AARoads Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

New rules to ensure post quality. See this thread for details.

Author Topic: The purpose of Arkansas 530  (Read 2812 times)

cbalducc

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 106
  • Last Login: October 01, 2022, 05:57:06 PM
The purpose of Arkansas 530
« on: November 13, 2021, 03:53:52 PM »

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?
Logged

jbnv

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3782
  • I take the back roads.

  • Age: 46
  • Location: Independence/Baton Rouge, LA
  • Last Login: July 15, 2022, 01:41:58 PM
    • Photos on Flickr
Re: The purpose of Arkansas 530
« Reply #1 on: November 13, 2021, 04:21:51 PM »

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.
Logged
🆕 Louisiana Highways on Twitter | Yes, I like Clearview. Deal with it. | Redos: US | La. | Route Challenge

sprjus4

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 7662
  • Location: Hampton Roads, VA
  • Last Login: Today at 03:38:45 PM
Re: The purpose of Arkansas 530
« Reply #2 on: November 13, 2021, 04:24:15 PM »

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.
Logged

cbalducc

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 106
  • Last Login: October 01, 2022, 05:57:06 PM
Re: The purpose of Arkansas 530
« Reply #3 on: November 13, 2021, 04:34:10 PM »

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?
Logged

jbnv

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3782
  • I take the back roads.

  • Age: 46
  • Location: Independence/Baton Rouge, LA
  • Last Login: July 15, 2022, 01:41:58 PM
    • Photos on Flickr
Re: The purpose of Arkansas 530
« Reply #4 on: November 13, 2021, 04:45:16 PM »

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.
Logged
🆕 Louisiana Highways on Twitter | Yes, I like Clearview. Deal with it. | Redos: US | La. | Route Challenge

sprjus4

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 7662
  • Location: Hampton Roads, VA
  • Last Login: Today at 03:38:45 PM
Re: The purpose of Arkansas 530
« Reply #5 on: November 13, 2021, 05:52:34 PM »

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.
Logged

edwaleni

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1604
  • Last Login: Today at 04:50:42 PM
Re: The purpose of Arkansas 530
« Reply #6 on: November 14, 2021, 03:51:03 AM »

Logged

Anthony_JK

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1595
  • Age: 58
  • Location: Lafayette, Louisiana
  • Last Login: Today at 01:56:22 PM
Re: The purpose of Arkansas 530
« Reply #7 on: November 14, 2021, 04:17:14 AM »

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.
Logged

Road Hog

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1826
  • Location: Collin County, TX
  • Last Login: October 01, 2022, 02:07:59 PM
Re: The purpose of Arkansas 530
« Reply #8 on: November 14, 2021, 09:07:20 PM »

I ask the thread title often myself.
Logged

The Ghostbuster

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3655
  • Age: 37
  • Location: Madison, WI
  • Last Login: Today at 12:02:03 PM
Re: The purpose of Arkansas 530
« Reply #9 on: November 15, 2021, 12:31:20 PM »

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.
Logged

capt.ron

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 322
  • Age: 51
  • Location: Central Arkansas
  • Last Login: September 29, 2022, 05:31:27 PM
Re: The purpose of Arkansas 530
« Reply #10 on: November 15, 2021, 01:25:24 PM »

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.
Logged

MikieTimT

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1163
  • Age: 49
  • Location: Wedington Woods, Arkansas
  • Last Login: September 30, 2022, 10:00:45 AM
Re: The purpose of Arkansas 530
« Reply #11 on: November 15, 2021, 01:57:27 PM »

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.
Logged

jbnv

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3782
  • I take the back roads.

  • Age: 46
  • Location: Independence/Baton Rouge, LA
  • Last Login: July 15, 2022, 01:41:58 PM
    • Photos on Flickr
Re: The purpose of Arkansas 530
« Reply #12 on: November 15, 2021, 08:45:45 PM »

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.
Logged
🆕 Louisiana Highways on Twitter | Yes, I like Clearview. Deal with it. | Redos: US | La. | Route Challenge

MikieTimT

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1163
  • Age: 49
  • Location: Wedington Woods, Arkansas
  • Last Login: September 30, 2022, 10:00:45 AM
Re: The purpose of Arkansas 530
« Reply #13 on: November 15, 2021, 08:56:07 PM »

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.
Logged

 


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.