So, I understand why tolls aren't popular in Arkansas, but it would be great if AHTD was honest about where money was going and we could have even better transportation infrastructure.
NUMBERS: They want to charge $5 in the study they did about tolling, but why couldn't they charge what other states like Florida charges? :confused: When I went to FL for the summer, I saw they charged around $1.50 per toll (obviously depending on whether you stay on the Tollway for the entirty or not). Point being, is that why can't AHTD charge similar amounts? The income wouldn't be just our state pop. that would be contributing to the toll revenue. MO and LA would be also! (As in, the residents that take I-49 of the two states, including us).
I wouldn't mind paying for direct connection, but only at a reasonable price. We aren't that big of a state, so why would we to have a too pricey toll?
Since to shunpike you would have to go quite a bit out of the way, it's a reasonable thought. Biggest question would be whether or not Arkansas law would allow tolling. I know some states still have that on the books.
The AHTD has tolling authority, so I don't see why not.
Unless the laws have changed, Arkansas doesn't allow tolling of *public* highways. "Private" roads are OK, like the XNA access road.
SM-G930V
I did a T-Log Research paper at the U of A on this in 2006 because the state claimed it was broke and had no funding back then, therefore I did tried to address the topic and I was Told that "I didn't know what I was talking about" SMH. It wont happen! Toll roads would benefit the state greatly. I 55, 49 and 40 Should be tolled even if its one area for 50 cents. It would help future road projects
Quote from: Tomahawkin on March 13, 2017, 09:13:35 PM
I did a T-Log Research paper at the U of A on this in 2006 because the state claimed it was broke and had no funding back then, therefore I did tried to address the topic and I was Told that "I didn't know what I was talking about" SMH. It wont happen! Toll roads would benefit the state greatly. I 55, 49 and 40 Should be tolled even if its one area for 50 cents. It would help future road projects
Tolling existing "free" highways in order to fund more toll highways is a bad idea and universally opposed. That's what sunk the Trans Texas Corridor plan for I-69. Any tolling must be restricted to construction and paying off any interest on whatever bond was floated, and then the road should revert back to free or reduced tolls for maintenance of that facility only. Otherwise, build with gas taxes and public funding and keep them open for everyone.
Quote from: Tomahawkin on March 13, 2017, 09:13:35 PM
I did a T-Log Research paper at the U of A on this in 2006 because the state claimed it was broke and had no funding back then, therefore I did tried to address the topic and I was Told that "I didn't know what I was talking about" SMH. It wont happen! Toll roads would benefit the state greatly. I 55, 49 and 40 Should be tolled even if its one area for 50 cents. It would help future road projects
AHTD would have to improve US 61, US 71, US 70 and US 64 to handle extra traffic, and 71 in Crawford county looks like it's about to wash down the mountainside. AHTD promised to maintain the road after I-49 was built, but that hasn't been the case.
Quote from: US71 on March 14, 2017, 10:27:06 AM
Quote from: Tomahawkin on March 13, 2017, 09:13:35 PM
I did a T-Log Research paper at the U of A on this in 2006 because the state claimed it was broke and had no funding back then, therefore I did tried to address the topic and I was Told that "I didn't know what I was talking about" SMH. It wont happen! Toll roads would benefit the state greatly. I 55, 49 and 40 Should be tolled even if its one area for 50 cents. It would help future road projects
AHTD would have to improve US 61, US 71, US 70 and US 64 to handle extra traffic, and 71 in Crawford county looks like it's about to wash down the mountainside. AHTD promised to maintain the road after I-49 was built, but that hasn't been the case.
AHTD needs to repave parts of US 71 in Fort Smith and Greenwood (Sebastian County). When they get big endorsements from FHWA US 71 doesn't even come up. It is the most neglected highway in Arkansas! Ther are parts in Fort SMith where they repave about 1/2 to 1/4 mile of 71 from fort smith to around Greenwood, but honestly; it needs it all. How do I complain to AHTD? Where do I go to get infromation from them and ask when they plan to get around to improving US 71?
Quote from: IDriveArkansas on March 14, 2017, 10:47:08 AM
Quote from: US71 on March 14, 2017, 10:27:06 AM
Quote from: Tomahawkin on March 13, 2017, 09:13:35 PM
I did a T-Log Research paper at the U of A on this in 2006 because the state claimed it was broke and had no funding back then, therefore I did tried to address the topic and I was Told that "I didn't know what I was talking about" SMH. It wont happen! Toll roads would benefit the state greatly. I 55, 49 and 40 Should be tolled even if its one area for 50 cents. It would help future road projects
AHTD would have to improve US 61, US 71, US 70 and US 64 to handle extra traffic, and 71 in Crawford county looks like it's about to wash down the mountainside. AHTD promised to maintain the road after I-49 was built, but that hasn't been the case.
AHTD needs to repave parts of US 71 in Fort Smith and Greenwood (Sebastian County). When they get big endorsements from FHWA US 71 doesn't even come up. It is the most neglected highway in Arkansas! Ther are parts in Fort SMith where they repave about 1/2 to 1/4 mile of 71 from fort smith to around Greenwood, but honestly; it needs it all. How do I complain to AHTD? Where do I go to get infromation from them and ask when they plan to get around to improving US 71?
http://arkansashighways.com/contactus.aspx
IF they listen.
But go to the section below Artists Point and see how bad it
really is
Quote from: US71 on March 14, 2017, 11:08:11 AM
Quote from: IDriveArkansas on March 14, 2017, 10:47:08 AM
Quote from: US71 on March 14, 2017, 10:27:06 AM
Quote from: Tomahawkin on March 13, 2017, 09:13:35 PM
I did a T-Log Research paper at the U of A on this in 2006 because the state claimed it was broke and had no funding back then, therefore I did tried to address the topic and I was Told that "I didn't know what I was talking about" SMH. It wont happen! Toll roads would benefit the state greatly. I 55, 49 and 40 Should be tolled even if its one area for 50 cents. It would help future road projects
AHTD would have to improve US 61, US 71, US 70 and US 64 to handle extra traffic, and 71 in Crawford county looks like it's about to wash down the mountainside. AHTD promised to maintain the road after I-49 was built, but that hasn't been the case.
AHTD needs to repave parts of US 71 in Fort Smith and Greenwood (Sebastian County). When they get big endorsements from FHWA US 71 doesn't even come up. It is the most neglected highway in Arkansas! Ther are parts in Fort SMith where they repave about 1/2 to 1/4 mile of 71 from fort smith to around Greenwood, but honestly; it needs it all. How do I complain to AHTD? Where do I go to get infromation from them and ask when they plan to get around to improving US 71?
http://arkansashighways.com/contactus.aspx
IF they listen.
But go to the section below Artists Point and see how bad it really is
Thanks! I have seen others on here that have had [some] success in emailing the AHTD, so I would just like to drop US 71 by them. So, I paused on this reply to go and email AHTD in regards to Sebastian County (District 4) I think what I could do is email or call whoever at District 4 to see what their plans are for my county. It's a shame! :confused: I don't want to end up like Oklahoma! I am suprised that OKDOT doesn't have better roads! Like, they are a bigger state than Arkansas and (in theory) they should get way more money than us to do improvements, but no, they have shit for roads! :-P I-40 in Oklahoma is terrible!
Quote from: IDriveArkansas on March 14, 2017, 12:19:46 PM
Quote from: US71 on March 14, 2017, 11:08:11 AM
Quote from: IDriveArkansas on March 14, 2017, 10:47:08 AM
Quote from: US71 on March 14, 2017, 10:27:06 AM
Quote from: Tomahawkin on March 13, 2017, 09:13:35 PM
I did a T-Log Research paper at the U of A on this in 2006 because the state claimed it was broke and had no funding back then, therefore I did tried to address the topic and I was Told that "I didn't know what I was talking about" SMH. It wont happen! Toll roads would benefit the state greatly. I 55, 49 and 40 Should be tolled even if its one area for 50 cents. It would help future road projects
AHTD would have to improve US 61, US 71, US 70 and US 64 to handle extra traffic, and 71 in Crawford county looks like it's about to wash down the mountainside. AHTD promised to maintain the road after I-49 was built, but that hasn't been the case.
AHTD needs to repave parts of US 71 in Fort Smith and Greenwood (Sebastian County). When they get big endorsements from FHWA US 71 doesn't even come up. It is the most neglected highway in Arkansas! Ther are parts in Fort SMith where they repave about 1/2 to 1/4 mile of 71 from fort smith to around Greenwood, but honestly; it needs it all. How do I complain to AHTD? Where do I go to get infromation from them and ask when they plan to get around to improving US 71?
http://arkansashighways.com/contactus.aspx
IF they listen.
But go to the section below Artists Point and see how bad it really is
Thanks! I have seen others on here that have had [some] success in emailing the AHTD, so I would just like to drop US 71 by them. So, I paused on this reply to go and email AHTD in regards to Sebastian County (District 4) I think what I could do is email or call whoever at District 4 to see what their plans are for my county. It's a shame! :confused: I don't want to end up like Oklahoma! I am suprised that OKDOT doesn't have better roads! Like, they are a bigger state than Arkansas and (in theory) they should get way more money than us to do improvements, but no, they have shit for roads! :-P I-40 in Oklahoma is terrible!
Oklahoma has NO money, unless it's gimmies for the corporations. Arkansas isn't far behind.
Everyone wants something for nothing. Guess I'm cut from different cloth. I'd gladly pay a toll toget to and from Texarkana via I-49 and avoid Oklahoma completely as well as using a turnpike across the northern half of the state connecting NWA and NEA without LR/Conway.
I would toll I-49 in two segments between Y -City and Greenwood and south of Mena to Texarkana.
Quote from: Wayward Memphian on March 14, 2017, 02:11:26 PM
Everyone wants something for nothing. Guess I'm cut from different cloth. I'd gladly pay a toll toget to and from Texarkana via I-49 and avoid Oklahoma completely as well as using a turnpike across the northern half of the state connecting NWA and NEA without LR/Conway.
I would toll I-49 in two segments between Y -City and Greenwood and south of Mena to Texarkana.
I would too! I don't know why we don't toll at least one big connection from point A to point B along that destination's route. They 'were' concidering I-630 for HOT lanes I would do that! Traffic on the 630 is horrific! HOT Lanes for I-630 would give more money towards repairs for the 40 due to rig traffic and reduce traffic on the 630. I love it when I see we have had a lane expansion somewhere because it makes me feel like we are growing very fast (which growth is good), but it's expensive. So, why not toll the 630 in the middle?
Quote from: Anthony_JK on March 14, 2017, 05:58:50 AM
Tolling existing "free" highways in order to fund more toll highways is a bad idea and universally opposed. That's what sunk the Trans Texas Corridor plan for I-69. Any tolling must be restricted to construction and paying off any interest on whatever bond was floated, and then the road should revert back to free or reduced tolls for maintenance of that facility only. Otherwise, build with gas taxes and public funding and keep them open for everyone.
Cross-pledging toll revenues within a tolling entity is fine as long as it's being used to build roads that are actually needed and will pay their share over time (e.g. the NTTA roads in Dallas), not just building and propping up toll roads that aren't needed and will never be self sustaining just to jerk off some asshole politicians (hi there, Oklahoma).
The TTC failed essentially because the land was going to have to be acquired via eminent domain, but the roads were likely to be built using a DBFOM mechanism, meaning that some private entity somewhere would be getting all the profits the tolls generated. Eminent domain is a touchy enough subject in Texas when it's for purely public benefit, and it's nearly impossible to get anywhere against a well-funded landowner when it's going to result in primarily private benefit.
Isn't at least some of I-49 between Fort Smith and Texarkana supposed to be built on top of existing US-71? Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't know of any US highway that is designated along a toll road. A number of toll roads have Interstate numbers, but not US highway numbers. The US routes have to run separate/parallel to a toll road, like US-281/US-277 and I-44 in my region. If there is a hard rule against building a toll road on an existing US highway route then that would force those overlaps of I-49 and US-71 to be routed differently. More road to build and maintain.
Quote from: Bobby5280 on March 15, 2017, 01:19:47 AM
I don't know of any US highway that is designated along a toll road. A number of toll roads have Interstate numbers, but not US highway numbers. The US routes have to run separate/parallel to a toll road, like US-281/US-277 and I-44 in my region.
The Cimarron Turnpike says hello.
Quote from: Bobby5280 on March 15, 2017, 01:19:47 AM
Isn't at least some of I-49 between Fort Smith and Texarkana supposed to be built on top of existing US-71? Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't know of any US highway that is designated along a toll road. A number of toll roads have Interstate numbers, but not US highway numbers. The US routes have to run separate/parallel to a toll road, like US-281/US-277 and I-44 in my region. If there is a hard rule against building a toll road on an existing US highway route then that would force those overlaps of I-49 and US-71 to be routed differently. More road to build and maintain.
Yes, but at some sections, it seems to abruptly end without signage that I have seen anyway. Down near White Bluff and just after 255 turning into a two-part cloverleaf. But, yes it bypasses US 71 at Massard Rd.
Quote from: kphoger on March 15, 2017, 08:46:19 AM
Quote from: Bobby5280 on March 15, 2017, 01:19:47 AM
I don't know of any US highway that is designated along a toll road. A number of toll roads have Interstate numbers, but not US highway numbers. The US routes have to run separate/parallel to a toll road, like US-281/US-277 and I-44 in my region.
The Cimarron Turnpike says hello.
So does the Cherokee Turnpike :)
Quote from: US71 on March 15, 2017, 01:39:30 PM
Quote from: kphoger on March 15, 2017, 08:46:19 AM
Quote from: Bobby5280 on March 15, 2017, 01:19:47 AM
I don't know of any US highway that is designated along a toll road. A number of toll roads have Interstate numbers, but not US highway numbers. The US routes have to run separate/parallel to a toll road, like US-281/US-277 and I-44 in my region.
The Cimarron Turnpike says hello.
So does the Cherokee Turnpike :)
Interestingly, when the Cimarron was built, along with the free segment immediately west of Tulsa, US 64 (the original closest parallel US highway) exited the limited-access facility before the tolled section and maintained its original alignment west of that point. It wasn't until US 412 was commissioned that the tolled Cimarron received any number whatsoever. Since all that occurred at about the time that the first batch of high priority corridors were legislated with the 1991 ISTEA act -- including HPC #8, which essentially included the entirety of US 412 east of Tulsa (including the section utilizing the Cherokee turnpike) it's likely that OK DOT simply requested that the Cimarron, being a logical western extension of that HPC, be designated as a western extension of US 412 (which eventually was further extended west segment by segment until it reached I-25 in NM).
As that pertains to I-49 between Texarkana and Fort Smith, there's no reason to think that if tolls were to be applied to an I-49 corridor that lay atop existing US 71, there would be an issue regarding tolls on a US highway. "Shunpiking" could be effected -- at least for longer-distance travel -- by simply using a US 59/271 alternate route via Poteau, OK. I'm sure that with electronic tolling, some accommodation for local traffic that would need to use the tolled route could be made (discounts or even waivers). However, it wouldn't be ancillary rules about what can or can't be signed over a toll road that would impinge upon toll plans -- it would be the overall reluctance in AR to impose any form of toll on their highway facilities; such would likely be framed as a form of taxation by opponents.
If tolling will get the unbuilt segments constructed sooner, I'd say go for it. Of course, some people would have issues with the tolls, but if they could be used to both build and maintain Interstate 49, it might be worth it.
Quote from: dfwmapper on March 14, 2017, 11:39:10 PM
Quote from: Anthony_JK on March 14, 2017, 05:58:50 AM
Tolling existing "free" highways in order to fund more toll highways is a bad idea and universally opposed. That's what sunk the Trans Texas Corridor plan for I-69. Any tolling must be restricted to construction and paying off any interest on whatever bond was floated, and then the road should revert back to free or reduced tolls for maintenance of that facility only. Otherwise, build with gas taxes and public funding and keep them open for everyone.
Cross-pledging toll revenues within a tolling entity is fine as long as it's being used to build roads that are actually needed and will pay their share over time (e.g. the NTTA roads in Dallas), not just building and propping up toll roads that aren't needed and will never be self sustaining just to jerk off some asshole politicians (hi there, Oklahoma).
There are a lot of bad things that can be said about OTA, but I think this one is unfounded. The only two toll roads I can see that one could not argue are necessary with a straight face are the Cherokee and the Chickasaw.
The Cherokee was built as a safety improvement to bypass the existing SH-33 (now Alternate 412), because ODOT could not find the funding to do so. So a four-lane turnpike was probably overkill, but it has a reason for existing.
The Chickasaw was meant to be a much longer route linking Ada to the interstate system in two places (imagine a diagonal line from I-35 in the Arbuckles to I-40, passing through Ada, and you have the idea for the Chickasaw). This would have been at least somewhat useful. However, it was included mostly to secure support for the bond package from rural legislators who felt that the package (which also included the Kilpatrick and Creek turnpikes) was tilted too heavily toward urban interests. As a result, it was cut back to what it is today in order to save money, thereby hobbling it.
Quote from: Scott5114 on March 15, 2017, 05:47:08 PM
The Chickasaw was meant to be a much longer route linking Ada to the interstate system in two places (imagine a diagonal line from I-35 in the Arbuckles to I-40, passing through Ada, and you have the idea for the Chickasaw). This would have been at least somewhat useful. However, it was included mostly to secure support for the bond package from rural legislators who felt that the package (which also included the Kilpatrick and Creek turnpikes) was tilted too heavily toward urban interests. As a result, it was cut back to what it is today in order to save money, thereby hobbling it.
Actually, if one can obtain an OK state map (preferably Gousha) from the mid-to-late 1950's, it can be seen that the Chickasaw is a remnant of what would have been a eastern branch of the pre-Interstate expanded turnpike network; a trunk generally following US 77 would have duplicated I-35 north to about Davis, where it split in two -- one heading northwest to near Maysville before turning due north via Norman and onward to OKC. The eastern branch would have followed what is now the Chickasaw turnpike/OK 1 to Ada before turning north on (then ) OK 99 (now US 377) to the Turner Turnpike at Stroud. This was meant to effectively divert Tulsa-bound traffic away from OKC. Of course, once Interstate routings were finalized, this particular 2-prong southern turnpike was dropped from the plans. It's likely the reasons for the eventual Chickasaw deployment were precisely as Scott depicts them.
There is just a lot of negitivity associated with tolls and tolling a road around here. Mainly truckers and the trucking industry, but let's not forget about the person who has a $6.58 pay-check to live off of. That is why tolls are so unaccepted, if we had a little higher income rates we might be able to get away with it. But, our state and its residents are dead-ass broke! How could the AHTD say we have come up to nearly one of the best in the nation in road and transportation standards?
Quote from: Scott5114 on March 15, 2017, 05:47:08 PM
There are a lot of bad things that can be said about OTA, but I think this one is unfounded. The only two toll roads I can see that one could not argue are necessary with a straight face are the Cherokee and the Chickasaw.
The Indian Nation is pretty light on traffic in general, but the portion south of US 69 is particularly useless with less than 2000 VPD. And, it really would have been better if it was a little more direct of a routing between DFW and Tulsa and if it replaced US 75 north of Henryetta with a full freeway all the way to Tulsa. The Cimarron also doesn't carry much and doesn't even have the Cherokee excuse of fixing a crooked routing. The southern portion of the Muskogee doesn't carry much either and largely duplicates US 64. Would have been perfectly reasonable to just end it at US 62.
Quote from: dfwmapper on March 16, 2017, 01:34:09 AM
Quote from: Scott5114 on March 15, 2017, 05:47:08 PM
There are a lot of bad things that can be said about OTA, but I think this one is unfounded. The only two toll roads I can see that one could not argue are necessary with a straight face are the Cherokee and the Chickasaw.
The Indian Nation is pretty light on traffic in general, but the portion south of US 69 is particularly useless with less than 2000 VPD. And, it really would have been better if it was a little more direct of a routing between DFW and Tulsa and if it replaced US 75 north of Henryetta with a full freeway all the way to Tulsa. The Cimarron also doesn't carry much and doesn't even have the Cherokee excuse of fixing a crooked routing. The southern portion of the Muskogee doesn't carry much either and largely duplicates US 64. Would have been perfectly reasonable to just end it at US 62.
The Cimarron and Muskogee, if considered together, comprise a 2-way access corridor to Tulsa from northerly points along I-35 and, by extension, I-135 and west I-70 -- and, conversely to the southeast, points along I-40 (essentially everything from Fort Smith to the east). Tulsa is a sizeable enough metro area to warrant such access facilities. I've used that particular combination several times to get from Denver and points beyond to Memphis and Atlanta -- it's quite useful if you can manage to hit Tulsa outside commute hours. Actually -- and despite the singular cross-traffic point near where the Cimarron segues into US 64 -- I'm surprised that OK didn't request an Interstate designation for the combined corridor when they extended I-44 over the Bailey Turnpike circa '82.
Ok, so why not have what I would call "Litter Tolls" on our highways? The gist is, If you have the money to smoke, drink, and buy fast food you surely have the money to contribute to a litter toll, if you will. The idea is to cut down on litter, since taking out of gas taxes for the funds is no biggie we should do that.
That brings way more resistance though... Just a thought I had.
Any thoughts?
Thanks!
The idea that everyone litters that eats fast food is pretty specious.
Quote from: Rothman on March 16, 2017, 12:08:36 PM
The idea that everyone litters that eats fast food is pretty specious.
Yes, I did notice the idea was flawed, but it is just a thought for a more noticible impact on what the cost is and how much manpower it takes for litter control in the state.
I thought of people that pay the toll even though they are not one of the many litter bugs, they would just compinsate for the people that have major amounts of debris in the road that don't bother to stop and either secure better (before it happens) or calls and lets the litter crew know of the obstruction.
Quote from: Bobby5280 on March 15, 2017, 01:19:47 AM
Isn't at least some of I-49 between Fort Smith and Texarkana supposed to be built on top of existing US-71? Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't know of any US highway that is designated along a toll road.
US-51 says hello with I-90 and I-39.
Quote from: IDriveArkansas on March 13, 2017, 03:06:22 PM
So, I understand why tolls aren't popular in Arkansas, but it would be great if AHTD was honest about where money was going and we could have even better transportation infrastructure.
NUMBERS: They want to charge $5 in the study they did about tolling, but why couldn't they charge what other states like Florida charges? :confused: When I went to FL for the summer, I saw they charged around $1.50 per toll (obviously depending on whether you stay on the Tollway for the entirty or not). Point being, is that why can't AHTD charge similar amounts? The income wouldn't be just our state pop. that would be contributing to the toll revenue. MO and LA would be also! (As in, the residents that take I-49 of the two states, including us).
I wouldn't mind paying for direct connection, but only at a reasonable price. We aren't that big of a state, so why would we to have a too pricey toll?
Sounds like a pretty good option, especially when you consider that this section of interstate will be a large connector between two already completed sections of I-49. Make it a ticket type turnpike (like the Ohio Turnpike) and it should do just fine, IMHO.
Quote from: Brandon on March 16, 2017, 12:39:44 PM
Quote from: IDriveArkansas on March 13, 2017, 03:06:22 PM
So, I understand why tolls aren't popular in Arkansas, but it would be great if AHTD was honest about where money was going and we could have even better transportation infrastructure.
NUMBERS: They want to charge $5 in the study they did about tolling, but why couldn't they charge what other states like Florida charges? :confused: When I went to FL for the summer, I saw they charged around $1.50 per toll (obviously depending on whether you stay on the Tollway for the entirty or not). Point being, is that why can't AHTD charge similar amounts? The income wouldn't be just our state pop. that would be contributing to the toll revenue. MO and LA would be also! (As in, the residents that take I-49 of the two states, including us).
I wouldn't mind paying for direct connection, but only at a reasonable price. We aren't that big of a state, so why would we to have a too pricey toll?
Sounds like a pretty good option, especially when you consider that this section of interstate will be a large connector between two already completed sections of I-49. Make it a ticket type turnpike (like the Ohio Turnpike) and it should do just fine, IMHO.
I wouldn't mind tolling I-49 for maybe to $2-3.50. What do residents of a state that has either a turnpike or just a tolled road in general feel is a reasonable toll rate(s)?
Here it is guys! I recieved an email form District four of the AHTD and this is what they said:
Trenton —
I am the District Engineer for District 4, which covers State Highways in Sebastian County. As such, your inquiry was forwarded to me for review and response. I appreciate your email and the opportunity to answer some of your questions.
Your email doesn't specifically indicate which area of Hwy. 71 in Sebastian County you are referring to, but we have upcoming work that might address some of your concerns. Our local maintenance forces are scheduled to remove and repave the top layer of asphalt in short, select areas north and south of the new I-549 interchange (between Fort Smith and Greenwood) this summer. Keep in mind that this is maintenance work and will not consist of a large scale project. We also have a 2019 Construction project that will overlay close to 4 miles of Hwy 71B (Towson Ave.) between Hwy 271 and Hwy 64.
As for your questions about expected pavement life, the true "life-span" of pavement varies. Because of the differing materials around the state, some asphalt sections of highway last longer than others. The materials used in NWA yield asphalt that is relatively maintenance free for up to 20 years, while the material in the River Valley seems to begin needing preventative maintenance work within 7 to 10 years. In reality, we would love to have the funds to do major work on every section of highway at least every 15 years. And while I wish that I could tell you these highway conditions are rare, that isn't the case. We continually monitor all state highways and can easily identify several that would benefit from an overlay or reconstruction. However, we simply do not have the necessary funds to improve these highways to the level that you (or we) desire. With the Department having $20 billion in needed highway improvements over the next 10 years and only anticipating $4 billion in revenue to meet those needs in the same timeframe, not all needs or wants can be met as they are identified. As it is with all sustainable organizations, we must operate within our budget. Knowing that reconstruction or repaving of Hwy 71 is not an option at this time, we will continue to preserve and prolong the life of the highway with routine maintenance practices.
Again, I do appreciate your comments and interest in the highway system. I hope this information sheds some light on the infrastructure challenges that our state and nation are facing.
Sincerely,
cid:image004.png@01D092EC.D44986F0
Chad Adams | District Four Engineer
Arkansas State Highway and Transportation Department
P.O. Box 11170 | Fort Smith, AR 72917
(: 479.484.5306
*: Chad.Adams@ahtd.ar.gov | www.arkansashighways.com
From: Trenton Wallace [mailto:twallace@fsfuture.org]
Sent: Tuesday, March 14, 2017 11:05 AM
To: Public Information Office
Subject: Future Plans for US 71
Click here to Reply, Reply to all, or Forward
They've wanted to toll I-40 for a while. But, FHWA won't allow it! :banghead: :clap:
QuoteThe Indian Nation is pretty light on traffic in general, but the portion south of US 69 is particularly useless with less than 2000 VPD. And, it really would have been better if it was a little more direct of a routing between DFW and Tulsa and if it replaced US 75 north of Henryetta with a full freeway all the way to Tulsa. The Cimarron also doesn't carry much and doesn't even have the Cherokee excuse of fixing a crooked routing. The southern portion of the Muskogee doesn't carry much either and largely duplicates US 64. Would have been perfectly reasonable to just end it at US 62.
I forget where I heard the statistic, but my understanding is the Will Rogers Turnpike and Turner Turnpike are the only ones in the OTA system which turn a profit. All the others apparently don't have the traffic/toll amounts to be self-sufficient.
It's arguable which OTA turnpikes are just a waste of road bed. I imagine the traffic counts on the Indian Nation Turnpike have to be miniscule. Same goes for the little 2-lane Chickasaw Turnpike between Ada and Sulphur.
Ultimately any super highway has to go somewhere. Certain politicians and powerful/connected citizens have wanted to use turnpikes as a means of economic development rather than their normal purpose of getting people from point a to point b faster. That was clearly the motivation behind scrapped turnpike proposals like ones from Duncan to Davis and Snyder to Clinton in the late 1990's. Oklahoma might have more turnpike mileage if the powers that be looked at more obviously productive travel corridors rather than just build an expensive road out in the middle of nowhere. For instance, Oklahoma City is in the geographical center of the nation's highway system. I think there should be a diagonal spoke across OKC from Southeast (Texarkana) going Northwest (Denver). Such a road could connect a lot of communities in the state and be more complimentary to the national highway grid. But the powers that be can't even get major corridor ROW secured in the OKC metro much less do anything logical like that.
Quote from: IDriveArkansasThere is just a lot of negitivity associated with tolls and tolling a road around here. Mainly truckers and the trucking industry, but let's not forget about the person who has a $6.58 pay-check to live off of. That is why tolls are so unaccepted, if we had a little higher income rates we might be able to get away with it. But, our state and its residents are dead-ass broke!
Personal income growth in real dollars has been pretty stagnant over the past 20 or so years. It has not kept pace with the very high inflation rates in things like health care costs, college tuition, fuel and infrastructure.
Quote from: Bobby5280 on March 16, 2017, 03:16:44 PM
QuoteThe Indian Nation is pretty light on traffic in general, but the portion south of US 69 is particularly useless with less than 2000 VPD. And, it really would have been better if it was a little more direct of a routing between DFW and Tulsa and if it replaced US 75 north of Henryetta with a full freeway all the way to Tulsa. The Cimarron also doesn't carry much and doesn't even have the Cherokee excuse of fixing a crooked routing. The southern portion of the Muskogee doesn't carry much either and largely duplicates US 64. Would have been perfectly reasonable to just end it at US 62.
I forget where I heard the statistic, but my understanding is the Will Rogers Turnpike and Turner Turnpike are the only ones in the OTA system which turn a profit. All the others apparently don't have the traffic/toll amounts to be self-sufficient.
It's arguable which OTA turnpikes are just a waste of road bed. I imagine the traffic counts on the Indian Nation Turnpike have to be miniscule. Same goes for the little 2-lane Chickasaw Turnpike between Ada and Sulphur.
Ultimately any super highway has to go somewhere. Certain politicians and powerful/connected citizens have wanted to use turnpikes as a means of economic development rather than their normal purpose of getting people from point a to point b faster. That was clearly the motivation behind scrapped turnpike proposals like ones from Duncan to Davis and Snyder to Clinton in the late 1990's. Oklahoma might have more turnpike mileage if the powers that be looked at more obviously productive travel corridors rather than just build an expensive road out in the middle of nowhere. For instance, Oklahoma City is in the geographical center of the nation's highway system. I think there should be a diagonal spoke across OKC from Southeast (Texarkana) going Northwest (Denver). Such a road could connect a lot of communities in the state and be more complimentary to the national highway grid. But the powers that be can't even get major corridor ROW secured in the OKC metro much less do anything logical like that.
Quote from: IDriveArkansasThere is just a lot of negitivity associated with tolls and tolling a road around here. Mainly truckers and the trucking industry, but let's not forget about the person who has a $6.58 pay-check to live off of. That is why tolls are so unaccepted, if we had a little higher income rates we might be able to get away with it. But, our state and its residents are dead-ass broke!
Personal income growth in real dollars has been pretty stagnant over the past 20 or so years. It has not kept pace with the very high inflation rates in things like health care costs, college tuition, fuel and infrastructure.
I am certianly too young to have experienced this, but I would like to find ways to counter the effects of our passed economys. I don't particularly love the generation I am in, but I want to change the preseption of us for the better. Anyways, if you read the email respose AHTD basically admited they were broke!
Quote from: IDriveArkansas on March 15, 2017, 11:22:00 PM
There is just a lot of negitivity associated with tolls and tolling a road around here. Mainly truckers and the trucking industry, but let's not forget about the person who has a $6.58 pay-check to live off of. That is why tolls are so unaccepted, if we had a little higher income rates we might be able to get away with it. But, our state and its residents are dead-ass broke! How could the AHTD say we have come up to nearly one of the best in the nation in road and transportation standards?
This message is what I am talking about:
"Thank you for visiting ArkansasHighways.com. It is an honor for me to serve as Director of the Arkansas State Highway and Transportation Department. Some of the most ambitious highway construction programs we've ever undertaken are currently underway across The Natural State, and I'm proud to say that we are up to the challenge.
The people of Arkansas have shown tremendous confidence in our ability to maintain and improve our state's highway system. Approved by voters in 2011, our Interstate Rehabilitation Program is now funding between 75 and 80 individual projects around the state. More than half of that work will be underway by 2015, and when completed, will give Arkansas one of the best Interstate systems in the country.
Our work isn't stopping there. In November, 2012, voters approved Issue Number 1, funding our $1.8 billion Connecting Arkansas Program. "CAP" is a perfect name, since the planned improvements to our state's four-lane highways will increase CAPacity and improve connectivity. And, because the revenue generated by Issue Number 1 has a CAP of 10 years, all this work will be completed in that timeframe.
We are thankful for Arkansans who have helped pave the way for a brighter future. Now, as we work to complete these projects, I'd like to remind all drivers to always use caution when entering work zones. We value your safety, and that of every member of our Highway Department family.
Our mission remains to provide a safe, efficient aesthetically pleasing and environmentally sound intermodal transportation system for the user. Rest assured that all of us at the Arkansas State Highway and Transportation Department will work our hardest to meet the needs of the traveling public across this great state."
AHTD, like so many other state transportation agencies, is broke or nearly broke in part because of the high cost inflation of road construction. The raw materials (steel, concrete, etc.) cost way more now than in the early 1990's. Labor costs are higher. Insurance costs (like worker's comp.) are far higher. New safety standards and other quality standards have added to the costs of the roads. There's more environmental regulation. Then add in all the legal red tape of public hearings, law suits, delays, political stunts, etc. All of that stuff has turned road building and infrastructure projects in general into a very slow, costly slog that can be soul-draining for anyone directly involved. A highway project that could have been done in just a few years during the 1970's is now something that will take decades to complete.
Quote from: Bobby5280 on March 16, 2017, 04:09:22 PM
AHTD, like so many other state transportation agencies, is broke or nearly broke in part because of the high cost inflation of road construction. The raw materials (steel, concrete, etc.) cost way more now than in the early 1990's. Labor costs are higher. Insurance costs (like worker's comp.) are far higher. New safety standards and other quality standards have added to the costs of the roads. There's more environmental regulation. Then add in all the legal red tape of public hearings, law suits, delays, political stunts, etc. All of that stuff has turned road building and infrastructure projects in general into a very slow, costly slog that can be soul-draining for anyone directly involved. A highway project that could have been done in just a few years during the 1970's is now something that will take decades to complete.
Well, we don't have the ability to "drawn from the pot" on most of our highway infatructure rehibilitation. And I think our state's situation is amplified, due to our all around finanical stituation.
Quote from: IDriveArkansas on March 16, 2017, 01:02:58 PM
What do residents of a state that has either a turnpike or just a tolled road in general feel is a reasonable toll rate(s)?
I feel like $5 per 100 miles is appropriate, with $7 or $8 per 100 miles acceptable if the terrain and alternate routes make it worth the extra.
Quote from: kphoger on March 16, 2017, 04:30:18 PM
Quote from: IDriveArkansas on March 16, 2017, 01:02:58 PM
What do residents of a state that has either a turnpike or just a tolled road in general feel is a reasonable toll rate(s)?
I feel like $5 per 100 miles is appropriate, with $7 or $8 per 100 miles acceptable if the terrain and alternate routes make it worth the extra.
5-6 cents per mile ($5-6/100 mi. as per above) is about what OK charges on most of their toll facilities; it's likely that if a long-distance toll route were to be deployed in neighboring AR, they'd utilize the OK rates as a form of baseline.
Quote from: IDriveArkansasWell, we don't have the ability to "drawn from the pot" on most of our highway infatructure rehibilitation. And I think our state's situation is amplified, due to our all around finanical stituation.
It's a very basic math problem that both politicians and the public deliberately ignore. Not enough money is coming in through taxes and too much is going out via costs. The imbalance is getting ever worse. Average wage/income levels are growing at a really low inflation rate. Meanwhile a few different "business" sectors (like health care and higher education) are greedily eating up an ever greater share of our nation's total economy. The costs they are charging to individuals and the government are at an inflation rate far higher than those personal wage/income levels. Infrastructure, construction, etc. is another one of those sectors with much higher than normal cost inflation. This is clearly a very unsustainable situation. Health care, higher education and infrastructure are all in price bubbles that deserve to be popped with a sledge hammer.
QuoteAHTD, like so many other state transportation agencies, is broke or nearly broke in part because of the high cost inflation of road construction. The raw materials (steel, concrete, etc.) cost way more now than in the early 1990's. Labor costs are higher. Insurance costs (like worker's comp.) are far higher. New safety standards and other quality standards have added to the costs of the roads. There's more environmental regulation. Then add in all the legal red tape of public hearings, law suits, delays, political stunts, etc. All of that stuff has turned road building and infrastructure projects in general into a very slow, costly slog that can be soul-draining for anyone directly involved. A highway project that could have been done in just a few years during the 1970's is now something that will take decades to complete.
QuoteIt's a very basic math problem that both politicians and the public deliberately ignore. Not enough money is coming in through taxes and too much is going out via costs. The imbalance is getting ever worse. Average wage/income levels are growing at a really low inflation rate. Meanwhile a few different "business" sectors (like health care and higher education) are greedily eating up an ever greater share of our nation's total economy. The costs they are charging to individuals and the government are at an inflation rate far higher than those personal wage/income levels. Infrastructure, construction, etc. is another one of those sectors with much higher than normal cost inflation. This is clearly a very unsustainable situation. Health care, higher education and infrastructure are all in price bubbles that deserve to be popped with a sledge hammer.
So, between the two statements (quoted above) you think that it isn't nessessarily just the culture of the state that makes it poor? As you have said, "AHTD, like so many other state transportation agencies, is broke or nearly broke in part because of the high cost inflation of road construction. The raw materials (steel, concrete, etc.) cost way more now than in the early 1990's. Labor costs are higher. Insurance costs (like worker's comp.) are far higher. New safety standards and other quality standards have added to the costs of the roads. There's more environmental regulation. Then add in all the legal red tape of public hearings, law suits, delays, political stunts, etc." and more so building materials regarding suffient construction of it's highways? Basically, We aren't the only ones stuck between a rock and a hard place. But, if you consider Arkansas' history, you see we have always struggled in some way or another.
Less-poor and more-poor are both still poor.
Don't let NE2 get under your skin. He's kind of like that mouse you can never get rid of in your kitchen. He'll poke his head in every so often just to annoy you, but he's really pretty harmless. But he's an invaluable resource when it comes to historical highway information and the like, so he has is own suite here at the Highway Hotel. By and large, the group on here is really quite respectful and patient with each other. The only real fights you see are when newbies act like they own the place, or when things get political or religious.
Remember, all newbies get a little flak at first, because they're eager beavers and haven't yet found their path in the forum. Don't worry and don't let it get to you. Take it in, let it teach you a lesson or two, and remember that we're all human with flaws of our own.
I never did get you a real welcome in my reply earlier, so... Welcome to the forum, from Wichita. I'll be in Arkansas for the first time in my life in two weeks. My wife and I will be taking a quick trip to Eureka Springs to celebrate our 11th anniversary (April 22). Even though she grew up in Branson and I've been there a thousand times, I've somehow never made it across the Arkansas line. I'm planning on taking some of the byways to get there, coming into Missouri from OK-10C and into Arkansas from MO-37.
[Edited to correct routing: OK-10C doesn't go to Akrnasas.]
Quote from: IDriveArkansas on March 17, 2017, 12:37:25 PM
So, you think just because I took after an agency's name that means I am part of it? Really? I guess I need to change my signature to start pleasing people... Telling people that I am not associated with something judging by my age.
Thanks for making people feel welcome and comfortable in the community! I am sorry my username doesn't meet your judgemental standards of perfection! Wow I thought this forum was filled with more mature people than this guy, I guess I was wrong.
He comes into threads all the time and posts anti- certain political candidate crap, whether its relevant to the topic at hand or not. Just report his post. The rest of us are pretty cool.
My name is Inkyatari, yet I don't work for Atari, nor am I ghost in Pac-Man. I'm not changing my name, and neither should you.
You're fine in here. :)
I hope I haven't walked in like I have owned the place, but I would to ease into the forum. But, back on topic about I-49.
I am fine.
Yes, back on topic...
Quote from: IDriveArkansas on March 17, 2017, 12:00:00 PM
it isn't necessarily just the culture of the state that makes it poor?
The above statement is certainly true. Arkansas may be historically on the low end of the prosperity spectrum, but these issues exist at a national level and affect all states to some degree or another.
Quote from: IDriveArkansasSo, between the two statements (quoted above) you think that it isn't nessessarily just the culture of the state that makes it poor?
It's a nation-wide problem. Maybe even a global one. It's all rooted in simple, greedy human nature. We want all sorts of things but don't want to pay one penny for it. We come up with all kinds of kooky ways to rationalize the contradictory attitudes while living in absolute denial of mathematical, financial reality. That's one of the corner stones of politics.
Now, some of this kookiness is worse in some states than others. I think the financial situation has gone to hell here in Oklahoma. Single party, super-majority rule has done nothing to grow the economy here. The big tax cuts they handed out like candy to us selfish, idiot voters got us into a very deep hole. Our public education system has been weathering horribly deep, painful cuts. Our teachers are among the lowest paid in the nation; most haven't seen a raise in over a decade. Many are fleeing to other states where they can be paid much better. Now with single party rule at the federal level and plans to push far more costs onto the shoulders of states Oklahoma's budget situation only stands to get considerably worse. Oklahoma is not unique either. Kansas' state government is in a financial disaster. There's plenty of other states with governments in bad financial shape too.
This crap makes me wish I wasn't a home owner. If you suddenly have to leave the state for better prospects elsewhere it's tough to unload a house in a market where no one wants to buy.
A few days ago, while surfing the Web to check construction plan downloaders that are now showing signs of script rot, I ran across a preliminary tolling feasibility study that was done for AHTD around 2002. The URL escapes me at the moment, but I recall that in the I-49 corridor, only the Bella Vista Bypass was considered likely to recover its construction costs in tolls. Cost cover for Bella Vista was on the order of 97% or so; for other I-49 corridors (US 71 back then), it was 17% and lower.
Quote from: Bobby5280 on March 18, 2017, 03:33:08 PM
Quote from: IDriveArkansasSo, between the two statements (quoted above) you think that it isn't nessessarily just the culture of the state that makes it poor?
It's a nation-wide problem. Maybe even a global one. It's all rooted in simple, greedy human nature. We want all sorts of things but don't want to pay one penny for it. We come up with all kinds of kooky ways to rationalize the contradictory attitudes while living in absolute denial of mathematical, financial reality. That's one of the corner stones of politics.
Now, some of this kookiness is worse in some states than others. I think the financial situation has gone to hell here in Oklahoma. Single party, super-majority rule has done nothing to grow the economy here. The big tax cuts they handed out like candy to us selfish, idiot voters got us into a very deep hole. Our public education system has been weathering horribly deep, painful cuts. Our teachers are among the lowest paid in the nation; most haven't seen a raise in over a decade. Many are fleeing to other states where they can paid much better. Now with single party rule at the federal level and plans to push far more costs onto the shoulders of states Oklahoma's budget situation only stands to get considerably worse. Oklahoma is not unique either. Kansas' state government is in a financial disaster. There's plenty of other states with governments in bad financial shape too.
This crap makes me wish I wasn't a home owner. If you suddenly have to leave the state for better prospects elsewhere it's tough to unload a house in a market where no one wants to buy.
I still scratch my head at the fact that we are taught economics and yet our government can't put the concepts within economics to good use. Greed.
I would like to intern with the AHTD someday to see what goes on in an organization like that. I want to be able to abserve and possibily fix flaws within my state's transportion infastructure.
Intern all you like within that organization. The real problem resides in the absolute idiocy of the American Public. As the years pass the less and less respect I have for my fellow IDIOT countrymen. And they really are idiots. I would be scared at seeing just how much of our general public failed at general math, much less things like algebra, trigonometry, calculus, etc. Even if these idiots got through those courses okay they're still living in absolute mathematical denial of reality. I feel like they need a drop kick to the head to wake them up already. Concussing them shouldn't be a worry for just how stupid they are. A shock to the system is badly in need of order. Anything to get any sort of light of reality onto the real budget situations going on.
We have runaway cost inflation taking place in infrastructure. The United States is very rapidly losing its ability to build any big things. Meanwhile our average wage growth in the face of all this inflation taking place in key, very painful areas, is very pathetically slow. This nation has a bunch of price bubbles badly in need of destroying.
There's no hope for humanity, is there?
If voters can't grasp simple mathematics this nation will have very rough times ahead of it. Voting in people who preach ideology and pander for votes, telling people only what they want to hear rather than the truth, only puts off the inevitable.
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on March 20, 2017, 04:36:16 PM
There's no hope for humanity, is there?
A wise old Doctor once said "while there's life, there's hope"
Quote from: sparker on March 16, 2017, 05:23:06 PM
Quote from: kphoger on March 16, 2017, 04:30:18 PM
Quote from: IDriveArkansas on March 16, 2017, 01:02:58 PM
What do residents of a state that has either a turnpike or just a tolled road in general feel is a reasonable toll rate(s)?
I feel like $5 per 100 miles is appropriate, with $7 or $8 per 100 miles acceptable if the terrain and alternate routes make it worth the extra.
5-6 cents per mile ($5-6/100 mi. as per above) is about what OK charges on most of their toll facilities; it's likely that if a long-distance toll route were to be deployed in neighboring AR, they'd utilize the OK rates as a form of baseline.
Remember that what one feels and what will actually build the road may be two very separate things. Oklahoma long ago paid off the construction debts on the major (i.e. I-44) turnpikes, so they're largely profit centers except for the occasional need to repave, put up cable barriers, rebuild toll plazas, etc., with the extra revenue paying off the more useless turnpikes (as I and others already commented on). I-49 is going to be new construction through rough terrain, meaning that if it was built as a toll road, it would likely end up more in line with Texas's urban toll roads, somewhere in the 12-15c per mile range. And, since it'll largely be serving truck traffic between KC/NWA and either New Orleans or the I-69 system in Texas, they'll have to be very careful to balance truck tolls against the time and fuel cost of shunpiking.
Walmart will make sure that I-49 is not tolled at any length. Besides that, now that one of NWA's own is governor, I-49 should be getting top priority going forward.
Quote from: Road Hog on March 26, 2017, 04:32:07 AM
Walmart will make sure that I-49 is not tolled at any length. Besides that, now that one of NWA's own is governor, I-49 should be getting top priority going forward.
Wal-Mart is getting their own exit off I-49. They are also getting a private toll road to XNA off the new 412 Bypass.
Quote from: US71 on March 26, 2017, 09:24:31 AM
Wal-Mart is getting their own exit off I-49. They are also getting a private toll road to XNA off the new 412 Bypass.
The only question I have about this is: will the signage for such be a corporate-matching Big Blue Sign in place of the usual BGS? :hmmm:
Interstates are not permitted to have exits directly serving private businesses. Likely the "WalMart exit" is really an exit to a local road that is near WalMart and otherwise wouldn't have an exit. As such, the sign would be a normal BGS.
Heck, one of our reference routes here serves a mall (and only the mall), and it uses a BGS instead of a blue sign.
I don't think I-49 would generate enough revenue to build the section between Fort Smith and Texarkana. Plus, I doubt Arkansas politicians would be willing to vote for a proposal, considering any attempts to raise revenue for projects is like pulling teeth these days.
Quote from: vdeane on March 26, 2017, 06:45:46 PM
Interstates are not permitted to have exits directly serving private businesses.
If this is the case, then Missouri must not have gotten that memo, since I-170 pretty much has a private exit to Boeing, and I-270 has a ramp that splits with one branch going into a mall parking lot.
Quote from: vdeane on March 26, 2017, 06:45:46 PM
Interstates are not permitted to have exits directly serving private businesses. Likely the "WalMart exit" is really an exit to a local road that is near WalMart and otherwise wouldn't have an exit. As such, the sign would be a normal BGS.
Heck, one of our reference routes here serves a mall (and only the mall), and it uses a BGS instead of a blue sign.
The 8th street exit will primarily help Wal-Mart Corporate HQ but is being as a city street with state and local money. But hardly anyone is on that street unless they have business with the Evil Empire.
The road off the 412 Bypass will be a privately funded tool road to XNA, taking traffic off the cow trails ;)
I think many mall places have the ring road as a "public" road to get around that. Or it could just be a newer prohibition. Or up to the individual FHWA office; different states don't necessarily get away with the same things.
Quote from: Revive 755 on March 26, 2017, 09:54:39 PM
Quote from: vdeane on March 26, 2017, 06:45:46 PM
Interstates are not permitted to have exits directly serving private businesses.
If this is the case, then Missouri must not have gotten that memo, since I-170 pretty much has a private exit to Boeing, and I-270 has a ramp that splits with one branch going into a mall parking lot.
If the I-270 one you're referring to is Exit 9, then I note the split goes to the named street of West County Center Drive, on which it's possible to bypass the mall and, for example, go south on Ballas Road. I am not having any luck, however, determining if that street belongs to the city, county, or otherwise.
I think the I-170 example definitely qualifies, though. It's signed "Boeing" and the street it serves only goes to Boeing.