The AARoads Wiki is live! Come check it out!
It's not the part of I-49 in Arkansas that's the focus of this thread, but I drove on I-49 around Texarkana yesterday, and the bridges were painted a most unusual hot pink color, which was an interesting change of pace from the rest of my trip.
Quote from: CtrlAltDel on January 12, 2022, 12:30:07 PMIt's not the part of I-49 in Arkansas that's the focus of this thread, but I drove on I-49 around Texarkana yesterday, and the bridges were painted a most unusual hot pink color, which was an interesting change of pace from the rest of my trip.Maybe it was Breast Cancer Awareness Month when they submitted the bridge designs that called for the girders to be painted hot pink.
So, it's confirmed that it will be Super-2 from Alma to Y-City, and they hope that the feds pitch in once they see progress made by the state.https://talkbusiness.net/2022/01/i-49-alma-fort-smith-route-might-be-complete-by-end-of-the-decade/Substantial progress won't be evident until 2024-2025, so guess the groundbreaking noted earlier will be predominantly ROW, utility, and engineering.
Quote from: MikieTimT on January 12, 2022, 04:19:40 PMSo, it's confirmed that it will be Super-2 from Alma to Y-City, and they hope that the feds pitch in once they see progress made by the state.https://talkbusiness.net/2022/01/i-49-alma-fort-smith-route-might-be-complete-by-end-of-the-decade/Substantial progress won't be evident until 2024-2025, so guess the groundbreaking noted earlier will be predominantly ROW, utility, and engineering.Any type of progress, however small, is great news. Getting it as far down as Y City is a lot more than I thought they would do.
Wait so does that mean major construction won’t happen until 24/25 or they mean substantial completion by then?
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on January 13, 2022, 03:31:56 PMWait so does that mean major construction won’t happen until 24/25 or they mean substantial completion by then?The latter.
Quote from: sprjus4 on January 13, 2022, 03:50:24 PMQuote from: Plutonic Panda on January 13, 2022, 03:31:56 PMWait so does that mean major construction won’t happen until 24/25 or they mean substantial completion by then?The latter.Okay good deal. Even if they could just start out with a super between this project and Texarkana that would be a huge improvement. It would be nice if they could start on that by the time this wraps up. One can dream, right?
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on January 13, 2022, 03:53:47 PMQuote from: sprjus4 on January 13, 2022, 03:50:24 PMQuote from: Plutonic Panda on January 13, 2022, 03:31:56 PMWait so does that mean major construction won’t happen until 24/25 or they mean substantial completion by then?The latter.Okay good deal. Even if they could just start out with a super between this project and Texarkana that would be a huge improvement. It would be nice if they could start on that by the time this wraps up. One can dream, right?Wait, I misread it.It’s the former.Substantial construction will not begin until 2024-25.
End of decade for 2 lanes across the river from Alma to AR-22 with substantial construction beginning in 2024, and the $270M is for the Super-2 segment from the current south end of AR-549 to Y-City how I read the article. $4.1B is the total price tag for all 4 lanes from Alma to Texarkana.
Quote from: MikieTimT on January 13, 2022, 06:46:35 PMEnd of decade for 2 lanes across the river from Alma to AR-22 with substantial construction beginning in 2024, and the $270M is for the Super-2 segment from the current south end of AR-549 to Y-City how I read the article. $4.1B is the total price tag for all 4 lanes from Alma to Texarkana.Sorry I didn’t look into it, how much is Arkansas getting from the infrastructure bill?
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on January 13, 2022, 07:12:01 PMQuote from: MikieTimT on January 13, 2022, 06:46:35 PMEnd of decade for 2 lanes across the river from Alma to AR-22 with substantial construction beginning in 2024, and the $270M is for the Super-2 segment from the current south end of AR-549 to Y-City how I read the article. $4.1B is the total price tag for all 4 lanes from Alma to Texarkana.Sorry I didn’t look into it, how much is Arkansas getting from the infrastructure bill?For highway programs, $3.6B.Bridge replacement and repairs, $278MI think those numbers are over a 5 year window.
Quote from: Road Hog on January 13, 2022, 01:18:14 AMQuote from: MikieTimT on January 12, 2022, 04:19:40 PMSo, it's confirmed that it will be Super-2 from Alma to Y-City, and they hope that the feds pitch in once they see progress made by the state.https://talkbusiness.net/2022/01/i-49-alma-fort-smith-route-might-be-complete-by-end-of-the-decade/Substantial progress won't be evident until 2024-2025, so guess the groundbreaking noted earlier will be predominantly ROW, utility, and engineering.Any type of progress, however small, is great news. Getting it as far down as Y City is a lot more than I thought they would do.$270M for two lanes all the way down to Y City (50 miles from the US-71/AR-549 interchange) seems a bit low. Are they planning to use the existing US-71 alignment in certain spots as a cost-saving measure?
Quote from: abqtraveler on January 13, 2022, 02:19:45 PMQuote from: Road Hog on January 13, 2022, 01:18:14 AMQuote from: MikieTimT on January 12, 2022, 04:19:40 PMSo, it's confirmed that it will be Super-2 from Alma to Y-City, and they hope that the feds pitch in once they see progress made by the state.https://talkbusiness.net/2022/01/i-49-alma-fort-smith-route-might-be-complete-by-end-of-the-decade/Substantial progress won't be evident until 2024-2025, so guess the groundbreaking noted earlier will be predominantly ROW, utility, and engineering.Any type of progress, however small, is great news. Getting it as far down as Y City is a lot more than I thought they would do.$270M for two lanes all the way down to Y City (50 miles from the US-71/AR-549 interchange) seems a bit low. Are they planning to use the existing US-71 alignment in certain spots as a cost-saving measure?Wouldn't shock me if they did, particularly the bypass around Waldron, which if I recall correctly has sufficient ROW space. This is almost entirely rural, so ARDOT is paying for pasture, which is way cheaper.
I don't recall the Y City-Acorn passage as particularly treacherous. Granted it was June last time I drove it, but that section moved at posted speeds and wasn't terrible. Curves and slopes were comparably very gentle. Very comparable to AR7 between Dover and the top of the mountain in Jasper but a lot shorter.Earthwork will obviously need to be done to widen the ROW, but this gap is not the money trap it's made out to be.
Issue will be bridges and cuts through a few ridges as the Ouachitas are the only E/W running mountain range in the continental US, and the road is N/S.
Quote from: MikieTimT on January 14, 2022, 09:10:49 AM Issue will be bridges and cuts through a few ridges as the Ouachitas are the only E/W running mountain range in the continental US, and the road is N/S.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Umtanum_RidgeMesocene era mountains that predate the Cascades.Drive I-82 from Yakima to Ellensburg as a reference.
Quote from: yakra on January 08, 2022, 01:48:44 PMDoes anyone have a link to an exit list of the old I-540 exit numbers?There were 2 different exit number sequences, one for S of I-40 and another for N of I-40.ISTR the northern section started at 0 or 1 or something, not 20 as it does now, though my memory may be wrong here.If so, we could be looking at the second renumbering along this section once ARDOT renumbers exits to fit the statewide I-49 mileage & eliminate the 186-mile jump at the Bella Vista exit.Edit:Old wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Interstate_540_(Arkansas)&oldid=410633771Looks like the norther section always started at 20. Exits 15 & 20 @ I-40 accounts for the 5-mile overlap, and explains starting the northern bit at 20.So the southern bit was... just numbered backwards. Sure guys. That makes sense.Actually, it's the northern part that became I-49 that doesn't make sense. There are actually surprising few signed interstate spurs (odd#XX) in the U.S., and Arkansas just happens to have 2 of them. The way Arkansas signs the exits, which makes perfect sense, is that mile marker 0 is where the child interstate splits from the parent. It has nothing to do with a southern or western border like the 2di Interstates track exits and mile markers. The part that got screwed up in Arkansas' case with I-49 is that AHTD/ARDOT was denied the I-49 designation back when they originally applied for it, so the next best designation they got in the interim was I-540. The exit numbers should have been done in the first place with I-49 mile markers knowing that was the ultimate goal of the freeway, so there's really no actual logic to starting with 20. It certainly took some mental gymnastics to get them there from the Oklahoma border and concurrency with I-40 with the original mile markers/exits working south from I-40 on I-540.
Does anyone have a link to an exit list of the old I-540 exit numbers?There were 2 different exit number sequences, one for S of I-40 and another for N of I-40.ISTR the northern section started at 0 or 1 or something, not 20 as it does now, though my memory may be wrong here.If so, we could be looking at the second renumbering along this section once ARDOT renumbers exits to fit the statewide I-49 mileage & eliminate the 186-mile jump at the Bella Vista exit.Edit:Old wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Interstate_540_(Arkansas)&oldid=410633771Looks like the norther section always started at 20. Exits 15 & 20 @ I-40 accounts for the 5-mile overlap, and explains starting the northern bit at 20.So the southern bit was... just numbered backwards. Sure guys. That makes sense.