route, the freeway is separated by a concrete divider from Exit 11 to south of the city. Plus, the shoulders are [very] narrow within the city. The frontage roads are also very close to the highway, not to mention the VERY short on / off ramps (reminds me of the ramps on I-5 in LA county, CA). They would have to replace an overpass (10B) in order to shoehorn in the extra 2 lanes. Now, north of Jacksonville, there is definitely room for the widening.
I'm just curious on how the Jacksonville portion will be handled.
Also, I have read on this thread that there will be a new flyover from SB US 67 to I-40. I still remember the old ramps that exited from the left lane of US 67 to I-40; the "not so old" flyover was constructed and opened in the late 1990's / 2000 which exited from the right lane (no. 3 lane) of SB 67 to I-40 east. Where will this new flyover be constructed?
Let's just say the widening of U.S. 67/167 through Jacksonville requires a lot of right of way acquisition. And that not only includes the third lane (we are widening to the outside here because there is already a barrier wall), but frontage roads too. We will start by replacing the Redmond Road and Main Street overpasses and the stretch of road between them. Hoping to let a contract for that later this year. Sectional replacement (repair) of the route between Main Street and Highway 5 in Cabot will be let in June. This will hopefully tide us over until the other projects along the route are let.
As for the U.S. 67/167 southbound to I-40, while design has not begun, the thought is the flyover will be above the I-40 eastbound flyover. It will come down where the I-40 westbound lanes currently sit. This will allow SB 67/167 traffic to flow without interruption to Interstate 30. The I-40 thru lanes will be shifted to the north.
I got a question about the 67/167 interchange with I-40. I've been driving that stretch of road going back and forth from Fayetteville to Memphis since 90. What were y'all smoking when you designed that? The fact that east bound traffic on I-40 has to cross over the right to keep going east and the traffic from I-30 seeking to go north on 67 has to cross over on the same stretch of road is insane. It's one giant game of chicken. I have never understood why the exit wasn't on the right hand side and then cross over the east bound I-40 traffic. I guess it's the same logic that gave us the mess the Fayetteville flyover is finally helping with or the bottleneck on I-540 at the Ark 112 exit heading south. Is there anything to address the cluster that is that interchange after you are done with fixing the decades of idiocy that was the 430/630 interchange.
Yes, this interchange and these movements will be addressed as part of the project to widen the I-30 corridor through downtown Little Rock.
Quote from: bjrush on March 14, 2014, 09:58:21 PM
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.fayettevilleflyer.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2013%2F03%2Froundabout.jpg&hash=d2a3247d59341579cd23dcc8576177dbf74e77de)
Check out the pedestrians in the central island of the roundabout! Me thinks an engineer didnt draw this.
Quote from: AHTD on April 17, 2014, 10:49:33 AM
Yes, this interchange and these movements will be addressed as part of the project to widen the I-30 corridor through downtown Little Rock.
So there's an "unweave the weave" plan in the works for the 30/40/67 interchanges? How's that gonna affect (a) the Pentecostal church, (b) the one-time Bass Pro Shops site (good thing they chose SWLR instead ;) ), or (c) the Lakewood/North Hills interchange in between them? (And remember to fill in the dip in North Hills at the south end of that interchange, which floods in nearly every hard rain. Apparently NLR forgot to tell you they raised it thru Dark Hollow above the old U.S. 67W roadbed decades ago.)
Could this possibly be why, even though I-30 in LR/NLR alone takes up a
huge percentage of CAP (20% IIRC -- I wonder if voters would have approved CAP if they knew how much of it was dedicated to Central & NW AR), you merely plan to
widen, NOT replace, the I-30 Arkansas River bridge? All the barge collisions there in recent years are because that bridge has a pier
dead center in the navigation channel -- AFAIK the
only one in the entire McClellan-Kerr Arkansas River Navigation System. That CANNOT be fixed by merely widening the bridge.
That bridge needs to be REPLACED, *not* just widened!!!
Quote from: johndoe on April 19, 2014, 01:09:57 PM
Quote from: bjrush on March 14, 2014, 09:58:21 PM
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.fayettevilleflyer.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2013%2F03%2Froundabout.jpg&hash=d2a3247d59341579cd23dcc8576177dbf74e77de)
Check out the pedestrians in the central island of the roundabout! Me thinks an engineer didnt draw this.
That's a bike/trial roundabout and the State has shot down this concept in recent weeks.
Quote from: RBBrittain on April 19, 2014, 02:06:58 PM
Quote from: AHTD on April 17, 2014, 10:49:33 AM
Yes, this interchange and these movements will be addressed as part of the project to widen the I-30 corridor through downtown Little Rock.
So there's an "unweave the weave" plan in the works for the 30/40/67 interchanges? How's that gonna affect (a) the Pentecostal church, (b) the one-time Bass Pro Shops site (good thing they chose SWLR instead ;) ), or (c) the Lakewood/North Hills interchange in between them? (And remember to fill in the dip in North Hills at the south end of that interchange, which floods in nearly every hard rain. Apparently NLR forgot to tell you they raised it thru Dark Hollow above the old U.S. 67W roadbed decades ago.)
Could this possibly be why, even though I-30 in LR/NLR alone takes up a huge percentage of CAP (20% IIRC -- I wonder if voters would have approved CAP if they knew how much of it was dedicated to Central & NW AR), you merely plan to widen, NOT replace, the I-30 Arkansas River bridge? All the barge collisions there in recent years are because that bridge has a pier dead center in the navigation channel -- AFAIK the only one in the entire McClellan-Kerr Arkansas River Navigation System. That CANNOT be fixed by merely widening the bridge. That bridge needs to be REPLACED, *not* just widened!!!
The CAP Program is "Connecting Arkansas Program". So, anything within Little Rock is eliminated... or it should be. Little Rock has a very high Interstate/Controlled-Access miles per capita. You have enough. Traffic issues with Little Rock are city issues, from what I've researched.
Quote from: RBBrittain on April 19, 2014, 02:06:58 PM
Could this possibly be why, even though I-30 in LR/NLR alone takes up a huge percentage of CAP (20% IIRC -- I wonder if voters would have approved CAP if they knew how much of it was dedicated to Central & NW AR), you merely plan to widen, NOT replace, the I-30 Arkansas River bridge? All the barge collisions there in recent years are because that bridge has a pier dead center in the navigation channel -- AFAIK the only one in the entire McClellan-Kerr Arkansas River Navigation System. That CANNOT be fixed by merely widening the bridge. That bridge needs to be REPLACED, *not* just widened!!!
The I-30/US 65-67-(maybe) 70-167 Arkansas River bridge should be replaced by a signature span. A suspension bridge would be nice but that ain't happening. A cable stayed bridge would be nice if it were more like the Sunshine Skyway or the Dames Point Bridge or the Talmadge Bridge and less like the new Paseo Bridge in Kansas City. Personally, I would prefer a cantilevered truss, but there's no way in hell they're going to build that. With the loss of the interesting Broadway Bridge (US 70 or 70B, depending on who you believe) the only interesting Arkansas River bridges in Little Rock are rail bridges. None of the road bridges will be the least bit interesting.
Quote from: M86 on April 20, 2014, 01:26:04 AM
Quote from: RBBrittain on April 19, 2014, 02:06:58 PM
Quote from: AHTD on April 17, 2014, 10:49:33 AM
Yes, this interchange and these movements will be addressed as part of the project to widen the I-30 corridor through downtown Little Rock.
So there's an "unweave the weave" plan in the works for the 30/40/67 interchanges? How's that gonna affect (a) the Pentecostal church, (b) the one-time Bass Pro Shops site (good thing they chose SWLR instead ;) ), or (c) the Lakewood/North Hills interchange in between them? (And remember to fill in the dip in North Hills at the south end of that interchange, which floods in nearly every hard rain. Apparently NLR forgot to tell you they raised it thru Dark Hollow above the old U.S. 67W roadbed decades ago.)
Could this possibly be why, even though I-30 in LR/NLR alone takes up a huge percentage of CAP (20% IIRC -- I wonder if voters would have approved CAP if they knew how much of it was dedicated to Central & NW AR), you merely plan to widen, NOT replace, the I-30 Arkansas River bridge? All the barge collisions there in recent years are because that bridge has a pier dead center in the navigation channel -- AFAIK the only one in the entire McClellan-Kerr Arkansas River Navigation System. That CANNOT be fixed by merely widening the bridge. That bridge needs to be REPLACED, *not* just widened!!!
The CAP Program is "Connecting Arkansas Program". So, anything within Little Rock is eliminated... or it should be. Little Rock has a very high Interstate/Controlled-Access miles per capita. You have enough. Traffic issues with Little Rock are city issues, from what I've researched.
Have you been on I-630 during rush hour? Many traffic issues in LR are state highway issues.
Quote from: Wayward Memphian on April 19, 2014, 03:03:20 PM
Quote from: johndoe on April 19, 2014, 01:09:57 PM
Quote from: bjrush on March 14, 2014, 09:58:21 PM
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.fayettevilleflyer.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2013%2F03%2Froundabout.jpg&hash=d2a3247d59341579cd23dcc8576177dbf74e77de)
Check out the pedestrians in the central island of the roundabout! Me thinks an engineer didnt draw this.
That's a bike/trial roundabout and the State has shot down this concept in recent weeks.
Actually it was last summer that our engineers modeled this plan brought forth by the city of Fayetteville. The drawing is simply a concept drawing. Little to no engineering involved in it. Not only did we determine it wouldn't work, there isn't enough right of way available if it did. And guess who would be required to come up with that additional (cost prohibitive) ROW? Not the state.
Quote from: bugo on April 20, 2014, 03:57:12 AM
Quote from: RBBrittain on April 19, 2014, 02:06:58 PM
Could this possibly be why, even though I-30 in LR/NLR alone takes up a huge percentage of CAP (20% IIRC -- I wonder if voters would have approved CAP if they knew how much of it was dedicated to Central & NW AR), you merely plan to widen, NOT replace, the I-30 Arkansas River bridge? All the barge collisions there in recent years are because that bridge has a pier dead center in the navigation channel -- AFAIK the only one in the entire McClellan-Kerr Arkansas River Navigation System. That CANNOT be fixed by merely widening the bridge. That bridge needs to be REPLACED, *not* just widened!!!
The I-30/US 65-67-(maybe) 70-167 Arkansas River bridge should be replaced by a signature span. A suspension bridge would be nice but that ain't happening. A cable stayed bridge would be nice if it were more like the Sunshine Skyway or the Dames Point Bridge or the Talmadge Bridge and less like the new Paseo Bridge in Kansas City. Personally, I would prefer a cantilevered truss, but there's no way in hell they're going to build that. With the loss of the interesting Broadway Bridge (US 70 or 70B, depending on who you believe) the only interesting Arkansas River bridges in Little Rock are rail bridges. None of the road bridges will be the least bit interesting.
Everything involving the I-30 corridor between the south terminal and the U.S. 67/167 interchange is still on the table. We do know it will be the first design-build project for us to undertake. There will be two design contracts let. The first will be for the environmental phase. The second will be for design. The winning firm involved in the environmental phase will not be eligible to compete for the design phase.
As of now, this will be among the last of the half-cent sales tax projects. 2018 perhaps?
Quote from: bugo on April 20, 2014, 04:00:25 AM
Quote from: M86 on April 20, 2014, 01:26:04 AM
Quote from: RBBrittain on April 19, 2014, 02:06:58 PM
Quote from: AHTD on April 17, 2014, 10:49:33 AM
Yes, this interchange and these movements will be addressed as part of the project to widen the I-30 corridor through downtown Little Rock.
So there's an "unweave the weave" plan in the works for the 30/40/67 interchanges? How's that gonna affect (a) the Pentecostal church, (b) the one-time Bass Pro Shops site (good thing they chose SWLR instead ;) ), or (c) the Lakewood/North Hills interchange in between them? (And remember to fill in the dip in North Hills at the south end of that interchange, which floods in nearly every hard rain. Apparently NLR forgot to tell you they raised it thru Dark Hollow above the old U.S. 67W roadbed decades ago.)
Could this possibly be why, even though I-30 in LR/NLR alone takes up a huge percentage of CAP (20% IIRC -- I wonder if voters would have approved CAP if they knew how much of it was dedicated to Central & NW AR), you merely plan to widen, NOT replace, the I-30 Arkansas River bridge? All the barge collisions there in recent years are because that bridge has a pier dead center in the navigation channel -- AFAIK the only one in the entire McClellan-Kerr Arkansas River Navigation System. That CANNOT be fixed by merely widening the bridge. That bridge needs to be REPLACED, *not* just widened!!!
The CAP Program is "Connecting Arkansas Program". So, anything within Little Rock is eliminated... or it should be. Little Rock has a very high Interstate/Controlled-Access miles per capita. You have enough. Traffic issues with Little Rock are city issues, from what I've researched.
Have you been on I-630 during rush hour? Many traffic issues in LR are state highway issues.
+1; in fact CAP also includes widening I-630 between Baptist Health & University (a sort of follow-on to Big Rock -- otherwise I-630 EB will become a huge traffic jam between Big Rock & Baptist, where IIRC 8 lanes will quickly merge into 3 until this is widened). I agree that CAP should have included more projects in other parts of Arkansas, but still that doesn't mean LR (or the rest of Central Arkansas) shoulda been left out entirely.
Quote from: bugo on April 20, 2014, 03:57:12 AM
Quote from: RBBrittain on April 19, 2014, 02:06:58 PM
Could this possibly be why, even though I-30 in LR/NLR alone takes up a huge percentage of CAP (20% IIRC -- I wonder if voters would have approved CAP if they knew how much of it was dedicated to Central & NW AR), you merely plan to widen, NOT replace, the I-30 Arkansas River bridge? All the barge collisions there in recent years are because that bridge has a pier dead center in the navigation channel -- AFAIK the only one in the entire McClellan-Kerr Arkansas River Navigation System. That CANNOT be fixed by merely widening the bridge. That bridge needs to be REPLACED, *not* just widened!!!
The I-30/US 65-67-(maybe) 70-167 Arkansas River bridge should be replaced by a signature span. A suspension bridge would be nice but that ain't happening. A cable stayed bridge would be nice if it were more like the Sunshine Skyway or the Dames Point Bridge or the Talmadge Bridge and less like the new Paseo Bridge in Kansas City. Personally, I would prefer a cantilevered truss, but there's no way in hell they're going to build that. With the loss of the interesting Broadway Bridge (US 70 or 70B, depending on who you believe) the only interesting Arkansas River bridges in Little Rock are rail bridges. None of the road bridges will be the least bit interesting.
So you don't think the new Broadway Bridge truss will be interesting? Maybe not quite as interesting as the old one, but still more interesting than your garden-variety plate-girder structure. A signature span on I-30 would be nice, but not if it means they don't replace the overpasses inside the North Terminal Interchange (IIRC even more structurally deficient than the old Broadway Bridge). Maybe the design-build folks can replace the NTI overpasses but leave the I-40 "weave" in place for now so they can replace the I-30 bridge.
Quote from: RBBrittain on April 23, 2014, 01:08:42 AM
Quote from: bugo on April 20, 2014, 03:57:12 AM
Quote from: RBBrittain on April 19, 2014, 02:06:58 PM
Could this possibly be why, even though I-30 in LR/NLR alone takes up a huge percentage of CAP (20% IIRC -- I wonder if voters would have approved CAP if they knew how much of it was dedicated to Central & NW AR), you merely plan to widen, NOT replace, the I-30 Arkansas River bridge? All the barge collisions there in recent years are because that bridge has a pier dead center in the navigation channel -- AFAIK the only one in the entire McClellan-Kerr Arkansas River Navigation System. That CANNOT be fixed by merely widening the bridge. That bridge needs to be REPLACED, *not* just widened!!!
The I-30/US 65-67-(maybe) 70-167 Arkansas River bridge should be replaced by a signature span. A suspension bridge would be nice but that ain't happening. A cable stayed bridge would be nice if it were more like the Sunshine Skyway or the Dames Point Bridge or the Talmadge Bridge and less like the new Paseo Bridge in Kansas City. Personally, I would prefer a cantilevered truss, but there's no way in hell they're going to build that. With the loss of the interesting Broadway Bridge (US 70 or 70B, depending on who you believe) the only interesting Arkansas River bridges in Little Rock are rail bridges. None of the road bridges will be the least bit interesting.
So you don't think the new Broadway Bridge truss will be interesting? Maybe not quite as interesting as the old one, but still more interesting than your garden-variety plate-girder structure. A signature span on I-30 would be nice, but not if it means they don't replace the overpasses inside the North Terminal Interchange (IIRC even more structurally deficient than the old Broadway Bridge). Maybe the design-build folks can replace the NTI overpasses but leave the I-40 "weave" in place for now so they can replace the I-30 bridge.
Arkansas never has much money, so almost everything is done the least costly way possible. If it means a UCEB (Ugly Concrete Eyesore Bridge), then so be it. All the roads have problems, but it will take a huge increase in the gas tax or money falling out of the sky to fix everything, but with the current anti-tax/anti-government sentiment, I don't see either happening anytime soon.
Interesting article/vid concerning road construction in Arkansas. http://www.ktbs.com/story/25323447/highway-projects-underway-in-arkansas
We all like to give AHTD a hard time on here for not signing concurrencies, but I saw this one in Arkadelphia the other day!
This is a thing of beauty AHTD!
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/8f/Highway_7%2C_8%2C_and_51_in_Arkadelphia%2C_AR.jpg)
Quote from: bjrush on May 18, 2014, 10:54:45 PM
We all like to give AHTD a hard time on here for not signing concurrencies, but I saw this one in Arkadelphia the other day!
This is a thing of beauty AHTD!
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/8f/Highway_7%2C_8%2C_and_51_in_Arkadelphia%2C_AR.jpg)
This is how all highways in Arkansas should be signed. It's not cluttered, it's not confusing, and it conveys all of the highways run along this stretch of road. And they are lovely signs to boot. AHTD, you got this one right, why did you fail so badly when it came to I-49's signage?
This was posted soon after I-540 was extended to Bentonville. It conveys all the information a traveler would ever need. As it stands, it is impossible to follow the border to border US 62 in Arkansas by going by signage alone. Is this sign assembly really too cluttered? Is it hard to read? No. And don't say "but Dothan!" because there were only 3 highways signed through here.
(https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3245/2874833866_a1a1f607ab_o.jpg)
Quote from: bugo on May 19, 2014, 08:00:46 AM
This was posted soon after I-540 was extended to Bentonville. It conveys all the information a traveler would ever need. As it stands, it is impossible to follow the border to border US 62 in Arkansas by going by signage alone. Is this sign assembly really too cluttered? Is it hard to read? No. And don't say "but Dothan!" because there were only 3 highways signed through here.
(https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3245/2874833866_a1a1f607ab_o.jpg)
Did you save a copy of that old Gridlock Guru column where you asked about this?
Quote from: US71 on May 19, 2014, 10:25:27 AM
Quote from: bugo on May 19, 2014, 08:00:46 AM
This was posted soon after I-540 was extended to Bentonville. It conveys all the information a traveler would ever need. As it stands, it is impossible to follow the border to border US 62 in Arkansas by going by signage alone. Is this sign assembly really too cluttered? Is it hard to read? No. And don't say "but Dothan!" because there were only 3 highways signed through here.
(https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3245/2874833866_a1a1f607ab_o.jpg)
Did you save a copy of that old Gridlock Guru column where you asked about this?
No, I tried to forget about that lying wanker.
I'd love to see "No Trucks In Left Lane" signage across all Arkansas interstates. Especially I540! Nothing is more annoying than having two truckers pacing each other in both lanes - no one can get around them! :banghead:
Quote from: Opinionated1 on May 20, 2014, 11:16:05 AM
I'd love to see "No Trucks In Left Lane" signage across all Arkansas interstates. Especially I540! Nothing is more annoying than having two truckers pacing each other in both lanes - no one can get around them! :banghead:
About 10-15 years ago, trucks were
encouraged to use the Left Lane to equalize pavement wear
(because it was cheaper than fixing the roads)
Does anyone know why there is the S curve on 49 next to the Wedington exit?
iPhone
Quote from: Arkansastravelguy on May 21, 2014, 04:57:32 PM
Does anyone know why there is the S curve on 49 next to the Wedington exit?
iPhone
ON 49? Not sure I've noticed unless it's part of adding the extra lane?
Quote from: US71 on May 21, 2014, 05:31:19 PM
Quote from: Arkansastravelguy on May 21, 2014, 04:57:32 PM
Does anyone know why there is the S curve on 49 next to the Wedington exit?
iPhone
ON 49? Not sure I've noticed unless it's part of adding the extra lane?
They did southbound side last week and northbound side yesterday.
iPhone
Oh on a separate note I drove 540 late last night and they seem to still have lanes blocked for no apparent reason.
iPhone
Quote from: Arkansastravelguy on May 21, 2014, 05:42:51 PM
Oh on a separate note I drove 540 late last night and they seem to still have lanes blocked for no apparent reason.
It's going to be 4-5 more weeks before work is finished per 40/29 News (http://www.4029tv.com/news/Construction-zone-in-River-Valley-close-to-completion/25984012?utm_source=hootsuite&utm_medium=facebook&utm_campaign=4029%2Bnews) last week.
I think most of what's left is just the potholes on the Arkansas River Bridge, though there appears to be at least one exit sign yet to be replaced (SB Exit 11/AR 255) and at least one older sign that appears to have been forgotten (SB Exit 10/ AR 45). I was out yesterday and noticed that the exit numbers are finally beginning to appear.
One would probably have to ask the contractor about the closed lanes. Maybe someone wants to keep playing slalom ;)
(https://fbcdn-sphotos-c-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-frc3/t1.0-9/10322653_10202943465780068_7449285846653353566_n.jpg)
(https://fbcdn-sphotos-e-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-prn2/t1.0-9/10334309_10202943465500061_395521378012519774_n.jpg)
(https://fbcdn-sphotos-g-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-frc3/t1.0-9/10171668_10202943465260055_235605287749734614_n.jpg)
There were not numbers on several signs. We also went left to right then back to left lane then back to right. There wasabi a single construction vehicle on the highway
iPhone
I have a hunch AHTD is waiting for I 49 to be completed before replacing the 540 Arkansas River bridges
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/1f/Arkansas_Highway_1Y.jpg)
So AHTD refuses to sign US 71 along I-49 but this sign in McGehee costs just as much to post and maintain as a US 71 shield. I am willing to take a poll that 99.99% of the traveling public doesn't know what Highway 1Y is, and it likely only serves to confuse the public. In a best case scenario, people think the "Y" is some dirt or bird crap. They know to turn left onto that "highway" to get to US 65, because this information is conveyed by the adjacent sign.
I don't really understand why this sign is posted
Quote from: bjrush on June 02, 2014, 09:28:57 PM
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/1f/Arkansas_Highway_1Y.jpg)
So AHTD refuses to sign US 71 along I-49 but this sign in McGehee costs just as much to post and maintain as a US 71 shield. I am willing to take a poll that 99.99% of the traveling public doesn't know what Highway 1Y is, and it likely only serves to confuse the public. In a best case scenario, people think the "Y" is some dirt or bird crap. They know to turn left onto that "highway" to get to US 65, because this information is conveyed by the adjacent sign.
I don't really understand why this sign is posted
AR 1Y is basically a two way ramp from AR 1 to US 65 (which are grade separated). This is pretty much just a ghetto interchange. The sign should really simply read "TO US 65".
AHTD,
Will the Highway 112 widening in Fayetteville be done soon? This project has gone on forever
If you go to www.idrivearkansas.com (http://www.idrivearkansas.com), you will see our construction zones marked in orange. Click on any of these and a dialog box will appear telling you when we expect completion of the project.
Drove between De Valls Bluff and Clarendon today. Please tell me those beautiful old curved concrete bridges are staying after the new one is built, AHTD!
By the way, this is a huge project I had no idea was even going on...what is the driver for a new bridge here?
Quote from: bjrush on June 28, 2014, 12:28:08 AM
Drove between De Valls Bluff and Clarendon today. Please tell me those beautiful old curved concrete bridges are staying after the new one is built, AHTD!
By the way, this is a huge project I had no idea was even going on...what is the driver for a new bridge here?
No chance. The Augusta and DeValls Bluff bridges are gone, and the Newport bridge is next. All the great White River bridges will be gone. One day the fine folks of Clarendon will wish that the bridge was still there.
Quote from: bugo on June 28, 2014, 02:53:35 PM
Quote from: bjrush on June 28, 2014, 12:28:08 AM
Drove between De Valls Bluff and Clarendon today. Please tell me those beautiful old curved concrete bridges are staying after the new one is built, AHTD!
By the way, this is a huge project I had no idea was even going on...what is the driver for a new bridge here?
No chance. The Augusta and DeValls Bluff bridges are gone, and the Newport bridge is next. All the great White River bridges will be gone. One day the fine folks of Clarendon will wish that the bridge was still there.
There is supposed to be a local effort to save the bridge as a pedestrian/bicycle path, but I can't find the info I thought I had.
It would make an excellent ped bridge, but there's no way AHTD will leave it there.
Quote from: bugo on June 28, 2014, 08:06:40 PM
It would make an excellent ped bridge, but there's no way AHTD will leave it there.
http://www.bigwhiteriverbridge.org
Looks like they tore out the raised ground the former alignment was on, too
Who knew AHTD was in tge wetland restoration business?
Not sure where it is, but yes, there is a local effort to save the old bridge.
Don't get us wrong, we love the old and historic too, but this is one of those issues where the local jurisdiction will have to completely take it over, maintain it, etc.
We're willing to work with the communities, we just can't keep it on the system.
AHTD, what is up with this concrete along the side of US 79 in St. Francis County? Some of the paving looked somewhat new. Truck rest/parking area?
There was also a little house/building decaying in the bush nearby
http://goo.gl/maps/hD30p
Quote from: bjrush on July 03, 2014, 11:34:48 AM
AHTD, what is up with this concrete along the side of US 79 in St. Francis County? Some of the paving looked somewhat new. Truck rest/parking area?
There was also a little house/building decaying in the bush nearby
http://goo.gl/maps/hD30p (http://goo.gl/maps/hD30p)
That is the old Brickey Rest Area site. The small structure is no longer on the right of way since the property reverted back to the original owner in the late 1980s, however a portion of the old ramps/parking is still on the right of way.
Quote from: AHTD on June 30, 2014, 07:59:10 PM
Not sure where it is, but yes, there is a local effort to save the old bridge.
Don't get us wrong, we love the old and historic too, but this is one of those issues where the local jurisdiction will have to completely take it over, maintain it, etc.
We're willing to work with the communities, we just can't keep it on the system.
Isn't Newport supposed to take over its bridge after it's replaced? Since my maternal grandparents lived in Newport, that's the one I remember most. (My paternal grandparents lived in Batesville; the old 167 bridge is LONG gone, but it seems we'll always have the Ramsey Hill/Mountain hairpin. ;) )
AHTD, I really would like to know more about this White River bridge project around Clarendon. What type of environmental permitting was required for this work in the bayou? Is this a wetlands restoration project? What controls do AHTD/USACE have in place to ensure wetland restoration success in the region?
FHWA approved an Environmental Assessment and Finding on No Significant Impact.
The USACE approved the Standard Section 404 permit for the impacts to jurisdictional waters, including wetlands.
Compensatory wetland mitigation required by the USACE was provided at the AHTD Brushy Lake and Glaise Creek Wetland Mitigation Banks. Success monitoring is required by the USACE on all mitigation banks.
The project is a bridge replacement project for Hwy. 79 over the White River, however, wetlands restoration is a key component of the wetland mitigation banks.
Thanks AHTD, that sounds like a real hassle. I'd love to see the response from Arkansas Game and Fish to AHTD regarding this project if it is available. I appreciate you getting this information
This is unrelated, but if someone put the project name and/or route number/section number next to these various job numbers (see link below) it would be a lot more helpful. Right now people basically have to guess and click, which takes forever since these are big PDFs
http://www.arkansashighways.com/ProgCon/General/construction_plans_include.aspx
AHTD, how can I buy a teal 2014 "bible" with the standard specs from the department?
Also, what is up with the wide right-turn areas from side streets onto Highway 265 in Fayetteville? A bridge was even widened to have this strange extra space.
Is the design vehicle a WB-40 for these intersections?
Quote from: bjrush on August 18, 2014, 08:10:09 PM
Also, what is up with the wide right-turn areas from side streets onto Highway 265 in Fayetteville? A bridge was even widened to have this strange extra space.
Is the design vehicle a WB-40 for these intersections?
Where, specifically?
I know 265 is being widened north of Joyce
The bridge I am referring to is over Clear Creek near Albright Rd
There is also a strange cross section at Zion Rd and at Par Ct
Also looking from above it is apparent the contractor was incompetent. Over half the road had to be ground down for drainage. I hope this was not at the taxpayers expense
Quote from: bjrush on August 19, 2014, 07:10:55 PM
The bridge I am referring to is over Clear Creek near Albright Rd
There is also a strange cross section at Zion Rd and at Par Ct
Also looking from above it is apparent the contractor was incompetent. Over half the road had to be ground down for drainage. I hope this was not at the taxpayers expense
I found the Street view for Albright (very up to date). A new bridge is being built to accommodate widening 265 to 4 Lanes. I don't know if it still is, but that area was closed for while to through traffic to work on the bridge.
Par Court I see a turn lane. There is/was a curve on the road near there, so that may be part of the reason it looks odd because they had to compensate when widening the road.
Zion is likely the same way: compensating for the curve created when 265 was first paved and went around Hillside Terrace.
That's my theory, at least.
I heard from a reliable source that AHTD is using WB 67 for all design vehicles from now on
What a waste
Quote from: bjrush on August 20, 2014, 06:58:08 PM
I heard from a reliable source that AHTD is using WB 67 for all design vehicles from now on
What a waste
Ummm 67 runs North-South
WB 67 is a truck with a specific turning radius as specified by the AASHTO green book
Quote from: bjrush on August 20, 2014, 06:58:08 PM
I heard from a reliable source that AHTD is using WB 67 for all design vehicles from now on
What a waste
Okay, this is not breaking news. We've been doing this for like the last decade or so. Exceptions include school driveway aprons where a WB 67 vehicle is not likely to track.
Here are some related tech. specs:
http://www.arkansashighways.com/forums/DV01.pdf (http://www.arkansashighways.com/forums/DV01.pdf)
http://www.arkansashighways.com/forums/DV02.pdf (http://www.arkansashighways.com/forums/DV02.pdf)
http://www.arkansashighways.com/forums/DV03.pdf (http://www.arkansashighways.com/forums/DV03.pdf)
Why do you consider this a waste? Waste of what?
A WB-67 design vehicle simply doesn't pass the common sense test in many cases. Sure, its great to be conservative but in this era of tight budgets I think we really need to be maximizing the bang for our buck. I'm an engineer, and I understand the conservatism and aversion to risk that is prevalent in the industry more than the hobbyist because I do it 8-5 every day, but sometimes we need to use common sense.
The new Highway 265 in Fayetteville includes a lot of extra asphalt to allow for a WB-67 to turn out of a subdivision. The problem is, no WB-67 is ever going to turn down those streets. The subdivisions themselves were not designed for interstate semis, they were designed for fire trucks at most.
Extra asphalt was included at the Zion/Crosover interchange; presumably for a truck to turn left from Zion onto Crossover heading north? Fine, I can understand that.
But when Zion turns east just north of the light, there is a massive turn radius allowing a truck to turn right from Zion onto northbound Crossover. But look at the road itself! There are four houses on it, no industries or commercial parcels, and there is not development potential for any of those land uses either. At full build out, there will be a subdivision there. No need to account for such a large vehicle ever making the turn described previously.
Same thing north of there at the Albright Rd intersection. Albright Rd is a local road, simple as that. There is absolutely no reason for an interstate semi to drive down Albright Rd. It is a country lane with 8 houses on it. Again, zero industry or commercial activity, and zero potential for it in the future. So why on earth was the bridge over Clear Creek widened to allow a WB-67 turn right from Albright Rd onto northbound Crossover?
Let's look south to validate my assumptions. Par Court is a subdivision road. It leads to a built-out residential subdivision. Yet AHTD included extra asphalt allowing a WB-67 to make a left turn from Par Court onto northbound Crossover Rd. When on earth would this movement ever happen?? That pavement will literally never be used.
Don't get me wrong. Overall, I love the access management included on this section (even thought the city wanted it, it'd be a 5-lane with suicide lane if up to AHTD). Except for the almost-continuous pavement grinding that the contractor had to do to allow drainage, it appears well done. But the engineer is to blame here. No WB-67 will ever use these tiny local streets. Don't use a design standard just because its a standard. Don't apply a textbook value if the conditions don't apply. The people of Arkansas put their trust in AHTD to be responsible with their money because they don't understand roadway design principles. Don't abuse that trust just to make your job easier, AHTD.
Semis occasionally make deliveries to residential areas.
Quote from: Scott5114 on October 26, 2014, 07:56:59 PM
Semis occasionally make deliveries to residential areas.
Can't say I've ever seen any myself.
Quote from: Scott5114 on October 26, 2014, 07:56:59 PM
Semis occasionally make deliveries to residential areas.
Never happened to me and I've never seen it anywhere else, either. Lived on local streets my whole life
Quote from: bjrush on October 27, 2014, 08:13:57 AM
Quote from: Scott5114 on October 26, 2014, 07:56:59 PM
Semis occasionally make deliveries to residential areas.
Never happened to me and I've never seen it anywhere else, either. Lived on local streets my whole life
Usually they're moving trucks.
I think it would be ok if a moving truck had to make a little bit wider turn once every few years.
Thats like building every bridge for the 500 year flood. Oh wait, AHTD does that too. Apparently no one ever told them the 500 year flood elevations are nothing more than a guess
Back in my high schools days I ordered a large guitar amplifier from Carvin. It was a "full stack" featuring a 100W British style tube amp head and a pair of 4x12 speaker cabinets equipped with 100W Celestion speakers. The whole thing weighs well over 200 pounds. It was delivered to my house (which at the time was on a Marine Corps base) out of the back of a semi truck.
I guess the question is, how much money does it cost to design to the WB-67 design criteria as opposed to whatever the previous standard is? My guess is that the added cost is negligible compared to the total cost of each project, as long as we're just talking about a few square feet extra of pavement and not something like super-reinforced pavement or something like that.
Well, I imagine there is a reason I have never seen this extra pavement in any other state
I doubt AHTD is on the cutting edge of a trend that is about to explode nationwide
It surely costs more than signing concurrencies would. And AHTD uses cost as a justification there
And here I just thought they did they for folks having to uturn to get back the driveways and streets blocked by the median.
Work is underway to pass a law so AHTD has the authority to negotiate for and buy utility easements from property owners and then utilities buy a "share" of the easement from AHTD rather than hassling a property owner several times for each individual utility
All utility easements along state roads would go through AHTD ROW office. This is an effort to save time and money when acquiring new easements only once, requiring one property assessment and one payment to landowner
AHTD has issued an Information Release (http://www.arkansashighways.com/news/2014/NR%2014-362.pdf) announcing the withdrawal of three projects from the January letting, primarily due to the uncertainty surrounding federal funding:
Quote
The Arkansas State Highway and Transportation Department (AHTD) has withdrawn three construction projects from the planned list of projects scheduled for consideration in its January 27, 2015 bid opening as a result of the uncertainty of Federal-aid reimbursements available from the Federal Highway Trust Fund.
The United States Department of Transportation has projected that the Federal Highway Trust Fund will run short of funds as early as July of next year without Congressional action. Because of this uncertainty, the AHTD has evaluated State and Federal funding that will be available and reduced the number of construction projects planned because of the possible inability of the Federal Highway Trust Fund to provide timely and full reimbursements to Arkansas ....
An evaluation of scheduled Federally-funded projects will occur prior to each Department letting until Congress acts to correct the funding shortfall. Additional scheduled letting dates in 2015, after January, are March 10th, April 21st, June 9th, July 21st, September 1st, October 13th, and December 1st. The Department delayed 15 projects with an estimated cost of nearly $70 million in 2014 because of the same Highway Trust Fund issue.
I suspect that this decision does not bode well for the I-69 Monticello Bypass project tentatively scheduled for March 10.
Quote from: Grzrd on December 26, 2014, 12:04:39 PM
AHTD has issued an Information Release (http://www.arkansashighways.com/news/2014/NR%2014-362.pdf) announcing the withdrawal of three projects from the January letting, primarily due to the uncertainty surrounding federal funding:
Quote
The Arkansas State Highway and Transportation Department (AHTD) has withdrawn three construction projects from the planned list of projects scheduled for consideration in its January 27, 2015 bid opening as a result of the uncertainty of Federal-aid reimbursements available from the Federal Highway Trust Fund.
The United States Department of Transportation has projected that the Federal Highway Trust Fund will run short of funds as early as July of next year without Congressional action. Because of this uncertainty, the AHTD has evaluated State and Federal funding that will be available and reduced the number of construction projects planned because of the possible inability of the Federal Highway Trust Fund to provide timely and full reimbursements to Arkansas ....
An evaluation of scheduled Federally-funded projects will occur prior to each Department letting until Congress acts to correct the funding shortfall. Additional scheduled letting dates in 2015, after January, are March 10th, April 21st, June 9th, July 21st, September 1st, October 13th, and December 1st. The Department delayed 15 projects with an estimated cost of nearly $70 million in 2014 because of the same Highway Trust Fund issue.
I suspect that this decision does not bode well for the I-69 Monticello Bypass project tentatively scheduled for March 10.
One of the projects take off the schedule was AR 220 north of Lee Creek: the last unpaved highway in the state. I hope it gets postponed for a long time.
I was on GSV on my phone and was trying to figure out if US 412B near Huntsville is just 4 characters crammed onto a 3dus or if that is a 4dus sign. My phone is being retarded and won't clarify the picture
Quote from: robbones on December 31, 2014, 10:16:54 AM
I was on GSV on my phone and was trying to figure out if US 412B near Huntsville is just 4 characters crammed onto a 3dus or if that is a 4dus sign. My phone is being retarded and won't clarify the picture
Likely a 3d sign with narrower numbers.
(https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3171/2702127545_6232fe5491_z_d.jpg)
Or maybe just crammed in there
(https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3025/3006199789_c1f3ccf310_z_d.jpg)
The former is what I have seen on US 278 in Arkansas.
Quote from: US71 on December 31, 2014, 11:44:19 AM
Quote from: robbones on December 31, 2014, 10:16:54 AM
I was on GSV on my phone and was trying to figure out if US 412B near Huntsville is just 4 characters crammed onto a 3dus or if that is a 4dus sign. My phone is being retarded and won't clarify the picture
Likely a 3d sign with narrower numbers.
(https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3171/2702127545_6232fe5491_z_d.jpg)
Or maybe just crammed in there
(https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3025/3006199789_c1f3ccf310_z_d.jpg)
Never seen a 4 digit shield in Ar
Here's a US 278B sign with 4 characters in a shield:
(https://www.aaroads.com/nofrills/arkansas/050100/us278278b.jpg)
Quote from: NE2 on March 05, 2015, 10:09:55 PM
didn't realize they were building a southern bypass of Paragould. You can see some construction in the southeast quadrant on the Goog's aerials.
(above quote from Moving I-69 Out of NWLA (Responding to NE2) (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=14950.msg2048646#msg2048646) thread)
Coincidentally, in an announcement that should brighten NE2's day, AHTD has posted a March 5 Information Release (http://www.arkansashighways.com/news/2015/NR%2015-054.pdf) heralding the choice of a SPUI for the AR 358 interchange on the bypass (although actual construction of it may be a long way off):
Quote
The Arkansas State Highway and Transportation Department (AHTD) has identified the preferred alternative for the future Highway 412 Bypass (Paragould Bypass) Interchange at State Highway 358 .... the Single-Point Urban Interchange (SPUI) on the eastern alternative has been identified as the best alternative for a connection at State Highway 358 .... Three alternatives were analyzed for this interchange — a West Diamond Interchange, an East Diamond Interchange, and an East SPUI .... Right of way acquisition is expected to begin this summer, and construction is tentatively scheduled to begin in 2016. Even though right of way is being acquired to accommodate the interchange, actual construction of the SPUI will not be part of the upcoming project. Only the initial two lanes of the ultimate four-lane bypass are being constructed at this time. The interchange will be constructed when the additional two lanes are added in the future.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FHvMa14e.png&hash=29ce6c5197256e0c959b0c5ae70065e2b785798f)
SPUIs are overrated.
Quote from: NE2 on March 06, 2015, 01:51:50 PM
SPUIs are overrated.
Be the first one in Arkansas, I think.
A SPUI could do some good in Lawton, OK at the Gore Blvd exit on I-44. Gore Blvd. has 3 traffic lights in short succession along that interchange. A SPUI would cut it to only two and ease what is perhaps the worst traffic clusterf**k in that entire city.
Quote from: Grzrd on March 06, 2015, 01:47:01 PM
Quote from: NE2 on March 05, 2015, 10:09:55 PM
didn't realize they were building a southern bypass of Paragould. You can see some construction in the southeast quadrant on the Goog's aerials.
(above quote from Moving I-69 Out of NWLA (Responding to NE2) (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=14950.msg2048646#msg2048646) thread)
Coincidentally, in an announcement that should brighten NE2's day, AHTD has posted a March 5 Information Release (http://www.arkansashighways.com/news/2015/NR%2015-054.pdf) heralding the choice of a SPUI for the AR 358 interchange on the bypass (although actual construction of it may be a long way off):
Quote
The Arkansas State Highway and Transportation Department (AHTD) has identified the preferred alternative for the future Highway 412 Bypass (Paragould Bypass) Interchange at State Highway 358 .... the Single-Point Urban Interchange (SPUI) on the eastern alternative has been identified as the best alternative for a connection at State Highway 358 .... Three alternatives were analyzed for this interchange — a West Diamond Interchange, an East Diamond Interchange, and an East SPUI .... Right of way acquisition is expected to begin this summer, and construction is tentatively scheduled to begin in 2016. Even though right of way is being acquired to accommodate the interchange, actual construction of the SPUI will not be part of the upcoming project. Only the initial two lanes of the ultimate four-lane bypass are being constructed at this time. The interchange will be constructed when the additional two lanes are added in the future.
I never would thought this was being built as a freeway. The bypass, unfortunately, ends at US 412 at 90 degree angles. Why it doesn't seamlessly tie into existing US 412 is beyond me. There is precedent: the US 412 bypass at Mountain Home is a left turn westbound onto the bypass.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FHvMa14e.png&hash=29ce6c5197256e0c959b0c5ae70065e2b785798f)
When did the east section open? What number does the road have?
http://www.arkansashighways.com/maps/Counties/County%20PDFs/GreeneCounty.pdf shows US 412S.
I wonder why it isn't AR 512?
Quote from: bugo on March 07, 2015, 08:56:04 AM
I wonder why it isn't AR 512?
I-530 around Pine Bluff was US 65 Spur. 512 would be a throwaway number which, IMO would make no sense.
Quote from: US71 on March 07, 2015, 09:51:44 AM
I-530 around Pine Bluff was US 65 Spur.
And 4S was the Camden bypass before 1976 (when 4 and US 79 were moved onto it). The policy of temporary spur routes on bypasses goes far back.
Quote from: US71 on March 07, 2015, 09:51:44 AM
512 would be a throwaway number which, IMO would make no sense.
It would sort of fit with 549 (which should have been 449, but whoever chose the number may have been confused with 540).
Quote from: US71 on March 07, 2015, 09:51:44 AM
Quote from: bugo on March 07, 2015, 08:56:04 AM
I wonder why it isn't AR 512?
I-530 around Pine Bluff was US 65 Spur. 512 would be a throwaway number which, IMO would make no sense.
549 is a throwaway number.
Quote from: US71 on March 06, 2015, 02:38:59 PM
Quote from: NE2 on March 06, 2015, 01:51:50 PM
SPUIs are overrated.
Be the first one in Arkansas, I think.
Will the SPUI at future I-49 at US 71 North in Bentonville actually be built before this one?
Quote from: codyg1985 on March 08, 2015, 05:28:20 PM
Quote from: US71 on March 06, 2015, 02:38:59 PM
Quote from: NE2 on March 06, 2015, 01:51:50 PM
SPUIs are overrated.
Be the first one in Arkansas, I think.
Will the SPUI at future I-49 at US 71 North in Bentonville actually be built before this one?
I've been trying to figure this out... Viewing AHTD's plans is like breaking into Fort Knox.
Just saw an AR 412 sign in Springdale at the I 49 (exit 72) NB off ramp. Should be US 412. Way to go AHTD
Quote from: M86 on March 18, 2015, 01:08:14 AM
I'll try and investigate tomorrow.Quote from: robbones on March 09, 2015, 01:05:20 PM
Just saw an AR 412 sign in Springdale at the I 49 (exit 72) NB off ramp. Should be US 412. Way to go AHTD
I am exQuote from: robbones on March 09, 2015, 01:05:20 PM
Just saw an AR 412 sign in Springdale at the I 49 (exit 72) NB off ramp. Should be US 412. Way to go AHTD
Nope. That is all.
Then the error has been corrected?.
Their STIP really needs to be updated.
It will be in 2016. It is updated in 3 year cycles
Quote from: bjrush on March 20, 2015, 11:04:04 AM
It will be in 2016. It is updated in 3 year cycles
I'm talking online for AHTD.
Scott Bennett, Director of Highways at AHTD, will be in NWA on Friday, April 24 from 12-1 pm speaking as a part of the Dan Flowers Distinguished Lecture Series at the University of Arkansas Topic is Arkansas Highways...the good, the bad, and the ugly.
The speech is free and open to the public
Quote from: bjrush on April 02, 2015, 03:52:00 PM
Scott Bennett, Director of Highways at AHTD, will be in NWA on Friday, April 24 from 12-1 pm speaking as a part of the Dan Flowers Distinguished Lecture Series at the University of Arkansas Topic is Arkansas Highways...the good, the bad, and the ugly.
The speech is free and open to the public
Mind the speed limit ;)
I hope any road enthusiast in NWA attends. I think this will be a good speech. Hopefully he comments on the proposal to shrink the highway system
Quote from: bjrush on April 04, 2015, 08:36:52 AM
I hope any road enthusiast in NWA attends. I think this will be a good speech. Hopefully he comments on the proposal to shrink the highway system
I'd like to, but it's iffy right now. Dealing with a family emergency
http://bugo348.blogspot.com/
There are some questions there that still haven't been answered, like the US 271 question. Feel free to comment on the entries.
DANR-1 and DANR-2 both became the new AR 274 by the 1963 official. DANR-1 was renumbered 203 in 1972.
What is going on with US 67 north of Walnut Ridge? Have they figured out what they want to do as far as how they will finish the four lanes and what alignment they will use?
Quote from: adamlanfort on April 06, 2015, 12:11:32 PM
What is going on with US 67 north of Walnut Ridge? Have they figured out what they want to do as far as how they will finish the four lanes and what alignment they will use?
This thread (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=6930.0) has more info about that.
Quote from: codyg1985 on April 06, 2015, 06:48:03 PM
Quote from: adamlanfort on April 06, 2015, 12:11:32 PM
What is going on with US 67 north of Walnut Ridge? Have they figured out what they want to do as far as how they will finish the four lanes and what alignment they will use?
This thread (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=6930.0) has more info about that.
But people rarely post to it anymore
That might be because there is no new news to report.
Quote from: US71 on March 18, 2015, 09:57:28 AM
Quote from: M86 on March 18, 2015, 01:08:14 AM
I'll try and investigate tomorrow.Quote from: robbones on March 09, 2015, 01:05:20 PM
Just saw an AR 412 sign in Springdale at the I 49 (exit 72) NB off ramp. Should be US 412. Way to go AHTD
I am exQuote from: robbones on March 09, 2015, 01:05:20 PM
Just saw an AR 412 sign in Springdale at the I 49 (exit 72) NB off ramp. Should be US 412. Way to go AHTD
Nope. That is all.
Then the error has been corrected?.
Error still isn't fixed. It on the right turn lane.
AHTD has been pretty vocal about how the Highway Ttust Fund crisis will significantly impact construction in Arkansas. They have cut $30M per month of lettings and I heard May will see $50M unless something is done ASAP
Passing a one year extension does nothing. Real reform is needed
Quote from: bjrush on April 16, 2015, 05:46:52 PM
AHTD has been pretty vocal about how the Highway Ttust Fund crisis will significantly impact construction in Arkansas. They have cut $30M per month of lettings and I heard May will see $50M unless something is done ASAP
Passing a one year extension does nothing. Real reform is needed
Fully agree!
Will you be attending Director Bennett's speech?
Quote from: bjrush on April 22, 2015, 06:20:59 PM
Will you be attending Director Bennett's speech?
I'll be in Missouri closing my mom's apartment.
Quote from: bjrush on April 22, 2015, 06:20:59 PM
Will you be attending Director Bennett's speech?
Director Bennett's presentation was not the same presentation AHTD officials have been giving for 10+ years. They actually showed pictures of some of the worst roads in Arkansas in an effort to raise awareness about funding shortfalls.
For some who may not know, things like showing AHTDs weaknesses and bragging about a social media campaign is a sea change from the AHtD of just 5 years ago. They have come a long way and really made great strides. Every AHTD employee I have ever spoken to about Director Bennett has had nothing but praise for him
I look forward to AHTD solving their funding issues and continuing to improve Arkansas's infrastructure
Quote from: bjrush on April 25, 2015, 09:20:49 AM
Quote from: bjrush on April 22, 2015, 06:20:59 PM
Will you be attending Director Bennett's speech?
Director Bennett's presentation was not the same presentation AHTD officials have been giving for 10+ years. They actually showed pictures of some of the worst roads in Arkansas in an effort to raise awareness about funding shortfalls.
For some who may not know, things like showing AHTDs weaknesses and bragging about a social media campaign is a sea change from the AHtD of just 5 years ago. They have come a long way and really made great strides. Every AHTD employee I have ever spoken to about Director Bennett has had nothing but praise for him
Now if they started actually signing all their highways then we can say that we have seen real reform.
Quote from: bugo on April 25, 2015, 12:36:32 PM
Quote from: bjrush on April 25, 2015, 09:20:49 AM
Quote from: bjrush on April 22, 2015, 06:20:59 PM
Will you be attending Director Bennett's speech?
Director Bennett's presentation was not the same presentation AHTD officials have been giving for 10+ years. They actually showed pictures of some of the worst roads in Arkansas in an effort to raise awareness about funding shortfalls.
For some who may not know, things like showing AHTDs weaknesses and bragging about a social media campaign is a sea change from the AHtD of just 5 years ago. They have come a long way and really made great strides. Every AHTD employee I have ever spoken to about Director Bennett has had nothing but praise for him
Now if they started actually signing all their highways then we can say that we have seen real reform.
That's petty reform. REAL reform would be maintaining what they have instead of constantly "upgrading". For example: 71 north of Alma is in terrible shape. AHTD promised not to neglect it after 540/49 was constructed, but it has been. There is a spot below Artists Point that is slowly eroding away.
The Governor's Working Group on Highway Funding (http://governor.arkansas.gov/governors-working-group-on-highway-funding) has issued its December 15, 2015 Short-Term Recommendation (http://ee-governor-2015.ark.org/images/uploads/HFWG_FINAL_Short-Term_Recommendation_.pdf).
AR 220 will be paved completely
http://5newsonline.com/2016/01/26/arkansas-last-gravel-highway-scheduled-for-paving/
HTC Desire 610
Quote from: robbones on January 26, 2016, 10:19:57 PM
AR 220 will be paved completely
http://5newsonline.com/2016/01/26/arkansas-last-gravel-highway-scheduled-for-paving/
Crawford County has been under construction since at least September . (https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=oa.1113892425296386&type=1)
I need to get back up there for an update. Maybe next week.
Had a slide on 220 that had to be repaired and reopened last Friday.
Work is progressing well otherwise on this project.
Quote from: AHTD on January 27, 2016, 10:57:20 AM
Had a slide on 220 that had to be repaired and reopened last Friday.
Work is progressing well otherwise on this project.
That concerns me: given the terrain in that area, will special precautions be taken to make sure the new roadway doesn't do a slip & slide?
AHTD director Scott Bennett spoke at the Bentonville/Bella Vista C of C breakfast taking about projects in the area.
Most interesting was when he said that Bentonville and Rogers are partnering to improve the interchange at Walton/Walnut exit above and beyond the improvements AHTD had proposed. They are chipping in $6M to ensure that exit flows better. After the interchange is complete, the cities will take over maintenance of Walton as a city street. This is a major turnback that hasn't been seen in Arkansas since Gregg St in Fayetteville.
I remember when Bennett told me he would encourage shrinking the system when he first took over at director. This is a great step in that direction. Bentonville probably wants to redo Walton to their own boulevard standards that AHTD doesn't want to fund anyway. Win win
Quote from: bjrush on February 20, 2016, 11:08:11 AM
AHTD director Scott Bennett spoke at the Bentonville/Bella Vista C of C breakfast taking about projects in the area.
Most interesting was when he said that Bentonville and Rogers are partnering to improve the interchange at Walton/Walnut exit above and beyond the improvements AHTD had proposed. They are chipping in $6M to ensure that exit flows better. After the interchange is complete, the cities will take over maintenance of Walton as a city street. This is a major turnback that hasn't been seen in Arkansas since Gregg St in Fayetteville.
I remember when Bennett told me he would encourage shrinking the system when he first took over at director. This is a great step in that direction. Bentonville probably wants to redo Walton to their own boulevard standards that AHTD doesn't want to fund anyway. Win win
I wish AHTD would turn back some of the half mile state highways.
They already basically just don't maintain those roads. I'm thinking we will have continued turnbacks as time goes on. I have seen a few AHTD presentations about how oversized the system is. Now that it's AHTD policy, it's just a matter of finding deals to hand off the roads
US71 "I wish AHTD would turn back some of the half mile state highways."
Exactly!
Truncate AR 267 from Booth Rd to Main Street. Why this is a state highway is beyond me. Get rid of AR 320. Morris School is no longer there, just some "church" grounds now. Again, AXE it!
Quote from: bjrush on February 21, 2016, 04:53:38 PM
They already basically just don't maintain those roads. I'm thinking we will have continued turnbacks as time goes on. I have seen a few AHTD presentations about how oversized the system is. Now that it's AHTD policy, it's just a matter of finding deals to hand off the roads
Yet they took over Devils Den Road and are "improving" it (ie destroying the scenic value so it can be paved).
Reviving thread
There's a new road being built in Alma, and appears to be a possible AR 162 realignment. It starts at the intersection of US 64 and Mountain Grove Road, crosses US 64B, and the Little Frog Bayou and ending at the intersection of East Main and Henry Streets. I know downtown Alma gets congested when school is in session and when a train rolls through.
Quote from: robbones on July 03, 2016, 06:56:58 PM
Reviving thread
There's a new road being built in Alma, and appears to be a possible AR 162 realignment. It starts at the intersection of US 64 and Mountain Grove Road, crosses US 64B, and the Little Frog Bayou and ending at the intersection of East Main and Henry Streets. I know downtown Alma gets congested when school is in session and when a train rolls through.
I saw construction signs a while back, but no work. Gut feeling was the Frog Bayou 64B bridge was doomed.
Quote from: US71 on July 03, 2016, 07:23:44 PM
Quote from: robbones on July 03, 2016, 06:56:58 PM
Reviving thread
There's a new road being built in Alma, and appears to be a possible AR 162 realignment. It starts at the intersection of US 64 and Mountain Grove Road, crosses US 64B, and the Little Frog Bayou and ending at the intersection of East Main and Henry Streets. I know downtown Alma gets congested when school is in session and when a train rolls through.
I saw construction signs a while back, but no work. Gut feeling was the Frog Bayou 64B bridge was doomed.
It crosses just east of the bridge
Quote from: US71 on July 03, 2016, 07:23:44 PM
Quote from: robbones on July 03, 2016, 06:56:58 PM
Reviving thread
There's a new road being built in Alma, and appears to be a possible AR 162 realignment. It starts at the intersection of US 64 and Mountain Grove Road, crosses US 64B, and the Little Frog Bayou and ending at the intersection of East Main and Henry Streets. I know downtown Alma gets congested when school is in session and when a train rolls through.
I saw construction signs a while back, but no work. Gut feeling was the Frog Bayou 64B bridge was doomed.
Did some screen caps from Google Maps:
(https://c6.staticflickr.com/8/7437/27994089941_bce2dc4ec2_z.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/JDK2D8)
Closer view of the bridge piers:
(https://c4.staticflickr.com/8/7092/27994090731_342606913a_z.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/JDK2SK)
Easy to see where the building used to be. Torn down for new road?
(https://c2.staticflickr.com/8/7090/27994091321_446e78196c.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/JDK33V)
Quote from: rte66man on July 03, 2016, 10:31:03 PM
Quote from: US71 on July 03, 2016, 07:23:44 PM
Quote from: robbones on July 03, 2016, 06:56:58 PM
Reviving thread
There's a new road being built in Alma, and appears to be a possible AR 162 realignment. It starts at the intersection of US 64 and Mountain Grove Road, crosses US 64B, and the Little Frog Bayou and ending at the intersection of East Main and Henry Streets. I know downtown Alma gets congested when school is in session and when a train rolls through.
I saw construction signs a while back, but no work. Gut feeling was the Frog Bayou 64B bridge was doomed.
Did some screen caps from Google Maps:
(https://c6.staticflickr.com/8/7437/27994089941_bce2dc4ec2_z.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/JDK2D8)
Closer view of the bridge piers:
(https://c4.staticflickr.com/8/7092/27994090731_342606913a_z.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/JDK2SK)
Easy to see where the building used to be. Torn down for new road?
(https://c2.staticflickr.com/8/7090/27994091321_446e78196c.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/JDK33V)
Yes just clicked on the link below.
On 97/117 of doc or pg 136 of pdf.
Preliminary 2013-16 STIP (http://www.arkansashighways.com/stip/2013-2016/2013-2016_Prelim_STIP.pdf)
I checked out the 162 realignment yesterday: looks like at at-grade 4-way intersection with Bus 64. I wonder if it will be signalized or a 2 or 4-way stop.
The supports are up for the bridge over the UPRR , but everything else is still playing in the dirt
Quote from: US71 on August 06, 2016, 09:59:30 AM
I checked out the 162 realignment yesterday: looks like at at-grade 4-way intersection with Bus 64. I wonder if it will be signalized or a 2 or 4-way stop.
The supports are up for the bridge over the UPRR , but everything else is still playing in the dirt
Driving to mulberry I noticed that south mountain grove rd in Alma is closed and the new road has been widened at the northern terminus. Also road work signs are up just west of the city limits I'm guessing they're building the "virtual" weigh station.
LG-H634
A lot of progress has been made on the 162 bypass since the last post in this thread. The section between 64 and 64B has been nearly complete for quite a while now, but has yet to be opened. The beams over the railroad started going in a month or two ago after a long period of little apparent bridge activity.
Traffic signals in various states of completion are at three intersections along the new alignment. The signal on Main St. was powered up and going through phases when I went through downtown about a week or so ago. The signal on 64B appears to be fully erected, but the lamps are still covered in cloth. The signal on 64 is unfinished pending power line work to provide clearance.
This Times Record article has some details and pics regarding the 162 realignment: http://www.swtimes.com/news/20170328/connectivity-focus-in-alma-with-more-sidewalks-and-downtown-boulevard (http://www.swtimes.com/news/20170328/connectivity-focus-in-alma-with-more-sidewalks-and-downtown-boulevard)
I was through there a couple weeks ago. Looks like all they have to do is surface the bridge and do a little work to tie in the south end where it connects back to the original highway.
I wonder though if 64B will remain or be re-extended to the 61/71B /162 junction.
The signal is erected and covered on 64 as well with the road signs by the signal.
Z963VL
Quote from: robbones on May 07, 2017, 07:15:15 PM
The signal is erected and covered on 64 as well with the road signs by the signal.
Time for me to take another look.
What's with the AR 162 bypass? Where does it run to/from? This is the first I've heard of it.
Quote from: bugo on May 09, 2017, 04:04:59 AM
What's with the AR 162 bypass? Where does it run to/from? This is the first I've heard of it.
Bypasses downtown Alma. Begins at US 64 near Mountain Grove Rd, crosses over the UP railroad, rejoins current 162 at Henry and Main St. Should be open sometime this Summer.
In related news, the Little Frog Bayou bridge on old 64 is being scheduled for replacement
http://arkansashighways.com/historic_bridge/HB_Bridge_Donation/FY_2017/040721-M1144MarketingDescrip.pdf
OT. I have stated this opinion in other Arkansas related interstate post, but should it be time to either install tolls on either IH 40, 55, or future IH 49? Especially since the state claims that it doesn't have money to fund road/infrastructure projects? Thoughts?
Quote from: Tomahawkin on June 16, 2017, 01:49:00 PM
OT. I have stated this opinion in other Arkansas related interstate post, but should it be time to either install tolls on either IH 40, 55, or future IH 49? Especially since the state claims that it doesn't have money to fund road/infrastructure projects? Thoughts?
IIRC, state highway law forbids tolls, except on privately-owned roads.
That figures, Bleh
Why would you assume it is "time"? The state has kept its roads in decent condition with the funds it has been allocated. Tolling roads just because it is "cool" or "trendy" is not a legitimate basis.
Arkansas needs to right-size its system, not find revenue to maintain its current size
Quote from: bjrush on June 18, 2017, 12:01:22 AM
Why would you assume it is "time"? The state has kept its roads in decent condition with the funds it has been allocated. Tolling roads just because it is "cool" or "trendy" is not a legitimate basis.
Not entirely correct.
Quote from: bjrush link=topic=6952.msg2236137#msg2236137 date=
Arkansas needs to right-size its system, not find revenue to maintain its current size
I would agree with this, not only do they need to refine the system and their methods, they need to maintain what they have a lot better. But, hey, they most recently resurfaced quite large sections of US 71 through Greenwood and Fort Smith, plus, Fort Smith has has resurfaced large sections of South Y St. And a few others, I do believe.
Quote from: TheArkansasRoadgeek on June 18, 2017, 11:37:20 AM
Quote from: bjrush link=topic=6952.msg2236137#msg2236137 date=
Arkansas needs to right-size its system, not find revenue to maintain its current size
I would agree with this, not only do they need to refine the system and their methods, they need to maintain what they have a lot better. But, hey, they most recently resurfaced quite large sections of US 71 through Greenwood and Fort Smith, plus, Fort Smith has has resurfaced large sections of South Y St. And a few others, I do believe.
US 71 below Artists Point is waiting to wash out. There are large gaps and pavement shifts, but all AHTD does is fill them in.
Quote from: US71 on June 18, 2017, 12:06:24 PM
Quote from: TheArkansasRoadgeek on June 18, 2017, 11:37:20 AM
Quote from: bjrush link=topic=6952.msg2236137#msg2236137 date=
Arkansas needs to right-size its system, not find revenue to maintain its current size
I would agree with this, not only do they need to refine the system and their methods, they need to maintain what they have a lot better. But, hey, they most recently resurfaced quite large sections of US 71 through Greenwood and Fort Smith, plus, Fort Smith has has resurfaced large sections of South Y St. And a few others, I do believe.
US 71 below Artists Point is waiting to wash out. There are large gaps and pavement shifts, but all AHTD does is fill them in.
They do have a tendency to grout fill gaps. District 4 anyway.
US71, have you reached out to D-4, in regards to Crawford County plans for resurfacing and/or rehabilitation? They were quite understanding with my inquiries.
If they just cut the roads with under 2000 vehicles per day from the system, it would be cut to 7,000 miles. That's a reduction of 60%
Quote from: bjrush on June 19, 2017, 02:04:28 PM
If they just cut the roads with under 2000 vehicles per day from the system, it would be cut to 7,000 miles. That's a reduction of 60%
I have a problem with all these half-mile industrial roads
Quote from: bjrush on June 19, 2017, 02:04:28 PM
If they just cut the roads with under 2000 vehicles per day from the system, it would be cut to 7,000 miles. That's a reduction of 60%
All that does is shift the financial burden onto the counties to keep up these roads. If the state grants funds to counties for road maintenance, then it's only a partial solution.
Quote from: Road Hog on June 19, 2017, 07:16:51 PM
Quote from: bjrush on June 19, 2017, 02:04:28 PM
If they just cut the roads with under 2000 vehicles per day from the system, it would be cut to 7,000 miles. That's a reduction of 60%
All that does is shift the financial burden onto the counties to keep up these roads. If the state grants funds to counties for road maintenance, then it's only a partial solution.
AHTD has no problem upgrading highways, then dumping them back on the counties and municipalities.
The counties can handle much more than they have responsibility over right now.
Quote from: TheArkansasRoadgeek on June 19, 2017, 08:41:18 PM
The counties can handle much more than they have responsibility over right now.
Based on what evidence? I know it isn't Arkansas, but many of Alabama's rural counties are struggling to keep up with maintenance of county roads. Some counties are even turning some lesser-traveled roads back to gravel.
Quote from: codyg1985 on June 19, 2017, 09:30:03 PM
Quote from: TheArkansasRoadgeek on June 19, 2017, 08:41:18 PM
The counties can handle much more than they have responsibility over right now.
Based on what evidence? I know it isn't Arkansas, but many of Alabama's rural counties are struggling to keep up with maintenance of county roads. Some counties are even turning some lesser-traveled roads back to gravel.
Sebastian is doing fine, they just resurfaced part of Massard Rd. I am only expressing my opinion based on world observations. I have not seen of any reports of my county shifting to gravel. Here: http://agcouncil.net/2015/09/arkansas-counties-voice-opposition-to-idea-of-shifting-responsibility-on-roads/ All I was able to find on any opposition to this subject.
Most counties in Arkansas are broke. County roads throughout the state suck. If AHTD decommissions all these highways then the municipalities will be raising taxes.
Quote from: bugo on June 19, 2017, 10:50:15 PM
Most counties in Arkansas are broke. County roads throughout the state suck. If AHTD decommissions all these highways then the municipalities will be raising taxes.
They do anyway.
Quote from: US71 on June 19, 2017, 11:23:03 PM
Quote from: bugo on June 19, 2017, 10:50:15 PM
Most counties in Arkansas are broke. County roads throughout the state suck. If AHTD decommissions all these highways then the municipalities will be raising taxes.
They do anyway.
So, what I gathered from this statement, wàs that if AHTD deccomissioned some highways, the result would be higher taxes throughout the counties (possibly differing from the state tax by X amount)? And, yet still shit for roads? But, I would like to say for a while Fort Smith needed resurfacing on some side streets and most recently, they got it! Maybe I am not seeing the whole financial scope, but what I am not seeing is a down grade. We may let our roads run over schedule, but when they do get resurface it feels and looks nice.
Quote from: TheArkansasRoadgeek on June 20, 2017, 12:11:42 AM
Quote from: US71 on June 19, 2017, 11:23:03 PM
Quote from: bugo on June 19, 2017, 10:50:15 PM
Most counties in Arkansas are broke. County roads throughout the state suck. If AHTD decommissions all these highways then the municipalities will be raising taxes.
They do anyway.
So, what I gathered from this statement, wàs that if AHTD deccomissioned some highways, the result would be higher taxes throughout the counties (possibly differing from the state tax by X amount)? And, yet still shit for roads? But, I would like to say for a while Fort Smith needed resurfacing on some side streets and most recently, they got it! Maybe I am not seeing the whole financial scope, but what I am not seeing is a down grade. We may let our roads run over schedule, but when they do get resurface it feels and looks nice.
Now only if they could fix North A & B Streets by temporarily allowing trucks to take Midland Blvd and 10th and 11th Street to/from Garrison Avenue
Quote from: robbones on June 20, 2017, 10:47:41 PM
Quote from: TheArkansasRoadgeek on June 20, 2017, 12:11:42 AM
Quote from: US71 on June 19, 2017, 11:23:03 PM
Quote from: bugo on June 19, 2017, 10:50:15 PM
Most counties in Arkansas are broke. County roads throughout the state suck. If AHTD decommissions all these highways then the municipalities will be raising taxes.
They do anyway.
So, what I gathered from this statement, wàs that if AHTD deccomissioned some highways, the result would be higher taxes throughout the counties (possibly differing from the state tax by X amount)? And, yet still shit for roads? But, I would like to say for a while Fort Smith needed resurfacing on some side streets and most recently, they got it! Maybe I am not seeing the whole financial scope, but what I am not seeing is a down grade. We may let our roads run over schedule, but when they do get resurface it feels and looks nice.
Now only if they could fix North A & B Streets by temporarily allowing trucks to take Midland Blvd and 10th and 11th Street to/from Garrison Avenue
While riding my bike, I have seen trucks on 11th and 12th streets. (I only cross them, it has the characteristics of Wheeler Ave, in how dangerous it looks just riding in traffic like that).
Quote from: robbones on June 20, 2017, 10:47:41 PM
Now only if they could fix North A & B Streets by temporarily allowing trucks to take Midland Blvd and 10th and 11th Street to/from Garrison Avenue
The city and AHTD have been talking the last day or two about enforcing Truck Routes.
Quote from: US71 on June 22, 2017, 07:46:11 PM
Quote from: robbones on June 20, 2017, 10:47:41 PM
Now only if they could fix North A & B Streets by temporarily allowing trucks to take Midland Blvd and 10th and 11th Street to/from Garrison Avenue
The city and AHTD have been talking the last day or two about enforcing Truck Routes.
Hince the word TEMPORARILY
Quote from: Road Hog on June 19, 2017, 07:16:51 PM
Quote from: bjrush on June 19, 2017, 02:04:28 PM
If they just cut the roads with under 2000 vehicles per day from the system, it would be cut to 7,000 miles. That's a reduction of 60%
All that does is shift the financial burden onto the counties to keep up these roads. If the state grants funds to counties for road maintenance, then it's only a partial solution.
Not true. County engineering and maintenance standards are much lower than AHTDs. Costs would be saved.
Really, turning roads back just puts them where they belong. A few hundred vehicles per day is not a state level priority
Dedication of new AR162 (http://www.swtimes.com/news/20170709/road-project-in-alma-to-be-dedicated)will be this Tuesday. Just don't expect to drive it yet. Must have been the only day all the politicians were available to tell people how important they are.
Quote from: US71 on April 11, 2017, 09:10:58 AM
I wonder though if 64B will remain or be re-extended to the 61/71B /162 junction.
My guess is that this will be a No:
QuoteOnce Arkansas 162 is complete, the old highway – which runs from U.S. Route 64 to Fayetteville Avenue down to Main Street and east to the new section of highway – will be turned over to the city to become part of Alma's downtown streetscaping project.
That being said, will US64Bus...
- remain as-is, ending at Fayetteville Ave?
- be cut back to end at the new AR162 intersection?
- be eliminated entirely?
Quote from: yakra on July 09, 2017, 12:48:54 PM
Quote from: US71 on April 11, 2017, 09:10:58 AM
I wonder though if 64B will remain or be re-extended to the 61/71B /162 junction.
My guess is that this will be a No:
QuoteOnce Arkansas 162 is complete, the old highway – which runs from U.S. Route 64 to Fayetteville Avenue down to Main Street and east to the new section of highway – will be turned over to the city to become part of Alma's downtown streetscaping project.
That being said, will US64Bus...
- remain as-is, ending at Fayetteville Ave?
- be cut back to end at the new AR162 intersection?
- be eliminated entirely?
I see 3 options:
Extend to 64/71B
Truncate at Marsha Woolly Drive. (new 162)
Eliminate
Considering Alma's plans to renovate downtown after 162 is moved I'd say it's likely 64B will be eliminated (based in part of the truncations of 64B east of Bald Knob. I wonder, too, if 162 will be extended along 64 back to 71B , or even I-40.
As an aside, I'll note the bridge at Little Frog Bayou (http://bridgehunter.com/ar/crawford/little-frog/) is on the schedule for replacement.
Quote from: yakraMy guess is that this will be a No:
Quote from: US71Extend to 64/71B
My post may have been based on faulty assumptions. Does Arkansas allow state "touring routes" to be signed on city-maintained roads? AR ain't KS, or IA, or even CT...
If so, depending on where AR falls on the KS/IA<->ME spectrum, this could help answer the extend/keep/truncate question. Or allow an extension of AR162.
QuoteConsidering Alma's plans to renovate downtown after 162 is moved I'd say it's likely 64B will be eliminated (based in part of the truncations of 64B east of Bald Knob.
Not 100% sure I follow. Do you mean, eliminated along the Fayetteville Ave - Marsha Woolly Dr stretch?
East of Bald Knob, I see a few US64Bus routes ending at AR highways. Probably because AHTD dislikes multiplexes?
I don't know enough to know whether there's anything (US64B-wise) that's been deleted entirely.
There are also a few instances of US business routes ending at unnumbered local roads:
US67 Bus (Biggers, AR)US67 Bus (Datto, AR)US79 Bus (Stuttgart, AR)...so I'm not writing off the "remain as-is, ending at Fayetteville Ave" option just yet.
Arkansas eliminated 62B at Rogers a few years ago and attempted to reroute AR 12 around downtown.
65B at Harrison was rerouted around downtown a few years back, as well.
If there are a lot of trucks through town, I can possibly see 64B being (re) extended. Otherwise I think it may be eliminated.
BTW: if you look at Stuttgart, 79B no longer enters downtown, but does continue as AR130..
Quote from: US71 on July 10, 2017, 09:03:55 AM
Arkansas eliminated 62B at Rogers a few years ago and attempted to reroute AR 12 around downtown.
Attempted; they did, right? Entering from the east on Locust, it turns north on 2nd to intersect US62 & AR94.
https://www.arkansashighways.com/maps/cities/rogers_cave_little_lowell_city.pdf
Shown in (https://www.google.com/maps/@36.3379293,-94.1156487,3a,18.8y,282.87h,88.95t/data=!3m9!1e1!3m7!1swhMFPsycamUaKHiQeJ_dQg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!9m2!1b1!2i41) GMSV (https://www.google.com/maps/@36.3551789,-94.1158297,3a,26.1y,277.85h,86.57t/data=!3m9!1e1!3m7!1s8f1iyHqPASpyFA3IjGYdHA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!9m2!1b1!2i41) too.
From there, well... another unsigned Arkansas multiplex. Or, officially, just a gap... :-/
Quote from: US71 on July 10, 2017, 09:03:55 AM
65B at Harrison was rerouted around downtown a few years back, as well.
Yikes. Definitely gotta fix this one in TravelMapping.
Quote from: US71 on July 10, 2017, 09:03:55 AM
BTW: if you look at Stuttgart, 79B no longer enters downtown, but does continue as AR130..
Aah yes. I didn't give this a close enough look in the Highway Browser; you're right. I was thrown off by the waypoint label (MainSt) -- the
transition point to AR130 is at an unnumbered road, but it's definitely AR130 east of there.
If you follow independent signage, 12 follows 71B to 8th, north to Hudson Rd, east to 2nd St (62/94 intersection), then south to Locust
Interstate signage suggests east on 71B, north on I-49, then east on 62 to 2nd St, south to Locust
I just checked in GMSV, and... wow. Just as you said. :wow:
Took a drive around Alma yesterday, and Marsha Woolley is still not open to traffic, By the look of things, AR 162 will multiplex with US 64 and turn North along US 71B with only AR 162 reassurance signs North of US 64 and south of I 40. US 64B from the current AR 162 (Fayetteville Ave) to the Eastern terminus was resurfaced, which makes no sense since they are going to replace the bridge soon.
LGL64VL
Quote from: robbones on July 26, 2017, 09:36:25 AM
Took a drive around Alma yesterday, and Marsha Woolley is still not open to traffic, By the look of things, AR 162 will multiplex with US 64 and turn North along US 71B with no reassurance signs North of US 64. US 64B from the current AR 162 (Fayetteville Ave) to the Eastern terminus was resurfaced, which makes no sense since they are going to replace the bridge soon.
162 is supposed to open sometime in August, despite already having had the dedication (probably the only time the politicians were available)
Quote from: US71 on July 26, 2017, 10:25:29 AM
Quote from: robbones on July 26, 2017, 09:36:25 AM
Took a drive around Alma yesterday, and Marsha Woolley is still not open to traffic, By the look of things, AR 162 will multiplex with US 64 and turn North along US 71B with no reassurance signs North of US 64. US 64B from the current AR 162 (Fayetteville Ave) to the Eastern terminus was resurfaced, which makes no sense since they are going to replace the bridge soon.
162 is supposed to open sometime in August, despite already having had the dedication (probably the only time the politicians were available)
Probably just in time for school
LGL64VL
Quote from: robbones on July 26, 2017, 11:04:16 AM
Quote from: US71 on July 26, 2017, 10:25:29 AM
Quote from: robbones on July 26, 2017, 09:36:25 AM
Took a drive around Alma yesterday, and Marsha Woolley is still not open to traffic, By the look of things, AR 162 will multiplex with US 64 and turn North along US 71B with no reassurance signs North of US 64. US 64B from the current AR 162 (Fayetteville Ave) to the Eastern terminus was resurfaced, which makes no sense since they are going to replace the bridge soon.
162 is supposed to open sometime in August, despite already having had the dedication (probably the only time the politicians were available)
Probably just in time for school
School starts August 15, so very possibly so.
AHTD really needs to decommission thousands of miles of state highway. There are numbered, state maintained highways on the system that simply end and turn into local roads. These are literally highways to nowhere as they don't end at a town or anything of significance, they just end at random locations. There is no reason for these roads to be state highways.
Quote from: bugo on July 31, 2017, 05:30:52 AM
AHTD really needs to decommission thousands of miles of state highway. There are numbered, state maintained highways on the system that simply end and turn into local roads. These are literally highways to nowhere as they don't end at a town or anything of significance, they just end at random locations. There is no reason for these roads to be state highways.
ARDOT ;)
I've complained before about state maintained road to factories like AR 369/ Charcoal Plant Rd at Paris, AR or 285 which connects Woolly Hollow Park with US 65
They did decommission AR 180 Township Rd/Gregg Ave AFTER they upgraded it. They removed 180 Assembly Dr in Fayetteville and 156 east of Fayetteville.
I see no need to have upgraded AR 220 to Devils Den. IMO, the scenery is ruined.
217 at Waldron is another: it's just an airport access road.
Quote from: US71 on July 31, 2017, 02:11:27 PM
217 at Waldron is another: it's just an airport access road.
What??? It wasn't numbered AR 980??? :-o :-o :paranoid: :paranoid:
Quote from: cjk374 on July 31, 2017, 04:59:41 PM
Quote from: US71 on July 31, 2017, 02:11:27 PM
217 at Waldron is another: it's just an airport access road.
What??? It wasn't numbered AR 980??? :-o :-o :paranoid: :paranoid:
Begins at Bus 71 in Waldron, crosses mainline 71, eventually dead ends at what passes for an airport in west of Waldron
The new section of 162 opened this week sometime between Wednesday afternoon and Thursday afternoon.
Quote from: TreeTunnel on August 05, 2017, 03:53:00 PM
The new section of 162 opened this week sometime between Wednesday afternoon and Thursday afternoon.
I'll have to check it out when I get home
SM-G930V
Requesting photos! :sombrero:
Particularly interested in knowing the full signed extent of US64Bus, and AR162.
Quote from: yakra on August 07, 2017, 02:55:41 AM
Requesting photos! :sombrero:
Particularly interested in knowing the full signed extent of US64Bus, and AR162.
Here are a few pictures I took. I did this on the fly so sorry in advance.(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170808/73661ffdd6e76ff9e3c5fc2c3973b0ab.jpg)(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170808/7aea998df06cccf23587774cfa2d73cb.jpg)(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170808/d07ecc9d996c3056fc22cb8e835c2109.jpg)(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170808/195059e1a978e55abd5a8e332c4e8a04.jpg)(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170808/94a5b8ba8030c80285c59bf47b0c80db.jpg)(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170808/9958e950f08ffc35ec49b3bd7fe14297.jpg)(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170808/ad829cba4fd257dea60d747b70e93908.jpg)(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170808/c2d8b029827ac0908f1c02f749150748.jpg)(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170808/416d5ee04492292d61729ad854e160d3.jpg)
LGL64VL
I see they fixed the South 162 from a couple weeks ago at I-40. Does 162 actually extend that far?
Quote from: US71 on August 08, 2017, 08:57:25 PM
I see they fixed the South 162 from a couple weeks ago at I-40. Does 162 actually extend that far?
Before the realignment, US 71B and AR 162 overlapped from US 64 to I 40/US 71. Now I'm assuming that AR 162 overlaps US 64 heading west then turning north to meet up with US 71B
Here's an excerpt from an older AHTD section maps. AR 162 goes all the way to I-40. US 64B (technically US 64C) ends at AR 162. I have no idea how it is now. I am guessing there's an exception for AR 162 along US 64.
Does US 71B actually end at I-540 in Van Buren or even at US 64 in Ft Smith?
(https://c1.staticflickr.com/5/4347/36456887245_ac11ec09e6_o.png)
It's either I 40/US 71 or the intersection of old AR 162
LGL64VL
Quote from: bugo on August 09, 2017, 01:59:44 AM
Here's an excerpt from an older AHTD section maps. AR 162 goes all the way to I-40. US 64B (technically US 64C) ends at AR 162. I have no idea how it is now. I am guessing there's an exception for AR 162 along US 64.
Does US 71B actually end at I-540 in Van Buren or even at US 64 in Ft Smith?
No. North terminus is I-40/US 71 (Exit 13) at Alma South terminus is I-540/US 71 (Exit 12) in Fort Smith.
Technically, 71B ends at the US 64 intersection in downtown Ft Smith. It may or may not be signed along US 64 but the part between I-40 and US 64 in Alma is officially AR 162 and there is no exception along that road.
Quote from: bugo on August 17, 2017, 04:59:28 AM
Technically, 71B ends at the US 64 intersection in downtown Ft Smith. It may or may not be signed along US 64 but the part between I-40 and US 64 in Alma is officially AR 162 and there is no exception along that road.
Yet until 2-3 weeks ago, it was never posted as 162.
It was signed as AR 162 the last time I was there (although I don't recall how long ago that was).
https://www.google.com/maps/@35.4880663,-94.2261436,3a,75y,189.32h,86.58t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sgT83-fPInTKUMzNVuQD7_w!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
Observations:
71B now appears to end at the former 64/162 junction.
North to I-40 it is now AR 162, but appears to be a separate entity from the new 162 east of Alma. There are no co-signs for 64/162 , though a separate junction sign for 162 along WB 64.
There are still two sign assemblies north of I-40 indicating you are approaching 71B. The ramp signs for both EB and WB I-40 still indicate 71 and 71B.
Also the 71B error still exists east of Alma (should be Jct 64B, but posted as 71B). 64B itself appears to still end where 162 turned to downtown.
Quote from: US71 on August 18, 2017, 06:21:18 PM
Also the 71B error still exists east of Alma (should be Jct 64B, but posted as 71B).
https://www.google.com/maps/@35.4882243,-94.2040773,3a,18.7y,294.97h,87.55t/data=!3m9!1e1!3m7!1svvZO5sNJUVZARu_t9EokEw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!9m2!1b1!2i41
Quote from: US71 on August 18, 2017, 06:21:18 PM
64B itself appears to still end where 162 turned to downtown.
So, there's still signage to and at Fayetteville Ave, but presumably no more signage for 162?
Is there an at-grade 64B/162 junction?
Quote from: yakra on August 19, 2017, 04:46:54 AM
Quote from: US71 on August 18, 2017, 06:21:18 PM
Also the 71B error still exists east of Alma (should be Jct 64B, but posted as 71B).
https://www.google.com/maps/@35.4882243,-94.2040773,3a,18.7y,294.97h,87.55t/data=!3m9!1e1!3m7!1svvZO5sNJUVZARu_t9EokEw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!9m2!1b1!2i41
Quote from: US71 on August 18, 2017, 06:21:18 PM
64B itself appears to still end where 162 turned to downtown.
So, there's still signage to and at Fayetteville Ave, but presumably no more signage for 162?
Is there an at-grade 64B/162 junction?
64B / 162 is at-grade with a signal. All the old 162 signage has been removed. I even drove through town to verify. 64B just shows up with no warning heading east.
Quote from: US71 on August 19, 2017, 09:44:22 AM
Quote from: yakra on August 19, 2017, 04:46:54 AM
Quote from: US71 on August 18, 2017, 06:21:18 PM
Also the 71B error still exists east of Alma (should be Jct 64B, but posted as 71B).
https://www.google.com/maps/@35.4882243,-94.2040773,3a,18.7y,294.97h,87.55t/data=!3m9!1e1!3m7!1svvZO5sNJUVZARu_t9EokEw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!9m2!1b1!2i41
Quote from: US71 on August 18, 2017, 06:21:18 PM
64B itself appears to still end where 162 turned to downtown.
So, there's still signage to and at Fayetteville Ave, but presumably no more signage for 162?
Is there an at-grade 64B/162 junction?
64B / 162 is at-grade with a signal. All the old 162 signage has been removed. I even drove through town to verify. 64B just shows up with no warning heading east.
They should extend 64B on the former 162 alignment back to 64
LGL64VL
Quote from: robbones on August 20, 2017, 10:59:49 AM
Quote from: US71 on August 19, 2017, 09:44:22 AM
Quote from: yakra on August 19, 2017, 04:46:54 AM
Quote from: US71 on August 18, 2017, 06:21:18 PM
Also the 71B error still exists east of Alma (should be Jct 64B, but posted as 71B).
https://www.google.com/maps/@35.4882243,-94.2040773,3a,18.7y,294.97h,87.55t/data=!3m9!1e1!3m7!1svvZO5sNJUVZARu_t9EokEw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!9m2!1b1!2i41
Quote from: US71 on August 18, 2017, 06:21:18 PM
64B itself appears to still end where 162 turned to downtown.
So, there's still signage to and at Fayetteville Ave, but presumably no more signage for 162?
Is there an at-grade 64B/162 junction?
64B / 162 is at-grade with a signal. All the old 162 signage has been removed. I even drove through town to verify. 64B just shows up with no warning heading east.
They should extend 64B on the former 162 alignment back to 64
Then ARDOT would have to maintain it, instead of the city
Quote from: US71 on August 19, 2017, 09:44:22 AM
64B / 162 is at-grade with a signal.
Right about here (http://maps.google.com/maps?ll=35.482730,-94.218267&z=18&t=h) I presume, based on the satellite imagery.
How does it tie in at 64 proper?
Edit: Answered my own question. (https://www.arkansashighways.com/maps/cities/alma_rudy_city.pdf)
Whoa, a US highway that doesn't end at the intersection of another highway that also doesn't end at a natural barrier like a seashore. AHTD (I refuse to call them by any other name) does it again.
East? (https://www.google.com/maps/@33.6640715,-93.6001329,3a,75y,180.83h,89.19t/data=!3m9!1e1!3m7!1shkb2DeTnxuXjgDKv4IUszg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!9m2!1b1!2i41) This (https://www.google.com/maps/@33.665132,-93.5997021,3a,15y,258.4h,88.76t/data=!3m9!1e1!3m7!1s5WXgtDBkGEBuN9_LrvBpqA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!9m2!1b1!2i41) is "East"? (https://www.google.com/maps/@33.6650001,-93.6002805,3a,52.6y,91.31h,83.55t/data=!3m9!1e1!3m7!1sdxO-9-lt4WfAcrbRfR95YA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!9m2!1b1!2i41)
In 2013 (https://www.google.com/maps/@33.664967,-93.6000809,3a,15y,276.46h,88.47t/data=!3m9!1e1!3m7!1s6uAgevsAqPEJjOnquDvJOA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!9m2!1b1!2i41), with the exception of the first shield (https://www.google.com/maps/@33.6641011,-93.6001204,3a,24.1y,183.3h,92.07t/data=!3m9!1e1!3m7!1slakiwVMDf-jfqauSa0wlxQ!2e0!7i3328!8i1664!9m2!1b1!2i41) (AR174 itself), this was signed (https://www.google.com/maps/@33.6651281,-93.599698,3a,15y,263.31h,88.12t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sBxMX97T-BCKJkA1Pd1Xkdw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) south (https://www.google.com/maps/@33.6650016,-93.6003342,3a,34.2y,89.4h,88.35t/data=!3m10!1e1!3m8!1sYYwvIXBKzRcEqv8xB0Jivg!2e0!5s20130701T000000!7i13312!8i6656!9m2!1b1!2i41).
Looks like AHTD changed the wrong directional banners. :pan:
Quote from: bugo on August 26, 2017, 01:00:09 AM
Whoa, a US highway that doesn't end at the intersection of another highway that also doesn't end at a natural barrier like a seashore. AHTD (I refuse to call them by any other name) does it again.
Do you realize that there might have been a cercumstance out of their control, which lead to the design of the ending terminus. We do have a special transportation department! :bigass:
Has any Arkansan taken ARDOT's Survey, yet?
Not sure if this was covered, but I found a 2016 Metroplan Board Meeting (http://www.arkansashighways.com/PowerPoints/2017/20170927%20LHT%20-%20Metroplan.pdf) referring to rehibilitation of the state's transportation infastructure and reminding me how poor we actually are, but our neighbors to the north (Misssouri) are way better about making a dollar stretch, hell they had to give a portion of their grant to us due to our poor money management we do! But, I am down playing my point: 1 million dollars is a LOT of money I am not sure how we are struggling this bad to get by... :banghead:
On their level it isn't even just 1 million, it's 400 million we are talking about! That's no small chunk of change! :confused: :pan:
Come on ARDOT! Get your ass in gear! :bigass:
:confused:
There isn't a single mention of Missouri in that PowerPoint
Quote from: bjrush on October 12, 2017, 09:18:01 AM
:confused:
There isn't a single mention of Missouri in that PowerPoint
Well no, but I was talking about in general; from the other mentions of 'The Show Me State'.
ARDOT director Scott Bennett is retiring in May, to be replaced by Laurie Tudor. Bennett served as director since 2011.
Quote from: bjrush on March 03, 2020, 07:05:18 PM
ARDOT director Scott Bennett is retiring in May, to be replaced by Laurie Tudor. Bennett served as director since 2011.
Retiring? How old is he, 29? He isn't very old.
Quote from: bugo on March 04, 2020, 08:10:18 AM
Quote from: bjrush on March 03, 2020, 07:05:18 PM
ARDOT director Scott Bennett is retiring in May, to be replaced by Laurie Tudor. Bennett served as director since 2011.
Retiring? How old is he, 29? He isn't very old.
I think he got a job offer out of state
Quote from: bugo on March 04, 2020, 08:10:18 AM
Quote from: bjrush on March 03, 2020, 07:05:18 PM
ARDOT director Scott Bennett is retiring in May, to be replaced by Laurie Tudor. Bennett served as director since 2011.
Retiring? How old is he, 29? He isn't very old.
He started with AHTD back in 1989 as an intern, so likely much older than he looks.
Quote from: MikieTimT on March 04, 2020, 12:09:54 PM
Quote from: bugo on March 04, 2020, 08:10:18 AM
Quote from: bjrush on March 03, 2020, 07:05:18 PM
ARDOT director Scott Bennett is retiring in May, to be replaced by Laurie Tudor. Bennett served as director since 2011.
Retiring? How old is he, 29? He isn't very old.
He started with AHTD back in 1989 as an intern, so likely much older than he looks.
He's been with ARDOT for 32 years, so he's probably 50-ish
ARDOT is also searching for a new public information officer. Danny Straessle has left the department for a job with Jacobs in LR. I think he was largely responsible for the improved communications in recent years. He always responded to my requests quickly and was very helpful.
He may well have been the ARDOT account on here as well IMO
Quote from: bjrush on March 28, 2020, 08:40:47 PM
ARDOT is also searching for a new public information officer. Danny Straessle has left the department for a job with Jacobs in LR. I think he was largely responsible for the improved communications in recent years. He always responded to my requests quickly and was very helpful.
He may well have been the ARDOT account on here as well IMO
Didn't know that. I'll have to start over being a nuisance to ARDOT ;)
Does anyone think IH south of Little Rock should have toll lanes? Toll lanes in Atlanta (Excluding the old 400 toll booth) have provided a lot of funding for badly needed interchange projects which are going on right now and will continue for the next 10 years. Toll lanes on IH 30 could fund IH 57 getting completed, as well as IH 69, and 49 and could fund US 412 across the state
Quote from: Tomahawkin on September 12, 2020, 07:37:53 PM
Does anyone think IH south of Little Rock should have toll lanes? Toll lanes in Atlanta (Excluding the old 400 toll booth) have provided a lot of funding for badly needed interchange projects which are going on right now and will continue for the next 10 years. Toll lanes on IH 30 could fund IH 57 getting completed, as well as IH 69, and 49 and could fund US 412 across the state
1) I don't necessarily see a need for toll lanes in Little Rock. The area is relatively low density and has adequate freeways.
2) They would be expensive to build and 3) I don't see many people utilizing them. The metro is 10x smaller than Atlanta and has more of a truck traffic problem (particularly 30 W and 40 E). There are many metro areas (Indianapolis, Columbus, Birmingham) with far greater populations and decent traffic without HOT lanes.
3) Exactly what route(s) would they be on?
4) ARDOT said they'd be studying this back in 2016, but I've yet to see any follow up on that. If someone has anything on that I would greatly appreciate it.
Quote from: I-55 on September 12, 2020, 08:25:31 PM
Quote from: Tomahawkin on September 12, 2020, 07:37:53 PM
Does anyone think IH south of Little Rock should have toll lanes? Toll lanes in Atlanta (Excluding the old 400 toll booth) have provided a lot of funding for badly needed interchange projects which are going on right now and will continue for the next 10 years. Toll lanes on IH 30 could fund IH 57 getting completed, as well as IH 69, and 49 and could fund US 412 across the state
First there is a constitutional issue with tolls in Arkansas.
Then there is the fact you are comparing a metro area with less than a million people to one with about 6 million.
I don't think that the tolls generated in that small of a metro area would even start to pay for what Arkansas needs.
Good point about the truck traffic across the state! I proposed making 49 a toll corridor around 12 years ago on here to get it built because of the snowbird traffic as well as the traffic in the NWA Area, Since a lot of people there are from Texas, California, Georgia and New England. Thanks for your Input! Its Football time! #FalconsRiseUp
Quote from: Tomahawkin on September 13, 2020, 08:28:00 AM
Good point about the truck traffic across the state! I proposed making 49 a toll corridor around 12 years ago on here to get it built because of the snowbird traffic as well as the traffic in the NWA Area, Since a lot of people there are from Texas, California, Georgia and New England. Thanks for your Input! Its Football time! #FalconsRiseUp
I think the big 3 (Tyson/JB Hunt/Walmart) would have a strong opinion about tolling 49. I don't see them favoring tolls on "their" highway.
Had thought to take US 412 west from Missouri to Walnut Ridge, but given the Paragould bypass was not quite finished and ongoing four lane construction west of Paragould, opted for a nrotherly route via AR 90 and AR 34.
Highway 412 bypass in Paragould set to open (https://www.kait8.com/2020/09/03/highway-bypass-paragould-set-open/)Quote
PARAGOULD, Ark. (KAIT) - A three-year Arkansas Department of Transportation project is nearing completion in Paragould.
The $13 million, Highway 412 bypass project began in 2017, according to ARDOT District 10 Engineer Brad Smithee.
He explained the project's slow process was due to wet seasons stopping work.
QuoteThe project now enters its final phases with striping, uncovering signage, and rumble strips to be placed.
Quote
In the next few weeks, drivers need to be aware of the changes taking place.
Stop signs will be uncovered, signs and advanced warnings will be placed, and once open, ARDOT employees will be stationed at the intersections to help drivers.
Is the US 412 Paragould Bypass planned to eventually be expanded to four lanes?
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on September 14, 2020, 06:44:57 PM
Is the US 412 Paragould Bypass planned to eventually be expanded to four lanes?
I've not seen any indication, but I would say it's contingent on traffic volume ala Fayetteville's 71 Bypass.
I see that part of I-555 allows farm machinery on part of it.
Quote from: roadman65 on September 18, 2020, 10:59:28 PM
I see that part of I-555 allows farm machinery on part of it.
Yes. Given the lay of the land, a service road would have been cost prohibitive .
This article on the new I-30 widening project in Little Rock says it will be the largest in the state's history.. financially, at nearly 632 million dollars. The project involves replacing the AR River bridges, and I'm guessing that is what makes it so expensive. If that's the case, then in the future, i-49 in Central and Southern AR may be more expensive. On top of building brand new AR river bridges, the route will involve blasting through the Ouachitas. Just a prediction.
link to article (https://www.thv11.com/amp/article/traffic/the-biggest-highway-project-in-arkansas-history-has-officially-begun/91-ea43d67d-cc8d-43f0-a384-a02049398838)
SM-G965U
Quote from: ozarkman417 on September 19, 2020, 01:00:13 PM
This article on the new I-30 widening project in Little Rock says it will be the largest in the state's history.. financially, at nearly 632 million dollars. The project involves replacing the AR River bridges, and I'm guessing that is what makes it so expensive. If that's the case, then in the future, i-49 in Central and Southern AR may be more expensive. On top of building brand new AR river bridges, the route will involve blasting through the Ouachitas. Just a prediction.
link to article (https://www.thv11.com/amp/article/traffic/the-biggest-highway-project-in-arkansas-history-has-officially-begun/91-ea43d67d-cc8d-43f0-a384-a02049398838)
SM-G965U
Arkansas needs another John Paul Hammerschmidt or Prissy Hickerson to make things happen.
Not sure if this has already been posted, but ARDOT recently had a virtual public meeting for extending I-555 from US 49 to AR 91. (https://vpiph01-i555-extension-hwy-49-hwy-91-jonesboro-ardot.hub.arcgis.com/)
Quote from: Revive 755 on October 20, 2020, 11:09:28 PM
Not sure if this has already been posted, but ARDOT recently had a virtual public meeting for extending I-555 from US 49 to AR 91. (https://vpiph01-i555-extension-hwy-49-hwy-91-jonesboro-ardot.hub.arcgis.com/)
It was posted earlier on the "I-555 End" thread.
Are there any plans to complete the AR 530 gap between AR 11 and AR 35?
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on October 27, 2020, 04:31:30 PM
Are there any plans to complete the AR 530 gap between AR 11 and AR 35?
Eventually. Maybe when I-530 is rerouted.
Quote from: US71 on October 27, 2020, 04:33:11 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on October 27, 2020, 04:31:30 PM
Are there any plans to complete the AR 530 gap between AR 11 and AR 35?
Eventually. Maybe when I-530 is rerouted.
And when the gap is filled, it will be with a 2-lane facility built in a 4-lane right-of-way until/if I-69 becomes a reality and generates the traffic necessary to expand it.
Quote from: MikieTimT on October 28, 2020, 05:42:23 PM
Quote from: US71 on October 27, 2020, 04:33:11 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on October 27, 2020, 04:31:30 PM
Are there any plans to complete the AR 530 gap between AR 11 and AR 35?
Eventually. Maybe when I-530 is rerouted.
And when the gap is filled, it will be with a 2-lane facility built in a 4-lane right-of-way until/if I-69 becomes a reality and generates the traffic necessary to expand it.
Depends how much of it becomes I-530
Looks like the transportation sales tax has passed.
https://www.4029tv.com/article/issue-one-passes-transportation-sales-tax-to-be-made-permanent/34567504# (https://www.4029tv.com/article/issue-one-passes-transportation-sales-tax-to-be-made-permanent/34567504#)
Quote from: I-39 on November 04, 2020, 11:46:21 AM
Looks like the transportation sales tax has passed.
https://www.4029tv.com/article/issue-one-passes-transportation-sales-tax-to-be-made-permanent/34567504# (https://www.4029tv.com/article/issue-one-passes-transportation-sales-tax-to-be-made-permanent/34567504#)
Not as wide a margin as expected (was predicted 60/40) . I, for one, am disappointed it passed
Quote from: US71 on November 04, 2020, 11:53:14 AM
Quote from: I-39 on November 04, 2020, 11:46:21 AM
Looks like the transportation sales tax has passed.
https://www.4029tv.com/article/issue-one-passes-transportation-sales-tax-to-be-made-permanent/34567504# (https://www.4029tv.com/article/issue-one-passes-transportation-sales-tax-to-be-made-permanent/34567504#)
Not as wide a margin as expected (was predicted 60/40) . I, for one, am disappointed it passed
I also voted against it. Not that I don't think that we need the revenue directed towards the roads, but that it's permanent and there's no longer the need for them to justify their expenditures of this revenue or the speed in which projects are started/completed. I would have been perfectly content for vote for another 10 year sunsetting tax like this past one was. Always good for the light to shine every once in a while on how our money is spent.
Quote from: MikieTimT on November 04, 2020, 05:07:42 PM
Quote from: US71 on November 04, 2020, 11:53:14 AM
Quote from: I-39 on November 04, 2020, 11:46:21 AM
Looks like the transportation sales tax has passed.
https://www.4029tv.com/article/issue-one-passes-transportation-sales-tax-to-be-made-permanent/34567504# (https://www.4029tv.com/article/issue-one-passes-transportation-sales-tax-to-be-made-permanent/34567504#)
Not as wide a margin as expected (was predicted 60/40) . I, for one, am disappointed it passed
I also voted against it. Not that I don't think that we need the revenue directed towards the roads, but that it's permanent and there's no longer the need for them to justify their expenditures of this revenue or the speed in which projects are started/completed. I would have been perfectly content for vote for another 10 year sunsetting tax like this past one was. Always good for the light to shine every once in a while on how our money is spent.
As I think I said earlier. have a
permanent tax lends itself to too many pet projects. When Obama passed his road plan, I witnessed several roads that were "improved" when they didn't need it, and others needing help that were ignored.
Where is US 63 now south of Jonesboro?
https://route.transportation.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/50/2019/06/003_USRN-Applications-Spring-Meeting-2019_AR-GA_Part-1.pdf
Found this application for realignment. Heard through the grapevine it's been approved.
Runs with US49 down to Brinkley. I know of some signage at at least the ends of the relocation:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/okroads/albums/72157712310488201
https://www.google.com/maps/@34.9091556,-91.1912889,3a,23.3y,268.68h,93.83t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sBvjl5wrzjfbQISd2ZcBgHg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
TravelMapping forum:
https://forum.travelmapping.net/index.php?topic=3441
https://forum.travelmapping.net/index.php?topic=3815
ARDOT! Why are there 1/2 into to 1 inch gaps in the concrete segments every 30 feet on IH 55 In the right handed lanes??? Please address this issue, it has been a problem since the spring! OT I love the speed limit increase
IMO, tolls on 40, 49 or 55 (only 1 interstate) would address the Arkansas road infrastructure issue, even a 50 cent toll. I Have been a broken record on this since the days I Lived in Fayetteville 15 years ago. tolls in Florida, GA and TX have helped a lot on road highway funding
Quote from: Tomahawkin on December 24, 2020, 11:04:00 AM
ARDOT! Why are there 1/2 into to 1 inch gaps in the concrete segments every 30 feet on IH 55 In the right handed lanes??? Please address this issue, it has been a problem since the spring! OT I love the speed limit increase
IMO, tolls on 40, 49 or 55 (only 1 interstate) would address the Arkansas road infrastructure issue, even a 50 cent toll. I Have been a broken record on this since the days I Lived in Fayetteville 15 years ago. tolls in Florida, GA and TX have helped a lot on road highway funding
State Highway law currently forbids tolls. They just raise our taxes now in the name of roads.
Oh wow, I did not know that there are laws in Arkansas that bans tolls. I guess its the same way in both Mississippi and Alabama as well as Tennessee???
Quote from: Tomahawkin on December 25, 2020, 12:28:27 AM
Oh wow, I did not know that there are laws in Arkansas that bans tolls. I guess its the same way in both Mississippi and Alabama as well as Tennessee???
I don't know about the other states.
Quote from: roadman65 on November 21, 2020, 10:50:18 AM
Where is US 63 now south of Jonesboro?
https://route.transportation.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/50/2019/06/003_USRN-Applications-Spring-Meeting-2019_AR-GA_Part-1.pdf
Found this application for realignment. Heard through the grapevine it's been approved.
It runs concurrently with U.S. 49 from I-555 to I-40, then picks up concurrent with I-40 to the Hazen exit, then carries south from there.
How well-signed is US 63 along its duplex with US 49? Unsurprisingly, Google Maps still shows US 63 following its 1999-2021 routing between Jonesboro and Hazen.
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on October 25, 2022, 07:47:51 PM
How well-signed is US 63 along its duplex with US 49? Unsurprisingly, Google Maps still shows US 63 following its 1999-2021 routing between Jonesboro and Hazen.
62 basically "ends" at Exit 62 (62 West/East 180) and begins at I49 Exit 86 (62East, /AR 12 East/ 102 West)There are a few 62 shields along 49, but very few. There more 71 shields than 62, but those are also hit n miss,
Hey BUGO: what was that BS excuse ARDOT gave you about not posting multiplexes?
My experience is ARDOT will sign major concurrencies like US 67-167 but will let minor ones like the AR 164 goat-screw in Pope County lie. However, in recent years I have seen a 67 shield solo, and even a 167 only shield in the field.
Quote from: Road Hog on October 28, 2022, 01:20:01 AM
My experience is ARDOT will sign major concurrencies like US 67-167 but will let minor ones like the AR 164 goat-screw in Pope County lie. However, in recent years I have seen a 67 shield solo, and even a 167 only shield in the field.
Signing concurrencies are basically "pick and choose" in Arkansas. And yes, the 67/167 corridor is a great example of haphazard signing. Right off of the northbound on-ramp (exit 28), there is NO US 64 shield but there is one after exit 29 northbound (US 64 joins the freeway alignment from exit 28 to 55). Numerous US 167 signs are missing along that stretch from Sherwood to Searcy. Plus, there are different sizes along the stretch. One set is huge ( like 36"x36" ) around the Sherwood area while they use smaller signs elsewhere. I think there are even a couple of 67 signs missing on that stretch, showing only US 167.
This article is regarding the appointment to the Arkansas Highway Commission. This is the first mention I've ever heard of the goal to make US-82 into an Interstate. It's always been planned to upgrade to a 4-lane facility, but I've never run across anything that indicated that it would be limited access. Probably just wishful thinking on the governor and commissioner's part as there are many, many competing priorities in Arkansas for road funds.
https://www.nwaonline.com/news/2023/jan/27/sanders-names-former-state-representative-to-the/ (https://www.nwaonline.com/news/2023/jan/27/sanders-names-former-state-representative-to-the/)
^ Probably is referring to 4 lanes, but decided to throw the term "interstate" in there to make it sound more appealing.
The only possible scenario I can see for turning parts of US-82 in Arkansas into an Interstate class highway is 1: I-69 gets fully built out thru Southern Arkansas and 2: Texas upgrades much of US-82 between Wichita Falls and Texarkana to Interstate standards. Both are possibilities, but kind of long-shot possibilities.
I do think TX DOT will be forced to upgrade US-82 to Interstate standards between Gainesville and Sherman since DFW development is spreading in that direction. US-82 between Sherman and Honey Grove is now 4-lane divided with some freeway exits (a bunch was previously Super-2). Over the long term I can see US-82 from Sherman to Paris eventually being 100% limited access. The leg from Paris to New Boston will be harder to upgrade.
US-82 across Southern Arkansas is a bit of a mess in terms of the existing alignment being able to be expanded. Even a regular 4-lane divided highway with at-grade intersections might have to be built on a lot of new alignment.
The new AR 5 extension from the new roundabout junction with AR 7 to the US 70/Business 70 interchange of the Hot Springs Bypass should be completed soon. Personally, I would have liked the AR 7 designation to have been routed down the new highway and have AR 5 continue southward on present-day 7's route to US 270's Exit 5A/B, where AR 7 would reconnect with its previous alignment. If the interchange at Millcreek Rd. gets a number, I assume it would be numbered as a continuation of US 70's and US 270's exit numbers.
That would be a terrible idea. Removing the AR 7 designation from Central and Park would take attractions like Bathhouse Row and Oaklawn off of the highway. AR 7 is primarily a tourist highway, and a bypass isn't in the spirit of the road. AR 7 is nationally known as a scenic highway, and you wouldn't want to reroute it out of the national park. It doesn't carry much truck traffic or high speed traffic. Taking US 70B out of the national park was bad enough. Finally, if they did what you suggest, AR 7 wouldn't even be signed between the Central Avenue interchange and the 70/70B split because of ArDOT's lazy signing. Numbering it as an extension of AR 5 isn't elegant, but it's about the best they could have done in the situation.
The intention of my thoughts was that if AR 7 through town became AR 5 and AR 7 was routed on the new bypass, both routes could continue straight forward, and thus would not have to make 90 degree turns through the existing roundabout where AR 5 currently ends. I have never been to Arkansas, so I didn't know they are lazy when it comes to signposting. If others think my brainstorm was a bad idea, I respect their difference of opinion.
Quote from: Bobby5280 on February 01, 2023, 10:06:24 PM
The only possible scenario I can see for turning parts of US-82 in Arkansas into an Interstate class highway is 1: I-69 gets fully built out thru Southern Arkansas and 2: Texas upgrades much of US-82 between Wichita Falls and Texarkana to Interstate standards. Both are possibilities, but kind of long-shot possibilities.
I do think TX DOT will be forced to upgrade US-82 to Interstate standards between Gainesville and Sherman since DFW development is spreading in that direction. US-82 between Sherman and Honey Grove is now 4-lane divided with some freeway exits (a bunch was previously Super-2). Over the long term I can see US-82 from Sherman to Paris eventually being 100% limited access. The leg from Paris to New Boston will be harder to upgrade.
US-82 across Southern Arkansas is a bit of a mess in terms of the existing alignment being able to be expanded. Even a regular 4-lane divided highway with at-grade intersections might have to be built on a lot of new alignment.
If they do decide to extend I-/AR 530 below Pine Bluff to at least Monroe, then I'd figure an upgrade of US 82 east if Monticello to the Greenville bridge at least to 4-lane expressway if not freeway is a given, especially if I-69 is axed in Arkansas. West of there to Texarkana, intermittent passing lanes or a full 4-lane would be sufficient.
AR 7 is also an Arkansas State Scenic Byway, and rerouting it would disrupt its status.
Quote from: bugo on May 30, 2023, 08:35:23 PM
That would be a terrible idea. Removing the AR 7 designation from Central and Park would take attractions like Bathhouse Row and Oaklawn off of the highway. AR 7 is primarily a tourist highway, and a bypass isn't in the spirit of the road. AR 7 is nationally known as a scenic highway, and you wouldn't want to reroute it out of the national park. It doesn't carry much truck traffic or high speed traffic. Taking US 70B out of the national park was bad enough. Finally, if they did what you suggest, AR 7 wouldn't even be signed between the Central Avenue interchange and the 70/70B split because of ArDOT's lazy signing. Numbering it as an extension of AR 5 isn't elegant, but it's about the best they could have done in the situation.
I AGREE!!
Only in Arkansas. Moving a building down the Interstate...
https://www.facebook.com/plugins/post.php?href=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.facebook.com%2FTXKtoday%2Fposts%2Fpfbid0RJaQJ9NaZJ5mpEun51kLNoqtWWFJHtjbGbbA3SYAKXTgWRPygv7NTe2FKcryfDyLl&show_text=true&width=500"
I see the state relinquished Sam Walton Blvd to municipal control northwest of the US 71B/ AR 12 split ( known as Rainbow Curve) to I-49 through Bentonville.
It seems to me they should end US 71 at Exit 85 at the Bentonville- Rogers City Line along I-49.
Now you have a short useless overlap into Bentonville and US 71B now just has a sudden end and not at its parent.
Quote from: roadman65 on September 15, 2023, 03:27:32 PM
I see the state relinquished Sam Walton Blvd to municipal control northwest of the US 71B/ AR 12 split ( known as Rainbow Curve) to I-49 through Bentonville.
It seems to me they should end US 71 at Exit 85 at the Bentonville- Rogers City Line along I-49.
Now you have a short useless overlap into Bentonville and US 71B now just has a sudden end and not at its parent.
That would make it US 71 Spur, but I doubt ARDOT will bother to re-sign it.
Quote from: Road Hog on September 16, 2023, 09:51:35 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on September 15, 2023, 03:27:32 PM
I see the state relinquished Sam Walton Blvd to municipal control northwest of the US 71B/ AR 12 split ( known as Rainbow Curve) to I-49 through Bentonville.
It seems to me they should end US 71 at Exit 85 at the Bentonville- Rogers City Line along I-49.
Now you have a short useless overlap into Bentonville and US 71B now just has a sudden end and not at its parent.
That would make it US 71 Spur, but I doubt ARDOT will bother to re-sign it.
Not to mention, they'll ultimately push offloading the remainder back up to I-49 at the Bella Vista exit as the overarching goal of ARDOT these days is to offload as many miles as possible to counties and cities so they don't have to maintain them. Can't say as I blame them, but they generally have to throw a large project like a bridge reconstruction to make the deal tempting to the receiving party.
Quote from: MikieTimT on September 16, 2023, 12:36:40 PM
Quote from: Road Hog on September 16, 2023, 09:51:35 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on September 15, 2023, 03:27:32 PM
I see the state relinquished Sam Walton Blvd to municipal control northwest of the US 71B/ AR 12 split ( known as Rainbow Curve) to I-49 through Bentonville.
It seems to me they should end US 71 at Exit 85 at the Bentonville- Rogers City Line along I-49.
Now you have a short useless overlap into Bentonville and US 71B now just has a sudden end and not at its parent.
That would make it US 71 Spur, but I doubt ARDOT will bother to re-sign it.
Not to mention, they'll ultimately push offloading the remainder back up to I-49 at the Bella Vista exit as the overarching goal of ARDOT these days is to offload as many miles as possible to counties and cities so they don't have to maintain them. Can't say as I blame them, but they generally have to throw a large project like a bridge reconstruction to make the deal tempting to the receiving party.
I read that Bentonville was more than happy to receive Walton Blvd as now that they own it, they don't need permission from the state to make changes to it.
Also I see that AR 72 is discontinuous as it has no overlap with I-49 and former US 71B between its two segments. Unlike AR 12 that is officially, but not signed, along US 71B and I-49, it does end and begin again with ARDOT recognizing it as two different routes with one number as AR 12 is still one continuous route.
Quote from: roadman65 on September 16, 2023, 05:37:56 PM
Quote from: MikieTimT on September 16, 2023, 12:36:40 PM
Quote from: Road Hog on September 16, 2023, 09:51:35 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on September 15, 2023, 03:27:32 PM
I see the state relinquished Sam Walton Blvd to municipal control northwest of the US 71B/ AR 12 split ( known as Rainbow Curve) to I-49 through Bentonville.
It seems to me they should end US 71 at Exit 85 at the Bentonville- Rogers City Line along I-49.
Now you have a short useless overlap into Bentonville and US 71B now just has a sudden end and not at its parent.
That would make it US 71 Spur, but I doubt ARDOT will bother to re-sign it.
Not to mention, they'll ultimately push offloading the remainder back up to I-49 at the Bella Vista exit as the overarching goal of ARDOT these days is to offload as many miles as possible to counties and cities so they don't have to maintain them. Can't say as I blame them, but they generally have to throw a large project like a bridge reconstruction to make the deal tempting to the receiving party.
I read that Bentonville was more than happy to receive Walton Blvd as now that they own it, they don't need permission from the state to make changes to it.
Also I see that AR 72 is discontinuous as it has no overlap with I-49 and former US 71B between its two segments. Unlike AR 12 that is officially, but not signed, along US 71B and I-49, it does end and begin again with ARDOT recognizing it as two different routes with one number as AR 12 is still one continuous route.
Bentonville has got enough pull and revenue to not have to deal with the state on road projects, so more power to them.
AR-72 will be another AR-74 in 2-3 decades.
Are you saying a city of 56k can control the big brass in the DOT?
I believe you as far as AR 72 going to be relinquished in parts especially now with the Bella Vista Bypass completed I can see the state handing over the route between Bentonville and Gravette to the county.
Has anyone heard about this?: https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/authorities-can-t-figure-out-why-this-pipeline-exploded-in-arkansas-causing-a-major-fire/ar-AA1hKsDF?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=61c1d330ede844ea9fe4fb8034a9a070&ei=110.
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on October 05, 2023, 04:18:52 PM
Has anyone heard about this?: https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/authorities-can-t-figure-out-why-this-pipeline-exploded-in-arkansas-causing-a-major-fire/ar-AA1hKsDF?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=61c1d330ede844ea9fe4fb8034a9a070&ei=110.
Holy Shit. What a biased article. Then I looked at the source, Green Matters. Does MSN also post articles for Watts Up with That or, oh say, Breitbart?
Quote from: roadman65 on September 16, 2023, 05:37:56 PM
Also I see that AR 72 is discontinuous as it has no overlap with I-49 and former US 71B between its two segments. Unlike AR 12 that is officially, but not signed, along US 71B and I-49, it does end and begin again with ARDOT recognizing it as two different routes with one number as AR 12 is still one continuous route.
AR 12 doesn't "officially" follow US 71B between Bentonville and Rogers. It was once signed along then-US 71, but that was 40 years ago, and because Arkansas doesn't recognize overlaps other than some very short ones that are called "exceptions", AR 12 Section 2 double ends with AR 112 Section 2, and Section 3 doesn't begin until the intersection of AR 94 and US 62 in Rogers.
According to the latest Benton County control section map, US 71B section 18B ends at I-49 and doesn't continue west.
Quote from: Wayward Memphian on October 06, 2023, 06:44:45 AM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on October 05, 2023, 04:18:52 PM
Has anyone heard about this?: https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/authorities-can-t-figure-out-why-this-pipeline-exploded-in-arkansas-causing-a-major-fire/ar-AA1hKsDF?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=61c1d330ede844ea9fe4fb8034a9a070&ei=110.
Holy Shit. What a biased article. Then I looked at the source, Green Matters. Does MSN also post articles for Watts Up with That or, oh say, Breitbart?
Didn't see anything biased about it. Just a straightforward article about a pipeline exploding. Two local news outlets reported on it and you got triggered because the source MSN got it from was called Green.
Quote from: Road Hog on October 07, 2023, 01:53:02 AM
Quote from: Wayward Memphian on October 06, 2023, 06:44:45 AM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on October 05, 2023, 04:18:52 PM
Has anyone heard about this?: https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/authorities-can-t-figure-out-why-this-pipeline-exploded-in-arkansas-causing-a-major-fire/ar-AA1hKsDF?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=61c1d330ede844ea9fe4fb8034a9a070&ei=110.
Holy Shit. What a biased article. Then I looked at the source, Green Matters. Does MSN also post articles for Watts Up with That or, oh say, Breitbart?
Didn't see anything biased about it. Just a straightforward article about a pipeline exploding. Two local news outlets reported on it and you got triggered because the source MSN got it from was called Green.
Quote
This incident in Jessieville is just another piece of evidence proving how unsafe pipelines — and the entire fossil fuel industry — are. Humanity must continue to transition to a renewable energy economy, and as fast as possible.
Nope, not biased at all.
Quote from: Wayward Memphian on October 12, 2023, 08:32:39 PM
Quote from: Road Hog on October 07, 2023, 01:53:02 AM
Quote from: Wayward Memphian on October 06, 2023, 06:44:45 AM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on October 05, 2023, 04:18:52 PM
Has anyone heard about this?: https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/authorities-can-t-figure-out-why-this-pipeline-exploded-in-arkansas-causing-a-major-fire/ar-AA1hKsDF?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=61c1d330ede844ea9fe4fb8034a9a070&ei=110.
Holy Shit. What a biased article. Then I looked at the source, Green Matters. Does MSN also post articles for Watts Up with That or, oh say, Breitbart?
Didn't see anything biased about it. Just a straightforward article about a pipeline exploding. Two local news outlets reported on it and you got triggered because the source MSN got it from was called Green.
Quote
This incident in Jessieville is just another piece of evidence proving how unsafe pipelines — and the entire fossil fuel industry — are. Humanity must continue to transition to a renewable energy economy, and as fast as possible.
Nope, not biased at all.
Define the bias.
I believe the bias there is the conclusion that a report on a single or several gas leak incidents confirms a broader conclusion about the safety of underground gas pipes or the fossil fuel industry in general. The inclusion of the conclusion as definitive proof of a settled contention suggests that the author is searching for evidence to confirm a point of view that underground gas pipelines and the fossil fuel industry are dangerous, inherently dangerous, or more dangerous than alternatives.
An example of bias the other way would be if, instead of the current final paragraph, the article concluded with the following: "While this incident was no doubt harrowing for local residents, the relative lack of such gas pipeline leaks in relation to the millions of cubic feet of natural gas delivered to homes and businesses annually suggests that natural gas pipelines are one of the least dangerous methods for delivering heat and energy to US consumers."
Quote from: Rothman on October 12, 2023, 08:46:12 PM
Quote from: Wayward Memphian on October 12, 2023, 08:32:39 PM
Quote from: Road Hog on October 07, 2023, 01:53:02 AM
Quote from: Wayward Memphian on October 06, 2023, 06:44:45 AM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on October 05, 2023, 04:18:52 PM
Has anyone heard about this?: https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/authorities-can-t-figure-out-why-this-pipeline-exploded-in-arkansas-causing-a-major-fire/ar-AA1hKsDF?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=61c1d330ede844ea9fe4fb8034a9a070&ei=110.
Holy Shit. What a biased article. Then I looked at the source, Green Matters. Does MSN also post articles for Watts Up with That or, oh say, Breitbart?
Didn't see anything biased about it. Just a straightforward article about a pipeline exploding. Two local news outlets reported on it and you got triggered because the source MSN got it from was called Green.
Quote
This incident in Jessieville is just another piece of evidence proving how unsafe pipelines — and the entire fossil fuel industry — are. Humanity must continue to transition to a renewable energy economy, and as fast as possible.
Nope, not biased at all.
Define the bias.
There's no need for that entire paragraph to exist. In a non-biased article, you would focus on the facts for that incident. Making it into a broad conclusion is not relevant to the incident at hand.
Quote from: sprjus4 on October 23, 2023, 10:14:46 PM
Quote from: Rothman on October 12, 2023, 08:46:12 PM
Quote from: Wayward Memphian on October 12, 2023, 08:32:39 PM
Quote from: Road Hog on October 07, 2023, 01:53:02 AM
Quote from: Wayward Memphian on October 06, 2023, 06:44:45 AM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on October 05, 2023, 04:18:52 PM
Has anyone heard about this?: https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/authorities-can-t-figure-out-why-this-pipeline-exploded-in-arkansas-causing-a-major-fire/ar-AA1hKsDF?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=61c1d330ede844ea9fe4fb8034a9a070&ei=110.
Holy Shit. What a biased article. Then I looked at the source, Green Matters. Does MSN also post articles for Watts Up with That or, oh say, Breitbart?
Didn't see anything biased about it. Just a straightforward article about a pipeline exploding. Two local news outlets reported on it and you got triggered because the source MSN got it from was called Green.
Quote
This incident in Jessieville is just another piece of evidence proving how unsafe pipelines — and the entire fossil fuel industry — are. Humanity must continue to transition to a renewable energy economy, and as fast as possible.
Nope, not biased at all.
Define the bias.
There's no need for that entire paragraph to exist. In a non-biased article, you would focus on the facts for that incident. Making it into a broad conclusion is not relevant to the incident at hand.
Unless it's an incident that's part of a hazardous pattern.
Quote from: Rothman on October 23, 2023, 10:40:36 PM
Quote from: sprjus4 on October 23, 2023, 10:14:46 PM
Quote from: Rothman on October 12, 2023, 08:46:12 PM
Quote from: Wayward Memphian on October 12, 2023, 08:32:39 PM
Quote from: Road Hog on October 07, 2023, 01:53:02 AM
Quote from: Wayward Memphian on October 06, 2023, 06:44:45 AM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on October 05, 2023, 04:18:52 PM
Has anyone heard about this?: https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/authorities-can-t-figure-out-why-this-pipeline-exploded-in-arkansas-causing-a-major-fire/ar-AA1hKsDF?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=61c1d330ede844ea9fe4fb8034a9a070&ei=110.
Holy Shit. What a biased article. Then I looked at the source, Green Matters. Does MSN also post articles for Watts Up with That or, oh say, Breitbart?
Didn't see anything biased about it. Just a straightforward article about a pipeline exploding. Two local news outlets reported on it and you got triggered because the source MSN got it from was called Green.
Quote
This incident in Jessieville is just another piece of evidence proving how unsafe pipelines — and the entire fossil fuel industry — are. Humanity must continue to transition to a renewable energy economy, and as fast as possible.
Nope, not biased at all.
Define the bias.
There's no need for that entire paragraph to exist. In a non-biased article, you would focus on the facts for that incident. Making it into a broad conclusion is not relevant to the incident at hand.
Unless it's an incident that's part of a hazardous pattern.
Yes, but how many incidents, when considering the quantity of energy delivered by this method, constitute a pattern? One could just as easily reach a similar conclusion about lithium ion batteries being a hazard due to the number of cellphone and laptop spontaneous combustions or battery electric cars catching fire while charging. Yet, we mitigate risks by limiting the battery size on flights and perform recalls on some models of electric cars for battery replacements rather than conclude that we just need to eliminate them as unduly risky.
Quote from: MikieTimT on October 24, 2023, 07:30:56 AM
Quote from: Rothman on October 23, 2023, 10:40:36 PM
Quote from: sprjus4 on October 23, 2023, 10:14:46 PM
Quote from: Rothman on October 12, 2023, 08:46:12 PM
Quote from: Wayward Memphian on October 12, 2023, 08:32:39 PM
Quote from: Road Hog on October 07, 2023, 01:53:02 AM
Quote from: Wayward Memphian on October 06, 2023, 06:44:45 AM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on October 05, 2023, 04:18:52 PM
Has anyone heard about this?: https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/authorities-can-t-figure-out-why-this-pipeline-exploded-in-arkansas-causing-a-major-fire/ar-AA1hKsDF?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=61c1d330ede844ea9fe4fb8034a9a070&ei=110.
Holy Shit. What a biased article. Then I looked at the source, Green Matters. Does MSN also post articles for Watts Up with That or, oh say, Breitbart?
Didn't see anything biased about it. Just a straightforward article about a pipeline exploding. Two local news outlets reported on it and you got triggered because the source MSN got it from was called Green.
Quote
This incident in Jessieville is just another piece of evidence proving how unsafe pipelines — and the entire fossil fuel industry — are. Humanity must continue to transition to a renewable energy economy, and as fast as possible.
Nope, not biased at all.
Define the bias.
There's no need for that entire paragraph to exist. In a non-biased article, you would focus on the facts for that incident. Making it into a broad conclusion is not relevant to the incident at hand.
Unless it's an incident that's part of a hazardous pattern.
Yes, but how many incidents, when considering the quantity of energy delivered by this method, constitute a pattern? One could just as easily reach a similar conclusion about lithium ion batteries being a hazard due to the number of cellphone and laptop spontaneous combustions or battery electric cars catching fire while charging. Yet, we mitigate risks by limiting the battery size on flights and perform recalls on some models of electric cars for battery replacements rather than conclude that we just need to eliminate them as unduly risky.
Pursuing safer alternatives altogether is always an option.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tjAquP6RD34
Arkansas State Highway Commission Meeting - December 06, 2023
Included in this meeting is a new I-55 Mississippi River Bridge that is going to cost $800 million, with the feds hopefully funding half of it ($400 million) and ARDOT and TDOT splitting 25% each ($200 million).
Good when is the Groundbreaking? This is 25+ years overdue! Hopefully it will be 10 lanes total
Quote from: Tomahawkin on December 07, 2023, 09:13:41 AM
Good when is the Groundbreaking? This is 25+ years overdue! Hopefully it will be 10 lanes total
The discussion of the bridge begins after 1:26:00
Quote from: Great Lakes Roads on December 07, 2023, 04:00:27 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tjAquP6RD34
Arkansas State Highway Commission Meeting - December 06, 2023
Included in this meeting is a new I-55 Mississippi River Bridge that is going to cost $800 million, with the feds hopefully funding half of it ($400 million) and ARDOT and TDOT splitting 25% each ($200 million).
And Tenn is progressing nicely with the work of the Old Bridge.
This seems way out of what Tennessee has said. Tennessee has said the social parts of the environmental study will not work in that location,
I'm not going to start a new thread on this, but I was in Cabot, AR today and saw a bunch of state roads have been divested in that city. AR 89 has been deleted between U.S. 67-167 and AR 367. For that matter, AR 367 has been deleted from south of AR 89 all the way down to AR 5 and a portion of 367 from roughly the elementary school to AR 5 has been retained as AR 367 Spur. Even the bridge mile log signs have been changed to 367S.
Looks like ARDOT has washed its hands of that rat's nest. Cabot has a population of about 25K and has a road network for a city of about 3,000, which it still was in the early 1980s.
For this upcoming weekend's Webinar presentation, we'll be taking a look at the freeway system of the state of Arkansas, with the focus on the Little Rock metropolitan area. Coverage will begin on Saturday (1/13) at 6 PM ET and will feature live contributions from members of this forum; we hope to see you there!
Quote from: roadwaywiz95 on January 10, 2024, 10:53:23 AM
For this upcoming weekend's Webinar presentation, we'll be taking a look at the freeway system of the state of Arkansas, with the focus on the Little Rock metropolitan area. Coverage will begin on Saturday (1/13) at 6 PM ET and will feature live contributions from members of this forum; we hope to see you there!
Never realized until now that Little Rock has six different I-shields. Soon to be seven if I-57 gets approval.
Quote from: Road Hog on January 12, 2024, 05:41:10 PM
Quote from: roadwaywiz95 on January 10, 2024, 10:53:23 AM
For this upcoming weekend's Webinar presentation, we'll be taking a look at the freeway system of the state of Arkansas, with the focus on the Little Rock metropolitan area. Coverage will begin on Saturday (1/13) at 6 PM ET and will feature live contributions from members of this forum; we hope to see you there!
Never realized until now that Little Rock has six different I-shields. Soon to be seven if I-57 gets approval constructed/finished/signed.
Pretty sure 57 already has approval via Congress, just needs MO&AR to build/upgrade the necessary segments. And thats all I'll say here as 57 has its own thread, titled "I-57 Approved" fwiw: https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=21289.0
Quote from: ilpt4u on January 12, 2024, 11:23:23 PM
Quote from: Road Hog on January 12, 2024, 05:41:10 PM
Quote from: roadwaywiz95 on January 10, 2024, 10:53:23 AM
For this upcoming weekend's Webinar presentation, we'll be taking a look at the freeway system of the state of Arkansas, with the focus on the Little Rock metropolitan area. Coverage will begin on Saturday (1/13) at 6 PM ET and will feature live contributions from members of this forum; we hope to see you there!
Never realized until now that Little Rock has six different I-shields. Soon to be seven if I-57 gets approval constructed/finished/signed.
Pretty sure 57 already has approval via Congress, just needs MO&AR to build/upgrade the necessary segments. And thats all I'll say here as 57 has its own thread, titled "I-57 Approved" fwiw: https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=21289.0
Yes, I'm well aware of the thread as well as the (highly conditional) approval. Appreciate the clarification.
The seemingly eternal I-30 expansion in Saline County is fixing to shift gears it seems. ARDOT has had enough of the contractor delays and is fixing to start looking for another.
https://www.kark.com/news/local-news/ardot-recommends-putting-company-working-on-saline-co-i-30-project-into-default-of-contract/ (https://www.kark.com/news/local-news/ardot-recommends-putting-company-working-on-saline-co-i-30-project-into-default-of-contract/)
They are still working on IH 30 SW of the 440 interchange? If so Cheesewhiz! For a Project to take that long I would have wanted to see 10 lanes total in that area and 6 lanes total all the way to Hot Springs. AR DOT must have hired the same trash Contractor that GDOT did? One Project here in Atlanta ( IH 285/SR 400 interchange rebuild) was supposed to take 6 years. It ended up turning into nearly 10...
The project started May '19 and was supposed to be done Nov. '22. When Apr. '23 came and went, they started the penalties, so they haven't been paying them for almost a year now. Jan. '25 is their new guess, so ARDOT had enough. The next Arkansas Highway Commission meeting has this as a topic as well and will make the final call to hold them in default and look for a replacement.
It has taken this stretch almost 5 years now and they're not close to done. This is a little 5-mile segment.
It didn't take more than about 5 or 6 years to get I-30 6-laned from Geyer Springs Road all the way to Benton.
Ridiculous malfeasance. Hopefully someone gets fired.
The biggest thing was probably the bridge over the Saline River, and I believe that is done or close to it. The rest of the grading and buildup has been paiiiiiinnnnnfully slow.
In regards to the last 2 posts! That is disgusting! I'm baffled that it is happening in a high priority corridor and in the Suburbs of The Rock... Someone should be fired. OT I have been saying this for 20+ years. Arkansas needs toll roads to fund these projects! Especially The completion of IH 49
This particular issue isn't due to funding, but contractor clearly underestimating the resources to complete the project that they won the bid on. This is fixing to result in the contractor's insurance having to pay out on the bond they had to put up and another contractor selected. Covid was the excuse for a couple of years, but that ship has long sailed.
ARDOT Set to Receive an Additional $91 Million in Federal Funding for Six Projects (https://www.ardot.gov/news/24-082/)
$67 million for Interstate 49 between Barling and Alma, and the rest split as follows:
$6 million for the Future Interstate 57 from Walnut Ridge to the Missouri State Line;
$5 million for the Highway 10 Greenwood Bypass;
$5 million for Highway 82 Corridor improvements in Ashley, Chicot, Columbia, and Union Counties;
$5 million for Highway 412 Corridor improvements of the portion that interfaces with Interstate 49;
$3 million for Highway 412 Corridor improvements in northern Arkansas.
Does anyone know if stretch of US-71 in Texarkana along King Boulevard or 7th Street is officially included in the state's mileage for the route? It doesn't seem like it is:
(https://i.imgur.com/xVnTm9q.png)
That would be a huge move to delete a US highway in the middle of a city and make it non-contiguous, but it would be on-brand for ARDOT.
Quote from: CtrlAltDel on April 13, 2024, 05:46:02 PMDoes anyone know if stretch of US-71 in Texarkana along King Boulevard or 7th Street is officially included in the state's mileage for the route? It doesn't seem like it is:
(https://i.imgur.com/xVnTm9q.png)
There is not a mileage figure from the O point at Hickory / East to the 0 point at the state line. It is however on the inventory for at least one of them. US67, 82. and 71 run concurrently at this point.
US-71 in Texarkana has a mixed up history. Back in the early 1990's the NEW US-71 (I-49 eventually) was supposed to go from approximately the US-71 @I-49 intersection to US-59 and on to I-30 and north through Pleasant Grove (about where ORR Chevrolet is now.) The projected ROW except for ORR was still mostly vacant until the past decade. The past decade has seen it developing pretty fully.
When Mike Huckabee was Governor, this all changed. In spite of TxDOT having built the freeway from the state line to I-30, Arkansas took it on their own to build I-49 around the East Side of Texarkana (in Arkansas.) I believe that ArDOT maintains their side of State Line Blvd from 7th to a break north of I-30. The only portion on the Texas inventory is from what appears to be the part from Either 7th or Hazel to I-30. The part north of I-30 is inventoried only for US-59 by Texas.
https://www.dot.state.tx.us/tpp/hwy/us/us0071.htm This is an interesting and never updated entry...
So where does Hazel come into all of this? The signs direct the US-71 traffic along Hazel from MLK and to 7th for US-71.