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

edwaleni

Quote from: Rothman on November 21, 2024, 07:39:20 PMAs someone who knows the strength of the HB line on plans and have seen firsthand engineers fall flat on their faces when their assumptions were totally wrong, the idea of using Google Maps to judge ROW ownership by sight is pretty funny.

I used the Arkansas GIS parcel map for Waldron for my guess. But my key word was "may".




MikieTimT

Quote from: MikieTimT on November 20, 2024, 09:46:32 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on November 20, 2024, 12:40:18 PMWhen more of future Interstate 49 is constructed, it won't utilize the existing US 71 bypass of Waldron, will it? It doesn't look like the bypass can be upgraded without significant right-of-way impacts.

According to the 1997 FEIS, all of the alignments including the "selected" alignment bypass the bypass to the west, so access will be retained as the current US-71 alignment is retained.  Now, since this FEIS is 27 years old at this point, and will likely be 37+ years old when they actually get around to the likely Super-2 construction of AR-549 through there, it's almost guaranteed that NEPA will have to be restarted with the 1997 FEIS results considered.  Not that this is a high growth area, so there aren't likely to be new considerations, but they'll have to go back through the process again.

I think everyone missed the link in my post above as the 1997 FEIS already shows the considered routes.  That said, it'll have to be revisited anyway due to age, but Waldron isn't exactly a high-growth part of western Arkansas, so likely isn't going to require significant changes.

1997 FEIS Waldron I-49 Routing

Rick Powell

Quote from: MikieTimT on November 20, 2024, 09:46:32 PMAccording to the 1997 FEIS, all of the alignments including the "selected" alignment bypass the bypass to the west, so access will be retained as the current US-71 alignment is retained.  Now, since this FEIS is 27 years old at this point, and will likely be 37+ years old when they actually get around to the likely Super-2 construction of AR-549 through there, it's almost guaranteed that NEPA will have to be restarted with the 1997 FEIS results considered.  Not that this is a high growth area, so there aren't likely to be new considerations, but they'll have to go back through the process again.

It depends on how much the alignment changes from what was approved, and if those changes warrant a re-opening of the original decision. It can be as simple as a "NEPA Re-evaluation" where the changes are minor enough that all that is needed is a revised impact evaluation making sure that the decision is still valid (as was done on the Missouri section of US 67/future I-57 north of the Arkansas state line). This should give you a flavor of how much change could be approved in a re-evaluation.
https://www.modot.org/sites/default/files/documents/Route%2067%20EIS%20Reevaluation.pdf

It can also be substantial enough that a Supplemental EIS is warranted, or in extreme cases, scrapping everything and starting all over with a new EIS.


roadman65

Why do you need to upgrade US 71 to freeway through that city anyway?

I mean if there is no other alternative, yes by all means. However, there is plenty of land in the area to build something else. With AR Hwy 80 there, it's easy access to that bypass anyway.
Every day is a winding road, you just got to get used to it.

Sheryl Crowe

edwaleni

Quote from: roadman65 on November 22, 2024, 10:29:46 AMWhy do you need to upgrade US 71 to freeway through that city anyway?

I mean if there is no other alternative, yes by all means. However, there is plenty of land in the area to build something else. With AR Hwy 80 there, it's easy access to that bypass anyway.

Perhaps not today, but if it is to become a major regional arterial, like becoming I-49, then it would come into play.

Bobby5280

It's not difficult at all to see utility easements on either side of a highway in Google Earth imagery. The utility easements usually define the boundaries of the highway's ROW.

US-71 going around Waldron has an ROW ranging between 150' to 180' wide. That's not enough for a standard freeway design that includes frontage roads. 300' is typically needed in order to accommodate frontage roads and slip ramps of standard design. It's possible to squeeze things down into a 250' wide footprint.

If they did without frontage roads and simply built diamond exits at important intersections they might be able to get by in the current ROW. But access would be cut off to several side streets and various businesses. They would have to fix that somehow.

MikieTimT

Quote from: edwaleni on November 22, 2024, 09:37:18 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on November 22, 2024, 10:29:46 AMWhy do you need to upgrade US 71 to freeway through that city anyway?

I mean if there is no other alternative, yes by all means. However, there is plenty of land in the area to build something else. With AR Hwy 80 there, it's easy access to that bypass anyway.

Perhaps not today, but if it is to become a major regional arterial, like becoming I-49, then it would come into play.

Waldron can't even keep a non-SuperCenter Walmart running, so growth over the next couple of decades is quite a long shot.  There's no reason to deviate from the 1997 FEIS new build preferred alignment.  None of the alignment alternatives in the 1997 FEIS used US-71, which is a "bypass" of US-71B, the original alignment of US-71 through Waldron.  So, access road aren't in the cards as it'll be half a mile or so to the west of US-71.

There's going to be a fair number of cuts involved with the project south of Greenwood, especially south of the initial segment to AR-378 (Elm Park near the rest area) just like there was on US-71 (and I-49 in NWA) with all of the E/W ridges the route will plow through.

bugo

Are there any detailed maps available online that show the proposed route from Fort Smith to Texarkana?

mvak36

Quote from: bugo on November 30, 2024, 11:21:44 PMAre there any detailed maps available online that show the proposed route from Fort Smith to Texarkana?

I remember about 10 years ago or so a poster from AHTD posted a proposed exit list which showed a general routing. It might be in this thread somewhere but I'm not sure if the links or photos are still there.

The only other thing I could find are these: https://ardot.gov/wp-content/uploads/District-4_Maintenance_Facilities.pdf and https://ardot.gov/wp-content/uploads/District-3_Maintenance_Facilities.pdf

The dashed line is the proposed routing I think. I don't know if it's been finalized or not.
Counties: Counties visited
Travel Mapping: Summary

MikieTimT

Quote from: mvak36 on December 02, 2024, 10:14:27 AM
Quote from: bugo on November 30, 2024, 11:21:44 PMAre there any detailed maps available online that show the proposed route from Fort Smith to Texarkana?

I remember about 10 years ago or so a poster from AHTD posted a proposed exit list which showed a general routing. It might be in this thread somewhere but I'm not sure if the links or photos are still there.

The only other thing I could find are these: https://ardot.gov/wp-content/uploads/District-4_Maintenance_Facilities.pdf and https://ardot.gov/wp-content/uploads/District-3_Maintenance_Facilities.pdf

The dashed line is the proposed routing I think. I don't know if it's been finalized or not.

Those dashed lines look like the 1997 FEIS preferred alignments down to DeQueen, so finalized, but will have to be revisited anyway since it's been so long, but likely not many changes since it's a sparsely populated part of the state without any significant growth once you're south of Greenwood and north of DeQueen.  Heck, even Texarkana isn't really growing, but comparatively so when talking about anything other than Greenwood.



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.