The purpose of Arkansas 530

[cbalducc]

There are two disconnected segments of Highway 530 in southeast Arkansas.  Though this shares the number of Interstate 530, it is not an interstate.  What is the intended destination for this highway?  Is it beneficial to many travelers now?

[jbnv]

I'll let the Arkansans explain in better detail, but my best guess is that it's a placeholder for a future Interstate 530 extension to Monroe, Louisiana.

[sprjus4]

It connects to the southern end of I-530, and is designed as a super-2 that will eventually be upgraded into a full freeway, to extend down to Future I-69 at Monticello.

[cbalducc]

It connects to the southern end of I-530, and is designed as a super-2 that will eventually be upgraded into a full freeway, to extend down to Future I-69 at Monticello.

But what if I-69 is never built?  Will the road be a waste of money?

[jbnv]

It connects to the southern end of I-530, and is designed as a super-2 that will eventually be upgraded into a full freeway, to extend down to Future I-69 at Monticello.

But what if I-69 is never built?  Will the road be a waste of money?

Not if they can work out something with Louisiana to connect it to Monroe. US 425 is already four lanes in Louisiana.

[sprjus4]

It connects to the southern end of I-530, and is designed as a super-2 that will eventually be upgraded into a full freeway, to extend down to Future I-69 at Monticello.

But what if I-69 is never built?  Will the road be a waste of money?

I wouldn't say so, even in its current form, it provides a high quality 2 lane 65 mph road between Monticello and I-530.

[edwaleni]

Much of this is discussed here:

https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=3524.0

[Anthony_JK]

There are two disconnected segments of Highway 530 in southeast Arkansas.  Though this shares the number of Interstate 530, it is not an interstate.  What is the intended destination for this highway?  Is it beneficial to many travelers now?

The AR 530 designation is a temporary placeholder for what will be a full Interstate freeway (I-530) at least to Monticello, where it is supposed to meet the proposed I-69 corridor. It may ultimately become part of a full Interstate corridor (extended I-57, I-51, or southern I-53) extending to Monroe, and ultimately to Alexandria or even Lake Charles.

[Road Hog]

I ask the thread title often myself.

[The Ghostbuster]

If the roadway makes it to Monroe, LA or even if it doesn't go south of Monticello, AR, Interstate/AR 530 should become a further extension of Interstate 57. I think the distance is too great to keep the road a 3-digit Interstate like 530.

[capt.ron]

If the roadway makes it to Monroe, LA or even if it doesn't go south of Monticello, AR, Interstate/AR 530 should become a further extension of Interstate 57. I think the distance is too great to keep the road a 3-digit Interstate like 530.

I agree. AR already tried that with I-540 from FS to Fayetteville and it turned into I-49. I definitely favor an I-57 extension.

[MikieTimT]

If the roadway makes it to Monroe, LA or even if it doesn't go south of Monticello, AR, Interstate/AR 530 should become a further extension of Interstate 57. I think the distance is too great to keep the road a 3-digit Interstate like 530.

I agree. AR already tried that with I-540 from FS to Fayetteville and it turned into I-49. I definitely favor an I-57 extension.

I'd third that as well, however, I'd wager that it won't happen unless I-69 actually gets build as planned to provide the other logical terminus, temporary or permanent as it may be.

[jbnv]

I'd third that as well, however, I'd wager that it won't happen unless I-69 actually gets build as planned to provide the other logical terminus, temporary or permanent as it may be.

I-69 isn't going to happen in Arkansas because it isn't going to happen in Louisiana. Arkansas would be better off ditching I-69 and working with Louisiana on bringing I-57 to I-10. Louisiana already has four-lane divided expressways that could serve as the footprint for I-57. As for I-69, Louisiana has no footprint at all and a full plate of projects for real needs.

[MikieTimT]

I'd third that as well, however, I'd wager that it won't happen unless I-69 actually gets build as planned to provide the other logical terminus, temporary or permanent as it may be.

I-69 isn't going to happen in Arkansas because it isn't going to happen in Louisiana. Arkansas would be better off ditching I-69 and working with Louisiana on bringing I-57 to I-10. Louisiana already has four-lane divided expressways that could serve as the footprint for I-57. As for I-69, Louisiana has no footprint at all and a full plate of projects for real needs.

It'd certainly be cheaper than sharing a Mississippi River bridge project with Mississippi for I-69.