News:

The AARoads Wiki is live! Come check it out!

Main Menu

I-49 in Arkansas

Started by Grzrd, August 20, 2010, 01:10:18 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

MikieTimT

#2850
Quote from: MikieTimT on March 24, 2021, 05:56:06 PM
Quote from: sprjus4 on March 23, 2021, 10:14:49 PM
Quote from: rickmastfan67 on March 23, 2021, 10:00:44 PM
Quote from: sprjus4 on March 23, 2021, 07:25:15 PM
It'll probably be posted at 70 mph in Missouri. As for Arkansas, 70 or 75 mph, depends what they go for north of Bentonville.

70mph in Arkansas.
https://www.4029tv.com/article/missouri-portion-of-bella-vista-bypass-on-schedule/35906021

@ 1:05, you can clearly see an already posted 70mph sign.
That makes sense, the area could probably be 75 mph, but considering it's not much of a distance between the urban segment in Bentonville and Missouri, where the speed limit is capped at 70 mph, they probably did not want a variability in speed limit (70 mph -> 75 mph -> 70 mph) and decided to keep it uniform throughout. If Missouri ever goes to 75 mph, I could see Arkansas I-49 north of US-71 being increased to 75 mph as well.

That's what I figure as well.  I can't help but think this northern portion that Arkansas is doing right now will have to be redone in 12-15 years as it appears as though it's asphalt rather than concrete like the lanes that were done prior to now.  I'm also wondering how much of the northbound lanes they're working on now will actually be surfaced in concrete to match the current Super-2 southbound lanes.

Since they have striped and signed the lanes north of the Rocky Dell Hollow exit where the current Super-2 portion of Future I-49 ends, asphalt is going to be the surface of the newly constructed portions, even though it's concrete on the southbound carriageway that serves the current AR-549.  Going to be resurfacing all this in 10 years, so not jazzed about that, but at least it'll carry the I-49 traffic around Bella Vista.

Took these pictures a couple of days ago to show the latest progress on the northern end of Arkansas' portion.

Rocky Dell Hollow exit northbound
Rocky Dell Hollow exit southbound


The Ghostbuster

Google Maps has been updated to show the new northbound lanes along AR 549/future Interstate 49. That is a welcome sign. Still no updates on the Missouri side of the Bella Vista Bypass.

CtrlAltDel

Quote from: MikieTimT on March 31, 2021, 02:09:15 PM
Took these pictures a couple of days ago to show the latest progress on the northern end of Arkansas' portion.

Rocky Dell Hollow exit northbound
Rocky Dell Hollow exit southbound

I’m amazed at how that view has changed between 2018 and now:




Interstates clinched: 4, 57, 275 (IN-KY-OH), 465 (IN), 640 (TN), 985
State Interstates clinched: I-26 (TN), I-75 (GA), I-75 (KY), I-75 (TN), I-81 (WV), I-95 (NH)

I-39

Are they going to re-number the exits along I-49 between I-40 and Bella Vista when the bypass opens?

rickmastfan67

Quote from: I-39 on April 01, 2021, 04:56:59 PM
Are they going to re-number the exits along I-49 between I-40 and Bella Vista when the bypass opens?

I would assume so, since all the exits on AR-549 currently use the new mileage and don't continue the old mileage.

abqtraveler

Quote from: rickmastfan67 on April 01, 2021, 08:09:17 PM
Quote from: I-39 on April 01, 2021, 04:56:59 PM
Are they going to re-number the exits along I-49 between I-40 and Bella Vista when the bypass opens?

I would assume so, since all the exits on AR-549 currently use the new mileage and don't continue the old mileage.

And then I would presume the focus shifts to getting the Texarkana to Fort Smith section done after they open the Bella Vista Bypass. Well, assuming it takes 40 years to complete the stretch between Texarkana and Fort Smith, I might still be alive--but well into my 80s--when it's finished. unfortunately, in its current form, Biden's infrastructure plan doesn't bear a lot of good news for big road projects like finishing I-49 and I-69.
2-d Interstates traveled:  4, 5, 8, 10, 15, 20, 24, 25, 27, 29, 35, 39, 40, 41, 43, 45, 49, 55, 57, 64, 65, 66, 69, 70, 71, 72, 74, 75, 76(E), 77, 78, 81, 83, 84(W), 85, 87(N), 89, 90, 91, 93, 94, 95

2-d Interstates Clinched:  12, 22, 30, 37, 44, 59, 80, 84(E), 86(E), 238, H1, H2, H3, H201

US71

Quote from: abqtraveler on April 01, 2021, 08:55:27 PM
Quote from: rickmastfan67 on April 01, 2021, 08:09:17 PM
Quote from: I-39 on April 01, 2021, 04:56:59 PM
Are they going to re-number the exits along I-49 between I-40 and Bella Vista when the bypass opens?

I would assume so, since all the exits on AR-549 currently use the new mileage and don't continue the old mileage.

And then I would presume the focus shifts to getting the Texarkana to Fort Smith section done after they open the Bella Vista Bypass. Well, assuming it takes 40 years to complete the stretch between Texarkana and Fort Smith, I might still be alive--but well into my 80s--when it's finished. unfortunately, in its current form, Biden's infrastructure plan doesn't bear a lot of good news for big road projects like finishing I-49 and I-69.

Doubtful (IMO). There are plans for extending  AR 612 (the 412 Bypass) and XNA south access road.  NW Arkansas and Central Arkansas get the lion's share of highway money,

There's focus on US 67/I-57 in Central Arkansas plus  talk of a western bypass near Little Rock.
Like Alice I Try To Believe Three Impossible Things Before Breakfast

Tomahawkin

A western bypass near Little Rock??? Tease Me? And why is that necessary? 640 can handle enough traffic as it stands now, IMO. Then again I'm curious to see if there has been growth there in population?

abqtraveler

Quote from: Tomahawkin on April 01, 2021, 11:21:37 PM
A western bypass near Little Rock??? Tease Me? And why is that necessary? 640 can handle enough traffic as it stands now, IMO. Then again I'm curious to see if there has been growth there in population?

They've been fighting over the western bypass of Little Rock (extension of I/AR-440 to meet I-40/I-430 west of Little Rock) for as long as I can remember. Ten years ago I was stationed at Little Rock AFB, and the newspapers then had articles detailing that fight. The Army has long opposed the I-440 concept as it would cut through Camp Roberts.

I kinda forgot completing US-67/Future I-57 to Missouri, but I think you're right in that is closer to getting done than the unbuilt sections of I-49 or I-69. Once the last substandard section through Jacksonville is rebuilt and widened, then they'll focus on finishing the road between Walnut Ridge and Missouri.
2-d Interstates traveled:  4, 5, 8, 10, 15, 20, 24, 25, 27, 29, 35, 39, 40, 41, 43, 45, 49, 55, 57, 64, 65, 66, 69, 70, 71, 72, 74, 75, 76(E), 77, 78, 81, 83, 84(W), 85, 87(N), 89, 90, 91, 93, 94, 95

2-d Interstates Clinched:  12, 22, 30, 37, 44, 59, 80, 84(E), 86(E), 238, H1, H2, H3, H201

Wayward Memphian

Quote from: abqtraveler on April 02, 2021, 08:41:35 AM
Quote from: Tomahawkin on April 01, 2021, 11:21:37 PM
A western bypass near Little Rock??? Tease Me? And why is that necessary? 640 can handle enough traffic as it stands now, IMO. Then again I'm curious to see if there has been growth there in population?

They've been fighting over the western bypass of Little Rock (extension of I/AR-440 to meet I-40/I-430 west of Little Rock) for as long as I can remember. Ten years ago I was stationed at Little Rock AFB, and the newspapers then had articles detailing that fight. The Army has long opposed the I-440 concept as it would cut through Camp Roberts.

I kinda forgot completing US-67/Future I-57 to Missouri, but I think you're right in that is closer to getting done than the unbuilt sections of I-49 or I-69. Once the last substandard section through Jacksonville is rebuilt and widened, then they'll focus on finishing the road between Walnut Ridge and Missouri.

Camp Roberts? Lol.

abqtraveler

Quote from: Wayward Memphian on April 02, 2021, 03:17:28 PM
Quote from: abqtraveler on April 02, 2021, 08:41:35 AM
Quote from: Tomahawkin on April 01, 2021, 11:21:37 PM
A western bypass near Little Rock??? Tease Me? And why is that necessary? 640 can handle enough traffic as it stands now, IMO. Then again I'm curious to see if there has been growth there in population?

They've been fighting over the western bypass of Little Rock (extension of I/AR-440 to meet I-40/I-430 west of Little Rock) for as long as I can remember. Ten years ago I was stationed at Little Rock AFB, and the newspapers then had articles detailing that fight. The Army has long opposed the I-440 concept as it would cut through Camp Roberts.

I kinda forgot completing US-67/Future I-57 to Missouri, but I think you're right in that is closer to getting done than the unbuilt sections of I-49 or I-69. Once the last substandard section through Jacksonville is rebuilt and widened, then they'll focus on finishing the road between Walnut Ridge and Missouri.

Camp Roberts? Lol.

My bad, should be Camp Robinson. Camp Roberts is in California. Do'oh!
2-d Interstates traveled:  4, 5, 8, 10, 15, 20, 24, 25, 27, 29, 35, 39, 40, 41, 43, 45, 49, 55, 57, 64, 65, 66, 69, 70, 71, 72, 74, 75, 76(E), 77, 78, 81, 83, 84(W), 85, 87(N), 89, 90, 91, 93, 94, 95

2-d Interstates Clinched:  12, 22, 30, 37, 44, 59, 80, 84(E), 86(E), 238, H1, H2, H3, H201

Road Hog

Quote from: US71 on April 01, 2021, 09:34:19 PM
Quote from: abqtraveler on April 01, 2021, 08:55:27 PM
Quote from: rickmastfan67 on April 01, 2021, 08:09:17 PM
Quote from: I-39 on April 01, 2021, 04:56:59 PM
Are they going to re-number the exits along I-49 between I-40 and Bella Vista when the bypass opens?

I would assume so, since all the exits on AR-549 currently use the new mileage and don't continue the old mileage.

And then I would presume the focus shifts to getting the Texarkana to Fort Smith section done after they open the Bella Vista Bypass. Well, assuming it takes 40 years to complete the stretch between Texarkana and Fort Smith, I might still be alive--but well into my 80s--when it's finished. unfortunately, in its current form, Biden's infrastructure plan doesn't bear a lot of good news for big road projects like finishing I-49 and I-69.

Doubtful (IMO). There are plans for extending  AR 612 (the 412 Bypass) and XNA south access road.  NW Arkansas and Central Arkansas get the lion's share of highway money,

There's focus on US 67/I-57 in Central Arkansas plus  talk of a western bypass near Little Rock.
You mean like a big loop between Conway and Benton? I might be for that, but the hilly terrain west of Little Rock would make it tough.

US71

Quote from: rickmastfan67 on April 01, 2021, 08:09:17 PM
Quote from: I-39 on April 01, 2021, 04:56:59 PM
Are they going to re-number the exits along I-49 between I-40 and Bella Vista when the bypass opens?

I would assume so, since all the exits on AR-549 currently use the new mileage and don't continue the old mileage.

549 north of Bella Vista AND 549 south of Barling use I-49 mileage as measured from south Arkansas. .

ARDOT just put up new exit signs a couple years ago from Fayetteville to Bentonville/ Bella Vista, but the signs near the 549/71 junction have been pasted over /greened out as traffic shifts.

Like Alice I Try To Believe Three Impossible Things Before Breakfast

sparker

Quote from: Road Hog on April 02, 2021, 11:13:51 PM
Quote from: US71 on April 01, 2021, 09:34:19 PM
Quote from: abqtraveler on April 01, 2021, 08:55:27 PM
Quote from: rickmastfan67 on April 01, 2021, 08:09:17 PM
Quote from: I-39 on April 01, 2021, 04:56:59 PM
Are they going to re-number the exits along I-49 between I-40 and Bella Vista when the bypass opens?

I would assume so, since all the exits on AR-549 currently use the new mileage and don't continue the old mileage.

And then I would presume the focus shifts to getting the Texarkana to Fort Smith section done after they open the Bella Vista Bypass. Well, assuming it takes 40 years to complete the stretch between Texarkana and Fort Smith, I might still be alive--but well into my 80s--when it's finished. unfortunately, in its current form, Biden's infrastructure plan doesn't bear a lot of good news for big road projects like finishing I-49 and I-69.

Doubtful (IMO). There are plans for extending  AR 612 (the 412 Bypass) and XNA south access road.  NW Arkansas and Central Arkansas get the lion's share of highway money,

There's focus on US 67/I-57 in Central Arkansas plus  talk of a western bypass near Little Rock.
You mean like a big loop between Conway and Benton? I might be for that, but the hilly terrain west of Little Rock would make it tough.

IIRC there were plans to connect the northern end of I-430 at I-40 with the northern end of AR 440 at US 67/167 (future I-57) with a northern loop; might this be the "bypass" being discussed?  Along with the stretch of I-30 between I-430 and I-440/530, that would constitute an effective full loop around greater LR.

O Tamandua

QuoteEarmarks would help get I-49 complete

SPRINGDALE, Arkansas – Congress needs earmarked federal spending to complete projects like Interstate 49, Rep. Steve Womack told the Kiwanis Club here on Thursday.

"If we're going to complete I-49 in our lifetimes, we need a new bridge over the Arkansas River and about 12 miles of new interstate near it," Womack, R-Ark., told the gathering of about 50 people in First United Methodist Church.

Such a project will get done much faster if individual members of Congress are able to set some of the specific priorities in spending, he said. He and other members of Congress should be allowed to earmark those projects in budget bills, within limits, Womack said.

https://www.texarkanagazette.com/news/arkansas/story/2021/apr/04/earmarks-would-help-get-i-49-complete/865988/


edwaleni

Quote from: O Tamandua on April 04, 2021, 01:36:56 AM
QuoteEarmarks would help get I-49 complete

SPRINGDALE, Arkansas – Congress needs earmarked federal spending to complete projects like Interstate 49, Rep. Steve Womack told the Kiwanis Club here on Thursday.

"If we're going to complete I-49 in our lifetimes, we need a new bridge over the Arkansas River and about 12 miles of new interstate near it," Womack, R-Ark., told the gathering of about 50 people in First United Methodist Church.

Such a project will get done much faster if individual members of Congress are able to set some of the specific priorities in spending, he said. He and other members of Congress should be allowed to earmark those projects in budget bills, within limits, Womack said.

https://www.texarkanagazette.com/news/arkansas/story/2021/apr/04/earmarks-would-help-get-i-49-complete/865988/


Don't count on it.  Only 5% of the proposed multi-trillion "infrastructure" bill in Congress is dedicated to roads.  Most of it is for Amtrak, solar, alternative energies and social programs.

silverback1065

Quote from: edwaleni on April 05, 2021, 09:06:11 AM
Quote from: O Tamandua on April 04, 2021, 01:36:56 AM
QuoteEarmarks would help get I-49 complete

SPRINGDALE, Arkansas – Congress needs earmarked federal spending to complete projects like Interstate 49, Rep. Steve Womack told the Kiwanis Club here on Thursday.

"If we're going to complete I-49 in our lifetimes, we need a new bridge over the Arkansas River and about 12 miles of new interstate near it," Womack, R-Ark., told the gathering of about 50 people in First United Methodist Church.

Such a project will get done much faster if individual members of Congress are able to set some of the specific priorities in spending, he said. He and other members of Congress should be allowed to earmark those projects in budget bills, within limits, Womack said.

https://www.texarkanagazette.com/news/arkansas/story/2021/apr/04/earmarks-would-help-get-i-49-complete/865988/


Don't count on it.  Only 5% of the proposed multi-trillion "infrastructure" bill in Congress is dedicated to roads.  Most of it is for Amtrak, solar, alternative energies and social programs.

which honestly doesn't bother me too much. it would be nice to have better rail!

sprjus4

Which will likely end up being underutilized infrastructure, and the highways will still be congested with little improvements planned or poor connectivity in the sense of I-49.

bwana39

Quote from: silverback1065 on April 05, 2021, 10:27:04 AM
Quote from: edwaleni on April 05, 2021, 09:06:11 AM
Quote from: O Tamandua on April 04, 2021, 01:36:56 AM
QuoteEarmarks would help get I-49 complete

SPRINGDALE, Arkansas — Congress needs earmarked federal spending to complete projects like Interstate 49, Rep. Steve Womack told the Kiwanis Club here on Thursday.

"If we're going to complete I-49 in our lifetimes, we need a new bridge over the Arkansas River and about 12 miles of new interstate near it," Womack, R-Ark., told the gathering of about 50 people in First United Methodist Church.

Such a project will get done much faster if individual members of Congress are able to set some of the specific priorities in spending, he said. He and other members of Congress should be allowed to earmark those projects in budget bills, within limits, Womack said.

https://www.texarkanagazette.com/news/arkansas/story/2021/apr/04/earmarks-would-help-get-i-49-complete/865988/


Don't count on it.  Only 5% of the proposed multi-trillion "infrastructure" bill in Congress is dedicated to roads.  Most of it is for Amtrak, solar, alternative energies and social programs.

which honestly doesn't bother me too much. it would be nice to have better rail!

Rail... Good rail transit is a good thing. Freight rail has become profitable through shedding all but the most lucrative types of cargo. For passenger rail to be profitable (sustainable) you have to create volume. I just do not see the volumes coming to pass outside population dense areas (major cities) . If the government were to incentivize a transition from truck cartage back to cargo rail, it might do more to help the highway problems than either intensive construction or ridding us of cars.
Let's build what we need as economically as possible.

Scott5114

Quote from: bwana39 on April 05, 2021, 12:48:39 PM
For passenger rail to be profitable (sustainable) you have to create volume. I just do not see the volumes coming to pass outside population dense areas (major cities).

Cause damn, ArDOT is raking in the big bucks from all of that highway system profit they're making, right?
uncontrollable freak sardine salad chef

I-55

Quote from: bwana39 on April 05, 2021, 12:48:39 PM
Quote from: silverback1065 on April 05, 2021, 10:27:04 AM
Quote from: edwaleni on April 05, 2021, 09:06:11 AM
Quote from: O Tamandua on April 04, 2021, 01:36:56 AM
QuoteEarmarks would help get I-49 complete

SPRINGDALE, Arkansas – Congress needs earmarked federal spending to complete projects like Interstate 49, Rep. Steve Womack told the Kiwanis Club here on Thursday.

"If we're going to complete I-49 in our lifetimes, we need a new bridge over the Arkansas River and about 12 miles of new interstate near it," Womack, R-Ark., told the gathering of about 50 people in First United Methodist Church.

Such a project will get done much faster if individual members of Congress are able to set some of the specific priorities in spending, he said. He and other members of Congress should be allowed to earmark those projects in budget bills, within limits, Womack said.

https://www.texarkanagazette.com/news/arkansas/story/2021/apr/04/earmarks-would-help-get-i-49-complete/865988/


Don't count on it.  Only 5% of the proposed multi-trillion "infrastructure" bill in Congress is dedicated to roads.  Most of it is for Amtrak, solar, alternative energies and social programs.

which honestly doesn't bother me too much. it would be nice to have better rail!

Rail... Good rail transit is a good thing. Freight rail has become profitable through shedding all but the most lucrative types of cargo. For passenger rail to be profitable (sustainable) you have to create volume. I just do not see the volumes coming to pass outside population dense areas (major cities) . If the government were to incentivize a transition from truck cartage back to cargo rail, it might do more to help the highway problems than either intensive construction or ridding us of cars.

It is important to remember that we developed out cities around cars, not trains, and as long as people own cars and trains don't offer any more benefits for their added cost, people will continue to use cars. I think we can all agree that freight rail is profitable and preferred to trucking and as long as that is the case we should continue investing in that to continue capitalizing on freight rails benefits to both shipping and reduced traffic. Passenger rail can go from there, but it is not ready now.
Let's Go Purdue Basketball Whoosh

silverback1065

we don't design our cities for anything other than a car. trains would still be great for large city to large city travel. give you an alternative to flying.

I-55

Quote from: silverback1065 on April 05, 2021, 04:13:26 PM
we don't design our cities for anything other than a car. trains would still be great for large city to large city travel. give you an alternative to flying.

If we had a system that could produce similar results it would be practical. Flying from Fort Wayne to Albuquerque takes two flights and 6 hours while a train ride from Waterloo (30 minutes from town) to Albuquerque is 34 hours. It would be EXPENSIVE to develop a system that doesn't cut current service AND gets that trip to <12 hours.

SNCF construction costs per mile vary by line but average about 15 million euros/km, or about 28 million USD/mile. (source)

For a US example, the price tag on California's High speed rail was $80 million per mile. (source)

Quote
The cost per mile of the planned 520-mile California high-speed rail system, assuming it could actually be built for the current estimate of $80 billion, is $154 million per mile. And Amtrak's own estimates for replacing its existing Northeast Corridor with true high-speed rail work out to over $500 million per mile.

To do this on a national scale would be like rebuilding the interstate system for well over 10x the cost, if we want to achieve similar results to existing, functioning systems. It just isn't financially feasible to do this at the current time, not with our current economy and technologies. I am not anti-train by any means, it's just that the cost-benefit ratio is just too high and we won't ever see this within our lifetimes.
Let's Go Purdue Basketball Whoosh

Road Hog

Quote from: silverback1065 on April 05, 2021, 04:13:26 PM
we don't design our cities for anything other than a car. trains would still be great for large city to large city travel. give you an alternative to flying.
That's the benefit that Texas Central Railroad is banking on. Downtown Houston to downtown Dallas in 90 minutes. A flight might take under an hour, but the shuttles and/or rental cars might more than double it. There are multiple examples of this train advantage in the Northeast.

O Tamandua

Quote from: bwana39 on April 05, 2021, 12:48:39 PM
Quote from: silverback1065 on April 05, 2021, 10:27:04 AM
Quote from: edwaleni on April 05, 2021, 09:06:11 AM
Quote from: O Tamandua on April 04, 2021, 01:36:56 AM
QuoteEarmarks would help get I-49 complete

SPRINGDALE, Arkansas – Congress needs earmarked federal spending to complete projects like Interstate 49, Rep. Steve Womack told the Kiwanis Club here on Thursday.

"If we're going to complete I-49 in our lifetimes, we need a new bridge over the Arkansas River and about 12 miles of new interstate near it," Womack, R-Ark., told the gathering of about 50 people in First United Methodist Church.

Such a project will get done much faster if individual members of Congress are able to set some of the specific priorities in spending, he said. He and other members of Congress should be allowed to earmark those projects in budget bills, within limits, Womack said.

https://www.texarkanagazette.com/news/arkansas/story/2021/apr/04/earmarks-would-help-get-i-49-complete/865988/


Don't count on it.  Only 5% of the proposed multi-trillion "infrastructure" bill in Congress is dedicated to roads.  Most of it is for Amtrak, solar, alternative energies and social programs.

which honestly doesn't bother me too much. it would be nice to have better rail!

Rail... Good rail transit is a good thing. Freight rail has become profitable through shedding all but the most lucrative types of cargo. For passenger rail to be profitable (sustainable) you have to create volume. I just do not see the volumes coming to pass outside population dense areas (major cities) . If the government were to incentivize a transition from truck cartage back to cargo rail, it might do more to help the highway problems than either intensive construction or ridding us of cars.

If the proposed Canadian Pacific - Kansas City Southern merger goes through, how fascinating would it be to have a Toronto - Chicago - Kansas City - Houston - Mexico City international passenger train, with a station in Siloam Springs?  You know right where the route would run.  (BTW, not expecting it whatsoever, especially since Chi-KC is already spoken for.  Just kicks and grins.)



Opinions expressed here on belong solely to the poster and do not represent or reflect the opinions or beliefs of AARoads, its creators and/or associates.