News:

why is this up in the corner now

Main Menu

I-69 in Arkansas

Started by AcE_Wolf_287, March 18, 2020, 06:53:28 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Road Hog

Quote from: Rothman on June 16, 2024, 12:27:52 AMDefine "slammed."
I-40 on the opposite side of Little Rock.


MikieTimT

Quote from: Road Hog on June 16, 2024, 04:51:49 AM
Quote from: Rothman on June 16, 2024, 12:27:52 AMDefine "slammed."
I-40 on the opposite side of Little Rock.

Just a random Google Street view around the Lonoke area I randomly selected east of Little Rock.  Note the percentage of truck traffic in the view as you look around 360°.

https://maps.app.goo.gl/vmXKE1S8QA3VdumN7

The Ghostbuster

Would it be possible (or practical) to add a truck-only lane in each direction on Interstate 40 between Little Rock and Memphis? If this is a truck-heavy corridor, maybe given them their own lane would help reduce congestion in the existing general-purpose lanes.

Plutonic Panda

I think if you're gonna do that, you might as well just build two new truck lanes in each direction.

Bobby5280

There is no question I-40 between Little Rock and Memphis is slammed with traffic. Truck traffic is insane on that stretch.

splashflash

If the ARDOT were able to set up a tolling authority like Oklahoma, Kansas and Texas (formerly), tolls could be placed on any new lanes.  Maybe the revenue would pay for the lanes once I-57 is completed.

 Revoke the "no tolls after already having been paid for" rule and extra lanes could be underwritten by I-30 and I-40 tolls to pay for a new I-69.

bwana39

Quote from: splashflash on June 16, 2024, 05:31:54 PMIf the ARDOT were able to set up a tolling authority like Oklahoma, Kansas and Texas (formerly), tolls could be placed on any new lanes.  Maybe the revenue would pay for the lanes once I-57 is completed.

 Revoke the "no tolls after already having been paid for" rule and extra lanes could be underwritten by I-30 and I-40 tolls to pay for a new I-69.

Arkansas has a (state) constitutional amendment disallowing tolls period.
Let's build what we need as economically as possible.

JREwing78

Quote from: Rothman on June 16, 2024, 12:27:52 AMDefine "slammed."
30,000-40,000 vehicles per day outside of the metro areas, with 50%-60% commercial trucks. North of US-70, it swells to 80,000-120,000 vehicles per day.

Given substantial sections are still only 4-lanes, and the high level of commercial trucks on it, I would say it's "slammed".

Source: https://addt-ardot.hub.arcgis.com/

Rothman

Quote from: JREwing78 on June 16, 2024, 07:03:01 PM
Quote from: Rothman on June 16, 2024, 12:27:52 AMDefine "slammed."
30,000-40,000 vehicles per day outside of the metro areas, with 50%-60% commercial trucks. North of US-70, it swells to 80,000-120,000 vehicles per day.

Given substantial sections are still only 4-lanes, and the high level of commercial trucks on it, I would say it's "slammed".

Source: https://addt-ardot.hub.arcgis.com/

Finally, someone that isn't just spouting blather.
Please note: All comments here represent my own personal opinion and do not reflect the official position(s) of NYSDOT.

Bobby5280

It's common knowledge I-40 between Little Rock and Memphis is slammed with traffic (especially semi trucks) and has been for a long time. Anyone calling this very easy observation "blather" might want to be sure they're not blathering themselves.

sprjus4

Quote from: Rothman on June 16, 2024, 07:42:58 PM
Quote from: JREwing78 on June 16, 2024, 07:03:01 PM
Quote from: Rothman on June 16, 2024, 12:27:52 AMDefine "slammed."
30,000-40,000 vehicles per day outside of the metro areas, with 50%-60% commercial trucks. North of US-70, it swells to 80,000-120,000 vehicles per day.

Given substantial sections are still only 4-lanes, and the high level of commercial trucks on it, I would say it's "slammed".

Source: https://addt-ardot.hub.arcgis.com/

Finally, someone that isn't just spouting blather.
It's been discussed ad nauseum on this forum, with traffic volumes & truck percentages as well...

Rothman

Quote from: sprjus4 on June 16, 2024, 08:23:08 PM
Quote from: Rothman on June 16, 2024, 07:42:58 PM
Quote from: JREwing78 on June 16, 2024, 07:03:01 PM
Quote from: Rothman on June 16, 2024, 12:27:52 AMDefine "slammed."
30,000-40,000 vehicles per day outside of the metro areas, with 50%-60% commercial trucks. North of US-70, it swells to 80,000-120,000 vehicles per day.

Given substantial sections are still only 4-lanes, and the high level of commercial trucks on it, I would say it's "slammed".

Source: https://addt-ardot.hub.arcgis.com/

Finally, someone that isn't just spouting blather.
It's been discussed ad nauseum on this forum, with traffic volumes & truck percentages as well...

And yet, the blathering continues rather than providing the actual info that Mr. Dallas provided.

No need to keep blathering.
Please note: All comments here represent my own personal opinion and do not reflect the official position(s) of NYSDOT.

Wayward Memphian

Quote from: The Ghostbuster on June 16, 2024, 10:52:12 AMWould it be possible (or practical) to add a truck-only lane in each direction on Interstate 40 between Little Rock and Memphis? If this is a truck-heavy corridor, maybe given them their own lane would help reduce congestion in the existing general-purpose lanes.

6 lanes with a prohibition of commercial traffic in the far left lane. It's the constant battle between governed trucks trying passing each other that's the nightmare.

I-39

Quote from: Bobby5280 on June 16, 2024, 08:02:33 PMIt's common knowledge I-40 between Little Rock and Memphis is slammed with traffic (especially semi trucks) and has been for a long time. Anyone calling this very easy observation "blather" might want to be sure they're not blathering themselves.

And part of the solution is completing I-57 to take some of the truck traffic off of it.

Road Hog

Quote from: The Ghostbuster on June 16, 2024, 10:52:12 AMWould it be possible (or practical) to add a truck-only lane in each direction on Interstate 40 between Little Rock and Memphis? If this is a truck-heavy corridor, maybe given them their own lane would help reduce congestion in the existing general-purpose lanes.
I-57 will be done and dusted decades before I-40 is expanded to 6 lanes all the way between Little Rock and Memphis. And I don't think it will be enough. In fact I think both interstates are likely to become similar hellholes as truck traffic expands. I hope ARDOT has the foresight to at least add passing lanes for 4-wheelers at points of each.

abqtraveler

Quote from: bwana39 on June 16, 2024, 06:40:38 PM
Quote from: splashflash on June 16, 2024, 05:31:54 PMIf the ARDOT were able to set up a tolling authority like Oklahoma, Kansas and Texas (formerly), tolls could be placed on any new lanes.  Maybe the revenue would pay for the lanes once I-57 is completed.

 Revoke the "no tolls after already having been paid for" rule and extra lanes could be underwritten by I-30 and I-40 tolls to pay for a new I-69.

Arkansas has a (state) constitutional amendment disallowing tolls period.
Amending the Arkansas state constitution to remove that prohibition on tolls would require the legislature to first approve it, and then it would have to go to the voters for ratification.
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

razorback0308

Knowing the location of these lithium deposits near Smackover, I'm not sure if this would encourage more movement on I69 in Arkansas.

https://www.newsweek.com/enormous-reserve-hidden-treasure-found-under-arkansas-1972840

MikieTimT

Quote from: razorback0308 on October 23, 2024, 09:23:40 PMKnowing the location of these lithium deposits near Smackover, I'm not sure if this would encourage more movement on I69 in Arkansas.

https://www.newsweek.com/enormous-reserve-hidden-treasure-found-under-arkansas-1972840

At a minimum, it would encourage a 5 laning of US-82 from Texarkana to El Dorado.  I-69 only gets traction in Arkansas other than Super-2 bypasses if Louisiana makes some moves south of the border more than the minuscule mileage of a 2 lane access road around the SW side of Shreveport.  If US-82 is 5 laned to El Dorado, then I can also see movement of at least a Super-2 bypass along I-69 ROW around the NW side of El Dorado to improve flows nearer to Smackover proper.  Not everything in this play is going to be focused on Smackover itself as the formation is in Texas and Louisiana even moreso than Arkansas itself.  The promising thing about the play in Arkansas is the regulatory environment as well as the oil, gas, and bromine industries already pulling the brine up to the surface, making lithium extraction of the "waste" products of those industries almost a value add as the dirtier parts have already been done.  All they have to do it figure out how to chemically or physically extract the lithium from the brine in the most cost effective way possible before reinjecting the byproduct back into the formation as is currently done.  Seems much easier than hard rock mining or evaporation ponds like is mainly done today.

Bobby5280

The Smackover Formation has a lot of potential. But the companies looking at extracting the metal via fracking methods still have technical & environmental details to work out before they can start drilling. Exxon Mobil hopes to begin Lithium extraction in Arkansas by 2027 and scale up production by 2030 if all goes well.

I wouldn't be surprised to see the effort delayed (possibly a number of years) via law suits.

Meanwhile I don't think a fledgling Lithium industry will do very much to help I-69 development. It might start making a difference 10-20 years from now. But that's if Lithium-Ion batteries are still widely used. Scientists are doing R&D work on other kinds of battery technologies.

Quote from: MikieTimeTNot everything in this play is going to be focused on Smackover itself as the formation is in Texas and Louisiana even moreso than Arkansas itself.

Geologists have said the greatest amount of Lithium in the Smackover Formation is concentrated in Southwestern Arkansas.



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.